Is there a reasonable suit preference signal on this lead? The contract is 3 NT, and the bidding has been a straightforward, 1NT, pass, 3NT, all pass.

West leads the king of diamonds from AKTxx. The defenders have agreed that this means three honors, counting the K (if West had AKxxx without the T, he'd lead A, then K or low, depending on how others play). But West could have AKQxx or KQJxx, etc.

Dummy (North) has two little ones, E has J72, and South has Qxx. South is going to win a trick with the Q if all the diamond leads come from West.

East has an ace in spades, hearts, or clubs. Given this, and the defenders' diamond honors, there aren't enough points left for other entries.

If East gets a lead to his ace, he can return a diamond to the AT tenace, trapping South's queen for five diamond tricks plus the side trick (down two).

In this sequence, can East play the J, 7, or 2, depending on the location of his side suit ace as a suit preference signal? Put another way, is it possible to have a suit preference signal in three suits in no trump (rather than two in a trump contract)? Or if the defenders agreed to play this way, and lead as described above, would they be giving up too many options (e.g. attitude and count signals) on other hands where the layout was slightly different?

The basic idea is reasonable but unpopular, perhaps justifiably so.

The main problem with using SP here is that declarer may hold no stopper in the suit. East needs a way to encourage with Qxx.

Some top pairs never the less agree to use SP extensively on the opening lead. I have not used this method, but having three suits in play seems impractical. East's card will often be difficult to read, and usually dummy will furnish enough of a clue to rule out one of the side suits.

If you do use attitude here, as I do, I suggest following the suggestion of the late Helge Vinje from his New Ideas in Defensive Play in Bridge. He used upside down attitude and would discourage with the J from Jxx. Now when East plays a high card lower than the J West may be well placed to continue with a low card at trick two.


Does the Dread Curse of Azathoth spell stay active for multiple monsters? The spell says

  Cast and exhaust to gain +9 to Combat checks until the end of this combat.

Does the spell last until the end of combat with the current monster, or the end of combat for this turn, i.e. when I have 3 monsters on my street location and am fighting them. The wording seems to imply the end of the single current monster.

From the base rules:

  Whenever an investigator enters combat with a monster, resolve the following steps, in order.

You enter combat separately with each monster. "Combat" refers to that set of steps (horror check, fight or flee, monster damage). So no, it doesn't stay active for multiple monsters, and yes, "this combat" means combat with a single monster.


Betrayal at House on the Hill - "Voodoo" (Haunt 25) - Do you continue if the traitor dies? We played the Voodoo scenario the other night and I as the traitor got killed in an attack. At the end of each traitor turn, the chance of survivors dying gets more and more likely. So I hoped that even though I was dead, the survivors might still succumb to the dolls.

The rules say that the traitor doesn't lose just because their explorer dies, and that the game can continue if the monsters could fulfil the traitor's task to win. I had no monsters (they don't really factor into this scenario), but I feel like the damage track and the voodoo doll effects were in a sense the equivalent of monsters in this case, and so would continue to be resolved at the end of each traitor/monster turn - giving me a chance to still win - the survivors are still in a race against time to find their dolls before the dolls kill them. Otherwise they've effectively won, it's just the laborious task of finding and destroying the dolls with little/no resistance.

Should the voodoo doll effects continue to be resolved at the end of the traitor/monster turn, even if the traitor explorer is dead?

You should continue.

The rules for winning and losing are defined by the specific scenarios, not the general game rules. The (heroes) rules for haunt #25 state what is required for the heroes to win:

  You Win When ...
  ... you destroy all of the dolls and at least half
  (rounding up) of the original heroes are still
  alive.

The main rulebook does NOT say that you must have a monster in order to continue with the traitor dead. What it says is:

  The first side (traitor or heroes) that completes its goals
  for the haunt wins the game.
  At least one hero must survive in order for the heroes to win.
  However, some haunts include goals that are written so that
  the traitor can still win the game after he or she dies. For
  instance, the monsters that player controls may be able to
  win the game without the traitor’s help.

(Emphasis mine). The idea of having monsters to help you win is just one example of how the traitor can win after he dies. It is clear that in order for the heroes to win, they need to meet the requirements in their rules. Killing the traitor has no effect on this (unless their rules state that specifically).


Does a Takeout Double Apply to a "Passed" Partner? Using Standard American my left hand opponent bid one heart. Partner passed. Right hand opponent raised to two hearts. I was in the "balancing" (fourth) seat and held:

(s) Axxx (h) x (d) KJxx (c) Axxx, doubling for takeout.

Partner passed me for "penalty" with Axxx in the suit, and the opponents made 2H, which (doubled) amounted to game.

I said that I expected a (competing) bid. Partner claimed that her original pass was a "bid" and therefore would not have "taken out" the double in any event. She was pleased to pass for penalty, but expected me to have something like Qxx, in which case we WOULD have set the opponents.

I always thought a double was for takeout until partner bid. And that partner couldn't pass except in very limited circumstances. Does Axxx in the opponent's suit represent enough "defense" to pass? Or does the previous pass justify the later one?

If you and your partner are playing standard takeout doubles, this double would certainly be for takeout.  The opponent's have not necessarily finished their bidding yet (the 1H bidder could still bid on), and you have not had a chance to bid before this.  Partner has passed, but you knew that and took that into consideration before you doubled.  Partner needs to trust you, and bid a suit that he has length in, or bid 2NT with the necessary stoppers and strength.  If he wants to pass, he does so at his own peril and should have a hand that can set 2H on his own nearly from the outset.

Given your options, the double is a good bid, and gives you the best chance of finding your best fit as cheaply as as possible.

One minor point: you really weren't balancing here.  "Balancing" refers to the person who, if they passed, would end the bidding.  Since LHO could have bid over the 2H if they had more strength, you were competing, not balancing.

(Edit: Expanded upon partner's responses)


Does Teferi, Time Raveler prevent casting spells for their madness cost? Teferi, Time Raveler's static ability reads:

"Each opponent can cast spells only any time they could cast a sorcery."

Madness rules state (emphasis added):

  502.24. Madness

  502.24a Madness represents two abilities. The first is a static ability of cards that functions while the card is in a player's hand. The second is a triggered ability that functions whenever the first ability is applied. The phrase "Madness [cost]" means "If a player would discard this card from his or her hand, that player discards it, but may remove it from the game instead of putting it into his or her graveyard," and "Whenever this card is removed from the game this way, until he or she passes next, he or she may play it any time he or she could play an instant as though it were in his or her hand by paying [cost] rather than paying its mana cost. When he or she passes next, he or she puts it into his or her graveyard."

Teferi prevents opposing players from casting spells except when they could cast a sorcery. If someone discards into exile as the result of a spell or triggered/activated ability causing them to discard a card, they cannot cast a sorcery because the stack isn't empty.

Am I correct in understanding that Teferi effectively disables madness for his controller's opponents while he's on the board?

Yes, you are correct. Opponents can't cast cards by using the madness ability. Teferi, Time Raveler's restriction applies to madness as well.


How to summon Number C107: Neo Galaxy Eyes Tachyon Dragon My favorite method of summon is the XYZ summon. However there's a monster I've been struggling to summon: it's my Number C107: Neo Galaxy Eyes Tachyon Dragon.

I found this card called Rank Up Magic Cipher Ascension that let's you use an XYZ monster you control to summon an XYZ monster who's rank is 1 higher. However this card only works on "Cipher" monsters.

Can I still use this magic card on Number 107: Galaxy Eyes Tachyon Dragon to summon it's chaos form? Or do I need to find another method?

There are several Rank-Up-Magic Cards.  Barian's Force, Limited Barian's Force, Numeron Force and Argent Chaos Force come to mind.

http://yugioh.wikia.com/wiki/Rank-Up-Magic


Do multiple Eternal Thirst give a creature multiple copies of the same triggered ability? If I have a creature with two copies of Eternal Thirst on it, and a creature my opponent control dies, do I get one or two +1/+1 counters?

You'll get two counters. Each copy of Eternal Thirst grants the creature an independent triggered ability. The two abilities happen to be the same, but there are still two of them. They'll both trigger, both go on the stack (separately!), and each will add one counter as it resolves.


Splitting the pot without showing hands Can the last 2  players in Texas Holdem agree to split  the pot equally after the river without showing their hands. is this legal or ethical?

This is a form of collusion, and would not be permitted in many casinos or tournaments according to their rules.

A home-game or less-reputable operation may make its own rules that allow this, but it would be considered very dodgy.

Legality does not typically factor, though anywhere in which it matters, either the entire game is illegal anyway or the operation already has rules to ensure they comply with law and regulation.


Is the Arena default deck "Line of Fire" bad or is it just me? I'm new to Magic. One of the default decks you can unlock when you start playing Arena is called "Line of Fire". It consists of:

1 Kroxa, Titan of Death's Hunger
1 Liliana's Standard Bearer
1 Temple of Malice
4 Bloodfell Caves
9 Mountain
10 Swamp
2 Serrated Scorpion
3 Careless Celebrant
3 Slaughter-Priest of Mogis
3 Discordant Piper
2 Blood Aspirant
3 Dire Fleet Warmonger
1 Elite Headhunter
1 Woe Strider
1 Tectonic Giant
2 Forbidden Friendship
2 Infuriate
3 Fire Prophecy
2 Heartless Act
1 Eat to Extinction
1 Goremand
1 Piper of the Swarm
2 Village Rites
1 Alchemist's Gift

The description you get when you first unlock it advises that sacrificing creatures may be necessary for progress. However, I've never won a game with this deck nor lost a game against it. Even when I do sacrifice the token creatures my cards create, my creatures aren't powerful enough to stand against late-game finishers or numerous enough to close out the game early. Is this just a bad deck, or are my opponents and I simply too new to understand its subtleties?

The default decks are all bad. Just look at the cards it runs - it has underpowered spells like Infuriate, underpowered creatures like Slaughter-Priest of Mogis, and doesn't max out on the actual power cards like Kroxa.
Of course, the point of the default decks is to give new players a taste of Magic's gameplay. From that point of view, the fact that good decks will destroy this one isn't actually a bad thing, and chances are it was constructed to provide an enjoyable game against other default decks. It is entirely possible this deck is bad relative to other default decks - I have not played or followed Standard for several months so I do not know - but that would just be a sign that you should upgrade this one by replacing the bad cards with good ones (hint hint).
What this means is ...

If you are looking to play a fair game (i.e. both players have similarly-powered decks), try the draft formats. Caveat: last I saw these formats are expensive to enter, and quite skill-intensive. As a new player you could very well lose gold quickly.
Alternatively, you can spend money on cards and build an actual competitive deck. Again I am not familiar with the Arena meta anymore, but there is a legitimate sacrifice deck in Historic, and in the past, BR sacrifice was also a real thing in Standard (I suspect it fell out of the meta after recent sets however).
Finally, if you want to get an overall view of what's good in the metagame, the default decks are not the place to start. Try instead a website like MTG Top 8 which indexes the winner's metagame.

Warning: there is apparently some wrinkle in MTG Arena's matchmaking algorithm such that "good decks" are queued into other good decks. It is why back when I played, if I queued up with monored, I was odds-on to play against other monored decks. It means that you are in for a shock if you upgrade your deck thinking you will get easy wins against bad decks. I don't know how Wizards define "good deck", however, and Wizards certainly has good reason not to reveal it or people will game the definition.


Does Hellkite Tyrant in combination with Mycosynth Lattice steal lands? Say you attack someone for player damage with Hellkite Tyrant whilst Mycosynth Lattice is in play (played by you if it makes a difference). Do you get control of all of your opponents lands? The answer to this question says that lands are permanents, and since all permanents are turned in to artifacts does Hellkite Tyrant steal them? I'm asking this because it feels so OP that I'm wondering if there is more to this.

Yes, as you stated correctly, lands are permanents:

110.1. A permanent is a card or token on the battlefield.
...
110.4. There are five permanent types: artifact, creature, enchantment, land, and planeswalker.

Enemy Lands are Artifact [Basic] Lands now due to Mycosynth Lattice, and nothing stops you from getting control of them if you deal combat damage with Hellkite Tyrant.


In Uno, can you play a Wild Draw 4 Card drawn as a penalty, if you have a card the same colour as the draw pile? E.g.
- Player 1 plays a Draw 2 Card.
- Player 2 picks up 2 cards, one of which is a Wild Draw 4 Card. He also draws another unplayable card. The draw pile is showing a yellow card. Player 2 has a yellow card in his hand (but he is not allowed to play these).

Can he play the Wild Draw 4 Card?

I say yes because he has no other playable cards.
My partner says no because he has a card in his hand that matches the colour of the draw pile.

What is the official rule?

Official Rules

"Official rules" do vary slightly from site to site, however all seem to agree (including the rules on Wikipedia) that being on the receiving end of a Draw Two or Wild Draw Four forces the player to draw 2/4 cards and forfeit their turn, therefore Player 2 is not allowed to use either card, and play continues to the next player after Player 2.

Under the official rules you are only allowed to immediately play drawn cards when, on your turn you choose to draw a card, and the card you have drawn is playable.

House rules

Otherwise there is a common house rule regarding not ending your turn after receiving a Draw Two and/or Wild Draw Four.

If playing with this house rule Player 2 must play the yellow card - if they were to play the Wild Draw Four they could be challenged by Player 1, and end up drawing more cards as a penalty for playing a Wild Draw Four while they have a card in hand that matches the current colour.


Pandemic Legacy: lost characters We are about to start the first season.
If we lose a character, at the start of the next game, do we choose another character?
If we are 4 people to play and is is possible to lose 2 characters, do someone plays only as a civilian?

From the rules (page 4, emphasis added):

  Each player has a specific character with special abilities to improve the
  team’s chances. Each player begins game 1 by creating a character.

  To create a character: Select a Character card (each one has different
  special abilities) and give your character a name.

  These characters will carry through from game to game and they may
  become lost (see below). You do not have to play the same character in
  every game.

And, from the Compiled FAQ on BoardGameGeek:

  If your character becomes lost, destroy that character. Discard your player cards and become a Civilian, and place your pawn in any city with a Research Station; if you had actions left, you may take those actions. At the start of the next game, you can choose a character (from those left) as normal, if there are not enough Characters left, some players may need to start as Civilians.

So, once a character is lost it can never be played again, and if there are not enough characters available for the number of players then you will have to have some players use civilians instead. However, there is no general requirement that you have to keep using the same characters over and over even if they don't get lost, so you can always change characters each game.


Nivmagus Elemental interactions with nivix cyclops, guttersnipe, and young pyromancer if I exile a spell with Nivmagus Elemental, will the spell still cause the abilities of Nivix Cyclops, Guttersnipe and Young Pyromancer to trigger?

Yes. All of your examples trigger when you cast a spell. They happen whether that spell resolves or not.

I have seen multiple EDH decks built specifically around cards such as those and Cipher, where the intent is to exile spells with Nivmagus whenever you don't really need them.


Does the Quarantine Specialist prevent Epidemic in connected cities? So, by example, if the Quarantine Specialist is in London, and an Epidemic card is pulled and the affected city is New York (or another connected city), does the specialist cancel the placement of infection cubes in New York?

Yes, she cancels the placement of any disease cubes on a city she is in and connected cities.

Note that this does not "prevent the Epidemic"... when an epidemic card is drawn, you still fully deal with it. It's just that during the "infect" step of the epidemic, she can prevent the extra infection.

From the rules:

  The Quarantine Specialist prevents both outbreaks and
  the placement of disease cubes in the city she is in
  and all cities connected to that city. She does not affect
  cubes placed during setup.


Would spells played with Enchanted Evening in play trigger Mesa Enchantress? With Enchanted Evening, all permanents are also enchantments.  Mesa Enchantress allows you to draw when you play an enchantment.  If I have both out, and play a creature, do I get to draw a card?

No, because Enchanted Evening does not change the card type of spells on the stack.

The Enchantress' Oracle wording makes this clearer:

  Whenever you cast an enchantment spell, you may draw a card.

"Casting" refers to the action of putting a spell on the stack.

Enchanted Evening only affects permanents. It will do so from the very moment they enter the battlefield, so they enter the battlefield as enchantments. But the spell that creates the permanent (which is the game object that's represented by the card on the stack) isn't an enchantment spell.


Monopoly Alternatives A recent Board Games with Scott episode [Breaking Up the Monopoly] has brought up an interesting question:  When someone that you know asks to play Monopoly with you, what game do you suggest playing with them?  I assume that you don't end up playing Monopoly with them.  If so, that's cool, just tell me why you do that instead (alternative rules, versions, etc.).

Try to limit your answer to one game, and explain the mechanic or "hook" that you use to entice them away from the dreaded Boardwalk, Park Place, and Free Parking.

Settlers of Catan
For adults, I would suggest Settlers of Catan, since it's a much better game to me and a lot more fun to play.  If your willing to play a full game of Monopoly, then Catan is a prefect fit since it's actually shorter.  There's also a much more nuanced trade mechanic, and a board to stack our your share of.  I see it as a great chance to introduce them to Euro games if they haven't played one before.
For young kids, if they want to play Monopoly, I wouldn't dare be a spoil sport and suggest something else.


Can Chandra, Acolyte of Flame cast Heartfire without the additional cost? I was under the impression that if you used Chandra, Acolyte of Flame's -2, targeting Heartfire, you would still have to sacrifice a creature, but someone told me that was not true. What is the ruling here?

Chandra's ability does nothing to change the total cost of Heartfire, which includes sacrificing a creature.

  You may cast target instant or sorcery card with converted mana cost 3 or less from your graveyard. If that card would be put into your graveyard this turn, exile it instead.

Note that it doesn't modify the costs, only where you can cast the card from (in this case, allowing you to cast it from your graveyard).  Compare the phrasing to Aluren, which allows you to cast specific creature cards for free.

  Any player may cast creature spells with converted mana cost 3 or less without paying their mana costs and as though they had flash.

Note that even if Chandra had the phrase "without paying it's mana cost" you would still have to sacrifice the creature as the sacrifice is an additional cost, not a mana cost.


How can I get rid of indestructible creatures with a Red and White deck? I am creating a Red-White commander deck using Gisela as my commander.  I noticed that my deck is incredibly weak against a deck with any sort of indestructible creature.  I know of the board sweeper Terminus, but I was wondering if red/white has any other tricks up its sleeve to get rid of tricky creatures.  I'm looking for both sweepers and target-specific cards.

There are a variety of general answers for indestructible permanents:

Exile effects, which are your real bread-and-butter for all kinds of removal.
Toughness-reducing effects against creatures.
Sacrifice effects.
"Tuck" (move to library) effects.
Bouncing permanents (temporary).
Stealing permanents: the indestructible thing isn't a problem if you control it, right?
Ability- and action- restricting cards like Pithing Needle and Pacifism, if all you're worried about is disabling a card rather than removing it from the battlefield.

White is probably the strongest color for dealing with indestructible permanents after they've resolved. Some of your options are:

Oblivion Ring and similar enchantments provide single-shot answers to any non-land permanent. Note, in particular, Grasp of Fate as the multiplayer-oriented variant.
Path to Exile and Swords to Plowshares are low-cost instant answers for creatures.
Return to Dust for is a nice two-for-one against artifacts and enchantments.
Final Judgement, Descend Upon the Sinful, and False Prophet are an exile-based sweeper.
Hallowed Burial and Terminus are "tuck"-based sweepers.
Condemn can "tuck" a troublesome creature, although only when it's attacking.
Pacifism effects may be good enough if you're just trying to get rid of a blocker or prevent a card from using its activated abilities; Faith's Fetters and Prison Term are probably the best choice there.
Angel of the Dire Hour can wipe out a wave of indestructible attackers.
Elesh Norn will clear out a lot of weenies even if they're indestructible.
Evangelize and a lot mana: steal all their stuff.
Gideon, Champion of Justice will exile everything else on the battlefield.
Oblation "tucks" any nonland permanent at the cost of giving your opponent more cards.

In red:

Chaos Warp can "tuck" anything.
Into the Core can answer indestructible artifacts like Darksteel Forge.
Apocalypse and Decree of Annihilation are exile-based sweepers.
Warp World and similar cards will remove the offending permanents, at the cost of giving your opponent new toys to replace them.
Insurrection will let you take all of an opponent's creatures for a turn — usually that's enough to finish off a player or feed them all to a sacrifice outlet like Ashnod's Altar so you don't have to give them back.

Colorless cards worth noting:

Duplicant is a popular card for exiling creatures.
Brittle Effigy, Amulet of Unmaking, and Helvault provide targeted exile effects, though not very cost-effectively compared to what you can get in white.
Karn Liberated and Ugin, the Spirit Dragon can easily exile multiple troublesome permanents.
All Is Dust is a sacrifice-based sweeper.


Sorry! Fire Token Bumping Rule In Sorry! if I have the fire token, and I advance to the next corner fire slot before drawing my card, do you bump somebody else back to start who is on the fire slot before drawing the card?  My thought is no, but I wanted to get another opinion.  My wife and I argued for about an hour on this.  We need a mediator...

I would say yes. The rules state that two pawns can never occupy the same space. Since it is your turn and you advance your pawn with the fire token to the corner, it would make sense to return the opposing player's pawn to start. The only time you wouldn't be able to do this would be if:

There is a pawn with the ice token on the fire corner

One of your pawns is on the fire corner.

Both of these scenarios would involve you not moving your pawn with the fire token to the corner. Otherwise, Sorry! is the name of the game.
The only reason I could see this having an effect would be if you have no other pawns on the board and the card you draw after sending the opposing pawn home is a 4.


How can we speed up Killer Bunnies? What are some common house rules that you might use for a Killer Bunnies game?

Because the game has so many rules/cards to begin with, the only one that we've come up with is not allowing Super Bunnies to be blanched.  Any others we should adopt to help simplify/speed up the game?

We've tried halving the cost of carrots, but that made "Take a carrot" cards nearly unnecessary.  We've also tried allowing people to have a free Black Pawn in order to limit the effectiveness of weapons but that kept too many bunnies on the board.  The free Black Pawn helped make the game move faster, but it meant that you nearly never had to play around not having a Bunny.

An old group of mine found it very effective to give each player a "holy hand grenade" token at the start of the game.  This can be used to destroy any card, weapon, bunny, etc.

Feel free to adjust the number of tokens, if one simply isn't enough.  Just remember, "three shalt be the number thou shalt count!"


How to make a small slam in bridge with only 25 high card points between the partnership? This follows my recent question about how to bid a small slam in clubs with <30 HCP; but this time the partnership only had 25 HCP in toto (board 15 TCG). The optimal contract was 6 diamonds by West; but even fewer couples bid and made that compared with the 6 club slam in my previous question. In fact, only 1 of 1807 partnerships bid and made the small slam in diamonds.

My partner and I bid 3 diamonds; but in fact ended up making a total of 12 tricks. East opened the bidding with 1 club and West responded with 1 diamond. East responded with 3 diamonds, which jump raise by Opener is usually forcing in our partnership. West chose not to be forced and ended up playing 3 diamonds. There were no intervening bids by our N-S opponents.

My question to you, gentle reader, is how would you bid this hand in order to end up in a small slam contract of 6 diamonds by West. Should East have shown his strength (17 HCP + 2 shortness points for the singleton heart) more forcefully ?   Should he have indicated an interest in slam investigation with a control-showing cuebid bid during the second round of the auction.  I look forward, as usual, to reading your comments, criticisms and words of wisdom.

Looking at just the East West hands without looking at the North South hands, 6D is a fairly poor contract.  It has only about a 20% chance of making unless you have peeked at the North South hands.

There are a number of choices that East/West can make during the bidding, but all of them should end up at 3N.

Possible auctions (depending on various subtle differences in partnership agreements and player judgement, all of which are playable) include:

1D-1N-2N-3N

1D-1N-2S-3D-3N

1D-2D-2S-3N (if not playing "inverted minors")

1D-3C(*)-3S-3N (inverted minors with a 3C mixed raise - I've also seen partnerships that use 2S or 2H instead of 3C for this purpose)

1D-3D(*)-3S-3N (inverted minors without a special mixed raise)

1C-1N-2N-3N

1C-1N-2S-3N

1C-1D-1S-1N-2N-3N

The calculation of slam success (thanks to Forget i was ever here) is as follows:

You need to guess who has the club Q so that you don't lose a club trick.  This is 50%.
You also need to avoid the diamond loser.  If the diamonds are 2-2, then you can ruff 2 hearts in the East hand.  There is another way to avoid a diamond loser, which is if the Q is singleton.  In this case, you need a heart finesse to work to avoid a heart loser, and whichever heart finesse you choose to try is 50%.  This comes out to 40% + 1/2*13%, so 47%.

Total odds are then about 50% * 47% = 24%.  This isn't exactly correct, as there are a few additional unlikely chances to make the contract as well as a few other unlikely chances for it could go down, but 6D is NOT a contract you want to be finding frequently.


What's the deal with the new Wastes land and the diamond symbol on it? One of the cards revealed for Oath of the Gatewatch is the basic land Wastes with a new diamond symbol instead of one of the existing mana symbols. We also saw Kozilek, the Great Distortion, which has two of that new symbol in the cost.

What does the symbol represent? How does it work? Is it a color? Can I create it with an effect that says "add one mana of any color to your mana pool"? Will this symbol be errata'd onto any existing cards?

What does Wastes do? Does it have any important differences from other basic lands?

Short answer

In a cost, the new diamond symbol {C} can only be paid with colorless, while {1} can be paid with any color or colorless.
In an effect that adds mana to a mana pool, {C} means the same thing as {1}. Cards that are printed with "Add {1} to your mana pool" have received errata to add {C} instead (e.g. Unknown Shores).

Likewise, cards that add {2}, {3}, etc have been updated to use the corresponding number of {C} symbols (e.g. Palladium Myr, Thran Dynamo)

Colorless mana doesn't work any differently (colorless is still not a color, and you can't pick "colorless" if asked to pick a color).
Wastes taps for 1 colorless mana. It's also Basic, so you can have more than 4 in a deck. It has no subtypes, so you can't pick "Wastes" if asked to choose a basic land type.

The official Oath of the Gatewatch mechanics guide includes a detailed description of this.

Long answer

The diamond symbol

The new diamond symbol is the new symbol for colorless mana, and it is written as {C} in text. Rule 107.4c says

  The colorless mana symbol {C} is used to represent one colorless mana, and also to represent a cost that can be paid only with one colorless mana.

In an ability that generates mana (i.e. "add {C}"), it adds colorless mana to your mana pool, exactly as the abilities on Reliquary Tower and Ancient Tomb currently do. In a cost, like on the new Kozilek, it represents a mana cost that can only be paid with colorless mana. Kozilek costs {8}{C}{C}, so its cost can be paid with 8 mana of any type, and 2 mana that must be colorless. This exactly mirrors how colored symbols work in costs: a cost of {8}{G}{G} can be paid with 8 mana of any type and 2 mana that must be green.

Rule 105 has the following subrules

  105.1. There are five colors in the Magic game: white, blue, black, red, and green.

  105.4. If a player is asked to choose a color, he or she must choose one of the five colors. “Multicolored” is not a color. Neither is “colorless.”

Colorless is specifically not a color, and you cannot choose it when making mana of any color. Mark Rosewater (the Head Designer for Wizards) has stated this repeatedly in the context of Oath of the Gatewatch.

The oracle text of every card that generates colorless mana has been updated to use {C} to represent colorless mana.

And rule 107.4b says

  Numerical symbols (such as {1}) and variable symbols (such as {X}) represent generic mana in costs. Generic mana in costs can be paid with any type of mana. For more information about {X}, see rule 107.3

So nothing about generic mana has changed. Costs with numeric and variable symbols can be paid with any type of mana, as it has always been.

This change has no effect on mana cost reduction effects. Rule 117.7a says

  Effects that reduce a cost by an amount of generic mana affect only the generic mana component of that cost. They can’t affect the colored or colorless mana components of that cost.

And every card that previously reduced a cost by a generic amount still has that effect. For example, Eye of Ugin still has the text

  Colorless Eldrazi spells you cast cost {2} less to cast.

Wastes

The complete text of the card Wastes is

  Wastes
  Basic Land

  {T}: Add {C} to your mana pool.

And rule 205.3i still says

  Lands have their own unique set of subtypes; these subtypes are called land types. The land types are Desert, Forest, Gate, Island, Lair, Locus, Mine, Mountain, Plains, Power-Plant, Swamp, Tower, and Urza’s.
  Of that list, Forest, Island, Mountain, Plains, and Swamp are the basic land types. See rule 305.6.

So, Wastes has no land type, and there are no new basic land types. This means that cards like Coalition Victory don't work any differently than they did before.

An additional important difference between Wastes and other basic lands is that to put Wastes into you limited deck (Draft or Sealed) you need to open them. They appeared twice as often as other common cards in Oath of the Gatewatch to make this easier.

The fact that it did not add a new basic land type also means that you cannot choose "Wastes" as the basic land type for cards like Convincing Mirage or Crystal Spray.

Some cards, like Walker of the Wastes, care about Wastes, but they specifically care about lands with that name, instead of lands with a specific type.

I want to emphasize this point: the mana generated by Wastes is just colorless mana. It works exactly like any other mana source that generates colorless mana, so it does not count for Sunburst, or Converge, or anything else that counts colors. If you copy the mana with Doubling Cube, you get regular colorless mana. If you have a Wastes and a Reflecting Pool, they both just tap for regular colorless mana.


What happens when you cast a spell with multiple copies of Krark, the thumbless Using the partner commanders Krark, the Thumbless and Sakashima of a Thousand Faces. Krark has the ability:

Whenever you cast an instant or sorcery spell, flip a coin. If you lose the flip, return that spell to its owner's hand. If you win the flip, copy that spell, and you may choose new targets for the copy.

With Sakashima removing he legend rule (and likely entering as a copy of Krark) it gets complicated. The question is what happens to the other Krark triggers when you lose a flip? Do they still resolve and copy the spell, or do they fizzle with the spell no longer on the stack?

On Gather, Krark has a ruling that covers this situation:

If you win the flip, but the spell that caused Krark’s triggered ability to trigger isn’t on the stack anymore (most likely because it was countered), the copy is still created.

This means that the flips still happen and the copies will still be created even if the spell has already been removed from the stack. In the ruling they suggest because of countering, but in this case it will work the same way for a earlier Krark returning the spell to hand.


What happens with Poison Counters in Two Headed Giant? I know that in Commander, 10 poison counters kills a player.

However, does the same apply in Two Headed Giant?

There are technically two players, even though they share a life total of 30.

Also I believe counters would only be placed on the targeted player of an attacking infect creature.

What are the conditions for losing due to infect in THG?

In Two-Headed Giant you need 15 or more poison counters. See Comprehensive Rules.

704.5t In a Two-Headed Giant game, if a team has fifteen or more poison counters, that team loses the game. See rule 810, “Two-Headed
Giant Variant.”

Also

810.5. With the exception of life total and poison counters, a team’s resources (cards in hand, mana, and so on) are not shared in the
Two-Headed Giant variant. Teammates may review each other’s hands and
discuss strategies at any time. Teammates can’t manipulate each
other’s cards or permanents.

You share those poision counters as a team. So if your teammate is
being hit for 5 poison counters, your team has 5 poison counters.

810.8a Players win and lose the game only as a team, not as individuals. If either player on a team loses the game, the team loses
the game. If either player on a team wins the game, the entire team
wins the game. If an effect says that a player can’t win the game,
that player’s team can’t win the game. If an effect says that a player
can’t lose the game, that player’s team can’t lose the game.

You win as a team, you lose as a team. There is no 'I' in team.
Further clarification regarding poison counters in Two-Headed Giant.

810.10. Effects that cause players to get poison counters happen to each player individually. The poison counters are shared by the team.
810.10a If an effect needs to know how many poison counters an individual player has, that effect uses the number of poison counters
that player’s team has. If an effect needs to know how many poison
counters a player’s opponents have, that effect uses the number of
poison counters opposing teams have.
810.10b If an effect says that a player loses poison counters, that player’s team loses that many poison counters.
810.10c If an effect says that a player can’t get poison counters, no player on that player’s team can get poison counters.
810.10d If a rule or effect needs to know what kinds of counters an individual player has, that effect uses the kinds of counters that
player has and the kinds of counters that player’s team has. A player
is “poisoned” if his or her team has one or more poison counters.


When discarding the card in the Love Letter, is it mandatory to show the card you had? I need a claryfication of the rules:

Let's say another player uses Baron and compares his card with mine, mine being the lower valued one. I know that I'm out of this round at that point, but what happens to my card? Is it discarded face up (everyone learns what I had) and or face down (only the comparison-winning player gets that information)?
Let's say someone uses the Prince on me. I have to discard a card and draw another one. Do I discard my card face up or face down, keeping the information what I had to myself?

The Tempest version of the rules is just a little bit vague - it does say that to play a card you discard it face up, it does say that your discarded cards go in front of you, it does say that when you're knocked out you place your card face up in front of you, it doesn't explicitly say that a card you discard to the Prince should be face up (although I'd say that they weight of all the other rules says yes it should).

The Kanai version definitely spells it out:

All discarded cards should remain in front of the player who played them, visible, so that it is clear in what order they were discarded.
If a player is out of the round he or she must reveal the card in his or her hand (if any) and place it in front of him or her.


Do multiple instances of paying extra mana to target a permanent stack? When I have two copies of Diffusion Sliver on the battlefield, does my opponent have to pay four mana, or two mana to target my slivers?
I mean it says, pay two, so when he pays two both cards should be happy, or does this stack?

An explanation how and why would be nice.

For convenience, I will quote Diffusion Sliver's ability:

  Whenever a Sliver creature you control becomes the target of a spell or ability an opponent controls, counter that spell or ability unless its controller pays {2}.

So, you've got two Diffusion Slivers. Let's call them Artemis and Boromir. Each of them has their own independent copy of this ability. When your opponent casts a spell that targets one of your slivers, you get two triggered abilities going on the stack: one from Artemis and one from Boromir.

When Artemis's triggered ability resolves, your opponent has to pay 2 mana to satisfy the cost of that ability (unless they let their spell be countered, but let's assume that doesn't happen). It's a general rule in Magic that you cannot pay for more than one cost using the same resources. So the two mana used to pay for Artemis's ability's cost cannot also pay for the cost of Boromir's ability. When they pay the mana, they no longer have that mana - just like money.

Later on when Boromir's triggered ability resolves, your opponent will have to find two additional mana to pay for that cost. That makes a total of four.


If you have two words left to link as spymaster, but they are extremely related to an opponent's word, what should you do? In about 10% or more of my games, I find myself in a tricky dilemma, where it seems almost impossible to link two words without hitting an opponent's card or a black card. I don't know if using a two hint clue or a one hint clue would be wiser here.
Wall, brush are my words left. Their other words are picture and one other irrelevant word left.
The hints I can think of are "mural 2" or "graffiti 2", but both have high risk of hitting picture.
In this scenario, should I use a one word or two word clue? What are advantages/disadvantages of each. Perhaps there's a way to link those two without hitting picture, but assuming there is none for the sake of this question, what are the pros and cons of each play?

anticipate. Try to get those clues in other sets in previous turns.
give a clue that fits all three but makes your spies wonder which of the three they should exclude. The goal is to have them think along the lines of "if it was brush and picture, he would have said painting; if it was picture and wall, he would have said hang." Here, you could say "decorating." This only works with experienced players.
think laterally. Try to find connections in a very different domain from the other team's word. E.g. plastering, scrape, fire.


How can I store hexagon tiles in a stack? I have been steadily ordering/printing armies for Neuroshima Hex, and now army storage is becoming a problem:

As you can see, there is a small mountain of plastic bags.  The current situation is necessary in order to make everything fit (including two game boards and some reasonably large army reference cards), which this leads to a packing problem at the end of game night. The boards and reference cards must be arranged into a pyramid:

And then all of the plastic bags must be meticulously and artistically layered to fit within the box.  I think the 'meticulous layering' step could be improved if I could store pieces in a stack, like a quarter roll. That would take up much less space:

I looked into other questions on storage and saw suggestions to use tackle boxes and toolboxes, but the compartments I've seen don't have the dimensions to fit an entire army.  I printed unofficial armies on thick hexes, meaning an army in a single stack is 5 inches, and an individual hex is 1.5 inches measured from one corner to the opposite corner.

Another consideration is that I would like to be able to give players the compartment the army is stored in, so that they can discard into it over the course of the game and progress towards a cleaned-up state.  This means rubber bands and similar options won't work.

This finally leads to the question: How can I store sets of hexagonal game pieces in a stack?

You can make some hexagonal tuckboxes, check out these ones from BGG.

You may need to tweak them a bit to deal with your custom tiles, but Inkscape does a pretty decent job of editing these types of PDF's (YMMV)


Starfield Field of Nyx and Mirror March If you cast a Mirror March and have five enchantments on the battlefield, including a Starfield of Nyx and another Mirror March, does the preexisting Mirror March copy the Mirror March that you just cast?

When the Mirror March enters the battlefield, it copies itself and the existing Mirror March copies it.

The Starfield's effect applies to the Mirror March as soon as it is on the battlefield, so each Mirror March sees both itself and any later Mirror March enter the battlefield as a creature, triggering its ability.


Can Mirrorworks' ability be activated multiple times for the same artifact? Mirrorworks reads like this:

  Whenever another nontoken artifact enters the battlefield under your
  control, you may pay 2 (colorless). If you do, put a token that's a
  copy of that artifact onto the battlefield.

If I cast say, a Darksteel Relic, could I then pay 4 colorless and get a total of 3 Darksteel Relics (the original and two copies)?

Since the thesunneversets is looking for an explict rules that prevent paying multiple costs to get multiple effects.
No. You can only get one token copy of Darksteel Relic for each nontoken Darksteel Relic that enters the battlefield.
Mirrorworks contains a triggered ability. We know this because its rules text begins with the word "When."

112.3c Triggered abilities have a trigger condition and an effect. They are written as “[Trigger condition], [effect],” and begin with the word “when,” “whenever,” or “at.” Whenever the trigger event occurs, the ability is put on the stack the next time a player would receive priority and stays there until it’s countered, it resolves, or it otherwise leaves the stack. See rule 603, “Handling Triggered Abilities.”

From rule 112.3c, we also know that the [Trigger Condition] is "another nontoken artifact enters the battlefield under your control", and with rule 117.12 (below) the [effect] is, "put a token that's a copy of that artifact onto the battlefield."
Rule 603.2c explains that abilities only trigger one time for each event that occurs (so if multiple nontoken Darksteel Relics were coming into play, it would trigger once for each occurence).

603.2c An ability triggers only once each time its trigger event occurs. However, it can trigger repeatedly if one event contains multiple occurrences. See also rule 509.4.
Example: A permanent has an ability whose trigger condition reads, “Whenever a land
is put into a graveyard from the battlefield, . . . .” If someone casts a spell that destroys all lands, the ability will trigger once for each land put into the graveyard during the spell’s resolution.

The final piece of the puzzle. We know from all the above, that there is a single existence of the triggered ability on the stack, and we know from the rule below that you can only get one token copy of the nontoken Darksteel Relic (the ability didn't say, "you may pay 2 any number of times", and this isn't an activated ability which allows playing a cost for an effect any time you have priority)

117.1. A cost is an action or payment necessary to take another action or to stop another action from taking place. To pay a cost, a player carries out the instructions specified by the spell, ability, or effect that contains that cost.
117.12. Some spells, activated abilities, and triggered abilities read, “[Do something]. If [a player] [does or doesn’t], [effect].” or “[A player] may [do something]. If [that player] [does or doesn’t], [effect].” The action [do something] is a cost, paid when the spell or ability resolves. The “If [a player] [does or doesn’t]” clause checks whether the player chose to pay an optional cost or started to pay a mandatory cost, regardless of what events actually occurred.
Example: You control Hesitation, an enchantment that says “When a player casts a spell,
sacrifice Hesitation. If you do, counter that spell.” A spell is cast, causing Hesitation’s
ability to trigger. Then an ability is activated that exiles Hesitation. When Hesitation’s
ability resolves, you’re unable to pay the “sacrifice Hesitation” cost. The spell is not
countered.

When the Mirrorworks trigger resolves, it gives you the option of paying a cost may pay 2. Then the [If you do] clause checks whether the cost was paid to determine if the [effect] (put a token that's a copy of that artifact onto the battlefield) occurs.


Activating Field of Ruin's ability without a target The activated ability of Field of Ruin states:

  Destroy target nonbasic land an opponent controls. Each player searches his or her library for a basic land card, puts it onto the battlefield, then shuffles his or her library.

Can I use this ability to make all players search out a basic land card even if the first part has no valid target, for example because there is no nonbasic land to destroy?

I am assuming the period matters, and the next section is a different effect that is not contigent upon the first resolving.

No, you won't be able to do that.
Abilities aren't split into parts by colons, or anything of the sort. They have an activation cost, and everything behind it is one block of effect text that is to be treated as a single entity:

602.1. Activated abilities have a cost and an effect. They are written as “[Cost]: [Effect.] [Activation instructions (if any).]”

The rules for activating abilities are identical to the rules for casting spells:

602.2b The remainder of the process for activating an ability is identical to the process for casting a spell (...). Those rules apply to activating an ability just as they apply to casting a spell. (...).

And just like for spells, you can't activate them without declaring the maximum number of possible targets - in this case, one.

601.2. To cast a spell is to take it from where it is (usually the hand), put it on the stack, and pay its costs, so that it will eventually resolve and have its effect. Casting a spell follows the steps listed below, in order. If, at any point during the casting of a spell, a player is unable to comply with any of the steps listed below, the casting of the spell is illegal; the game returns to the moment before that spell started to be cast (...)
601.2c The player announces his or her choice of an appropriate player, object, or zone for each target the spell requires. (...) If any effects say that an object or player must be chosen as a target, the player chooses targets so that he or she obeys the maximum possible number of such effects without violating any rules or effects that say that an object or player can't be chosen as a target. (...)


is it possible to target a player as if they were a Planeswalker? I ask this question so that I can clarify an old description. Players, from before there was castable Planeswalkers, have been described as Planeswalkers themselves and I understand that after each battle at a card shop the player gets that description again due to the Planeswalker point system. But my question lies between the past and the post battle are players classified as Planeswalkers when it comes to card effects?

No, you cannot target a player as if they were a planeswalker, and you cannot target a planeswalker as though it was a player. Saying that players are "planeswalkers" is simply part of the flavor of the game.

That being said, there are a couple of ways in which the rules treat planeswalkers as similar to players. While declaring attacks, you may declare that a creature is attacking a planeswalker instead of a player. That creature can be blocked by creatures the planeswalker's controller controls, and it deals combat damage to the planeswalker instead of the player. This is specified in rule 508.1b:

  If the defending player controls any planeswalkers, or the game allows the active player to attack multiple other players, the active player announces which player or planeswalker each of the chosen creatures is attacking.

In addition, if a source you control would deal damage to an opponent, you may choose to have that damage be dealt to a planeswalker that player controls instead. This is specified in rule 306.7 (from the reversed perspective):

  If noncombat damage would be dealt to a player by a source controlled by an opponent, that opponent may have that source deal that damage to a planeswalker the first player controls instead. This is a redirection effect (see rule 614.9) and is subject to the normal rules for ordering replacement effects (see rule 616). The opponent chooses whether to redirect the damage as the redirection effect is applied.


What does "removed from the game" mean? I've seen some cards that say "remove from the game". For example, an old version of Swords to Plowshares says:

  remove target creature from the game.

What does that mean? Is it different from "exile?

"Remove from the game" means "exile", and all cards that say it have been given errata to say exile.

For example, Swords to Plowshares in newer printings reads "Exile target creature." And no matter what, the Oracle text for cards (the card text shown on Gatherer) will always have the correct wording with "exile", even if the card has never been physically reprinted to fix it.

There's a historical reference in the comp rules:

  406.7. Previously, the exile zone was called the "removed-from-the-game zone." Cards that were printed with text that "removes [an object] from the game" exiles that object. The same is true for cards printed with text that "sets [an object] aside." Cards that were printed with that text have received errata in the Oracle card reference.

Specifically, this change was made in the Magic 2010 rules update. One of the big reasons for the change (besides "exile" just being shorter) was to try to clarify that they're not 100% for sure forever removed from the game, since that's not really true in general:

  The Reality: "Removed from the game" is increasingly a misnomer as we design more cards that use the removed-from-the-game zone as a temporary holding cell for cards that are very much still in the game. Like the "in-play zone," the name "removed-from-the-game zone" does a poor job of maintaining the game's fantasy metaphor.

  The Fix: The phrase "remove from the game" is being changed to "exile," which is shorter, more flavorful, and not at all misleading about actually being in the game. The zone is now called the "exile zone" and cards in it will be referred to as "exiled cards."

Note that some cards do still refer to "outside the game" (e.g. Burning Wish). This has absolutely nothing to do with exile, which is a zone that is part of the game. "Outside the game" in tournaments means sideboards, i.e. actually totally outside the game, wasn't in your deck in the first place. In casual play it could mean your collection or something more restricted, depending on who you play with. Either way, they don't work with exiled cards. They used to back when it was called "remove from the game", but it was changed in the same rules update.


Do benched Pokemon heal? I'm trying to learn Pokemon TCG so I can play with my kids; and I'm trying to figure out whether benched Pokemon heal or not? If so: are there any constraints ("healing rate", etc.) which apply to this healing process?

If not, can we remove Pokemon from the bench and return them to our hand and have them heal then? Or is the only way to heal via potions or trainer cards?

This rules guide explicitly says that:

  You'll see that each pokemon has HP, this stands for hit points. When they have damage on them equal to or greater than that number, they are knocked out. Each attack does damage, which is written on the card. This damage stays on the pokemon, even if it is no longer the active, unless you can heal it with a card.

This suggests that if you don't remove the damage counters from your Pokemons, they don't in fact heal by themselves. It doesn't matter whether the Pokemon is active or benched.

And yes, returning a Pokemon to your hand removes all damage from it, but you cannot return a Pokemon to your hand whenever you want to. You need to use trainers or an ability of a Pokemon to do so.


What is the name of this snakes-and-ladders-like race game? Someone taught me a game that they remember playing many years before. They drew the board from memory, it looks mostly like this:

 _____________
|  __________ |
| |E|   |   | |
| | | | | | | |
| | |<| |<| | |
| | | | | | | |
|S|___|___|___|

Each player began at the start (S), took turns to roll the dice and move, to see who could read the end (E) first. In some places, there were shortcuts (<) allowing players to move ahead more quickly.

There is a classic game in Spain called "El juego de la Oca", which in english is known as the "Game of The Goose". There are thousands of variants for the board (including bridges, ladders etc.), so maybe you saw a Chinese version


Name of this interesting variant of Tic-tac-toe? A group of grad students and I regularly meet up at conferences. Often, we spend our coffee breaks between talks playing various suggested generalisations of common pen-and-paper games to see if we can find an interesting one. This has lead to some quite interesting games in the past such as connect 4 with changing gravity, and tic-tac-toe on more general surfaces (such as a cylinder and Klein bottle). A group favourite, which was suggested a few months ago seems to be an interesting variant of Ultimate Tic-tac-toe.

For want of a better name let us call it Spillage-tic-tac-toe or Spillage for short.

Before stating the rules I shall ask my question.

  Is the game Spillage a well-known variant of Ultimate Tic-tac-toe? If it is, is there a reference to the game being solved in the literature? If it is not, can any insight into winning strategies be offered?

I'll now attempt to give the rules of Spillage. I apologise for not including any images with the rules (which would help to illustrate certain game states) and if anyone feels like editing the question with such illustrations, you are encouraged to do so.

Spillage

Players: 2
Board size: 9x9 - separated in to 9 smaller 3x3 'meta squares' similar to Ultimate ttt.

We will label the 9 smaller 3x3 meta boards in the obvious way with the numbers 1 - 9 (using bold to indicate a meta square) reading from top-left to bottom-right, and the individual 81 squares by subscripts n_m to denote the m-th square in the n-th meta square. So for instance the four corner squares would be labelled 1_1, 3_3, 7_7, 9_9.

As usual, player O and player X alternate placing their respective symbols, O's and X's, on the board, with X going first, until a player wins or all available squares have been played in without a win (resulting in a draw).

There is no restriction to where a player may place their O/X (this is the first major deviation from Ultimate ttt).

When a player creates a line of three consecutive identical symbols anywhere on the board, if the central symbol is in a meta square which has not yet been claimed, then that player claims the meta square which that central symbol lies in. Chains of more than three consecutive symbols are considered to be separate instances of three-symbol chains, each with their own central symbol.

For instance, if no meta squares have yet been claimed, and the squares 4_2, 1_9, 2_4 all have O's in them, then 1_9 is the central symbol of the chain and so O claims the meta square 1 . If O later plays 2_2, then (if 2 has not been claimed yet), 2_4 is a central symbol and so O will claim the meta square 2 as well.

Once a meta square has been claimed, it can not be claimed by the other player. A player wins, when they claim a chain of three consecutive meta squares as in the usual tic-tac-toe. So, for instance if player O later claims 3 in the above scenario before X can win, then O has won the game.

BGG doesn't have any game with "Spillage" in the title. Looking at the Tic-Tac-Toe entry there is also no game that reimplements Tic-Tac-Toe which is the same as Spillage. There are a number of games which play some sort of meta-game of Tic-Tac-Toe in which there are nine 3x3 games being played and the object is to get 3 in a row on the meta-board. So all in all "Spillage" would seem to be as good a name as any.

I'd guess that the game is a first player win like the game Hex since having an extra position can't hurt.

Since it is a "new" game it won't have been solved. But writing a program to play would need a dept first approach with symmetry. The look ahead would seem to be fairly uncomplicated so I'd guess that a computer could either win or tie with a decent program.

Given that the human moves first I'm not sure that a human could out-play a computer on this. If such a winning strategy could be found for the first player then the game would just be a gigantic meta-Tic-Tac-Toe game of course.


Fluxx - What counts as a 'play'? When the current rules in play are along the lines of 'Play 4', does that include any cards you have already played as the result of other actions / playing your Keepers, or do they have to be fresh cards from your hand?

If I have 2 action cards and 2 keepers in my hand and I have to play 4, do I have to also play the keepers in front of me? (I've interpreted the rules as such in this case)

(Zombie Fluxx in this case, but common to all variants of Fluxx I think?)

One thing that may be worth clarifying (for new players) is that, if you've played one card already this turn and your second play is "Play 4", you don't play four more cards; you play two more cards.

Likewise, if you start your turn with "Play 4" in effect and your third play is "Play 2", you don't play any more cards; you have already played more than your currently allotted number of cards for the turn.

Playing cards as part of an action doesn't count towards your Play 4 limit, though.  For instance "Draw 3 and play 2 of them" counts as one of your four plays for the turn, not two or three.

Playing a Keeper or a Goal does very much count as playing a card.  Creepers don't, of course, but they're a well-documented special case.


Ambiguous mission objectives and scenarios In the newer form of Mission Risk (link), where each player has 4 mission cards of varying difficulty, there are a number of ambiguities that are not covered by the manual. After an exhausting (if not exhaustive) search of the intertubes for an official stance on mission objectives (particularly relationships between similar missions), I have landed here to seek advice.

Overlapping objectives

This is when different mission cards can be fulfilled (in part or in full) from actions taken to complete other missions.

This was brought to a head in my last game, where I had the following 3 missions: "Conquer 4 territories", "Conquer 1 territory on 4 continents" and "Take 1 territory from each opponent". Do these objectives need to be completed independently, or can a single conquest count towards each mission?

I was tempted to say that they were, but, in another recent game, I had "Control 2 continents" and "Control 3 continents". If treated the same as the first example, that's nearly the entire map and therefore way more difficult than almost every other mission.

Update (2012-01-30): Using the 3 Mission Cards from the first paragraph, let us say that in my opening turn I manage to conquer 4 territories on different continents, all owned by different players. This fulfils the objectives of each Mission Card. Am I entitled play all 3 Mission Cards over the next 3 turns?

Is there a distinction between the two types of mission other than their relative difficulty, and if that is the only distinction then how is the line drawn?

Sparse reinforcements

Also in a recent game, I had the mission "Gain 18 reinforcements this turn" (played after gaining reinforcements). I gamely attempted to suggest it might be possible to play this mission after eliminating another player and playing the captured territory cards for further reinforcements.

My argument went that it satisfied both criteria of being "after gaining reinforcements" and occurring within "this turn" as specified by the mission description.

Nobody else agreed and I accepted that it was a stretch, but I'm keen to hear thoughts.

Eliminated players

Somebody other than me tried to claim that a player eliminated that turn (by them) should count for the purposes of the "Have twice as many territories as any 1 enemy". This was swiftly rebuffed. Edit: We assume an implied equal-to-or-greater-than for all quantity-based missions, so the mission in question would, for practical purposes, read "Have at least twice as many...".

In short, any general rule or standard that could be consistently applied to any combination of overlapping/ambiguous mission combinations would be greatly appreciated.

Overlapping Objectives: You may only complete one mission per turn, even if you have achieved the objectives on multiple mission cards, and only on the turn which you achieved the objective. On page 17, under Completing a Mission (emphasis mine).

  Completing a Mission

  You may claim a completed mission once you have achieved what it says on the card. But you cannot claim more than one mission on a turn.

Update: You may only complete missions if you achieve the objectives that turn. There are 3 examples of when mission cards can be claimed.

1) Play at the Start of your Turn: before Reinforcements.

2) Play after you gain Reinforcements: show when you receive reinforcements (either during the reinforcement step, or at any time you have 5+ cards in hand)

3) Play at the end of your Turn: after drawing a territory card (if applicable).

I imagine it would be a nightmare if you would be required to remember all a players action since the beginning of the game as proof that you did/didn't complete some mission objective. The rulebook doesn't state clearly that you have to complete the mission objectives on the turn that you claim the card, but years of Risk history would indicate that this is the correct interpretation. This would further be clearer if the "Control X continents/territory cards" all had (play at the Start of your Turn) since you cannot change the number of continents/territories you control until your combat step, the "Conquer X continents/territory cards" all had (play at the End of your Turn) after your combat step, and all "Gain X+ reinforcements" cards with (play after you gain reinforcements) since that is when you gain reinforcements. The alternative, of counting all your actions since the beginning of the game, would make it easy to complete many of the missions +3 troops per turn allows you claim 18+ troops on turn 6, conquer X+ territories cards would require a pen & paper to keep track of, etc.

As for the differentiating factor for the Mission Cards, they are sorted by the type printed on their card backs (page 17), General, Major, Colonel, Captain. I would surmise that they there are differing levels of difficult in completing these goals, but the rulebook doesn't say.

Sparse Reinforcements: You may only use an opponents territory cards to gain further reinforcements during a turn, if you have 5+ territory cards in hand. The rules specifically state the steps in your turn on page 7. You will note that Combat happens after Reinforcements. You can only gain a players territory cards from eliminating them during Combat, so it is too late in your current turn to purchase reinforcements during your normal Step 1. The only exception to this is on page 12, under Eliminating Another Player: that says, "if your new hand of Territory cards is now 5 or more, you must stop immediately turn in a set in for bonus reinforcements. Since you may play the mission card after gaining reinforcements, you can play it during this bonus reinforcement step. You probably can also count any reinforcements you have gained since the start of this turn (during Step 1), and any troops you gain during this bonus step towards fulfilling this requirement.

  Step 1: Receive and Place Reinforcements (always)

  Step 2: Combat (if you like)

  Step 3: Fortify your Position (if you like)

  Step 4: Collect a Territory Card (if you have conquered at least one territory)

Eliminated Players: Yes, any number of territories is twice as many as zero.

I agree with this statement. An eliminated player clearly has zero territories, and zero times any number is zero (2 x 0 = 0). Therefore, any number of territories (including 0) would be having twice as many territories as any 1 enemy.

0 - 0 or more
1 - 2 or more
2 - 4 or more
...


Can Clockspinning from Time Spiral be used to remove infect or poison counters? I believe the answer is that Leeches is the only appropriate card for removing poison counters from players, based on this question, but I'll ask anyway since I have observed this card posted elsewhere as an answer to poison counters.

Can cards which remove counters, such as Clockspinning, be used to remove poison counters or is Leeches the only appropriate response?  What about the same question but targeting the -1/-1 counters on creatures?

The Magic comprehensive rules state that:

  110.1. A permanent is a card or token on the battlefield. A permanent remains on the battlefield indefinitely. A card or token becomes a permanent as it enters the battlefield and it stops being a permanent as it's moved to another zone by an effect or rule.

As a player is neither a card nor a token, and a player is certainly not on the battlefield, Clockspinning can not target a player and thus can not be used to remove poison counters. It can, of course, be used to remove -1/-1 counters on creatures that was caused by infect damage.


double movement in Scrabble Can you resolve a dispute between myself and my girlfriend? She recently won a game with what I think is a double movement (although there's no mention of this in the rule book).

She put one two letters down to make one word, which also scored linked to another letter. But she then added another letter immediately to the left of the finished word, which then extended the second word. I just don't think you can make a second movement like this in scrabble!

My sister placed down W, D and E, the ones that I circled in red. Is she allowed to do that? I told her it was impossible is it?

Can you resolve this for me please?

From the official rules:

  All tiles played in any one turn must be placed in one row only across, or one column only down the board.

As you know, it is perfectly fine to score for multiple different words you made on your turn, but only if you made them from tiles played that turn. Since any tiles played on that turn must be in a single row or column, you cannot play two letters in one column and start a word, and then finish it by playing another letter in a different column. If I'm understanding your example properly, then you are correct in that she made an illegal move. :D


Can a non-instant or sorcery ever have flashback? Normally the Flashback ability only exists on instants and sorceries. But with all the various strange combinations and rules quirks that exist in MTG, I was wondering if there's anything that can cause a creature or enchantment or land to have Flashback.

If so, then what would happen if you cast it for the Flashback cost? Flashback rules say that the card is exiled after it is cast, so I'm guessing that the card would never enter the battlefield at all; rather it would just resolve and be exiled immediately. Is this correct?

That's correct.

It's currently impossible for a permanent card to gain Flashback[1], but let's say it's possible. Instead of being put on the battlefield on resolution, the card would be exiled instead.

  “Flashback [cost]” means “You may cast this card from your graveyard by paying [cost] rather than paying its mana cost” and “If the flashback cost was paid, exile this card instead of putting it anywhere else any time it would leave the stack.”

Flashback can only be granted to instants and sorceries, and it would be too messed up for a card with a permanent type to gain one of those types.


Are you allowed to not block and let the damage slip through? Is it allowed for you to not defend with any creatures at all when the opponent is attacking (even if you have untapped creatures) and take the damage yourself?

For example, I have a sliver deck and I want to build up on slivers to take down my opponent, but my opponent attacks me and the creature she uses is capable of taking out my sliver. Am I allowed to ignore that creature and not assign defenders to defend the damage and just take the damage myself?

You are not forced to block attacking creatures.

There are certain creature abilities that force you to block, but generally, you can leave attacking creatures unblocked, and they will deal their damage to you instead of your creatures. I suggest you read the Basic rulebook:

  Your opponent chooses which of his or her creatures will
  block. Tapped creatures can’t be declared as blockers.
  For blocking, it doesn’t matter how long the creature has
  been on the battlefi eld. Each creature can block only one
  attacker, but multiple blockers can gang up on a single
  attacking creature. If that happens, the attacking player
  orders the blockers to show which is fi rst in line for
  damage, which is second, and so on. Creatures don’t have
  to block.


Will a Wandering Giant Skunk prevent the combat participation of an already committed helper? This situation came up last weekend:

Player Alice is in combat with monster X and losing.
Player Bob offers to help and together they're beating monster X.
Player Craig plays a Wandering Monster card with a Giant Skunk to join the combat.
Alice and Bob are now losing the combat.
Heated discussion ensues with Player Dan arguing that Bob is no longer involved in the combat as the Giant Skunk prevents friends from assisting in the combat. Craig argues that Bob is already committed may not be removed without an explicit effect.
Alice uses an item and now the duo are winning the combat.
Alice and Bob win the combat, Alice levels up twice
Craig plays a Trojan Horse to prevent treasure acquisition.

So the question is, can the Giant Skunk remove committed helpers to a combat? Various googling after the fact could not find an answer.

Yes, the wandering skunk stops people helping even if they've already agreed.
"Helping" in combat isn't the same as "agreeing to help". The rules discuss asking for help:

Only one player can help you, adding his combat strength to yours.
If someone successfully helps you kill the monster, discard it, draw Treasures...

"Helping" means everything from agreeing to the resolution.
Giant Skunk says that other players "may not help you". It doesn't matter if they've already agreed to help or started helping, because the skunk forbids them from helping.

This is similar to a situation with the Gazebo, which says:

No one can help you. You must face the Gazebo alone.

The FAQ has the following:

Q. What if the Gazebo appears as a Wandering Monster after the player already has a helper?

A. The helper has to back off and let the player whose turn it is fight the Gazebo and the other monster(s), alone.

Again, the person was helping you, but is now forbidden from doing so, so they stop.

As a final point, my take on the rule for settling disputes through loud arguments and the owner deciding is that it's a mechanism for convenience. Since the game is a bunch of random events of wildly varying utility and power, it doesn't really matter whether some of the rules are followed or not and it's more important to keep the game running. However, when you're taking the time to figure out the correct rules outside of the game, there usually will be a correct answer.


Why is Sunken Hollow a rare? Yesterday I was opening some boosters from the new Oath of the Gatewatch expansion, and got Sunken Hollow as a rare.

(Tap: Add Blue or Black to your mana pool.) Sunken Hollow enters the
battlefield tapped unless you control two or more basic lands.

To be honest I was kind of dissappointed to get a land for a rare (then again, I also got Nissa, Voice of Zendikar, so I can't complain), but it also made me wonder why it is a rare? What are the exact advantages of this card? The gatherer website has some rulings on this card, but I can't really make much of them, or see how this would affect a game.

The land is a rare for a couple reasons:

It is a land that can provide two colors and it has the chance to enter untapped. Entering untapped is important for maintaining tempo.
It is a dual land*, in the classic sense of having two basic land types(Island Swamp). Lands with two basic types are very important, especially when fetch lands are currently in standard. A Plain-Island fetchland could get a Sunken Hollow, allowing the player access to black mana.

*I call it a dual land, but there are many lands that can be considered dual. Any land that produces two (or more) types of mana may be considered dual, even if they aren't a basic land type (e.g. Llanowar Wastes produces green and black, but isn't a forest nor a swamp, and costs life to make colored mana). Many dual lands enter tapped, which trades mana fixing for speed. Some do give you a slight benefit (1 life, scry 1, relevant land type).

And of the dual lands with two land types, each of them is slightly different. The original dual lands always entered untapped. Shock lands enter tapped unless you pay 2 life but it can be untapped the first or second turn. The dual land you have won't normally enter untapped until the 3rd turn or later.


Warkite Marauder and the timing for its effect Whenever Warkite Marauder attacks, target creature defending player controls loses all abilities and becomes a 0/1 creature until end of turn.

What is the timing for this ability? Is it during assign attackers, where the defending player would be unable to activate an ability? Or would they be able to activate an ability and put it on the stack before their creature loses its abilities? I assume that Warkite Marauder is putting a triggered ability on the stack, or is this incorrect?

Warkite Marauder's ability will trigger during the "declare attackers" step in the combat phase, and your opponent will be able to respond to it.

The combat phase in each turn is divided into five steps:

  506.1. The combat phase has five steps, which proceed in order: beginning of combat, declare attackers, declare blockers, combat damage, and end of combat.

"When attack" abilities trigger when a creature is declared as an attacker, which is during "declare attackers".

  Declare Attackers Step

    508.1. First, the active player declares attackers. This turn-based action doesn’t use the stack. [...]

    508.2. Second, the active player gets priority. (See rule 116, “Timing and Priority.”)

      508.2a Abilities that trigger on a creature attacking trigger only at the point the creature is declared as an attacker. They will not trigger if a creature attacks and then that creature’s characteristics change to match the ability’s trigger condition.

      508.2b Any abilities that triggered on attackers being declared or that triggered during the process described in rules 508.1 are put onto the stack before the active player gets priority; the order in which they triggered doesn’t matter. (See rule 603, “Handling Triggered Abilities.”)

So before the active player gets priority, Warkite Marauder's ability will be placed on the stack. At this point, the active player gets priority, and when they pass, the nonactive player will get priority, all while the ability is still on the stack.

Note that placing the triggered ability on the stack requires declaring targets for it, so the defending player will know which creature is being targeted by the Marauder's ability when they respond. So they can respond by activating an ability of the creature that is being targeted, because the Marauder's ability has not yet resolved, so the targeted creature will still have its abilities.

If the nonactive player passes; then the Marauder's ability will resolve, and the targeted creature will lose all abilities.This means that by the time blockers are declared in the combat phase, the targeted creature will already be a 0/1 with no abilities.


What happens when two units attack each other with equal support? We have the following orders:
England:

F Nor - Swe.
A Den S F Nor - Swe.

Russia:

F Swe - Nor.
F St. P (NC) S F Swe - Nor.

Both have an equal strength. How does this resolve?

In the rules as of 2015, this is covered under "Standoff Rules":

Units can’t trade places without the use of a convoy. If two units are each ordered to the province that the other occupies, neither can move.

and then in "Support in Standoffs":

Diagrams 10 and 11 show two common standoff situations. In both cases, a strength of 2 meets a strength of 2 and all units stand in place. In Diagram 10, if there had been a Fleet in the Tyrrhenian, it wouldn’t be dislodged by the standoff. (A standoff doesn’t dislodge a unit already in the province where the standoff took place.)

Since the two units both have the same support, they cause a standoff and neither one moves.
However, if any other unit was moving into Sweden or Norway with support, then the unit in that province would be dislodged since its support related only to its move order.


Can You Create Free Rent Agreements in Monopoly Is it legal to allow free rent agreements as part of a real estate transaction in Monopoly?  Specifically I'd like to purchase a property and sell two additional properties but only if both parties in the transaction receive 'free rent' as long as we own the properties.

You can offer a rent free situation by promising the player that you will never claim rent.  As rent is only ever paid when the owner of a property claims it, you can in effect offer free rent.

There is no way to enforce this though and you must treat this as nothing more than a gentleperson's agreement.


can you activate abilities during a resolving stack? So for example: I have Krenko, Mob Boss with Thornbite Staff equipped. He is targeted with Doom Blade. In response I tap Krenko to make 1 Goblin token. I also have Goblin Bombardment to sacrifice the token. Can I sacrifice the token after it has been made to untap Krenko and make more tokens before Doom Blade resolves?

It sounds like you're trying to determine which of two possible models is the real one:

If all players pass priority in succession, then every spell/ability on the stack resolves, with no further opportunities to respond until it is empty. If this is the real model, then you can't sacrifice the goblin token to Goblin Bombardment before Doom Blade resolves.
If all players pass priority in succession, then only the top spell/ability on the stack resolves, and players may continue to respond to spells/abilities remaining on the stack. If this is the real model, then you can sacrifice the goblin token to Goblin Bombardment before Doom Blade resolves.

So which is the real model? It's the second one. Items on the stack resolve one at a time, rather than all at once.

  116.4. If all players pass in succession (that is, if all players pass without taking any actions in between passing), the spell or ability on top of the stack resolves or, if the stack is empty, the phase or step ends.

and

  116.3b. The active player receives priority after a spell or ability (other than a mana ability) resolves.

With these in mind, the play-by-play goes like this. I'm assuming it's your opponent's turn, but this only matters for order of priority. The outcome would be the same otherwise.

It's your opponent's turn, so he is the active player. He casts Doom Blade targeting Krenko.

Stack: Doom Blade.

Your opponent passes priority to you. You activate Krenko's tap ability.

Stack: Doom Blade, Krenko.

You pass priority. Your opponent passes priority. The top spell/ability on the stack resolves. You receive one goblin token.

Stack: Doom Blade.

Your opponent passes priority. You activate Goblin Bombardment, sacrificing a goblin and choosing a target. Krenko's "untap me" ability triggers and goes on the stack.

Stack: Doom Blade, Goblin Bombardment, Krenko's untap ability.

You pass priority. Your opponent passes priority. The top spell/ability on the stack resolves. Krenko untaps.

Stack: Doom Blade, Goblin Bombardment.

Your opponent passes priority. You pass priority. The top spell/ability on the stack resolves. Goblin Bombardment deals one damage to whatever you targeted.

Stack: Doom Blade.

Your opponent passes priority to you.

At this point, you can pass priority, letting Doom Blade resolve and destroy Krenko. Or you can go back to step 2 and make another goblin token. In fact, you could repeat the loop as many times as you wish.

(This is all assuming that your opponent has no more plays to make after Doom Blade. He could play additional spells and abilities any time during this process where it says "Your opponent passes priority". For instance, if he plays a second Doom Blade on Krenko during step 3, then your infinite damage combo will be foiled)


Commandeering a spell with rebound? My opponent and I each have 5 1/1 soldier tokens on the battlefield.

My opponent casts Nomads' Assembly, I cast Commandeer targeting the Nomads' Assembly and gain control of that spell.  No other spells are cast, nor any other shenanigans are performed during the rest of the turn.

Once the spell resolves, I have 10 1/1 soldier tokens on the battlefield, and the spell is exiled.  Do I still control this exiled spell?  Or does my opponent now control this exiled spell?  I think rule 400.7 is the proper rule, but I'm not seeing this interaction explained.

Specifically, my opponent owns the Nomads' Assembly while it is in exile, but do I control it?  Or does he control it as the card moves into exile?  When does the spell return to play?  And who gets to double their number of tokens?

The real outcome is that Rebound doesn't do anything: it doesn't get exiled, and nobody gets to cast it again.

The definition of Rebound in rule 702.87a says

  Rebound appears on some instants and sorceries. It represents a static ability that functions while the spell is on the stack and may create a delayed triggered ability. “Rebound” means “If this spell was cast from your hand, instead of putting it into your graveyard as it resolves, exile it and, at the beginning of your next upkeep, you may cast this card from exile without paying its mana cost.”

In your scenario, your opponent cast the spell, but you control it as it resolves. This means that you didn't cast it from your hand, so the condition isn't met and Rebound doesn't do anything.


What to do with two gold on one card? If a card has gold on both morning and evening action, do you have to put them in separate holds or can you combine them into one?

The morning action and evening action are done consecutively. The case of the card you're describing is discussed in the Continent section of the rules at the very bottom:

  doubloons obtained with the gold-gold card cannot be combined and placed in a single hold


In what order are triggered abilities executed? When in a player window where triggered abilities can take effect, how do players determine the order of execution of the triggered abilities?  Can they be in any order, i.e. player 1 triggers 2 abilities, then player 2 triggers 1, then player 1 again triggers 1?  Or do they follow certain restrictions such as particular abilities requiring all triggerings for that to be done atomically or, in the case of a disagreement among players, defaulting to the player who controls the lead investigator to decide who goes when, or in player order etc.?  I would think the answer is likely in the order the players decide, with disputes resolved by the lead investigator.

Form Rules Reference, p.17

Priority of Simultaneous Resolution

If an effect affects multiple players simultaneously, but the players
must individually make choices to resolve the effect, these choices
are made in player order. Once all necessary choices have been
made, the effect resolves simultaneously upon all affected entities.

If two or more forced abilities (including delayed effects)
would resolve at the same time, the lead investigator
determines the order in which the abilities resolve.
If two or more constant abilities and/or lasting effects
cannot be applied simultaneously, the lead investigator
determines the order in which they are applied.


How should we be keeping track of secret doors? How are players keeping track of which doors a player has uncovered? Once you have discovered a door you do not need to roll again to find it. It seems like a lot to memorize or are we playing this game wrong?  Do all four get the knowledge of the door once uncovered?

Assuming you are playing the new WotC version, the rules state

  You might wish to keep track of the doors you found on a piece of
  scrap paper

Now all you need is some way to easily reference a specific door.  You could try to describe the area it is in, like "Door to east-most level 4 room".

Of course, if you're playing the older "New Dungeon", it wouldn't really be a problem, because in that version you forgot about secret doors as soon as you moved away from them.


Removing a Commander permanently So I was thinking of ways to get rid of Commanders other than destroying and exiling them. I found that some cards just plain out remove creatures and other permanents from game entirely. I was wondering if its possible to remove them that way because it's not like it went to the graveyard or exile.

As @Dopplegreener mentions, all cards that said "remove ... from the game" has been errataed to say "exile ...".

The problem with getting rid of a commander permanently is rule 903.9:

  903.9. If a commander would be exiled from anywhere or put into its owner's hand, graveyard, or library from anywhere, its owner may put it into the command zone instead. This replacement effect may apply more than once to the same event. This is an exception to rule 614.5.

This rule lets the commander's owner put it back to the command zone no matter what happens.  Well, almost no matter what happens.

Ways to Nullify a Commander

The rule doesn't apply to phasing.  If you phase out a commander, such as with Vanishing, and have Stasis in play, their commander will be out of play until stasis is removed (phasing happens during the untap step, so Stasis prevents their commander from phasing in).  You can also have the commander out of play for most of the game without using Stasis by activating Vanishing as soon as their commander phases back in (their commander will exists for only a brief window at the beginning of some upkeeps).
If you take over their turn, such as with Mindslaver, and exile their commander on their turn, such as with Unmake, you chose whether or not to apply the replacement effect and can choose to have the commander be exiled rather than go to the command zone.
You can turn their commander into something else, such as with Song of the Dryads or Imprisoned in the Moon.  (Note that causing a commander to lose all abilities, such as with Lignify, isn't sufficient to nullify the commander against some decks, as a commander with no abilities is still a commander and can still deal commander damage.)
You can prevent them from casting their commander, such as with Meddling Mage
You can take control of their commander, such as with Empress Galina (your friends might not play with you if this is your commander) or Aethersnatch (it pains me that Commandeer doesn't work on most commanders; it can only target the few planeswakers that say "can be your commander").
You can eliminate the player that owns the commander, such as with Door to Nothingness.  When a player leaves the game, all objects owned by that player leave the game.

At the end of the day though, short of eliminating the player, you can't permanently prevent someone from accessing their commander1.  Any permanents you use to lock down their commander can be destroyed.  Any other tricks you pull can be negated through some combination of Pull from Eternity, Elixir of Immortality, Mastermind's Acquisition, and Brand.  There is always a way to get a card back, no matter where it has gone, unless it's owner has been eliminated from the game.

1. @ThomSmith found a way to permanently prevent a player from accessing a commander but it requires you to concede the game.

Joke Answers

There are a handful of cards not legal in the format2 that can either permanently remove a commander or that deserve honorable mentions:

The silver-bordered cards AWOL and Look at Me, I'm the DCI can put their commander into a zone not referenced by any other card in Magic.
Bronze Tablet (an ante card, not legal in any format) is one of the few cards that can change ownership of a permanent, nullifying rule 903.9.
During a subgame of magic, from Shahrazad or Enter the Dungeon, a commander is only available to a player if it was in the command zone at the start of the subgame ("719.2c As a subgame of a Commander game starts, each player moves their commander from the main-game command zone (if it's there) to the subgame command zone.") or if they pull a card from outside the game ("719.4. All objects in the main game and all cards outside the main game are considered outside the subgame (except those specifically brought into the subgame).")
If you make their commander a copy of the silver-bordered Chaos Confetti (such as by animating Chaos Confetti with March of the Machines and then using Cytoshape), take control of their turn (such as with Mindslaver) and activate the Chaos Confetti ability on their commander, you could destroy their commander card permanently (by ripping it to pieces).
Using the silver-bordered R&D's Secret Lair, you can remove cards from the game by playing an older version of a spell that exiles (such as Unmake) and ignoring the errata that changes this text to "exile".
If their commander is Mirko Vosk, Mind Drinker or Hokori, Dust Drinker, you could attempt to claim ownership of it via the silver-bordered Ashnod's Coupon (you'd probably need a judge to rule on this one).  If drink ever becomes a creature type, Ashnod's coupon will gain additional potency via cards such as Amoeboid Changeling and Unnatural Selection.
The silver-bordered Spike, Tournament Grinder lets you use any of these other banned cards (if only it weren't banned as well).

2. Some of these cards were briefly legal between Dec 1, 2017 and Jan 15, 2018.


Can Disallow prevent me from crewing a vehicle? It is my turn and I have Veteran Motorist and an Aethersphere Harvester on the battlefield.

Entering the declare attackers phase I announce/tap my motorist to crew the harvester. In response my opponent plays Disallow to counter my crewing the harvester.

Does this prevent me from crewing the harvester?

Yes, Disallow will prevent you from crewing your vehicle: your vehicle will not become a creature, and the creatures you tapped to pay the crew cost will remain tapped.

From the comprehensive rules on Crew:

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

This is an activated ability with a cost of tapping creatures and an effect of turning the vehicle into a creature. It's a legal target of Disallow, so we can prevent its effect from resolving.

Note that even despite the crew ability being countered, Veteran Motorist's ability would still trigger (because you tapped it to pay a crew cost), and the vehicle will still receive +1/+1 until end of turn. If you manage to turn the vehicle into a creature later this turn, that +1/+1 will start to apply.


Trashing Estates in Dominion How vital is it to trash Estates in the early rounds of a Dominion game, given that there is an action card available to trash Estates?

Multi-card trashing, when available, is usually the best way to open the game. Indeed, as The Chaz says, you want to get rid of your coppers as well your estates.

Theory's writeup on the chapel gives a thorough coverage of the quality of dense decks.  You can also see how many of the best openings from the 6 million games played online involve the chapel.

Trashing with single card trashers like Remodel and Develop are less pressing and often not the best opening.


How many of each type of path cards are there in Saboteur? I lost 4 Saboteur path cards, and want to print my own versions as substitutes. However, I don't know which 4 cards I lost. How many of each type of path card are there in the game?

Edit
I managed to find a Saboteur card breakdown image with a count of each type of card (see link).

Here is my count based on that image.
Here is how to interpret the ASCII art: each card is represented by a 3x3 square, with x denoting that part of the card is filled with rocks.

x x         x x         x x         xxx         xxx
x x = 4     x   = 5         = 5     x   = 4       x = 5
x x         x x         x x         x x         x x

xxx         x x         x x         xxx         xxx
x x = 1      xx = 1      x  = 1     xx  = 1      xx = 1
x x         x x         x x         x x         x x

xxx         x x         xxx
  x = 1         = 5         = 3
xxx         xxx         xxx

x x         x x         xxx
xxx = 1         = 1      x  = 1
x x         xxx         xxx

This gives a total of 40 path cards. However, my manual indicates that there are 44 path cards, 27 action cards, 28 gold nugget cards, 7 miner cards and 4 saboteur cards. I only counted 40 path cards (excluding the start card with the ladder, and the 3 destination cards). Am I indeed missing 4 cards, or is the count given in the manual wrong?

You are not missing any.

As you can see, the treasure card ("la carte Arrivée avec le trésor") and the rock cards ("les cartes Arrivée avec des pierres") and the starting card ("carte de départ") are not listed in the contents. There are 40 "normal" path cards, or 44 when you include those four.