Recommended rules for 1000 Blank White Cards I really like the idea of the game 1000 Blank White Cards (aka 1000bwc), and have played it a couple times. Seems like there is some variation with the rules (yes, there are rules) and want to get some recommendation for the best or most fun rules to play with from others who have played.

Thanks!

We played the game based on a badly remembered skim through the rules, and that version has stuck.  We also call it 1001 blank cards because we remembered the title incorrectly!  Personally I think it's better than the original game, but I'm sure many would disagree.

To set up, each player is given a pen and something to lean on.  A deck is created containing about 50-100 cards.  Most of the cards should already be written, and some should be blank ones.  Before the first game this will require the creation of a load of new cards, but we usually each create new cards before a game anyway.

The cards are shuffled, each player is dealt five, and then the rest are placed in a draw pile.  Each player starts with a score of zero and the player with the highest score at the end is the winner.

A players turn consists of playing a card from their hand into a discard pile, following the rule, and then replacing it with a card from the deck.  If a player takes (or is dealt) a blank card then they must create a new card, and place it at the bottom of the draw deck. They may then take a replacement card from the deck.

Each card must have three parts - a title, a picture and a rule.  There are no restrictions on the rules on the card, but we have a gentlemanly agreement not to obviously benefit ourselves with the rules - e.g. we tend not to create cards that say "Jack gets a million points".  The other thing to take into account is replay-ability, as any of the cards could end up being used in future games.  However, it is a source of constant amusement to be playing with cards that no longer make sense - e.g. "Score 10 points if you can guess how many baubles are on the Christmas tree".

When the draw deck is exhausted, play continues, but players no longer pick up new cards.  When a player has no cards that will go, and the draw deck is exhausted, then the game is over.

The major benefit of our version of the rules, compared with other versions I have seen, is that there is less incentive to create a good or bad card.  Whenever you create a card you do not know who will end up playing it.  The primary aim is to get the most points, but I think everyone agrees that the real aim is to create the most noteworthy cards!


Are players permitted to resolve errors between themselves, without involving a judge? Suppose that a game play error occurs during a tournament. Both players agree that they would rather handle the error themselves than call a judge, and so they agree on a resolution and continue to play.

Examples:

Sarah accidentally looks at the top two cards of her library during her draw step. She asks her opponent, "Is it okay if I just take the top card, and shuffle the other card back into my library?" Her opponent says that this is okay, and so Sarah does this, and both players continue.
During combat, José mistakenly believes one of his creatures has taken lethal damage, and puts it into his graveyard. His opponent doesn't notice the mistake. A couple of turns later, José's opponent realizes José's mistake and points it out. José says, "It's okay, we'll just keep playing", and his opponent agrees.

Is this legal, or is it an infraction of some kind (perhaps collusion or cheating)?

As far as I can tell, there is no specific rule in the tournament rules that requires a player to call a judge when a rule is broken. All it says is that a player is responsible for

  Calling attention to any rules or policy infraction they notice in their matches.

In fact, the infraction procedure guide says

  If a minor violation is quickly handled by the players to their mutual satisfaction, a judge does not need to intervene.

You should consider, though, that it may be unwise to make such an agreement when your opponent breaks a rule. These agreements are informal and do not involve a judge, so your opponent is under no obligation to extend the same courtesy to you. Plus, an unscrupulous player could use these agreements to their advantage.


In Monopoly, can you save an 'advance' card to use later? Playing with friends, and they give me this rule I've never heard of before, can't find any info.
They say you can save an 'advance token' card (like a go to jail card) to use at any time.
Their reasoning is because it says 'advance token' instead of 'advance to', even though it says 'advance token to'.
Is this legitimate?

No. Cards are resolved when drawn (except for Get Out Of Jail, by explicit card text).

CHANCE AND COMMUNITY CHEST
When you land on either of these spaces, take the top card from the deck indicated, follow the instructions and return the card face down to the bottom of the deck. The "Get Out of Jail Free" card is held until used and then returned to the bottom of the deck.

Source : Hasbro - Rules of Monopoly
The wording choice of "advance token to" versus "advance to" is a distinction without a difference: the token in question is the player's playing piece, i.e., the pawn: top hat, shoe, racecar, whatever.
In the case of cards that say to advance your token, you must advance your token to the designated space when the card is drawn.


7 wonders: builder's chambers If I build the Builder's Chambers at the same time as someone builds his first wonder stage, should he be charged?

(I assume you mean Builders’ Union, where other players have to pay 1 coin to the bank for each Wonder stage they built.)

Yes, players have to pay also for stages built in the same turn.

From the Cities rules about Debts (page 4):

  Important : monetary losses are always resolved at the end of a turn, after players have played their cards, possibly having paid for trade and/or obtained money...


Cities produce in Traders and barbarians of Catan In the initial setup of the Traders and barbarians expansion and scenario, we use 1 settlement and 1 city (from where the caravan head out). At this moment the city will produce only 1 resource.

But will that initial city ALWAYS produce only 1 resource?

Further, Will any other city built during the game always produce 1 resource?

When it says you will receive only 1 resource for the city, it is talking about the initial resources that you start the game with, NOT the resources produced by the city whenever the adjacent numbers are rolled.

From the rules under Setup:

  Set up as outlined in the Catan base Settlers game, except that your second settlement is replaced by a city. You still only receive 1 resource for each terrain hex adjacent to your city.

Note that this is specifically talking about the setup; in normal Catan you start the game with 1 resource for each terrain hex adjacent to your second settlement; this rule is just clarifying that you still only start with 1 per hex even though it is a city instead of a settlement. The city acts the same as any other normal city throughout the game.


Does a player have to say uno twice on the same last card? When playing with 4 or more players, if one player says "uno" when the second-to-last card is placed on the pile and now holds only one card, must they say "Uno" again at the start of their next turn, or can they say "out", or do they simply place the last card down as long as the card is playable?

Per the rules:

  The moment a player has just one card they must yell "UNO!".

So calling "Uno" happens at the point where you go from having 2 to 1 card in hand. When you play your last card, you do not need to call anything, you just go out.


What is this weird d12 for? So I won these d12s at an arcade only to realise they're not normal. Instead of having 1-12 on them, they have some array of numbers from 3-8 or 4-9.
There were red, blue and white ones, and I don't know if all the same coloured ones had the same array of numbers or not.

The two I got is as follows:

Blue: a four in a circle, three fives in squares, two sixes, two sevens, three eights, and a nine.
White: as above, but one number lower (from three to eight)

All they (incorrectly) 'knew' was that they're for Dungeons and Dragons which afaik they are not.

These dice are for a game called GOLO Golf Dice.

I asked dice guru Kevin Cook at dicecollector.com and he recognized them almost immediately. This game is sold by a company called Zobmondo. It looks like the PDF rules are free to download, but you're missing some dice. In order to play, you're going to need the other seven dice since you roll all nine at the start of your turn.


Cumulative Upkeep on the Stack If I have Glacial Chasm, Power Conduit, and Coretapper out, during my upkeep can I wait for the cumulative upkeep on Glacial Chasm to go on the stack, activate Power Conduit to remove the age counter on the Chasm, and then move that to Coretapper in the form of a +1/+1 counter?

If I cannot, how would all of that interact? Would I have to pay 2 life per turn, but as long as I moved them it wouldn't be any more than that?

No, not quite. The age counter isn't actually placed on Glacial Chasm until the cumulative upkeep trigger resolves. When it resolves, as part of the same triggered ability, you must then pay two life for that counter or sacrifice Chasm. You can't remove the counter before you have to pay two life for it because you don't get priority while an ability is resolving.

You can, however, remove each counter immediately after the cumulative upkeep trigger resolves, meaning you pay only pay two life per turn indefinitely.


In Killer Bunnies can you play a Terrible Misfortune on a bunny that needs to be fed? In Killer Bunnies when a Bunny has a "feed your bunny" card on it you have until the end of your turn to feed it. If you draw a Terrible Misfortune card (plays immediately) can you play it on the bunny that needs to be fed (assuming you can't feed it)?

Yes, you may since your turn isn't over until you replace your Bottom Run card in Step (4), which occurs after you draw back up to five cards. Under the rules for Feed Your Bunny it says:

When using a Feed The Bunny card, a player places it on any opponent’s bunny in The Bunny Circle. The opponent will need the Cabbage Units and Water Units to Feed The Bunny by the end of his next turn. [...] If the bunny is not fed by the end of the opponent’s turn, then it dies and is removed from The Bunny Circle (discarded).

and for Play Immediately cards:

If a player draws a PLAY IMMEDIATELY (Terrible Misfortune) card during play, then he must stop the game, announce that he has the card, and kill one of his own bunnies in The Bunny Circle.

So, when you play a Feed Your Bunny card on an opponents bunny, they only have until the end of their turn to feed and save it. So, when is the end of your turn? The Blue Starter Deck rules breaks down the steps of your turn as:

(1) Flip over the TOP RUN card.
(2) Slide the BOTTOM RUN card up to the TOP RUN card position.
(3) Draw a replacement card from the Draw Pile.
(4) Replace the BOTTOM RUN card with a card from your hand.

(Note: the yellow/blue bunny bits rules were very confusing since they didn't breakdown the turn into steps, "A player’s turn is over when he has flipped his TOP RUN card (or played a SPECIAL card directly from his five-card hand), and has replaced the card so that he once again has five cards in his hand and two cards down on the table.")


Moving the Gardener/Panda 'in a straight line' in Takenoko The rules in Takenoko state that the Panda/Gardener can move in a straight line as far as they like, but not over gaps between tiles.

In practice this means that the movement of the Panda/Gardener is hardly restricted. Would it be possible to restrict the movements of other players by placing the Gardener/Panda right on the edge of a tile on the edge of the map, thus reducing the available angles of movement for the next person to move the Panda/Gardener?

I have assumed that movements are taken from the position of the Panda/Gardener piece, not the centre of the tile he is in. I have also assumed that the angle that the Panda/Gardener moves does not have to be congruent with any of the edges of the segment.

The "straight line" is between tiles, not the precise position of the gardener. This isn't a miniatures wargame like Warhammer 40k; it's a tile-based abstract Euro.

Here are the diagrams of what a "straight line" means from the rulebook:

As you can see, the "straight line" limitation simply means that movement must be across shared edges of tiles, in a straight line, rather than "around the bend".


What are good placement strategies for Stratego? How would I set up a good placement in Stratego, especially with bombs and the flag?  What is a good strategy for varying the placement?

I find that the key to Stratego lies in-

Cover your flag with bombs
Kill all enemy miners.
DO NOT MOVE a new piece when moving an old one will suffice.

Of those, I find that #3 is the most crucial.  Most players have a very hard time attacking pieces about which they have no information;  every time you touch a piece, or even visibly consider moving it, you inform your opponent that that piece is NOT a bomb.


Is the extra attack from frenzy on the profile of the Vargheist? Vargheist have frenzy. Frenzy gives an extra attack. The profile for vargheist says it has 3 attacks. Does the profile include the extra attack from frenzy or are they supposed to have 4 attacks with frenzy?

The Vargheist is supposed to have 4 attacks. Its profile states it has 3 attacks naturally, and then you add 1 for the frenzy special rule.

This is due to the unit being able to lose Frenzy, and as such losing the extra attack, without changing the unit's baseline.

This is the same for other units such as Witch Elves, and dual wielding units, with the extra attack being added to the unit without changing the unit base stats.


Are hosted power counters and advancement tokens the same thing? For example:

VIKTOR 2.0:

  Hosted Power Counter: Do 1 brain damage

Aggressive Secretary:

  trash 1 program for each advancement token

Can I advance a card that makes use of Hosted Power Counters in the same way that I can advance an agenda or a card like Aggressive Secretary?

Power counters don't (currently) interact with anything other than the card that placed them. A card will define when to place a power counter, and the effects of having them on itself. EG Draco lets you pay to place power counters when it's rezzed, and they boost the strength. The most complicated one currently is Personal Workshop which places power counters on hosted cards, but these cards are inactive while on the workshop, and so the power counters are only referenced by the personal workshop which placed them.

So no, you cannot interchange advancement and power counters.

Advancement and Virus counters are two specific types of counters which a range of cards let you place/remove/move. You can use Trick of Light or Shipment from SanSan to place or move advancement counters. The corp can clear all the virus counters, the runner can play Surge! to place extra virus counters.


Where can I find reviews of board games? Before buying a board game, I would like to read some detailed reviews.  It's also hard to tell if the review is just a paid announcement from the publisher.

Is there any website that is "the reference" for those?

BoardGameGeek can be a great resource, but it can be a bit hard to figure out where everything is.

First, you can search for games by name, if you know what game you're looking for. Or you can use the "Browse" feature to find games by category or mechanic.

Once you've found a game, you find yourself on a page that's stuffed full of information, somewhat haphazardly laid out. At the top, there is the name of the game, a picture, and some basic information on number of players, suggested age range, and so on. This can be useful to determine if it will work well for your group.

You then see a description of the game, followed by some places it might be for sale, followed by some additional information. Keep on looking as you go down, you eventually come to the Forums. Click on the "Reviews" link, and you will see a list of all of the reviews for that game. Look through these; they tend to be fairly detailed, explaining the mechanics of the game and how they work.

That's not all that BGG has to offer, though. If you keep looking further down the page, you come to the Statistics section. This is where statistics about people's ratings and the game's ranking are collected. One of the links is to "Personal comments." This will give you a list of many short comments that people have made on the games, organized by their rating. I find this invaluable for getting a quick feel of why some people liked the game, and some didn't; I usually try to check out a few of the comments with a 10 rating, a few with a 7 rating, and a few with lower ratings, to get a sense of how different people see the game. Only a few people leave long, detailed reviews, but there are usually hundreds of people who leave comments.


Penalty For Skipping Priority Sometimes when I pass my turn, my opponent simply untaps and, if nothing triggers during upkeep, they draw. This can be a major headache for me when I want to cast Mana Short after my opponent untaps but before he or she draws a card.

What is the penalty for skipping priority at competitive REL? At a regular REL event?

Assume that

The card was drawn and has already touched the players hand, such that no judge could tell it apart from the cards already in that player's hand
My last spoken words were "Pass turn"
I had 2-3 seconds of time between untap and draw during which I could have said something but failed to do so

The situation is frustrating because I do not want to tell my opponent, "Hey, I have something to do during your upkeep. Now I pass my turn." That gives away my plan.

If the answer is "You should speak up faster!" that's fine, as long as the answer contains a respectable source (a judge's ruling, the comprehensive rules, etc.).

Nothing/Warning for both you and your opponent at a Competitive REL or Regular REL event.

The rules at Regular Rules Enforcement Level (REL) events (such as Friday Night Magic, Game Days, and Prereleases) has a more relaxed/friendly atmosphere, and does not use the Infraction Procedure Guide. The Infraction Procedure Guide has no Game Play Errors that match your situation and the closest matching Common Issue from the Regular REL is:

  A player makes an in-game error not mentioned above - This will cover the bulk of player errors, and we will usually leave the game as it is. Fix anything that is currently illegal (e.g. an Aura enchanting an illegal permanent) and continue the game. If the error was caught quickly and rewinding is relatively easy, you may choose to undo all the actions back to the point that the illegal action happened. This can include returning random cards from the hand to the library to undo card draws (though don't shuffle the library if you do this) and reversing various other actions (such as untapping permanents and declaring attackers or blockers). Don't go crazy with this!

In general, they just leave the game as it is. It is probably fairly common that people just skip upkeep when nothing triggers during the upkeep. In the relaxed environment, judges are there to be friendly and educate, not to hand out violations. At the Competitive level though, if any violation occurred, it would have to be the generic ones Game Play Error/Failure to Maintain Game State, and both you and your opponent are guilty of each one respectively.

  Now, within "game errors" there are four specific categories of warnings that the offending player can get. However, because bothplayers are now responsible for maintaining a legal game state, if one player gets a warning for one a game error, the opponent will receive a warning from the special fifth group, which is "Failure to maintain game state." [...]

  4) Game Play Error - This is the "everything else" category, so any game errors that don't fall under the first three categories land here. So this is where we're talking about things like accidentally playing a card for the wrong mana cost, forgetting to attack with a creature that must attack each turn, etc.

  5) Failure to maintain game state - This is the special fifth group, which is the warning a player gets for not noticing that the opponent made a game error.

The MtG Tournment Rules note the following regarding shortcuts:

  Tournament Shortcuts

  A tournament shortcut is an action taken by players to skip parts of the technical play sequence without explicitly announcing them. Tournament shortcuts are essential for the smooth play of a game, as they allow players to play in a clear fashion without getting bogged down in the minutia of the rules. Most tournament shortcuts involve skipping one or more priority passes to the mutual understanding of all players; if a player wishes to demonstrate or use a new tournament shortcut entailing any number of priority passes, he or she must be clear where the game state will end up as part of the request. [...]

  A player is not allowed to use a previously undeclared tournament shortcut, or to modify an in-use tournament shortcut without announcing the modification, in order to create ambiguity in the game.

You opponent used a Tournament Shortcut that was previously undeclared. They should have informed you that they wished to proceed to the Draw Step, possibly by saying, "Draw step? I wish to skip the Upkeep Step and proceed to the Draw Step." You failed to maintain the game state, by not being quick enough to interrupt your opponents draw in the time your opponent untapped and waited an additional 2-3 seconds.

  A player may not request priority and take no action with it. If a player decides he or she does not wish to do anything, the request is nullified and priority is returned to the player that originally had it.

You should not request priority during your opponents Upkeep unless you plan to take an action.

  Certain conventional tournament shortcuts used in Magic are detailed below.

  The statement "Go" (and equivalents such as "Your turn" and "Done") offers to keep passing priority until an opponent has priority in the end step. Opponents are assumed to be acting then unless they specify otherwise.

A judge could issue you both a Warning. Your opponent needs to explain that they want to proceed to the Draw Step. You need to maintain the game state so your opponents errors are caught early before they can give you/him an advantage. Additional remedies are also a possibility.

  Additional Remedies

  If the error was discovered within a time frame in which a player could reasonably be expected to notice the error and the situation is simple enough to safely back up without too much disruption to the course of the game, the judge may get permission from the Head Judge to back up the game to the point of the error. Each action taken is undone until the game reaches the point immediately prior to the error. Cards incorrectly placed in hand are returned to the location in the zone from which they were moved (if the identity of the incorrectly drawn card is not known to all players, a random card is returned instead). Once the game is backed up, it continues from that point.

In the future, you might want to take a little longer before you announce, "Your Turn," until you have decided whether you want to play Mana Short next turn during your opponent's Upkeep. This way you can interrupt them when they reach for their deck, and not give them any advantage (if they have a Split Second card) nor you an advantage if a judge decides to return a random card to the top of their library (possibly a Counterspell). Repeatedly receiving warnings for the same violation (skipping an upkeep, or failing to maintain the game state by not interrupting a draw) can result in an upgraded penalty.


Why is this type of hesitation considered unethical? In two previous questions, it was clearly agreed that hesitating before playing a singleton specifically, and hesitating during play as a bluff generally constitute "wrongful/unethical hesitation." As an advanced beginner, I don't understand this rule at all.

I know that at the highest level, the best way to play and not give away any information about your holding to the opponents is to play each card at a nice even tempo. I am not a world class player; I am not even an advanced player (if I endplay you, I promise it wasn't intentional). As such, I frequently need to pause and calculate what to play, even in situations where the correct play should be obvious.

Knowing that I will inevitably need to pause and consider a play and that that pause will provide my opponents with the information that I had a potentially difficult decision to make, why is it considered unethical for me to occasionally insert a similar pause before a routine play?

It isn't as if I could use such a pause to reliably signal something to my partner. In fact, this strategy removes the temptation for partner to draw unauthorized inferences from my pauses.

If you routinely take 2-3 seconds before each play of the cards, that is ethical. If you usually play cards more quickly, but take a pause when you have a problem, that is ethical.

If, on the other hand, you usually play cards more quickly, take a pause when you have a problem, and sometimes take a pause when you don't have a problem to throw declarer off, this is unethical. Even though your partner is not entitled to know when you have a problem, declarer is entitled to know. Pausing in order to mislead declarer is called "coffee-housing." It is unethical because in bridge only your actual plays should mislead declarer. It is related to the idea that you and your partner may not have secret bidding agreements. Bridge is not poker; you are not trying to bluff your opponents based on your demeanor.


Are there any systems or experts that factor in "intermediate" cards in deciding when to bid? With a hand like (s) KJT864 (h)Kxx (d) Ax (c) xx, I'd open one spade, that is, with 11 hc points and six spades. (Under the rule of 20, I have 11 hcps+ 6 spades + 3 cards in my second suit=20). And the T, behind the jack, is worth a good fraction of a point, so I really have "11+," almost 12.

But in today's bridge column, a declarer came to grief with a similar hand because his spades were KJ7653. Dummy bid NT trump with 42 of spades, and they ended up in a 4 spade contract, with the opponents' five spades (divided 4-1) being AQT98.

Are there either systems or individual experts that would subtract one point in bidding for the "baby" trumps (specifically no spots above an 8, the "average" card in the suit)? Or make other adjustments, positive or negative, for presence or absence of "intermediate" cards like 8, 9, T?

The most accurate system I have seen for notrump bidding is a 5-4-3-2-1 count for the cards Ace through 10. This of course is a base 60 for the whole deck instead of 40, but can easily be normalized by doubling and dividing by three. (Round 2/3 up and 1/3 down.) With a little practice this is barely slower than the standard Work point count.

Not the assumption here of notrump - the Work 4-3-2-1 point count overvalues aces and kings for notrump play.

Although this system is no better for suit play than the standard Work point count, it is perhaps no worse. Aces and Kings are undervalued as a disadvantage, but counting 10's for something is an advantage. One possibility for restoring the true value of Aces and Kings (in suit play) might be to add (Quick Tricks - 1.5) to the count above in that circumstance. (The 1.5 comes from the Quick Trick strength of an Ace and a King in separate suits, which is an average holding.)


Does a builder count as a follower when scoring? The rules say  you can have more than one builder on a road or in a city, so what happens when a city is completed and it has a follower and builder of one person and a big follower and builder of another person? Does the builder count as a follower or do you only count the other normal followers?

Builders (and Pigs) are not followers and are not counted when calculating a majority.

In your case, the city would be scored for the owner of the big follower.

Originally, builders and pigs were followers but this was changed a while back.  Rio Grande Games adopted this rule upon the release of the Big Box Edition.


Can the sorcerer's ability be used at any time during the turn? I've always played Smallworld with the belief that the Sorcerer's swap/replace ability was only used at the end of the player's turn.  But I recently played it with a different group who said the power could be used at any point during a player's turn.

How do other people play this ability?  Does it really matter?

From the rules

Once per turn per opponent, your Sorcerers can conquer
a region by substituting 1 of your opponent’s active
tokens with one of your own from the tray.

From the FAQ

Q: Can Sorcerers use their Ability after placing all their units?
A: It depends what you mean. The Sorcerers cannot use their Ability after doing a final conquest for the turn using the Reinforcement die roll. But they can use their ability otherwise.

So it should be playing during the attack phase, before the reinforcement die roll.
Personally, I don't think it makes a big difference, but in Smallworld one point can make the difference.


Prismatic omen and gruul turf If I have both Prismatic Omen and Gruul Turf on the battlefield, can I tap the Gruul Turf for two of any land type it's become now, or does it still only add one g and r?

Gruul Turf will have 6 separate activated abilities. One of them is to tap for RG, the others each tap for 1 mana, 1 ability for each color. So no, you cannot tap for 2 mana of any color.

Also a note on terminology, tapping a land adds a mana to your pool, it does not add a land or land type.


In Monopoly, what happens if we run out of houses and/or hotels? How the game proceeds after all the properties, houses and hotels already bought?

Building shortages are part of the strategy of the game and it is intended that players might not be able to buy houses because of a lack of them in the bank. It is also intended that when a player has to sell a hotel they also have to sell all all houses as well if there are not enough in the bank.

  BUILDING SHORTAGES
  When the Bank has no houses to sell,
  players wishing to build must wait for some player to return or sell
  his/her houses to the Bank before building. If there are a limited
  number of houses and hotels available and two or more players wish
  to buy more than the Bank has, the houses or hotels must be sold at
  auction to the highest bidder.


Which rule(s) govern the difference between {T} activated abilities and activated abilities that require tapping? There seems to be a difference in Magic between activated abilities with the tap symbol, and activated abilities with a cost that requires you to tap permanents, and I'm unsure which rules specifically detail this difference.

For example: Assume I have four vampires in play and I have just used Sorin, Vampire Lord's -8 ability stating:

  Until end of turn, each Vampire you control gains "{T}: Gain control of target creature."

I play a Captivating Vampire. Thanks to Sorin he has "{T}: Gain control of target creature." in addition to his other abilities, but I can't activate it because he has summoning sickness. For some reason, however, I can activate Captivating Vampire's second ability by tapping himself and my four other vampires. Why is this not similarly prohibited by his summoning sickness?

302.6. A creature’s activated ability with the tap symbol or the untap symbol in its activation cost can’t be activated unless the creature has been under its controller’s control continuously since their most recent turn began.

So it's the tap symbol vs. the word 'tap'.

I'm not sure why this is ruled differently; one reason could be that the tap symbol is always an ability of the creature itself, while the word 'tap' indicates an external ability. But there are (of course) exceptions: there's an Elf which allows you to tap three Elves for three green mana. It can tap itself the turn it enters the battlefield.

But I guess one could question the origin of most Magic rules this way; for instance, why do creatures suffer from this but lands do not? (To which the answer probably is: lands are played and creatures are summoned. It does make some sense, flavour-wise.)


Sacrificing a creature you don't own but you control I use a Thief of Sanity and exile a Kroxa, Titan of Death's Hunger from my opponent's deck. I cast Kroxa, but then of course would have to sacrifice it because it wasn't escaped. Would it go back into my opponent's graveyard or mine? Am I able to escape it without the correct mana still?

Kroxa will be put into its owner's graveyard.

  400.3. If an object would go to any library, graveyard, or hand other than its owner’s, it goes to its owner’s corresponding zone.

So if you cast your opponent's Kroxa, Titan of Death's Hunger using your Thief of Sanity you will have to sacrifice it, since it wasn't cast using escape, and it will be put into your opponent's graveyard.

Additionally, even if Kroxa was put into your graveyard, you would have to pay {B}{B}{R}{R} to escape it.

  400.7. An object that moves from one zone to another becomes a new object with no memory of, or relation to, its previous existence. There are nine exceptions to this rule:

None of the exceptions are relevant in this case.  That means that as soon as you cast Kroxa using the Thief of Sanity's ability the Thief's ability loses track of Kroxa and its effect that allows you to spend mana of any type to cast the Kroxa no longer applies.


Can a creature target itself with an effect that sacrifices itself? The card Vampire Hexmage lets you sacrifice it to remove all counters from target permanent. Can it target itself with this effect?

I know a creature can target itself unless it says otherwise (like the examples from this question and answer), but I do not know how a card that sacrifices itself would work.

Yes, you can

The rules for activating an ability are as follows (slightly abridged for clarity)

  602.2. ... Activating an ability follows the steps listed below, in order. ...

  602.2a The player announces that they are activating the ability. ...

  602.2b The remainder of the process for activating an ability is identical to the process for casting a spell listed in rules 601.2b–i. Those rules apply to activating an ability just as they apply to casting a spell. An activated ability’s analog to a spell’s mana cost (as referenced in rule 601.2f) is its activation cost.
  ...

Well, that's not precisely helpful.  What are is the procedure for casting a spell?

  601.2b If the spell is modal, the player announces the mode choice (see rule 700.2)... [This section is pretty long, but basically states that any choices that are to be made such as modes, split cards, or variable costs are chosen here.  This does not include targets, however!  That comes next]

  601.2c The player announces their choice of an appropriate object or player for each target the spell requires... [This section is even longer than the last, and explains how targeting works.  But it isn't really relevant here]

  601.2d If the spell requires the player to divide or distribute an effect (such as damage or counters) among one or more targets, the player announces the division. Each of these targets must receive at least one of whatever is being divided.

  601.2e The game checks to see if the proposed spell can legally be cast. If the proposed spell is illegal, the game returns to the moment before the casting of that spell was proposed (see rule 721, “Handling Illegal Actions”).

  601.2f The player determines the total cost of the spell. ...

  601.2g If the total cost includes a mana payment, the player then has a chance to activate mana abilities (see rule 605, “Mana Abilities”). Mana abilities must be activated before costs are paid.

  601.2h The player pays the total cost in any order. Partial payments are not allowed. Unpayable costs can’t be paid.
  ...[Example]

  601.2i Once the steps described in 601.2a–h are completed, effects that modify the characteristics of the spell as it’s cast are applied, then the spell becomes cast. Any abilities that trigger when a spell is cast or put onto the stack trigger at this time. If the spell’s controller had priority before casting it, they get priority.

The key ideas here are that targets are chosen and spell (ability) legality are both checked before costs are paid.

That means that when you chose the target for Vampire Hexmage, you haven't sacrificed Vampire Hexmage yet.  And when you check to make sure that you can cast the ability, you still haven't sacrificed Vampire Hexmage.  Once you've paid the cost and sacrificed the Hexmage the ability will go on the stack, and it won't check for the presence of targets again until it resolves (at which point it will fizzle due to lack of target)

If you play Arena you can see this order of operations in action with the card Final Payment.  When you play Final Payment, you will first be asked which additional cost you wish to pay, then you will be asked to chose a target, and finally you will be asked which creature or enchantment you wish to sacrifice (assuming you chose that option).  This has tripped me up several times actually, as I tend to think about it in the opposite order, leading me to select my chosen sacrifice as the target, only to realize my mistake when I can't chose an opponent's creature as the sacrifice.  Fortunately, Arena lets you undo spells you are in the process of choosing options for.


The origin of the color wheel Is there a reason for why were the five colors of MTG ordered, clockwise, white, blue, black, red and green?

The colors adjacent to each other on the pentagon are "allied" and often have similar, complementary abilities. For example, Blue has a relatively large number of flying creatures, as do White and Black, which are next to it. The two non-adjacent colors to a particular color are "enemy" colors, and are thematically opposed. For instance, Red tends to be very aggressive, while White and Blue are often more defensive in nature.

I don't think that white is on the top has a reason though.


Pokemon tcg knock out attacks versus effects Is the Amazing Destruction (Yveltal) knock out an effect or part of the attack?

Shining Fates Amazing Rare Yveltal has the following attack text:

Amazing Destruction

Your opponent’s Active Pokémon is Knocked Out.

That is an attack, and the effect of that attack is that the opponent’s Pokémon is knocked out. A Pokémon that was protected from the effects of attacks would be protected from that; it is not dealing damage.


What to do when a deal breaker is played against a complete set with more property in it...? I have a red color property complete set(3 cards) then I put rent and my opponent gives me another red. Then my moves ended. My opponent put a deal breaker now I have to give him a set (3 cards) or all of it(4 cards) .

You would have put the new red card in another place -- it doesn't go in the set that's already full (you're starting a new set of red).
When they play Deal Breaker, they only get the full set (3 cards in this case)


Who takes extra turns first when I copy someone else's "take an extra turn" card? What happens when a player copies an opponent's Time Stretch? Does the copyer take two extra turns then the owner? Does the owner even take two extra turns? What about Part the Waterveil? These spells say take X extra turns after this one, so my playgroup is confused.

The player who cast the spell that creates extra turns will take their extra turn(s), and then the player who copied the spell will take their extra turn(s).

From the comprehensive rules (emphasis mine):

  500.7. Some effects can give a player extra turns. They do this by adding the turns directly after the current turn. If a player gets multiple extra turns or if multiple players get extra turns during a single turn, the extra turns are added one at a time. The most recently created turn will be taken first.

The order in which the spells resolve will determine the order of the extra turns. For example:

Player A casts Time Stretch targeting themself, adding it to the stack
Player B copies it using  Reiterate, adding a copy of Time Stretch targeting themself to the stack
Player B's Time Stretch will resolve, giving them two extra turns after the current turn
Player A's Time Stretch will resolve, giving them two extra turns after the current turn

Player A's extra turns are created after Player B's, so they will get the next two turns because are the most recent extra turns. The new turns will be taken in the order {A, A, B, B}. Then the game will return to normal turn order, which assuming it was Player A's turn when Time Stretch was cast, will belong to Player B. From the point of the Time Stretch, the next set of turns will look like {A, A, B, B, B, A, B, A...}. Note that nothing in this prevents the original caster from taking additional turns.


MTG: Abilities lost when exiled? I used Glaring Spotlight ability and granted my creatures hexproof and unblockable until end of turn. Then I exiled them with Legion's Initiative after attacking with Aurelia, the Warleader. Do they lose hexproof and unblockable when exiled and come back to the battlefield without hexproof/unblockable? Or will they have that ability until end of turn as stated by glaring spotlight?

Your creatures will not have hexproof, but they will be unblockable
Glaring Spotlight's activated ability creates 2 continuous effects. One grants hexproof, so it changes the objects' "abilities" characteristic. The other  ("creatures you control can't be blocked") modifies the rules of the game. Because of that difference, the first is locked in to the set of objects and will not affect other objects (such as those objects that are created after the blink from Legion's Initiative), whereas the second affects all applicable objects as long as it's active.

109.3. An object’s characteristics are name, mana cost, color, color indicator, card type, subtype, supertype, rules text, abilities, power, toughness, loyalty, hand modifier, and life modifier.
400.7. An object that moves from one zone to another becomes a new object with no memory of, or relation to, its previous existence.
611.1. A continuous effect modifies characteristics of objects, modifies control of objects, or affects players or the rules of the game, for a fixed or indefinite period.
611.2. A continuous effect may be generated by the resolution of a spell or ability.
611.2c If a continuous effect generated by the resolution of a spell or ability modifies the characteristics or changes the controller of any objects, the set of objects it affects is determined when that continuous effect begins. After that point, the set won’t change. (Note that this works differently than a continuous effect from a static ability.) A continuous effect generated by the resolution of a spell or ability that doesn’t modify the characteristics or change the controller of any objects modifies the rules of the game, so it can affect objects that weren’t affected when that continuous effect began. If a single continuous effect has parts that modify the characteristics or changes the controller of any objects and other parts that don’t, the set of objects each part applies to is determined independently.


Power Tile Effect: Initiative and Movement/Victory When using the 'Initiative' power tile (which destroys two units pre-battle)  against a [foolish or unfortunate] opponent who has only two units:

Is a victory point scored?
Is movement interrupted?

The rulebook says:

  If the attacker wins the battle, and has at least one unit left, he gains a permanent Battle VP.

The English rulebook doesn't seem to be clear about the movements, but the German version clearly states that in the case of an Attack:

  The movement ends in every case.


Settlers Of Catan - discarding cards when rolling 7 If 2 or more players have 8+ cards, do they discard their cards in some "player order" (starting from the one who threw the dice) or is it simultaneous ... is there any specific rule to that situation?

Example:

We played 3 player game.

Player A had 8 cards
Player B had 8 cards
Player C had 0 cards

"A" rolled 7. Player A will steal one card from player B (player C has no cards). Due the card counting player B wants to wait for player A to discard first so he can see the cards and choose better which of his own cards to discard (eliminate the possibility of player A stealing what he is after - maybe discarding 1 ore on purpose if he knows the player A is left with 2 ore and 2 wheat).

So to repeat the question, is there a rule for discarding your hand in some clockwise order or its simultaneous or some third option?

The best way to do is simultaneous. While discarding, all the players keep all the cards aside face down. When everyone is done with this then the cards go to bank and are revealed to other players. I have seen this in action on the online version of Settlers of Catan on www.playcatan.com hence I think this is how it should be done.


Timings of Mana Costs vs Mana Payments If I have 7 lands and a Wild Cantor (or another creature that sacrifices to produce mana, e.g. an Eldrazi Spawn token) in play, and there are no other creatures on the battlefield, can I cast Blasphemous Act?

I seem to have hazy memories that a Wild Cantor didn't interact particularly well with cards with Convoke, so I was wondering if it was a similar story here...

From my interpretation, it should work.

  601 Casting Spells

  601.2e The player determines the total cost of the spell. Usually this is just the mana cost. Some spells have additional or alternative costs. Some effects may increase or reduce the cost to pay, or may provide other alternative costs. Costs may include paying mana, tapping permanents, sacrificing permanents, discarding cards, and so on. The total cost is the mana cost or alternative cost (as determined in rule 601.2b), plus all additional costs and cost increases, and minus all cost reductions. If the mana component of the total cost is reduced to nothing by cost reduction effects, it is considered to be {0}. It can't be reduced to less than {0}. Once the total cost is determined, any effects that directly affect the total cost are applied. Then the resulting total cost becomes "locked in." If effects would change the total cost after this time, they have no effect.

  601.2f If the total cost includes a mana payment, the player then has a chance to activate mana abilities (see rule 605, "Mana Abilities"). Mana abilities must be activated before costs are paid.

  Example: You cast Altar's Reap, which costs {1}{B} and has an additional cost of sacrificing a creature. You sacrifice Thunderscape Familiar, whose effect makes your black spells cost {1} less to cast. Because a spell's total cost is "locked in" before payments are actually made, you pay {B}, not {1}{B}, even though you're sacrificing the Familiar.

So first you determine and lock the mana cost, then you can activate mana abilities, then you have to pay the mana cost.

As for the definition of a Mana Ability:

  Mana Abilities

  605.1a An activated ability is a mana ability if it meets three criteria: it doesn't have a target, it could put mana into a player's mana pool when it resolves, and it's not a loyalty ability. (See rule 606, "Loyalty Abilities.")

The cantor meets all 3 criteria, so its ability is a mana ability. Therefore, you should gain both the cost reduction and the mana through saccing.

As for why a cantor should not play nicely with Convoke, I don't know - do you have an authoritative source that it really doesn't work? "Tapping a creature" is an optional, additional cost by Convoke, and after tapping for convoke you should still be able to sac the Cantor with its mana ability.

Here is an explanation why the cantor can only reduce convoke spells by 1. However, that does not affect my answer to your actual question. The subtle difference between the two is that Blasphemous Act has a cost reduction, which is locked after you determined it. Convoke, OTOH, offers an alternative way of paying the mana costs and requires you to tap creatures to pay for its cost. You can announce to tap the cantor, but once you sacced it for mana, you can of course no longer do so, and the game rewinds to before you announced Blasphemous Act.


In Phase 10, can you play out your hand before all players has played a turn? In Phase 10, is it legal to lay out your phase and play out your hand (placing remaining single card in the discard pile) in the first round, before all players have had a chance to play in that round (i.e. pick up a card and discard)?

Yes, of course it is.
There's no rule limiting when you can go out.  Play your phase, empty your hand, round over.
Nice hand, BTW.


What is this game similar to Quoridor? A friend of mine spoke about a game with rules a little bit similar to Quoridor but different.

The rules are the following:

you have a board constituted of squares
each player has a pawn which he has to move until the opposite side
each player has several walls consisting of two square pieces
each move a player can either:

move his pawn of one square
place a wall to a position on the board but always let an escape route for the opponent: unlike Quoridor the walls are placed on the square rather than between them.

the game is won when the pawn reaches the opposite side

I'm curious if you know the name of this game.

edit :

It was actually qoridor but the rules was wrongly explained you can close the question as incorrect.

I know this is like 4 years late but I think you're looking for a game called Got'em!

I haven't played either. But you can find it on boardgamegeek.


Are TCG's the only class of games that have lists of Banned or Restricted pieces? I'm familiar with TCG's that employ banned or restricted lists for cards that are deemed to powerful for fun, interactive gameplay. Are there any other types of games that have similar ways of affecting game balance after release? Is this a feature present in other games with expansions? Are there any games without expansions that have had game balancing bans/restrictions created by the game maker or game community?

Miniatures games often have units or models banned if they are over powered or "break" the game. Generally it's less frequent than w/ some CCGs, but it does happen. That said bannings are often specific to a specific tournament rules set (LVO vs ITC for 40k) rather than issued by the creators of the game, especially when the game creators don't actively support tournaments. On the other hand most miniatures companies that do support tournaments tend towards errata rather than outright bans (See X-Wing Miniatures from FFG).


Differences between Steam and Age of Steam? What are the key differences between the Steam and Age of Steam games?

Assuming you're referring to the "standard" version of Steam, the two major differences from Age of Steam are:

Split income and VP tracks. When delivering goods, you must choose where your points go, either to an income track (that goes from -10 to +10) or to your victory point track. Early in the game, you'd usually concentrate on income to grow your business, then at some point switch to VPs.
There is no board with randomized upcoming goods for each city and therefore no "production" action. Instead, 12 sets of 3 goods are available for use with the new "city growth" action or when you place down a new city tile while "urbanizing". A startup city can only get one new set of goods with city growth, and urbanized cities cannot get another set after being placed.

Smaller rule changes include tile costs, tile distribution, no income reduction, loco is not allowed if you're on 6 already, final scoring for tracks is 1 VP per link, and when shipping you can't give more points to any other player.

This great review contains a more detailed list of differences.


Is the click a part of install cost? The card says something like "paying install cost" (Hayley Kaplan, Shipment from MirrorMorpt). Is the click a part of install cost?

No. From the core rule book:

  Install: This is the game term for playing a card onto the table.

This could be done as an action, during the Action Phase, but in the examples you're talking about it is triggered because of card text. A click cost is not inherent in an install, just as "click, $2" is not inherent in trashing a resource or removing a tag, and playing Diesel does not result in spending 4 clicks to draw 3 cards.

And aside from all of that, if the install off of Hayley did cost a click, that would make her ability MUCH less good, to the point of irrelevance.


Should We Eliminate or Modify the "Factory Rule" In Axis and Allies? The better players I know don't build industrial complexes "factories" outside of their home countries. It costs 15 IPCs (five infantry) up front, and offers an uncertain return. Far better, they would argue, to "stick to the knitting" and "go for the throat,"--of a war in Europe, which is already "overbuilt." What's worse, a factory in say India or Sinkiang can (and probably should be) captured by the Japanese, possibly giving them the momentum they need to win the war.

Other players argue in favor of e.g., a South African factory for Britain. A writer at Morrison Games likened to a two "supertransports" shuttling four zones between the UK and South Africa with two infantry on alternate turns, for similar costs in IPCs. Thus, factories do make the US and UK easier to play.

I (a newbie) don't mind some aspects of factories and dislike others. First, I think factories outside the main countries should be allowed to produce only infantry. I can imagine "local levies" of riflemen in India, China, or South Africa, but really can't imagine them producing tanks, ships or planes (and this was 70 years ago). And I wouldn't allow factories at all in landlocked territories like Sinkiang (which consists of Tibet and the Taklamakan desert. Camels, anyone?)

Also, three out of the five countries already have two industrial complexes. Only the UK and Japan have only one. Perhaps we should have a limit of two "factories" per country, meaning that only the UK and Japan can build new ones?

If "good" players don't like factories and intermediate players do, are factories necessary to the game? And if "unnecessary," should they be permitted anyway? With or without modifications?

If "good" players don't like factories and intermediate players do, are factories necessary to the game?

I'd classify myself an intermediate player and would say that the only country that really has any business building factories is Japan, and then not until the late game. The most common early game factory builds are usually mistakes, at least when playing against stronger players. A skilled Japan player will take out the Indian or Sinkiang factory in due time. And a skilled German player will have enough manpower to neuter a South African or (gasp) Egyptian factory if it is built too soon in the game.

That being said, allowing no factories for either sides is a common Axis & Allies variation, which I noted in my question, Recommended Axis & Allies alternative rules / variations?

I've played this variation a number of times and I've found it to shift the strategy of the game a bit. Without doubt, it affects Japan the most. Without the aid of factories, Japan must ferry man and material into Asia from the homeland. Since each transport can only carry a single tank, this forces Japan to go with a less than optimal infantry/tank mix. Moreover, it makes the battle of the Pacific more paramount, because if Japan loses her navy - or even suffers a heavy set back - her flow of troops to mainland Asia is impaired, if not neutered.

The no factory variation foists a dilemma upon the USA strategy - does the US still go full steam ahead with the "shuck-shuck" strategy, focusing on aiding her Allies in nixing Germany first, or does she use her IPCs to build up a navy in the Pacific with the intent of quelling the Japanese flotilla?

All that being said, to answer your question...

  If "good" players don't like factories and intermediate players do, are factories necessary to the game?

They are certainly not necessary, but they make the game much harder for Japan without them. Japan's must have a prepared strategy and be prepared to execute on that strategy deftly. Little mistakes - like not correctly balancing transports with the number of troops in mainland Japan - can be fatal. Therefore, I think a no factories option is an interesting variation if the Japan player is a strong one, otherwise eliminating them presents an uphill battle for Japan that she might not be able to overcome.

  And if "unnecessary," should they be permitted anyway? With or without modifications?

There are other units in the game that are unnecessary, no? How necessary are submarines, for instance?

Speaking of factory variations, the standard rules allow the factories that exist at the start of the game to churn out as many units as can be afforded, whereas factories built after the start can only output as many units as the territory's IPC value. Moreover, factories cannot be moved.

For your consideration, here are three factory variations. Personally, I'm not much of a fan of either, but both do color the game quite differently:

Initial factories outside of the capital territory can only produce as many units as their IPC value. This has the most pointed effect on Russia, as her factory in Karelia can only output three units per turn.
Factories, like AA guns and other units, may be moved during the non-combat phase. A moved factory could not output any units this turn or next, and would have its output restricted to the IPC value of its new territory once units can be produced. This option allows the UK to move its Indian factory out of harm's way (if needed), but on the flip-side it allows Japan to march factories closer to the Russian capital.
When an attacker successfully invades a territory with a factory, he may decide to destroy the factory.

Food for thought...


Trashing two birds with one stone If I have a card that I have to trash another card to use, can I trash a card that has a paid ability where the cost is to trash the card, and then activate the paid ability?

Consider Trade-In and Cortez Chip (emphasis mine).

Trade-In:

  As an additional cost to play this event, trash an installed piece
  of hardware. Gain credits equal to half the install cost of the
  trashed hardware (rounded down) and search your stack for a piece of
  hardware, reveal it, and add it to your grip. Shuffle your stack.

Cortez Chip:

  [Trash]: Choose a piece of ice. The Corp must pay 2[Credits] as an
  additional cost to rez that ice until the end of the turn.

Assuming I had a Cortez Chip in play, could I play Trade-In and trash Cortez Chip, and use the effects of both cards?

No. Once the first paid ability is triggered, it resolves completely before another paid ability can be triggered. The exceptions are "prevent" and "avoid" abilities. So, in your example either ability will result in the Cortez Chip being in the Heap and no longer installed before you could possibly trigger the other ability. The specific text from the rulebook that applies:

  Once an ability is triggered, its effect is resolved immediately and
  can only be stopped by prevent or avoid effects.


Taking advantage of an Insane Investigator I've only played a couple games so I know my experience could be faulty and I'm definitely comparing Mansions of Madness to Arkham Horror where loss of sanity and loss on health are roughly equivalent.

That said, as the keeper player I haven't found causing a player to go Insane to be very effective.  The ability to play a trauma card as a keeper action doesn't seem very strong.  By the time you've driven someone insane, it is late in the game and Threat is at a premium.  I haven't been able to get enough Insanity Trauma cards to take advantage of the Insane person.

How can I better take advantage of an Insane Investigator?

In at least scenario 2 mythos and trauma cards are pretty cheap. For 1 threat you get 1 mythos or 1 trauma card per cultist. Playing the trauma card is in itself free. In my last game the keeper managed to get my insane investigator to run 3 spaces into one of her monsters who at once took a sample and ran through a locked door I couldn't follow. This ended up being probably the most important move in the game. I forced the investigators to go from passive to aggressive to stop the keeper from getting her last sample.

So while the use will depend on the luck of the draw a well placed trauma card can change the course of the game. Many of the low insanity cards are really not nice. In a game where your objective is to kill the investigators you could get lucky and draw "final solution" and simply make the investigator kill themselves or the card that makes the investigator attack one of his friends.

In a couple of the scenarios you get trauma at the same time as you get mythos. This is a way to get some use out of them.


Coalition Honor Guard and Hexproof As Coalition Honor Guard was card of the day on DailyMTG the other day, it got me thinking. If you gave it hexproof, through whatever means you choose e.g. Swiftfoot Boots, would my opponent be unable to play spells that target a single creature?

Your opponent can still cast spells.  As the last part of Coalition Honor Guard's text says (emphasis mine):

  your opponents must choose at least one Flagbearer on the battlefield
  if able.

If they can't target a flagbearer (because of, say hexproof or a restriction on the spell, ie. "target green creature" and all flagbearers are white), you don't have to obey the rest of that text.


In Catan, can you continue a "circular" road? If I have 6 roads that go all around a single hex tile, they are a continuous uninterrupted road (assuming none of my opponents interrupts it with their settlements/cities). But, can I continue this 6-piece road and create a 7-piece continuous road by building a road that goes out of this hex tile? Here's an image of what I'm talking about:

Is this a valid 7-piece continuous road?

Yes.

Say you start with the following:

           _
     _ _ /   \
           _ /

We all agree that's 7 segments long. It makes no sense that adding a segment would make it shorter, so the following can't possibly be 6 segments long:

           _
     _ _ /   \
         \ _ /

Therefore, it must be 8, and your example must be 7.

The rules indicate that you count the number of roads in the longest branch. In your example, there are six on both the right and left branch, for a total length of seven.


Choose from discard pile ability: put into play simultaneously? The rules for the Wonder Pack say:

  If multiple players take cards from the discard pile during a given turn, the resolution order is the following: Halikarnassos, The Great Wall, Manneken Pis, Salomon and finally, Courtesan’s Guild

Let’s say Alice plays this ability from Halikarnassos and Bob plays it from The Great Wall.

Alice chooses a card from the discard pile. Does she have to put it in play before Bob chooses a card? Or do they put their cards in play simultaneously?

The cards are taken secretly from the discard, and then put into play simultaneously
The quote from the Wonder Pack rules should be taken literally. When they use the term, "resolution order" they are specifically speaking of what order to resolve the actions in the previous conditional: (I.e. multiple players taking cards from the discard pile.)

If multiple players take cards from the discard pile during a given turn, the resolution order is the following: Halikarnassos, The Great Wall, Manneken Pis, Salomon and finally, Courtesan’s Guild

Cards are always played simultaneously, so some way to resolve conflicts between multiple players taking conflicting actions is necessary. Take for example the original rules (page 5, 8):

Overview of an Age - [...] Each Age is made up of 6 game turns. During each turn the players put into play a single card, simultaneously.
The Mausoleum of Halicarnassus - the player can look through all of the cards discarded since the beginning of the game (those discarded for coins as well as those discarded at the end of an age), pick one, and build it for free.
Clarification : this special ability takes place at the end of the turn in which this stage is built. If players discard cards this turn (as in the case of the 6th turn of an age), the player can also choose from among them.

The same rules text is in the Leaders Expansion (page 4, 7):

Recruitment Phase - During this phase, each player will play one of their Leader cards. The cards are chosen secretly by each player, then revealed simultaneously to be played.
Solomon - Once Solomon enters play, the player can choose an Age card from the discard pile and put it in play for free.

The Leaders rules also only notes that Halicarnassus chooses its card before Solomon, not that it plays the card before Solomon.

Leader: Solomon
Q: What happens if Solomon enters play in the same turn in which Halicarnassus builds a Wonder stage?
A: Halicarnassus chooses its card from the discard pile before Solomon.


Poison Counters and Damage Redirection Last week we had a bit of a situation in our commander game and we would like to clarify this for future reference.

Our Situation

One of the players attacked with Bruna, Light of Alabaster who gained infect thanks to Corrupted Conscience and had a power over 20. The attacked player responded with Shining Shoal with the X being 10.

Now for the Question

These two players are the last remaining players on the game, as player 1 and 2 have already lost. Does the game end in a draw? Did the Bruna, Light of Alabaster's player win the game? Or does he lose because he obtained 10 poison counters due to Shining Shoal?

Assuming nobody has any poison counters before Bruna attacks, Bruna's controller will lose the game assuming that her power is at least 10, but less than 20 when she deals damage, and it will be a draw if her power is 20 or greater, if her power is less than 10 her controller will have poison counters equal to her power.

This occurs because Shining Shoal replaces the first X damage dealt by the chosen sources (in this case 10) and redirects it to the chosen target (presumably Bruna's controller). The redirection doesn't change the source of the damage so it will still have infect, thus it will still deal damage in the form of poison counters.

So if Bruna's power is less than 10 all of the damage will be redirected to Bruna's controller; nobody will win or lose. If her power is at least 10, but less than 20, ten damage will be redirected to her controller and you would take the remainder; her controller would lose. If her power is 20 or greater 10 of the damage would be redirected to her controller and the remainder of the damage would be dealt to you, since you both have 10 or more poison counters you would both lose the game a the same time which ends up being a draw.

  702.89b Damage dealt to a player by a source with infect doesn’t cause that player to lose life. Rather, it causes the player to get that many poison counters. See rule 119.3.


How To Play Coup: The Resistance with more than one set of cards? I recently purchased 2 sets of Coup: The Resistance So that I could play with more than 6 people. However, The included rules don't state how many of each card to use when dealing with more than 6 players.

I know the developers intended for more than 6 players to be able to play with additional cards but I can't find the recommended numbers anywhere.

Coup: Reformation is the expansion for more than 6 players.

It contains 15 cards; 3 of each rather than 2 of each. I think the rules from the game say how many cards to use for how many players, since someone quotes it as 25(5 of each) cards for 9-10 players. Since you use 15(3 of each) cards for 6 players, I'm guessing you add 1 of each card for 7-8, 2 for 9-10 and 3 for 11-12.

The rules for reformation are slightly different, as it has 2 factions where you can take an action and 1 money to the almshouse to change your faction; 2 money to change someone else's faction; or take all the money from the almshouse if you do NOT have a Duke.

You are only allowed to attack people of the opposite faction to you, unless everyone is the same faction where you can attack whoever you want.


North Star and Fist of Suns A discussion on Reddit about bad combos mentioned combining the following two cards (Oracle included here):

Fist of Suns

  You may pay {W}{U}{B}{R}{G} rather than pay the mana cost for spells that you cast.

North Star

  {4}, {T}: For one spell this turn, you may spend mana as though it were mana of any color to pay that spell's mana cost. (Additional costs are still paid normally.)

The idea being that by activating North Star you could pay {5} to play anything instead of the usual {W}{U}{B}{R}{G}, due to the oracle wording. The total mana cost would be 9 mana thanks to the {4} required to activate North Star of course.

Does this combo work?

I do not believe it works due to the wording of the rules regarding costs.

202.1. A card’s mana cost is indicated by mana symbols near the top of the card. (See rule 107.4.)
601.2e The player determines the total cost of the spell. Usually this is just the mana cost. Some
spells have additional or alternative costs.

Fist of Suns has a static ability that creates an alternative cost for all spells that are played. This alternative cost if {W}{U}{B}{R}{G}. However that alternative cost is not the mana cost which is still the original printed symbols.
For this reason when both are out if you attempt to pay the alternative cost of {W}{U}{B}{R}{G} you are no longer paying the mana cost, so the ability to pay mana as if it were mana of any color no longer applies.
Thus after activating North Star with Fist of Suns in play you can either pay {W}{U}{B}{R}{G} or the CMC of the spell, but cannot choose to pay {5}.


Which books to buy to start playing Warhammer 40K 8th edition? My sons (12 & 13) are new to Warhammer and want to start playing 40K with Chaos Space Marines and Blood Angels.

We already have the free 'Warhammer 40,000 Battle Primer' but need to know what else we need.

I thought that we'd just need the new 8th edition Space Marines and Chaos Space Marines codexes, but I understand that Blood Angels need their own codex which isn't out yet. (BAs are apparently 'non-codex', which I don't understand as we are not very knowledgeable of 40K lore and history).

Q. **What rules/books do we need to play from the following list?:

280-page hardback rulebook
Index: Imperium 1
Codex: Chaos Space Marines
Codex: Space Marines

or would we be better of getting either of the 'Know No Fear' or 'Dark Imperium' sets (we already have lots of miniatures, as well as older mini-rulebooks and both Chaos and Space Marine codexes)

Strictly speaking the barest minimum needed to play would be Index: Imperium 1 and Index: Chaos. If you already have the CSM Codex you can do w/out Index: Chaos. You do not actually need the Codex: SM for Blood Angels. They will eventually get their own codex, but in the meantime you could either use the Index or the Codex until the chapter specific book is released.

You do not need to purchase the rule book, but you'll probably want to. The core rules (about a dozen pages) are available for free. However the main rulebook does have a lot more options for play, more missions, and advanced rules, plus fluff and more.


Scrabble variation: use double and triple word scores (but not double/triple letter scores) twice? Is there a popular Scrabble variation that:

lets you play double/triple word scores twice, once vertically and
once horizontally?
does NOT let you play double/triple letter scores twice?

This is how I've always played, so it surprised me to learn that
official Scrabble rules do NOT permit using double/triple word scores
twice.

Perhaps this was true in an older version of Scrabble (I started
playing in the 70s).

I searched Changes to the Box Top Rules, 1949 - 1999 and found the following clarification was made in 1953:

  1953: If a word is formed that covers two premium WORD squares, the score is doubled and then re-doubled (4 times letter count), or tripled and then re-tripled (9 times letter count) as the case may be.

Nowhere in the rules was there any mention of being able to use the same premium square twice.

The Diamond Anniversary Edition rules includes some interesting variations, but does not mention your scoring rules.

Personally, I would find your scoring variation confusing and prone to error, since Scrabble tiles are not transparent, and therefore a novice may have trouble realizing that they are reusing a premium word square.


Do board game publishers design games 'in house', or do they merely publish games by external designers? My understanding is that a book publisher typically publishes the work of an author, and takes responsibility for the printing and distribution of the book, and take some kind of percentage of the sales of the book.

Are board games published in a similar manner, or do board game publishers design games 'in house' and pay designers a fixed salary?

There's publishers who only have in-house staff, there's ones who farm projects out to freelancers, and there's ones who buy games off designers.

Some companies only use one of these models. Some companies use two or all three of these models.

E.g.,

Buying Games from Designers: Richard Garfield went to Wizards of the Coast to try and sell them a complete game he'd made called Robo Rally.
Freelancing: Wizards of the Coast said they were looking for a card game people could play between events at conventions, and if he could come up with one they liked they would buy Robo Rally as well. He came up with Magic: The Gathering.
In-house staff: Richard Garfield was eventually hired by Wizards of the Coast and later came up with Netrunner while employed by them.

So there's one person, who has designed games published by one company, under all three models.


How can I used double-faced cards in casual play without checklist cards? I recently bought a "deck builders" kit that included, among other things, a Dark Ascension booster with Scorned Villager (a double-sided card) in it. It did not include a checklist card for me to use.

If I wanted to use this in tournament play, I realize I'd have to buy sleeves or acquire more checklists, but for now I'm mostly playing casual games. Are there any alternatives that would be "generally accepted" among M:TG players for using these cards? e.g. marking up the face of some land card to indicate that it's really my Scorned Villager?

Alternatively, is there a good place to get checklist cards that won't also result in getting more double-sided cards to go along with them?

A checklist card is simply a tournament-sanctioned proxy with a specialized purpose. In casual play, you could make a proxy more-or-less any way you want. Writing with a marker on a basic land is probably the most common custom.

I recommend including the mana cost as well as the card's name, so you can quickly tell whether you are able to cast it without having to look over at your double-faced cards outside of play.

If you wish to get some more of the official checklist cards, you can buy them online for about 10 cents each through a major singles dealer like Star City Games or Channel Fireball (since they resell the token cards that come in boosters).

Note that Innistrad and Dark Ascension have their own separate checklist cards.


How to eliminate advantages gained from the seating position of inferior players? In many games, such as Liar's Dice or On The Underground, there is an advantage to be had by sitting immediately after (in the turn order) the player who is least experienced or just plain bad at the game. Are there any widely applicable ideas for resolving this problem? Or, is there some house rule or variant that improves this aspect of a particular game?

I think you can't have a serious, cutthroat game with a wide range of skills, so relax. Gently coach the new players, but no more than they're willing to receive. Play a couple of dummy rounds for the new players and then restart if needed.

If you're really serious, you can investigate ways to handicap the game, but that's really hard to do without ruining the balance of most games.


Do weak decks win a disproportionate amount of multiplayer FFA games? Some people ignore weak decks in a multiplayer FFA setting. They believe that because a deck's card quality is poor that leaving that player basically unmolested, and not expending resources to remove that weak player from the game, leaves you with more resources to deal with the stronger decks at the table. Weak decks should be easier to beat when the game comes down to a duel anyway, rather than fighting another strong deck 1 vs 1.

Is there any evidence that weak decks actually win more often than stronger decks played in the same multiplayer FFA setting?

There's no direct advantage to playing a weaker deck. There is, however, an advantage to managing perceptions.

In some sense, free-for-all is about always being outgunned: taken together, your opponents have more resources — more cards, more mana, more life, more time (turns) — than you do. Luckily, those resources aren't always directed against you at all times. However, as The Ferrett says, "Eventually, you have to be Alpha Threat to win" — and, when you are in that position and most of the table is gunning for you, it pays to have access to strong cards that can power you through that opposition.

The flip side is that those strong cards are more likely to get you labeled as the "Alpha Threat" prematurely. The best way to mitigate this isn't playing weaker cards, it's good strategic timing: as he continues, "The lesson is that you have to time your shot at dominance perfectly. You have to wait until your opponents don't have the resources to stop you, or you have the ability to stop them."

Multiplayer strategy writers emphasize the importance of gaming your opponents' perception to get to that point. Your card selection certainly plays a role here:

Even if you're just defending yourself, too powerful of an early board presence might make your opponents see you as the major threat. This could be an argument for playing bad cards, but...
Inversely, too little of an early presence marks you out as an easy target — some players love to take pot shots at anyone who doesn't have some blockers — or, worse yet, gets you flagged as That Guy Biding His Time Until He Can Use His Combo, at which point many players are likely to move to take you out even if you have no obvious strength, based on the fear that you could steal the game at any time.
Some players just love to "spread the love around," e.g. by attacking a different player each round, largely independent of their relative standings. Moreover, lots of multiplayer cards affect all players at the table: you don't have to be "The Threat" to have your carefully-laid plans trampled by another player's Cabal Conditioning. A weaker deck may dodge opponents' direct attention but find its game grinding to a halt anyway because it can't recover from collateral damage.

Thus, depending on the group, appearing weakest may be an advantage, a disadvantage, or largely irrelevant. Strategy writers often advise hiding your strength without actually showing weakness — trying to keep yourself in the "middle of the pack" to avoid the undue attention that may come from being either on top or at the bottom.

In my experience, the best way to dodge attention in multiplayer, particularly with relative strangers (e.g. at a game store rather than an enduring kitchen-table group) is not so much to play a deck that appears weak as a deck that seems linear and predictable. Players tend to spend most of their energy worrying about decks that threaten to do big "broken" game-changing things, or decks whose gameplan they have yet to figure out. Thus, it pays to play a deck that can build up in a slow, measured way with a very "obvious" gameplan, like creature-based midrange beats. Even when opponents notice your buildup, there's a bit of a tendency to dismiss it as a problem they can deal with in a couple more turns, after whatever more pressing concern is addressed.

My wife often steals games this way. She develops her board with some decent creatures, goes after one or two of the weaker players while the big splashy decks fight each other, and then sticks a card like True Conviction or Bellowing Tanglewurm for a game-winning alpha strike once the coast is clear. To win this way, you actually need some of the attributes of a strong deck, just in less "sexy" categories like consistent development and resilience. A deck that's straight-up weak across the board can play the same unassuming startup, but won't be able to capitalize on the late-game state in the same way.

Does her approach win a disproportionate amount of games? It's hard to say with certainty. She seems to win more than her fair share of games, but I do, too, with much splashier punch-everyone-in-the-face control decks. I think trying to be unassuming and predictable works best when there are several big decks fighting for supremacy, e.g. with lock pieces, serving as a suitable distraction for themselves and all of your other opponents; if the table just has one, that deck likely has the resources to run you over while you're still in your "slow and steady" mode.


Why is my Deck not legal for Frontier? I'm using www.deckstats.net to play around with my cards and making different decks. I'm very new to MTG and deck building.

Here is my deck so far:

//Lands
4 Dragonskull Summit
10 Mountain
11 Swamp

//Spells
1 Chandra, Pyromaster
1 Cobbled Wings
1 Firecannon Blast
1 Flame Lash
1 Hungry Flames
1 Raise Dead
1 Shadowed Caravel
1 Skulduggery
1 Spreading Rot
1 Thaumatic Compass
2 Untamed Hunger
1 Vanquish the Weak
1 Wrangle

//Creatures
2 Alley Strangler
1 Battle Squadron
1 Bishop of the Bloodstained
1 Blight Keeper
2 Bloodhunter Bat
1 Boggart Brute
1 Dune Beetle
1 Falkenrath Reaver
1 Foundry Street Denizen
1 Goblin Ringleader
2 Gravedigger
1 Nightmare
3 Ruin Rat
1 Rummaging Goblin
1 Sengir Vampire
1 Shivan Dragon
1 Skittering Heartstopper
1 Skymarch Bloodletter

Deckstats says this is not a valid Frontier deck...why is this? What cards are illegal?

Goblin Ringleader and Battle Squadron were not printed in anything that's legal in Frontier. Though they do have a recent printing, it's in a dual deck, which does not make it Frontier legal. The only cards that are not in sets since M15 which are Frontier legal are cards in Welcome decks or Planeswalker decks.


Arsonist vs Hedge Tavern in Rivals for Catan When using the arsonist against the Hedge Tavern, where does the Hedge Tavern card go?  Does it go to the bottom of an "Era of Turmoil" stack or does it go back to its original starting position face up?

I think they key phrases to consider here are:

  Choose 1 of your opponent's buildings adjacent to a settlement/city. He must place it under a draw stack of his choice

--From the instructions on the Arsonist action card.

and

  In each Theme Set, there are expansion cards that must be accessible to both players. Separate these cards and place them as a face-up expansion card stack next to the draw stacks. These cards are never part of your hand.

--From page 14 of the rule booklet.

Two of these could point to an exception - the arsonist sends a building to a draw stack - and the face up expansion card stack is next to the draw stacks - implying that this stack is perhaps not defined as a draw stack itself; also most cards explicitly state that a destroyed or discarded card is placed under a matching draw stack, where the Arsonist simply says one of his choice.

If we look at the rules explaining how the Fraternal Feud event card is resolved, we see:

  ... you either place them both at the bottom of the same stack or at the bottom of 2 different stacks. All your opponent knows is under which draw stack(s) you placed the cards.

--From page 20 of the rule booklet.

There can be a tactical advantage to deciding which draw stack a discarded card goes under, even in the basic version of the game where there are no expansion card or theme set draw stacks to choose: a small stack may allow a player to get that card again soon (or if there's an empty stack, the player who's turn it is may be able to return the card to their hand at the end of their turn) and a large stack will guarantee that the discarded card remains out of play for a longer period of time.

The Arsonist gives the choice of the stack to the victim. This limits the power of the card by not allowing the active player to effectively "steal" a card from her opponent's principality and add it to their hand. Or at least, not without some cooperation, or exceptionally few cards remaining in the stacks.

Of course, the Hedge Tavern is one of the face-up expansion cards, and as such it "must be accessible to both players." This is further ensured by limiting principalities to only having one at a time - so the other would be accessible to the other player.

Also, whenever there are possible implicit inconsistencies in a rule set, the best practice is to rule in favour of the mandated rule, rather than the implied one. Of the phrases highlighted above, only "never part of your hand" is mandated by its wording. If the Hedge Tavern were placed under one of the theme set draw stacks, this would enable it to appear in a player's hand later in the game.

It seems clear that:

The game designers did not intend the Hedge Tavern to end up in a player's hand.
The game designers intended the Hedge Tavern to always be available to both players when playing it's Theme Set - never permanently destroyed as an option, nor held hostage by the other player.

Ergo: There's not a lot of room on that bottom line on the card. Most likely they left out the word "matching" as it wouldn't fit and seemed somewhat redundant by the time you're playing the second theme. If the Arsonist is played, and the Hedge Tavern is destroyed, it returns to the face-up Expansion Card stack.


Magic the Gathering - What to do with permanents that only work "until end of turn"? I specifically have a Trial of Solidarity that is only active "until end of turn." I am wondering for this and other relative cards, whether they are to be discarded at end of turn since they are used up, or if they remain as permanents with no use? It is especially important for this card, since it has an additional effect that depends on another card's entering the battlefield AFTER its been played.

An enchantment is a permanent, and permanents remain on the battlefield indefinitely. Only another effect can move them to another zone.

110.4. There are five permanent types: artifact, creature, enchantment, land, and planeswalker.
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.

You are correct that once a Trial has entered the battlefield and done its thing, it's practically useless. When you play a Cartouche and return the Trial to your hand, you can cast the Trial and get its effect again. You can play the Cartouche the same turn or any number of turns later. The Trial will remain on the battlefield until something happens to it.
The idea behind the "Trials" card cycle is that you get a one-shot effect that you can reuse with Cartouches, with the downside being that the combo can be broken by e.g. destroying the Trials while it's sitting uselessly on the battlefield.


Can we take "Death Company Tycho" in an army without a Death Company? Captain Tycho (Blood Angels Codex, 5ED) can be chosen as either as "Captain Tycho" or "Death Company Tycho".
I haven't found any indication that you must have a Death Company to include the DC version of Tycho.

Can I have an army with "Death Company Tycho" but with no Death Company?

Yes.
He is an individual model. He does not come attached to the Death Company nor can he join it, because he is not an Independent Character (the 'normal' version is an Independent Character). This is how the rules are written and was confirmed in the Blood Angels FAQ published on the Games Workshop website, last updated February 2013:

Q: Are the Sanguinor, Mephiston and Death Company Tycho Independent
Characters, or single model units in their own right? (p.41, 47, 51)
A: Single model units in their own right.


Can a player use only the communal cards when selecting their best hand? In Texas Hold'em, there are 5 communal cards that are shared by all players, and 2 hole cards, that are private and may only be used by the player that the cards were dealt to.

Can we just select all the 5 communal cards for creating our best hand, or do we need to keep our 2 hole cards and only choose 3 communal cards out of 5 communal cards to make a hand?

In Hold'em, each player makes the best possible 5-card hand possible using any of the 7 cards available. To each player, there is no distinction between the communal cards and their own private cards. The selected 5-card poker hand can include 0, 1, or 2 of the hole cards.

It's possible that the best hand you can make uses 0 of your hole cards. In this case, you cannot win (unless everyone else folds), but if no player can make a better hand than the 5 communal cards then it is a tie.

Background info (prior to edit)

Poker hands, that is, sets of cards that can be ranked by standard poker rules, contain 5 cards. Many poker variants, including Texas Hold'em, give players access to more than 5 cards and let them create the best 5-card hand they can out of all the options. In 7-card stud, some of the cards are private, but face-up. In Texas Hold'em, some of the cards are shared.

As you said in your question, in Hold'em there are 5 communal cards and 2 hole cards, so each player has 7 cards from which to choose 5 to make the best poker hand they can. The number of ways to choose 5 from 7 is 21 (Combinations, from Wikipedia).

You might think you can get away with omitting the combination consisting of just the communal cards, but this should still be evaluated because if it's the highest scoring hand, then everyone ties (e.g., if the communal cards are a Royal Flush, then everyone ties regardless of their hole cards).


Games with flipping tokens for action selection? We are creating a game with what we think is a new action selection mechanic. The mechanic is based on poker chip like tokens that you flip to take the action the top side, then there is a different action on the bottom side. Have you encountered a similar mechanic in any other game?

Thanks in advance!

Sadly I don't think its new.

I've seen flipping discs for action selection in various games such as Mr Jack Pocket.

There are also games that when actions are taken that a token or card is flipped and another action becomes available such as Planet Defenders

Another similar to what you described is Coin Age where the options you have are literally determined by the way coins land when flipped.


Identify Strategy Game with Chariots and Elephants This was a strategy board game I played a few times as a child almost 20 years ago. Here is what I remember:

There were two sides with identical sets of pieces. I seem to recall the sides being brown and grey.
There were medieval soldier pieces. Some chariots (that the soldiers could ride), and elephants.
Each player has a set number of moves per turn that he can distribute as he sees fit on his pieces.
There was a hierarchy of power. I'm pretty sure a soldier (alone) couldn't kill an elephant.
The map was a network of connected circles.
Each side had a castle composed of 5 or 6 connected circles.
To win you had to occupy your opponents castle.

Thanks in advance!

The game you are looking for is Conquest:


Drop pod deviation above terrain Assuming a drop pod place 2 inch away from a 6 inch wide impassible terrain (eg: river of lava).

Drop pod deviation says that it has to deviate 12 inches, in the direction that passes above said impassible terrain.

Does the drop pod stops deviation at the first boundary of the impassible terrain (and thus deviate only 2 inches), or does it cross/passes over the terrain since it can be placed freely on the other side of it?

Drop pods scatter 2D6 inches.  If the scatter does not take the model fully over a piece of impassible terrain, it stops at the edge of the impassible terrain.  If the model can be physically placed on the other side of the terrain moving no further than the rolled distance-even if that would put it off the edge of the playing area-it must then be placed on the other side of the terrain.

Sames goes for enemy units encountered by a drop pod scatter roll.


Why was TAMSK removed from the GIPF series? Is the gameplay broken or was it just too hard to manufacture?

Because of the time element (making it not a pure abstract strategy game like the others in the project).

Production costs were higher for that game than others in the series, due mostly to the timers. The designer has noted that that is what keeps it from being reprinted at the moment (in 2008). But it's just speculation to say that that is a reason for its removal.

The designer says that it was removed because it didn't fit with the rest of the series: the rest were all pure abstract.

From this blog post:

  But I also want to stress once more that it was not removed because it was not good enough. I like TAMSK a lot—and also SMART is convinced of its qualities—but I cannot deny that it appeals to another public than most players who like pure abstract strategy games.
  Feb 5, 2008


Can you claim a Double Sacrifice Bonus? Two very closely related questions:

If a card has two different "Sacrifice this creature for X" abilities on it, does sacrificing it give both benefits?

Likewise, if a card requires a creature to be sacrificed, but that creature has a "Sacrifice this creature for X" ability, do you get the sacrifice benefit when you sacrifice it for the other requirement?

No to both - each ability has an individual cost, which you'll need to fulfill before it is put on the stack.

Anytime you see Sacrifice [X]: Do [Y], that is expressing a cost that must be paid in order to activate the ability.  A single paid cost may not activate multiple abilities; see the following (from the comp. rules):

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


bridge club alert rules internationally Are the rules for alerting bids broadly similar at clubs throughout the world, or do they differ? Are bidding boxes used internationally?

(My most specific interest is whether clubs in Switzerland are like clubs in the US but I have asked the question more generally because it may be of use to others. Of course I will ask the local director when specific questions arise, but there is a language barrier, and the director here may not know what I am accustomed to in US clubs, so I hoped someone here could offer a comparison.)

I have played extensively in clubs in the US and Switzerland, and occasionally in other countries. Bidding boxes are now in almost universal use. Alert rules vary by country, and are substantially different from what you are used to in the ACBL. Fortunately most are simpler than the ACBL's. The club directors I met in Switzerland spoke excellent English -- I recommend asking. Be sure to inquire about Stop Card use as well.

The Swiss Bridge Federation (FSB) site is http://www.swiss-bridge.ch/ but I did not spot anything about alert rules.


If there are two or more abilities that go off on the upkeep, can a creature's activated ability go off preventing the second? I have Sheoldred, Whispering One and the Eldrazi Monument in play. At the beginning of my upkeep, I sacrifice a creature to pay the upkeep for the Monument. My plan was to bring it back out using Sheoldred's ability, but my opponent has a Scavenging Ooze. He taps one green and exiles the sacrificed creature when it hits the graveyard. Is he able to exile my creature after the sacrifice but before the Sheoldred ability activates?

If you sacrifice a creature to Eldrazi Monument's ability, you can't bring that creature back with Sheoldred during the same upkeep. But if you could, then your opponent would be able to stop you using Scavenging Ooze.

As your upkeep step starts, the first thing you do is put all abilities that trigger at the beginning of your upkeep on the stack. You can choose what order they are put on the stack, so you can have Eldrazi Monument's ability resolve before Sheoldred's ability. However, you also have to choose the target for Sheoldred's ability when it is put on the stack, so Sheoldred can only return a creature that was already in the graveyard before you sacrifice a creature to Eldrazi Monument.

It would work differently with a slightly different ability. Consider this ability:

  At the beginning of your upkeep, return target a creature card from your graveyard to the battlefield.

In this case, the ability does not have a target, so you do not choose which creature to return until the ability resolves. Then the situation plays out like this:

You put the alternate Sheoldred ability and the Eldrazi Monument ability on the stack.
The Eldrazi Monument ability resolves, and you sacrifice a creature.
At this point, both you and your opponent have another chance to respond before the alternate Sheoldred ability resolves. Your opponent activates the Scavenging Ooze's ability targeting the creature you sacrificed.
The Scavenging Ooze's ability resolves, and the creature is exiled.
The alternate Sheoldred ability resolves, and you can return a creature from your graveyard to the battlefield. You can't return the creature you sacrificed, because it has been exiled, but you can choose a different creature, if there is one available.