What constitutes a month? What is a month in Pandemic Legacy? We are not sure.
We were new to Legacy version so we first played the game simply like Pandemic and are now ready to play first round as a Legacy version.

A breakdown of how long a month takes depends on the outcome of each game you play. If you win the game it goes faster and if you lose the game it goes slower and it is described in the rules.

If you look at the game calendar (page 16) at the end of the rules you will notice that it has 12 months each broken down into early and late. This shows that is possible to get 24 plays out of this legacy game.

This is further broken down by the game end rules (Page 14) of which I am only including the part about game month

Game Win:

  You start your next game at the beginning of the next month

Game Loss:

  If this is the first time the month has been played, you must try the month again. If not, move on to the next month for your next game.

What this means is the better you play the faster the game will progress. This will get you between 12 games (If you win every time) and 24 games (if you lose the first attempt every month).

To sum it up just think that months are an indicator of how many more play sessions there might be left in the game.


Ensuring a game of Arkham Horror runs quickly even with new players I am teaching the game to a ton of new people this week. I was going to be playing with only 3 others and planned to join in myself, but now that we're up to 8 players including me, I figured the game would be more fun if I keep things moving as a non-player Arkham Master. Staying out of the game as a player and act as rules guardian, referee for things 1st player normally resolves, reader of cards, and general knowledge base.

How can I keep the game running smoothly? With only one experienced investigator (has played a single game a month ago) still in the group. We have either 4.5 hours or if we're lucky, 6 hours to play the game in, and I think we all know that even with an experienced group 6 hours can be too short.

I'm playing Vanilla, and they're up against Yig, so as a light sleeper, that should make it easier.  What techniques, homerules, and other adjustments have you developed to counter game-length creep?

It may sound silly, but in these cases (especially with so many players) the "we came here for kicking monster asses, not for pleasure" attitude should help immediately. Focus is a key word. Make sure those aren't playing at the moment are planning for the next round, it could help the focus effort.

In addition, I'd try to hint or even say straight up that they need to get themselves up with a strategy; it could be some kind of role separation - who closes the gates? who clears the monsters? Who gets the weapons and distributes them? - it could be geography separation, etc. But it'll keep the players focused on what they should do every turn instead of re-strategizing everything every time a monster pops up.


Do Goblin tokens count as Goblins? I have a typically mono red Goblins deck.

My question, are tokens considered Goblins too?

For example, I have 10 1/1 Goblin tokens put onto the battlefield by Krenko, Mob Boss. Can I use those tokens for Skirk Fire Marshal's ability?

Yes, the tokens created by Krenko, Mob Boss are creatures with the subtype Goblin. That subtype is exactly what the word 'Goblin' on Skirk Fire Marshal is referring to, so you can use them. (They also count for Krenko, Mob Boss' ability if you activate it a second time. Goblin exponentation FTW!)
The relevant rules are:

110.5c A spell or ability that creates a token sets both its name and its subtype. If the spell or ability doesn’t specify the name of the token, its name is the same as its subtype(s). A “Goblin Scout creature token,” for example, is named “Goblin Scout” and has the creature subtypes Goblin and Scout. Once a token is on the battlefield, changing its name doesn’t change its subtype, and vice versa.
109.2. If a spell or ability uses a description of an object that includes a card type or subtype, but doesn’t include the word “card,” “spell,” “source,” or “scheme,” it means a permanent of that card type or subtype on the battlefield.
110.1. A permanent is a card or token on the battlefield.


When your active race has no tokens on the board, do they still have to go into decline before you choose a new race? This is a pretty simple question, but I can't find a definitive answer for it.

Let's say that my active race has only a single race token on the board. During another players turn, that last token is removed. When my turn comes around am I allowed to choose a new active race (as my current race was completely wiped out) or do I have to put that race into decline and wait until my next turn to choose a new active race?

My gut feeling is that you need to send your active race into decline, basically skipping your turn and not scoring any points. However, some of the other players are saying that sounds too "unfair." I'd prefer an answer to include an official Days of Wonder ruling, if one is out there.

You still have to go into decline. This is clarified in the FAQ, where every answer has been made by a Days of Wonder spokesperson:

  All active units destroyed

  If all your active units are destroyed in
  one turn you may:

  1) Score points only with the in-decline race. or

  2)
  Go into decline and score 0 for that turn. You may not take a new
  combo this turn

This makes sense to me. If it were otherwise, you would be effectively penalised if you had just one unit left in play. Although having no units is unfortunate, it shouldn't be a strategy to prefer being wiped out in order to skip a decline.

With regard to the "fairness" objection, if you've waited until such a late moment that you could be wiped out, then you've already accrued the benefit of keeping the race active up to now, and this is the price. Small World is all about the trade-off in choosing when to decline. In this situation you've got what was coming to you!


Advanced two player rules clarification for 7 Wonders Perhaps I overlooked the following when reading the rules, but I don't recall these questions being addressed in the two-player advanced rules for 7 Wonders:

Can the free city build its wonder, or must it only build cards?

What does the free city do if it can't afford to build anything, since it isn't allowed to discard for coins?

According to the rules, the free city can take any action a 'normal' player can take with a restriction on discarding cards for money. The free city CAN build a wonder. In fact, a good strategy for the third city is to use it to bury cards your opponent might want, e.g. by building the wonder.

The free city CAN also discard a card for money, but only if no other playable card is available. Therefore, if the city has no playable cards, you can choose a card to discard and the free city gains the coins.

(Rules are here: http://www.rprod.com/en/7W-rules.html)


Does a vehicle require a crew if it is enchanted to become a creature? So, say I have a Consulate Dreadnought and I enchant it with Siege Modification. The Crew effect makes it to become an artifact creature, but if it is already an artifact creature, does it need to be crewed to attack?

No it does not. Siege Modification says that it's a creature in addition to its other types, so it counts as a creature for anything that cares about it being a creature, including the ability to attack with it.

This is the main point of Siege Modification's ability.


What does an enemy do when the target of its movement is on a space with 3 models? If the enemy wants to move toward a hero that is already on a node with 2 others, does it stop movement as if it has hit a wall / obstacle or as if there is no node to travel to?

Update:

Page 10 of the rules state

  Only three models can share a node at the same time, regardless of how many are friendly or enemy models. If there are already three models on a node and another model moves onto that node, the players must push one of the three models already on the node

So I suppose the enemy does move and then the players select which model gets pushed, however this doesn't answer the question of whether the players can elect to have an enemy be pushed.  Strictly speaking it must be an option but isn't stated that if possible a character should be pushed.  Enemies don't typically push each other but if there is a situation with 4 enemies all wanting to inhabit the same space, it breaks the 3 model rule.  A reasonable reading is probably that the enemy pushes the character if possible and otherwise an enemy, but I haven't found any ruling yet.

If there are already three models on a node and another model moves onto that node, the players must push one of the three models already on the node.

The emphasized text above gives you your answer, the players themselves must decide who stays on the node and who is pushed off so as not to break the 3 model rule.

I would say this is enforced by the wording of "the players must" and the lack of listed priorities anywhere in the rule book for who should be pushed off first. It can be logically assumed that without an order provided, the players can decide an order for themselves.


Can you purchase a ship to win your final Fame Point? In Xia: Legends of a Drift System, there are many ways to gain Fame.  One of them is to purchase it, at the cost of 5,000 credits per fame point.  However, the rulebook explicitly states that you cannot purchase your final fame point in this manner.  Another way to gain fame is to purchase a new ship.

Is there anything preventing a player from purchasing a new ship for 5,000 credits and receiving his final Fame point in this manner?

Yes, you can win by purchasing a ship (upgrade to a higher tier). As you stated, the only method of gaining points that you are forbidden to use to win the game is buying 1 point for 5,000 credits. Other than that, anything goes


Recommendations for making board tiles I'm designing a board game with a board consisting of hexagonal tiles. I plan to design them on a computer, print them off, glue the printout to matboard, and cut the hexagons out with an XACT-O knife.

Before I begin, any obvious pitfalls in my plan?

Is there a kind of glue that would work best for this? I want to be sure the edges of the paper are firmly held down after cutting out the tiles.

Would using thick paper help? (Must be thin enough to run through an inkjet printer.)

My first published game has a map of seven hexagonal tiles, so I have some experience with this.

If you must have hex tiles (e.g. a case where the board layout is user-generated as in the 4x game E C L I P S E, not fixed as in Catan or as in my game), then I would buy a bunch of blank tiles from The Game Crafter or Amazon. Our earliest prototypes used something similar (though made of a thicker composite material).
With tiles in hand, just print square icons and tape them to the tiles. For that matter, you could just write freehand on the tiles.

If you can get away with a using a pre-determined grid layout, then that will be much less expensive. Just print an appropriate hex grid, and use square or circular tokens to randomly distribute the hexes on the board. We used this in later prototypes, and eventually in the published version of my game.

In any case, I would strongly advise against cutting out a lot of hexagons. It's unwieldy! Make some icons and send the files to The Game Crafter or to Print and Play Productions. They are much better at cutting :)


When casting a spell with Cascade, when do the exiled cards go on the bottom of the library? Say I cast Bituminous Blast and with cascade I exile Angrath, the Flame-Chained then Vampiric Tutor. Can I use Vampiric Tutor to search for Angrath, or is Angrath still exiled until Vampiric Tutor resolves?

The cards are put on the bottom of the library as part of the Cascade ability. Any spells cast as part of the Cascade ability are on the stack at that point, so they will resolve after putting the cards on the bottom of the library. So in this situation, yes, you can search for Angrath with the Vampiric Tutor.

The Cascade ability is defined in rule 702.84a:

  Cascade is a triggered ability that functions only while the spell with cascade is on the stack. “Cascade” means “When you cast this spell, exile cards from the top of your library until you exile a nonland card whose converted mana cost is less than this spell’s converted mana cost. You may cast that card without paying its mana cost. Then put all cards exiled this way that weren’t cast on the bottom of your library in a random order.”

The instruction to cast the spell here works just like casting a spell at any other time: you put it on the stack, make all of the relevant choices, and pay the cost. And just like any other time you cast a spell, everyone gets an opportunity to respond before it resolves. This opportunity comes after the Cascade ability finishes resolving, which includes putting the exiled cards on the bottom of the library.


Solution Wheels, Escape Game Wheels I was recently playing various exit/escape board games, and was wondering if there is a proper name for the "solution wheels"?

Also, are there any common strategies, techniques or applications to create these?

Examples-Pictures:
Escape the Room - Mystery at Stargazer’s Manor
Exit: The Game - The Secret Lab

The proper name for this sort of encoder/decoder ring is a Cipher disk, but they are also commonly called Caesar or Cipher Wheels.

Generally speaking they are relatively easy to create using either a ruler, compass and protractor, or a template.


What are "other" ways you can prevent your opponent from winning in magic the gathering, given the "right" decks? In a game, if you can prevent your opponent from winning, there are only two possible outcomes: 1) You will win or 2) Your opponent can also force a draw.

This question outlined how you can prevent your opponent from winning in magic the gathering by obtaining "infinite life." What are other ways you can achieve this result, at least in various situations? According to an answer to the question, getting "infinite turns" is not a way for the opponent to avoid defeat, or is it?

I feel like this question is unclear; however, an explanation of why it's unclear could easily also answer the question, so I am writing this answer.

How do you prevent opponents from winning? It depends on how the opponent is planning to win in the first place. There are tons of Magic decks and tons of strategies, but broadly speaking there are four ways to win:

Reduce your opponent's life to zero.
Give your opponent ten poison counters.
Use a "you win the game" (or "your opponent loses the game") card.
Maneuver to a state where the opponent has to draw from an empty library.

Method #1 is by far the most common way to win. Virtually all the competitive decks in the current Standard (from MTGTOP8) primarily win this way. Some of them try to win quickly with a fast creatures and a low curve, others take it slowly and win on turn 20 with Dream Trawler attacks, but they all win by reducing the opponent's life total to zero. The corollary is they all cannot win against infinite life, and this is why the infinite life combo alluded to in the OP is effective.

To go a bit further here, there are different ways to reduce the opponent to zero life. Perhaps a deck attempts to win with creatures; in this case Ensnaring Bridge could stop it from winning. Or perhaps a deck uses ground creatures only; in this case Moat is just as effective. Or perhaps a deck is aiming to cast burn spells (e.g. Lightning Bolt, Skewer the Critics, Boros Charm) at the opponent; in this case Leyline of Sanctity stops it from winning.

Against Method #2, you can use cards that either remove poison counters or prevent you from getting them, such as Suncleanser, Solemnity and Melira, Sylvok Outcast. Or you can use the various creature removal / prison cards alluded to above, since poison counters usually comes from creatures.

Beating Method #3 will depend on what the exact card used is. Right now, in Pioneer, one of the top decks is Dimir Inverter. This deck wins by milling most of the cards in its library, then casting Thassa's Oracle with enough blue devotion to trigger the "you win" clause. In this case you can't prevent the win by removing Thassa's Oracle, since the ability is an enters-the-battlefield trigger, but you can prevent them from resolving Thassa's Oracle in the first place with a counterspell.

Other "you win" cards can be vulnerable to creature removal, e.g. one of the ways the Modern Ad Nauseam deck can win is by emptying its library and then attempting to draw a card while Laboratory Maniac is in play. In this case counterspells do nothing, but removing the Laboratory Maniac stops the opponent from winning (and most likely wins the game).

Method #4 is straightforward to attack by running a bigger deck. I vaguely remember reading that back in the day when Tolarian Academy mill was the dominant deck, someone calculated that the maximum amount they can mill for is about 400 cards. Therefore, if you have a 450-card deck, you cannot lose against that deck. You'll likely lose to everyone else, but you will beat this deck 100% of the time, even if the only cards in your deck are basic lands.

So why is this question unclear? Because Magic decks have insane variability, it's impossible to say "using this you can prevent your opponent from winning". Gaining infinite life means you beat many decks, but not all of them; having Solemnity in play guarantees you'll beat Infect, but it doesn't mean anything against an opponent trying to win with normal damage. Having an Emrakul against this deck attempting to win with method #4 stops you from losing, but does nothing against the Tolarian Academy deck mentioned above, and so on. Even taking infinite turns doesn't necessarily win, as you can see from the linked question.

The answer to the headline question relies completely on what deck the opponent is playing, and therefore, it's not really an answerable question.


How to play teaching game and give a useful review I've reached a rank where I'd like to start and help weaker players improve their games.

How can I make a review useful for the opponent?

Should I go deep into variations
Talk about theory?
Should I comment every move until the very last one?

Are there guidelines or best practice to give a good review?

It depends.

As a teacher, the most important is to reach your student and provide him the information he wants and requires in a way he can understand. You have to see how he likes to work and adjust to him accordingly.

However, I can give you general advice as well.

Time settings and at what point to explain

The teaching process should start prior to the game. Talk to your student before playing even a single move. Is there anything he wants to focus on? Or is he unsure what his weaknesses are? Keep the information gained here in mind.

It is possible, though pretty rare, to teach during the game: This is a matter of style, but I like to pause the game after important mistakes or turning points and explain them. Alternatively and more common, wait until the end before you start explaining. Then again, how do you actually define "end"? There is no need to play until resignation or scoring, you are also free to hold the game at any point and start the review (I never had a student who minded this practice).

If you're giving the student enough time and explain during the game, chances are you're forced to cut the game off at some point because it would take too long. Actually, I finish only a tiny fraction of my teaching games. Most of them are stopped in middle game or even earlier, but thanks to my teaching style explained later in this answer the student will still get told enough to make his head spin.

So, if possible, give him a lot of time. Blitz games are unsuitable for teaching. I like to play without time or with 5x60 byoyomi. If he lacks thinking time, you could not expect him to play his best moves and show his full strength. Teaching is not about stupid blunders, it is about subtle mistakes. On the other hand, if you only want to offer him a chance at playing a stronger player and possibly encounter and learn new shapes, a blitz game is fine, just tell him to review the game himself later.

How to explain

So, now that for whatever reason you're in explanation mode:

First, let's talk about situations that came up in the actual game. During the game you should have noticed what exactly the student did wrong in this situation. Did he misread? That's easy, show him the right way, possibly showing the the tesuji he missed. Did he play bad shape? Show him the right shape and how it is superior. Did he play a slow move, or a too wide extension? Explain the reasons and show him the right move.

Next, there are theory questions the student may be curious about, either because they relate to the game or because he's just interested. What is the idea of the Chinese opening? What is its intention in comparison to sanrensei? Show him examples, tell him about the basic characteristics. What's the joseki move in this corner shape? Or earlier, what is the right joseki to chose on this board? Show him the right moves, show him a few common mistakes and explain why they are bad.

The theoretical knowledge required is probably present when you're used to giving and receiving teaching games. However, I met high dan players that had basically no clue about fuseki (they compensated by insanely strong shape sense and reading ability). In case that applies to you, grabbing a good book on the subject will certainly help very efficiently (and make you a even stronger, too).

Go for the root

One particular thing I love to do, but which requires the student to cooperate, is asking him questions. "Look at your move. Is it a good move?". Don't just show them, make them show you! Many teachers disregard this point and simply show the correct moves, but I believe it is rather crucial to remove the roots of the wrong moves.

Make him think about the move, make him critically question his motives and intentions. If he comes up with the right answer, splendid. If not, even better, you just found a flaw in his reasoning. Those mistakes are the most important, and correcting them is the best thing a teacher can possibly achieve.

Note that you can do this for both wrong and correct moves. Is he sure that his correct move is correct? Or was he unsure? You're basically trying to make him be confident about any move he plays. He should be able to tell you his reasons for any move, no matter wrong or right. "I don't know why", "I played there because it's joseki", "I was vaguely afraid so I added a move just to be sure" are typical examples of answers you should focus on and make him understand the situation better.

You should let him know in advance that you'll ask trap questions to avoid confusion. "Do you really think your move here is correct?" - "Yes I am!" - "Excellent, you're right!" will occur often in the review.

This style of review takes a lot of time, but I strongly believe it is the right way to teach in the West since players won't be able to study for themselves as much as they can in the East with tons of strong players and knowledge around.

Note though that you need to take care not to demand too much of your students. If you notice that they reached their limits of understanding, e.g. because they simply cannot read a tsumego well enough, it would be counter-productive to force them to try. In their mind, the situation is simply too complicated, and rightfully so. You should simply move on, maybe a few moves later the situation became easier to grasp, and they can evaluate it more accurately.

I mentioned that I like to play without time. This fits perfectly in this scheme: If he's been thinking for more than a minute, ask him: What are you contemplating? What moves are you considering? What are your intentions (life, get sente, get a vital point, find largest point on board, whatever)? Do you understand the situation (you're dead if you don't play the right move - are you thinking about this or mistakenly about something else)?

Make sure to apply this to the white moves as well. Especially ask him about your mistakes in case you noticed them. Give him confidence to try and find weaknesses in your moves, make him build up kiai.

Know stuff

If you're unsure at any point, say so. Never try to convince him of anything without understanding the situation yourself (understand it at least enough to be able to convincingly explain it to someone of your strength).

It is very useful to have some example (pro) games in mind that highlight the situation you're focusing on. If you have trouble memorizing pro fuseki (like I do), instead try to come up with reasonable similar situations. This helps a lot to understand why certain joseki suck on certain boards and are great on a slightly different board, especially with weaker students that lack the visualization ability yet.

And obviously, knowing the standard content of teaching games is most useful in any situation. Tell your student about the table shape, tell him about the L+2 shape in the corner, tell him about monkey jumps and the wall+1 rule. This stuff can be extracted from books or learned from good teachers.

When I was a kyu player and even now, I got regular lessons by a great teacher who, interestingly, isn't "strong" in the classic sense (low-mid dan). In practice that never mattered and thanks to his particular style I learned very quickly and always found his lessons most interesting and understandable. The teaching style described in this answer is a continuation of his ideas.


What is the maximum number of dice you can roll in Arkham Horror 2nd Edition? I have the complete set of Arkham Horror 2e, including all the expansions.  I'm now wanting to get some custom dice for AH, and I'd like to know what the max number of dice needed is to be able to make a single roll no matter the situation.  Does anybody have any ideas what this would be?  Someone mentioned a situation where a player would roll 13 dice, but it was an example, not a limit.  That's the highest I've seen so far though...

There is no maximum number of dice you can roll - it is infinite as the rules never explicitly call out a maximum dice total.

Considering the mechanics of the game though the extreme theoretical limit would be somewhere over 70 (but likely less than 80).

In theory....

I don't have the time to go through every card to work it out, but given the example from the rulebook as a basis where Ashcan Pete has 16 dice (it was 13 after accounting for the monster he was facing), we could easily add a further 2 by replacing his .45 Automatic with another copy of Shrivelling, bringing us to 18.

We then account for the fact there should be 48 Clue tokens in the game according to the rulebook (extremely unlikely a player could ever get all of them, but we are talking pure theory here), we are up to 66 dice.

Then considering a few monsters give a positive combat modifier, and some skills give further bonuses, and (it's been a long time so I don't quite remember) there may be character abilities that can add a few more points (situationally or by spending resources), we could push past 70 dice for a single combat roll.

In actuality....

Around 15 dice will do in most real cases, and any player who does stack up a larger hit has the satisfaction of rolling multiple handfuls of dice (and the pain of keeping a running tally if they really want to roll all of them).

My personal copy of the game has 30+ dice, but that is more for spreading them around the table within easy reach of all players, than in the expectation of a massive roll.


How does the ability on Urza, Lord High Artificer interact with Treasure Nabber? Does Treasure Nabber grab artifacts tapped with Urza, Lord High Artificer?

It's sort of surprising and counter-intuitive, but Treasure Nabber won't nab artifacts that are tapped for mana with Urza's ability.

The rules are fairly specific about what counts as “tapped for mana”, and it's more specific than we might intuit:

  106.12 To “tap [a permanent] for mana” is to activate a mana ability of that permanent that includes the {T} symbol in its activation cost. See rule 605, “Mana Abilities.”

The {T} symbol here is the tap symbol. That is to say, we have to use an ability found on the permanent itself that is similar to the form “{T}: Add some mana.”

This means when we tap an artifact using Urza's ability, even though we get mana out of it and tapped something, it isn't considered to have been “tapped for mana” by the rules: we didn't use an ability found on the permanent we tapped.

The rulings on Treasure Nabber also describe this for us:

  An artifact is “tapped for mana” when a player activates a mana ability of an artifact that includes {T} (the tap symbol). Notably, tapping an artifact to pay for a spell with the improvise keyword is not tapping that artifact for mana.


As Italy, when is it profitable to attack France? Some experience playing Italy has shown me that attacking France can be quite difficult. If France has a unit in Marseilles, the only way to break through is to bring a fleet to the Gulf of Lyon, which usually takes over a year (it takes a similar length of time to even get a shot at Spain). Since a unit in Piedmont can do little more than bounce in Marseilles, I generally forgo moving there at all, preferring to focus on my Eastern front as long as I'm not worried about a French Invasion.

Is this usually the best choice? As Italy, when should I attack France?

Simply, when it is a commitment required of (or an opportunity provided by) your best possible alliance.

Although the tactical situations are not irrelevant in Diplomacy, they should always be regarded as secondary to the choice of allies and alliances. Any country can win, and one should regard the game as more akin to Survivor than to a typical strategy board game.

Assess the credibility, veracity and trustworthiness of the players who are offering you alliances, always bearing in mind that if it sounds too good to be true, it certainly is. Investigate, as best you can, the behaviour of your potential allies in previous games as part of assessing their credibility, veracity and trustworthiness. Remember that the strategic assessment of other players should be performed differently in a one-off game, as compared to a single game played as part of a tournament. In the latter case players know that their behaviour in early games will affect their ability to make alliances in later games; but that tis effect wears off slowly as the series continues.


Can I exile a token copy of Greenwarden of Murasa for its second ability? I have a Greenwarden of Murasa out, and I make a token copy of it with Fated Infatuation or Progenitor Mimic or something along those lines.

When the token dies it will immediately vanish from the graveyard per token rules, but this ability will also trigger:

  When Greenwarden of Murasa dies, you may exile it. If you do, return target card from your graveyard to your hand.

Will I have no option to return a card via this ability? It vanishes too soon for me to exile it, and I don't have the ability to meet that "if" with a token, right?

You cannot choose to exile the token because it has already ceased to exist, and you won't be able to return a card to your hand.

A token ceases to exist as soon as it moves to a zone other than the battlefield:

  110.5g A token that has left the battlefield can’t move to another zone or come back onto the battlefield. If such a token would change zones, it remains in its current zone instead. It ceases to exist the next time state-based actions are checked; see rule 704.

When the token dies, its death ability will trigger. As per state-based actions, the token ceases to exist. On resolution of the triggered ability, you will get to choose whether to exile the token. However, because the token has already ceased to exist, you cannot choose to exile it, and you will not be able to return a card to your hand.


Chaos in the Old World: What happens to units in ruined regions? When a region is ruined, I found it very hard to get units out of the ruined region into new regions (i.e. by using chaos cards). So, what happens to units in ruined areas? Do they:

Come off the board? (I don't think this happens, as it would render Nurgle's 'remove units card' moot)
Allow units to move to a new region? (Unlikely, as the units only 'move' from your reserve to a region, or by intervention of a chaos card, e.g. teleport)
Do something else?

Nothing special happens. The figures just stay there and can be moved to another region in the summoning phase, or by other means. To quote from the rulebook, page 25, "Ruined Regions":

  When a region is ruined [...] the following rules affect that region:

  • New Chaos cards cannot be played to that region.
  • New Old World tokens cannot be placed in that region (although existing Old World tokens are not necessarily removed at the time of ruination).
  • During the corruption phase, no victory points are scored for dominating that region (i.e., domination is not checked for that region).
  • During the corruption phase, no corruption tokens are placed in that region.

  All other normal rules for regions remain in effect for ruined regions. Battle still occurs in a ruined region each round [...]

(my emphasis)


Do I have to say if the face-down card I'm playing is a trap or spell, or is it enough to place it in the trap/spell zone? Am I obligated to tell my opponent whether the card I'm playing is a trap card or a continuous spell card that's placed face down, or is it enough to just place it in that zone and say "I'm playing a card face down"? Am I obligated to be specific?

You do not have to state if it is a spell or trap card when you set a card face down, it just must be legal in the zone you are setting in. This is actually done with spell cards to bluff traps and make your opponent pause to think about what you could have, and what it could mean for them with their plays.


In Santorini, does my opponent win if I pull them onto a third level with the Siren? In Santorini, one of the God Powers is of the Siren. The Siren places a Siren's Song token next to the game board, and on their turn, instead of performing the traditional move+build, can move any of their opponents pawns towards the Siren's Song. If I pull my opponent up onto a third level, do they win, or does it not count as a win for them. Dionysus' power, for example, explicitly states that you cannot cause a win if you move the opponent's piece.

No.

The win condition is stated as follows:

  If one of your Workers moves up on top of level 3 during your turn, you instantly win!

This doesn't happen in the scenario you described. Your opponent's Worker moved up on top of level 3, but it didn't happen on their turn.


Bang! Distances scope Does the scope card change the distance at which you can Panic somebody ?
As the Panic card has the symbol "Distance of 1", I'm wondering if the scope changes that. Same question for Rose Doolan who sees everybody at a distance decreased by 1.
And does that apply to the tomahawk card as well ? (which means you could throw it to somebody that is at a distance of 3).

Yes, cards like the scope allow you to see everyone as if they where 1 distance closer. This lets you use any card with restricted range to hit someone 1 distance further away then normal. This is great with panic or to let you shoot someone who was just out of range before.

On the other hand cards like mustang increase the distance that other players see you by 1. So if you have a scope and the person next to you has a mustang the two effects would cancel each other out.


In Monopoly, Can I mortgage properties during an auction time? In Monopoly, Can I mortgage properties during an auction time? Monopoly on the Nintendo Gameboy, Nintendo Entertainment System, and Super Nintendo like to go by the real rules. All though on the Nintendo, it does not allow you to mortgage properties during an auction site. Does that rule apply, if you are playing the real actual board game? Can you build houses and hotels during an auction time?

Yes.

For mortgages the rules state:

  Unimproved properties can be mortgaged through the Bank at any time.

and for building houses:

  you may buy and erect at any time as many houses as your judgement and financial standing will allow.


Whan Happens if I Copy Etrata, the Silencer? What happens if I try to copy Etrata, the Silencer with Quasiduplicate (via Qicken, Leyline of Anticipation, etc.) in response to her triggered ability? Since I create a copy of a Legendary creature, according to the rule, I have to sacrifice one. So my question is: what happens if I choose the one which is going to be reshuffled in the deck? Does the copy remain and the effect of the exiled monster etc. + the reshuffle take place?

No, you don't get to shuffle Etrata into your library if you sacrifice her.
First of all, Quasiduplicate is a sorcery. That means you can't play it while Etrata's ability is on the stack. You can play sorceries only when you have priority, during your main phase, and when the stack is empty.

307.1. A player who has priority may cast a sorcery card from their hand during a main phase of their turn when the stack is empty.

Second, if you somehow manage to play Quasiduplicate at instant speed in response to Etrata's trigger, it would resolve first and, as you already noted, you would have to choose which Etrata to keep. If you keep the copy, the original that triggered its ability goes to the graveyard. When the triggered ability resolves, it tries to shuffle Etrata into your library, but the card in the graveyard is a new object - Etrata's ability "loses track" of its source when it changes zones. It will still exile the targeted creature with a hit counter on it, but Etrata will not be shuffled back.

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.
609.3. If an effect attempts to do something impossible, it does only as much as possible.


If opener "pre-empts" in first or second position, can you reasonably assume a pretty strong suit? Opener bids three of a suit. This particular opener always has seven cards when s/he does this. My a priori view of "average expectations" for opener's suit would be something like A-Q-T-8-6-4-2 (every other card for a total of seven). If I held, say, A-8-3, I would subtract the A and 8 from opener' hand, and replace it with a 7 and 5 (conservatively) or more likely, J-5 (a balanced high low), giving Q-T-7-6-5-4-2, or Q-J-T-6-5-4-2 respectively. If I held a K-J-9, I would mentally remove the opener's Q, and credit him/her with A-T-8-6-4-3-2.

Is this a reasonable way to estimate opener's suit holding? Could it actually be stronger (on average) if it is true that "no one" would open with Jxxxxxx or weaker? On the other hand, would I reduce my estimate if the opener would bid one of a suit with the above suit and say, a side ace?

For "guidance," consider the following questions.

Is it true that based on sheer numbers, hands as strong as AKQxxxx or as weak as Jxxxxxx are low probability events?
Do most conventions eliminate prempting with the above hands?
If yes, is the remaining range, (AKJxxxx to Qxxxxxx) reasonably well represented by my hypothesized "average expectations" or do you need further agreements for a narrower range to "bracket" A-Q-T-8-6-4-2?

This question is for first and second positions, third and fourth have their won peculiarities.

Seat, vulnerability, and partnership agreement all affect required strength for preemptive openings.

On seat:

In second seat, you are preempting 1 partner and 1 opponent; this seat has the narrowest range of suit quality and hand strength.
In third seat, you are preempting 0 partners and 1 opponent; this seat has the widest range of suit quality and hand strength.
In first seat, you are preempting 1 partner and 2 opponents. In this seat the hand might belong to your side or opponents'; it requires a narrower range than third seat but allows a wider range than second seat.

On vulnerability:

When you are vulnerable and opponents are not, missing your side's game imposes a higher cost and preventing opponents from reaching their side's game (or preventing them from finding their best strain) has a lesser benefit.
When you are not vulnerable and opponents are, missing your side's game imposes a lower cost while preventing opponents from finding their best contract has a greater benefit.
When vulnerability is equal, the cost/benefit ratio is in between. You should be slightly more conservative when both are vulnerable than when neither is vulnerable, because the penalty for undertricks is higher (though I take this as a lesser concern).

On partnership agreement:

Broadly speaking, preempts have two purposes. The first is constructive: you wish convey to partner your hand type. The second is destructive: you wish to prevent opponents from finding their best contract. Different partnerships will have different philosophies here as to which goal is more important, and this will vary by seat and vulnerability as laid out above.

The more constructive you wish to be, the narrower the range of hand strength and suit quality you should have. The narrowest common range is something like "my opening 3 bids show exactly 7 cards with 2 of the top 3 honors or 3 of the top 5, in a hand with 7-10 points and no void or side 4-card major." This is a very reasonable standard for nonfavorable second seat openings. This will help partner evaluate their hand for a raise to 3NT or 4 of your major.

The more destructive you want to be, the wider your range should be. This increases the frequency of the bid while decreasing the information given to your opponents. This will make it more difficult for them to determine whether 3NT is safe, for example, and make it more difficult for them to place cards in the defenders' hands during the play. The widest "reasonable" standard for 3-bids is something like "a good six-card suit or a bad seven-card suit in a hand with 2-10 points."

Edited to answer the sub-questions:

Given a 7-card suit (and no other information), it will have all 3 top honors 12% of the time, 2 top honors 44%, 1 top honor 37%, and 0 top honors 7% of the time.
With most of my partners, I would open e.g. a 7321 hand with AKQxxxx and no other honors at the one level in most seats, but at the three level in second seat. Other partnerships open it at the three level more often. With a 7321 hand with Jxxxxxx and no outside honors, I would open at the three level not vulnerable in third seat; other partnerships would never open such a hand. As mentioned above, this depends wholly on your partnership's philosophy of constructive vs destructive preemption. There's not a single right answer here.
I don't understand your "average expectations" rubric. Why do you care about the spots? If you have agreed to play sound preempts with your partner, and you hold Axxx AT Axxx Axxx across from your partner's 3H opening, you can be nearly certain that you'll take 10 tricks in a no trump or hearts contract. It's not reasonable to replace the AT in AQT8642 with the 3 and 5, because your partner has agreed to open only if holding two of the top three or three of the top five. They almost certainly hold KQxxxxx or KQJxxxx. If you agreed to play a wider range, you'll often have to lose a trick in hearts, but it's probably worth the gamble when vulnerable -- even if partner has a poor heart suit like Q9xxxxx, they'll generally have an outside king to make the tenth trick.


What cards give +1/+1 counters to all friendly creatures? I wonder if there is any card that gives +1/+1 counters to all creature I have on the field? I have Krenko, Mob Boss, Abzan Battle Priest and Mirror Entity so it would be awesome to have +1/+1 counters on all my goblins.

Ajani Goldmane's -1 ability will give counters to all your creatures and also give them vigilance until end of turn:

  −1: Put a +1/+1 counter on each creature you control. Those creatures gain vigilance until end of turn.

Ajani Steadfast's -2 ability will also give counters to all your creatures

  −2: Put a +1/+1 counter on each creature you control and a loyalty counter on each other planeswalker you control.

Abzan Ascendancy also gives +1/+1 counters to all creatures you have on the battlefield at that moment:

  When Abzan Ascendancy enters the battlefield, put a +1/+1 counter on each creature you control.

Archangel of Thune will work awesome with Abzan Battle Priest(the one you already have):

  Whenever you gain life, put a +1/+1 counter on each creature you control.

Borborygmos may also be used to get +1/+1 counters. And it's a big 6/7 Trample creature

  Whenever Borborygmos deals combat damage to a player, put a +1/+1 counter on each creature you control.

But Cathars' Crusade might actually be (one of the) best for your scenario. That card and Krenko, Mob Boss... I'm adding red to my Abzan deck!

  Whenever a creature enters the battlefield under your control, put a +1/+1 counter on each creature you control.

Celestial Ancient can also give +1/+1 counters to all your creatures:

  Whenever you cast an enchantment spell, put a +1/+1 counter on each creature you control.

Decree of Savagery for four +1/+1 counters

  Put four +1/+1 counters on each creature you control.

Mikaeus, the Lunarch a Legendary Human Cleric that will only cost you 2 mana to get a +1/+1 counter on all your creatures(Mikaeus might die in process)

  {T}, Remove a +1/+1 counter from Mikaeus: Put a +1/+1 counter on each other creature you control.

Phalanx Leader's Heroic ability can also give all your creatures a +1/+1 counter

  Heroic — Whenever you cast a spell that targets Phalanx Leader, put a +1/+1 counter on each creature you control.

Tempt With Glory

  Tempting offer — Put a +1/+1 counter on each creature you control. Each opponent may put a +1/+1 counter on each creature he or she controls. For each opponent who does, put a +1/+1 counter on each creature you control.

Titania's Boon

  Put a +1/+1 counter on each creature you control.

As Mephy pointed in his comment, Gavony Township can also be used to give all your creatures a +1/+1 counter.

  {2}{G}{W}, {T}: Put a +1/+1 counter on each creature you control.


Zurgo + Assault suit questions Can people help me clarify the following situation:  let's say I have Zurgo Helmsmasher, already equit with Assault Suit + some other equipment + some enchantment.  It is player A's upkeep, and I give Zurgo to A.

1) is it correct that Zurgo is now still indestructible (since the Your turn refers to the current controller player A) ?

2) is it correct that Zurgo cannot attack me? Here it seems like the "Your or a planeswalker you control" on Assault suit text still refer to myself? How is that different from question 1)

3) While player A has control of the Zurgo, does he "control" the other equipment and that enchantment? eg can he sacrifice that enchantment if he gets an outlet? can he re-equipment assault suit or Zurgo's other equipment to his own creatures? Does Zurgo's CMC counts towards player A's devotion?

4) If player A attach some other equipment or some enchantment he has to Zurgo, is it allowed?  Are they all coming back at the end of player A's turn to me?

Thank you.

As long as you control a creature, you fully control it, no matter how you got control of it. For all gameplay purposes except ownership, it's "your" creature. When a creature's controller changes, the controller of equipments and enchantments attached to that creature does NOT change.

As you correctly pointed out, "You" in an object's card text always refers to the current controller of that object. Your questions of devotion is answered with this:

  109.5. The words “you” and “your” on an object refer to the object’s controller, [..]

An enchantment retains its controller even if the enchanted creature's controller changes:

  303.4e An Aura’s controller is separate from the enchanted object’s controller or the enchanted player; the two need not be the same. If an Aura enchants an object, changing control of the object doesn’t change control of the Aura, and vice versa. [..]

An equipment retains its controller even if the equipped creature's controller changes, and only the equipment's controller can use its activated abilities, such as the "Equip" ability:

  301.5d An Equipment’s controller is separate from the equipped creature’s controller; the two need not be the same. Changing control of the creature doesn’t change control of the Equipment, and vice versa. Only the Equipment’s controller can activate its abilities. [..]

Equipments and enchantments do not become unattached if the creature changes controllers, unless that would make the creature an illegal target (e.g. Bloodfire Infusion, which "falls off" if you stop controlling the enchanted creature). They continue to function normally as long as they are attached. The equipment's controller may choose to equip to a different creature when he is allowed to by the normal rules. If player A equips some other equipment to Zurgo, the same rules apply, the equipment will stay attached and function, no matter who controls Zurgo.


Solitaire game with all cards up in 5 rows of 10 cards each? What is this game?

The rules are:
Goal - To create four "foundations" from all the cards.
Foundations - Build up in suit from Ace to King.
Initial Tableau - 50 cards in 5 rows of 10 each and two cards on the side.  All cards are faced up.
Actions - You can move the cards around alternating between red and black in descending numerical order.
Temporary spaces - You can have up to three extra cards on the side.

The game sounds like Seahaven Towers. Here is a JavaScript version of the game. The one clarification is that you may have four extra cards on the side. A short explanation of the rules, from the link above.

Sea Haven Towers is a solitaire game created by Art Cabral and is similar to Freecell, Eight Off, and Baker's Game.
There are 4 temporary spaces and 4 foundations above the 10 columns of the tableau. Foundations are build up in suit from Ace to King. Temporary spaces can hold one card at a time.
The bottom card of each column is available for play. It may be moved to a temporary space, the foundation, or another column building downward in suit. Empty columns may be filled only by a King.
To improve the game play, multiple cards may be dragged at once as long as there are enough empty temporary spaces such that the move could be made by moving the cards individually.


Bay Window Defense Combat Strength Bonus When a Bay Window is added to a tower and has 1 or 2 marksmen on it, does it provide +1 value to defense strength when resolving strength at any one wall section connected to it ? Or does it provide +1 strength to resolutions for both wall sections connected to the tower it is on ?

Looking at the rules here it says (emphasis mine):-

  Gain 1 Strength at both Wall sections adjacent to this Tower
  during Melee combat if there is at least one Marksman present.


Where can I find Magic: the Gathering puzzles? The Duelist used to publish MTG puzzles by Mark Rosewater in which you were placed in the last turn of a game and had to figure out the correct play to win.  I remember these puzzles being extremely fun and a great way to improve skills.  I know that these puzzle were collected in Magic: the Puzzling, but with the M10 rules changes, these might be outdated/broken.  Is there any other place I could find something similar?

Duels of the Planeswalkers 2012 includes several puzzle games.

Gatheringmagic.com has a pretty nice archive of puzzles.


Can I cast Killing Glare with X=0 while no creatures with zero power are on the battlefield? I wonder if I am able to cast Killing Glare if there are no powerless creatures on the board?

For example to Extort after casting.

No, you have to pick a legal target (a creature with power 0 or less) when you cast the spell, as instructed by the third step of casting a spell.

  601.2c The player announces his or her choice of an appropriate player, object, or zone for each target the spell requires. [...]

If you can't, any steps of casting the spell already taken are undone.

  601.2. [...] If, at any point during the casting of a spell, a player is unable to comply with any of the steps listed below, the casting of the spell is illegal; the game returns to the moment before that spell started to be cast [...]


How far away does Reach let you hit? The rules for Reach read:

  The Reach keyword allows the figure to use a Melee attack to target a
  figure up to two spaces away, rather than only adjacent spaces. The
  target still needs to be in line of sight.

Does this mean that the reaching figure can hit one additional space away from where it could normally hit, or two spaces away from where it could normally hit? Alternatively, is "adjacent" considered to be figures that are zero spaces away, or one space away? (my question is about what "x spaces away" means, and not what adjacent means)

Per this FAQ:

  The Reach ability allows a figure to make a melee attack targeting
  both adjacent spaces and spaces at a range of 2

I think it's pretty clear from the way that's phrased that "adjacent spaces" means the same as "spaces at a range of 1".


Interaction with "with power 2 or less" The Pathmaker Initiate ability can target creatures with power 2 or less. Can this creature then have its power grow beyond 2 through other means, while still keeping the benefits from the Pathmaker Initiate?

For instance can I target the Graceful Cat and then turn it into an unblockable 3/3 this turn?

Yes. The restriction "with power 2 or less" is something that restricts the valid targets of the ability. As long as the creature has power 2 or less when you activate the ability, and also when the ability resolves, then the ability happens, and the creature cannot be blocked this turn. It doesn't matter what happens to the creature's power after that.

To have the sort of restriction you are thinking of, the ability would need to be something along the lines of "target creature cannot be blocked this turn as long as its power is 2 or less".

Here is the Gatherer ruling on Pathmaker Initiate:

  If the creature’s power is greater than 2 as the activated ability tries to resolve, the ability will be countered and none of its effects will happen. However, if instead the creature’s power is raised above 2 after the ability resolves, it still can’t be blocked that turn.


What happens to Mythos, Trauma, Keeper Action cards that have been used once? What happens to Mythos, Trauma, and Keeper Action cards that have been used by a Keeper?
Are they discarded to a discard pile, and can these discards later return back to the game when they run out?

For Mythos Cards (Page 16):

  After playing a Mythos card, the keeper discards it to a faceup pile
  adjacent to the Mythos deck. If the Mythos deck runs out of cards, this
  discard pile is shuffled to create a new Mythos deck.

For Trauma Cards (Page 25):

  Each investigator may have a maximum of one injury and one
  insanity at any given time. If he receives a second card of the
  same type, the original card is discarded first.

Additionally, some injuries/insanities say discard immediately.

Under Component Limitations (Page 25):

  Decks of Cards: If a deck of cards runs out, the players
  shuffle the discard pile to create a new deck. The only
  exception is the Event deck, which always ends the game after
  the last card is drawn (as listed on the card).

For Keeper actions (Page 10):

  During this step, the keeper may resolve any number of these
  Keeper Action cards that he wishes (threat permitting). These
  actions are resolved one at a time by spending (discarding) the
  appropriate amount of threat (printed on the upper left corner of
  the Keeper Action card)

So Keeper Action cards don't get discarded ever, just the threat tokens. In fact, some keeper cards can be used multiple times in the same turn.


What is the best way for one character to check multiple other characters loyalty cards, without knowing who each card belongs to? I'm designing a game with loyalty mechanics similar to Secret Hitler or Battlestar Galactica. In it I have character abilities. One of the abilities will allow a player to choose three players, take their loyalty cards and shuffle them, look at the loyalty cards, and then RETURN them to the correct player. Basically the goal is to have it so the player with this character (and ONLY that player) can look at 3 people and know how many of them are on the bad team and how many are on the good team, without knowing which one is which.  Now obviously there are a few problems with this, how can I have it so that who each loyalty card belongs to is hidden from the player using the ability, while still being able to return them to the right players?

Now I have ideas on how to achieve this, but I want to do it in the fewest amount of steps possible, hopefully without adding any extra cards other than the basic loyalty cards.

Some variations on the Resistance mechanism, that may be more efficient depending on your design:

Let each player being investigated take a "good" and "bad" token from a common stock, then put one of those tokens in a bag and the other back in the stock (in a way that you can't see what they put back.
Use a pair of hand-held clicker counters with the displays covered up. When you get them, you click the one that matches your alignment, then the person doing the investigation gets to see the final counts.
Do it like old-school Werewolf/Mafia, and just have a moderator handle all the secret information.


When should you avoid a third bean field in Bohnanza? I've played Bohnanza(BGG|Publisher) a few times, and it seems that most players will buy a third bean field card as soon as possible. A third bean field card costs 3 gold, but through the course of the game, it feels like the extra flexibility from owning a third bean field will more than pay for itself, as you can save up more beans of a given type in order to sell them for more.

Is it ever worthwhile not to buy the third bean field? Has anyone calculated how much a third bean field is worth (on average) over the course of the game? Should you buy a third bean field as soon as possible, or wait only until it's necessary?

I would never, ever buy the third bean field in Bohnanza except as a last resort (and yes, I win at least my fair share of games and consider myself a good player).  Look at the final scoring margins of your games: is the winner usually ahead by half a dozen points or more?  In my experience, this is not the case, it's usually much closer than that, and as such, those 3 coins you spent on a third bean field could be the difference between first place and a much less auspicious final position.

Of course, the question really is, does a third field usually pay for itself, or not?  Obviously it can pay for itself.  But shrewd bargaining, good timing, and paying attention to what cards have been cashed in for gold do too, and I think working hard at improving those skills is way more important than getting a third field at the earliest opportunity.  The third field makes the game feel a lot easier - once you have one, you will very rarely be at risk of losing a crop before you have a chance to make some gold out of it.  In my experience that leads to complacency and complacency leads to less profitable bean farming!

In short, either you regularly find yourself with not enough fields to make money with, or you don't.  If you don't, you don't need a third bean field.  If you do, I feel like you could probably benefit from tightening up your game a little - the bean field is an easy but expensive way out of your problems.  In one of Uwe Rosenberg's other fine games, At The Gates of Loyang, there's the option to increase the size of your storage barn for a small cost, at which point you can keep 4 vegetables from one turn to the next instead of 1.  And I feel that it's a trap in that game too: if you are regularly producing more vegetables than you can use, you're doing something wrong.  Unless you've exhausted all the other possibilities for fixing your supply/demand imbalance, you want to be VERY wary of spending your valuable coins!


What happens when I copy a card with awaken? If I copy Part the Waterveil for which I pay 6UUU with Mirrorpool, do I get to turn one or two lands into creatures?

The awakened version of Part the Waterveil targets a land; since Mirrorpool's ability says "You may choose new targets for the copy." you can choose either the same land or another land. As @Arthur says in the comments, it should be noted that the copy is also awakened, since that is an alternative cost:

  702.112a Awaken appears on some instants and sorceries. It represents two abilities: a static ability that functions while the spell with awaken is on the stack and a spell ability. “Awaken N—[cost]” means “You may pay [cost] rather than pay this spell’s mana cost as you cast this spell” and “If this spell’s awaken cost was paid, put N +1/+1 counters on target land you control. That land becomes a 0/0 Elemental creature with haste. It’s still a land.” Paying a spell’s awaken cost follows the rules for paying alternative costs in rules 601.2b and 601.2f–h.

and that information is copied as well:

  706.10. To copy a spell, activated ability, or triggered ability means to put a copy of it onto the stack; a copy of a spell isn’t cast and a copy of an activated ability isn’t activated. A copy of a spell or ability copies both the characteristics of the spell or ability and all decisions made for it, including modes, targets, the value of X, and additional or alternative costs.


How do I properly place handicap stones? Handicap games are very common in Go. The weaker player, taking black, gets to place (usually) up to 9 stones on the board, depending on the difference in skill.

Both free and fixed placement are possible, with fixed placement being far more common. This question refers to fixed placement.

Traditionally, both in handicap and regular games, black opens in the upper right corner, making him "bow down" to the (stronger) white player thus paying respect.

$$ -----------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . 1 . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |

How does proper placement continue after the first stone?

The second stone in handicap games is, as far as I know, always placed in the lower left corner, but is the third stone in the upper left or the lower right? And what about the order of the next moves?

Is there a difference in tradition between Japan and China (or elsewhere)?


Can Guttersnipe hit Planeswalkers? Guttersnipe's ability states:

  Whenever you cast an instant or sorcery spell, Guttersnipe deals 2 damage to each opponent.

Now, Planeswalkers are classed as "Players". I found this ruling that someone's interpreted:

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

Does this mean Guttersnipe can hit a Planeswalker that opponent's controlling instead?

As of the Dominaria rules update, no. The planeswalker redirection rule you cite has been removed, and so dealing damage to "each opponent" means literally that, just player(s), no planeswalkers involved.

It now reads:

  306.7. Previously, planeswalkers were subject to a redirection effect that allowed a player to have noncombat damage that would be dealt to an opponent be dealt to a planeswalker under that opponent’s control instead. This rule has been removed and certain cards have received errata in the Oracle card reference to deal damage directly to planeswalkers.

In that spirit, many cards which said "target player" have been changed to read "target player or planeswalker", many which said "target opponent" now say "target opponent or planeswalker", and many which said "target creature or player" now say "any target".

Cards like Guttersnipe that wouldn't be so trivial to update have generally been left alone.

For posterity, the original pre-Dominaria answer follows.

Yes, you can redirect Guttersnipe's damage to a planeswalker, due to the rule you cited. (That's an actual rule, not a ruling or someone's interpretation.) Guttersnipe is dealing noncombat damage to a player, you are that player's opponent, you control the Guttersnipe, and you may therefore redirect the damage.

But saying "planeswalkers are classed as 'players'" is only going to get you into trouble. They are not players. They're, well, planeswalkers. There are a few things you can do that make them feel like players: you can redirect damage like this, and you can choose to attack them or your opponents with your creatures. But they aren't players. If a card actually says "player", it means a player, not a planeswalker.

Some examples:

A burn spell like Lightning Strike ("...deals 3 damage to target creature or player") can only target a player. You may end up redirecting the damage, effectively using it on their planeswalker, but you still have to target your opponent. If they have a Witchbane Orb ("You have hexproof"), you can't target them, so you can't cast the spell in the first place.
Gray Merchant of Asphodel ("...each opponent loses X life...") doesn't do anything to your opponents' planeswalkers - you can't redirect loss of life. Similarly, you can't somehow use life gain on a planeswalker.
Dreadbore ("Destroy target creature or planeswalker.") doesn't do anything to players.

Most of the time things are pretty obvious anyway - for example you're not too likely to think a planeswalker can draw cards and try to use Opportunity on it. But you can avoid the chance of confusion by just remembering what you can do (attack and redirect damage) rather than thinking of planeswalkers as players.


Dominion - Saboteur use Dominion is designed to take 20-30 minutes, which is one of the reasons I enjoy it so much.  However, I find that the card Saboteur causes the game to take much longer if more than 1 or two are purchased (which they almost always are) simply because it's nothing more than reverse progression.

All the other attack cards have at least some benefit to you, this just seems to be reverse progress, with no upside to the player.  The only exception to this would be Sea Hag, however Sea Hag has a much smaller (and much less aggravating) effect on the flow of the game.

Besides "it's a good attack", are there any reasons to actually use Saboteur?

I disagree strongly with aramis and goldPseudo's answers. Using the data from Isotropic, we can see that in all the games played on the site, people who bought 4 fewer Saboteurs than their opponent increased their win rate by a factor of 1.5. In fact, this graph suggests that the only worse attack card is Thief, and that even buying a single Saboteur hurts your odds of winning relative to someone who doesn't.

In my play group, I decided not to buy them at all, and I typically won when they were available. We've since decided that it's not a fun card, so now we don't play with it.

To quote the Dominion Strategy Blog, "The best counter to Saboteur is probably not getting one."


To which edition of Monopoly would this Monopoly board belong? To which edition of Monopoly would this board belong?

Source : Facebook page for Monopoly collectors.

It's concept art

From an ebay description:

  an Original Monopoly Neiman Marcus Concept / Prototype Artwork from 1976. This was purchased from a Neiman Marcus marketing executives estate sale, whom worked at the company in the late 60’s & 1970’s.


Do Native Help cards apply when replacing another player's settlers? In Century: A New World, Native Help cards allow one to use less settlers than normal when activating a location. When a location already has opposing settlers, you usually need to place the number of settlers already present +1, regardless of the location's cost. Does this also get reduced by having Native Help cards or do they only apply to the base location cost?
For example, if a location has 3 of an opponent's settlers and I want to oust them while having an appropriate Native Help card, do I need to use 3 or 4 settlers to do so?

Yes they do.  Looking at rules from link here it says the following (emphasis mine)

Native Help cards have the following permanent benefit: Whenever you
use a location that includes the depicted icon in the circle, the
required number of settlers you need to place on this location is reduced by 1. If you have several cards of the matching symbol, each
of them reduces the required number by 1. However, you must always
place at least one settler.

Earlier in the rules the term 'required number' has two definitions.  One is the number printed on the board.  The other is the number of workers on a space plus one.  BOTH are consider a 'required number'. So if that is the case the benefit of the native card applies in both situation you describe.
Secondly there is this thread on BGG where a user says they asked the publisher your same question and it was answered-

Yes they do reduce the number of settlers needed to bump another
player from a tile to a minimum of 1.


Does the "Tea" card apply to a multiple set of cards from a single player? If Chris has a "Tea" card and his largest set are 2 "Temaki," 2 "Edamame," and 2 "Pudding" cards, does he only score 2 points for the "Tea," or 6 points?

The Tea card can only count the cards in your single largest set of cards with the same background colour.
When you have multiple possible largest sets due to a tie, you can still only use it against the cards from a single set, so you have to pick one of them. So the Tea card is only worth 2 points in your example.
The rulebook (page 15) states:

TEA
End of the round: Count the number of cards in your largest (or tied
for largest) set of cards with the same background color. Tea is worth
1 point per card in that set.


Epic Spell Wars rules clarifications I have three card clarifications that came up while playing games last night.

Treasure card "Proton Gem":

  You may add this card to your spell face up. It counts as a Wild Magic card but is not discarded.

Interpretation 1: Spells are crafted before a round starts. The player places the treasure in place of either a source, quality or delivery card. When the player's spell is revealed the treasure is placed aside and the wild card action takes place.

Rebuttal: The treasure says the player can add it to the spell, but does not specify when.

Interpretation 2: A player composes its spell then when revealed the player adds the treasure to its spell and goes through the wild card action.

Rebuttal: Spells are composed before a round so the treasure can't be added whenever the player wants.

Delivery card "Nuke-U-Lur Meltdown":

  3 damage, and 1 damage to each player adjacent to that foe.

Interpretation 1: The caster is considered a player. If the caster is also adjacent to the target for the caster will take 1 splash damage.
Interpretation 2: The intent of the card would not be to have it damage the caster even if the caster is adjacent to the target.

Source card "Professor Presto's"

  If you played a Wild Magic card as part of your spell, gain a treasure.

Interpretation 1: The action of drawing a treasure triggers once even if the player composes its spell with more than one wild magic card.

Interpretation 2: The action of drawing a treasure triggers once for each wild magic card in the player's spell.

You may add this card to your spell face up. It counts as a Wild Magic card but is not discarded.

1. Everyone with whom I've played has intuitively understood it's added add the same time as the other parts. It should be part of the spell on reveal.

  3 damage, and 1 damage to each player adjacent to that foe.

1. There's no reason to believe the caster can't be damaged by this spell. This is hardly the only spell with a drawback.

  If you played a Wild Magic card as part of your spell, gain a treasure.

1. Standard board game language. It's not "For each Wild Magic played card as part of your spell, gain a treasure."


What is the highest achievable score in Catan The game ends as soon as you get 10 or more points, so even if you can build multiple things, the one that gets you to 10 is it.

I'm fairly certain that the highest score possible in Catan is 12 points. Assuming you are at 9 points, and are in second place for longest road, if you were able to build a settlement that broke up longest road that would give you three points at once.

Is there a way to end with a higher score?

The game ends when you reach 10 points on your turn, so if you are playing with 5 or 6 players you could easily get high then 10 on the special build phases so it would be closer to the maximum number of points possible with the amount of building you have.

5 point for settlements

8 points for cities

4 for longest road and largest army

5 in hidden victory points
So in theory you could get to 22 points if you are extremely lucky.

taken from the rule book on ending the game:
"If you have—or reach—10 victory points on your turn, the game ends immediately and you win! You can only win during your turn. If somehow you find you have 10 victory points during another player’s turn, you must wait until your next turn to claim victory"


When is the game state checked for "Whenever you cast [...]" triggers? When you cast a creature for its bestow cost:

When you begin casting, it is a Creature spell

We know this because Steel Golem prevents Bestow creatures from being cast

When you pay the alternative cost, it becomes an Aura spell
When it gets placed onto the stack, it is an Aura spell

Bestow triggers things like Prowess. See Matt Tabak's ruling on this subject. However, it does not trigger things like Karametra, God of Harvests' triggered ability. See the ruling on Karametra herself. The Karametra case is confusing to me, because at one point, you were casting a Creature spell, and at another point, you were casting an Aura spell. It seems like both should trigger. So my real question...

At exactly what points during the casting of a spell do triggered abilities check to see if they triggered?

A spell is cast and will trigger any 'on cast' triggers when all of the steps of casting the spell are complete and it is on the stack

  601.2h. Once the steps described in 601.2a-g are completed, the spell becomes cast. Any abilities that trigger when a spell is cast or put onto the stack trigger at this time.

At that point it only matter what the spell currently is. The game does not look back to the steps of playing the spell to see what it was at various points during the process.

Here are the steps required to cast a spell, detailed in 601. Casting Spells:

Announce (and place on stack)
Choose (modes)
Target  How (to divide)
Total (costs)
Mana (abilities, activate)
Pay (costs)


Are the two words "synonym 2"/"similar 2" and "opposites 2"/"antonyms 2" valid clues in Codenames? E.g. "opposites 2" for "quiet" and "shout" Earlier, I've asked a question about whether poetry elements/sound devices like alliteration, assonance, consonance, and rhyme (Is it legal to use poetry elements/sound devices as hints like "alliteration 3", "assonance 3", and "rhyme 3" in Codenames?), and the consensus was that it was illegal because it didn't refer to the meaning of the words but just the way they were spelled. I'm curious about synonyms/antonyms because they refer to the meanings of words, but only the meaning of cards on the board compared to other cards on the board as opposed to the clue itself (I know that sounds complicated, but please read my examples below for an explanation.)
An example of "synonyms 2" would be for "ice" and "water" because it might be hard to come up with a clue that doesn't have water in it--closest I can think of is "cup 2", "moisture 2", "refrigerator 2" or "cold 2" but can hit unwanted cards.
An examples of "antonyms 2" would be "quiet" and "shout". I think "volume 2" could work perhaps there are other cards on the board that are related to volume that you don't want to hit, like "music".
The rules state:

Your clue must be about the meaning of the
words. You can't use your clue to talk about
the letters in a word or its position on the table.
Gland is not a valid clue for ENGLAND. You
can't tie BUG, BED, and BOW together with
a clue like b: 3 nor with a clue like three: 3.
However …

I am thinking it is valid because synonyms are antonyms are about the meaning of the words. However, I'm a bit sketchy about it because it's not the meaning of say "ice" that is related to the clue "synonyms 2", but it is that a card on the board "ice" that relates to another card on the board "water". It doesn't say you can't link cards on the board using other cards on the board, but I would imply that when it says "Your clue must be about the meaning of the words", it could suggest that the meaning of the word must be related to your clue, not the other card. "ice" is certainly not related to "synonym".

From the rules:-

DON'T BE TOO STRICT

and

If the opposing spymaster allows it, the clue is valid.

and

Sometimes you have to make judgment calls about what is valid and what
is not. Different groups may prefer to play the game differently.

For any question about if a clue is a valid all the above applies.  Unless there is a rule which prohibits a clue its more than likely ok.
I've seen clues given for the meaning of groups of words.  A team had just "ICE" and "QUEEN" left to guess and gave the clue "NARNIA 2" to hint at those which for out group was OK.   As long as you don't say things like "this is for a group", or "this is a stretch" then its fine.


What happens if I tap Aetherling to attack and in my 2nd main phase I exile it? I'm talking about this card:

In my interpretation if I exile it after I tapped it to attack I instantly get it back untapped before the opponent's turn starts.

Am I right?

you are correct.

as long as you activate the exile ability before your end step, it will return untapped before your opponent's turn.

It does not return instantly however, if you exile it during your turn e.g. during the combat phase, it will not return until your end step. If you wish to cast sorcery or creature cards with it on the battlefield, you will not be able to until your next turn.


Platinum Emperion and Tree of Redemption If I have a Platinum Emperion on the battlefield and I tap my Tree of Redemption, will the Tree still change it's toughness to my current life total, or will the Platinum Emperion negate that effect, since my life total is unable to change?

The Tree of Redemption will not be changed.

  701.8. Exchange
  701.8a A spell or ability may instruct players to exchange something (for example, life totals or control of two permanents) as part of its resolution. When such a spell or ability resolves, if the entire exchange can’t be completed, no part of the exchange occurs.

Also see this ruling on Platinum Emperion:

  If an effect would cause you to exchange life totals with another player, the exchange won't happen. Neither player's life total changes.


Monster Stacking Puzzle Game? A couple of years ago I bought a game that I absolutely adored. Unfortunately I lent it to a friend, never got it back and haven't been able to find it since. Can anyone help? I don't know the name of it, but basically it was a white plastic case that the little see through monsters could be stored in but it was also the game board. The monsters were red, blue and green and they could be stacked on top of one another, but only in a certain order. The aim of the game was that you would start with the monsters set up in a certain pattern and then had to work out how to move and stack them into a single pile.

http://www.passionforpuzzles.com/puzzles/cannibal-monsters-logic-puzzle

Cannibal Monsters is your game maybe?


Good tips for first-time Power Grid players? Disclaimer: I know there's already been some discussion on this topic, but I'm going to ask the question anyway because I've never played the game before, and thus, have yet to use my copy of Power Grid in the context of actually playing the game.

What are some general tips for people who have never played before to get started and have an actual idea of what they're doing in Power Grid? Also, what are some tips for explaining the game to people who have also never played the game before?

P.S. Sorry if this question seems like it's been asked before (and thus, horribly redundant), and altogether a dumb question

The other question is about beginner tactics so do read that, however I'll cover a couple of common confusions for first timers

Board regions (in the base game) have no meaning other than to decide the size of the playing area.  The rules describe setting up as having one area per player.  That should be read as "if you have three players use a 3-area-sized playing area" not "Albert has the red area, Bert has blue, Charlie has green,..."
You have to build additional houses in a way that is connected to your network.  That does not mean they have to be adjacent.  You can build anywhere but to do so you have to pay the connection cost across to your existing network. Unlike in Settlers, you can build through others' houses; but, boy, is it expensive.
"Turn Order" can be confusing.  The order as indicated by the order of markers on the line is only used once per round, most of the time the order is the reverse of that.

(1a. On some expansion boards particular areas affect the play, for example you can't build nuclear if you're only in Eire on the UK map or Denmark on the Europe map, etc.)


Can Termi-Nation Unity's power be used if you don't have a Mechanical Golem in play? The variant Termi-Nation Unity character card has the following power:

Reconfigure
Power: Shuffle a Mechanical Golem from play into your deck. Move a Mechanical Golem from your trash into play. You may draw a card.

There was debate at our table about the first sentence. We were in agreement that if an Mechanical Golem is in play, you must shuffle it into your deck (since the text was worded as a command). However, we had two conflicting interpretations about what happens when a Mechanical Golem is not in play:

If you don't have a Mechanical Golem in play, you can't continue to the rest of the text (thus you can't use this power).

If you don't have a Mechanical Golem in play, you just ignore that sentence (or think of it as a command that has no effect) and continue on.

Which interpretation is correct?

Sentinels of the Multiverse follows a rule of "Do as much as you can."

Unless an effect explicitly depends on a previous effect actually occurring, then any actions that cannot be performed are simply skipped.

I ran a test case in the video game version (which sources its rules interpretations directly from the game designer Christopher Badell), and here are the results, taken from the log file.

Case 1:  Greatest Legacy uses Gung-Ho to let Unity use a power.  She has no Golems in play or in the trash.  Unity still draws a card.

  Legacy uses the power on America's Greatest Legacy.
  America's Greatest Legacy's Gung-Ho tried to increase Termi-Nation Unity's HP, but they are already at their maximum HP.
  Unity uses the power on Termi-Nation Unity.
  Unity draws Turret Bot.
  Went from Legacy's UsePower phase to DrawCard phase.

Case 2: Unity uses her power with 1 Golem in play and none in the trash.  Unity destroys her Golem and draws a card.

  Went from Unity's PlayCard phase to UsePower phase.
  Unity uses the power on Termi-Nation Unity.
  Termi-Nation Unity's Reconfigure destroys Raptor Bot!
  GameController moved Raptor Bot to Unity's deck.
  Unity shuffles their Unity's deck.
  Unity draws Brainstorm.
  Went from Unity's UsePower phase to DrawCard phase.

Case 3: Gung-Ho Unity uses her power with no golems in play and 1 in the trash.  Unity reanimates a Golem and draws a card.

  Went from Unity's PlayCard phase to UsePower phase.
  Unity uses the power on Termi-Nation Unity.
  Termi-Nation Unity's Reconfigure puts Swift Bot into play.
  Unity draws Flash Forge.
  Swift Bot increased the action count of DrawCard by 1.
  Went from Unity's UsePower phase to DrawCard phase. (Count: 2)

There are conditional powers, but Unity's is not one of them

If the rest of Unity's effect was conditional upon destroying a Golem, it would be worded like Freedom Six Tempest's power Sacrifice:

  Sacrifice - Destroy 1 of your cards.  If you do, draw 3 cards.


Who chooses what order to apply damage prevention and redirection effects in a fight? If Swans of Bryn Argoll is involved in a fight and an opponent activates an ability to redirect damage assigned to the Swans of Bryn Argoll.  Which effect takes precedence?  My assumption is that the controller would chose which damage prevention mechanism to use.

When multiple damage redirection and prevention effects, or other replacement effects, are applied to the same object for the same event, the controller of the object decides the order in which they are applied. In this case, the controller of the Swans of Bryn Argoll decides whether the damage is redirected or the damage source's controller draws the cards. The exact process for applying these effects is described in the rules section titled Interaction of Replacement and/or Prevention Effects.


Can I attack a player directly if they still have a flying defender? I have a 4/2 Spiked Baloth (with trample) and my opponent has an untapped 1/1 Bird with flying. He has only 2 lives and I want to finish him off. Can I attack directly even though my attacker doesn't have reach or flying (and his creature does)?

Yes, you can attack your opponent with your Spiked Baloth, and you will win if you do so. (Trample is relevant; it's the reason you win in this scenario.)

However, your question seems to indicate that you don't understand exactly how combat works. Combat goes in step:

In the Declare Attackers Step, you say what creatures are attacking which players. You can only attack players, and it doesn't matter what creatures they have to block. In your particular case, you would declare the Spiked Baloth as an attacker attacking your opponent.
In the Declare Blockers Step, your opponent says which of their creatures are blocking which of your creatures. This is where the flying becomes important. When they're blocking, the fact that the bird has flying just means that it can block your creature even if your creature has flying. In this particular situation, your opponent would declare that their bird is blocking your Baloth.
In the Combat Damage Step, all of the combat damage is dealt at the same time. Since your Baloth has trample, it only has to deal as much damage as the bird's toughness (1) to the bird, and it can deal the rest (3) to your opponent. The bird just deals 1 damage to your Baloth. Then your opponent would lose because they have -1 life.

In addition, flying and reach only affect what attackers a creature can block. They don't affect damage, or what creatures can attack.


In magic, if a attacker attacks with a 2/1 and I defend with a 1/2 who dies In magic if a attacker attacks with 2/1 and I defend with 1/2 who dies.

Both creatures will die.

When one creature blocks one creature, each will simultaneously deal combat damage equal to its power to the other. Thus the 1/2 will receive 2 damage from the 2/1, and the 2/1 will receive 1 damage from the 1/2. Whenever a creature has total damage on it greater than or equal to its toughness, it dies immediately (technically, it dies when "state-based actions" are checked, which basically happens right before each time that any player is allowed to do anything).

There are many effects and abilities that could change this result, including:

If exactly one of the creatures has First Strike or Double Strike, it will deal damage before the one that does not, so it will survive while the other will die.
Since players can cast instants and activate abilities between the time blockers are declared and the time combat damage is dealt, either player could make their creature survive by e.g. pumping up their creature with a Giant Growth.


Does the print version matter, or the card name? I thought of this question while reading Why are there illegal cards?, which mentions that the illegal Egyptian God cards were later printed as legal versions with the same names.

In Magic, all tournament-legal printings (non-tournament-legal ones would be, for example, promotional versions with different card backs) can be used as the up-to-date card. An old card functions identically to a new card of the same new, even if it was originally printed with rules or wording that don't work anymore.

Does such a rule exist in Yu-Gi-Oh!, or are cards as-printed? For example, can the illegal Egyptian God cards (e.g. the original Slifer the Sky Dragon) be used as their updated legal versions (e.g. the updated Slifer the Sky Dragon)? If not, have the rules been maintained in such a way to keep older printings valid?

According to this link, the old cards are still valid, but you must ensure that your opponent is aware that the effect has been errata'd and provide them with the new effect.

  If you are using an “Old Text” version of a card in your Deck, you must make it clear to your opponent that the effect of that paricular[sic] card is different to what you are currently playing.

With regards to the Slifer the Sky Dragon example, the original card was never legal to be used in a match, Errata or not. It is a promotional card that includes the explicit text "This card cannot be used in a Duel," and is distinct from the actual card that lacks this text and includes the card's actual effect text.

This can further be established by using that website's Card Database and searching for the card (result of the search). On that page, it shows all the legal sources for a given card. The first time the card became legal to play was in August of 2012 when it was distributed in an issue of Shonen Jump. By extension, this excludes the original versions that were released alongside the Gameboy games in the early 2000s.


What happens if a unit recruited with "Bonds of Loyalty" dies due to paralyze? What does happen?

I can use Bonds of Loyalty to recruit yet another unit.
It can be reused as a normal command token (without the special boni).
It is discarded.
Your idea.

You can use Bonds of Loyalty to recruit another unit with the bonus it offers.
There is a discussion about this question on BGG. The last poster quotes Paul Grogan, who is the maintainer of the Official FAQ for the game and appears to be at least partially responsible for the writing of the rule book. A unit recruited by Bonds of Loyalty cannot be disbanded, but Paralyze destroys the unit and removes it from the game. This is probably the "clever way" that Paul Grogan was talking about of replacing a Bond of Loyalty recruited unit.
From Paul Grogan's post regarding Bonds of Loyalty, emphasis mine.

The other skill is Bonds of Loyalty. ...
First of all, this skill gives you an extra command token. i.e The Skill itself counts as another command token, so you can recruit one more Unit. When you gain this Skill, you add 2 more regular Units to the Unit offer.
The Unit that you recruit into this slot costs you 5 less Influence to recruit. But it doesn't stop there. This unit is so loyal to you, it can be used even in situations when you couldn't normally use Units (i.e when down Dungeons or burning down a Monastery)
The only slight downside of this Skill is that you cant dismiss voluntarily the Unit that you recruit into this slot, so if you use it in the early game to recruit a low level Unit, you're going to have to find a clever way of getting rid of it if you want to replace it.

Paralysis definition from the Rulebook.

If a Unit is assigned damage by a Paralyzing enemy and would be given a Wound, it is immediately destroyed (remove it from the game)


How to teach strategic thinking to non-gamer players? I have some players in my gaming group that seem to have a bit of a problem with devising their strategy. How can I help them improve?

First of all, I want to clarify - I don't need gateway games recommendations. We play various types of games, from Dobble or Times Up through Settlers of Catan and Discworld to Cyclades and Power Grid. Answers found here didn't help me one bit.

I'll elaborate on my problem:

We have a quite diverse gaming group. We have some hard-core thinkers and gamers, myself included, who like to plan, devise a strategy, have an idea for their play. On the other hand, we have some more casual players. They like to think about their moves, sometimes to the point of reaching Analysis Paralysis, choose what they think is best for them, but they have a problem with long term planning.

They tend to think in terms of the turn at hand, weighing immediate outcomes of their actions against each other. For example in a game of Catan, they will think what's best for them in long term, they will cut someones longest road when possible, they will take the best spot available when building a new city.

If there is no single move that brings immediate gain better than any of the other options, they get stuck. If they can build a road in one of two or three places, they wont think "hey, Mike has a long road and is cut off on the north. He will probably build it down south in a few turns, so I could cut him off too if I go there now". They have a few similar options in their hands and have a hard time figuring out what to do. Sometimes they even mumble "I dont know what to do" during play.

That is fine in some less strategy focused and/or complex games. But when we play games that reward some long term planning or too many options, they have problems or dislike the game. When we play Thunderstone, I tend to win, because I plan out what can I possibly draw from my deck and when will I reshuffle my library. I also tend to buy things with a plan for a deck, I seek out a combo or think what sort of hand would I like to have during the game and build a deck that delivers them. Some of our players tend to just buy the best card around. If the best cards are all bought out, they just randomly buy some of the other options, not having a plan for them. Yesterday I won two or three games in a row, and it was kind of a bummer.

We wanted to try some new board games, and we got Eclipse. I really loved the game and have LOTS of fun, but some of our players felt overwhelmed by the options. It's not like they didn't grasp the rules - we made some mistakes, but that was not the issues. They knew what they could do and how to do it. They just couldn't devise a plan. They had a problem getting an idea of what they would like to do/accomplish in a given round, so deciding what to do in every turn was annoying for them - they chose kind of randomly, because they felt they couldn't make an informed decision. All in all, they decided they didn't like the game very much.

So, my question is: How could I help our casual players better at developing a strategy? They are fine on the tactical level. They experiment and play with tactics. How can I help them transfer that attitude and abilities to a more strategical level?

Talk about it.

That's it; make the game a topic of conversation. Talk about it at random moments. Talk about your strategy when you're breaking out the game to play again. Talk about other players' moves while they're moving, and what plans they might be laying. Talk about how to break up an opponent's strategy, or even how to break up your own strategy. When the game ends, talk about how the winner pulled it off.

You should try to avoid boring the other people to death, of course, but the mere act of hearing about how you can plan for (some particular game) will put more tools in their toolbox the next time they play. These "non-strategic" players haven't put much thought into how to win these games, and probably don't know how you can do long-term planning for those games. Most games have a particular strategy that works well; some work best with purely-tactical moves, some work best when you've planned your strategy 15 turns ahead, some work with a mix of strategic planning and proper tactics as opportunities crop up. If you really want these players to improve, and they haven't figured it out themselves, share your hard-earned insights into the game. Don't keep your secret game-winning strategy to yourself just because you're a knowledge miser.

To illustrate, here are a few examples of things I didn't even realize were important until long after I started playing that particular game. (I make no claims to being a genius.) Withholding key insights from games can really cripple someone's ability to play well. Share some insights like these, and they'll start seeing how the game is more subtle than it initially looks.

Puerto Rico: you can screw other players by choosing Captain to force players to ship their valuable trade goods, and Craftsman is frequently a bad move.

Glory to Rome: it's a bad idea to play Craftsman cards to lead the Craftsman role, because the player to your left will Patron, and pick up a Craftsman client. Playing Craftsman cards to follow the role is only a good move if the player to your right led the Craftsman action.

Dominion: Coppers are bad, and should be actively removed if reasonably possible. If you want to afford Provinces, you really have to get your average-coins-per-card up.

Race for the Galaxy: I still don't understand how to do a proper mix of military and trading strategies. Sure, there are plenty of developments that support both, and no military tableau should purely be military developments and military worlds, but the major source of victory points for a military strategy is the high-value military worlds, right?

Power Grid: Don't buy a power plant every round; only do it when it's a significant improvement over what you already have.