Grand slam bidding with high card points hand What is my opening bid with a 24 high card point hand, so that I don't get 3 passes and end up short of slam?

AKQJx AKx Ax KQJ, I think. One year players. So rare to see this hand.

Partner had 11 HCP. I opened w 2NT, Part bid 3 something,I bid 3NT and then 3 passes.

She had 3rd A and we had 4 K. Made Gr slam. Bid 3 NT. What a waste of a great opportunity. Should part. know with her 11 and my 2NT open that we should not stop, go to Gerber?

As explanation of why it is completely insufficient to ask "What is my opening bid with a 24 high card point hand ...?" consider these examples of hands with 24 HCP:

QJT9876 AK AK AK     Open 5S, asking partner to pass or raise to 6 or 7
                     with respectively 0, 1, or 2 controls in the Spade
                     suit. This is a useful asking bid because it is
                     pointless as an opening pre-empt - the only player
                     at the table you are pre-empting by opening 5 of a
                     major is partner.

AKQTx x AKQTx AQ     Open 1S in order to preserve room to show your strong
                     two suiter with a second round jump to 3D. Opening 2C
                     with strong two-suiters is a bad practice, because you
                     will either lose the second suit, or be forced to
                     introduce it at the 4 level where partner will mis-
                     read it as a control bid in support of his suit.

AKxx Kx AQJx AQJ     Open 2C planning to rebid 2NT.

K32 AK AK32 AK32     I lean towards opening 2C planning to rebid 2NT, but I
                     could forgive a partner who simply opened this 2NT.
                     Game is very unlikely if partner cannot move over 2NT,
                     because of the major suit shortness and the poor
                     texture in all suits.

AKQJTxx AKQ KQ 2     Open 4NT, Blackwood. The only information you require
                     from partner is how many Aces he has, and you may lose
                     the opportunity to ask if you let opponents into the
                     auction.

Update

Consider the following deal, consistent with OP's description. As the hand given by OP is actually 27 HCP, and an obvious 2S opener in consequence, let's amend to be an interesting question, dropping the SK to become:

S_AQJxx
H-AKx
D_Ax
C-KQJ

opposite something like

S-Kxx
H-JTxx
D-Kxx
C-Axx

Theoretical issues now aside, and with an actual hand to analyze, let's assume a casual partnership playing a Goren style bidding system - so no relevant conventions beyond Stayman; Strong 2C with a 2D waiting response and a second negative; straight Blackwood; and Gerber as an immediate jump over NT.

Opener has 24 HCP plus a strong 5-card Spade suit, counting 5.5 QT and 9 PT (playing tricks); this is well above the minimum for a strong 2C opener and, significantly, too strong for a 22-24 HCP Strong 2NY opener. Opener should open 2C (or 2S if that is a strong opener rather than a weak 2).

Over 2C responder will bid 2D (waiting) because she is too strong to bid a 2NT response.  Opener rebids 2S to show the strong 5 card suit; and responder rebids 3S (game forcing because a fit has been announced and a 3C second negative wasn't bid). Even if Responder errs and jumps to 4S, which should be a minimum distributional raise in Spades, the partnership should easily find the small slam in either Spades or Notrump.

Note that the grand, although possibly making on this hand, is a bad bet to bid because it requires responder to have either 4 clubs or for a beneficial break in hearts, or for a squeeze to come home.  This reflects the flaw in Opener's hand of no small diamond, wasting the DJ unless Responder has precisely Axxx or longer.

To directly answer the question in regards the actual bidding sequence at the table: once Opener underbids with an opening of 2NT and hides the strong Spade suit on the second round, Responder can be forgiven for passing 3NT. There is really nowhere for Responder to go with confidence.


In bridge, what level of strength do different systems require to bid a short minor? Most players will bid 1 spade with (s) AKJxx (h)Axxx (d)xx (c)xx. That is, 12 hcp and a five card major.

If you "redistribute" the two spade spots, you get: (s) AKJ (h)Axxx (d)xxx (c)xxx.

Many systems would say that this is not enough to bid a short one club. They would require 13 hcp, or something like (s) AKJ (h)Axxx (d)xxx (c)Jxx.

Are there systems that say "12 is 12," so go ahead and bid 1 club without the jack?

Conversely, are there other systems that say, "your three card club suit is so short, we need 14hcp for one club"?

Would any of the answers change if the hand had FOUR clubs instead of three and two diamonds instead of three?

1)
Yes, there are systems that that open these ugly 11 counts (Repeat after me: Subtract a point for 4-3-3-3 distribution!), but they are (a) strong club systems that limit an opening bid to 15 or so HCP; (b) systems with a weak NT; or (c) systems with a strong club AND a weak NT.

N.B. The average playing potential, in both NT and a suit contract, is almost a full trick less for a 4-3-3-3 compared to a 4-4-3-2 hand. This is evaluated by awarding a point for the doubleton in 4-4-3-2, AND subtracting a point for the 4-3-3-3. You are significantly overbidding your 4-3-3-3's if you do not make this adjustment.

2) NO, not really; but there are systems that say you really only have 12 points (or even 11) because the hand is crap.

3) No, the answer wouldn't change on reversing the minor suits in any system I know of.

Update from comments:

Considering AKJ-Axxx-xxx-Qxx: Nominally 14; -1 (flat); -1/2 (poor
honour placement) = 12.5. I would open, in preference order: 1NT if
weak; 1H if playing 4-card majors; else 1C. With proper evaluation of
distribution and honour-support, 12 point hands are worth an opening.
I intend to rebid 1NT over partners 1D or 1S, or raise 1H to 2H. If
partner jump-shifts I will give a single raise. I will not
voluntarily compete past 2S unless partner shows 10+.
Considering AKJ-Axxx-xx-Jxxx: I wold prefer to see the SK trade with
a small clubs, but this will do. Nominally 13, +1 for diamond
doubleton, -1/2 for poor honour placement = 13.5. My preference for
openings remains identical to the previous comment: iNT, or 1H, or 1C
with the same proviso.

Update #2 - Advanced Hand Evaluation
Those interested in more precise and more accurate hand evaluation could do worse than to adopt the Banzai Point Count. This uses a 5-4-3-2-1 system and then multiples the result by 2/3, rounding a remainder of 1 down and a remainder of 1 up. This can be done independently of any system, or even partnership understanding, to simply improve one's judgement of hand worth. (Of course, if you DO discuss it with partner, it becomes a partnership understanding and must be revealed on your convention card.)


How does Sheltered Aerie work? I have Sheltered Aerie enchantment aura on one land. Does the mana that get added while it's tapped stay after your end phase? Does the mana keep adding up?

No, all players' mana pools get emptied at the end of every step and phase of the turn.

  500.4. When a step or phase ends, any unused mana left in a player’s mana pool empties. This turn-based action doesn’t use the stack.

There are some cards  that let you keep some or all of your mana, but they always state that clearly in the card text, and Sheltered Aerie is not one of those cards.


Magic: The Gathering Sorcery vs Activated Abilities The question I have is for a hypothetical situation where even though rules state(if I read correctly) that activated abilities are in their own unique stack to their owner. Player A plays a field wipe card like say Whelming Wave or Evacuation—can player B tap their creatures in response to the target player to deal damage and kill them before either card resolves? Or, is it simultaneous or does the wipe go off?

I'm relatively new, so I'm curious. The opposing player can really go "In response to that" and make it meaningless? It's fine if it's a rule, but it defeats the purpose of strategic play, of disabling such things because they didn't do it first. If it's considered on top like a counter to my card, it makes sense, but if the stack is supposed to be unique, outside, not on top of an already resolving card, then I'm not sure what to think by the way it reads.

There is one stack, that all spells and abilities use (with the exception of special actions and mana abilities). In your specific example, player A casts Whelming Wave, and once they finish casting it, it's on the stack. Then, player B activates their creature's ability "in response" to the Whelming Wave, meaning "while the Whelming Wave is on the stack". That ability goes on the stack on top of the Whelming Wave. Then the ability resolves, and the ability does whatever it does. Finally, the Whelming Wave resolves, and, the creatures are returned to their owners' hands. If, however, the resolving ability killed player A, the Whelming Wave would immediately leave the game with its controller, and it would never resolve.

This can happen because abilities can be activated at instant speed; in this case, they can be activated in response to other spells or abilities. Rule 112.3b says

  Activated abilities have a cost and an effect. They are written as “[Cost]: [Effect.] [Activation instructions (if any).]” A player may activate such an ability whenever he or she has priority. Doing so puts it on the stack, where it remains until it’s countered, it resolves, or it otherwise leaves the stack. See rule 602, “Activating Activated Abilities.”

Notable exceptions are the Equip and Outlast abilities, which can only be activated at sorcery speed.


Space Hulk: Death Angel - playing a 'multi-player' game solo I just beat the game solo but could not do so when I had a teammate. I get the feeling beating it is easier when you are solo b/c the most genestealers that can pop out is 2. And having smaller swarms is greatly beneficial to rolling for defense.

Anyways, I was wondering if anyone has tried playing a solo mission but with more than 6 space marines. Do you think it is easier or harder?

I find it harder with more players. Mostly because people tend to coordinate less... and so suboptimal decisions are more common.

There also is the issue of more genestealers per event card, but more troops means more shots made.

Worst blowouts I've seen have been 6p games.

I've run the game with a 3p setup for 2p, with one of the two controlling two groups, and it works fine that way. (P3 dropped out after turn 1.)


If you trigger Tree of Perdition's ability, then give the tree -13/-13, does the player go to 0 life? If you activate Tree of Perdition's ability, "Exchange target opponent's life total with Tree of Perdition's toughness", then play a spell before the ability resolves that brings the tree's toughness to 0, does the opponent's life total become 0?

No - the Tree's ability will fail to do anything when it resolves. After the -13/-13 effect resolves, the Tree will die as a state-based action. Thus by the time the Tree's ability resolves, it won't be in play so the exchange can't happen.

The general rule:

  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.

And confirming this, a specific ruling for a very similar card:

  If Tree of Redemption isn’t on the battlefield when the ability resolves, the exchange can’t happen and the ability will have no effect.


What are the best ways to manage challenges to the storyteller? The rules list various subjective ways players can force a storyteller to end her turn when she:

Gets stuck
Contradicts the story
Rambles
Is too silly
Introduces unimportant elements

What have you found are the smoothest or best ways to handle these challenges? Do you simply put it to a majority vote, a unanimous vote? Are there problems that often occur like spirited agreement to the challenges by people simply wanting to get more of an edge toward winning?

I'm looking for insights on what people have found works better and what sort of stumbling blocks they encountered with this aspect of a game that clearly requires people to be on the same page and somewhat sporting of each other to truly make it work.

Or drunk.

For my money the simple thumbsup system works with my group. You're welcome to tell the story and if someone contradicts or uses a card for a nonessential element you call an audible and stick out your hand thumbs down. You have about five seconds and then everyone else joins in thumbs up or thumbs down. Majority rules.

The rest of the time if the story teller is rambling you can just stick out your hand thumbs down and as they go if more people join your thumbs down and it reaches majority then you lose and the story passes on.


Rolling for Horror Between Rooms with No Door The setup for Story 2 contains adjacent rooms with no wall or door.  The rules say that you must roll for horror when entering a room with a monster or when a monster enters the room.  My assumption is that applies in the case where there is a clear line of site since the rules specify "room".

However, I just wanted to know if anyone could verify that even if there is a line of site between 2 rooms, you only do the horror role when in the same room as a monster.

The rules clearly state that you roll a Horror Test, when a monster enters a room with an investigator or visa versa (page 15). Line of Sight has nothing to do with the question, you do not roll a Horror Test, because you can see a monster.

Room - An area of the map tile that has a name and is separated from the other rooms by solid brown walls, doors, or the edge of the map tile. ... (page 8)
Whenever a monster enters (or is placed in) an investigator’s room (or vice versa), the investigator must immediately make an attribute test called a HORROR TEST. He does so by making a Willpower test modified by the monster’s horror rating (the blue number at the top of its monster token). If he fails this test, he takes one horror (see “Damage and Horror” on page 24)


How does this Example Endgame work in Scrabble? Playing Out Scenario In Wikibook's Scrabble guide, they have a Scrabble/Endgame section.

In the Example Endgame Subsection, they show how a person could play out his letters, knowing through tile-tracking that the opponent has a W. They note that the opponent has only two places to play the W, as OW or WAG. The first move they play is OTIC, blocking OW. Then they go on to play three more times, leaving the opponent with W and winning the game.

How does this work? If I were the opponent and OW was used I would play WAG directly after, ending the game.

What am I missing here?

Playing OTIC blocks both OW and WAG.  OTIC starting at H3 will put the 'C' on H6, blocking the opponent from playing W on I6.


Should I avoid pairing my opponents first lay in cribbage (singles)? Should I avoid pairing my opponents first lay in cribbage (singles)?  I ask because more often than not, he seems to have a third.

Let's look at some statistics. Let's assume that you have only a single one of some card value 'x' and 3 other cards. Let's also assume that your opponent has a single one of that card value 'x' (since he laid the first of the 'x' cards). Assuming also that he chose 4 random cards of the 6 he was dealt (not likely, but makes the math simpler), he has 3 chances to have second of that 'x' valued card from a remaining deck of 45 cards (52 - Your 4 - The 2 you threw into the crib - Your opponent's 1 'x' card), 2 of which are value 'x'. The chance of him not getting the 'x' valued card in his 3 more chances is (43/45)*(42/44)*(41/43) or .870 meaning that he has only a 13.0% chance of having a third card of value 'x' and therefore being able to get that 3-of-a-kind. Because you get 2 points for the pair and your opponent gets 6 points (aka you lose 6 points) for the 3-of-a-kind, playing to get the pair nets you (2*.870 - 6*.130) or +.960 points.

If we assume that if he is given a pair of 'x' value cards in his 6 cards, then he will keep them (a reasonable strategy), then the chances of him not getting the 'x' valued card in his now 5 more chances is (43/45)*(42/44)*(41/43)*(40/42)*(39/41) or .788 meaning that he now has a 21.2% chance of having a third card of value 'x' and therefore being able to get that 3-of-a-kind. This nets you +.304 points, a lesser amount than before, but still positive.

In both these scenarios, it is unlikely that your opponent will have that third 'x' card and either way you get a net gain of points over your opponent. Others may have strategies to provide, but these are the raw statistics of your scenario.


Cold contract in bridge A cold contract usually means that a contract, which makes on most reasonable lines, as the cards lie. You hear people say, "He managed to find a line to go down in a cold contract".

(Note: the meaning could slightly differ based on region etc).

I am curious, how this term came into being. There is a past BBO forums thread: http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/43444-what-is-a-cold-contract/ but that does not seem to help.

Does anyone know the origin of this term?

Official Encyclopedia of Bridge, 6th Edition (2001) lists:

  Cold contract: Bridge slang for an easily makeable contract.

Merriam Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, 8th Edition (c 1980) lists as sense 5 b:

  Cold: certain, sure viz The actors knew their lines cold a week before opening.

OED Compact Edition (1928) does not list any comparable sense for the word cold.


In bridge, should a defender play differently with most, about half, or few of the partnership's points? This example is from Victor Mollo's "Test Your Defense, Where the Points are Won."

You are East. The bidding has been 1NT pass 3NT pass. West leads what looks to be the fourth highest spade. You hold:

(s) Axx (H) KQJ9 (d) Kx (c) xxxx.

Dummy shows (s) Kxx (h) Txx (d) Axxx (c) Kxx.

You take the ace of spades. Normally you would return a spade, partner's suit. But Mollo recommends establishing the hearts for a "set."

The key features are: 1) Dummy's T falls under your J, making the 9 good 2) you have the guarded K of diamonds "offside" the ace, hence a sure entry and 3) You have 13 of your partnerhip's HCP.  West has the J of spades at most (Q if South has only 15 HCP).

So is your strength the reason you should deviate from the usual rule of returning partner's suit? Should you return your partner's suit if you didn't have the heart honors (meaning that partner has about 7 HCP), or if you had only the A of spades (partner has  about 10)?

Conversely, if you were "West" (on lead), would you lead differently with the three different hypothetical hands?

I don't think the number of points in your hand it the relevant feature here at all.

Essentially, you look at your hand, and see that you can easily take down the contract if you establish your 3 hearts winners before your opportunity to regain the lead with the KD is removed.

Returning a spade isn't going to help much as we're pretty certain partner isn't going to win that trick with his Jack.  As such, you have to forget the "usual rule" of returning partner's lead, which isn't going to help in the current situation, and just make the best play for beating the contract instead.  Partner has basically nothing, and you have an excellent defensive hand here: it's not up to him to dictate the whole play of this contract via his lead, just because of the seat he happens to be sitting in.


Time Stories Asylum - missing card 1 Just got this game from a friend and card 1 that starts the Base card section is missing - does anyone have it? A screenshot or the the text would be great. Possibly it just says to read Base cards A to G from left to right but maybe it has other important info?

There isn't much to it, you assumed correctly. Here's the card:


Is it better to try to reveal a Traitor early, or wait until later in the game? Since a Traitor might help you, to avoid making it obvious they are a Traitor, is it better to wait to reveal them? The advantage of accusing early, is that if no White Swords are on the board, you don't get a Black Sword if you make a false accusation. You also prevent Special Cards being played by the Traitor (if they decide to reveal themselves) that can hurt everyone.

Does the strategy of when to Accuse change with the number of players? Why?

My experience is that a known but unrevealed traitor is less damaging than a revealed traitor. Moreover, an unrevealed traitor who doesn't know for certain he's been ID'd may be of some minor benefit, especially if the solo-quests are not his to lose.

An unrevealed traitor, however, can truly sabotage the single-time solo quests something fierce...

If the game is close to 12 swords, say 9+, and a quest is close it's time to gank the traitor to prevent 2 swords from flipping.


7 Wonders Look Through Discard Order I am playing with the Cities, Babel, Leaders, and Wonder Pack expansions for 7 Wonders. There was a situation last night where two players attempted to look through the discard to play a card at the end of Age III.

My question is: which player gets to look through the discard first? Is there any specific game-balancing reason why?

From the FAQ at the end of the Wonder Pack rules:

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

My guess is that nobody thought too hard about balance here: it's important for there to be some order, but it's rare enough and minor enough that it barely matters which. Instead, note that a copy effect always comes after the thing it's copying: Manneken Pis after the other wonders, and Courtesan's Guild after the leader. I'd speculate that this was designed for feel rather than for balance - some players might think it unfair or unintuitive if an opponent could copy their effect before they'd gotten to use it themselves.

Continuing with the speculative post hoc justifications: imagine a game with one of the wonders in play and one of the cards. The person holding the card can see the wonder. The person with the wonder, however, might not even know there's a conflict since they might not know that the card is in play, so it would be quite reasonable for them to build the wonder stage and then grab the discard pile immediately and start looking through it. Rather than make this behavior wrong, the rule just codifies it as the canonical order: wonders before cards.


What qualifies as a "monocolored creature"? I'm a little confused about what a "monocolored creature" is.

Defiler of Souls is definitely not, having a mana cost of 3BBR - Black and red is definitely not monocolored.

Birds of Paradise definitely is monocolored, having a mana cost of G.

Soulfire Grand Master has a mana cost of 1W - this is where my uncertainty lies. Is this a monocolored creature because of the single (W), or does the (1) disqualify that?

Soulfire Grand Master is monocolored. Monocolored cards have exactly one color of mana in their cost. Colorless does not count as a color. So, a cost of 1 white and 1 colorless mana contains only one color - white. Of course, anything that specifically alters a card's color overrides this general rule.

105.2. An object can be one or more of the five colors, or it can be no color at all. An object is the color or colors of the mana symbols in its mana cost, regardless of the color of its frame. An object’s color or colors may also be defined by a color indicator or a characteristic-defining ability.
105.2a A monocolored object is exactly one of the five colors.
105.4. ... “Multicolored” is not a color. Neither is “colorless.”


Where (or to whom) do sold items go? In Munchkin you can sell items which amount to not less than 1000 gold pieces or multiples, in exchange for levels.

Am I right that selling is a form of discarding, that is you are "selling" to the "discard pile" of the Treasure deck?

Selling is a form of discarding, as emphasized by the World of Munchkin FAQ (part of the "The rules say that cards in play must be traded or discarded. When can I discard them?" question). Sold items would go to the respective discard pile.

For completeness' sake, the rules have the following to say about selling items in general, also mentioning that selling items is discarding them:

Selling Items for Levels:
At  any  point  during  your  turn  except during combat or Running Away, you may discard Items worth a total of at least 1,000 Gold Pieces and immediately go up one level. ("No Value"  cards  are  the  same  as  zero  Gold  Pieces.)  If  you  discard  (for instance) 1,100 Gold Pieces worth, you don't get change. But if you can manage 2,000 worth, you can go up two levels at once, and so on. You may sell Items from your hand as well as those you are carrying. You may not sell Items to go to Level 10.


Exchanging control of creatures that have since left the battlefield If my opponent casts Switcheroo targeting my 3/3 and his 1/1 and I immediately cast Shock to kill his 1/1 will he still gain control of my 3/3?

No, per the Gatherer Ruling:

  If one of the target creatures is an illegal target when Switcheroo resolves, the exchange won't happen. If both creatures are illegal targets, Switcheroo will be countered.

This is because in order to preform an exchange there must actually be something to exchange, you aren't allowed to exchange something for nothing.

  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.


When should Beginners finish a Game of Go? I was reading the answers to this question, about who has won a game of Go and came across the two following statements.

  You pass at the end of the game when you do not think you can increase your score (explained below), and stop when both of you pass one after the other.

And

  You needed to finish the game...

As a beginner at go, I think an implicit part of the other question that has possibly been missed is "How do I learn when the game is over". Logically, assuming both players are beginners it is possible that they both think they cannot increase their score and the game is over; where as a more experienced player, such as those answering the question, disagrees.

Is there a suggested method of learning or teaching when the end of the game has been reached? For example continuing to play until only a "few" spaces are unclaimed?

Under Chinese scoring (AKA area scoring), you can (and with new players should) play until each player has no move they can make.

There is no downside under Chinese scoring for a player to play stones into untenable positions, nor is there downside for a player to defend a position inefficiently (so long as they don't fill in their eyes).  As a result, a new player should try to attack any area they think they can and you should attack them on any area you can, even if those areas are too small to build a live group.  This will help them get a more concrete sense of why certain groups are alive or dead, understand what territory can or cannot be viably contested, and learn how defend their own groups from attack without losing their eyes.

For these reasons, I actually recommend Chinese scoring for new players.  In addition, I believe it's easier for new players to understand.  Japanese scoring requires players to understand the concept of territory, which is much easier once a player has played several games.  The overall strategy and techniques of Go are not substantially affected by which scoring system you use (it mostly matters in terms of endgame play), so learning to play under Chinese scoring should not be an impediment to later learning Japanese scoring.  See What are the difference between Chinese and Japanese rules in Go? for more information.


Can you use a planeswalker ability even if the planeswaker doesn't have enough loyalty? For example Tamiyo, the Moon Sage. Can I use the -8 ability even though she only has 4 loyalty? I understand it would kill her. Or would I have to get 8 loyalty first with the +1 ability?

Wizard's wording on the matter is thus:

  606.5. A loyalty ability with a negative loyalty cost can't be activated unless the permanent has at least that many loyalty counters on it

It doesn't specify how those counters get there. It could be through +X abilities, proliferate, or even cool things like Doubling Season. But they must exist on the planeswalker in order to pay the cost.


How many of a legendary card should I be including in my deck? So, I am making a Magic: The Gathering cat deck for my younger sister, and I am running in to a wall with trying to narrow my 63 card deck into a 60 card deck. My biggest problem is that I have 6 really awesome planeswalkers to choose from. They are pairs of three different types of planeswalkers.
6 planeswalkers is quite a lot for a deck. 4 seems decent.

There are two options I have: Get rid of one pair, (as well as another card,) or have each type of planeswalkers, but only one of them.
BUT, you can only have one legendary card of the exact same name on the field at the same time.

So, my big question: For legendary cards that you can only have one of on the field at a time, is it usually better to have two types of the same card, and increase your probability of picking it up, but at the risk it taking up space in your hand, and being unable to play it because it's already on the field,

OR

Have different types of legendary cards, meaning you could have both on the field at the same time, but it decreases your chance of picking up either one of the card, making it more unpredictable?

Note: I do not expect people to help me pick cards to put into her deck. That’s not what I want the focus of this question to be about. But I would still gladly listen to any card suggestions. ^^

I will provide card context into the comments below for anyone who desires to help me on my quest to make an awesome cat deck for my sister.

I'm not 100% sure this question is suitable for this site, so just tell me if you feel otherwise.

My deck list is:

Lands: 21x Plains, 6x Forest
Enchantment: 4x Compulsory Rest, 4x Anointed procession
Creature: 4x Sacred cat, 4x Adorned pouncer, 4x Regal caracal, 4x Pride sovereign, 4x Leonin warleader, 2x Brimaz, king of oreskos,
Planeswalkers: 2 each of Gideon, Martial Paragon (to help pride sovereign make cats), Huatli, Radiant Champion (to draw cards quicker), Ajani, adversary of tyrants (to make even more cats)

It depends on what you want out of your legends. Sometimes the legend is so important for your deck that you're willing to risk drawing multiples of them. Other times the legend drawback is real, and you don't run four copies for exactly this reason. Some examples from recent Standard:
Adrian Sullivan's Jeskai Control won GP Milwaukee. Note the 4x Niv-Mizzet, Parun. This is a legend, but he has four copies. Why? Lots of factors go into this.

Niv-Mizzet is a fantastic win condition: if you ever untap with him, you've more or less won the game (he's even more powerful than Teferi in this regard).
Because Niv-Mizzet is so good at winning the game, Adrian Sullivan is dedicating other cards to supporting him - note he has Dive Down to protect Niv-Mizzet from targeted removal, and Treasure Map to accelerate Niv-Mizzet onto the battlefield. These cards (especially Dive Down) are not nearly as good if the deck doesn't draw Niv-Mizzet.
Another way of thinking about this is that, this deck wants to draw Niv-Mizzet every single game, and the obvious way to maximize that chance is to run four copies.

Ari Lax's Selesnya tokens from Pro Tour Guilds of Ravnica. Note he has only three copies of Emmara, Soul of the Accord. Why? Again, many factors go into this:

Emmara is a great role-player and a great body to Convoke with, but you don't need to draw Emmara. The turn after you play Emmara, you're still only convoking for one mana. If you didn't draw Emmara, you might have drawn another of the deck's 2-drops, which also convoke for the same amount. All your lose out on then is a 1/1 token - still a loss, but not a devastating one. Meanwhile if you draw Emmara without drawing a convoke card, she's not particularly good - just a 2-mana 2/2, easily prevented from attacking.
Emmara is easily answered. Shock kill her at mana advantage (Shock costs 1 mana, Emmara costs 2). She's also fully vulnerable to all the commonly-played sweepers, from Ritual of Soot to Deafening Clarion.
Emmara is not nearly as threatening as Niv-Mizzet. Niv-Mizzet is a removal magnet: it's fine if you can't play any more Niv-Mizzets, since if you stick a copy of him, you win. With Emmara, if she lives, the game still goes on. In this case any more copies of Emmara in hand become genuine dead cards.

If you followed this, it should be clear why there're only three copies of Emmara in the Selesnya deck. The first copy of Emmara is great, but the second is not. But for the Jeskai deck, casting and protecting Niv-Mizzet is its gameplan. It wants to draw a Niv-Mizzet every game. It doesn't want to draw multiples, but if the first copy dies, it immediately wants to draw another. So it runs four copies of the legend.
Hall of Famer Frank Karsten once wrote an article on how many copies of a card one should include in a deck. He suggests the heuristic:

4 copies – You want to draw the card as often and as early as possible. The card is essential for the deck to work as it's supposed to, and you don't mind drawing multiples, even in your opening hand. You might even be happy to do so. It's rare to play legends as 4-ofs, but you can make exceptions for cards that are extremely powerful and/or removal magnets. Example: Heart of Kiran in Mardu Vehicles or Karn Liberated in Modern Tron.
3 copies – You want to see the card at some point in the midgame, but you prefer not to draw multiples. A second copy is not necessarily dead, but it's much less valuable than the first. Most commonly, this is because the card is expensive to cast, a situational answer, and/or a non-essential legendary. Example: Kari Zev, Skyship Raider in Mono-Red Aggro or Teferi, Hero of Dominaria in U/W Control.
2 copies – You're not excited to see the card in your opening hand, and it's not vital to your strategy. Often, the card is not much better than the alternatives, worthless in multiples, and/or crazy expensive to cast. Example: Josu Vess, Lich Knight in Mono-Black Control or Ugin, the Spirit Dragon in Modern Tron.
1 copy – You don't want to draw the card naturally, but you want to have access to one in your deck. Most commonly, this is because it's a kill condition for strategies that see their entire deck, because you hope to mislead your opponent into thinking you're playing more copies than you actually are, or because it's a tutor target in a toolbox-style deck. For example: Elesh Norn, Grand Cenobite in Gifts Ungiven decks or Shalai, Voice of Plenty in Chord of Calling decks.

On a side note: it sounds like you're including planeswalkers because they're "cool". There's nothing wrong with that, but if your aim is to make a strong deck aimed at winning, each card must have a reason for being included. Take Huatli, Radiant Champion. What does this card do for you? Does it make cats? Does it synergize with cats? Is it better than simply casting another creature like Brimaz? I'm pretty sure the answer to all these questions is "no", and so you should not be including her. There's a place for planeswalkers like Huatli, but in a deck like yours, that place is the sideboard. If you're playing against a deck with lots of Cleansing Nova and Golden Demise, then you bring her in because she's a threat that survives these sweepers. But in game 1, when many decks don't have sweepers, you're better off just casting another creature. Among the planeswalkers you listed, the only one I can see playing in the maindeck is Ajani.


Haunt 42 - How does the traitor attack the [spoiler]? The rules don't seem to say what are defense traits for the

   statue

and they don't seem to say what the traitor attacks with?

The Traitor's tome intentionally doesn't cover the [spoiler]

That's up for the Heroes to let the traitor know. The Secret's of survival book has all the rules for

   attacking the statue.

Here's the relevant bits from the Secrets of Survival book:

   Once the Statue animates, it remains in whatever state it transformed into for the rest of the game. When the Statue has been animated, tell the traitor what form it has taken.
 If the traitor attacks the Statue and defeats it, it isn’t stunned. Instead, the Statue can’t lower an ability during its next turn. The Statue can still be moved to follow the traitor.

So this is how it works:

   The traitor can attack the Statue normally, and the heroes should let the traitor know so when it animates. The traitor attacks with the default might, and the statue defends with might, as normal in any combat - unless an item says differently (like The Ring allows you to attack with Sanity). The Statue's attributes are 8 for everything (Speed, Might, Sanity and Knowledge) and it defends with the appropriate attribute for the attack.


Creating a TCG - Checking Mechanics I have created a very simple card game but I am worried some of the mechanics may be shared with others.
Is there anywhere I can check this, and what would be the outcome if other games did share the mechanic?

Note: I Am Not A Lawyer, this is mostly just accumulated internet knowledge, and may be inaccurate.
Card game mechanics are patentable. This means your mechanics could be already be patented by another company.

A patent protects a unique invention or process. It protects it by preventing someone else from duplicating your invention/process for a period of time (typically 20 years).
Yes, Richard Garfield patented tapping. The patent, by my reading, runs out on June 22 of this year (2014). Wizards went back and tacked on some other parts to that same patent, which you can read here. The patent covers just about everything you could imagine in a TCG. It covers building decks, casting spells, the process of trading with others and more.
Wizards is saying that Hex violates a lot of its patents. Hex probably does. Here’s the problem:
Those patent claims are beatable.
For example, they might be too abstract. They might be too broad. Having a patent does not guarantee that it will be valid in the face of someone challenging it. And importantly, if they run out when I think they will, Hex/Crypto can limit the damages they pay out to only the infringing time. After that, Hex isn’t infringing on any sort of patents held by Wizards. They’re probably still infringing on all the patents that early adopters lined up on the internet regarding downloads, backups, dropboxes and other horror stories. Litigating patents takes an incredible amount of money, especially when you’re trying to get it declared invalid one way or another.
Source

While your game is in development/playtesting, this is not a big deal, as you're not charging money, and so the worst you could expect would be to be told to stop.*
Once that changes and you're actually trying to charge for this stuff, you should seek actual professional paid-for advice. Apart from anything else, you should consult a lawyer about starting a company to control the game, so that in the event of lawsuits or contracts, only the assets of the company will be liable.
*: Warning: I may be completely wrong about this.


Can you play a piece of Ninja Gear that gives a flat bonus to turn a failed roll into a success? In Ninja Burger, you attempt to deliver tasty food to people. Along the way, you need to pass skill checks (such as Climbing at -2 to get to the International Space Station, because nowhere is outside our delivery zone). To help with this, there are various things that help, including Ninja Gear, some of which gives a flat bonus to, say, Climbing rolls. (There are other pieces of gear that grant an automatic success after you have failed; I am not asking about these, they're clear enough.)

Can you play (and apply) Ninja Gear that gives a flat bonus after you have failed the roll, or do you have to have the gear in play before rolling?

The manual says two things about this :

1) "If you come to a hard roll, don’t be shy about asking for help" (implying that you need the gear before the roll)

2) "If you fail any roll, and cannot turn your failure into success by making a legal re-roll, playing a card, or using a special ability, you have failed the mission." (Implying that playing a +1 bonus after the roll might work.)

Yes, in the rules under Fortune Cards (page 4):

  If you fail a skill roll, but you have a useful item in your hand and enough money, you may buy that item from your hand. If it gives you an automatic success or increases your skill enough that you succeed, then you made your roll!


Settlers of Catan trade dynamics question Is it ok though to offer trade never intending to do it, as a way to gauge what other player is willing to give out for a said card? And then backtrack after other player agrees to that trade?

Is it ok, if you don't have wheat at all, to start trading like "I would like to give out wheat in exchange for X, not having wheat at all in order to find out what other players are willing to give you for wheat? Is that allowed?

It's not a rules violation, but there are still consequences

I don't think that there are any rules against it (Catan doesn't have much to say about when trade agreements become binding), but I would consider it poor sportsmanship lie about your trading plans in order to gain information and mislead your opponents.  If you repeatedly act like this there's a reasonable chance your game group will sour on playing Catan with you.


Running an introductory bridge lesson I've introduced bridge to a small group of coworkers at a few jobs now, and I still don't really know the right way to do it. I'm hoping to get some feedback/suggestions on my approach, so I'll just describe it here; feel free to suggest improvements in whatever part(s) you like.

I usually just do minibridge for at least the first lesson, because the initial investment to figure out bidding is too high and un-fun, and I'm pretty set on that plan. But what hands do we play, what do I try to teach? In the past I've used shuffled hands, and that seems to go okay, but it's easy to get bogged down in higher-level stuff they're not really ready to get yet.

I'm considering pre-making a couple hands from the Bridge Master level 1 series, like "You're in 6NT, and you need to knock out an ace before you cash your other eleven tricks" or "In 3NT, you need to overtake KQ with AJT9 to untangle your nine winners" to introduce some basic concepts, and then random hands after that. But that makes things pretty boring for the defenders, and I don't know if those deals are too high-level or too low-level anyway: maybe I just start with "Cash your nine tricks in a 4333 mirror". I'm also considering a defense-oriented hand, where it's like "Remember how we talked about knocking out aces? Declarer is trying to do that, and you can see from dummy that he will succeed unless your partner has HA, so try leading a heart."

Another thing I'm not sure of: if I do go with prepared lesson deals, do I explain the key point before the deal, or do I just let them play the hand, and then do a post-mortem where we talk about what happened, what could have happened instead, etc?

After the first lesson, I usually describe the skills relevant to bidding/defending/declaring, and ask the students which branch they're interested in investigating more deeply for the next lesson. I'm fairly happy with that approach, but if you dislike it feel free to pipe up.

My goal is to give a feel within the first couple hours for vaguely what playing bridge is about, so that interested folks can come back and others can get on with their lives; I definitely don't plan for students to survive at a duplicate club anytime soon, so I don't mind glossing over things like bidding, leads, or basic carding until students show interest in something related.

My friends and I have taught a bunch of different people how to play bridge, and we've developed a system over the years. It basically boils down to: go slowly. Don't overwhelm them with information.

The first time that I play with them, I tell them nothing more than the rules. No conventions, no HCPs, no nothing. Just the literal rules as required.

We play a few hands, perhaps even a full evening of cards like this, as you see fit, and based on how well they take it. Basically, just ask them to pay attention. Did they do well? What worked? What didn't?

Next time, or perhaps later that session, we introduce HCPs. Nothing more than that, and noting that there are 40 HCPs in a deck, so if they think that they and their partner have more than half, then they probably have the stronger hand and should be bidding a bit more.

I can't remember what we would add next (I think 5 car majors? open with 12--14pts? 8 cards is a fit? Conventions like that. Basic ones.)

As I said, start basic. Let them get a feel for the game before even thinking of overwhelming them.

To respond to one of your ideas, I think staged hands would be weird, personally. However, we never tried it, so I don't know how it would work. Still, it seems like staging a hand forces them to be aware of too many things all at once. Let them figure out finesses after they have been playing a while, not the first time you sit down with them.


Countering Villa + Jeweler in Puerto Rico: The Nobles A while ago I played a game of Puerto Rico with all of the buildings from Expansion II: The Nobles.  One of the players pretty much had a run-away game using Villa + Jeweler, and we were pretty much at a loss as to how to stop it.

With the new expansion, each time the Colony Ship is refilled, one of the colonists is replaced by a Noble.  Each Noble is worth 1 VP at the end of the game, but more importantly they can trigger other buildings.

Mayoring became the hot action of the day, and the Corn player pretty much forsaking all building until they hit 6 doubloons + quarry + building privilege to buy the Jeweler (they were pretty much Captaining the rest of the time, if you're curious).  The Jeweler gives you 1 doubloon in the Craft phase for each Noble you have, which isn't exactly overpowered given it's cost, until you bring Villa into the picture.

Within two turns of Crafting, the Jeweler player had enough money to buy a Villa, which lets you take an additional Noble from the supply when anyone mayors.  Thus, if he would Mayor, he could actually get two Nobles, one from the ship and one from the supply.

This is pretty much where the game got silly, because every Mayor gave him +1/2 endgame VP which translated into +1/2 more doubloons during the crafting phase, which, in turn let him buy the Royal Gardens (+1 VP for each noble at end of game) and other big-ticket items quickly.

I'm not sure which part of the combo is broken, though, the Villa or the Jeweler?  The Jeweler is more expensive than the Factory, but rewards you for something you already want to do (collect Nobles).  The Villa simply gives you an extra Noble each turn (1 VP a turn isn't unreasonable), but put them together and the free money starts to roll in.

Short of all other players buying Villas as soon as someone buys a Jeweler, or applying a house rule, how can you counter this?  Or have others seen that Jeweler + Villa is degenerate enough to simply not allow both buildings in the game at the same time?

Ultimately, we decided that Jeweler and Villa shouldn't be allowed in the same game.  Since the first expansion already has the rule that the Hacienda and Forest House shouldn't be allowed in the same game, there's a precedent for this.

Villa + Royal Gardens is still a bit of a problem, but with Jeweler out of the picture, you won't be getting obscene amounts of money from all of your Nobles during the crafting phase.


Is the quest leader required to be part of the team? One of the players suggested that the team leader should be able to pick the team and not include himself in it, so we decided to try that for one game. We were playing with 10 people. As we tried this out, I got the role of Merlin and immediately knew who all (except mordred) the bad guys were. The first team that the team leader picked was all good people and we passed the first quest. The next quest leader was on his left, and he was in the first quest, so logically we told him to pick that same team and add one person. And after we added that person, he was also good and we passed the quest. However, now the next quest leader was a bad guy, but because we are allowed to pick the team without the leader in it, we basically forced the bad guy to choose the previously same successful team without the quest leader (who was bad), because after all, if the bad guy didn't, then obviously that guy is bad or else why would they not pick the team that had no troubles? This strategy ended up in a 3-0 match, and the assassin didn't guess me correctly. So the good guys won quickly and easily.

We all thought that this rule seemed kinda weird, so I wanted to ask you guys who played more than us to explain this to me. Should the quest leader have to include himself? because if not, than the game could happen like what happened before.

It is legal to create a team that does not have you on it.  It should be very rare though.  Here's why:

The argument that the previous teams succeeded is not logically strong enough to force the leader to leave himself off the team.  He could argue that the previous teams had a sleeper spy (which is not provable either way with the information public at the time) and replace one with himself.

Consider that a person can always make the argument that he trusts himself more than any other single person, and that argument is essentially irrefutable.

After all, if he is a resistance member, he knows with 100% certainty that he is a resistance member and should put himself on the team. Therefore, a resistance leader would need a very good explanation for why he would be excluding himself from the team he builds.

Since a spy should frequently act like a resistance member to be convincing, a spy leader also has a strong reason to put himself on the team and needs a good explanation to exclude himself.

In my opinion the third leader in your game played poorly in that situation.
That player should have replaced one of the earlier team members, had some discussion about it, and put it for a vote.


Illusionist's bracers and werewolf rulings Lets assume that I equip an Illusionist's Bracers on Mayor Of Avabruck.

When he flips on the trigger of not casting a spell, can he technically flip twice, meaning that he would turn into a werewolf and then back again, or does he remain as a werewolf permanently?

Illusionist's Bracers only copy activated abilities.

  112.3b Activated abilities have a cost and an effect. They are written as “[Cost]: [Effect.] [Activation instructions (if any).]”

Most transform cards, like werewolves and Delver of Secrets, have triggered abilities. Illusionist's Bracers have no effect on them. They will, however, double the activated abilities of Bloodline Keeper, causing it to flip twice when it transforms.

All of the abilities of Mayor of Avabruck and Howlpack Alpha abilities are triggered, so he won't benefit from Illusionist's Bracers unless you give him an activated ability from an outside source.


Does Rooftop Storm work with Arcane adaptation? If I had Arcane Adaptation and Rooftop Storm in play, with the chosen creature type as zombie, would I be able to cast a creature such as Nemesis Of Reason for 0 mana? Or would that not work because Nemesis Of Reason would not yet be in play, therefore not yet a zombie?

Yes, you can cast any creature spell for {0} with that combo.

As Arcane Adaptation states, every one of your creature permanents (on the battlefield), creature spells (on the stack), and creature cards (anywhere else) are the chosen type, Zombie in your case.

The process for casting spells is, in summary:

  601.2. To cast a spell is to take it from where it is (usually the hand), put it on the stack, and pay its costs, so that it will eventually resolve and have its effect.  [..]

So to cast a creature spell, you put the card on the stack (where it's a Zombie spell because of Arcana Adaptation), then you determine and pay its costs. When it comes to determining the total cost of the spell, you can choose the {0} alternative cost granted by Rooftop Storm.


What's the hexagon symbol under the Sanctuary? In Terra Mystica, under most structures, you find the income that building generates. But, the Sanctuary also has a weird hexagon:

The gold outline looks just like those used on the town tokens. I couldn't find anything about it in the rules, looking under anything I could find related to the Sanctuary or towns (based on the shape). I don't see the image anywhere either.

It looks important. What am I missing?

This seems to be a common enough question that there's a link directly to a thread about it on the game's boardgamegeek page.

Short answer, quoted from one of those threads:
"It means you only need a minimum of 3 connected buildings instead of 4 when forming a town if the sanctuary is part of these structures."


Is a "drop-finesse" better than a simple "drop" play with a nine card suit in bridge? Regarding finesses for a missing queen in a key (e.g. trump suit), there is a proverb of "eight ever [always] nine never."  Instead, one is supposed to play for a drop. (This, and most other proverbs need to be taken with grain of salt).

A "blind" finesse (without further information), is 50-50. If you have nine cards in a suit headed by the ace and king (and play them to drop the queen), your chances of success are 52.5%. That is, the opposing cards will fall 2-2. 40% of the time. Some 50% of the time, they will be split 3-1.And of these, the singleton will be the queen one-fourth of the time, or 12.5% of the total (40%+12.5%)= 52.5%.

But suppose you have one or more finesse possibilities. That is, you have AJxxx. Dummy has KTxx. Then you can lead one of your tops "blindly" and catch the queen 12.5% of the time. A finesse the other way would succeed 50% of the remaining times =.5*87.5% or 43.75%. The total chances of success would be (43.75+12.5%)=56.25%> 52.5%.

So a "drop" (top card) play followed by a finesse has an advantage over a pure drop (two top card plays), right? And wouldn't this be even more true if East or West showed strength by opening, meaning that you would finesse "around" him to one hand after playing the top honor in the other hand.

And wouldn't the exception be if you had only a "one way" finesse e.g. Axxxx opposite dummy's KTxx and East opened, meaning that the Q was probably "offside?

Your calculation seems off. You seem to have missed an approximately 5% chance of a 4-0 break which the play for drop will catch, but have that implicitly included in the calculations for the drop-finesse.

If you include that, the play for drop indeed comes out to be more, but by very little.

A possibly simple way to figure this out is to compare the holdings where one wins but the other loses.

Say you have AJT9x opposite K87x (in hand) and you decide to play the K first (in both lines).

Taking the finesse next wins over the drop when RHO has Qxx (assuming both follow to the first trick, otherwise it is the same for both lines).

Playing for the drop wins over the finesse when RHO has Qx.

Since RHO will have Qxx 3/4ths of 1-3 split = 3/4ths of ~25% = ~19%, while RHO will have Qx 1/2 of ~40%  = ~20%, playing for the drop is better.


In Phase 10, can Wild Cards be discarded? Can you discard a wild card in order to NOT have them as points in your hand?

For instance, I was about to go out and someone else discarded their wild so that they wouldn't have those extra 25 points.

Assuming you mean as your normal discard on your turn, yes.

From the rules:

  End your turn by discarding any one of your cards onto the top of the discard pile.

For clarity, if you by "about to go out" you mean that it is your turn, then no, your opponent cannot discard anything when it is not their turn.


In Axis and Allies, could a house rule upgrading the German navy finally "balance" the 1942 game? Because of the historical strength of the Allies, Axis and Allies is somewhat Allies favoring, despite numerous attempts to "balance" the game. I was wondering if curing the Axis' "achilles heel," the German navy, would complete the job.

Props to Scott Mitchell who inspired the "Tirpitz (house) rule":

Subdivide the UK sea zone at the 57th parallel (above Scotland) into the UK sea zone proper (south) and the Norwegian sea (north).
Place a German battleship unit there in the Norwegian Sea (the Tirpitz and the battle cruisers), while giving the UK a SECOND battleship in the new UK sea zone to compensate.
Move the German transport and sub from the Baltic to the Norwegian Sea to prevent "cheap" Allied attacks.

This looks "even" but it's not. Because of the ship synergy (and the first attack advantage) Germany comes out about 12 IPCs better than before, according to my simulations on the AA combat simulator.  Put another way, the "Tirpitz" cancels out not only the second UK battleship, but an additional Allied fighter. Together with the "no Russian first turn attack rule," it seems to erase the "consensus" estimate of a 22 IPC advantage for the Allies.

In his question, Adam Wuerl implied that Germany could use the help in the Mediterranean instead. Could this be the locale for the naval "fix?" Or could Germany be given another submarine somewhere with additional rules for their use?

In the game, the key issues are

whether the Allies can get reinforcements to Russia in time to save it from the Axis
whether Germany can hold onto Africa long enough for the Russians to be defeated. These issues appear to be decided in the North Atlantic and Mediterranean.

Could naval units giving Germany a better shot in these waters (together with the no Russia first attack rule) induce players to finally be willing to play the Axis "straight up"? And could the "Tirpitz rule" (together with a house rule saving German fighters in Finland and the Ukraine) produce this result even if Russia is allowed to attack the first turn?

Interested in what you say here about the Allies having a slight edge. I assume you mean First Edition here.

My friend and I have been playing for years. We originally used to think that the Allies were slightly ahead. Usually this was due to US being able to afford a bomber or two that nails down German economy.

We have had the optional rule of fighter defense turned on for a long time. This makes it much harder for the Allies to strat bomb Germany.

This seemed to give the Axis a break and have been consistently winning 1942, but we are now trying new tactics as Allies that is making a difference.


What exactly is the "game state"? The Tournament Rules define free information to include:

  Details of current game actions and past game actions that still affect the game state.

The rule refers to the "game state". What exactly is the that? What does it mean for something to "still affect the game state"?

For example, I shuffled Golgari Grave Troll from my graveyard into my library with Elixir of Immortality. I am playing a dredge deck, so I could have dredged the troll. My opponent says "Ten turns ago, there was a Golgari Grave Troll in your graveyard. What happened to it?" Is my opponent asking for free information, derived information, or private information?

Note: some of the rules for missed triggers in the Infraction Procedure Guide also depend on the "game state".

My interpretation is based on the following premises:

The combination of Free Information and official game information that a judge will provide upon request (Gatherer, Comprehensive Rules, etc.) is sufficient to determine Derived Information.
The combination of Free and Derived Information is sufficient to determine whether any single action is allowed, and what would deterministically happen when that action is taken.

All of the other free information is clearly and strictly defined, so we can fill in the blanks to determine what current and previous game actions need to be free information for those things to be true. For example:

Any actions that created continuous effects that modify characteristics of existing objects affect derived information, so that information must be free.
The number of lands you have played this turn determines whether you can legally play a land, so that information must be free.
The number of spells players have cast this turn determines what happens when you cast a spell with Storm, so that information must be free.
The names of spells that have been cast this turn determines what can possibly happen if Twinning Glass is activated, so that information must be free.
The number of permanents that have entered the graveyard this turn determines what happens if Bitter Ordeal is cast, so that information must be free.

For obvious reasons, it is hard to give an exhaustive list, but I believe this process can be used to determine whether any particular information is free. Also note that there is no mention of actions in the derived information section, so any action information that is not free is private.

In the case of the Troll example in the question, there are no cards or rules that care at all about zone changes to non-public zones from more than a turn ago, so the information is private.


Is it possible for a Creature permanent to become a non-Creature permanent without losing its abliities? The Oath of the Gatewatch release notes say the following in the section about Stone Haven Outfitter:

  In this context, “equipped creatures you control” and “equipped creature you control” refer to any creatures you control with Equipment attached to them. In the highly unusual case that Stone Haven Outfitter becomes an Equipment, the meaning of its abilities doesn’t change. The bonuses continue to refer to any equipped creature you control. They aren’t bonuses applied solely to the creature Stone Haven Outfitter is attached to.

I am trying to determine whether the highlighted case is at all possible. I know that I can turn non-Creature, non-Equipment Artifacts into Equipments with Bludgeon Brawl, and that I can turn non-Artifact permanents into Artifacts with cards like Mycosynth Lattice. So, for that highlighted case to be relevant, the only requirement is for Stone Haven Outfitters to become a non-Creature permanent. Is there any way to do that with currently existing cards?

Alternatively, is there any way for a non-Creature permanent to gain Stone Haven Outfitter's abilities?

I think this is the highly unusual case they talk about:
Have Bludgeon Brawl, Dominating Licid (or any other Licid) and Stone Haven Outfitter on the battlefield.
So far every permanent is just as they are printed.
Activate the Licid targeting a creature. Respond by casting Mirrorweave on the Outfitter.
When Mirrorweave is resolved the Licid is an exact copy of a printed Outfitter. So it loses the "You control enchanted creature." ability too here.
When the Licid's activated ability is resolved it becomes an Enchantment - Aura and stops being a creature and it becomes attached to the creature. It still has all abilities of the Outfitter.
Cast Mycosynth Lattice.
The Licid becomes an Artifact in addition to it other types. Bludgeon Brawl therefore makes it an Equipment with Equip 2 and "Equipped creature gets +2/+0", based on it having CMC 2 from being a copy of Outfitter. It retains its other abilities.
The Licid is now considered as both equipping as enchanting the creature it's attached to because all that matters for being equipped/enchanted is that it is attached and is an Equipment/Aura.
The enchanted/equipped creature will have +2/+0 because of the Brawl and +1/+1 for each Outfitter you control.
The Licid's typeline and textbox will be:

Enchantment Artifact - Aura Equipment
Enchant creature
Equip 2
Equipped creature gets +2/+0.
Equipped creatures you control get +1/+1.
Whenever an equipped creature you control dies, draw a card.


If maximum stamina gets reduced during an environment card, when the card is discarded, do I return to max? If an environment card makes my max stamina go down 1, I would lose a stamina token.  However, if a new environment card shows and I haven't taken any stamina damage, do I get to move it back up to my maximum?

No you wouldn't.

You don't instantly gain stamina/sanity when your maximum increases, thus you also wouldn't gain stamina/sanity if a penalty to your maximum was removed.


How does Confusion in the Ranks trigger itself upon entering the battlefield? Under the rulings for Confusion in the Ranks is this gem:

12/1/2004
Confusion in the Ranks triggers on itself entering the battlefield. If an opponent controls an enchantment, exchange Confusion in the Ranks for that enchantment.

For some reason, I simply cannot wrap my brain around this.
How does Confusion in the Ranks trigger itself when it comes into play?  I would have though that by the time it was already in play, it would be too late to trigger itself.
Is there a particular ruling in the Comprehensive Rules that I'm just not seeing?

Triggers look at the board state immediately after the spell resolves and moves from stack to battlefield.  The "event" is object of given type moved from stack (or other zone) to battlefield.  The state of the board is checked for triggers that see that event immediately after the event, and so there it is.  I guess there isn't really a better answer than, the comp rules say so, so here it is!

  603.6a Enters-the-battlefield abilities trigger when a permanent enters the battlefield. These are written, “When [this object] enters
  the battlefield, . . . ” or “Whenever a [type] enters the battlefield,
  . . .” Each time an event puts one or more permanents onto the
  battlefield, all permanents on the battlefield (including the
  newcomers) are checked for any enters-the-battlefield triggers that
  match the event.

  603.6d Normally, objects that exist immediately after an event are checked to see if the event matched any trigger conditions.


Can I use Summoning Glass immediately upon receiving it? Do I have to wait until the arkham encounters phase of my next turn, or can I use this card immediately upon receiving it?

Nope.  Since there's nothing on the card that tells you that you have to wait for it, the ability is used the first time it's requirements are met.


Why this challenge in Yu-Gi-Oh! 5D's Tag Force wasn't completed? I was playing Yu-Gi-Oh! 5D's Tag Force in PPSSPP "PSP emulator for Android".

In this game, there are a challenge list to complete; one of those challenges is:

  001 - Caused 10,000 or more points of battle damage during a duel.

In a free duel against Tetsu Trudge, I was able to make the following battle damage by using these cards:

Marauding Captain (Monster effect) - equipped with the following equip spell cards:
Big Bang Shot
Big Bang Shot
Mage Power
Mask of Brutality
Swords of Revealing Light

Turn 1: Marauding Captain (with the mentioned equip spell cards), attacked a face-down monster in face-down position - causing piercing damage due to "Big Bang Shot"'s effect.

Damage: 5300 LP

Turn 2: other attack from Marauding Captain (with the mentioned equip spell cards) to a 2000 DEF monster in face-up position.

Damage: 5300 LP

Total: 10600 LP damage in battle phase.

I think I completed the challenge, but, once the duel ended, the challenge didn't show the text "indicating the challenged was completed".

Maybe I'm wrong, but, why the challenge wasn't recognized?.

Just in case I'm making it all wrong, can someone tell me how to complete these specific challenge?

N.B. I'm not asking for a deck building "I have a Maha Vailo's custom deck", but rather, how complete this challenge.

I tried also search on Google, but I couldn't find only but the challenge list rather than how complete such challenges.

Maybe I'm wrong, but, why the challenge wasn't recognized?

Perhaps this could be a bug on that game... but I suspect the reason was the following: you actually did 8000 points of damage, not 10600.

The first hit your Marauding Captain did caused 5300 damage; that is true. Your opponent's LP went from 8000 to 2700 thanks to that attack.

Now, on your second attack you actually did... 2700 damage, and not 5300. Why? Because on YuGiOh Lifepoints can't go negative. From the rules on LP:

  If a player's LP would drop below 0, they become 0 rather than negative.
  If a player's LP become 0, they lose the Duel.

This means that you did a net amount of damage of 8000, and not 10600 as it may seem.

In order to achieve the challenge, perhaps you will have to fight an opponent that gains LP, so when you win you would have made more than 8000 damage (and perhaps 10k to complete the challenge).


What led to the creation of games in antiquity? I am thinking to use games for my development of thinking on a particular concept/problem. I hope to use it to know on how games provide ways of thinking on other problems. I am also thinking on making these games naked, by knowing the general structure of all these games. If on how these games came to dawn or if a origin story of the first games are given, it will be helpful.

If any related book, article, passage, quote or even abstract game is suggested, it will be of greatest help.

But was there any theme or rationale behind early games?

Most of these games (running, jumping, chariot racing, fencing, javelin throwing etc.) were based on skills useful in war.

In fact, many considered these games a "civilized" form of war that allowed for the release of hostilities, without having the real thing.


Abilities interrupting effects on a cast card When casting a card with multiple effects (e.g. Fated Infatuation) targeting another card with a triggered ability (e.g. Golos, Tireless Pilgrim) at which point does Golos ETB? Ideally I cast Fated Infatuation, create a Golos token, it ETB so search for land, shuffle library, then scry 2. However I think I would have to resolve all of Fated Infatuation before Golos ETB. Meaning I would lose the benefit of scrying by having to shuffle my library after searching for land.

Abilities that trigger during the resolution of a spell or effect wait until that spell or effect has finished resolving before they go on the stack.

As you suspect, you have to wait until the spell or ability has finished resolving before the triggered abilities go on the stack. Then you have to wait until Golos' ability actually resolves to get its benefits.

  116.2a Triggered abilities can trigger at any time, including while a spell is being cast, an ability is being activated, or a spell or ability is resolving. (See rule 603, “Handling Triggered Abilities.”) However, nothing actually happens at the time an ability triggers. Each time a player would receive priority, each ability that has triggered but hasn’t yet been put on the stack is put on the stack. See rule 116.5.


What is the recommended range for the number of players in Liar Dice? This game isn't really an official game, but I recently bought a set of dice (poker dice) and I thought about bringing it to my local board game night as we often want small games to play in between bigger games.

To clarify, the version I have is five 6 sided dice with 9/10/J/Q/K/A on and you have to roll poker hands of increasing score while passing the dice around, bluffing whether or not your hand is higher than the previous.

The thing is we sometimes have groups of 2-8 people, as we wait for other people's games to finish so we can shuffle players and whatnot.

I cannot find online a recommendation for how many players this game works with. My gut feeling is that if you had say, 8 players, the dice would never reach the 8th player because the escalating hands would be too hard to beat.

Is there a recommended number, either in general from common knowledge, or if looking for a more specific answer, perhaps from an 'official' set of the game (or from a game with a similar concept and number of dice)?

(In addition, I genuinely don't know how to tag this question, perhaps Player-Count or something)

There's no clear consensus on recommended player count

As you're not playing an official version of liar's dice, giving you a hard and fast rule for your own game, would be guesswork. What follows deals with the 'official' version of the game - a perspective which you said might also be useful.

On the website boardgamegeek, on each game listing, users are able to vote on the player counts at which they would recommend playing a particular game. For each possible 'player count' users are able to select either 'Not recommended', 'Recommended' or 'Best'.
The community's recommendations for Perudo (an alternative name for Liar's Dice), based on 166 respondants, are as follows:

More than 50% of users think Perudo is 'Best' with 5 / 6 players
57% of users would at least 'Recommend' playing Perudo with more than 6 players (42% would not recommend it)

I'm not sure you need to worry, based on your criteria
You stated that one of your concerns about high player counts was: 'the dice would never reach the 8th player because the escalating hands would be too hard to beat'.
In most common variants of liar's dice this isn't an issue becuase play is circular rather than linear. Whenever one hand is finished the next hand resumes from that point in the circle, rather than starting back with the original first player. So, if a 'hand' resolves before some players have participated, those same players will be among the first players to participate in the next 'hand'.
However, adding extra players will make the game longer

The total play time will be longer

Liar's dice is commonly a player elimination game - the more players there are to eliminate the longer it will take to reach its conclusion. As you intend this to be a light filler that's probably not desirable.
This is less of an issue if you're not concerned with playing the game to completion.

Time between a player's turns will increase

If this is a filler to keep people engaged between other games, then a longer time between player's turns is not ideal. that said, in my experience of Liar's Dice, players's do tend to remain fairly invested in paying attention to other player's turns, in comparison to some other games.

Time spent while eliminated will increase

As mentioned above, Liar's Dice is most commonly a game that involves player elimination (on BGG 'Player Elimination' is listed with 'Dice Rolling' and 'Betting/Wagering' as one of the game's key mechanisms). In an eight player game the first player to get eliminated could conceivably spend significantly longer not playing the game, than they ever did playing it. Once again this probably isn't that desirable for a filler.
How much weight should be put on any of these factors is up to you. You know your context, you know your players and most importantly, you know the exact rules of the specific Liar's Dice variant your playing.
If on reflection you do decide that player count is a concern, then one way that these issues could be avoided / mitigated is by splitting larger groups into separate games.


Does each stable in a pasture double the number of animals allowed? I popped round to visit some friends earlier this week and a 4-player game of Agricola sprang up, as often happens.  One of the players hadn't played before so we ran through the rules for her benefit.  While stables were being explained, I "helpfully" chimed in with the fact that, if you have 2 stables in a two-space pasture, each one doubles the capacity of the pasture - so you end up with a pasture capable of holding 16 of one type of animal.

My host who was explaining the game was unimpressed. "Actually that's not true - it would only hold 8 animals."

I said I was sure I was right, and he said no, they'd looked this up in the rules specifically.  I immediately started leafing through the rulebook in search of justification for my position, and thought I'd found it.  "I think you're misreading this rule that says you can only have one stable per farmyard space.  That doesn't mean you can only have on stable per pasture."

"No," he retorted wearily, "you can have more than one stable per pasture, but nowhere does it say that that keeps redoubling the number of animals.  All it says is that a pasture with a stable in it has double capacity.  Anyway that's the way we play it and that's the end of it."

And it did seem as though he had a point, the rules didn't seem nearly as explicit on this subject as I had imagined them to be.  In addition, it's actually really unlikely that you'd need a pasture holding 16+ of one type of animal in Agricola, so it wasn't something there was any point in having a big fight over.

Still, on the principle of the thing: which of us was right and which wrong on this point?  Is there anywhere in the rules, or in an external authoritative ruling, that clarifies how multi-stable pastures work?

Each stable doubles the capacity of the pasture.

While not usually a great move, there are situations where this could be useful.

From the rules, top right on page 9: (Emphasis is mine)

  Each stable costs 2 Wood and can be placed on a fenced or empty unfenced farmyard space.
  A fenced stable doubles the holding capacity of a pasture. Each farmyard space can hold 1
  stable. Each space within a pasture may have its own stable: the pasture’s capacity is then
  multiplied by 4, 8, etc.


Where can I find a database with a list of all magic cards? I am going to write a program to manage my library of Magic cards and I am looking for a database file or list of all of the cards that have been released.  I know that the Gathering site is useful, but it limits the number of cards I can return in a search.  I would happily accept a spreadsheet file, database file, or even a text file.

The more information contained in the database, the better.  Having associated images would just be fantastic, but at this point I would settle for names and basic stats of the cards.

as an alternative, you can also get the full set of cards in JSON format - including all sets, languages, printings and detailed information - from this website: http://mtgjson.com/

This website also provided information to work with its associated site for serving images, found here: http://mtgimage.com. Unfortunately however, subsequently this website has been shut down by WotC.

this websites appears to be designed specifically for developers, with explanations of what each property in the JSON objects means.


Dan levels: difference between amateur and professional? Is there a difference between amateur and professional dan levels in go? If yes, how are they related?

For amateurs, each level is one stone difference. So an amateur seven dan is six stones stronger than an amateur shodan. "Seven dan" is about as strong as a "pure" amateur is likely to get, although there are some amateurs that have had professionalized training, and are believe to be "eight dan" in strength, on the amateur scale.

"Pro" starts about where amateurs leave off. That is a pro one dan is about an amateur seven dan. Pro dan levels go from one to nine, but the difference in each level is about one third of a stone, rather than a whole stone. So a pro nine dan might be a "ten" dan on the amateur scale.


What game uses dice with sides powers of 2? I have one die. It has six sides marked 2, 4, 8, 16, 32 and 64. Does anyone know what game uses this?

Backgammon uses a die like that; it's known as a doubling cube.  It's used, when playing a multi-game match or for money, to track the current stakes of the game.  Note that in this capacity it's not really rolled as a die; it's just a cube with the necessary numbers on the faces.


How Many Standard Attack Modifier Cards? I am trying to verify that most or everything came in a Gloomhaven box. However, the rule book has its count for Attack Modifier Cards at 457. I was disconcerted to see I only had 145, until I realized each class has its own stash. I don't love the idea of opening every class, counting everything, and summing them up. What is the correct number of standard cards not specific to any class?

145

4 base decks of 20 cards for players.
1 base deck of 20 cards for monsters.
10 Bless cards.
10 Curse cards for players.
10 Curse cards for monsters.
15 -1 cards for players.

Each base decks consists of the following cards:

1 x2
1 x0
1 +2
5 +1
6 +0
5 -1
1 -2

The 1st printing didn't have separate Curse cards for players and monsters. I don't know if the total count was the same or not.

The following are the class-specific Attack Modifier cards (including Forgotten Circle):

6 BRU:+1 cards
1 BRU:+1,Shield1S card
1 BRU:+3 card
1 BRU:r:DISARM card
1 BRU:r:MUDDLE card
2 BRU:r:PIERCE3 cards
6 BRU:r:PUSH1 cards
2 BRU:r:STUN cards
2 BRU:r:TARGET cards

1 TIN:+0 card
1 TIN:+0,TARGET card
2 TIN:+1 cards
2 TIN:+1,Heal2S cards
2 TIN:+1,IMMOBILIZE cards
2 TIN:+1,WOUND cards
1 TIN:+3 card
2 TIN:r:FIRE cards
3 TIN:r:MUDDLE cards

1 SPE:+0,STUN card
6 SPE:+1 cards
1 SPE:+1,CURSE card
1 SPE:+1,IMMOBILIZE card
1 SPE:+1,WOUND card
2 SPE:+2,FIRE cards
2 SPE:+2,ICE cards
1 SPE:r:AIR card
1 SPE:r:DARK card
1 SPE:r:EARTH card
1 SPE:r:LIGHT card

1 SCO:+0 card
1 SCO:+1 card
2 SCO:+2 cards
4 SCO:r:+1 cards
1 SCO:r:INVISIBLE card
2 SCO:r:MUDDLE cards
2 SCO:r:PIERCE3 cards
4 SCO:r:POISON cards

3 CRA:+1 cards
2 CRA:+1,IMMOBILIZE cards
2 CRA:+2 cards
2 CRA:+2,MUDDLE cards
1 CRA:-2 card
2 CRA:r:AIR cards
4 CRA:r:EARTH cards
2 CRA:r:PUSH2 cards

1 MIN:+0 card
2 MIN:+2 cards
2 MIN:+2,ICE cards
4 MIN:r:+1 cards
1 MIN:r:DISARM card
2 MIN:r:IMMOBILIZE cards
4 MIN:r:MUDDLE cards
3 MIN:r:PULL1 cards
1 MIN:r:STUN card

1 SUN:+0 card
2 SUN:+1 cards
1 SUN:+2 card
4 SUN:r:+1 cards
4 SUN:r:Heal1S cards
4 SUN:r:LIGHT cards
1 SUN:r:STUN card
2 SUN:r:Shield1S cards

3 QUA:+0,Refresh cards
2 QUA:+1 cards
2 QUA:+2 cards
4 QUA:r:+1 cards
3 QUA:r:MUDDLE cards
2 QUA:r:PIERCE3 cards
1 QUA:r:STUN card
1 QUA:r:TARGET card

1 SUM:+0 card
5 SUM:+1 cards
2 SUM:+2 cards
1 SUM:r:AIR card
1 SUM:r:DARK card
1 SUM:r:EARTH card
1 SUM:r:FIRE card
6 SUM:r:Heal1S cards
2 SUM:r:POISON cards
2 SUM:r:WOUND cards

2 NIG:+1 cards
2 NIG:+1,DARK cards
2 NIG:+1,INVISIBLE cards
2 NIG:-1,DARK cards
2 NIG:r:CURSE cards
2 NIG:r:Heal1S cards
6 NIG:r:MUDDLE cards
1 NIG:r:TARGET card

1 PLA:+0 card
4 PLA:+1 cards
3 PLA:+1,AIR cards
2 PLA:+2 cards
2 PLA:r:CURSE cards
2 PLA:r:IMMOBILIZE cards
3 PLA:r:POISON cards
2 PLA:r:STUN cards

2 BES:+1 cards
2 BES:+2,FIRE cards
1 BES:r:+1,DISARM card
2 BES:r:+2 cards
2 BES:r:Heal1S cards
2 BES:r:STUN cards
4 BES:r:WOUND cards

1 SOO:+0,STUN card
1 SOO:+1,DISARM card
1 SOO:+1,IMMOBILIZE card
1 SOO:+2,CURSE card
1 SOO:+2,POISON card
1 SOO:+2,WOUND card
1 SOO:+3,MUDDLE card
2 SOO:+4 cards
3 SOO:r:+1 cards
4 SOO:r:CURSE cards

1 DOO:+0,STUN card
6 DOO:+1 cards
1 DOO:+1,IMMOBILIZE card
1 DOO:+1,POISON card
1 DOO:+1,WOUND card
1 DOO:+2,MUDDLE card
4 DOO:r:+1 cards
2 DOO:r:TARGET cards

1 SAW:+0,Refresh card
2 SAW:+1,IMMOBILIZE cards
2 SAW:+2 cards
2 SAW:r:+2 cards
2 SAW:r:Heal3S cards
1 SAW:r:STUN card
4 SAW:r:WOUND cards

4 ELE:+0,AIR cards
4 ELE:+0,EARTH cards
4 ELE:+0,FIRE cards
4 ELE:+0,ICE cards
1 ELE:+0,STUN card
1 ELE:+0,TARGET card
1 ELE:+1 card
2 ELE:+1,PUSH1 cards
1 ELE:+1,WOUND card
2 ELE:+2 cards

3 BEA:+1 cards
2 BEA:+1,IMMOBILIZE cards
2 BEA:+1,WOUND cards
2 BEA:+2 cards
2 BEA:r:EARTH cards
6 BEA:r:Heal1S cards

2 BLA:+1 cards
1 BLA:+1,AIR card
1 BLA:+1,DARK card
1 BLA:+1,EARTH card
1 BLA:+1,LIGHT card
2 BLA:+1,POISON cards
2 BLA:+1,WOUND cards
1 BLA:+2,MUDDLE card
4 BLA:r:Heal1S cards

2 DIV:+1 cards
1 DIV:+1,Heal2A card
1 DIV:+1,Shield1A card
1 DIV:+2,CURSE card
1 DIV:+2,DARK card
1 DIV:+2,LIGHT card
1 DIV:+2,REGENERATE card
1 DIV:+3,MUDDLE card
2 DIV:+3,Shield1S cards
2 DIV:r:CURSE cards
2 DIV:r:Heal1S cards

"r" indicates a Rolling Modifier. "S" (on Shield and Heal cards) means "Self", while "A" means "Ally".


Who is the controller of an Aura with Enchant land placed on an opponent's land? Say I enchant an opponent's land with Psychic Venom. Who controls the Psychic Venom, me or my opponent? This is important to know in case I want to sacrifice it to Forbidden Ritual, for example.

Yes, the aura remains under your control even if it enchants an opponents land and you can sacrifice it to forbidden ritual.

from the comprehensive rules:

  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. Only the Aura’s controller can activate its abilities. However, if the Aura grants an ability to the enchanted object (with “gains” or “has”), the enchanted object’s controller is the only one who can activate that ability.

In general, if you cast the spell and the spell creates a permanent (as with enchantments, creatures, artifacts and so on) the permanent will be under your control unless the card says something different.


Cards for Reanimator in Cube What cards should a good cube supporting reanimator decks contain? Which ones are crucial and what's extra.

I figure there are at least 3 types of cards:

Reanimation E.g. Animate dead, Necromancy.

Put-em-in-the-yard: E.g. Entomb, Careful study.

Targets: E.g. Akroma, Angel of Wrath

What's best in each category and am I missing anything? How many cards of each type are needed in a 540 cube?

The first thing you need to do is decide which colors you want to support the reanimator theme in. Black is the go to answer, but there are solid reanimation options in white as well. Enablers are going to be mostly blue or green. Once you know the color options, then envision what you want a good reanimator deck to look like in your cube. Do you want it to be a Legacy styled combo deck that can have Griselbrand on the field on turn 2, or do you want it to be a much more grindy Rec-Sur styled GB deck? You can also use cards like Debtor's Knell that give a good value BW deck an awesome late game by itself.

Balancing cards that can be used in both a dedicated reanimator strategy and other strategies is important. Cards that discard for a benefit, like Oona's Prowler and Lotleth Troll are perfect for this. Survival of the Fittest like cards are strategies to themselves, and just get better with a few reanimation cards. Draw/Discard cards such as Thirst for Knowledge fit great into reanimator decks as well.

Once you know what you want your decks to look like, and you have a list of cards you want to include, then all that's left is to find slots in the cube and playtest. Force the strategy a few times, and see if you feel like you're getting enough support. Let others draft and see how often the strategy is taken, and how often it wins. If it's too powerful, cut back cards or add dedicated GY hate*. If its too weak, then add more support cards. If it's good but under-drafted by your group, then bean them with it a few times.

*A note about dedicated GY hate - I don't recommend adding these cards to begin with. They're dead cards more often than they're used. Instead try things like Scavenging Ooze (or if you're like me have Leyline of the Void and Helm of Awakening in your cube...)


In MTG, when sacrificing another player's creature, who performs the discard into the graveyard? Dovetailing off this question...

Can I sacrifice a creature that is only temporarily under my control?

...where the answer is, yes, you definitely can.  'Who' discards it?

I'm specifically looking at including Waste Not in a sacrifice-themed deck.

But if I sacrifice another player's creature, does it trigger 'Whenever an opponent discards a creature card...'?  Or would I be discarding it into their graveyard?

Nobody discards it. It gets sacrificed.

Sacrificing doesn't involve discarding. Discarding specifically refers to an instruction to move a card from your hand to your own graveyard:

  701.7a To discard a card, move it from its owner's hand to that player's graveyard.

Sacrificing on the other hand is an instruction to move a card from the battlefield to the owner's graveyard.

  701.14a To sacrifice a permanent, its controller moves it from the battlefield directly to its owner's graveyard.

Since the sacrificed creature doesn't go straight from someone's hand to their own graveyard, it doesn't count as discarding. The sacrificed creature also dies, which is the term for the event where a creature moves from the battlefield to the graveyard.

Waste Not's triggers don't care about sacrificing. You need cards like Mind Rot or Ashiok's Adept, which actually say 'discard'. Tormented Thoughts could be relevant to you - not because of the sacrifice, but because the sacrifice leads to your opponent doing some discarding.

For the record though: when a creature's sacrificed, it's whoever's controlling the creature that does the sacrificing, regardless of who actually owns that card/creature. Regardless of who actually does the sacrificing, it lands back in the original owner's graveyard.


Can I deal combat damage with a 1/1 Walking Ballista and deal damage with its ability? Rules Question:

Player A attack with 1/2 creature
Player B block with Walking Ballista with 1 +1/+1 counter
And now can player B use Walking Ballista activation ability, after combat damage but before it go to graveyard, to kill 1/2 creature?

No, you cannot.  Going to the graveyard (due to damage) is a State-Based action that happens before either player gets priority.  Without priority, you can't activate Ballista's ability.

  704.3. Whenever a player would get priority (see rule 116, “Timing and Priority”), the game checks for any of the listed conditions for state-based actions, then performs all applicable state-based actions simultaneously as a single event. If any state-based actions are performed as a result of a check, the check is repeated; otherwise all triggered abilities that are waiting to be put on the stack are put on the stack, then the check is repeated. Once no more state-based actions have been performed as the result of a check and no triggered abilities are waiting to be put on the stack, the appropriate player gets priority.


Why doesn't 'Bite Shoes' trigger the effect of 'Tragedy' in Duel Links? Is it a bug in Duel Links, that when I turn an enemy card from attack to defense position with Bite Shoes, then I can't activate the effect of Tragedy?

Currently I can activate it only with Sphere Kuriboh, Enemy Controller, or Windstorm of Etaqua.

It depends on what card you changed with Bites Shoes.

Tragedy requires that the monster which changed position from attack to defence, be face-up and under your opponent's control.

If you changed the battle position of a monster you control, this effect does not apply, and no monsters are destroyed.
If you changed the battle position of a defence-position monster to attack position, this effect does not apply, and no monsters are destroyed.
If you changed the position of a face-down monster, this effect does not apply, and no monsters are destroyed.

If you changed the battle position of a face-up attack-position monster that your opponent controls, to defence position, then the effect should be activated. Only in this case have you found a bug.


What are the changes in the second edition of Doctor Who: The Card Game? I own the original edition of Doctor Who: The Card Game, published in 2012 by Cubicle 7. What is new in the second edition, published in 2014? Is it just different companions and such on the artwork? Or are there mechanical changes?

It appears that the majority of the game mechanics are the same, except for the addition of a two-player variant.  The major additions are new cards featuring more of the new Dr. Who universe, which themselves feature different abilities.  The 1st edition covers only the Eleventh Doctor (Matt Smith), whereas the 2nd edition expands this to the 9th-12th Doctors.

The FAQ page for the game says there is a new version of the rulebook, but does not indicate any game mechanics changes:

What’s different about the second edition?
Doctor Who: The Card Game second edition features the same great game as the first edition. We’ve tidied up some of the rules text and put in some more examples. There are rules for playing with 2 players, too.
More importantly, we’ve added in loads of new cards, from the Ninth and Tenth Doctors to Rose and Martha, Clockwork Robots to Ironsides and a whole bunch of new locations, like Royal Hope Hospital (now on the surface of the Moon).

The FAQ also indicates that the rules for the second edition are compatible with the cards from the first edition:

I already own the first edition – do I need to buy the second edition?
Of course not! Your game will still be just as much fun as it always has been. If you want to carry on playing you can do just that – in fact, you can download the new rulebook here, if you like.

...and even suggests shuffling the two editions together to form "one super deck."
As for the new cards themselves, the FAQ suggests that they are not just reskins of the cards from the first game:

Can I still blow up the Dalek Flagship with a Jammy Dodger?
But of course! It’s our favourite trick. You can also turn the tide of battle with an Ironside or escape in the Valiant when the going gets tough, and many more new tricks besides!

This BoardGameGeek post has the following details about the card changes:

[T]he 1st Edition has 65 cards that do not appear in the 2nd Edition. The Starting Locations are all different. There are 12 enemies that didn't make it to 2nd Edition (18 cards). Some of the duplicated Defenders have been replaced in 2nd Edition with 4 different companions. Eight of the Support cards are different. All of the Location cards are different.


Toughness and the Stack If a creature's toughness were to reach 0 before the stack is finished resolving, does it die, or does the stack finish. For example, if a Llanowar Elf had Gigantic growth cast on it and the growth was responded to by Dismember what would happen? Would Dismember bring it to 0 and Gigantic raise it to 3 before it could die? Or does it bite the dust?

Yes, the creature would die as a State Based Action.

704.1. State-based actions are game actions that happen automatically whenever certain conditions (listed below) are met. State-based actions don't use the stack.
704.3. Whenever a player would get priority (see rule 116, "Timing and Priority"), the game checks for any of the listed conditions for state-based actions, then performs all applicable state-based actions simultaneously as a single event.

So, the state based effects would get checked after Dismember resolves.
Then, this SBA would happen

704.5f If a creature has toughness 0 or less, it's put into its owner's graveyard. Regeneration can't replace this event.

So, before the Giant Growth would get a chance to resolve, the Llanowar Elf would die.


What are these number cards for? I recently bought the Civil War expansion for Marvel Legendary. In addition to the advertised contents, it also contained a number of cards with the standard Legendary back whose front was identical to the back except with the addition of a number at the lower right. There are ten with the number 1, four with the number 2, and sixteen with the number 3.

I didn't see any mention of these in the rulebook. What are they for? Do I need them?

Those cards are just filler in the printing process, and serve no actual game purpose.

It is up to you what you do with them. Whether you throw them away, keep them in the box, or maybe even try to come up with a custom scenario that utilises them somehow.

For a bit more explanation see this thread on boardgamegeek.


Do supply limits apply if you capture ships at a port? In the situation where your armies are at supply limit, and you capture a territory that has ships in port, do you have to immediately disband armies, or you do you get to keep them until next supply round?

IMO it seems you should be allowed to keep them.

No, you are not allowed to keep them if you are over your supply limit. From page 25:

  Taking Control of Enemy Ports - If the land area connected to a Port is successfully attacked and taken control of by another player, that player may immediately replace any enemy Ship units in the Port with an equal number of his own available Ship units (or as many Ship units as he has available, he desires, or is allowed by supply limits). Excess enemy ships are simply removed from the board.


Card shuffler for many sizes A simple search for Card Shuffler on google will list loads of them, does anyone have experience with one that can be used for multiple card sizes?

I'm looking for something that can preferably shuffle both small games like Gosu, big ones like Dixit as well as standard bridge playing cards. Sleeved and unsleeved alike.

Any recommendations out here?

A battery-operated card shuffler can shuffle any deck of cards of width/height 1/2 the size of the bay all the way up to the full width/height of the bay. Slightly smaller cards shouldn't be an issue, but I've never seen one larger than a standard deck.