Basic set draw stacks So some cards say “from your draw stack” but the game doesn’t specify each players draw stacks, how does this work? Do we both use all 4 piles or do we each have two of our own?

In a normal game of Rivals, there are 4 draw stacks that do not belong to either player. In a tournament game (rules), each player has their own 4 piles containing the cards they most want to play with. In the version of Rivals I could find, no card says "from your draw stack" unless it also explicitly references tournament mode - for example, the text of Library is

  When you build the Library, you may immediately choose a card from a draw stack (Tournament: from your own stack.)

I know there are some differences between this version and the older one you are presumably playing, but I'd guess that references to "your draw stack" just mean any draw stack outside of tournament mode, and that you might be able to find a fixed wording of your card by looking it up in the back of the linked updated rulebook.


How can I play a bot with expansion cards in Dominion Online? Dominion Online noob here. I'm trying to play a bot with expansion cards, but it seems to only allow me to select base cards.

I've added familiar cards by adding expansions I own, but can't seem to select any of them.

I wondered if this was even possible, but I spectated a game in which a user was playing a bot with expansion cards, so it's definitely possible.

You have to purchase a subscription to the expansion sets. While the base-game cards are free, the expansion cards are not. After you log in, go to the Store tab and you shall find two different types of subscriptions available:

Silver, which includes the following sets: Intrigue, Seaside, Prosperity, Cornucopia, Hinterlands, Guilds
Gold, which includes all sets from the Silver subscription, plus Alchemy, Dark Ages, Adventures, Empires

These are per-day subscriptions, not permanent purchases, but you can define the expiry day of your subscription; e.g., if you would like to test the expansions, you can even subscribe for a day or week. Note that there is a transaction fee to be paid as well (0.35 EUR, as of 2017-04-08).

Note that you need to purchase the expansions to open a new table on your own. This, naturally, includes playing alone against a bot. Nevertheless, you can always join for free any table, even with expansion cards, as long as the table administrator has paid for them.


Can King Macar the Gold-Cursed be tapped without attacking? So a buddy and I were playing a game of Magic that turned out to be a really quick game because he got King Macar, the Gold-Cursed out on the battlefield early. He was tapping it without attacking because of its obviously awesome ability but I don't know if you can tap a creature for its Inspired (untap-triggered) ability without attacking for it to then be tapped. Are you allowed to tap a creature whenever you want?

You can't just tap your creatures whenever you want. You can only tap it at one of the following times:

When the game tells you to tap it (like when you attack).
When a card tells you to tap it (like Twiddle).
When you can tap it to pay a cost (like Endless Obedience).

Cards that would allow you to tap King Macar include spells with conspire and convoke, cards that grant tap abilities (that has a couple of false positives), and cards that tap creatures as an effect.


In Risk when do I have to give up my turn? In Risk when it's my turn and I attack.
Do I give up my turn if I lose some troops while attacking or could I continue attacking until I want to give up my turn?

Your turn does not end if you lose troops.  You may continue to attack until you either don't want to attack, or have no territories with 2+ troops adjacent to an enemy.


Do I have to use Link monsters on my Yu-Gi-Oh! Deck? Like the title reads, I was just wondering whether or not I need a link monster in my deck to play Yu-Gi-Oh! at tournaments or my local game store.

Using Link Monsters is optional.

It's the same case if you decided to, say, build a deck without any Trap cards.

If your deck or strategy doesn't require them, you can play without having to have one.

However, if you plan to play in tournaments, or play competitively, I'd suggest you include or at least considering using Link Monsters, as your options could improve (and because the meta game is tending towards using Links).


Can you stack cards of the same number but different colors? During an Uno game, can one player put multiple cards of the same number but not the same color on top of each other, with the first card the same as the previous one in the Discard Stack?

You may only play a single card each turn and note the rules mention playing "a card" not multiple.

Rules

  You have to match either by the number, color, or the symbol/Action. For instance, if the Discard Pile has a red card that is an 8 you have to place either a red card or a card with an 8 on it. You can also play a Wild card (which can alter current color in play).


Good board games for single player I love playing board games but often there's not many people around that share my passion. For that reason I'm looking for board games that can be played with just one player. I've discovered Arkham Horror few months ago and I think it's a fabulous game but I was wondering for some time now if there are other good board games that are as good or even better for single person?

Agricola has a supported one player option.  I find it doesn't have the same feel.  It's more of a puzzle, but it is still very enjoyable.


Activating an ability that affects blocking after Declare Blockers step My opponent had on the battlefield a Swarm Guildmage and three other creatures. My opponent then enters Combat and declares his three other creatures as attacking.

After this happens I then declare two of my creatures as blockers, each blocking one of his creatures, to which then he responds by activating Swarm Guildmage's ability that grants each of his creatures Menace. His argument is then that, because now his creatures have Menace, my blocks are illegal and I have to re-assign blockers.

My assumption is that once blockers are declared then no matter what happens afterwards during combat the blockers initially declared would remain legal.

Is this true, or is it that my opponent was correct and my blockers suddenly became illegal after the activation? If so, are there any other scenarios in which a blocker can be made illegal after being declared as a blocker?

Your friend is wrong.  His creatures are blocked.

Blocking goes through a series of steps outlined in rule 509.  The first step is declaring blockers (509.1).  To sum up, you declare which creatures are blocking, what they are blocking, check any restrictions and pay any costs.  At the end of all that we get to 509.1h:

  509.1h An attacking creature with one or more creatures declared as blockers for it becomes a blocked creature; one with no creatures
  declared as blockers for it becomes an unblocked creature. This
  remains unchanged until the creature is removed from combat, an effect
  says that it becomes blocked or unblocked, or the combat phase ends,
  whichever comes first. A creature remains blocked even if all the
  creatures blocking it are removed from combat.

That's it.  Your opponents creatures are blocked.  The only chance he has to activate abilities or cast spells are once he receives priority which comes much later (outlined in 509.4).  Once 509.1h happens, restrictions (like menace or flying or whatnot) are never checked again.  And since nothing in Swarm Guildmage's effect instructs you to make a creature unblocked, those creatures are still considered blocked.

If your opponent wanted to use Swarm Guildmage's ability to give his creatures menace and have that effect blocker legality, the last chance he has to do so is after attackers are declared and each player gets priority but before the declare blockers step starts.


What card game is this? 4 cards per player faced down When I visited Bulgaria, someone taught me a game, he called “kabum” ( not sure if that's how you write it).

2 or more players.
each player receives 4 cards faced down and need to arrange them in a formation to last till the end of the game ( side by side...). Everyone can only look at 1 of their cards and then return it to the same position.

Each card has a value (A=0, 2=2...,J=-1,Q=12,K=1) and the objective of the game is to finish with the minimum amount of points. When you have 5 points or less you can say Kabum to start the last round.

When you buy a card you can either discard or substitute it with one of your own, placing it in the same position, that way you can start knowing your cards.
Some cards have some powers when you discard:

Cards with 7: You can look at one of your cards
Cards with 8: Look at one of your opponents cards
Cards with 9: Exchange cards with someone without looking
Cards with 10: Look at one card and change it

I believe these rules must vary.

But that the game:

Less points
Same position always faced down
Change cards

There are more rules but I believe this is enough to someone that knows the game to identify it.

It's an actual remake of "Golf" and it's name is Kabo!


When you don’t have to move (bonus card), do you pick up your separated assistant or do you have to separate another one? My question is about this bonus card:

When playing it at the beginning of your turn, you don’t have to move your merchant (and you may use the field’s action).

The rules say that you "again" have to use one of your assistants for this, but I’m not sure if this always applies (i.e., not following the normal movement rules), or if it only applies if you would have to use an assistant as if you had moved normally.

Situation after the first turn:

Situation A: Your merchant is on top of all his assistants (from that field), because you have picked the assistant up that was left there.
Situation B: No assistant was on the field, so you had to separate one assistant. Now your merchant is on top of 1+ assistants, and next to them is one assistant.

Second turn begins and you play the bonus card, so you stay on this field:

In situation A: You have to separate one of your assistants and he will be left there when you move on in your third turn.
In situation B: Do you have to separate another assistant (so leaving two assistants when moving on in the next turn), or do you pick up your previously separated assistant (leaving no-one when moving on in the next turn)?

Act as if you would have moved your Merchant.

So if you play this card while an Assistant is separated (from your previous turn), you pick this assistant up and play the Place’s action.

The rules say "Your Merchant stays at his current Place but you have to use an Assistant again", however, "use an Assistant" does not necessarily mean to separate one. You also use an Assistant if you visit a previously visited Place and pick this Assistant up.

References

This question gets discussed in these threads on BoardGameGeek:

Some questions about rules

André Bronswijk confirms it
Grzegorz Kobiela confirms and explains it

Bonus Card, which lets you stay where you are
Need clarification about the "Do not move your Merchant" Bonus Card

Ralph Bruhn confirms and explains it

No movement card

Ralph Bruhn confirms it indirectly


Are there any other spells in bant colors that will cause Enduring Scalelord to go infinite? Are there creatures, artifacts, enchantments, etc that will make Enduring Scalelord go infinite in Bant?

I'm building a Bant counters EDH deck and it'd be fun to have ES blow up in a couple of different ways. I have Progenitor Mimic in the deck and I know ES would also benefit from the Archangel of Thune/Spike Feeder combo.  I'm blanking on anything else that wouldn't just stop at 1 trigger.

Yes. Cackling Counterpart and Battlegrowth are in Bant colors and combo with Enduring Scalelord.

Can you teach me how to search for cards myself?

Introducing the Gatherer's advanced search feature. We know that Enduring Scalelord goes infinite with itself. Let's try to find a clone in Bant colors. Here is what I started with:

Color:

Does NOT contain Black
Does NOT contain Red

Rules Text:

Does contain "copy"
Does contain "target creature"

Tons of results. Let's try narrowing it down. Instants are nice if they are cheap, so let's see if we can find one.

Card Type:

Does contain Instant"

Still a lot of false positives. I notice a lot of "copy target spell" cards. We don't want those.

Rules Text:

Does not contain "spell"

Here is the final result. The top four cards are all three mana instant speed spells that can copy your Enduring Scalelord. Nice.

I repeated this process to find Battlegrowth, but I'll leave the exact search as an exercise for you. Learning how to mine the Gatherer is far more valuable being handed a list of cards.


Recording Go games and importing into software In chess, algebraic notation is the standard for recording games and Portable Game Notation (PGN) is a format for importing games (notation plus metadata) into chess software or even forums.

The Go books I read never use notation, only diagrams where moves are numbered. I played a few games against the Go software Cosumi. After a game, it allows me to replay (using a slider) and generates notation like this:

(;GM[1]FF[4]PB[COSUMI]PW[You]SZ[19]KM[6.5]RE[B+92.5]
;B[pd];W[dd];B[qq];W[dp];B[fc];W[ec];B[fd];W[ee];B[gf];W[fe]
;B[ge];W[ff];B[gh];W[fg];B[fq];W[gg];B[hg];W[ej];B[cf];W[dg]
;B[bd];W[ce];B[be];W[df];B[cd];W[de];B[iq];W[cg];B[db];W[dc]
;B[cc];W[eb];B[lq];W[bf];B[cb];W[em];B[ie];W[hh];B[hi];W[ih]
;B[gj];W[fh];B[gi];W[ii];B[ig];W[ij];B[gl];W[hk];B[gk];W[hn]
;B[fb];W[ea];B[fa];W[gm];B[mf];W[fm];B[mn];W[jl];B[pm];W[kn]
;B[oi];W[lh];B[kg];W[jh];B[nh];W[jg];B[jf];W[kh];B[ok];W[ml]
;B[dq];W[ep];B[cq];W[eq];B[er];W[cp];B[bq];W[bp];B[lg];W[mi]
;B[ap];W[ao];B[aq];W[bo];B[fp];W[fo];B[go];W[ho];B[gp];W[fn]
;B[nm];W[hp];B[hq];W[kp];B[kq];W[jp];B[mk];W[mj];B[lk];W[ll]
;B[nl];W[jq];B[jr];W[kk];B[lj];W[nj];B[oj];W[nk];B[mh];W[li]
;B[lp];W[lo];B[mo];W[mm];B[ln];W[ko];B[lm];W[kj];B[km];W[jm]
;B[ip];W[io];B[af];W[ag];B[ae];W[bg];B[da];W[jn];B[bb];W[ac]
;B[ni];W[kl];B[ga];W[gn];B[gr];W[ed];B[];W[])

Is this a Go standard similar to PGN? What websites and software can I import this into to generate diagrams for the whole game? I am hoping to analyse the games afterwards and post them on Go forums for stronger players to give advice.

That format is called SGF (Smart Game Format).  Pretty much all Go software can read it.  Eidogo lets you work with it in your browser.


What happens if you sacrifice a creature brought back with Postmortem Lunge? Let’s say I have a creature in the graveyard.  I then cast Postmortem Lunge, which reads

  Return target creature card with converted mana cost X from your
  graveyard to the battlefield. It gains haste. Exile it at the
  beginning of the next end step.

Then, after bring the creature back, I sacrifice it, or it dies some other way.  At the end of my turn would Postmortem Lunge exile it out of my graveyard?

This card has the following Oracle ruling:

  If the creature is no longer on the battlefield at the beginning of the next end step, it won't be exiled.

This is an instance of general principle: when an effect states that a card moves from one zone to another, if the target card is no longer in the starting zone when the effect resolves, then the effect is countered. In this particular case, Postmortem Lunge creates a delayed trigger which implicitly expects its target to be on the battlefield when it resolves, since that's where the card last put that creature. If the target is no longer on the battlefield, then the effect is countered.


How can creatures with indestructible end up in the graveyard? How does a creature with indestructible end up in the graveyard?

I have been trying to figure this out for a little while.

Indestructible prevents the permanent from being destroyed.  This usually is caused by damage exceeding a creature's toughness, or an effect that explicitly says that it will destroy a permanent.
The main ways that a creature with indestructible will die (being put to the graveyard from the battlefield) will be:

Having its toughness reduced to zero via -X/-X effects. (Tragic Slip, Black Sun's Zenith or -1/-1 counters, including damage from a source with infect)
Being sacrificed. (Innocent Blood)
Losing indestructible and being destroyed (Hour of Devastation, Turn to Frog + destruction effect)

Other ways to deal with indestructible permanents that do not cause them to "die" include:

Exiling. (Swords to Plowshares)
Bounce. (Unsummon)
Interacting with them on the stack. (Counterspell)
Discard. (Thoughtseize)
Removal from the deck. (Memoricide)
Taking control of them. (In Bolas's Clutches)
Move them to their owner's library. (Condemn)


Is it allowed to activate the ability of multiple planeswalkers in a single turn? Suppose I have more than one planeswalker (different planeswalkers) in play.

During my turn, am I allowed to use both of their '+' abilities? Or can I only use one planeswalker ability from one planeswalker during my turn?

You can use all of them; one from each planeswalker.

Here is the rule that prevents you from using the same ability repeatedly on your turn:

  606.3. A player may activate a loyalty ability of a permanent they control any time they have priority and the stack is empty during a main phase of their turn, but only if no player has previously activated a loyalty ability of that permanent that turn.

Emphasis mine. It only cares that you haven't used an ability of the specific permanent that turn; you can use one from each planeswalker each turn.


Cast spells as if they have flash - does it affect equipping? I was reading Equipment cards and the timing of their activated ability and wondered about the Equip keyword timing.
Let's say I'm playing Vedalken Orrery (which has, You may cast spells as though they had flash) and have an artifact with Equip. I can now cast sorceries (because they are spells) at any time (because it's "as though they had flash"). Does that mean I can equip at any time?

702.6a: Equip is an activated ability of Equipment cards. “Equip [cost]” means “[Cost]: Attach this permanent to target creature you control. Activate this ability only any time you could cast a sorcery.”
702.8a: Flash is a static ability that functions in any zone from which you could play the card it’s on. “Flash” means “You may play this card any time you could cast an instant.”

No.

  307.5. If a spell, ability, or effect states that a player can do something only “any time they could cast a sorcery,” it means only that the player must have priority, it must be during the main phase of their turn, and the stack must be empty. The player doesn’t need to have a sorcery they could cast. Effects that would preclude that player from casting a spell or casting a sorcery don’t affect the player’s capability to perform that action (unless the action is actually casting a spell or casting a sorcery).

So in other words, "any time you could cast a sorcery" is just short-hand; it doesn't actually mean "casting a sorcery is a thing you can do right now". It means that the timing rules for that ability follow the normal timing rules for casting a sorcery.


King of Tokyo: Complete Destruction What is the expected number of turns required to get the required roll for Complete Destruction, given no evolutions or other cards?

The probability of getting a Complete Destruction in 1 turn is roughly 20%.  So, the expected number of turns is 1/0.2 or 5 turns on average.

The 20% number comes from two sources.  First, I found a lengthy discussion at board game geek on this topic, which gives the final result of approximately 20%.  http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/1155539/king-tokyo-odds/page/2

Secondly, I wrote a quick Matlab simulation to compute this.  The optimal strategy is pretty clearly to take any die that's a duplicate of another die, and reroll it.  Using that fact, I get the following table, which performed 100,000 trials:

      % of the time, you get 1-6 different numbers
      on 6 dice after 3 rolls
             1     2     3     4     5     6
Roll 1 :   0.0   2.0  23.2  50.1  23.1   1.6
Roll 2 :   0.0   0.0   3.3  35.2  52.7   8.8
Roll 3 :   0.0   0.0   0.4  17.4  62.3  19.8

Here is the matlab script I used, in case you're interested:

% King of Tokyo, Total Destruction

% Object of total destruction card, is to get 1-6 on 6 different dice
% in three rolls.

NUMTRIALS = 100000;

results.numUniqueRoll1 = zeros(1,6);
results.numUniqueRoll2 = zeros(1,6);
results.numUniqueRoll3 = zeros(1,6);

for ix = 1 : NUMTRIALS
    n1 = numel(unique(randi(6, 1, 6)));
    results.numUniqueRoll1(n1) = 1 + results.numUniqueRoll1(n1);

    n2 = n1 + sum(unique(randi(6,1,6-n1)) > n1);
    results.numUniqueRoll2(n2) = 1 + results.numUniqueRoll2(n2);

    n3 = n2 + sum(unique(randi(6,1,6-n2)) > n2);
    results.numUniqueRoll3(n3) = 1 + results.numUniqueRoll3(n3);
end

fprintf('  %% of the time, you get 1-6 different numbers\n');
fprintf('      on 6 dice after 3 rolls\n');
fprintf('             1     2     3     4     5     6\n');
fprintf('Roll 1 :');
fprintf('%6.1f', 100*results.numUniqueRoll1/NUMTRIALS);
fprintf('\nRoll 2 :');
fprintf('%6.1f', 100*results.numUniqueRoll2/NUMTRIALS);
fprintf('\nRoll 3 :');
fprintf('%6.1f', 100*results.numUniqueRoll3/NUMTRIALS);
fprintf('\n');


Can I select zero colors for Prismatic Lace? I noticed that Prismatic Lace explicitly states "color or colors" in it's rules text:

Target permanent becomes the color or colors of your choice.

I realise "colorless" is not one of the five colors of Magic, but can I choose no colors as an option? I'm thinking of scenarios where I may want to protect a permanent from an effect such as those from Ugin and Ugin.

You have to choose at least 1 color.

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

Prismatic Lace instructs you to choose a color or combination of colors. If you were allowed to choose zero colors, the instruction would be worded such that the zero choice would be obviously allowed, for example by containing the phrase "any number of...". There is also the wording that a player may make a choice, in which case you could avoid choosing at all, rather than choosing zero colors. However, there is no mechanical difference between these approaches, the result would be the same.
Also, just in case, don't get hung up on the potential difference between "a color" and "the color" - unless a term or phrase is defined in the Comprehensive Rules, apply the normal rules of English to it.


Can players tap lands for mana with Enchanted Evening and Grand Abolisher in play? If I play Enchanted Evening and turn everything into an enchantment, and then play Grand Abolisher to disallow them activating abilities during my turn, can my opponents tap their lands during my turn (say, to make a payment for something)?

No they cannot.

From the rulings on Enchanted Evening:

  This has no effect on those permanents other than letting them interact with things that care about enchantments.

Which Grand Abolisher clearly interacts with:

  During your turn, your opponents can't cast spells or activate abilities of artifacts, creatures, or enchantments.

I think it's clear that lands have an innate implied ability, even if not printed of "Tap: Add 1 mana of the appropriate colour to your mana pool."

So all we need to know is that this ability is treated like any other:

  CR 605.3. Activating an activated mana ability follows the rules for activating any other activated ability (see rule 602.2)

The exceptions listed don't apply to this case because Grand Abolisher is not countering the mana ability, it is preventing it from happening.  Just because it's a mana ability doesn't make it special in this case.


When are targets chosen in Final Fantasy TCG? In the FAQ, some cards, like Hades (1-046U ハーデス) mention a need to have valid targets when the card is used. This entry also implies that some targets may become invalid before resolution time. This implies that targets are chosen at cast time. However, in the official rules, the only place where choosing a target seems to be mentioned deals with thing happening at resolution time (11.11.4.1.1.). Since there's no special rules mentioning it, this implies that choosing a target is just part of the effect and so is done at resolution time.

I don't know how to resolve this. When is the choosing of a target supposed to take place?

This was explained in a tweet from the developer:

Question
「選ぶ」ある召喚獣やアビリティがあります。使う時に選ぶと思うが11.11.4.1.1.以外「選ぶ」を特別扱うルールは見つけることができないので結果の一部として解決時に選ぶべきも思われます。どっちが正しいですか。ルールにその答えがいたならその番号も教えてください。
There is a summon and abilities that "choose". Although 11.11.4.1.1. Other than "choose" a special treat rules also seems to choose at the time of resolution as part of the result because it can not find think that choosing when to use. Which is correct? Please also tell me the number if the answer was in the rules. (Auto-translated through Google Translate)
Answer
選ぶのはアビリティを使用する際になります。総合ルールに明記されていませんので、次の更新の際に追記いたします。ご指摘ありがとうございます。
It will be when you use the ability to choose. Because not explicitly stated in the Comprehensive Rules, it will be appended to the time of the next update. Thank you for your advice. (Auto-translated through Google Translate)

In other words, targets are chosen when the card is used. It has not been added to the comprehensive rules by mistake.


Dresden Files Cooperative Card Game promotional/exclusive event cards For the Dresden Files Cooperative Card Game, I think I read once that there were about 2 or 3 promotional cards given out at a convention or in a Loot Crate type box. Maybe had a female character on them? Forgot where I saw some for sale.
Can't seem to find the cards searching Google.

Anyone know what the names were or where they were given out?

At the time of this writing, BoardGameGeek's list of expansions for the game show that the following are the only promotional cards that have been released:
Mouse & Variants

An Evil Hat webstore exclusive for the Dresden Files Cooperative Card Game! Bring Harry's faithful companion Mouse (with a dash of Mister) into the game with this character deck packet. Also includes 2 variant cards for Harry's deck and 3 variant cards for Susan's deck to add a little variety to your play.
–Store page

Ra Crossover

An Evil Hat webstore exclusive for the Dresden Files Cooperative Card Game — and a crossover with Greater Than Games' Sentinels Comics universe! The sun god Ra steps into a new avatar in the Dresdenverse with this fully playable character deck. When one supernatural fire-slinger isn't enough, it's time to call down the flames!
–Store page

Both of these were also available as Kickstarter promotional items before being made available on the web store.
It sounds to me like the Mouse & Variants pack is the one you are thinking of with a female character on them, given that it contains 3 variant cards for Susan's deck.


Does Celestial Crusader also boost my opponent's creatures? I have a Celestial Crusader card that says other white creatures get +1/+1. Does that apply only to my white creatures or will it apply to my opponents white creatures as well?

There are no hidden limitations.

The effect of Celestial Crusader's ability applies to white creatures other than that Celestial Crusader, no matter who controls them.

If it only affected creatures your control, the ability would have been phrased like Paragon of New Dawns's:

  Other white creatures you control get +1/+1.


What happens if you activate a loyalty ability from a creature instead of a planeswalker? An answer on another question tells of a way to give loyalty abilities to creatures:

  Basically you start by playing the Mycosynth
  Lattice
  which turns all your permanents into artifacts, this includes
  Planeswalker.

  Then you play March Of the
  Machines
  turning your Planeswalker into an artifact creature with power and
  toughness equal to it's casting cost.

  Then you use the ability of an Experimental
  Kraj
  to put a +1/+1 counter on the Planeswalker artifact creature.

  Now since the Planeswalker artifact Creature has a +1/+1 on it, the
  Experimental Kraj can use all of the Activated Abilities of the
  Planeswalker without any of the restrictions of a Planeswalker.

Since creatures don't have loyalty to add to or deduct from, what happens if you were to use a loyalty ability from a creature, rather than a Planeswalker?

More specifically:

In the case of using a (+) loyalty ability from a creature, what happens?
In the case of using a (-) loyalty ability from a creature, what happens?

Loyalty is not the same thing that loyalty counters.  Non-planeswalker creatures don't have loyalty, but the can have loyalty counters. So, if a (+) loyalty ability is played, then we add that many loyalty counters to the creature. If a (-) loyalty ability is played, then we remove that many loyalty counters from the creature.

Remember that we can only play activated abilities if we can pay the cost, and loyalty abilities are activated abilities, so we can't play a (-) ability if we don't have enough counters.

  306.5. Loyalty is a characteristic only planeswalkers have.

  306.5a The loyalty of a planeswalker not on the battlefield is equal to the number printed in its lower right corner.

  306.5b A planeswalker is treated as if its text box included, “This permanent enters the battlefield with a number of loyalty counters on
  it equal to its printed loyalty number.” This ability creates a
  replacement effect (see rule 614.1c).

  306.5c The loyalty of a planeswalker on the battlefield is equal to the number of loyalty counters on it.

  306.5d Each planeswalker has a number of loyalty abilities, which are activated abilities with loyalty symbols in their costs. Loyalty
  abilities follow special rules: A player may activate a loyalty
  ability of a permanent he or she controls any time he or she has
  priority and the stack is empty during a main phase of his or her
  turn, but only if none of that permanent’s loyalty abilities have been
  activated that turn. See rule 606, “Loyalty Abilities.”

As we can see, the loyalty of a planeswalker on the battlefield is linked to the number of loyalty counters on it. But nothing stops a non-planeswalker permanent from having loyalty counters or loyalty abilities.

However, as rule 306.5d indicates, all permanents with loyalty abilities, not just planeswalkers, may only use their loyalty abilities at sorcery speed and once per turn.


Use exactly 36 combinations instead of two dice I like playing Settlers of Catan with one extension: "Catan: Event Cards"

The deck consists of 36 dice cards to represent the 36 different combinations that can be rolled with 2 dice. This means that number "rolls" are evenly distributed according to its probability.

How can I get this running on Android? Is there a way to roll two dice with predictable probability?

There is one Android app, where you can use those cards, but unfortunately there is one card in it that causes shuffling of all cards, which destroys the probability sorting.

http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/20038/catan-event-cards?
http://www.catan.de/spiel/ereignisse-auf-catan

Especially in settlers I would also like to take the sevens out of the pile and roll each turn only to have random amounts of sevens but if I didn't roll a seven I would take one card instead.

Also optimal, I would like to have such a dice app that allows to set the number of dice to one or more and roll accordingly to play other games too.

How can I get this running on Android?

There is an app called Catan Smart Dice which does exacly what I need.

With the possibility to have the dice be a fair dice: there are 36 possible rolls (1-1, 1-2, 1-3...) And such a fair dice rolls all the possible permutations once before repeating a permutation again

Also an app, where you can also adjust the number of dice and adjust the "fairness": Fair Dice


Which Axis and Allies Game Takes the Least Amount of Time to Play? I have A&A Europe.  I generally just play with one other person.  The problem is that the game takes so long to play that we rarely play - because it takes so long.  Do different editions take more or less time to play?

A&A Pacific takes significantly less time to play than standard.  While I havent played Europe, BGG says that estimated time is 210 minutes as opposed to 120 for Pacific, so pacific should be shorter. Its about 2-3 hours, depends how willing to concede defeat the players are and. Additionally, it works excellently with 2 players. I would give that a try.. Have fun


How do actions that trigger on a certain movement die result work when rolling two dice? Some cards have things happen when you roll a certain result on the movement die. For instance, the Troll has the option of regenerating:

  Whenever you roll a 6 for your move, you may regenerate instead of moving. If you choose to regenerate, heal one life and your turn immediately ends.

The Grim Reaper works this way too, moving when a 1 is rolled, and other cards such as Rumour of Riches and Flying Carpet also have an effect trigger this way.

But how does this work if you roll two dice for movement? For instance, the Riding Horse:

  You may roll 2 dice and add them together to determine how far you can move.

Or the Torch:

  You may roll two dice for your movement in the Dungeon and choose one of the results to use for your move.

How do abilities that trigger based on the result of the movement die happen when either die has the value?

You have to roll a 6 for your movement in order to be able to regenerate instead of moving. If you have Riding horse then you roll 2 dice for movement. If one of the two is a 6 you can regenerate instead as long as you control the Troll.


Why does a blocking 1/1 creature with double strike kill a 3/2 creature? I was playing MTG Arena and had a 3/2 creature get blocked by a 1/1 creature with double strike.
What I thought would happen:

First strike: Attacker down to 3/1 (but still alive)
Normal combat: Blocker down to 1/0 (lethal damage)
No double strike damage is dealt by the blocker since they're dead, the attacker remains alive

What actually happened: Both creatures died
What went down here and why?

Here's how the combat actually goes:

First strike damage: Attacker marks one damage (they are still 3/2, but with 1 damage marked), Blocker is at 1/1 with no damage marked.
Normal strike damage: The two creatures exchange damage simultaneously. The attacker marks another damage (still at 3/2 but with two damage), and the Blocker is a 1/1, but with 3 damage marked.
State-based actions are checked. Both attacker and blocker have at least as much damage marked than they have toughness, so both die.

(Technically state-based actions are checked after first strike damage, because they are checked when player priority changes, but there are no actions to check.)
Really, the only difference is that the damage doesn't take effect immediately, so read up on state-based actions to learn more.


During battle can I play a one-shot card? If combat has started and the other players start discussing what to do to me can I play a one-shot card while they are discussing?

Yes, go right ahead. For most one-shots, the only requirement for playing them is that there's combat happening. As soon as it is, you can play your one-shots. You don't need to wait your turn or anything like that - there's no turn to wait for! Snoozers losers, you've got loot and levels to find.

From the original rules:

  Items – Using Them

  Any one-shot Item can by played during any combat,
  whether you have it in your hand or on the table. (Some
  one-shot Items, such as the Wishing Ring, may also be used
  outside of combat.)

There are no other constraints, and no "you can only play it when the other players say it's OK or are done talking."

As for Curses in particular, remember:

  Curse cards may be played on any player at any time. ANY time, do you hear me?


How to score two tiled cities in Carcassonne? The rules in my copy of Carcassonne state that cities that consist of only two tiles are worth only 2 points.

I played another copy of carcassonne (10nth anniversary edition), and the rules don't mention this rule anywhere and so I'm left to assume that each tile would each be worth two points like a normal city.

My question is, which set of rules is correct (most up to date, I guess)?

It seems like the rules have changed since we bought our copies of Carcassonne. Two-tile cities are now worth two points per tile (four points total) like any other city.

I have an old copy published by Rio Grande. In its rules, the following exception is found:

  Exception: a 2 tile city does not get 2 points per tile

A newer copy of the rules (dated 2008) on Rio Grande's site doesn't have that exception. The same example as my rules is used, but the two-tile city now grants two points per tile like any other city. Seeing as both of the documents came from Rio Grande, it's clear there was a shift.

The 2008 rules were only found via Google. Seems like the rights got transferred from Rio Grande to Z-Man, so Rio Grande wiped their site of Carcassonne references. A check of Z-Man's version of the rules also show two-tile cities being worth four points.


How do you score failed nil bids? Say you are playing 4 person spades, and somone bids nil and they get a book/trick what is the penalty? Does it count as a sandbag, or do they just lose the points from failing nil? Does that book count towards the partners bid?

Now in three man spades if someone bids nil and gets a book do they get a sandbag or just lose the points?

Given that there isn't exactly a single set of "official rules" for Spades, I would say that there two valid answers:

1) Tricks collected by a set (failed) NIL bid count as tricks for the partner, at which point all normal rules apply as far as sandbags, making the bid, etc. The team loses -100 (or -200 if it was a double/blind Nil) for the set nil, but scores the partner's bid normally.

2) Tricks collected by a set Nil bid are void and count for nothing. The partner must make their bid completely independently.

Players should agree on the rules ahead of play.

Personally, I've always played per #1 and would prefer that greatly. First, it makes losing the nil not quite as painful, since you can help your partner out. Second, it means that while you can take extra tricks to try to set your opponent's bid, you will risk taking sandbags for it, whereas with option 2, you could take those extra tricks with no further penalty.


What do we do if we need to place a large minion and all minion entry spaces are occupied? In Mice and Mystics, we entered a tile and had an encounter which dropped several rats and a spider (which is large).  On the very first turn, the minions ended up defending against an attack and rolling another cheese, triggering a surge, which was a centipede (which is also large).

Large minions are supposed to be the only things that fit on their spaces, but unfortunately every minion entry space was already occupied (either by our mice, rats, or the spider).

What should we do with this newly spawned centipede when he can't fit anywhere?

(What we ended up doing was having him eat a rat and take the rat's spot, but we were looking for something a little more official.)

I agree, it isn't completely clear from the rule book what to do. Page 14 covers, Placing Minions on the Board, and notes to add new Minions to (not full) minion entry spaces. Luckily, the designer, Jerry Hawthorne, responded to that question on BGG:

Q: We had a situation where a surge called for a centipede, but every spawn space was taken by either a small monster or a mouse. We just didn't spawn the centipede because it couldn't "fit" in any space; was that correct?
A: That is correct.


Cloning a Molten Primordial at instant speed - who will end up controlling the target creatures? This came up in a multiplayer game:

I play a Molten Primordial. It resolves and I target 4 creatures controlled by 4 different opponents.
Before the triggered ability resolves one of the opponents casts a Stunt Double.
The double resolves as a copy of my Primordial, its trigger goes on the stack. My opponent targets the same creatures I did (except his own) and 1 of mine. The ability resolves. He now has control of these creatures.
The ability from my Primordial tries to resolve, but as the targets are now under his control it no longer fulfills the "up to one creature" clause.

Do I still gain control of all targeted creatures, or do I only get one?

You get to control one creature, the one controlled by the opponent who played their own Molten Primordial.
The wording of Molten Primordial's ability is shorthand for:

Gain control of up to one target creature controlled by opponent A until end of turn. Gain control of up to one creature controlled by player B until end of turn.

and so on for each opponent in the game.
Legality of targets is checked twice; once when the ability triggers, and again when it tries to resolve.
When the ability triggers after MP enters the battlefield, all targets you choose are legal. Opponents A, B, C, and D each control a creature, you target one of each.
Before your ability resolves, opponent A casts his own MP. He targets one of your creatures, and one each of B, C, and D. The creatures of B, C, and D are the same you targeted earlier. The ability resolves and he controls them now.
Now your ability gets to resolve. It checks all its targets' legality again. According to the text of MP's ability, for each opponent (A, B, C, D), that opponent has to control the targeted creature. That is false for the creatures of B, C, and D, because A controls them. Only the creature previously controlled by A is still controlled by A.
Therefore, the ability does as much as possible with the remaining legal target, and you gain control of creature A.

Handling Triggered Abilities

603.3d The remainder of the process for putting a triggered ability on the stack is identical to the process for casting a spell listed in rules 601.2c–d.

Casting Spells

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

Resolving Spells and Abilities

608.2b If the spell or ability specifies targets, it checks whether the targets are still legal. A target that’s no longer in the zone it was in when it was targeted is illegal. Other changes to the game state may cause a target to no longer be legal; for example, its characteristics may have changed or an effect may have changed the text of the spell. If the source of an ability has left the zone it was in, its last known information is used during this process. If all its targets, for every instance of the word “target,” are now illegal, the spell or ability doesn’t resolve. It’s removed from the stack and, if it’s a spell, put into its owner’s graveyard. Otherwise, the spell or ability will resolve normally. Illegal targets, if any, won’t be affected by parts of a resolving spell’s effect for which they’re illegal. [..]


Can you reveal your hand when you fold in poker? In some situations in poker it might be beneficial to reveal my hand when I fold.

Is it allowable to do this, or must the contents of a folded hand remain secret?

No, you are not allowed to show reveal your hand when you fold as that gives unequal and unfair knowledge to the rest of the players. For example in Texas holdem where you have two cards in your hand it would reveal to others two cards that would not possibly show up in the cards on the table and that could give them knowledge that they need in order to fold or bet to their advantage.
http://poker.wikia.com/wiki/Fold

Folding should be done without revealing your cards. To do otherwise is against the rules and is considered rude in poker etiquette. If a player folds their hand face up, the other players get additional information about what cards are dead and what cards are still live, and this additional information may affect later betting or game play (a player on a draw may subsequently fold if they see another player fold one of their outs face up, for example). If a fold is done in such a way that only some players at the table could see the cards being folded (e.g. they flipped up on edge, facing one end of the table, then fell back facedown), the dealer is responsible for ensuring that all players have an equal opportunity to know what cards were folded. If a still-active player suspects that some other player has seen a folded card, they may request the dealer to show it to everyone, under the common "show one, show all" rule. Generally speaking, however, hands which are folded by a player are not shown to other players, and other players do not have a right to see them.
In variants with upcards such as 7-Stud, folding is done by first turning your upcards over, facedown, and then returning them to the dealer or the muck. Note that in these variants, it is often against the rules (and is always inconsiderate) to fold out of turn, since hiding your upcards prior to someone being able to act deprives them of information which other players may have seen.


Can sea units have more then the given amount in Axis and Allies 1941? So I'm currently in a game where my opponent has 5 battle ships using the circle grey markers, and I have 4 battle ships.

Is this legal? or is only each faction allowed 2 battleships? what about other sea units?

Unlike Monopoly, in which the rules restrict players to 32 houses and 12 hotels (in total), the number of pieces in Axis and Allies are limited only by what you can build according to the rules.

The number of pieces given in the games are based on the most common number of pieces in play. But feel free to play outside the parameters indicated by the "equipment," and by all means, substitute your own markers or tokens for the extra pieces you need.


Are there any playable Twilight Imperium 2 player variants? I love TI 3rd edition, but can't always get together 3 players willing to commit the amount of time it takes to play a game.

Are there any 2 player variants of this game?

There is no official 2-player variant; the game just wasn't designed for it.

But as always, the internet provides.  Various fans have proposed two-player rule sets.

The Roland Wood variant is probably the most commonly used, building on earlier suggestions by other players.

(There was another popular version in the "Shattered Expansion", but I can no longer find a live link.)


Does any cards care about the color of mana spent on other spells/abilities? There are plenty of cards, such as cards with Sunburst and Converge and most of these cards, which care about the colors of mana spent on themselves.

Additionally, Nix cares about whether or not any mana was spent on its target, but doesn't care about what color(s) it was.

Are there any cards that care about what color(s) of mana
were spent on something other than the card which cares?

As a concrete example, suppose I tapped a Mountain and Temple Garden to cast Roast. Can it ever matter whether the Temple Garden was tapped for G or W, i.e. whether Roast was cast for GR or WR?

It depends on what you mean by "care".

There are abilities that remember what colors of mana were spent to activate them, such as the abilities of Illusionary Mask and Ice Cauldron (credit to this answer and its comments).

There is at least one spell allows you to cast another spell based on the number of colors used to cast it: Bring to Light.

There are also indirect effects. Although things like Sunburst only directly affect the card with Sunburst, other spells could depend on attributes of the Sunburst card which in turn depend on the color(s) of mana spent to cast it. For example:

  Situation A

  Cast Arcbound Wanderer for {W}{U}{B}{R}{G}{G}.
  Cast Devour Flesh, targeting yourself.

  You gain 5 life.

  Situation B

  Cast Arcbound Wanderer for {G}{G}{G}{G}{G}{G}
  Cast Devour Flesh, targeting yourself.

  You gain 1 life.

There are zero spells currently in existence that do the following:

"If you/the controller of the spell spent [color] to cast [some other spell], [effect]."
"Whenevever you cast a spell, if you spent [color] to cast it, [effect.]"


Blinking face down Auras and Non-Permanents When I exile a manifested permanent like an enchantment or creature with something like Roon of the Hidden Realm, it comes back face up (from what I understand). What happens if I exile and return an instant, sorcery or aura enchantment? Do their effects take place on the end of my turn?

Instants and sorceries would stay in the zone they're currently in, in your case in Exile. They do nothing.

304.4. Instants can’t enter the battlefield. If an instant would enter the battlefield, it remains in its previous zone instead.
307.4. Sorceries can’t enter the battlefield. If a sorcery would enter the battlefield, it remains in its previous zone instead.

If an Aura enters the battlefield other than by resolving, you can choose a legal object or player for it to enchant. Note that this does not target the chosen object. If you can't because there are no legal objects to enchant, it remains in the zone it came from; in your case, in Exile.

303.4f If an Aura is entering the battlefield under a player’s control by any means other than by resolving as an Aura spell, and the effect putting it onto the battlefield doesn’t specify the object or player the Aura will enchant, that player chooses what it will enchant as the Aura enters the battlefield. The player must choose a legal object or player according to the Aura’s enchant ability and any other applicable effects.
303.4g If an Aura is entering the battlefield and there is no legal object or player for it to enchant, the Aura remains in its current zone, unless that zone is the stack. In that case, the Aura is put into its owner’s graveyard instead of entering the battlefield.


In Diamonsters, what happens to the cards on your monster board at the end of a round? The rules are very unclear on this. Do we take these cards on hand for the next round? Are they discarded? Or shuffled into the draw pile?

And do I keep the current 5 cards in my hand, or do I start over with cards 1-5?

Based on reading around at forums such as BoardGameGeeks, the usual approach is to reset the hands every time a diamond is won. That seems fairly settled.

As to your main question, I have been discarding all collected monster cards each round. It seems to me that as the deck slowly dwindles the game is likely to get more challenging, because everyone has increasing information about the deck. Resetting the hand is important because the uniform hand is a basic concept of the game, but I don't see the point in playing 3-5 rounds that are exactly identical. That is, if you reset the deck as well, each round is merely a replay with a different shuffle. The limit of 3-5 rounds then becomes an even more arbitrary cutoff than it already is.


Can I re-equip an equipped artifact to the same creature? Say I have Sun Forger equipped to my only creature on the battlefield. Can I re-equip Sun Forger to the creature it is currently equipped to? That way I can tutor a card with only one creature card out on the battle field?

As our other Can you re-equip equipment to the same creature? question says, yes you can equip an equipment to a creature it is already equipped to.

However with Sunforger part of the cost of the ability is "Unattach Sunforger", this means that Sunforger will no longer be equipped to the creature it was equipped to prior to the ability being activated. This means that you are in fact not equipping the Sunforger to the creature that it is equipped to because the Sunforger is not equipped to any creature.


Should supports be used as the primary weight of your attack? It seems that support orders confer several benefits over march orders.

The support troops won't be destroyed if the fight goes badly.
The support troops won't be routed if the fight goes badly.
The support troops can be used in multiple fights in the round.

It seems that a good strategy might be initiate combat with a single infantry, and use the support troops on an adjacent territory to the one you're attacking.

The sole reason I can think that you might not do this, is if on the following turn you want to march your entire army again to a territory that is only accessible from the newly conquered territory.

Is my understanding of these rules correct? - What are the downsides of using support over march orders?

You've done a good job of detailing the main advantages of using a support order, but you've left out a key concern when using them: enemy raid orders can remove support orders, so your supporting regions would need to be buffered against enemy-controller regions of the board. You also rightly introduce the fact that the march orders are the only way to get your troops to move around the board.

Another somewhat related aspect is the limitations on the size of your armies based on the supply track. If you have one or two large armies supporting a number of single unit forward positions, you can make much better use of the larger armies if they are supporting forward positions.

One other thing to consider is that there are a number of hero abilities which negate or change the effects of supporting troops, which don't affect the troops in the region doing the attacking/defending.


How to limit time of game in GoT? We have played a few times (5-7 probably) and every time single game takes around 6 hours for someone to win. It's not even finished at that point, but somewhere around 6th turn.

Is there a way to reduce time spend on the single match?

This seems like an issue brought about by some analysis paralysis, as mentioned in the comments on the original question. Check out the linked post (Countermeasures to "analysis paralysis"?) for help with dealing with that aspect at a high level.

As far as making Game of Thrones go faster, there are a number of ways you can do it (with the first four bullets borrowed from the BGG thread on the same topic):

Use a timer for the order placement, negotiation, and order execution phases of each round. This can be done for everyone at once, or by starting the timer once the first or second-last player is done (a la RoboRally or Galaxy Trucker).
Use text messaging (or another non-verbal method) to do all of the secretive discussion, instead of having players leave the room or try to whisper.
Have everyone place their orders at the same time, instead of in turns.
Have printouts of each player's hero cards available, so that they aren't being passed back and forth every battle.
For anyone who is new to the game, make sure they have read through the rules on their own and had a chance to ask questions before the game starts.
Use social pressure to encourage everyone to go faster. For example, whoever is last to place their orders is in charge of getting drinks/snacks until the next order placement phase.
Put a timer on the table which can be flipped by anyone at any time who feels like someone is taking too long (a la Codenames).

These are just a few different ways to speed up the game, I'm sure there are more. Using just a few of the above approaches, we got our games down to a reasonable ~90 minutes even with a couple analysis paralysis folks involved.


Odin's Smite card and Thor's Primacy card and Heimdall's Watch player A and B are in battle

1- player A plays Odin's Smite  card(Destroy one warrior from each opponent in this province before comparing STR) and player B plays Heimdall's Watch  card(Discard all revealed cards. Gain glory equal to the total +STR revealed. Then Play new cards)
Now what happen ?
Which card will be used ?

2- player A plays Thor's Primacy card (Cancel the text of each opponent's reveled card before it takes effect) and player B plays Heimdall's Watch  card (Discard all revealed cards. Gain glory equal to the total +STR revealed. Then Play new cards)
Now wha happen ?
which card will be used ?

3- player A plays Thor's Primacy  card (Cancel the text of each opponent's reveled card before it takes effect) and player B plays Odin's Smite card (Destroy one warrior from each opponent in this province before comparing STR)
what happen now ?
which card will be used ?

The wording on Thor's Primacy makes it clear that it happens first, because it cancels the other cards' text before their text takes effect.

Heimdall's Watch clearly has to happen before any "normal" cards, otherwise it would be pointless. "normal" here meaning any card which doesn't specifically affect other cards.

I can see that it's not crystal clear which would take priority out of the two of these cards, but the use of the word "Primacy" meaning first or most important, and the fact that it specifically says "before" other cards, means that it takes precedence.

So it would make sense if the order of priority was:

Thor's Primacy
Heimdall's Watch
Any other card

This is backed up by this link and this link from boardgamegeek, where Thiago Aranha, apparently one of the game's producers, gives them the same priority.


Are there multiplayer equivalents to trading places after the first move? In many two-player games a first move advantage can be mitigated by giving the second player the option to trade places if the first move appears desirably strong, which encourages the first player to make a mediocre first move. This is referred to as the pie rule, named after a fair way to divide a pie between two people (one person cuts, the other chooses).

Can this be generalized to more than two players in a fair manner? If so, which games would this mechanic work well with? Which is it entirely inappropriate for (such as games with secret information)?

Mathematically the Pie rule can be generalized. This is actually a well known problem.

One of the solutions is to let people take it in turns to add what they want from the common lot to a set of goods until one person calls that he wants that set. For example, in the 40 thieves problem, the goal is to share the bounty in 40 equal sets, which seems difficult, since there are jewels, gold, weapons etc. So the leader prepares a set and each thief adds one thing at a time until one thief claims he wants that set. Then the thief leaves with his share and the problem is reduced to n-1 people.

I never heard of a board game using exactly this principle, however in some board games the players bid point to determine the order of the players for the turn. For example, in the expert-variant of the game Tikal, each turn you draw as many tiles as there are players, and they bid to play first.

The strict application of the principle to a board game would be to have a first turn where you set up some initial position on the board. And afterwards, the players declare: "I add X money to the white meeple", "I add X pieces of wood to the white meeple", "I add X card to the blue meeple", "OK STOP, I take the blue meeple".

Actually, there are probably some games that use this kind of mechanic, I just don't recall one now.

[Edit:] You probably wonder what to do when several players wants to take a share. In that case, you just subtract something until nobody or (only one person) wants it any more, and then you continue adding.


Can you win a two player Uno game by playing a skip card then your final card? My boyfriend and I are playing a game of two player Uno.

It’s my turn, and I have a red Skip card and a red 9. The color of the pile is currently red. If I place down my Skip card, skipping his turn, then say Uno and put down my red 9, do I win?

I’ve heard of this being called “Uno out”, but I need to clarify since he doesn’t believe me.

Yes, this is a good way to win. Since you played a skip card in a two player game it is your turn again letting you play your final card and win the game. It should be noted that he would still have time to say uno if he could say it before you did or you played your final card.


What's the order of resolution for "everybody discard" in MTG? Usually, in MTG, when you play a card that requires multiple players to do something, like "Each player sacrifices a creature", players make choices in "APNAP" (active player / non-active player) order (going around the table in normal turn order if it's multiplayer), and then the effect itself happens simultaneously.

How does this work with hidden information? You'd still choose first, but when do you reveal the hidden information? Take, for instance, an "Everybody discard" effect (e.g. Liliana of the Veil): if I activate the ability, I'm supposed to choose a card first — do I immediately show my card to the other players, or do I set it aside face-down until everyone has made a pick?

You go in AP-NAP order around the table to choose a card.  However, the actual act of discarding is considered simultaneous, which means the chosen cards are still in the hand, a hidden zone, until all are chosen.  It is perfectly fine to, for example, set the chosen card aside face down until everyone has chosen one.

  101.4. If multiple players would make choices and/or take actions at the same time, the active player (the player whose turn it is) makes
  any choices required, then the next player in turn order (usually the
  player seated to the active player‘s left) makes any choices required,
  followed by the remaining nonactive players in turn order. Then the
  actions happen simultaneously. This rule is often referred to as the
  ―Active Player, Nonactive Player (APNAP) order‖ rule. Example: A card
  reads “Each player sacrifices a creature.” First, the active player
  chooses a creature he or she controls. Then each of the nonactive
  players, in turn order, chooses a creature he or she controls. Then
  all creatures chosen this way are sacrificed simultaneously.

  101.4a If an effect has each player choose a card in a hidden zone, such as his or her hand or library, those cards may remain face down
  as they‘re chosen. However, each player must clearly indicate which
  face-down card he or she is choosing.


Hungarian card says MINIMUM in the description, but MAXIMUM on the top I have a translation problem, I'm playing Terraforming Mars in Hungarian and the following card (original name is probably 'colonizer training station') description at the bottom says you need a MINIMUM of 5% oxygen level, but the symbol on the top says you need a MAXIMUM of 5% oxygen level.

Which one is the correct in the original version?

The English text on Colonizer Training Camp is

  (Oxygen must be 5% or less.)

This goes with the "max 5%" icon, as you suspected.

edit: Link to an image on BGG, where the English card can be seen.


How should I plan for a VP win as Nurgle? I played a game of Chaos in the Old world today and I came close to winning as Nurgle, whilst trying to win via ticks on my counter. The thing is, I only came close to winning via VPs, and my ticks were fairly bad. I also nearly won via VPs in another game as the Horned Rat.

Considering I seem to be doing something right to win that way (and I got some fairly solid advice about winning via ticks), how can I finish it off and assert my victory point victory?

Nurgle's general best winning strategy seems to be to go for VPs, not ticks. Khorne goes for ticks, and the other 3 go for either or depending. (This is actually suggested in the rules, near the end in a 2-page spread about strategy.)

In short: dominate all you can partake in every ruination. Those provide the big points.


How to bid a slam when partnership cannot find the best suit? The following hand was dealt recently in the Common Game; but only a very small number of partnerships bid and made a slam (1 grand; 2 small slams).

As you can see from the last 2 lines, the computer predicts that 4 different slam contacts are make-able. Would you please let me know if you can see the best way of bidding to reach a slam contract.

Playing 2-over-1 with a few conventions (including the serious 3nt), my auction would be something like

1d
1s
2c (this is a bit conservative but I think the right call)
2h (artificial game force)
2s (showing three cards in spades)
3s (setting trumps, showing a hand that is not bad for slam. A hand with poor controls would bid 4s, ending the auction)
3 nt (conventional. Serious 3 nt shows a strong slam try. This hand is a maximum for the actions taken so far and has good controls)
4h (showing first or second round control in hearts, denying the same in clubs or diamonds)
4 nt (asking for key cards)
5d (3 or 0 - ak in spades and a in h)
5 nt (confirms all 5 key cards and sq, asks for kings)
6s (no side king. With 7 spades, I would have bid 7 spades, as I have two tricks partner didn't know about, which must be enough to make grand reasonable)

Now north has a couple of options. They can count 6 tricks outside of spades, with a possibility of two more in diamonds. This makes me think that we should be in spades, not no trump. That virtually guarantees a fourth diamond. To make grand, we'll need six trump tricks. It doesn't seem too difficult to get there, so an aggressive north can bid 7s.


Spades - how to bid my spades suit? In the game of Spades, what is the best or popular practice to bid the ♠ suit? That is to say, how to estimate the number of tricks my spades suit can take?
I calculate my takes in the spades suit by considering those three factors:

High spades - {A,Kx,Qxx,Jxxx} where x are spades cards used as protection.
Long spades suit - count each spade beyond the 4th, some count the 4th spade as a "half a take" which combined with other factors might be a take.
Short sides suits + spare spades

Void and 1/2/3 spare spades is 1/~1.5/~2.25 takes.
Singleton and 1/2 spare spades is ~1/~1.5 takes.
Doubleton and 1 spare spade is a bit less than 1 take.

Note: do not count the same card twice.  Each card should be count once where it produce the maximal value.

Your method of adding [Spade-Length] - 3.5 seems reasonable, except I would halve that whenever partner has already made a bid of 4 or higher. Any bid in excess of 3 is very likely to include Spade length, and it is desirable to avoid double-counting that asset.

Even when partner's bid above 3 is solely based on high card strength, that reduces the value of extra Spades in your own hand as you will be attempting to not ruff those assets.

Also, I believe a refinement of the Spades' tricks estimate should consider the presence or absence of a void/singleton in one's hand. Balanced holdings around the table reduce the likelihood of ruffing tricks, while unbalanced holdings increase their likelihood. I'm not yet sure how I would do that.

Here is a table of all the hand pattern probabilities, with the top few (covering nearly 85% of possibilities) excerpted below.

Note that the 4333 pattern is only the fifth most common hand pattern, and the most common is 4432 at over 21%. If we take the 4432 pattern as standard, then we can rank the most common patterns as being either stronger or weaker than the standard (in ascending order of estimated strength:

Distinctly Weaker: Estimates from Contract Bridge analysis suggest at east 0.25 trick weaker

4333 HPS = 2(4-5) + (3-3) = -2

Standard:

4432 HPS = 2(4-5) + (4-2) =  0
5332 HPS = 2(5-5) + (3-2) =  1

Stronger: Estimates from Bridge analysis suggests at least 0.25 tricks stronger than average

5422 HPS = 2(5-5) + (4-2) =  2
6322 HPS = 2(6-5) + (3-2) =  3
5431 HPS = 2(5-5) + (4-1) =  3

Distinctly Stronger: Estimates from Bridge analysis suggest at least 0.5 tricks stronger than average.

6331 HPS = 2(6-5) + (3-1) =  4
6421 HPS = 2(6-5) + (4-1) =  5

In this context stronger should be interpreted as more capable of implementing the desired strategy.  A 6421 hand with short Spades and all its high cards, even if Aces, in the two long suits might be very capable of successfully bidding Nil. Obviously the placement of a hand's high cards is of import as well, as an additional refinement.

Also, these estimates are a priori - before trumps have been established. Clearly a long trump holding (Spades playing Spades) is even more valuable than shown here for winning tricks - but is less able to lose tricks.

One numerical estimate of Hand Pattern Strength would be to take double the excess of the length of the longest suit over 5, plus the excess of the second longest suit over the shortest suit. I have marked this value as HPS for the hand patterns above.

My first attempt at a comprehensive hand evaluation for Spades would be the sum of:

Culbertson Honour Tricks;

HPS (as above) / 4; and
(Spades length - 4) / 2.

That could be further refined, with experience, by adjusting the denominators for the second and third components for HPS and Spades length. When contemplating a Nil bid, consider subtracting the HPS term instead of adding it to the sum.


Are you required to search your deck when playing a search card? I had a miss click while playing arena and played a search card and it automatically showed me my deck.  In the paper magic could you play a search card and choose not to look at your deck if you had scry something to the top and you just want another affect of the card, I had Aetherflux Reservoir in play and mainly just wanted the life gain from playing a cheap spell.

Yes. (Unless the card says "You may search your library for ... If you do, shuffle it afterwards.)

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

If the spell tells you to search your library, you search your library. Most of these place restrictions on what cards you search for; in those cases, actually finding a card is not required:

701.19a To search for a card in a zone, look at all cards in that zone (even if it’s a hidden zone) and find a card that matches the given description.

701.19b If a player is searching a hidden zone for cards with a stated quality, such as a card with a certain card type or color, that player isn’t required to find some or all of those cards even if they’re present in that zone.

701.19d If a player is searching a hidden zone simply for a quantity of cards, such as “a card” or “three cards,” that player must find that many cards (or as many as possible, if the zone doesn’t contain enough cards).


In Eldritch Horror, do epic monsters have to be encountered before non epic monsters? The guide by The Esoteric Order of Gamers says

  If you are on a space with 1 or more monsters, you must resolve a single combat encounter against each monster there, one at a time, in the order of your choice. Each non-epic monster must be encountered before each epic monster.

I'm not familiar with this source, so is there a definitive reference in the quick reference or rulebook or some officially released errata that confirms this?

I think this is taken from the rules of the Forsaken Lore expansion pack. Those rules say:

Additional Rules
The Forsaken Lore expansion adds new rules as described below.

Combat Encounters
During the Encounter Phase, an investigator must encounter each non-Epic Monster on his space before encountering each Epic Monster on his space.

Do note however, that this is the opposite of this question title. Epic Monsters should be encountered last, not first, according to the expansion rule set.


In Warhammer fantasy, is it permissible to make an army using an old version of a race's codec? In Warhammer fantasy, new codecs for the races are released periodically that tweak units' attributes, cost, etc.

About 15 years ago I remember comparing two versions of the High Elves codec, which among other changes had increased the cost of a bolt thrower from 50 points to 100 points. I assume this is because the weapon was under-priced at 50 and 100 was a more fair and balanced valuation.

It is against the rules (either explicitly or in terms of etiquette) to build an army using  an older version of a codec? For example to take advantage of the cheaper bolt throwers at the cost of not being able to use any of the material in the newer book?

(Obviously anything that a given play-group decides is acceptable they can do; I'm asking in the context of official tournaments or an event where strangers would be playing.)

Every tournament has its own specific rules, but I've never seen one that hasn't required the use of the latest/greatest rules sets available, both for the game itself and the army. There are often additional restrictions, e.g. banned items or characters, troop limits etc, as well as model requirements (minimal painting requirements, no use of non-GW models, etc).

There are several good reasons to require the latest rules for a tournament:

Everyone is on a level playing field (tournament organiser understands the environment)
Everyone knows exactly what to expect
Army list checking and meta game preparation is much simpler
Strange, unbalanced or just broken loopholes from previous editions are obsolete
Games Workshop gets you to spend more money


Optimal Dimensions for a Checkerboard-style board? Let me clarify.

First off: I have a sheet of paper, 8 1/2" by 8 1/2". What are the optimal dimensions (<# of squares> by <# of squares>) of a checkerboard-patterned board that I could print on this sheet of paper?

Second: I'm creating a board in an image editor. The squares can be any dimensions (<# of pixels> by <# of pixels>). What are the optimal dimensions of the squares themselves, and what is the optimal dimensions of the board (<# of squares> by <# of squares>)

By optimal, I mean the most amount of squares that still looks aesthetically pleasing.

Also, I am open to different suggestions on what kind of "tiles" to use (i.e. squares or octagons or etc) and to what the dimensions are and sizes are. I merely chose checkerboard-style (square tiles) due to its ease of creation.

I don't think 'optimal' is easy to answer without getting into personal preference. There are certainly minimal and maximal sizes. A good example of a very small grid would be Halma (or Go). A good example of a large grid would be human chess. As long as you can make out the pieces and see the whole board. So it depends on the size, complexity, variation and even degrees of freedom in movement of your pieces.

Also squares might not be your best option. Go uses rectangles, so that when you view the board at a normal playing angle it looks like a square grid.


Rivals for Catan AoE Islands of Scholars Clarification This refers to the Age of Enlightenment expansion of Rivals for Catan. When discovering the Islands of the Scholars, it says you can choose two cards from one draw stack. Does that mean you can look through the stack and choose, or do you just get to draw the top two cards of the stack?

The game makes a fairly clear distinction between "draw" and "choose". This page has the rules in pdf form: http://www.catan.com/service/game-rules

In the rules for the base game, on page 10, under the exchanging a card from your hand portion, you have two options (emphasis added):

  Take a random card. Draw the top card from a draw stack of your choice.

OR

  Select a specific card. Pay any 2 resources of your choice. Choose a draw stack and look at all of its cards. Then take 1 card of your choice from that stack.

The same document describes Game Rules for the Theme Games (starting page 14). Preparation step 4 (page 15) says (again, emphasis added):

  Choosing the Starting Cards. You don't draw your starting cards randomly from a stack like you've done in the Introductory Game. Instead, beginning with the starting player, each player chooses a Basic Set draw stack and selects 3 cards for a starting hand. You may not change the order of the cards in the draw stack.

These are about choosing draw stacks, not cards specifically, but the language appears to be consistent in the expansion. For instance, the Grove of Fraternity says "You may draw 3 cards from any 1 or more draw stacks..." whereas Grove of Freedom says "Choose 1 card from a draw stack..." We've always interpreted "choose" to mean pick a stack, look through it, and take card(s) of your choice.


What happens when a deal is passed out in Duplicate Bridge Tournaments? I understand how duplicate bridge works, but I'm still missing one small conceptual part of the scoring, being the outcome when a deal is passed out. Is the score for that hand just assumed to be 0 for both sides, making it identical to a hand that happened to have a 0 score?

What happens if some tables play the hand and score highly where others just don't play it since they all passed? Are certain measure taken in the creation of the hands to avoid deals that are likely to be passed out?

I understand how duplicate bridge works, but I'm still missing one small conceptual part of the scoring, being the outcome when a deal is passed out. Is the score for that hand just assumed to be 0 for both sides

Yes. Why would there be an exception? Passing out the hand is a perfectly valid way to play it.

  making it identical to a hand that happened to have a 0 score?

There are no other ways to have a 0 (raw) score.

  What happens if some tables play the hand and score highly where others just don't play it since they all passed?

The usual rules for converting score to matchpoints (or team IMPs, if you use those) apply.

  Are certain measure taken in the creation of the hands to avoid deals that are likely to be passed out?

No. It's not a TD's responsibility to speculate on how a hand is likely to be played before play occurs.


Is it better to learn to play bridge by reading about it, or just playing? I'm an avid card player, and I have a particular love for trick-taking games (above all, Hearts and Spades). I've wanted to learn to play bridge for a long time, and I've bought two different books on the subject, but neither really launched me into playing. For experienced players, what is the best way to learn to play bridge, for someone who is already experienced and comfortable in four-person trick-taking games?

Should I just master the most basic rules and then try playing? I find this works well for Hearts and Spades, but I'm not sure that the complexity of Bridge will be as easily acquired.

I think you'd be hard-pushed to learn Bridge just by reading about it.  There are many, many excellent books out there, but until you're sitting down at an actual table it will be hard to visualise what it actually feels like, having only partial information, trying urgently to communicate your hand to your partner despite your opponent continually getting in your way.

Equally, I think it'd be a slow process learning Bridge just by playing it.  Sure, you'll get better and better as the fundamental concepts begin to dawn on you; but Bridge is an immensely subtle and sophisticated game and some of the finest game-playing minds of this and last century have thought about it for millions of hours.  Reading some of the greatest writers on the subject will be a short-cut to ideas and epiphanies that would take you years or decades to stumble across in the course of playing with just the basics under your belt.

So to answer your question, yes I would "just master the most basic rules and then try playing"; but I'd make sure to keep reading more, then playing more, then reading more again!  Bridge is an incredibly deep game, perhaps unequalled in depth by any other game - you could easily spend your life playing it, mastering it, assimilating the ideas of others who have tried to master it.  It's well worth it though - I envy you your journey!


Acing a copy of a unique card that you have in play Say that you have a character or deed in play that does not have the non-unique keyword (which are most dudes and deeds), and another card of the same name in your hand. You would not be able to play this second one because the character is unique. Similarly, if the card on the table is aced, you still cannot play the same card because it is unique.

But what happens if you have a unique card in play and then you try to ace the duplicate in your hand, either intentionally through something like Gomorra Parish, or forcibly through something like This'll Hurt in the Mornin'.

Is this permitted? Does anything happen when you have a dude in play and then a duplicate gets aced to Boot Hill?

Nothing special happens and the unique character in play is permitted to remain in play, despite a duplicate being added to Boot Hill. The uniqueness rule only applies to bringing cards into play, not to cards that are already in play.

  You can put more than one copy in your deck, but you can’t bring a unique card into play if you own another card with the same name that is either already in play or in your Boot Hill. (DTR Rulebook, Page 14 Uniqueness)

This is corroborated by a ruling on the AEG forums.


Must a Boss use their Level Up ability? Most Level Up abilities clearly benefit the Boss, but Robobo's is:

  Each opponent mush choose and destroy one Room in his or her Dungeon.

The opponents get to destroy a room (often quite beneficial), and Robobo doesn't!

Is there any way - short of only building a four room dungeon - that Robobo can avoid using this ability? What play strategies can Robobo use to maximize his Level Up ability?

According to the rules, your boss's "Level Up" ability is triggered when your dungeon is 5 rooms in size. "Triggering" implies necessity. So yes, the only way to avoid levelling up is by not building a fifth room.

Secondly, and more to your concern... according to the Advanced Rules (see the entry for Robobo in the glossary using the link above), using Robobo's level up does not trigger the "destroy this Room" ability for the destroyed room.


Cards granting emblems Are there any spells (sorceries, instants) that grant emblems? The only way to get an emblem that I've seen so far is for a planeswalker's ability to grant an emblem. I wonder if there is any other spell that can be cast to receive an emblem.

No, not at this time.

o:emblem means the Oracle text (rules text) of the card must include the word "Emblem".
-t:planeswalker means the card must not have the type "Planeswalker".

The 18 cards that do mention "Emblem" are all Planeswalkers.


What is the board game played in Houseki no Kuni? I am trying to identify this game from Houseki no Kuni, a buddhism-inspired manga.
My English is so poor I can't describe this game and "google" it.

the bottom picture looks like Go, but with an unusual shape for a board
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go_(game)


Bidding game (simple SAYC) Partner opens 1D -- I respond 1H -- Partner responds with 2D -- (I have 3 spades, 5 hearts, 1 clubs, 4 diamonds, 13 hcp) --> I'm tempted to bid 3NT now. Should I always get to game with me and partner both having opening strength even if we don't have 8-card fit? In essence, what do I bid here?
- Bidding 2H shows 5 hearts, but not game values.
- Bidding 3NT - we and partner might not have both together NT distribution.

A good general principle is that when you have an opening hand and partner opens, you should get to a game.

Partner has advertised a 6+-card diamond suit (some people may rebid 2D with 2353 shape on this auction, but I prefer 2H) and has limited their values (with a good 17-count or better, partner would have a different bid). So you can see that you (probably) don't have an 8-card fit. You don't describe your hand completely, but if you have half a spade stopper or better, 3NT seems like the right place to play. If partner rebids 4D, this is game forcing and suggests some slam interest; it cannot be passed.

If your spades are bad, probably your best rebid is your 4-card club suit; if partner has a spade holding they can rebid 3NT. Rebidding your hearts is not very attractive because you only have 5 of them.


Why it is important to make a delayed raise and not jump directly to 4-lvl? (System: simple SAYC) On responding with 13 pts and 4-card major support why it is important to make a delayed raise (e.g. change suit and only then jump to 4-lvl) and not jump directly to 4-lvl- what added value does it supply to the partnership? What would go wrong if I'd just jump to 4-lvl - would our partnership be deprived in some way?

A common bridge principle for SAYC is to bid up strong hands slowly, but jump to a high bid quickly with weak hands that have long suits or other preemptive features.

In the situation you describe with responder having 13 points, you'll want bidding space to communicate whether or not you should be in game or slam, because opener has promised 13-21 points (and therefore the combined hands have 26-34 points).

If slam is possible, most tables will bid it up slowly and find the right slam contract, while your hasty 4 bid lands you a mere game contract (which will give you the bottom score in duplicate bridge).

Therefore, in SAYC, the jump to 4 of the opener's major response is reserved for a weak bid that typically indicates a small number of points but good shape.

For example, with 6 low trump, a void, and a single Ace for high card points, that would be a perfect hand to jump to the 4 level because:

You have a great chance of making the contract
You may prevent your opponents from exploring game
You would have no interest in exploring slam with such a hand, even
if partner has 20-21 points.


Does an Archetype affect summoning cost effects? If I have say an Archetype of Imagination:

  Creatures you control have flying.

  Creatures your opponents control lose flying and can't have or gain flying.

and a Warden of Evos Isle:

  Creature spells with flying you cast cost 1 less to cast.

Will a card that does not normally have flying receive the cost reduction or do they not gain flying until they reach the battlefield?

No, Archetype of Imagination does not interact with Warden of Evos Isle.

When Archetype, or any other card, refers to "creatures", it means creature permanents. So it does not affect creature cards or creature spells while they are in any other zone besides the battlefield. The relevant rule here is 109.2:

  If a spell or ability uses a description of an object that includes a card type or subtype, but doesn't include the word "card," "spell," "source," or "scheme," it means a permanent of that card type or subtype on the battlefield.


Are there any bridge systems where cards played convey deeper information in a manner similar to bidding systems? Such a system might be too complex for a human to consistently/safely implement, but I am curious if they exist. I am imagining a system where your choice of suit or rank to lead or follow with could convey additional information mid-hand.

For a starter, it is obvious that such signalling only applies on defence - Declarer has no need to communicate with his partner (Dummy), and such communication is anyways illegal. Let's start with the basic defensive systems and progress from there.
 All of these are perfectly legal when fully explained to the opponents (except some of the more complex techniques are restricted in limited-master-point events).

Basic Signals:

Lead highest of touching honours (except King from Ace-King) either at the top of a suit or from an interior broken sequence; fourth-best from length; highest of a doubleton; low to show interest in having the suit lead back and high to deny interest in having the suit lead back; Lead high for partner to rough asking for a higher-ranked side-suit lead back an low to ask for a lower-ranked side-suit lead back.
Follow in trumps high-low on first two rounds to show a 3rd trump and interest in a rough; follow high-low to partner's lead suit to express interest in continuation, low-high to ask for a switch; follow high-low in other suits lead by Declarer to show an even number, low-high to show an odd number; Follow high-low as suit preference for a higher-ranked side-suit and low-high as suit preference for a lower-ranked side-suit.

You will of course notice that many of these are contradictory or ambiguous - that is the cost of asking a very restricted language to convey a rich amount of information. Established partnerships discuss the priority of these signals at great length, but the general gist is (usually): Attitude first; Count once attitude is known; Suit-preference once count is known, or when obligatory. Deciphering that consistently with your partner is one of the most highly rewarded skills in Bridge, as most of your opponents are so very bad at it.
;-)

More complex signals involve adding a mixture of these variations to the basic scheme:

Second-highest from touching honours. Sometimes only at the top; sometimes only from interior sequence (Coded 9's & 10's); sometimes both.
Upside-Down signals - reversing the meaning of high-low and low-high sequences;
Odd-Even signaling - replacing high-low and low-high combinations with the play of either an odd-spot or an even-spot, sometimes combining attitude with suit-preference so that an odd-spot encourages; a low-even spot asks for a lower side-suit switch; and a high-even spot asks for a higher side-suit switch.
Round-the-corner suit preference in place of absolute suit-preference.

That's all I can recall off the top of my head, but I have seen attempts to play even more unusual combinations. Myself, I don't think the benefit is worth the risk of a disaster from misunderstanding.

Update:
With some exceptions, any partnership agreement on the meaning of a legal call made or card played, or sequence of such, that is well explained in advance of the round/match to the opponents is legal. The exceptions generally cover methods deemed too complex, in the context of the competition being held, for the opponents to defend and understand. Generally there are few restrictions in 10-day World Team Championships, and very many in 3 hours novice match-point games.

The section on Carding on each chart of current ACBL Convention Charts explains the defensive carding systems allowed or disallowed for the corresponding class of competitions held under the aegis of the American Contract Bridge League.

Update #2 - Partnership Agreements:

re Duplicate Bridge: see Law 40 in Section 6, pages 48-52 of Laws of Duplicate Bridge
re Contract Bridge: see Laws 16 (page 10) and 40 (page 20); Proprieties Points 2 (page 45) and 4 (page 47) of Laws of Contract Bridge

Update #3: A sample Convention Card (pdf) as approved for ACBL sanctioned events.


In One Night Ultimate Alien, can neutral roles win if the Synthetic Alien dies? If you have a game of ONUA where the Synthetic Alien gets killed, can the Mortician and Blob still win? If the Blob keeps its whole blob alive, and/or if the Synthetic Alien was neighbor to the Mortician, do those roles still win?

As best I can find, this is what the rulebook says for the Synthetic Alien (copied from a BGG thread):

  The Synthetic Alien wakes up with the Aliens. Even though he is an Alien, he has a different winning condition. Due to the self-awareness he is programmed with, he realizes that his advanced technology is too powerful for the aliens to wield, and too dangerous for the villagers to have, so he only wins if he dies. If the Synthetic dies, everyone on the alien and villager teams lose.

Since only the villager and alien teams are named, I would say that the roles not associated with either can still win regardless of what happens with the SA.


Question about following suit A player puts down a red 3 and it is my turn. I have red cards, but I also have a yellow 3. Do I have to keep on following the red suit until I have no more red cards? If so am I then able to start another colour?

According to UNO Rules:

  You have to match either by the number, color, or the symbol/Action. For instance, if the Discard Pile has a red card that is an 8 you have to place either a red card or a card with an 8 on it. You can also play a Wild card (which can alter current color in play)

So you do not necessarily have to continue the color, you may change the color any time you want, even when you still have the cards of the same color as the one on the top of the discard pile.


Do creatures that enter the battlefield at the same time see each other enter? Let's say I have Goldnight Commander on the board. He is a 2/2 that says:

Whenever another creature enters the battlefield under your control, creatures you control get +1/+1 until end of turn.

I play a Thatcher Revolt. It says:

Put three 1/1 red Human creature tokens with haste onto the battlefield. Sacrifice those tokens at the beginning of the next end step.

The sacrifice portion is not important to this question. What is important is how these two cards interact with each other.
Playing this card in my first main phase, assuming no counters or other shenanigans by my opponent, I will have my Commander and 3 tokens on the battlefield. What will happen in terms of the power/toughness of my tokens and Commander?
Option A
The tokens will be 1/1 each. They don't see each other come in at all. The Commander is 3/3, as one "enter the battlefield" trigger happens.
Option B
The tokens will be 1/1. They don't see each other come in at all, because they weren't on the battlefield to see any of the triggers. The Commander is 5/5, as he saw three "enter the battlefield" triggers occur.
Option C
The tokens will all be different, with one being 3/3 as he saw the other two come in, one being 2/2 as he saw only the last one come in, and 1/1 as the last one saw none come in.
Option D
The tokens will all be 4/4, as three creatures entered the battlefield this turn.
I am obviously hoping for this option. It may be supported by a ruling on Goldnight Commander that says, emphasis mine:

The creature that entered the battlefield will also get +1/+1 until end of turn if it's still on the battlefield when the ability resolves.

The key being the ability resolving. So my thought is thus:

Thatcher Revolt goes on the stack.
Thatcher Revolt resolves, and three separate "enter the battlefield" triggers go on the stack as the three humans enter the battlefield as 1/1.
The last (it is a stack) "etb" trigger resolves. This puts an ability from Goldnight Commander on the stack. This resolves and the humans are now all 2/2.
The next "etb" trigger resolves. This puts a new ability from Commander on the stack, and resolves with the humans being 3/3.
The first "etb" trigger finally resolves, puts a Command ability on the stack, which resolves putting the humans at their final state of 4/4.

Option E
The tokens will all be 2/2.

Thatcher Revolt goes on the stack.
Thatcher Revolt resolves, and one single "enter the battlefield" trigger goes on the stack.
The "etb" trigger resolves. This puts an ability from Goldnight Commander on the stack. This resolves and the humans are now all 2/2.

I would really like to have a complete understanding both of the result and how this result is calculated by the game engine.

Summary: Option D is spot on. All three of your 1/1 are now 4/4 until end of turn (and your Commander is 5/5 until end of turn).

The question has nothing to do with whether the tokens see each other enter the battlefield or not.* It's about how many creatures are on the battlefield when each of the triggered abilities resolve.

The game unrolls as follows, starting with Thatcher Revolt's resolution:

Thatcher Revolt places three creatures on the battlefield simultaneously. Goldnight Commander's ability triggers three times. [CR 603.2][CR 603.2c]
As a player is about to receive priority, you place Goldnight Commander's ability on the stack three times. [CR 603.3]
The third instance of Goldnight Commander's ability resolves: Creatures you control get +1/+1 until end of turn.
The second instance of Goldnight Commander's ability resolves: Creatures you control get +1/+1 until end of turn.
The first instance of Goldnight Commander's ability resolves: Creatures you control get +1/+1 until end of turn.

Three continuous effects were created by a triggered ability. They will only affect the creatures that existed when the abilities resolved [CR 611.2c], but all three of the 1/1s were on the battlefield when they resolved.

So all three of your 1/1 are now 4/4 until end of turn (and your Commander is 5/5 until end of turn).

* — To answer your title question, yes. If you had two creatures with a triggered ability such as "When another creature enters the battlefield, ...", they would see each other entering the battlefield. This is codified by CR 603.6d: "Normally, objects that exist immediately after an event are checked to see if the event matched any trigger conditions. [...]"

For example, if two Goldnight Commander entered the battlefield simultaneously, both of their abilities would trigger [CR 603.6d], and both would end up getting +2/+2 until end of turn.


Can you move your keeper with creepers using the teleport card? In Star Fluxx, can you move your keeper with creeper(s) attached to another player using Teleporter card?

The Evil, Malfunction and Brain Parasites creepers say "Both cards stay together until discarded". This clearly means you can only move the keeper with the attached creeper.


In Magic, is the player going first advantaged? It seems to me that the player going first has a considerable advantage in the game.

How does the game balance that out for the player going second?

I'm new to the game, there might be something I'm missing.

The game balances first player advantage because the start player does not draw a card at the beginning of his first turn, but the second player does draw a card during his first turn.

The rule that says it is this one:

  103.7a In a two-player game, the player who plays first skips the draw step (see rule 504, “Draw Step”) of his or her first turn.

While this does balance the game somewhat, this article by Florian Koch shows that the start player still has a small statistical advantage. Koch points out that other factors could influence the results, including the skill level of the players and the decks being played (including knowledge of what deck your opponent is playing).

In case you didn't know, if you win the coin toss (or dice roll) it doesn't mean you have to begin, it means you decide whether you want to begin. There are players who actually don't want to begin; some decks prefer the extra card instead of the turn advantage.