In reversi, can you overwrite two chips in one move? In Reversi if you have a line of chips --xxxy--, you can place another x in the 5th position and overwrite the y you for sure can get the line --xxxxx- (where x is light, y is dark, and - is empty, line may be horizontal, vertical or main diagonal).

Can you do the same if the line contains one (or more) enemy chip in between? If you for example have -xxyxyx-, can you get -xxxxxxx?

No. From the Rules of Play:

  Each piece played must be laid adjacent to an opponent's piece

  so that the opponent's piece or a row of opponent's pieces is flanked by the new piece and another piece of the player's colour.

  All of the opponent's pieces between these two pieces are 'captured' and turned over to match the player's colour.

where I have split up and numbered the clauses of the paragraph for easier reference.

Note that:

from (1), the suggested move is illegal, not being adjacent to an opposing piece;
even if one is playing to make -xxyxy-- into -xxyxyx-, by (3) only the second 'y' is flipped, resulting in -xxyxxx- upon completion of the move; and
playing to make -xxxyy-- into -xxxyyx- does convert multiple opposing counters, by (2) and (3), flipping to yield -xxxxxx- upon completion of the move.

Reason:

"All of the opponent's pieces between the these two pieces [(the just placed piece and the enabling friendly piece at the far end of the just surrounded enemy row of pieces)] are 'captured' and turned over to match the player's colour."


Catan Junior: When drawing the "pirate ghost" Coco (parrot) card to move the ghost, do you recieve resources? The rules for Catan Junior, for the "Coco" card with the Ghost Captain state:

  Move the Ghost Captain as if you had rolled a ‘6’

The description of rolling a 6 says you move the ghost captain and take 2 resources.  Do you take resources when moving the captain in that case?

Its not clear from the wording for the Coco card whether you should take two resources as you normally would with the ghost.

If you do take resources there is almost no downside to building Coco cards.

(Sorry about the incorrect tag - I just joined, so I couldn't create a catan-junior tag)

We just got this game for our daughter for Christmas and have only played it once. Just as with regular settlers, there is no downside to building development cards so I would say there is no downside to building Coco cards as well. The description says

  You move the ghost captain and take 2 resources.

Then move the ghost captain and take the two resources. I believe the inclusion of

  as if you had rolled a ‘6’

is where the implication of taking the two resource cards comes in. It would be the same as playing a knight in Settlers. You still move the robber and take a resource from another player.


If the Warlord destroys a player's eighth district, does the game still end? In Citadels, if the Warlord destroys a player's eighth district, assuming no other players have eight districts, does the game still end at the end of the round?

If so, does that player still get the "first to build eight districts" bonus points?

What if on the last round, Alfred finishes eight districts, Betty finishes eight districts, and Charlie Warlords one of Alfred's districts.  Who gets what bonus points here?  Alfred was the first to build eight districts, but does not have eight districts at the end.

I believe the Warlord is not allowed to destroy a building if that person already has 8 built.


Playing Nope on a Double Slap after it has been played If a person plays Double Slap on me, can I use the triple card combo to steal someone else's Nope card, then play that Nope card on the Double Slap to avoid drawing?

Nope. You can't do that.

The rules (under the section on Nope) specifically state that:

  You can play a Nope Card at any time before an action has begun, even if it’s not your turn.

As soon as you begin your first turn as a result of the Double Slap then you are accepting that the Double Slap card is in effect.

The only way the Double Slap could be negated is if you, or another player, played a Nope card directly on it before you start your first turn that results from the Double Slap.


MTG: What set is Seelenruhe (Tranquility in German) from? I recently picked Magic: The Gathering back up after a 15 year lapse. Currently making my way through what seems like a thousand cards from my childhood and entering them into a card database at DeckBox. I happened upon a German card by the name of Seelenruhe and I'm trying to figure out what set/edition this card is from.

I Google searched and found that seelenruhe means tranquillity in German. An image search, via Google, gave me an image of the same Seelenruhe that I have (plus a Jolly Roger added in?).

However, the image is from an Ebay account that is no longer hosting the image or product, and the Ebay website is written in what I think is German, which I can't read. Therefore, I can't figure anything out about the set/edition this card comes from.

Do cards written in a language other than English, belong to a set different than their English counterpart's set?

- Other Research -

According to CardKingdom, Seelenruhe most resembles Tranquility from the following sets/editions: Alpha - Beta - Collectors Edition - Collectors Edition International
Following How can I tell the difference between early Magic: The Gathering card editions?

    Black Border -> No Right-Side Center Symbol -> Corner Curve Sharpness?
        Sloped -> Alpha
        Sharp -> Not Titled "Reconstruction" -> Beta

This card is a Revised German Tranquility. For English sets without a set symbol only Alpha and Beta have black borders. But when Magic started out whenever a Core set was printed for the first time in a language it had black borders. The first printing of German Magic cards was Revised Edition, Strangely it seems that German Revised had at least 2 printings, one in black border and one in white.

Reference: Revised German Tranquility on Scryfall


Is this improvised card game is a known game? I'm looking for the name of the improvised card game for two players with the following rules:

Each player gets 13 cards numbered from 1 to 13 (These could also be from Ace to King).
Both players play a card and place it upside down on the middle of the table, and then turn their cards. The player with the higher number wins the round and scores one point. If the values are equal, no one scores a point. The player with the most points at the end of the game wins.

I have tried searching by description (''card game the card with the higher number wins''), but without success.

Since players choose their next card it is a variant of Colonel Blotto game (unlike in War where players just pick the top card in their deck).

  In Colonel Blotto, players are tasked to simultaneously distribute limited resources over several battlefields. The player devoting the most resources to a battlefield wins that battlefield.  The player that won the most battlefields wins the game.

In your variant, players contest over 13 battlefields. Each side poses 1+2+...+13=91 resources (armies), however they must assign the resources to battlefields in set amounts (the value of cards).


Diplomacy Support Question? In the Diplomacy board game, can player A issue a support order for a player B unit? Let's say player B has a hold order for his unit. Can player A use that unit for support in an attack? Basically, at any point under any circumstance can I "commandeer" an opponents unit to support my own attack, and in essence cut that support if he is also using it in an attack?

No, you can only give orders for your own units.

The first sentence of paragraph 2, "Order writing phase" in the rules is, emphasis mine,

  Each player secretly writes "orders" for each of his/her own units on a slip of paper.


Losing points for partially completed destination tickets in Ticket to Ride I have the game Ticket to Ride: Europe and I'm a little confused about the points for destination tickets. I read somewhere that if you don't start to complete one of your destination tickets, at the end you don't lose any points. Not sure if this rule it's real, but if it is...

Let's say that I have done these 2 tickets: Frankfurt-Wilno, Danzig-Kiev and I have one more route from Wilno-Athina. Does the last one count as unfinished or does it count as not started?

I consider it started because it goes from Wilno to Kyiv and from there you can continue towards Bucharest-Sofia-Athina.

So, if you can clear things up.
What's the deal with the unfinished and not started tickets?

There's no such thing as a ticket that's "started" vs "not started". Unless it refers to the act of taking the ticket. When you take a ticket, you must complete that route, or lose points for not having completed it. It doesn't matter if you've touched those cities with any trains or not.


Does an enchantment ability that gives -1/-1 to opponent creatures resolve before other abilities can be used on a 1/1 entering the battlefield So I control an Ethereal Absolution that gives all opponents creatures -1/-1.  On my opponents turn he sacrifices a creature to create two 1/1 white token spirits.  He then wants to sacrifice these using an ability on another card (Teysa Orzhov Scion).

My question is does the enchantment resolve first and remove the 1/1 tokens, e.g. as completion of them entering the battle field, and, before his ability can be triggered, or as he is the active player he gets to decide the order?

Your opponent cannot sacrifice them before they die. The -1/-1 ability is a static ability. It is always in effect, does not use the stack, and will kill off all */1 creatures before anyone can interact with them.

A static ability such as "Creatures your opponents control get -1/-1." is always in effect:

  604.1. Static abilities do something all the time rather than being activated or triggered. They are written as statements, and they’re simply true.

That means creatures this applies to enter the battlefield with the -1/-1 effect. The game never sees a 1/1 creature, it enters as a 0/0. As soon as the spell or effect that put that creature on the battlefield has resolved, the game checks for state-based actions (A set of rules that is checked almost all the time), because the active player would gain priority (the right to take actions).

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

  116.5. Each time a player would get priority, the game first performs all applicable state-based actions as a single event (see rule 704, “State-Based Actions”),[..]

  704.5. The state-based actions are as follows:

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


Can the factory card 'move' action cause combat? I've just bought Scythe and I'm looking for the rules.

I'm wanting a clarification on the Factory cards.

The rules tell me that these are essentially a fifth action space,and that each of them have a 'move one unit two spaces' as a bottom row action.

I'm wondering about how we deal with this with the 'overlap the turns' suggestion.

ie. The rules also suggest that, in order to improve game flow, that as a player is taking their bottom row action, the next player can start taking their top row action.

Given that for the ordinary actions, the bottom row actions aren't going to change anything on the board (actually, not quite true, the build action will add structures to the board), this overlap doesn't matter.

However, with two move actions overlapping, it would create a great deal of confusion.

To clarify:

Just how should the 'overlapping turns' dyanmic work?
Does the factory move order result in combat and encounters?

Yes, in Scythe every move order can result in a combat and encounters: it's clearly stated in the manual, by the fact that there is no text at all saying that the move from the factory must be considered different from any other move.

  The rules also suggest that, in order to improve game flow, that as a
  player is taking their bottom row action, the next player can start
  taking their top row action.

"Suggest", "in order to improve" is way different from "state that it's mandatory to". Feel like it's not working for you? Don't do it.

  However, with two move actions overlapping, it would create a great deal of confusion.

Then avoid overlapping the two moves. If you get confused by a simple suggestion, then you need to know the game better. To be able to improve the flow of the game in respect no normal playing, you first need to know how to play the game normally -this applies to Scythe the same way it applies to Yatzhee the same it applies to Bunny Kingdom, where after a while you've played it you realise you can skip an entire turn. How many time have you played it already?

  Just how should the 'overlapping turns' dynamic work?

The "overlapping turns" dynamic works exactly as stated in the rules:

  in order to improve game flow, that as a player is taking their bottom row action, the next player can start taking their top row action.

So, while a player is taking their bottom line action, the next player can begin taking their top row action. If it creates any kind of confusion, don't do it. If the next player thinks he wants to wait before taking his top row action, he can wait. And if the current player and the next player fail to realize something so obvious as the consequence of doing two overlapping moves and end up in a mess, then they need to play the game a few times more. Or maybe trying to play something simpler.


Does "Destroy all creatures with power 4 or greater" also affect *my* creatures? Does "Destroy all creatures with power 4 or greater" also affect my creatures? I have a planeswalker card that has this ability; will it also kill my creatures? Also, this only affects creatures on the battlefield, not in players' hands, right?

It will destroy your creatures as well. Just read the card literally. There's nothing there to imply that your creatures would be excluded. As for players' hands, the word "creature" by default means "a creature card or token on the battlefield." You cannot have a "creature" in your hand, you can only have a "creature card" in your hand. Finally, note that "destroy" would have no meaning when used on a card in your hand, it would have to say "discard" to remove a card from your hand.


If they counter my Goblin Grenade, do I still lose my goblin? If they use a Counter Spell or some other similar way to counter my Goblin Grenade do I still lose the sacrificed goblin?

Yes. This is pretty obvious if you remember that, like the card says, sacrificing the goblin is an additional cost. It's like paying mana for a spell - and you don't get mana back if someone counters one of your spells.

If you want to read the comp rules, casting spells is section 601.1. Paying the cost for a spell is 601.2g; the spell becomes cast after that in 601.2h. At that point, it's on the stack and your opponent has a chance to counter it. When they do, the costs are already paid (your goblin is dead and your mana is spent).


Devoured while lost in time and space One of our investigators I1 was lost in time and space. Then, another investigator I2 got a dark pact triggered, and the effect was "Another investigator of your choice is devoured".

1) Can I1 be targeted by I2's dark pact effect?

2) If 1), would I2 actually be devoured? The text says that an investigator lost in time and space cannot be affected by anything.

We reason two things:

a) the wording means that I2 could be targeted but not affected by the devouring

b) given the general theme and the unspoken rule that "if there are various interpretations of a rule in a cooperative game, choose the least helpful", it feels like a loophole that breaks the rules. Therefore, we chose another investigator to be devoured

We chose b). Did we choose "right"?

I think that you are right because of the unspoken rule of cooperative games. I could not find anything in the erratas apart from a reference to "move".

  You are unaffected by other game effects […]

This does imply that the investigator cannot have any effects at all. So they cannot be a target for anything at all: spells, Dark Pacts, etc…

This is again implied by the errata, although it refers to "moves" and not other specific effects.

  Q. Can an investigator with a Lost in Time and Space Condition
  be moved by another investigator using the Plumb the Void Spell?

  A. No. If an effect states that an investigator cannot move,
  such as a Lost in Time and Space Condition or a Detained
  Condition, that investigator cannot move on his own nor can
  he be moved by any effect.


Can you untap an attacking creature to use its ability at the end of declare blockers? Looking at this question and this question, it seems like I can activate abilities after blockers are declared (and before damage is assigned).

So if I'm attacking with Scourge of Skola Vale, can I untap it (say with Kiora's Follower) then tap it and sacrifice a creature to pump it with +1/+1 counters, thus doing extra damage?

Would this also work if I'd given it vigilance before declaring the attack?

Yes you can.

The combat phase consists of five steps:

beginning of combat
declare attackers
declare blockers
combat damage
end of combat

In each of these steps players get priority and can cast instants or activate abilities. In the declare blockers step the first thing you do is declaring the blockers. It is after this that each player gets priority and can do stuff. And this is before the combat damage step


What's the etymology of the term "rez" in the Netrunner games? In the Netrunner games, "rezzing" a card is the act of revealing and paying for it when you're playing as the Corporation (in the new LCG anyway; I'm not familiar with the original CCG, but I believe it's the same).

The games take a great deal of inspiration from real computing terms for all of their "keywords" but this isn't one I'm familiar with. It must be short for something: "resurrect" is the best I can come up with, but doesn't really make literal sense since you're playing something for the first time. What's the origin of the term?

It is short for "resolve", and derez is short for "deresolve". I have seen the terms several times in cyberpunk fiction; the earliest use I can find is Tron (1982).

Here are some quotes from IMDB. Note that the MCP uses the term "deresolution" when being formal, and the anthropomorphic programs use "de-rezzed" to mean the same thing.


Hexproof and the stack I have a 1/1 Kitesail Scout and use a +1/+1 pump spell to make it a 2/2. My opponent casts a Fiery Temper to deal 3 damage to it. I respond with Blossoming Defense for +2/+2 and Hexproof, he responds with Murder.

Does the Kitesail Scout die?

I know the last in first out stack rule, but didn't my Kitesail have Hexproof, so therefore his Murder could not be cast as the Kitesail was no longer a legal target?

With only a few exceptions, spells only have an effect once they resolve.
Just like you can cast Blossoming Defense in response to their Fiery Temper to save your creature before it would be killed, your opponent can respond to your Blossoming Defense by casting Murder to kill your creature before it's being protected.
Your 2/2 Kitesail Scout will be destroyed by Murder. Blossoming Defense and Fiery Temper will be countered by the game rules for not having any legal targets when they would resolve

608. 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. (...) The spell or ability is countered if all its targets, for every instance of the word “target,” are now illegal. (...)
608.2c. The controller of the spell or ability follows its instructions in the order written. (...)

If instead your opponent allowed Blossoming Defense to resolve and didn't cast Murder in response to it, the Kitesail Scout would indeed be an illegal target for the spell and therefore couldn't be cast.

601. Casting Spells
601.2. To cast a spell is to take it from where it is (usually the hand), put it on the stack, and pay its costs, so that it will eventually resolve and have its effect. Casting a spell includes proposal of the spell (rules 601.2a–d) and (...). To cast a spell, a player follows the steps listed below, in order. (...) If, at any point during the casting of a spell, a player is unable to comply with any of the steps listed below, the casting of the spell is illegal; the game returns to the moment before the casting of that spell was proposed (see rule 720, “Handling Illegal Actions”).
601.2c. The player announces his or her choice of an appropriate player, object, or zone for each target the spell requires. (...) The chosen players, objects, and/or zones each become a target of that spell. (...)


Does having protection from Grapeshot work against the storm copies? Do storm copies have the same name as the original card? If you name Grapeshot with Runed Halo, do you have protection from the copies as well?

I remember back in the day you could not have protection from faerie rogue tokens because they where not cards and was wondering if it is the same with storm copies.

Yes, they have the same name, so you have protection from them.

702.39a Storm is a triggered ability that functions on the stack. “Storm” means “When you cast this spell, copy it for each other spell that was cast before it this turn. If the spell has any targets, you may choose new targets for any of the copies.”
706.1. Some objects become or turn another object into a “copy” of a spell, permanent, or card.
706.2. When copying an object, the copy acquires the copiable values of the original object’s characteristics and, for an object on the stack, choices made when casting or activating it (mode, targets, the value of X, whether it was kicked, how it will affect multiple targets, and so on). The “copiable values” are the values derived from the text printed on the object (that text being name, mana cost, color indicator, card type, subtype, supertype, rules text, power, toughness, and/or loyalty), as modified by other copy effects, by its face-down status, and by “as . . . enters the battlefield” and “as . . . is turned face up” abilities that set power and toughness (and may also set additional characteristics). Other effects (including type-changing and text-changing effects), status, and counters are not copied.

(emphasis mine)
IIRC the Faerie Rogue example you mention didn't work because there is no card named "Faerie Rogue" so it's not a legal choice for Runed Halo's "choose a card name".


How can I create my own card for my own game? I've created a set of rules for a card game I would like to test, but I have no clue on how to build my nice-looking cards.
Any hint on what program/site to use is very welcome.

There are multiple prices of software that do this. A good list is available at http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/991506/resources-card-game-makers but rather than repeat those I'll say that beyond using something like illustrator and drafting you're own one by one looking up custom card makers for whichever game had the closet format to yours and creating your own.


Can I play two instants back to back? Basically lets say I attack with Triton Shorestalker. My opponent can't block. Can I then play Become Immense and Titanic Growth?

Or if I attack with a creature that can be blocked and my opponent chooses not to can I then play Become Immense and Titanic Growth?

Yes, you can. There's no limit to the number of instants you can cast, other than having the mana available to pay for them. Is there anything in particular that made you think such a limit would exist? If you haven't done so, check out the basic rule book.

For your second question, yes, at the end of the "declare blockers step", in which your opponent will have decided whether or not to block, each player then gets a chance to cast instants or activate abilities.

From the basic rulebook:

  An instant is just like a sorcery, except you can cast it just about any time you want,
  even during your opponent’s turn or in response to another spell. Like a sorcery, an
  instant has its effect, then you put it into your graveyard.

And

  Your opponent decides which, if any, of his or her
  untapped creatures will block your attacking creatures,
  then they do so. If multiple creatures block a single
  attacker, you order the blockers to show which is first
  in line for damage, which is second, and so on. Players
  can then cast instants and activate abilities.

Note that there are 2 ways to cast 2 instants during the same step:

You can cast the instants one at a time, waiting to cast the second until after the first resolves. Most commonly this is smarter, because you can see what your opponent does before deciding to cast the second one.
Or:
You can cast the second instant immediately after casting the first, in which case the second one you cast will resolve first. If you wish to do this, then you must state as you cast the first instant that you wish to retain priority, otherwise you are assumed to be passing it after casting the instant. You would need to do this if, for example, you wanted to cast Fork, targeting your first instant.


Quantum Predictive Model Questions I have two questions about the NBN agenda Quantum Predictive Model, its text reads: If Quantum Predictive Model is accessed from R&D, the Runner must reveal it.
If the Runner is tagged when Quantum Predictive Model is accessed, add it to your score area.

The first is this: If the runner is tagged and has Film Critic (Relevent text: Whenever you access an agenda, you may host that agenda on Film Critic (the agenda is no longer being accessed and is uninstalled)). installed and then they access QPM, who gets the agenda?

My second question: If QPM is installed by Casting Call (text: Install an agenda from HQ faceup and install Casting Call on that agenda as a hosted condition counter with text "Whenever the Runner accesses this agenda, he or she takes 2 tags.") and the runner accesses it, who gets the agenda?

The important rule here is that when multiple triggers happen off the same event the active player's triggers happen first. And a player gets to choose the order in which effects they control happen.
With that in mind...
The first question depends on whose turn it is when the runner accesses QPM.
During runner's turn the runner would be able to place QPM on Film Critic. Since both cards have the same trigger - "when accessed" - the person who's turn it is goes first, so Film Critic would take priority.
However, if the runner somehow accessed QPM while tagged on the corps turn (such as with An Offer You Can't Refuse) then the corp would score it, because on the corps turn QPM would take priority.
The second question the corp gets to choose who gets the agenda.
Since both Casting Call and QPM have the same trigger of "when accessed" and both are controlled by the corp, the corp player chooses the order of resolution. Most corps would pick Casting Call to resolve first, giving the runner tags and then resolving QPM to give themselves the point. However, there are a few situations where the corp might want to let the runner steal it, (such as landing Midseasons) in which case they let QPM resolve first and give the runner the point.
The runner would steal QPM as they are not tagged at the time of access.
Per the FAQ :

Question: If a Runner with no tags accesses a Quantum Predictive Model that hosts Casting Call, does the Corp score the Quantum Predictive Model?
Answer: No. The Quantum Predictive Model does not resolve if the Runner is not tagged when the access occurs.


How do I score this field in Carcassonne? Me and a friend were playing Carcassonne earlier and weren't quite sure how to score this field. Does it have 3 or 4 cities in it? Not sure if all 3 meet at the same point and therefore all 3 are in the field or not.

According to the rules:

  Each field is worth 3 points per adjacent completed city.

So the city must share a line with the field. It does this for three of the cities. The small vertical city is adjacent to two fields which does not connect to the field with the red meeple, so this one does not count.


Othello on a non-square board? Many games - such as Othello, Checkers, Chess1, and Go - are played on highly-regular, square boards.

How would the game mechanic change if you played an Othello-like game on, say, a Chinese Checkers board?

All other rules being equal - ie you can only flip in direct vectors from the piece played - would this be likely to be a viable game-play mechanic?

1 excluding variants such as Chess4

As long as the grid is even, Othello should play just fine, provided you change the staring cluster.

 . . . .
. . B W .
 . B W B .
. . W B .

should do, with white moving first...


MTG instant "Expedite" - can I resolve second spell ability if I cannot resolve the first? The instant, Expedite says the following:

  Target creature gains haste until end of turn.

  Draw a card.

If there are no creatures on the battlefield (or at least none under my control), am I required to resolve the first ability in order to resolve the second?

If there are no creatures on the battlefield, you cannot cast the spell at all. You need to choose all of the specified targets to cast a spell. If the only creatures on the battlefield are under other players' control, you can cast the spell targeting one of those creatures. If you do, that creature will gain haste until end of turn and you will draw a card. The downside of doing that can be mitigated by casting the spell after combat or targeting a creature that would not benefit from haste.

If you cast the spell and the targeted creature no longer exists when the spell begins to resolve, the spell will go directly to the graveyard and you will not resolve any of its abilities. This is not because of resolving the spell's abilities in order, but rather a rule about spells with targets.


How important is memorizing chess openings in casual play? I've played chess since I was kid and after much practice have become a decent player.  I still though, have little strategy to my opening moves besides starting with a King's Pawn Game.  I know professional players and grandmasters have a large repertoire of openings they know.  They also know a large number of responses to those openings.  How important is knowing different openings when playing chess casually?

Its far better to thoroughly understand a small number of openings than it is to mindlessly memorize a large number of openings.  Frequently, if you know why a set of moves is considered optimal, then you're in a better position to adapt once the board gets "off the opening".  However, if you have a wide set of openings memorized, you may find that while you are moving down your 'optimal opening', ready to transition to a strong midgame, your opponent may have other plans, and make a move that takes him off your chosen opening.

Now frequently, there's a good reason why that move is not covered by your opening chart;  that move may be terrible.  But if you don't understand why that move is terrible, then you may not be able to take advantage of it, and if the other player improvises better/faster than you, you may find yourself at a disadvantage despite your 'superior' play to this point in time.

Don't let that happen to you.


What are the rules of the mysterious game with "phát tài" written on the box? I bought this game in a small grocery store in Vietnam. I've asked several Vietnamese people of various age if they know the game. Usually, they knew the game but didn't know the rules.

My questions are:

What is the name of this game?
What are the rules of this mysterious game?

These are the photographs of the game itself. Perhaps they'll help you to identify the game and provide me with a set of rules.

Box

The box is not big. It has some Vietnamese words on it:

The title is: phát tài
The text on the top of the box is: chính hiệu cao cáp; dề phòng giả mạo
The words in the four octagons between two children on the side of the box are:

cung
hỉ
phát
tài

Content of the Box

There are ten matchboxes inside the main box - a half of them is green and the second half is red.

The Vietnamese words on the matchboxes are:

phát tài on one side of the matchbox;
thuận thiên on the other side;
thuận thiên on the bottom.

￼

Inside the matchbox

Every matchbox has 4 sets of 28 cards of different colors: green, red, white and yellow.

It is written phát tài on the back of every card.

Note: To view the images in a higher resolution, just remove the last m character from the link to imgur. For example change http://i.stack.imgur.com/H1vKVm.jpg to http://i.stack.imgur.com/H1vKV.jpg.

Your game is probably related to Four Color Cards (Tứ sắc in Vietnam) since it uses similar very narrow cards in those colors.


Can someone fully explain link summoning? Can someone explain the new rules that Konami is planning for yugioh on link summoning and how it relates to the rest of the game? Also, when are they planning to make the rules an official mechanic to the game?

Let's see...

Short answer

Link Summoning is the act of using monsters you control as Link Materials, to summon a Link Monster from your Extra Deck.  It's basically Contact Fusion mk.2.

Long answer

Link Summoning is the act of using monsters on your side of the field as Link Materials, for the Link Summon of a Link Monster in your Extra Deck; these Link Materials are sent to the Graveyard, just like tributes, Fusion Materials, and Synchro Materials.

The number of Link Materials that must be used is equal to the summoned monster's Link Number (i.e., a Link 2 monster needs 2 materials, and a Link 4 monster needs 4 materials); if a Link Monster is used as a Link Material, you can use it as a number of monsters equal to its Link Number, but this isn't required (i.e., a Link N monster can count as either 1 material or N materials for a Link Summon).  Link Monsters can also specify a number of required materials (e.g., Decode Talker requires 2+ monsters), along with other qualities such as types or attributes (e.g., "Decode Talker" requires Effect monsters), all of which must be met (e.g., since "Decode Talker" requires 2+ Effect Monsters, it cannot be summoned using another Link 3 monster as the sole material, even though that would satisfy the Link Number requirement).

This Link Monster, due to residing in the Extra Deck, must be summoned to an Extra Monster Zone (the two in the middle of the field, between both players' sides).  If there are already one or more Link Monster(s) on the field, and one or more of their Link Markers point to one of your Main Monster Zones (the original five, on your side of the field), then that pointed-to zone(s) is a Link Point(s), and can be treated as an Extra Monster Zone when summoning from the Extra Deck.

To my knowledge, those are the only rules specifically regarding Link Summoning.  Related rules would be the rules regarding Link Monsters themselves (such as that they're unaffected by effects that change Battle Position, or anything regarding Link Markers), and rules regarding Extra Monster Zones and Main Monster Zones (as mentioned in the final paragraph, above).


What are good standard strategies for Carcassonne ? I've only just discovered Carcassonne (thanks to the iPhone app), but I keep losing (in 3-player games).

Which standard strategies are there? (game without extensions, 3-4 players).

One strategy per answer please.

Strand your opponents Meeples

When you place a piece, of course try to make it advantageous to yourself.  But if you can, place it to hinder your opponent.  If he is trying to complete a city and you weren't able to figure out a way to share it, then place a tile next to the potential closing piece.  This will limit his options.  By slowing down the rate that his meeples return you will gain an advantage.

Often times, it is possible to leave an empty space that no tile can be placed in.  If your opponent has an unfinished city or road that connects to that empty space then his meeple will not be returning to his hand and will generate a sub-standard score.

There are 2 main empty squares that cannot be filled using pieces from only the base set.

There is no tile containing 1 road, 1 city, and 2 field sides.
There is no tile containing 1 road, 2 city, and 1 field sides.

With a little practice it is pretty easy to get this to work against even moderately experienced players.  I played a game online recently that followed this general sequence

My opponent had a couple pieces towards a city
I played a city tile with a meeple to try to encourage sharing the city.
He played another city+meeple to defend and was able to connect his 2 before I could share
I was able to complete my city while surrounding an empty square, making it unplayable.
As a bonus, he also had an unfinished road running into the empty square.

My opponent had 3 meeples stranded and it we were only 1/3rd of the way through the game!  He stood no chance to win the game at that point.


How does casting a Storm spell on Zada, Hedron Grinder work? Related Question: How does each copy of a spell cast to Zada, Hedron Grinder count towards Storm abilities?

If I cast a storm spell that targets only Zada, Hedron Grinder (like Astral Steel) then I will have a copy of it for each of my creatures. However, If spells had already been cast this turn, then I will have more than one copy of the Storm Spell, a nd I could have each copy target Zada. Would the additional copies of the storm spell also trigger Zada's ability, thus giving me more than one copy of the spell per creature?

Zada only makes copies of the original Storm spell, not the copies that it makes.

Zada has the text

  Whenever you cast an instant or sorcery spell that targets only Zada, Hedron Grinder, copy that spell for each other creature you control that the spell could target. Each copy targets a different one of those creatures.

And the definition of Storm says

  Storm is a triggered ability that functions on the stack. “Storm” means “When you cast this spell, put a copy of it onto the stack for each other spell that was cast before it this turn. If the spell has any targets, you may choose new targets for any of the copies.”

The copies of the spell that storm creates are put onto the stack, not cast, so Zada's ability does not trigger when that happens. So, Zada only makes copies of the original spell that you cast.


What is the name of this Rummy variant? It's called Devil's Delight by the people I know but I can't find any google results for it. Does any one know what people call this?

The game is played with two decks and everyone gets seven cards passed to them. Then the deck is put into the middle of the table with the first card placed up. The person after the dealer takes the first turn.

EDIT: At the start of a turn, a player is passed a card from the previous player. They can either take the card, or pass it to the next person who must pick it up along with another card. Then you must discard a card, and the next person can either pick it up or pass.

The goal of the game is to make sets and runs depending on the round. First round is three sets, next round is one run with two sets, the round after that is two runs etc. Twos are wild and can be played anywhere. After you get your required sets and runs you can put them on the table (go down). Once you do you can play on other players who are down and take their 2s that are down. Also, sets are three cards and runs are four cards of the same suit. One hand has a seven card run in it.

The round ends when someone has no cards in their hand. Then players add up their cards which turn into points. number cards (3 through 9) is 5 points, 10 and any face card is 10 points, an A is 15 points and a 2 is 30 points. The player with the lowest score at the end of seven rounds wins.

It's just one of many forms of a class of games called Contract Rummy. (The various rounds' goals are called contracts).

The major variation here seems to be:

The discard (or rather lack of discard): I guess by your description (since one cannot make three sets with only seven cards) that players just draw a card each turn and are not required (or permitted) to discard, but rather can only play melds and lay off on other melds.

See more common versions at, for example, http://www.rummy-games.com/rules/contract-rummy.html


Kathril, Aspect Warper and his ability's "targets" I have a question regarding Kathril, Aspect Warper's ability. The ability is as follows:

When Kathril, Aspect Warper enters the battlefield, put a flying counter on any creature you control if a creature card in your graveyard has flying. Repeat this process for first strike, double strike, deathtouch, hexproof, indestructible, lifelink, menace, reach, trample, and vigilance. Then put a +1/+1 counter on Kathril for each counter put on a creature this way.

Now, as I understand it, this ability is a triggered ability that is put on the stack when Kathril enters the battlefield (so the spell "Kathril, Aspect Warper" has resolved). This means any player can immediately react to this trigger, before it has resolved. This has led to some confusing situations regarding the creatures that receive a counter.
The part that confuses me is this:

put a flying counter on any creature you control

According to rule 115. Targets:

115.1d A triggered ability is targeted if it identifies something it will affect by using the phrase “target [something],” where the
“something” is a phrase that describes an object and/or player. The
target(s) are chosen as the ability is put on the stack; see rule
603.3d.

This is not a target-ability since it does not state "target [something]".

So what is this ability then?
Do I need to specify targets as soon as the ability is put on the stack?
Can the chosen creatures be changed by something like Willbender?
Is there even a moment opponents gain priority between Kathril entering the battlefield, en putting counters on creatures?

Question 2, 3 and 4 matter quite a lot when you want to make Kathril hex-proof and indestructible, but an opponents wants to remove Kathril before the trigger resolves.
Any info or relevant rules would be greatly appreciated.

Your general understanding is correct; this ability does not target, because it doesn't use the word "target". It IS still a normal triggered ability though.

603.1. Triggered abilities have a trigger condition and an effect. They are written as “[When/Whenever/At] [trigger condition or event], [effect]. [Instructions (if any).]”

Your confusion seems to be that you were under the impression that all abilities (or at least all triggered abilities) target. This isn't the case. What we have here is simply a triggered ability that has no targets.
Because the affected creatures are not targeted, you do not have to choose them when you put the ability on the stack. Instead, you choose them as part of resolving the ability.

608.2d If an effect of a spell or ability offers any choices other than choices already made as part of casting the spell, activating the ability, or otherwise putting the spell or ability on the stack, the player announces these while applying the effect.

So when Kathril, Aspect Warper enters the battlefield, its ability triggers. The next time a player would receive priority, that ability goes on the stack. Because there are no targets (and it is not a modal ability), no choices are made as part of putting it on the stack. Players will receive priority like normal and could respond to that ability. Something like Willbender cannot be used here, because the ability doesn't have a target, making the ability an invalid target for something like Willbender.
When both players pass priority, the ability will resolve, at which point you follow the instructions, making choices as needed.


Could A Taoist Split Movement? One of the Red Taoists abilities allows him to move twice. Could that taoist possibly split their movement?

Move Once (1)
Exorcise or Use Village Tile
Move Again (2)

Similarly, can any taoist pick the order in which they do their actions? For example, can a taoist attack first and move second or does the optional move have to be taken first?

Move always happens before your action. The red power doesn't affect this; it only makes the move part more powerful.

From the rules:

  After the Yin phase is done, the player plays the role of his Taoist, according to the
  following sequence:

  1) Move (optional)

  2) Request help from a villager OR attempt an exorcism


Who is in charge of knowing abilities of blockers and attackers? I was in a situation where I lost due to a combo where a creature that deals combat damage mills me due to an enchantment attached to it. I lost the game due to not knowing that ability was on the card. My opponent knew but decided not to tell me when he declared that attacker. Was it the defenders (my) job to read the card and block it, or was the attacker in the wrong for not declaring its ability when attacking. Also, if the trigger goes off as a result of the defending player not knowing, would the defending player be allowed to reassign a blocker in response?

It's your job to read the card, no matter what the situation.

Your opponent never has to explain cards to you. You can always request to read any card, and if you don't know for sure everything that a given card does, you probably want to read it. (If it's an old card or a foreign card, you could also look up the current oracle text of the card in Gatherer.) Your opponent has no more obligation to let you know that a creature has an ability than they do to remind you that it has enough power to kill you.

Assuming that creature had a triggered ability (like Mindscour Dragon), your opponent is responsible for remembering that trigger. But they only have to do so once it triggers and needs to affect the game state, i.e. once you've already let it hit you and it's going to mill you. They don't have to warn you ahead of time.

Your opponent is certainly allowed to help you out if they wish to; in casual play you might end up doing this in order to have more fun games and not waste time on really obvious mistakes. I've certainly pointed things out sometimes when it was clear my opponent didn't realize what my cards did, in friendly kitchen table games when they'd have done the same. But there's definitely no obligation to do this under the rules.

So bottom line, you just made a mistake, and you're not allowed to go back and change a decision because of it. It's unfortunate for you, but hopefully it provides some incentive to read the cards more carefully next time.

If you want to know more details about player communication, it's covered in the tournament rules - search for "player communication". If you actually ask your opponent a question, there are some things they do have to tell you (covered under "free information"). But they don't have to volunteer anything beyond what's necessary to progress the game (e.g. "I cast this", "I attack with this", "I take 3 damage", "that creature should be dead").


What are the limitations on using a Planeswalker's loyalty abilities? I assume I can only use a loyalty ability once per turn, is that right?

Otherwise it'd seem to me that Planeswalkers would be hideously broken. And I assume that if you used the +1 ability that the 0 ability can't be utilized - that it's not "use each loyalty ability once per turn" but rather "use only one loyalty ability once per turn".

Also, can I use them the turn I cast a planeswalker?

When you have basic questions like this about how cards work, the basic rules are a good place to start. Here's the section about planeswalkers, which directly answers your main questions.

Planeswalker
Planeswalkers are powerful allies you can call on to fight by your side. You can cast a planeswalker only at the time you could cast a sorcery. They’re permanents, and each one enters the battlefield with the number of loyalty counters indicated in its lower right corner.
Each planeswalker has loyalty abilities that are activated by adding or removing loyalty counters from the planeswalker. For example, the symbol {+1} means “Put one loyalty counter on this planeswalker” and the symbol {-3} means “Remove three loyalty counters from this planeswalker.” You can activate one of these abilities only at the time you could cast a sorcery and only if none of that planeswalker’s loyalty abilities have been activated yet that turn.
Your planeswalkers can be attacked by your opponent’s creatures (if so, you can block as normal), and your opponents can damage them with their spells and abilities instead of damaging you. Any damage dealt to a planeswalker causes it to lose that many loyalty counters. If a planeswalker has no loyalty counters, it’s put into your graveyard.

So yes, one ability per turn per planeswalker. If you've got more than one, you can use them all up to once, though. You can even, say, use one Vraska's ability then play another Vraska (sending the first to the graveyard, due to the uniqueness rule) and use it.
And yes, you can use it the turn you cast it - there's nothing here saying you can't. (The "summoning sickness" restriction is something that specifically applies to creatures.)


Does a Wizard gain treasures from a charmed monster AND flee a second monster during the same combat? During a combat, I was first fighting a monster of level 6, that I could easily beat. Then, a player added a monster to the combat of level 18, that I couldn't successfully beat. So, as a Wizard, I was able to charm the highest monster, so he leaves his treasures in the room.
The question is; do I directly gain the left treasures within my hands after charming the monster, as stated in the Wizard card ?
However, I ended fleeing the entire combat. Do I gain the treasures left in the room still?

No. From the FAQ:

...if you use an ability to make one monster disappear, you cannot claim
levels and/or Treasures for beating it (depending on the method used)
unless you can then kill or defeat all the remaining monsters. You
cannot, for instance, use your Wizard to charm one monster and take
its Treasures before fighting the rest. Combat isn't over until the
WHOLE combat is over.


What's the name of the theory that the player with the most options has the advantage? A long time ago, I remember reading about a theory that sounds like this:

  Players A and B have access to options X and Y. Player A also has access to option Z. Player A is, at worst, equal to and, at best, at an advantage to player B.

Ok, so that was poorly worded. Let me put it another way:

  Having more options available to you in a two player game can't possibly hurt you.**

Example

Player A can attack from both sides. Player B must attack from the left. If attacking to the left is the best choice, then both players are equal. If attacking from the right is the best choice, then Player A has a distinct advantage. Player A is either tied or winning. Player B is either tied or losing.

Can anyone tell me the name of the theory I described?

** "... can't possibly hurt you" assumes optimal play from both players. It's not always the case the player with the most options will use them wisely. Intuition tells us that sometimes having too many options can make it difficult for the player to find the best one. Just assume that both players are making the best choices when this theory applies.

This sounds a lot like a strategy-stealing argument. It's often used to prove that one side of a game has an advantage, even if optimal strategy is not known. As a broad example, consider a game with the following properties:

It is a turn-based game
The starting positions are identical except Player A goes first
Player A has the option of skipping the first turn

Assuming optimal play, the first player cannot be at a disadvantage. The proof is a strategy-stealing argument: Any hypothetical strategy that Player B could use to get an advantage could be countered by Player A just skipping the first turn and then using that exact strategy.


Balanced, 9-player setups for Bang! I am interested in the possible 9-player setups for Bang! that do not upset the balance of the game too much. I do not want any of the players to feel hopeless right at the start of the game when they get their role card.

I found one promising setup on boardgamegeek:

  1 Sheriff, 3 Deputies, 4 Outlaws, 1 Renegade (that's how the original game worked)

Are there any more setups that proved to be working or Bang! gets pretty unbalanced at 9 players?

I could imagine something with 2 Renegades, 4 Outlaws, 1 Sheriff, 2 Deputies but I am not sure about it.

The problem with larger games in Bang! is that they tend to be unbalanced by the way the game is played. In a 7 or 8 player (in 6 also really) it is very easy for players to be killed before they get a turn. Depending on what character you get and the cards everyone has it is possible that there is nothing that can be done to prevent yourself from being eliminated before your turn. And this is something that would only be magnified in a 9 player game.

From the very fact that it is very possible for people to be eliminated from the game before they had a chance to play I would call it unbalanced.

That is not even mentioning the fact that in the standard rules for 8 players that there are two renegades who are working against each other. As a quick example if an 8 player game comes down to the sheriff, and both renegades one of which accidentally kills the sheriff the game ends with the outlaws winning even though they had all been eliminated.


When do routed units capture a castle/stronghold If some units rout and are able to retreat in to a territory that has an unoccupied castle or stronghold, does that castle count as captured immediately? Or do you need to wait until the next turn when the routed units are able to 'stand up' again?

The reason I ask is that on the final turn (i.e. no chance for routed units to stand), this ruling can have an effect on the number of castles and hence, who wins the game

Yes, even routed units immediately control the areas they occupy.

According to the FFG rule book,

  Controlling Areas - A House is said to control a land area when it has at least one Footman, Knight, or Siege Engine in the area, or has previously established control in that area by placing a Power token there (see below).


Is this card worded correctly and balanced? I created this card recently and just want to make sure that it's balanced and that its ability is worded correctly/functionally:

  Wojek Lionheart (1)RW
  Creature - Human Soldier [Uncommon]
  First strike
  Wojek Lionheart may block while tapped and blocks each turn if able.
  "The people may rise against us, but that does not excuse me of my oath to defend them."
  2/1

Is there a better way to word that second ability?

While the way you have the ability worded is 'proper', normally they give a creature this mechanic in the form of Vigilance. In this way, the card may be tapped by some external source and then made unable to block, but will not be unable to block because he attacked last turn (which is the most common reason he would become tapped). To have a creature that cannot be evaded by tapping him significantly increases his power level, but as noted in the comments greatly increases his complexity. I find it hard to justify the complexity increase for the increase gained when such an elegant alternative exists.

On a related note:

Being attack heavy is very much red's thing. It is part of red's color pie to force opponents to block (flavor wise, that's being so aggressive they simply must defend themselves), not very much in red's color pie to block themselves. Simply put, red is not a very block-happy color. Boros (the guild of this card) is very haste heavy,

I would compare your card to Truefire Paladin if you're looking for recent examples of similar creatures.

As far as tweaking it to make it red, I would do one of the following:

Make it cost RW and make it First strike, vigilance, ~ attacks each turn if able. ~ blocks each turn if able.
Make it First strike, vigilance, haste.

Bottom line: adding red does not encourage it to block. Adding red would make it much less likely to be able to block. If you want to keep the tap-blocking mechanic, I would make it cost 1WW.


Is it always better to play a knight immediately? I'm fairly new to Settlers. I was playing online last night and drew a Knight card.  The robber was already on a tile that had two of the game leader's cities attached.  I had few resource cards at the time, so I wasn't close to being able to get something I needed, so I saved it for a few turns. When I finally played it, the other player went off on me for not playing the knight sooner.

Also, no, I did not already have two other knights, so it would not have gotten me the largest Army token.

So my question is this: Is it always better to play the knight immediately, or can it make more strategic sense to play save it?

Simple answer is no, it is not always in your best interest to immediately play a knight when you get one.  In all truth I would say that it is better to hold onto it for a while unless the robber is currently in a position that is hurting you. By holding onto it you accomplish two things, first you keep protection for yourself allowing you to move the robber if it moves to a bad place for you. Second it allows you some time to make sure you optimize use of the card.  And lastly if the robber is in a place that hurts your opponents and not you that is great reason to not play the knight.


Does transforming keyrunes count towards Evolve? Suppose I animate my Simic Keyrune into a 2/3 artifact creature. Will it evolve my 1/1 Fathom Mage?

No, Evolve triggers on creatures entering the battlefield, and the Keyrune must necessarily be on the the battlefield to use its ability.

Changing an object's characteristics (power, toughenss, type, etc) does not cause it to enter or leave the battlefield.

  702.99a Evolve is a triggered ability. “Evolve” means “Whenever a creature enters the battlefield under your control, if that creature’s power is greater than this creature’s power and/or that creature’s toughness is greater than this creature’s toughness, put a +1/+1 counter on this creature.”


Can the Mermaids create towns with +1 shipping bonus? Is it possible for the mermaids to create a new town with their special ability when they have the bonus +1 shipping card?

The shipping, whether regular shipping or the temporary shipping bonus, would not have an impact on the mermaid towns. Even with shipping, towns cannot be founded across river; it only counts direct adjacency. So yes, even if they have a shipping bonus, the mermaids could found a town by placing the town marker on the river space that connects 2 half-towns.


How different are "Kill Doctor Lucky" and "Save Doctor Lucky"? I've played "Kill Doctor Lucky" and highly enjoy it.  A great, light, game that non-gamers quickly pick up and play easily.  In this game, players move from room to room in a mansion, trying to get Dr. Lucky out of sight of other players so they can kill him.

I'm considering purchasing "Save Doctor Lucky."  It looks like this game reverses the intent.  Players move from room to room in the Titanic, hoping to be in sight of another player as they save Dr. Lucky (so they can be known as a hero).

Obviously, the mechanics sound similar.  I'm wondering what the overall feel of the game is.  Does it offer new and interesting strategies?  Will my family, who are veteran assassins from the first game, find it interesting?  Or is it "just a skin" on the old game?

Save Dr Lucky is similar in some ways, but does play differently. In order to increase the chance of success as the game progresses, the board shrinks one deck at time as the Titanic sinks, which means forces the players closer together. This can be annoying when you are holding on to room cards for a lower deck that has just sunk.

It is definitely worth owning if you enjoy Kill Dr Lucky. I will say that it doesn't play very well if you don't have at least four players.


Do you need a solo player variant to make a Print&Play game successful? A friend of mine is creating a multiplayer dice game. The game rules are currently designed for 3-5 players, and don't require much of an investment for the PnP to create the necessary components. Only a 30 card deck needs to be printed, a lot of dice, and a pen and paper to keep track of score.

He has been struggling to come up with a solo variant, because he believes that a large majority of the PnP community either plays PnP games solo, or most PnPers like to try out the game by themselves before bringing it to their group.

This got me to wondering,

If you don't have a solo player variant, is your PnP likely to get played?

Do you also need 2, 3, 4, ..., player variants?

What is the optimal number of players for a game? Is the number of players that will play a PnP designed for 1 player the greatest, and as the number of players increases, the likelihood to find people willing to PnP decrease linerally (exponentially, or does the graph look like a bell curve?)

There is nothing particularly exclusive to print and play regarding solo play modes.  They have the same problems as buy and play games.

There are a great many games that cannot adapt to single player, at least not while still being fundamentally the same game.

I would suggest to your friend that he can work on a different game, perhaps inspired by the first, that would play solo, and free him from the burden of making a solo mode that works.

You can check the geek lists at Board Game Geek Print & Play, and you'll see many of the top ranked games do not support 1 player.

As for an optimal number of players, you have averages, but there is no direct correlation between # of players and P&P popularity.  Other aspects of the game (fun, gameplay, etc.) are more important.

A general statement about game popularity (not just P&P) does say that games that require a large number of players (>4) or do not support up to 6 players tend to get played slightly less compared to games of equivalent gameplay, this is only due to the obvious logistics involved in finding a game that fits the number of players you have.


Texas hold'em flush Tie or Not? I was playing Texas Holdem last night with some friends at my house and this was the hand we were dealt:

My cards 7♠ 6♦

His cards 10♠ 7♥

Cards on table  6♠ 8♠ Q♠ J♠ 2♠

Odd hand. Everyone else folded after the flop. Who would have won?

My arguments, 1. Because there is a flush on the table our pocket cards are void and we split the pot. 2. Because the Queen is the highest ♠ card on the table it is shared by both of us so we split the pot. I thought that in a flush the only card that matters is the highest for example if he had a pocket K♠ he would have won.

His argument, was that since his 10♠ is higher then my 7♠ he won and takes it all.

We were all confused and the vote between players was split 50/50 so i said house rules and split the pot. He got pissed and left the table and didn't come back. Was i in the wrong? Any help is appreciated.

Your opponent won the pot.

The fact that there's a flush on the table isn't relevant to whether or not your pocket cards matter. Each player creates the best 5-card hand that he can out of the total 7 cards (2 pocket cards plus 5 table cards). While it is possible that the best 5-card hand is the 5 table cards, that is not the case here.

The best 5-card hand that you could make was Q♠-J♠-8♠-7♠-6♠, and the best 5-card hand that your opponent could make was Q♠-J♠-10♠-8♠-6♠. Your opponent's resulting 5-card hand was better than yours. You both had a flush, so you look at the highest card you each had. This was a tie, so you look at the second-highest card. Still a tie, so you look at the third-highest. Your opponent's third-highest was an 10, while yours was an 8, so he wins.


Mushroom Armor In decline? Can you still generate more Mushroom Armor while in decline? What about the turn you go into decline? There is a little disagreement about how to interpret the rules.

  For each Mushroom Forest Region you occupy at the end of your Conquest phase, take 1 Mushroom Armor from the tray in your hand. Deploy these Mushroom Armors in any of your Region(s), during your Troop Redeployment phase. Each Armor placed in a Region augments that Region's defense by 1, even when In Decline. These markers do not count as Race tokens (for instance a single Race token with 1 or more Shields in a Region could still be Vampirized). You can stack multiple Mushroom Armor in the same Region. Remove the Armor and discard them back in the tray when you abandon the Region or an enemy conquers it. Otherwise keep it in play as long as your Shield troops are on the board.

Edited for full rules.

No, you don't generate more Mushroom Armor in decline.  From the rules on entering in Decline:

  To do so, the player flips his current Race banner upside down, so
  that the duotone In Decline side becomes visible to all, and discards
  the Special Power badge that was associated with it as that Special
  Power badge is no longer in effect, unless dictated otherwise (e.g.
  Muddy, Reborn, Royal, etc…).

As for the turn you go into Decline, the rules for Shield state "For each Mushroom Forest Region you occupy at the end of your Conquest phase".  Back to the rules for Decline: "The player can make no conquests during the turn his race goes into decline; his turn ends immediately after scoring!"

Basically you don't even get a Conquest phase on the turn you go into Decline, much less any new Mushroom Armor...


Warhammer Age of Sigmar moving within 3" of enemy models This seems quite an obvious question, but I can't seem to find any answer around the net.

AoS rules state:

  When you move a model in the movement phase, you may not move within
  3" of any enemy models. Models from your army are friendly models, and
  models from the opposing army are enemy models.

And also

  Any unit that has charged or has models within 3" of an enemy unit can
  attack with its melee weapons in the combat phase.

So my question is: can I move a unit at exactly 3" from an enemy unit, skip charging, and then just pile in and fight in combat phase?

This kinda sounds awkward as I can imagine an unit running toward an enemy unit, stopping at 3" (because you cannot move it within 3") and then just pile in during combat phase. So like I'd just run every time instead of charging as the odds of adding a D6 to your base movement seem better than just moving 2D6.

I think the key of this might be in that within keyword: how far from an enemy unit in practice may I end my movement? how far from an enemy unit in practice may I perform a pile in?

I think this is pretty clear, if you trim out some of the extra stuff in those quotes:

  you may not move within 3" of any enemy models

and

  has models within 3" of an enemy unit

It seems clear to me that you cannot avoid the charge phase - you can't move within 3", and you can't fight without being within 3".  At the very least, the intent of the rules are clear, and trying to avoid the intent would likely be looked down upon by your opponent.


MTG: Balthor the Defiled as a Commander Balthor the Defiled has an activated ability with the cost "Remove Balthor the Defiled from the game". Excusing that this is now called exile, if Balthor was your commander, could you have Balthor go to your command zone instead of exile and still fulfill the cost for the ability?

You sure can. 903.9 says anytime a commander goes into exile, the graveyard, hand, or library from anywhere; you can instead put them into the command zone. This will, however, increase the cost to play them by (2) every time you do this, which is known as Commander Tax. E.g. First cast of Balthor from the command zone will cost the base of 2BB, 2nd time will be 4BB, 3rd time 6BB, etc.

Also, for older cards, make sure to check the oracle text on your card-viewing site of choice if the wording is confusing. (Gatherer is the official Wizards card-viewer.)


Can I flicker Aurelia to get more than two attack phases? Whenever Aurelia, the Warleader attacks for the first time each turn, untap all creatures you control. After this phase, there is an additional combat phase.

If I attack with Aurelia once, then flicker her (e.g. with Acrobatic Maneuver), will her second attack also count as "attacks for the first time each turn," thereby allowing me a third?

Yes.

There are two completely separate Aurelia, the Warleader in the scenario.

The first attacked in the first Combat Phase before being removed from the battlefield using Acrobatic Maneuver.

The second was placed on the battlefield by the blinking ability and went on to attack in the second Combat Phase.

It's of no relevance that the same physical card represents both Angels.

  400.7. An object that moves from one zone to another becomes a new object with no memory of, or relation to, its previous existence. [...]

When a card refers to itself by name, it means "this object".

  201.4. Text that refers to the object it’s on by name means just that particular object and not any other objects with that name, regardless of any name changes caused by game effects.

As such, the post-blinking Angel first attacks in the second Combat Phase, triggering the creation of a third.


Finding places to play Magic the Gathering games A friend of mine recently got MTG for the XBox and is talking us into getting real cards.

I'm all up for starting but I dread the idea of playing the same two people over and over with no change epically since one of them is over competitive and exploits every loophole he can to win.

Does anyone know of any a reliable (not just google it) way to find places where people play MTG?

As for your location-specific needs, I don't know that many people can speak to that.  However, for the more generalized "How do I find more places/people to play Magic with," here are a few answers:

Wizards of the Coast has a Store and Event Locator
Check your LGSs (Local Gaming Stores) - many will either run Friday Night Magic, regular events, or casual play days
Look online for people or groups that play in your area (e.g. something like Craigslist or http://www.meetup.com in the US - not sure about the UK)
Teach other people to play

Besides those, there's always Magic the Gathering: Online - yes, it's another place to spend money on Magic (and you don't physically own the cards), but lots of the older (and less-played newer) cards can be found very cheaply, and it shouldn't be hard to put together a decent collection and play online.


Is rent owed when landing on a property because of a card rather than a dice roll? If I land on a property because of a card, do I have to pay rent for the property I landed on?

For example, if I landed on Community Chest and the card stated to go to a Railroad, do I then have to pay the fee for landing on that property if it's owned by another player?

The property can be bought (or auctioned) if it's unowned, and rent is owed to its owner otherwise.

The card in your example doesn't exist as a Community Chest card. There is such a Chance card. It's exact text is

Advance token to the nearest Railroad and pay owner twice the rental to which he/she is otherwise entitled.
If Railroad is unowned, you may buy it from the Bank.

So, for that card, not only do you have to pay the fee, it's twice what it normally is!

Now, there are a number of other Chance cards that don't explicitly state that rent is entitled.
For example,

Advance to Illinois Ave
If you pass Go, collect $200

But as you may have noted, the first card quoted above said the rental fee was twice that "otherwise entitled". That means the owner of the space to which the Chance card moves you is normally entitled to rent.
Landing on a space because of a Chance card moved you there is no different than landing on a space as a result of rolling the dice. Rent is owed if the property is owned, or the property can be bought (or auctioned) if it's not.


How many players realistically possible in Pandemic Board Game 2nd edition I love playing Pandemic, but the one of the biggest holdups for me is how you can only play 4 players. However, in the box there are 7 roles! (Scientist, Researcher, Medic, Quarantine Specialist, Dispatcher, Operations expert, Contingency planner).

Has anyone had experience or would like to hypothesize playing with 5, 6, or all 7 players at once? If so, what additional rules do you incorporate (if any) to keep the integrity of the game (i.e. starting cards, number of actions, etc.)?

I'm aware that there are only so many city cards to use so 7 players would really make you be super sensitive in how you use the cards. And I'm sure there are other things to consider also.

I'm just very curious to know what all of your experiences are! Thank you for your time.

The On the Brink expansion does allow for five player games . I believe the only rule change in On the Brink that would affect this is only shuffling two event cards per player into the deck. I'm not sure if this would affect only playing with the base game (the expansion includes many more event cards which makes this necessary), I can't remember how many event cards there were with just the base game.

The main issue you face with playing with more people is the game's built-in time limit (when you run out of city cards). I've never tried altering the rules to better accommodate more players.

I can't remember where I saw it posted. But I believe the creators of the game said that they limited the number of players to such a small number as playtesters didn't find it to be fun having to wait so long between turns. If a player traveled to a city to treat diseases on their next turn. A game with five other players meant that ten more infection cards would be played before they had a change to clear anything up.


When a land becomes creature, can you kill it? Some lands have an ability to become a creature, but they usually say they are still a land. If a land is a 3/3 creature and a land, can you target and kill it with a Lightning Bolt to send it to the graveyard, or does it remain in play as a land?

From the Magic Comprehensive Rules (effective as of November 11, 2016):

119. Damage
119.1. Objects can deal damage to creatures, planeswalkers, and players. This is generally detrimental to the object or player that receives that damage. An object that deals damage is the source of that damage.
...
119.6. Damage marked on a creature remains until the cleanup step, even if that permanent stops being a creature. If the total damage marked on a creature is greater than or equal to its toughness, that creature has been dealt lethal damage and is destroyed as a state-based action (see rule 704). All damage marked on a permanent is removed when it regenerates (see rule 701.13, "Regenerate") and during the cleanup step (see rule 514.2).

For absolute clarity, here is part of the rules on "State-Based Actions"

704.3. Whenever a player would get priority (see rule 116, "Timing and Priority"), the game checks for any of the listed conditions for state-based actions, then performs all applicable state-based actions simultaneously as a single event. If any state-based actions are performed as a result of a check, the check is repeated; otherwise all triggered abilities that are waiting to be put on the stack are put on the stack, then the check is repeated. Once no more state-based actions have been performed as the result of a check and no triggered abilities are waiting to be put on the stack, the appropriate player gets priority. This process also occurs during the cleanup step (see rule 514), except that if no state-based actions are performed as the result of the step's first check and no triggered abilities are waiting to be put on the stack, then no player gets priority and the step ends.

So the sequence goes like this.

You cast Lightning Bolt (when you have priority), spell goes on the stack.
You have priority. If you pass:
Opponent has priority. If they pass:
Lightning Bolt resolves. Three damage is applied to land creature.
If it's your turn, you have priority, if it's opponent's turn he/she does. Regardless. WHOOP WHOOP game checks for state based effects first.
State based effect: damage on land creature >= toughness. It is destroyed.

You certainly can "kill" a land, but "kill" is not the proper Magic term. Over the years Magic has become very specific about the terms used to describe cards, abilities and effects just to avoid "intuitive" confusion like this (how can you kill a land???) The term your friend was looking for was:

701.7. Destroy
701.7a To destroy a permanent, move it from the battlefield to its owner's graveyard.

There are plenty of magic cards which have the words destroy target land in the rules text.


Cheating with foils and card orientation Foils are slightly thicker than regular cards, more stiff, and are usually a bit curved. Even with sleeves it's possible to tell if a face down card is foil by looking at it or feeling/bending it a bit. (Is there a legitimate situation where you could be given the chance to feel/bend a card that's not revealed?)

Another thing is whether the card (sleeved or not) is pointing up or down while in the library. I always sleeve my cards and make sure they are all facing the same direction, but as far as I know it's not required. It would be easy to turn one card upside down so I know when it's on the top of my library.

It seems like these two things could be used to cheat. Are there any rules about this? Is it even an issue?

The rules simply say that you cannot have marked cards, without enumerating all the specific ways they might be marked. From section 3.11 of the tournament rules:

  A card or sleeve is considered marked if it bears something that makes it possible to identify the card without seeing its face, including scratches, discoloration, and bends.

So if someone is actually able to identify cards by messing with their orientation, or determining whether they're a foil, or anything else, they're breaking the rules. (Note that bends are explicitly mentioned, so that part of "is it a foil" is right out.)

Exactly how someone might get caught doing this and what the consequences are of course depends on the situation and the level of play. If someone accidentally has a card turned the wrong way at FNM, I doubt they'll be thrown out of the building. But if you're at a serious tournament and you notice your opponent carefully feeling the thickness of the top card of their library, things probably aren't going to go well for them.

In any case, the takeaway here for everyone is sleeve your cards and don't cheat. Cheating is bad, and if you think you see it, call a judge. But at an FNM or a kitchen table, it's possible to be friendly about little things. If there's a card out of place, just talk to your opponent, and fix things. They're probably a person who just like you is trying to play Magic and not cheat, and all it takes is a few words to turn the card around and get back to the game. I don't think any of this is a real problem - it's a kind of dumb way to try to cheat, one that won't ever get you much information - but if you do suspect it's happening, just pretend you're dealing with nicked sleeves and handle it however you'd handle that.


What is the meaning of 'karai' and how is it applied? A Western insei recently wondered about the term "karai":

  Japanese
  players call black 57 "karai", which is a term which I haven't heard
  used in western go at all! The meaning appears to be close to "(a move
  creating) a solid position, including a territorial profit".
  Professionals appear to love "karai" moves and groups.

This term is apparently unknown in the West and so far I found no books explaining or even mentioning it. What does it mean exactly, and to what moves is it applied? An example board would be great.

"Concentrating on getting territory, rather than playing for influence."

Pasting in the native speaker sources from the Sensei's answer (put there by Bill Spight I think):
辛い（からい）厚みよりも地をとることを意図すること。
from Weblio's Basic Go Dictionary

厚みより地をとることを目的とすること。
from a different go dictionary

厚みよりも実利（地）を重視していること。
From the katteyomi go dictionary

Also, if you google for "地に辛い" (ji ni karai, i.e. concentrating on taking territory) you get it described as a style of some players (Wikipedia mentions Hane Naoki, Iiyama Yuta, but also says this style of play is becoming more widespread/dominant recently).


Is it now a good time to buy rotating Magic Cards? There are many cards from the RTR block and M14 that I want just for my collection and not for play (maybe just some casual play), for example, I would like to buy a Domri Rade and a Kalonian Hydra. Right now the prices for these and many other cards are reasonable but I am not in a hurry to buy NOW since I only want the cards for my collection.

In my case, when is the best moment to buy the cards? I have read some people saying that NOW is the best moment, but in other places I also have read that maybe it would be wise to wait until the release or pre release week for Khans, while others suggest to wait until December.

Based on your experience, what do you recommend?

Thank you.

This answer is based on the very weak assumption that history will repeat itself.

When this answer was written, cards rotated once per year. Wizards of the Coast is moving to two rotations per year. This will drastically change the pattern described below.

Innistrad was the first set of a block that rotated in October 2013. The rares and mythics that are not seeing play in Modern or Legacy from that set trended towards an all time low around December 2013 before finally beginning to rise due to being out of print.

If Return to Ravnica follows the same pattern, the rares and mythics from the set that are not seeing play in Modern or Legacy will trend towards an all time low around December 2014 before finally beginning to rise due to being out of print.

I used the price history line charts on TCGPlayer.com as a reference. I used my own experience to determine what cards see play in Modern and Legacy.


Pressman Rummikub joker rule From the Pressman Rummikub rules:

"When a player retrieves a joker, the joker will once again have any value or color. However, a player who retrieves a joker must play the joker on his/her current turn to make a new set, and must also use at least one tile from his/her rack on that turn (just as on any other turn). A player cannot retrieve a joker before  s/he has played his/her initial meld."

My question: If a player uses a tile from his/her rack to retrieve a joker. Does that tile count as the "at least one tile..." or must the player use another (second) tile from his/her rack?

The tile does not count as the "at least one tile." You would still need to use an additional tile(s) from your rack to play the joker.


Is it required that someone is Admiral? When starting a game of Battlestar Galactica: The Board Game, the three players selected Roslin, Tyrol, and Apollo. Per page 5 of the rules, none of us are the Admiral. Then we got a Crisis card that clearly expected someone to be the Admiral, as the Admiral makes a choice.  The rules have a full line of succession for Admiral on page 28, but no text makes it clear that this list applies for game setup when determining who the Admiral is.

Is there supposed to always be an Admiral, and if so how are they selected?

That's a great question. I never noticed that the setup rules only list the top three in the line of succession. We have always played as if the full line of succession were in play there. So in your example, the admiral would be Apollo. Not having an admiral (or president for that matter) would cause some significant game play issues. I have to assume the intention was to always use the full line of succession. So I would say, yes, someone always has to be admiral.

In the base game, the only way this can happen is in a three player game where someone chooses a support character, i.e. Tyrol. I think this was an oversight in the rules. Without Tyrol, it would be impossible for this to happen, because someone would have to choose one of the three military leader characters.

If you follow the rules-as-written, to the letter, it could be even stranger in a game including the Pegasus expansion. Cain is first in line of succession, but I don't believe anything in the rule book technically modifies the rule you mention on page 5 of the base rule book. So if Cain and Helo were both selected, a literal interpretation of the rules would give the admiral title to Helo. Clearly that isn't the intent. I think the obvious answer is to always refer to the line of success lists.


Can you choose whether to use a character's ability after declaring or challenging? Imagine a scenario where player A is the Witch and is in the lead (has the most gold). Player B knows that player A is the witch. On player B's turn, she declares that she is the witch. If no-one challenges, then the ability is activated and player B will swap her gold pile with player A. If player A challenges, then she will win the challenge. When the ability is activated, player A will have to swap her gold pile with another player, but because she is in the lead she will end up with less gold than before.

In this situation, can player A choose not to use the ability?

No, you have to use the ability. According to the rules (English Rules, p. 7):

  If one of the players is indeed the announced character, that player
  immediately uses the character’s power (which can happen outside of their
  turn).

Since they don't state "may use", it's mandatory. In your case, Player A correctly challenged Player B, as he denied the latter getting the lead, which could be disastrous if Player B has a coin-generating character (King, Bishop, etc). At least, like that, Player A can choose to swap with a player who can't win, even with the lead, i.e., he has the Spy.


Cost increase and suspend During a recent game, my opponent Suspended two Rift Bolt in the same turn. Then, during my turn, I played a Damping Sphere.

The way we resolved it, is that at the next turn, my opponent payed 1 for the second Rift Bolt.
I'm not sure if this is correct, because the rule text for supspend says that when you remove the last suspend counter you cast the spell without paying its mana cost.
So, to me, it sounds like even if the cost was increased, one still does not need to pay for it.

What's the correct thing to do?
If actually one needs to pay for the second suspended spell, what would happen if he can't?

The first Rift Bolt costs {0} to cast, and the second costs {1}.

The total cost to cast a spell
= mana cost or alternative cost
+ additional costs and cost increases
- cost reductions

Suspend allows spells to be cast for the alternative cost of "free". Cost increases, such as the one from Damping Sphere, still apply.[1]

If you can't cast it (because you can't or choose not to produce the mana for it), it will remain exiled indefinitely.

Only Trinisphere modifies the total cost.


Trading Property to settle a debt in Monopoly Player 1 has landed on Player 2's property and cannot afford the rent. Can Player 2 accept a property with money to settle the debt?

Example: Player 1 owes the rent of 500, they have 400 and a property worth 100 (according to the bank). Can Player 2 accept the money and the property to settle that debt?

This could be considered a trade and it the official rules don't explicitly restrict the time at which a trade can be completed. (However, since it could be considered a trade, Player 2 could consider the property to be worth what they want [and therefore worthless] to bankrupt the Player 1)

As a family, we have always played it so that the property is worth the equivalent of its face value. We chose this because it reflects the "real world" in a more accurate way.

However, after re-reading the rules, taking them at very face value, you should be bankrupt the moment that you cannot afford the rent after mortgaging and selling houses (if by doing that it will cover the rent).

I'm now more on the side of bankrupting without allowing for trading. However, we've been keeping high scores since 2002, it might not be worth it.

Summary:
When a player cannot pay rent with money, mortgages and buildings, the rules can be interpreted in 4 ways:

the player is bankrupt immediately.
the player may trade with the other players, except the creditor.
the player may trade with any other player.
the player may use the face value of the card to pay towards the debt.

What's unclear about the rules:

  You are declared bankrupt if you owe more than you
  can pay either to another player or to the Bank. ....

  ... A bankrupt player must immediately retire from the
  game. The last player left in the game wins.

Unless one can find a way to clear the entire debt while retaining an asset of at least $1 value, thus avoiding bankruptcy, the bankrupt player is out of the game; just as the rule stipulates.

Part of the beauty of the game is the simplicity of the rules as written. Imagining considerations that are not actually in the rules is what leads to games dragging on for hours; I for one would rather concede a lost game and get started on a second.


Can I activate my "once per turn" effect twice if the activation is negated? Let's assume I have two copies of "Spellbook of Secrets" in my hand. I activate one, and my opponent chains to it with their set copy of "Solemn Judgement". Am I able to activate my second copy? "Spellbook of Secrets"' effect reads:

  Add 1 "Spellbook" card from your Deck to your hand, except "Spellbook of Secrets". You can only activate 1 "Spellbook of Secrets" per turn.

Since "Solemn Judgement" negates the activation of cards, would I be able to activate my other copy, or does it not work that way?

The answer is yes.

There is a difference between negating the activation and negating the effects of cards. "Only once per turn" effects, like "Spellbook of Secrets", may only be activated once per turn, and if the activation is negated you can use them again. However, if the effect is negated, say, with something like "Ash Blossom & Joyous Spring", you have still activated the card, and you cannot activate another copy.

You can read more about the distinction among these mechanics here.


Does No Mercy get triggered by Blood Scrivener? Let's say I control the card No Mercy. The card states that whenever a creature successfully deals damage to me it gets destroyed.

Now let us suppose:

I also control Blood Scrivener
I have no cards in hand.
I need to draw a card.

Because of Blood Scrivener's ability, I draw 2 cards and I lose 1 life.

Question: Does the loss of life induced by Blood Scrivener count as damage? (And does it cause Blood Scrivener to be destroyed?)

Damage is different than life loss.  For players, damage causes life loss.

  119.3a Damage dealt to a player by a source without infect causes that player to lose that much life

So no, the Blood Scrivener isn't destroyed.


Do cards not on the battlefield have their "conditional abilities"? How do conditional abilities of creatures cards not on the battlefield work?  In particular, which abilities do those creature cards have and which do they not have, for the purposes of cards that copy abilities from creatures not on the battlefield (such as Necrotic Ooze, Cairn Wanderer, or Skill Borrower)?

Here are some examples of conditional abilities:

Guul Draz Assassin
Student of Warfare
Auriok Edgewright
Battlewise Aven
Fledgling Dragon
Belligerent Whiptail

In general, conditional abilities are not copy-able if the creature is not on the battlefield because they are actually the result of granting abilities on those creatures, and these granting abilities don't work off the battlefield:

  112.6. Abilities of an instant or sorcery spell usually function only while that object is on the stack. Abilities of all other objects usually function only while that object is on the battlefield.

Most of the examples given have either static or triggered granting abilities.  Triggered granting abilities are ones that read "when/whenever ..., [CARD NAME] gains ...".  Static granting abilities are ones that read "as long as ... [CARD NAME] has ..." or " [CARD NAME] has ... as long as ...".  Note that higher level abilities on a card with level up are shorthand for this text:

  710.2a "{LEVEL N1-N2} [Abilities] [P/T]" means "As long as this creature has at least N1 level counters on it, but no more than N2 level counters on it, it has base power and toughness [P/T] and has [abilities]."

For lack of a granting ability that says it works from a different zone, these granting abilities only work while the creature is on the battlefield.  Thus, a creature not on the battlefield won't have a conditional ability even if the condition for the granting ability is true or has been met.

For example, Necrotic Ooze will copy the ability to add level counters from any creature in a graveyard (since that's not conditional) but will not gain any of that creature's higher level abilities, even if the Ooze has an appropriate number of level counters.

Exception 1: if the condition is part of the activated ability (such as text like "activate this ability only if...") as opposed to a condition on the creature having the activated ability, then the creature has the ability in all zones.  For example, Vedalken Certarch's ability will be copied by Necrotic Ooze because the condition is part of the ability.

Exception 2: a creature that copies everything from a card not on the battlefield (such as Body Double) can gain conditional abilities, but that is because it copies the granting abilities (among other things).


How can we beat Prince of Gluttons in Aeon's End Been playing a bit more of Aeon's End base game, so far, the only nemesis that we simply can't beat with a team of two is the Prince of Gluttons.
We never manage to beat him, whatever the spells/relics/gems, we just get overwhelmed by his minions and his base power. We tried buying only things he devoured, but usually, that's not enough. We do not manage to get geared early enough, Gravehold gets beaten hard, we somehow stale (or die) then he eats everything and we loose.
We had some trouble with the Crooked Mask, but we managed with it, it was a very close game, but it felt "fair". The Prince beats us with no trouble, we have trouble to survive, and he has a time limit...
What can we do to beat him? Are there specific compositions to have? Do we need to buy expansion packs to get better/other mages/cards?

Any tips to beat him?
-Great work gaining cards that were devoured. That helps.
-Consider that when you gain any cards from the supply you help the Prince. How much damage can you do based on minimal card buys? For instance, buy ONLY ONE gem like Searing Ruby for the whole game. Now, how can you set up a hand to be that Ruby + 4 Crystals? Because 7 aether can buy any spell in the game. Now you're cooking.
-Consider player health and Gravehold's health as a just another resource you're spending. If players and Gravehold are at full health but you lose because Prince devoured the store then maybe you were being overprotective. Take some trade offs, absorb more damage and focus on preventing devours and dealing damage on the Prince.
-If you're losing because of Devours than defensive mages like Brama (heal player health) and Phaedraxa (prevent damage) don't have abilities that help. Better to choose attackers like Jian and Kadir and win during Tier 2.
-You know the cards. You know what's coming. What are you keeping prepped to crush Cerephage?
Specific compositions to have? Do we need to buy expansion packs to get better/other mages/cards?
-No. My partner and I have played an embarrassing amount. We have no trouble against the Prince with randomly chosen mages and supply.
Soft advice for new players.
-You'll get it with more playing/experimenting.
-Look at high cost cards that don't seem worth it. The design team is smart. Challenge yourself to think about why those strange cards are so valuable. You'll unlock another insight to help.
-This is a game about efficiency. You want to play 'tight' where nothing is wasted. I often see new players love opening breaches (because it's rad) without any spells to prep. Having 1 aether left over that you do nothing with is like a tiny bit of damage to the team.
-How's your development? Your decks start wimpy, start to grow, then at least one player should be ready to drop bombs. The minions are a decent measuring stick. If a minion, like Tier 2 Venomite (9) appears then at least one player should be reasonably positioned to deal out at least 9 damage in the round.
-The endgame is often a 'boss rush'. All players need to agree it's time to go all in on damaging the boss, absorbing damage from nemesis cards.
-For practice, if you're playing 2 or 3 player, put more Tier 1 and Tier 2 cards in the nemesis deck. This is how we got our first victories many battles ago. It will make the game a bit easier but still give you a lot of practice.
-Experiment by playing a battle where you ALWAYS prevent a nemesis Power card.
Sorry for the long answer :) I hope this finds a player who finds it useful. Needless to say, we've really enjoyed this game.