How to sell a new game, similar to chess I designed a board game that is similar to chess, but on a hexagonal board and fundamentally different in a number of significant ways. For instance it can be two or three player, and the moves of every piece have full rotational symmetry. I have played a handful of people, and most everyone who likes chess really enjoys playing my game. My audience is probably a niche of people, maybe 50-60% of people who enjoy chess will want to try my game.
It's not urgent, but at some point I want to seriously pursue selling it. What's the best path of action to take, especially if I want to keep the rights to the design?

Refine details with a focus group - to get feedback
Patent the game (somehow?)
Bring to gaming conventions to get feedback
Draft up a business & marketing plan
Start to manufacture and sell online

Is this a good plan?
Can anyone speak from experience?

It's important to play test your game A LOT with strangers.  Watch people read your rules.  Things you think are easy to understand people will struggle with!
You may find play test groups local to you.  With global lockdown there are a huge number on online play test groups if you can make a digital version of your game.  Details are here. https://cardboardedison.com/playtest-groups.  I take part in these groups and they are extremely useful.
With regards to trying to find a publisher or self publishing there is an absolute mountain of information online particularly on the Cardboard Edison website.
I will say is there a huge amount of competition out there.  You are describing what is called an abstract game.   There are countless abstracts games on the market already so for it have a chance it would need to stand out.  I'm finding playing in playtest groups lots of game from people who have only played a few games,  if you're going to design a game I recommend playing as many different games as you can to learn what works.
I personally wouldn't bother with a patent, the industry is so interconnected that if anyone was going to steal an idea this would be widely known.  I also don't think you can patent a game mechanic anyway.
My friends who have self published via Kickstarter are doing so because they want to release a game, not because they want to make money.  Kickstarter is also a huge investment in terms of time and money upfront making prototypes, videos, marketing etc.  Self publishing friends have described it as doing a full time job as a hobby.
I'm currently talking with publishers about a game I've spent last 16 months working on and have been play testing online with strangers.  Through online groups I'm fortunate enough to have been able to speak with published designers, My understanding with talking to to them is that designers is that you would get about 5-8% of the wholesale price as a royalty.  So if a game has a retail price of about £50 the designer will get about £1 per copy sold.


How to resolve spawning two monsters on one tile in Castle Ravenloft Castle Ravenloft is a new game, but already it's struck a chord with me.  I enjoy playing it.

One problem with it being a new game is that the rules and errata haven't quite been fleshed out .

What happens when you spawn two monsters on one tile?

First:

On each tile, there is a skull pile on the floor.  When the first monster is placed on the tile, it is placed on the skull tile.

Each subsequent monster placed on that tile is placed as close to the skull pile as possible, so any square adjacent to it.

I believe this is stated in the rulebook, but I don't have it in fromt of me, so I will add the page number later.

Second:

I'm not sure that there is a huge need for house rules.  I think that the rules are succinct and well written.  I think that it can be easy to put too much thought into this game, and if you let go of the need to make it "D&D", you will find that the rules work quite nicely without customization 'needed'.

I really enjoy this game and take it out whenever I can.


Talking about Go: Using "he" and "she" for Black and White It comes quite handy to assign different genders to the two abstract players "Black" and "White" and than use gendered personal pronouns in order to refer to them.

But who should be male, and who should be female?

Berlekamp and Wolfe in their book Mathematical Go use Wright White (male, "he") and Bella Black (female, "she") for the two rôles, but in this answer  Using the edges of the board in Go by Benjamin Cosman it seems that the opposite assignment is used. Where does it originate from?

Which assignment is preferable?

EDIT: I just noticed that Sensei's Library seems to use the White/she convention.

Employing some search engine tesujis, I found the page Player Gender on senseis.xmp.net. It clearly states my anecdotal finding, that Sensei's Library uses White=she and Black=he as a convention.

The same convention is used in several influential books, e.g.,   Whole Board Thinking In Joseki by Yi-Lun Yang, Essential Joseki by Rui Naiwei and in the works of Janice Kim (co-author of the Essential Go series).

Note that traditional Yin/Yang symbolism would support the other assignment that is also used by Berlekamp and Wolfe in their book Mathematical Go. From all what I can see, this is the minority position.

My conclusion is that—if one want to use gendered abstract players at all—the White=she and Black=he convention is used in the majority of influential sources and therefore preferable over the opposite convention.


What happens when target of an activated ability becomes illegal (in this particular situation)? I have a Hunting Kavu, and the opponent attacks with a Craw Wurm.
I decide to use the Kavu's activated ability, in order to exile both creatures.
But, in response to this, the opponent casts a Jump on the Wurm, which obtains flying this way.
My question is then as follows: since the target of Kavu's activated ability has become illegal, what happens to both creatures?

The Wurm remains on the battlefield, while the Kavu goes to exile anyway;
Both creatures remain on the battlefield.

It's 2: both creatures remain on the battlefield.

Hunting Kavu's ability has only one target, the attacking creature. It's not a target itself. Since the ability does no longer have any valid targets, it doesn't resolve:

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

So the Hunting Kavu will survive as well.


Do rockets or destroyed systems count for the green d8? From Mobile Frame Zero Rapid Attack, page 64:

A mobile frame with neither direct fire nor artillery range weapon systems get 1 green 8-sided die as well. This doesn't count as a system and can't be destroyed.

And from page 65:

In addition to its frame and systems, a mobile frame can also carry up to 3 single-shot rockets.
A single-shot rocket provides 1 red d8 at direct fire range, once only. Discard it after you use it.

And from page 123:

When a mobile frame takes damage:
For each damage it takes, it loses one system. Its owner chooses which system it loses. Pop it off the frame and drop it on the field. Since that system's gone, it doesn't provide its die or dice in any future turns.

This leads to the following questions:

If I make a melee mech with all of its red dice devoted to a claw attack (hand-to-hand range), can I put a rocket on my mech and still get the green d8 movement bonus? Even when I'm firing my rocket?

If my mech had a gun, but it got blown off so now it doesn't anymore, do I get the green d8 movement bonus for my last big dramatic charge? Or am I a sitting duck on the battlefield?

If I make a melee mech with all of its red dice devoted to a claw attack (hand-to-hand range), can I put a rocket on my mech and still get the green d8 movement bonus?

Yes.  Since Single Shot Rockets don't count as systems, the bonus Green d8 for having no ranged weapons ignores them.

  Even when I'm firing my rocket?

Yes.  (See above.)

  If my mech had a gun, but it got blown off so now it doesn't anymore, do I get the green d8 movement bonus for my last big dramatic charge?

Yes.  Once you have no ranged weapon systems left you gain the bonus Green d8.


Having started a small avalanche, what does one do with an undefended cutting stone? Having just looked at the small avalanche (nadare / konadare) in 38 Basic Joseki I tried it out as White in a 2-stone game against GNU Go and was surprised that it left out the move at a, immediately playing 9 although Ishida’s Dictionary says that after Black 6 the moves 7 – 8 – a – b are the only possible order.

$$Bc Up to the deviation from joseki
$$ ........-
$$ ....6...-
$$ ....12..-
$$ ..9.34..-
$$ ...5O7a.-
$$ ...b8...-
$$ ........-
$$ ---------

Is Black 9 indeed an error, and if so how should White punish Black? Please explain why your answer is ideal and suggest any general principles that apply. I suspect that one should capture with a, though that does make Black b sente.

How the game actually continued

In case it is relevant or of interest, though I am only asking about the joseki, here is the continuation.
I was playing a little hurriedly and also was not aware that 9 was an error, and continued with:

$$Wcm10 17 connects at 14, 20… in next diagram
$$ . . . . . . . .|
$$ . . . 7 O . . .|
$$ . . 1 6 X O . .|
$$ . 9 X 5 X O . .|
$$ . . 0 X O X . .|
$$ . . 4 3 O 2 . .|
$$ . . . . . . . .|
$$ ---------------+

after which both sides created moyos:

$$Wcm20 Move 29 followed by circled, then squared and finally triangled stones
$$ +-------------------------------------+
$$ |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .|
$$ |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .|
$$ |. . . Y Q . . . . 4 . . 6 . . . . . .|
$$ |. . X , O . . O . , . . . . . X . . .|
$$ |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .|
$$ |. . . X . . . 5 . . . . . . . . 0 B .|
$$ |. . . . . . . . . . . . 9 . . 7 W W .|
$$ |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .|
$$ |. . 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .|
$$ |. . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . .|
$$ |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .|
$$ |. . . . B . . . . . Q . . . . . . . .|
$$ |. . . . . . . . Y . . . . . . . . . .|
$$ |. . . . . . . . . . . . 3 . O O . . .|
$$ |. # . . . . . . . . . . . O X X O . .|
$$ |. @ # X . . . . . , . . O X X X O . .|
$$ |. @ @ @ # # # . . Q . . 1 X X O X . .|
$$ |. . . . @ @ . . . . . . 2 X O O X . .|
$$ |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .|
$$ +-------------------------------------+

9 looks like a severe mistake to me. White may simply capture the single stone and be satisfied, like this:

$$B Simple punishment
$$ ........-
$$ ....Ob..-
$$ ....XO..-
$$ ..1.XO..-
$$ ...XOX2.-
$$ ...cOa..-
$$ ........-
$$ ---------

After this, if black c, white may answer at a, or may tenuki. Tenuki is reasonable, because the black followup does not threaten white, only captures two stones and ends in gote.

(If W2 instead at a, which is sometimes a good move, then black has a cut at b. This cut is worth more than the black descend at c.)

In other words, the cut at b works a lot worse than in the joseki for black. At the same time, black is not strong (e.g. the point you played at in the game remains a weakness). Territory is white's, too. This is not an even result.

As for why B1 was played at all: It is indeed a shape point, because it makes black a work (to capture the two white stones). In some other joseki that look (vaguely) similar, it is actually the correct move.

The underlying reason why the order was wrong becomes visible if we compare with the joseki move. If black plays at W2 instead of B1, then it is significantly harder to capture him in the corner (four liberties instead of two). That is why, in the joseki, white will need to offer a trade, losing two stones but capturing the stone at B1. (There is a ladder involved etc., but those are details.)


I've massively over-sprayed my models! Help! I foolishly over-sprayed some of my Warhammer models. They are now have a thick coat that obscures some details and has cracked in places.

Can I remove this coat at all? Do I use chemicals? Do I just sand them down?

Yes, acrylic paint can be safely removed, and quite simply too. The basic process is to dunk your models in a solution of household cleaner, watered down if you like, and leave them in the bath for a few hours. The paint turns into a kind of slimy goo, which you can then scrub off with a toothbrush and toothpicks.

In the US, Simple Green All-Purpose Cleaner is the standard recommendation. In the UK, diluted Dettol (a common disinfectant), has been shown to be effective.

Somebody actually did a comparison of different cleaners for this very purpose. He actually found that oven cleaner worked best of all (easy removal after an hour), but also reported positive results with Simply Green (although interestingly, not 409, which serves a similar purpose).

Degreaser or brake fluid are other possibilities, but these are nastier and harder to assess, since they come in many variants. For safety, I'd stick to surface cleaner, or oven cleaner if you have a test model you are willing to potentially sacrifice (if you've ever cleaned an oven, you'll be well aware that oven cleaner is viscous stuff!).

Methylated spirits and so on are best avoided, as these can erode your models over time.


Eurogames suitable for playing outside We're planning a camping holiday and are expecting to be outside for a fair amount of it.  Most of the board games we enjoy have lots of small pieces, or require cards to be displayed on the table.  Are there any Eurogames that would stand up to a strong gust of wind?

Travel Editions

There are travel editions of some very good boardgames that are specifically designed to have more durable board states than the standard games. For example...

Settlers of Catan plays 3 or 4
Ingenious plays 2

I've played the Ticket to Ride Card Game on a train - I think you could probably manage it outdoors, if you had a card table or something. A bungee cord strapped across each face of the tabletop could help everyone secure their cards and could be used to secure boards for games that have pieces substantial enough to survive some breezes.

I'm not sure if it's a "Eurogame", but Abalone is an abstract with substantial, heavy pieces. At least, my '80s vintage edition is.

Dice games might be a good choice. Zombie Dice would be a great choice for a quick game outside, especially after a few beers have dulled everyone's strategic minds a bit. But Roll Through the Ages is an excellent game by any standard! I've only played the iPhone implementation, but game state is maintained with pegs, not pieces, so it should naturally be wind-resistant:


Can I activate the tap ability of a creature summoned last turn before I have to remove it to my hand? We had this situation come in a game last night, and I wanted to make sure that we played it correctly and that I understood the rules.

Player A had an Eiganjo Free-Riders in play. During this turn, he cast an Icatian Javelineers. He then ended his turn. During the upkeep of his next turn, he targeted the Javelineers with the Free-Riders' ability and then responded by tapping the Javelineers to use their ability.

By my understanding, the Javelineers ability would resolve first and he'd get to do a point of damage. Then the Free-Riders' ability would resolve, returning the Javelineers to his hand, and allowing him to cast them again. That seemed to be within the rules.

However, I wasn't sure when the Javelineers' summoning sickness wore off. Does it wear off in time for him to use this ability before they get returned to his hand by the Free-Riders?

Yes, he can do this. The rule for summoning sickness is as follows:

  302.6  A creature’s activated ability with the tap symbol or the untap symbol in its activation cost can’t be activated unless the creature has been under its controller’s control continuously since his or her most recent turn began. A creature can’t attack unless it has been under its controller’s control continuously since his or her most recent turn began. This rule is informally called the "summoning sickness" rule.

Emphasis mine. In this case, the creature was under his control continuously since his most recent turn (which is the current turn) began.


In magic the gathering can I tap a creature at the attacking/blocking phase? I was looking at this link
and was kind of confused. In Magic, when can I tap my opponent's creatures to prevent them from attacking?
So if a instant says tap target creature and they attack I have basically have to either do 2 things. Asks if they are on combat phase or if they rush to attacking phase say something like before you attack.
I was wondering because if you wait for them to declare attackers then you tap target creature they have to reconsider if they want to attack.

On another note there is a card that taps target attacking or blocking creature if I'm correct (might be exile) if so what are the rules on that?

You can always ask your opponent to "rewind" phases if they attempt to skip through them.  According to the rules, each player gets a chance to act within all phases, however, many players choose to skip through the phases in interests of saving time. A player is never allowed to "rush" you through a phase. They will need to reset their creatures to how they existed before attackers were declared.

In this particular case, if they move to attack step before you get a chance to respond, I would politely inform them that I wish to cast a spell during the "begin combat" phase.

For your side note: there are many cards such as Celestial Flare that effect attackers or blockers (scroll down to the bottom for example rulings that I believe you will find helpful)


Can a hunter attack diagonally? The rules state that line of sight for a hunter is down the row and column it is on. However, if an agent has been spotted by one hunter, can another hunter attack diagonally since the position of the agent is known?

Quoting from the rules (page 5 bottom right):

  After a hunter moves, if the agent is visible to that hunter, that hunter
  may attack the agent.

So no, a hunter has to see its own target, you can't use another hunter's line of sight for that.


What does "float mana" typically mean? Normally, whenever I take an action that involves paying for an effect that is any more complicated than tapping lands, I declare that I'm floating mana. For instance:

When I tap Priest of Titania with 3 other elves on the battlefield (for a total mana cost of 4), than I will typically say "I float 4 mana" before I make any plays and use this mana.
Even if I'm using Llanowar Elves to pay for a 1-drop, I declare how I'm floating mana.

One time, I was accused of cheating because of this habit. I tapped my Llanowar Elves  and said "I float 1 to play Quirion Ranger", and I was accused of cheating, because I "didn't have 1 floating after that play".

It would seem that the person I was playing against had taken "floating mana" to refer exclusively to mana that was left over after paying a mana cost.

Have I been doing it wrong all along? Has my talk about "floating mana" before I pay costs been a miscommunication all this time?

I'm asking this now because I recently came across this passage whilst reading the comp rules:

  106.4a If a player passes priority (see rule 116) while there is mana in his or her mana pool, that player announces what mana is there. If
  any mana remains in a player’s mana pool after he or she spends mana
  to pay a cost, that player announces what mana is still there.

Does that mean that talking about my "floating mana" communicates that I'm passing priority?

mana floating is a slang mtg term and refers to mana left over after you play a spell.

  Refers to mana added to a player's mana pool and not used immediately.
  For example, a player might tap all of his or her lands for mana, then
  play Armageddon (destroying all land in play), then use the excess
  "floating" mana to play some other card.

http://mtg.wikia.com/wiki/Slang#Float

Talking about floating mana does not imply that you are about to pass priority. This is because you can play multiple spells before you pass priority and you would potentially have mana left in your pool between such plays. After casting each spell you need to make it clear how much and what type of mana you still have in your pool, so talking about how much and of what types of mana are still floating seems appropriate.

In a tournament, as long as your usage is clear and consistent there should be no problems.


Replacing center cards in Ascension Do I understand the rules correctly in that all center cards are replaced when defeated/bought?

So I can if I have good power cards spend some runes on replacing cheap cards in order to hope something stronger with a better reward will come up to replace them cards, or is the turn played with the cards at the center and then replaced when your turn finishes?

The rules as I read them seems to suggest that they are replaced when fought/bought but that made the game feel very strange. This might simply be a feeling based on playing a lot of Dominion lately with its restrictions.

I have only played one game of Ascension, and I got the same idea.

Here is the ruling directly from the download-able FAQ:

  Q:  When does a card in the center row get replaced?  If I defeat Mephit, do I banish a card
  in the center row before or after a new card replaces the Mephit?

  A:  Whenever a card leaves the center row, the first thing that happens is that it is replaced from the center deck.  There should be six cards in the center row at all times.  In this instance, if you
  defeat Mephit, you replace the Mephit from the center deck and then make your decision about
  what card to banish.

FAQ Link


German Carcassonne fan expansions - available in English? I was browsing the Hans im Glück website and found two 'official' fan-made expansions for Carcassonne.
The expansions are called:

Die Stadttore (The City Gates)

Der Osterhase (The Easter Bunny)

Unfortunately the site is in German and so are the rules, both for Die Stadttore and Der Osterhase.
Where can I find the English rules?

A quick Google web search reveals this post for the Easter Festival (yes, it's the same author although a different name). The full rules for both expansions can be found in the downloads sections of Carcassonne Central (you'll need to register, but it's free to do so).

Easter Festival - Rules
Easter Festival - Tiles
City Gates Rules - English translation


Mustering in port territories Could I get a comprehensive clarification of the rules surrounding mustering and supply limits in territories that have ports?

My understanding is:

When mustering, all territories (whether land, port, or sea) must adhere to supply limits.
When mustering at a Castle/Stronghold territory with a port, units can be placed in either the land, the port, or adjacent sea territory.

Is my understanding of these rules correct?

What it seems is that a player could keep a single infantry on their Castle/Stronghold territory, and because they have two adjacent territories (the port, and the sea) they can muster into, it makes it possible for them continually muster every turn, using the special consolidate power token.

Is this correct?

Yes, that is correct. However remember that as soon as you have two or more ships in the same area (port or sea), they are considered an army and must adhere to supply limits.

Obviously if you muster into both the port and sea you're potentially blocking your port ship for being able to move out into the sea. That makes your castle/stronghold a ripe target for attack as if an enemy were to defeat that one footman, any boats in port would be replaced by an equal number of your enemy's ships (pg.25).

Something else to note: The special Consolidate Power token must be placed on the castle/stronghold in order to muster. You are not allowed to muster by placing the special Consolidate Power token on the port space.


Dragons servant and Shivan dragon Dragonlord's Servant reduces the cost to cast dragon spells by 1 and for 1 you can put a +1+0 on Shivan Dragon. Dose this make Shivan Dragon's power infinite???? (Also the spell for Shivan Dragon does not cause it to tap)

Shivan Dragon itself is a spell (while it's on the stack, anyway), but the text on it that allows it to get more powerful is not a spell - it's an "activated ability". Any effect that makes spells cost less will not make the ability cost less.

Also, even if Dragonlord's Servant did make abilities cost 1 less to cast, it only reduces costs by 1 generic mana, so any cost (like that of Shivan Dragon's ability) that includes only specific types of mana would not be reduced at all.

Finally, if you do ever find a sequence of actions you can execute over and over indefinitely (such as a free activated ability), the rules do require you to stop after some finite number of times. For example, you could say "I activate the dragon's ability one billion times," but you can not say "I activate the ability an infinite number of times."


Can you still battle a monster even if it will not pursue you? Can you still battle a monster even if it will not pursue you due to low level?

For example, if I'm level 1 and am fighting a monster that "Will not purse anyone level 2 or below."

Absolutely.
"Will not pursue anyone of level X or below" is a rule that only affects your potential to run away from the monster, it does not prevent you from facing or killing the monster.
However it does leave you with an easy way out in case your friends do decide to power the monster up (not likely at level 1 or 2, but it may still happen).
From the official FAQ:

Q. I'm fighting a monster that says "Will not pursue anyone of Level X or below." I'm below that Level; can I still fight the monster?
A. You certainly can fight the monster. If you do not win the combat and have to Run Away, you escape automatically (no roll required).


Can Skullcrack's damage be prevented? Rule 608.2c. starts with "The controller of the spell or ability follows its instructions in the order written.", and Skullcrack's effects read

  Players can't gain life this turn. Damage can't be prevented this turn. Skullcrack deals 3 damage to target player.

Does the second sentence causes the damage from the third one to become impossible to prevent?

As you quote in rule 608.2c, you resolve a spell or ability, effects in different sentences are resolved consecutively. When Skullcrack resolves, first it creates a continuous effect that stops players from gaining life for the rest of the turn. Then it creates a continuous effect that makes damage unpreventable for the rest of the turn. Finally, it deals the damage, which cannot be prevented because the effect stopping prevention already exists.


Would my effects cover my partner's GY as well as mine in a Tag Duel? Basically, if you and your tag partner both use Dragon Decks, would their effects cover your partner's GY as well?

Basically, if you and your tag partner both use Dragon Decks, would their effects cover your partner's GY as well?

From the wiki page on Tag Team Duels we have, emphasis mine:

  When taking part in a Tag-Team Duel, both teams consist of 2 players. Players share a combined Life Point total and their fields and Graveyards.

So yes, you and your partner share graveyards.

Here's also a link to the Official Tag Duel Rulings, for reference.


Are chain reaction outbreaks considered part of the original outbreak, in regards to "Containment Failure" The Containment Failure emergency event says to place 2 cubes in each connected city when doing the next outbreak. If one of those connected cities already has 2 or 3 cubes, this triggers a chain reaction outbreak, add usual, but is this considered a separate outbreak? That is, should I place 1 or 2 cubes on each of those connected cities?

Pandemic co-creator Tom Lehmann gave an example (answering another question, admittedly) indicating that further outbreaks add only one cube.

  In your Manila/Taipei example, each with three cubes, you will first place 2 cubes in Hong Kong, Shanghai, and Osaka; then do one chain reaction outbreak in Manilla, placing cubes in San Francisco, Sydney, Ho Chi Minh City, and Hong Kong, for a total of 10 cubes and 2 outbreaks.


Does the game end if all current investigators are defeated? Page 11 of the rulebook says the game ends if all investigators are eliminated from the game. Does this mean that if all currently active investigators die, the game ends, or does it mean if the pool of investigators from which we draw new ones gets exhausted as well, then it ends. We had a case where all 4 of our investigators simultaneously lost all sanity, and I wasn't sure whether to fast forward to the end of the mythos and redraw 4 investigators.

From the FAQ (Page 3)

  Q. If all investigators are defeated at the same time, do investigators lose the game?

  A No. At the end of the Mythos Phase, each defeated investigator will choose a new investigator to play as. However, if being defeated would cause a player to be eliminated, such as if the Ancient One has awoken, all players could be eliminated. In this case, investigators lose the game.

As for when players are eliminated when defeated, the Reference Guide (Page 5) provides:

  Eliminated players do not choose new investigators after being
  defeated.
  If an investigator is defeated and there are no undefeated
  investigators available, that player is eliminated.
  If an investigator is defeated or devoured after the Ancient One
  awakens, that player is eliminated.
  If the investigators win the game, any eliminated players win as
  well.
  If all players have been eliminated, the investigators lose the game.


If a player is forced to discard a card in which another card has a dependency, do they lose both cards? In Rivals of Catan a player can be forced to discard buildings.  If a player chooses an Abbey, do they also lose their University (which has a dependency on an Abbey), or do they just lose the Abbey?

No, they only lose the first card.

There are no dependencies, only requirements that must be met in order to play the second card.

On Page 16 of the rules it states:

  The Theme Sets introduce cards that have special requirements that must be met before you can play them.  The requirements may vary significantly - such as requiring the trade advantage or requiring that another building must already be in your principality.

Once the card is played and the requirement is satisfied, the requirement has no further effect on play.


Factory bonus when some supply piles are exhausted In a recent game of Puerto Rico, I had a Factory with a colonist on it, and I had manned plantations and production buildings to produce four different kinds of goods. However, when the Craftsman was taken, by the time it was my turn to take my production all but one of the supply piles was exhausted, and I was only able to take one barrel.

In this case, do I still get the +3 doubloon bonus from the Factory since I could produce four types of goods, or do I not get any bonus since I only did take one?

No bonus is received.

You only get credit for what you produce. See the rules, page 10.  The answer is clear within the Example for the factory.


I need help to find card 094 in Fallout: The Board Game I'm having trouble finding card 094. Card 016 says to add 094, but I can’t find anywhere. I've counted all my encounter cards and I believe I have them all. I don't know what 094 is meant to be or where I'm meant to find it.

Could someone tell me what kind of card it is, if it's a vault card or something else, and where in the game materials I'm supposed to find it?

Card 094 should be included in the contents of the box.

If you are missing card 094 you can send a request to Asmodee for a replacement here : https://parts.asmodeena.com/partsrequests/


Why would I want negative effects? In the board game smash up some cards state that if someone destroys a card, that card will have negative effects on them. Therefore, why would I want to destroy the card? I don't know if I'm not getting something, and if I am not could someone please help? I just don't see a point to playing a card that does negative effects to the person who destroys it, because obviously no one will destroy it.

The point is just that. Players don't want their own cards destroyed, so playing a card that has a penalty to whoever destroys it makes it less likely to be destroyed. If card A provides some effect to its owner and card B provides the same effect but does something to whoever destroys it, clearly card B is more beneficial to it's owner as fewer players would want to destroy it.

All these cards have some beneficial effect for the player (for example Gremlin from the Tricksters). Clearly, other players would want to destroy them, but if they do, they have to pay some kind of penalties. Some players may be willing to pay that if the net value (destroying the card - penalty paid) ends up being positive in some way.

Another case may be destroying cards for its effect. For example, Nukebot from the Robots destroys other minions in its base once destroyed. Placing it on the Fields of Honor (1 VP per minion destroyed to whoever destroys it) makes it really tempting for anyone trying to destroy it.


In bridge, how low an "unlucky" percentage would a good player guard against? If a contract depended on say, a finesse, most good players would look for plays that would give a better than 50-50 chance of succeeding. (Unless the finesse was marked by the bidding or early play.)

Most good players would make, or consider making, a safety play to guard against a 4-1 split (except maybe in matchpoints). This occurs with a greater than 28% frequency (or 14%+ if it was relevant with the singleton on one side and not the other).

But I read of a situation in a tournament where a world class declarer took an inordinately long time to study the play of a hand, to the point where his opponents called the tournament director (TD). When the TD asked the player why, the player answered that he had just worked out a way to make the hand against a distribution with only a 2% chance of occurring (a 5-0 trump distribution with the 5 "offset" a finesse).

He looked like a genius when the relevant opponent admitted to having that hand.
Apparently, there was little time to play the game out, but the TD awarded the point to the player after the player described his game plan and the opponents conceded, showing down their hands. All the other declarers on that board went down.

Is that unusual? Do good players routinely study ways to guard against 2% chances over the board? Or do most players have a higher threshold, say in the 5%-10% range?

2%?  I don't think most would worry about 2% on most hands, because most hands you'd be losing a higher percentage of the time to protect against the lower.

But yes, in this kind of case it's not uncommon to protect against 5-0 splits.  While it's not common, 2% is 1 in 50 hands, meaning it might come up a few times in a weekend; the difference between a highly experienced player and a top-tier player might only be a few hands, and those would be some of them.

It really comes down to the hand.  If the hand is played at IMPs (where making the hand is paramount, rather than overtricks), and it's solid for 4-1 or 3-2, then there's no reason not to explore 5-0 split lines.  I've certainly done it a number of times before, and I'm hardly a world class player.

I suspect your story is a bit of an apocryphal one, given the description of the actions after the tournament director was called are inaccurate to what would really happen at a tournament (slow play involves slow play warnings, and eventually board penalties, but would not modify the results of a hand; the tournament director would not "award the point" either, it would be up to the opponents to accept the claim or not, if a claim was indeed what was made).  But the actual details - that a world class player considered his line of play for several minutes in order to find a safe line against a 5-0 split - are entirely reasonable, if a bit boring compared to the dramatic telling.


Do summoned units count towards victory points? In the rules for counting victory points it says every defeated or unit that fled off the board counts as points equal to the amount it costs to include in the army.

This leads me to believe that summoned units do not count toward victory points because they were not included in the cost of the army.

So do summoned units count for victory points?

No, they do not.

As you said, they did not cost anything to inlude in the army so are worth zero (unless the unit has a rule that states otherwise).

In addition to which, many summoning spells explicitly state this.

For example, Raise Dead:

  Units summoned by this spell cannot be dispelled, and do not award
  victory points under any circumstances. (Vampire Counts 8th Edition, pg 60.)


What happens if you hit a rolling modifier when you have advantage? What happens if you hit a rolling modifier when you have advantage?

When you have advantage, you draw two modifier cards.

Then:

If none are rolling modifiers, you pick the better card.
If one is a rolling modifier, you add its effect to the other card.
If both are rolling modifiers, you continue to draw cards until a rolling
modifier is not drawn, then you add together all drawn effects.

  Source: Page 20 of the 2nd Edition Rulebook, Advantage and Disadvantage section


How it is physically possible to play ONUW with 10 players? We were playing with only 6, and we found it is virtually impossible to reach for cards across the table without making a lot of telltale noise. I opted for crowding in and keeping my arm raised on my elbow so that I could reach any card just by lowering it.

How can 10 people gather around the cards and take their actions without most of the table knowing?

What do you do?

We run into the same issues; generally playing with 7-8 people.

There are a few techniques we use to help:

Players don't keep their own cards immediately in front of them; they keep somewhere in between their own seat and the center of the table. Close enough that it's clear whose is whose.
I try to start the night phase already leaning forward, so that if I don't make noise leaning forward if I need to later.
Even with doing these things, taking actions that involve other players' cards such as seer, troublemaker, or robber, are generally just restricted to choosing a player that is seated close to you. As a seer, I would never attempt to look at the card of a player sitting across the table from me.


How to contact a moderator on boardgamegeek.com? I created an account on boardgamegeek.com only for my account to be frozen after my first post.
While logged in, I get the message "Your user account is not permitted to perform that action." on anything I click.

How do I contact a moderator on boardgamegeek.com? The site requires me to be logged in to send a personnal message, but I'm not permitted to do so.

At the footer of every page, there's a link to their contactform, which doesn't require you to be logged in to use.

According to that form, you can also send an e-mail to contact@boardgamegeek.com.


In Spades, what to lead from {Ace,King,...} In Spades, when holding AKx is there a correct play of either the King or the Ace?  Playing the King produce a (rare) problem: if your partner is void, she might think the RHO holds the Ace, therefore she may ruff your King.
Is there a known conventions that playing each of them send some signal?
The High-Low from a Doubleton Convention: Leading the K, next the A, signals to partner that it was a doubleton.  So when partner lead the trick she can lead this suit knowing you can ruff.

Spades and Contract Bridge share most of the same mechanics as far as play of the cards are concerned, and this has long been a matter of disagreement between experts. Also, the style of playing from AKx bears on what is appropriate from lower touching honours.

Three main styles have developed in Bridge:

Traditional:

Highest from touching honours at the top of the holding, except K from AKx, so: K from AKx, Q from KQx, etc.; but highest if the holding is a doubleton.
Highest from an interior sequence, so: Q from AQJx, J from KJTx, etc.
Advantage:
The play of an A can be made without the K, as from Ax, without misleading partner.
Disadvantage:
Additional ambiguity on the lead of the K, which can be from AKx, KQx, or Kx

Traditional - with A from AK

As above - but with the the play of A or K from AK and AKx holdings reversed. Partnerships must agree if this is played throughout the hand (rare), or just on Opening Lead (much more common). In the Trump suit (always Spades in Spades, of course) the K is lead from AKx because the lead of A from Ax is more common.
Disadvantages:
(i) The play of an A potentially misleads partner due to the ambiguity between Ax and AKx holdings.
(ii) More complex than vanilla Traditional because of the exceptions.
Advantage:
Reduces ambiguity on the lead of the K, which can now only be from KQx, or Kx.

Rusinow:

Second highest from touching all honours, so K from AKx, Q from KQx, J from QJx, etc.
Highest when the touching honours are an original doubleton.
Second highest also form an interior sequence, so J from AQJx, T from KJTx, 9 from QT9x.
Typically played only on the opening lead - Traditional is played on all subsequent tricks.
Disadvantage:
More complicated than either of the first two, due to being an Opening Lead convention only.

Of course, it is paramount that you and partner be in agreement on which system will be played. That experts have no consensus between the three systems suggests that the differences are relatively minor.

There are any number of Contract Bridge sites that discuss both Opening Leads and other defensive agreements of partnership benefit, such as Richard Pavlicek's site.


What happens if your partner hits you in Pegs and Jokers? Question for marble movement.

Your partner has a marble in their in-spot (start of home). If you hit that marble with yours, what happens to your partners marble? And yours?

We have been playing with this sequence of events:

The rule is that when you hit your partners marble it is sent to its in-spot.
That position is now occupied by your marble so now your partners marble hits yours and sends you to your in-spot.
The end result would be both of you are in your in-spots.

Any thoughts on this play?

Yes, that is actually (and strangely) correct.

https://boardgamegeek.com/filepage/72993/instruction-sheet

  Rule 3: ...If player 2’s ("Your partner's") home position hole is occupied by one of his/her own pegs then move that peg to his/her start position. If player 2’s ("Your partner's") home position is occupied by any other peg, follow rules 3 and 4 recursively until the last peg has found an unoccupied hole.

Some of the basic rules:

  You cannot pass or land on your own marble (either moving forward or moving backward).
  You can pass or land on your partner's or an opponent's marble.
  If you lands on your partner's marble, your partner's marble is moved to its "In Spot"
  (the space just outside of the "Safe Area").
  If your partner's "In Spot" is occupied by one of your marbles, that marble is moved to its "In Spot" and then the landed on marble is moved to your partner's now empty "In Spot".
  If your partner's "In Spot" is occupied by any other marble, that marble is returned to its starting position ("Home Area").
  If you lands on an opponent's marble, the opponent's marble is returned to its starting position ("Home Area").

Other links:

https://liftbridgefurniture.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Lift-Bridge-Furniture-How-to-Play-Pegs-and-Jokers.pdf

http://www.rovin.texasgoodsam.com/Games/Jokers%20&%20Marbles%20Game%20Rules.pdf


Can Winds of Qal Sisma trigger Willbreaker's ability? If I use Winds of Qal Sisma to prevent damage from a creature, does Willbreaker trigger and let me gain control of that creature?

No. Willbreaker triggers specifically when something "...becomes the target of a spell or ability...". Spells and abilities only target if they say "target" (or if they're an aura being cast). Winds of Qal Sisma doesn't say "target", it just prevents all combat damage, regardless of where it came from, so Willbreaker never sees anything that'd cause it to trigger.


What is this game with cards you describe, draw, or act out, decided by an electronic unit? Can anyone help me remember the name of this game? We played it around 2005. It was an electronic game with a purple (I think) unit. There were no teams. Each player chose a color. All the participating colors checked in on the unit to start the game. There was no game board. The game then chose a color to take a turn. You would select a card and insert it into the unit. The game then decided if you had to describe it, draw it, or act it out. The game also chose which color you would be doing the card with. It was all completely random. The game unit kept up with the score and at the end announced how many points each color had earned. I think there were two electronic hosts, one male and one female. I distinctly remember the female voice slowly saying, "Maybe you should try to act", slowly sounding out each letter in the word 'act'.

I remember playing this game as a kid! I believe it was called "Express Yourself". Hope I helped in some way!


Can you use an ability and scrap a card in the same turn? I'm pretty sure you can do this with my understanding of the rules, but my friend keeps arguing that you can't.

When you play a card like an "Explorer" for example. Can you in the same turn, use the 2 units to buy in the trade row and then scrap the card for 2 combat?

Explorer card for reference:

According to the Star Realms rules, I think your interpretation is correct: you may play a card for its trade value, then scrap it in the same turn.

The relevant text (in the third row, top):

  When a Ship is played, its Primary Abjility triggers immediately.  If
  a ship has an Ally and/or Scrap ability, you may choose to use one or
  both of these abilities any time during your Main Phase (provided you
  fulfill the obligations for doing so).

Your interpretation is supported too from the Main Phase description:

  At any time during your Main Phase, you may perform any of the following actions, in any order you wish:

And then finally, under Using Abilities:

  With the exception of a Ship's Primary Ability, players may use the various abilities of their in-play ships and Bases at any time during their Main Phase.  Each ability may be used just once each turn. (emphasis mine)

Since a ship has more than one ability (primary, scrap), each ability is only being used once per turn, too.


Haunt requires adding a room, but it will seal off a floor. What do I do? In Betrayal at House on the Hill, there is a rule saying that you can't add a tile if it would close off the floor:

Can I Seal Off a Floor by Placing a Tile?
You can’t place a tile in such a way that it seals off a floor (that is, leaves no way to connect other rooms to that floor). If the only possible placement of a tile would seal off a floor, discard that tile and draw new ones until you draw one that leaves a free doorway. If all the remaining tiles for a floor would seal off the floor, then the person whose turn it is rearranges the floor until there are more free doorways.

However, some haunts require that a certain room be added, if it doesn't exist already. For instance, Haunt #46 (The Feast) says the following

If the Attic isn't in the house, search the room stack for it and put it on the upper floor. Then shuffle that stack.

It says a similar thing for the Dining Room as well.
What happens if adding one of these tiles would seal off a floor? The room needs to be there for the Haunt, so not adding it isn't an option. What happens?

The rules for sealing off rooms have this line at the end:

  If all the remaining tiles for a floor would seal off the floor, then the person whose turn it is rearranges the floor until there are more free doorways.

It seems reasonable to infer that this rule would also apply if adding the necessary room for the Haunt also seals off the floor. Thus the floor will need to be rearranged so that the room can be added without sealing off the floor.

The above rule also says that the person whose turn it is should be the one to rearrange the floor, which seems appropriate given that they are the Haunt revealer who is kicking all of this off.


Do all players interact with the Mansions of Madness app, or does one player act as GM? I've seen a few board or card games that use an app as part of gameplay, and they fall into two categories: ones where all players must interact with the app (for example, everybody has to touch the screen to signal "I'm done" in a turn), and ones where a single player uses the app to drive the game.  Which type is Mansions of Madness?  It sounds like the latter from the descriptions I've found (including Board Game Geek), but I prefer information to guesses.

The reason I ask is that I don't use electronics on Shabbat, and I'm trying to plan my schedule for a boardgame convention.  More broadly, I know a few people who would be challenged to use an app running on a phone because of either vision or mobility issues, and that's something I would want to take into account when planning a game with such players.

The app introduced with the second edition of Mansions of Madness is designed to replace the role of "Keeper", and as such it's best to think of the app as an automated GM.

This means the app is designed in a way that makes it possible for a player to assume that role, and be the sole player interacting with the app and updating the physical board appropriately.


What to do about evolution cards that don't work well in solo games? Archipelago has some evolution cards that fit quite well in a multiplayer game, but in the solo game, they make little or no sense.

For example, the "Financial Advisor" gives you 1 florin for every 5 florin you reveal to your opponents. How should this be played in a solo match? It does nothing? I get 1 florin for every 5 I have? Should I remove it from the solo game?

Something similar happens with the "Queen" card. She adds 2 free florin to the order of play bid which is skipped in solo games. Again, should I remove it? Should I simply assume it does nothing?

There are many other examples. How do you deal with those cards? Are there any special rules about that?

Several cards can be left out of the solo game, as they only have an effect when there are multiple players:

King
Queen
Thief
Spy
Pirate

The main problem with this is that this could change the balance of the game due to the backs of these cards (during crisis).  A middle ground may be to remove them and replace them with the next card when they are placed face up (but disregard the new crisis now showing).

Also, the designer has mentioned (although I can't find it anywhere) that the assassin should not be allowed to kill off your own character cards.


Chesscademy exercise: material part 2 - why doesn't this move result in a 2 point material lead? I'm trying to re-learn chess with the wonderful Chesscademy site.

This exercise asks me to "make a move that will leave you up two points in total".

As the hint suggests, I've counted up the number of points on the board - I make it 38 for white, 37 for black. (I'm playing white).

So, clearly white needs to take 1 point of black's material in order to turn the 1 point lead into a 2 point lead.

Moving c4 x f7  - taking one black pawn - is the correct answer according to Chesscademy. But why isn't my initial answer of f3 x e5 - also taking one black pawn - also correct?

(For what it's worth, both moves could subsequently result in the loss of a 3 point white piece in a real game, so it's not due to a difference here.)

f3 x e5 - Knight takes Pawn - does give you a 1 point advantage on your turn. However black can retaliate with c6 x e5 taking your knight without fear of any retribution which resets the advantage in black's favour. Interestingly note that this move also defends against c4 x f7 which also results in a positional advantage to black.

c4 x f7 - Bishop takes Pawn - gives you a 1 point advantage as well but crucially results in a check. Black cannot retaliate with e8 x f7 since that would result with check from your queen on b3. Interestingly this is also a check; you are forcing black to move his King thus preventing him from developing any defence/offence for this turn.

It is important to consider how the material advantage will change on your opponent's turn as well as your turn when making your move.

As Pieter Geerkens stated the key difference is the guaranteed loss. Theoretically you could lose a 3 point piece from c4 x f7 (i.e. the Bishop), however your loss is not guaranteed in the next turn and any attempts to threaten the Bishop with another piece allows you to respond before the Bishop is taken.


In the game of sequence: A sequence of more than 5 coins In the game of sequence, if you create a sequence of more than 5 in one move, do you have to declare which 5 coins make the sequence?

You don't have to declare which row of five is the sequence, as any row of five is protected by the rule:

You cannot remove a marker chip that
is already part of a completed SEQUENCE. Once a SEQUENCE is achieved by a player or a team, it cannot
be broken.

Where a Sequence is defined as:

A Sequence is a connected series of five of the same color marker chip in a straight line, either up and
down, across or diagonally on the playing surface.

Together, these rules prevent any connected series of five chips from being broken.
As mentioned in my comment, any series less than 9 is only valid as one sequence for scoring. A series of 9 can count as two sequences overlapping by one coin.
Rule Source


Does First Strike cause a creature to deal damage twice? Do creatures with first strike deal first and normal strike damage? I attacked with a Goblin Machinist that had +5/+0, and my friend argued that his 3/1 first strike would kill it, is that true?

No, First Strike does not cause your creature to deal damage twice; it only causes your creature to deal damage before normal damage is dealt.

  702.7b If at least one attacking or blocking creature has first strike or double strike (see rule 702.4) as the combat damage step begins, the only creatures that assign combat damage in that step are those with first strike or double strike. After that step, instead of proceeding to the end of combat step, the phase gets a second combat damage step. The only creatures that assign combat damage in that step are the remaining attackers and blockers that had neither first strike nor double strike as the first combat damage step began, as well as the remaining attackers and blockers that currently have double strike. After that step, the phase proceeds to the end of combat step.

So in the second / regular combat damage step, creatures with first strike will not deal damage, because they already dealt their damage.

If your attacking creature is blocked by a 3/1 with first strike, it would take a total of 3 damage. If it has 3 or less toughness, then it will die in the first strike damage step, before it can deal damage. If it has 4 or more toughness (which Goblin Machinist does), then it will still be alive to deal its damage after it has taken the 3 damage.

Your friend may have been confusing First Strike with Double Strike, which is an ability that causes creatures to deal damage twice.


Does someone really need to play Harry in the Dresden Files Cooperative Card Game? My boyfriend and I are looking at the Dresden Files cooperative card game, based on the books by Jim Butcher.

However, a serious problem we both have with the idea of the game is that someone must play the eponymous Harry Dresden.  That seems at best boring and at worst really poor game design.  Has anyone played this game without Harry Dresden in play?

I'm the publisher. You CAN play without Harry's deck, but you run the risk of having an unsolvable board if you do.

Harry's Talent has the ability to rearrange parts of the board in order to move things closer that need to be cleared before other parts of the scenario can be taken on. So on some boards you might not need that — random shuffle being what it is. On others, it's make-or-break. The reason why it's necessary to play Harry might not be in the rules (frankly it's not necessary to explain the why in the rules); the statement "Always include the Harry Dresden deck" however is.


What happens when Patchface discards somebody's last character card? In the Game of Thrones board game, each player gets a set of character cards that give bonuses to combat and can be played once each. Once a player has played all of their cards, they pick up all of their previously-played cards to use them again (except for the last-played card; that stays in the discard pile).

What happens when the character card Patchface causes you to discard your last character card? By a truly abusively literal reading of the rules, you don't get to pick up your discards. (The rules say something like "if you have played your last card...") This is obviously wrong, but which card must stay in the discard when you pick up your discards?

An example: I have two cards in my hand (MOST_POWERFUL_CARD and ICKY_CARD), and go to battle. I play MOST_POWERFUL_CARD, so that it will not be my last card played when I get into a battle next time. (I want ICKY_CARD to be my last played card, so it won't be in my hand when I pick up my discards.) My opponent plays Patchface, and causes me to discard ICKY_CARD. Combat resolves, and I win because Patchface is useless in combat. Now I'm going to pick up all of the cards in my discard, but I must leave behind my "last played" card. Which card stays in the discard: MOST_POWERFUL_CARD or ICKY_CARD?

The House card discarded by Patchface stays in the discard pile, all other cards are returned to the non-Baratheon players hand.
I don't believe that an official answer exists for this situation, as noted here in this BGG thread. I believe that a literal reading of the rules leads to a definitive answer. Important information of note from the rule book (page 19), under 3. Choose and Reveal House Cards:

"Playing a House card during combat is mandatory. Both attacker and defender must play a card." (rule book, page 19)

"At the end of a combat, if a player used his last (i.e., seventh) House card, he then returns the other six House cards currently in his discard pile to his hand. The last played card remains in the discard pile."

"Note: All House cards, whether available or used (i.e., discarded), are public knowledge. As such, a player’s discard pile or hand may be examined by others players at any time except during Step 3 of combat.

From the rules, I agree that you must pick up six House Cards, otherwise it would be impossible to satisfy the mandatory playing of a house card during the next combat (1st rule quote). The rules indicate using your seventh House card as the only rule (besides card rules text, like that of Roose Bolton) that makes you eligible to pick up the other six House cards in your discard (2nd rule quote). Luckily, the rules define two possible statuses for House cards, available or used (i.e. discarded) (emphasis mine) (3rd rule quote).
From the FAQ1.0 2nd Edition, we know that Patchface's ability applies after a player would pick up their six other cards, after playing their seventh. Since the non-Baratheon player isn't playing their last card though, the sixth card (played by the non-Baratheon player) is discarded, then Patchface discards their seventh and last card, making the non-Baratheon player pick up all their other cards including the House card played this combat. The House card discarded by Patchface stays in the discard pile.

Q: If a House card’s text ability says “after combat...,” when is that card resolved?
A: At the end of the Combat Clean Up step of Combat Resolution (after played House cards are discarded to their respective discard piles).
Q: If the Baratheon player plays his “Patchface” House card but his opponent is playing his last remaining House card, does the Baratheon player still get to discard one of his opponent’s House cards?
A: Yes, Patchface’s text ability would allow the Baratheon player to discard one of his opponent’s six House cards at the end of the Combat Clean Up step.


Can't find the specific price for MTG japanese cards Hello so I have a few Japanese MTG cards from the year 2000. Among them is a Mountain #344 (from Invasion) illustrated by Jeff Miracola in foil. The English version's value is 1.49$ and I've read that due to rarity Japanese versions cost up to double the price.

I also can't find prices for other cards that I have that probably don't have much value which are some Dragon Quest Card Game cards including a foil one, some Monster Collection Trading Card Game cards, and some Kikaider The Animation cards. I would appreciate any orientation into finding if they have any value other than nostalgic.

PS: Just to clarify all those cards are in japanese

While it is sometimes the case, not all foreign cards are actually worth more than there English counterparts. Nonetheless, older cards definitely might be.

While you can check eBay, this is likely your best source:

http://www.hareruyamtg.com/en/

If you can't find a reference anywhere, check other foreign languages of that card, such as korean or russian.


Is there a canonical way of placing the scoring meeple to signify having gone round the scoring track? Newer versions of Carcassonne (or perhaps it's one of the expansions) contain scoring tiles, to track how many times a player's score-keeping meeple has gone round the scoring track, so that 50 or 100 points need to be added to the score the meeple indicates.

Before that, I've seen (and used myself) an alternative way of tracking that: placing the meeple in another position than both feet down. Either balancing on one foot and one hand, balancing on one hand and its head, or lying  flat.

Is there an established rule of which position indicates what?

I've always used hand+foot: +50, hand+head: +100, lying flat: +150.

The official, pre-expansion rule to keep track of 50 points was to lay down the scoring meeple like a farmer.

Start of page 4 of the official rules (pdf):

  Note: if your score passes 50 points, lay down your scoring meeple to show your 50+ points

Of course, any way to mark 50+ or 100+ points that your group agrees on and that can be clearly distinguished from each other is fine.


Unique Assets with same name in my possession When Encounter instructs me to gain new Unique Asset and I receive the same card that I have in my possession.

What happens? Do I get both of them or I should discard the card I have?

You keep both. There is no limit, according to the FAQ:

  Q. Can an investigator have multiple copies of the same  Unique
  Asset?
  A. Yes. There is no limit to the number of Unique Assets an
  investigator can have.

Source


How Can I Improve Combat in DungeonQuest? I've been playing DungeonQuest for a while with some of my friends, and what I've discovered is that there's a noticeable drop in interest during the combat, which is too complicated for new players to pick up easily and surprisingly slow for such a fast-paced game.

Does anyone who's been playing this for a while know of a better rule set or house rules to make it more fun?

I really don't like the combat stack, particularly its use for death blows - it seems like a misguided attempt to add some influence between one round and the next without much thought about what part of combat it might be representing. The rule-book claims this represents "players manoeuvring for a stronger attack", but why is this stronger attack being directed by which losing attacks were made in the past... and even by your past opponent's losing attacks?
Respecting the need to not slow combat any more, I developed some rule amendments - they seem to work well:

losing cards and cards from a stalemate are returned to the bottom of the deck not the combat stack

the combat stack, now representative of "environmental opportunity", is populated by turning cards face up from the deck at the end of the combat round to maintain a total of 3 face-up cards. These may be used in the same way as before for so called "death blows", although that's a misnomer as death is likely but not certain.

the winning player from the previous round draws replacement cards first

Drawn cards may be taken from the visible "opportunity stack" or from the deck. If taken from the opportunity stack, both players will know what they are.

A further simple enhancement to represent reinforced/renewed attack:
The attacking player may add more cards of the same type from his hand against a counter attack made by his opponent. So may the counter-attacker, in any order.

A further enhancement to represent exhaustion:
Players may only draw up to 3 cards a round to renew their hand. Hence their hand may contain less than 5 cards.

I also think monsters need to carry treasure (who works for free these days!) - otherwise the encounter is purely punitive. It's easy to add a treasure card draw for a kill.
Up to 2 other players are going to be bored by combat not involving them, so to me it looks like the game should be recommended for two players.


What are the rules to this "CheeseGame"? I was treasure hunting through a second-hand shop that imports most of its items from Japan and I found this wooden game.

Pieces:
5 Natural-colored Cheese Wedges
1 Yellow Cheese Wedge
1 Mouse
1 Dome Base Board (?)

It did not come with original box and there are no other branding on any of the pieces other than what I'm assuming is the base or board of the game as you can see in the first image below, with the words "CheeseGame". But there is a distinct small white X on the mouse's cheek.

I'm not sure if I have all of the pieces because when I line up the cheese wedges on the "board", there is a perfect gap for two more wedges. (seen in second image)

The base is a wooden dome that I am assuming is placed upside down so that the rounded bottom creates the stage for a balancing game. The third image turns this base upside down to show it clearly.

Can anyone help identify this? I'm usually quite good at internet sleuthing, but no luck so far.

Thanks to @npst for the tip on the Japanese manufacturer's name, which lead to contacting them directly and receiving a response on the rules of the game!

Here is what they wrote back:

  Thank you for your inquiry.
  The image you have attached is "Balance Game" of our product "Cheese Game".
  This is a wooden toy that also becomes an interior, and the contents are 7 pieces of cheese, 1 mouse and 1 base.

  The attached PDF data is a guidance sheet enclosed with the product.
  Stack the cheese and the rat on the base so as not to collapse.
  There is no particular rule.
  Please try various stacking methods and enjoy.

Here is the image that comes with the game to explain the rules (in Japanese). But the image at least suggests some pretty interesting stacking options.

Not sure what they meant by "also becomes an interior", maybe "interior decoration"? Because I have been playing with it as a desk toy and it works well for that.

So, not an actual 2 player game as I was hoping but fun none-the-less, and glad to have been able to solve the mystery. Thanks to all who attempted to track this down.


Does the "forced response to a new suit" concept apply to both players in the Goren bidding system? Does the "forced response to a new suit" concept apply to both the partner and the opening bidder during the course of bidding, assuming both have adequate point count to bid to game?

For example,
1.  Opening bidder bids 1♥,
2.  partner responds 1♠ (new suit = forcing),
3.  opener responds 2♣ (new suit = forcing),
4.  partner responds 2♦ (new suit = forcing),
5.  opener responds 2NT (inviting),
6.  partner bids 3NT,
7.  The contract is made.

Does this bidding sequence accurately depict forced response as applicable to both opener and partner?

This answer should not be limited to Goren only, but should be a general guideline to most natural systems.

Whether a bid is forcing or not depends on whether the bidder (or sometimes his partner) is limited or not. In your example:

1S is forcing because responder has not a chance to show his strength yet. He can have a massive hand waiting to be shown on the next few rounds.
For most pairs, 2C is not forcing, since opener is in some sense limited: he did not make a forcing opening, and he did not jump shift when given the chance to. Responder has the right to pass this bid if he decides 2C is the most suitable contract at that time.
2D is forcing, be it natural or artificial, again because responder's hand is still unlimited. Opener is bound to keep the bidding open.

Therefore the general rule is that responder's new suit bid is forcing due to an unlimited hand. For opener's non-jump suit bid, it is not forcing since his hand is limited, but this is still subject to partnership agreement.


Female world chess champion? Has there ever been a female world chess champion (or, before the title existed, any woman who was widely regarded as the best chess player in the community or region)?

There's a correct list of World Champions (preceded by a list of players regarded as the world's strongest before the title existed) on Wikipedia. All of them are men, there hasn't been any woman considered to be the strongest chess player at a certain point of time.
As for regional championships, Judit Polgar, mentioned by @BenjaminCosman, won the Hungarian National Championships. There are probably others who achieved this.


Can warmachine Battle Engines gain stealth? Is it possible for a battle engine to gain stealth via a spell like Prowl while in an area that would grant concealment (like a forest)?

Given that forests and clouds don't block line of sight to a huge based model it seems weird that being in a forest with prowl would result in a stealthy battle engine.

Concealment & Cover (pg 50) - This model never gains the DEF bonus from concealment or cover. It can get other effects (such as Prowl) though.

It's not explicitely said they can't get Stealth like Gargantuans, so they can.


How to apply the ko rule (Go) I’m having trouble understanding how to apply the ko rule. For instance, in the description in Wikipedia, there is an example where the ko rule can potentially apply. But suppose there were two, or three, or four such scenarios on the board. Does one really have to keep track of all the past states of the board? Would you just keep going round-and-round, and whoever created the last original board configuration wins those points?

Ko only prevents a player from making a move that would have the effect of returning the board to the position that it was in just before his opponent's last move only. So the only thing you ever need to keep track of is what the board was like just before your opponent made his last move; you cannot move such that it would recreate that position.

All the further description in the wiki is explaining what a player will do if the move they want to make it prevented by ko. They make a move somewhere else on the board that forces black to respond to it; thus freeing them to make the play that they couldn't have played the previous turn due to ko.


How do doors, locked doors, and hidden doors differ? Passageways and Doors have already been cleared up. How does a door differ from a locked door, aside from move cost? How does a locked door differ from a hidden door? When playing as a thief, does his ability to treat it as a regular door mean movement cost goes to 1? Does this apply to hidden doors too?

Doors are a very... very poorly documented section in the rules.

Okay, I've played through a few times with some shop runners, and pored over boardgamegeek (http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/397178/rules-question-locked-and-hidden-doors) -- Here's my best interpretation.

Doors- 1 movement costFundamentally identital to a passageway. The door itself plays an important role with monsters. If a monster is tiny or human sized, they can usually open doors, unless directed otherwise with their monster card. Huge monsters generally can't go through doors unless they have a skill dictated on the card.

Locked Doors- 3 movement costThieves can treat this as a normal door, meaning it will only cost 1 movement point to pass through. Monsters generally can't pass through these unless their cards specify they can break a door down-- allowing all monsters also moving during that turn to pass through the broken doorway. During combat, the movement cost is ignored, and the room is considered "adjacent" and a neighboring munchkin can participate in combat unless the room tile states otherwise. In the rulebook, this is justified by the statement that combat movement "just happens," and doesn't cost anything.

Hidden Doors- 3 movement costWizards can treat this as a normal door, meaning it will only cost 1 movement point to pass through. Nearly all monsters cannot pass through this door, even if they have the ability to break down doors. Only monsters which can see hidden doors, Like King Tut, can pass through a hidden door. Hidden doors do not have to be "discovered", and are not treated as a wall by munchkins. All combat rules for locked doors apply to hidden doors as well.

At no point do doors get treated as corridors unless a monster breaks it down. The presence of a door has the most significant impact on monster movement and movement cost, not munchkin movement.


Swap Plays For Draws and Play X with fewer than X cards on hand Lets say the rules are Draw 1 / Play 4, and the Swap Plays For Draws promotional rule card is in play:

My turn begins and I have zero cards in my hand.
So I draw one card.

If I now want to make use of the Swap Plays For Draws rule, how many cards should I draw?

The rules say "Play 4", but I can only play one card, because I only have one card in my hand. So should I draw 4 cards or one card?

Also, if I first play my only card, can I after that use the Swap Plays For Draws rule and exchange my remaining 3 plays for 3 draws (even though I don't actually have 3 more cards to play)?

This is answered in the Fluxx FAQ:
http://faq.looneylabs.com/question/272

  if you have 3 plays left, you get to draw 3 cards, even if you only have 1 card left in your hand. Of course, now you’ve used up your plays, so you can’t play any of those cards on the current turn.


Can I sacrifice a creature that I lost control of after activating its ability? My opponent controls a Rootwater Hunter enchanted with Charisma and I control a Tar Pitcher.

I tap Tar Pitcher to sacrifice it to deal 2 damage to my opponent. In response, my opponent taps Rootwater Hunter to deal one damage to Tar Pitcher.

My opponent's ability resolves first, he gains control of my Tar Pitcher. Tar Pitcher's ability is still on the stack. I referenced this question so I know it tries to resolve but I am no longer in control of that creature to sacrifice it. Is Tar Pitcher successfully sacrificed and 2 damage dealt?

This doesn't work as described because by the time your opponent has priority to activate the Rootwater Hunter the Tar Pitcher is already in the graveyard. This is because in order to put an ability on the stack you need to pay all of the costs associated with it before your opponent gets priority, in this case that involves sacrificing the Tar Pitcher.
The rules for activating abilities share the same rules as casting spells, excerpts of the relevant rules are

601.2e The player determines the total cost of the spell. Usually this is just the mana cost. Some spells have additional or alternative costs.
601.2g The player pays the total cost in any order. Partial payments are not allowed. Unpayable costs can't be paid.
601.2h Once the steps described in 601.2a–g are completed, the spell becomes cast.

Just substitute ability for spell and you can see that you pay all of the costs before the ability is actually counted as played by the game.


Fiery Temper and Electrostatic Pummeler on the Stack So I've been trying to play these two scenarios in my head, but I'm a little confused.

1). A person casts an Electrostatic Pummeler, and while it is on the stack, I cast a Fiery Temper. The person in response plays a Blossoming Defense. Would this player be able to do that since EP is still technically on the stack?

2). A person casts an EP, and while it is on the stack, I cast a Fiery Temper. The person originally had 3 energy counters. Once the person allows the stack to resolve, would they get another 3 energy counter, and be able to pay them to make EP a 4/4, allowing EP to survive?

I'm new to magic, so I don't understand these things fully yet.

You generally cannot cast a spell that requires a creature as a target while that creature is still on the stack, because by that time it's still a spell.

While a creature card is on the stack, it's not a creature, but a creature spell. On the stack, only spells/abilities can exist, and spells/abilities can only exist on the stack.

  111.1. A spell is a card on the stack. As the first step of being cast (see rule 601, “Casting Spells”), the card becomes a spell and is moved to the top of the stack from the zone it was in, which is usually its owner’s hand. (See rule 405, “Stack.”) A spell remains on the stack as a spell until it resolves (see rule 608, “Resolving Spells and Abilities”), is countered (see rule 701.5), or otherwise leaves the stack. [..]”

When a spell or ability says, for example, "creature" without further specifying the type of object, it means "creature permanent":

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

A creature, on the other hand, is a certain type of permanent, and permanents can only exist on the battlefield; everything on the battlefield is a permanent.

  403.3. Permanents exist only on the battlefield. Every object on the battlefield is a permanent. [..]

Since both Fiery Temper and Blossoming Defense require a "creature" (= "creature permanent") as a target, not a creature spell, neither of you can cast Fiery Temper or Blossoming Defense on the Electrostatic Pummeler while it's on the stack. The creature spell has to resolve first, which results in the Pummeler entering the battlefield as a creature permanent.

Once the Pummeler is on the battlefield and both of you can start casting spells on it, the usual "last in, first out" stack resolution procedure commences.

Note that whenever a spell or ability resolves, either player may play new spells or abilities, even if the stack hasn't fully resolved yet. So if the enemy Electrostatic Pummeler is on the battlefield and you cast Fiery Temper on it, your opponent can respond with Blossoming Defense, let the BD resolve, then activate the EP's ability to make it a 6/6 before your Fiery Temper resolves, thereby saving the EP.


Identify this space combat game with a letter based ship architecture I remember going through an old board game I found in my parents attic when I was a child (early 2000s, however it's an old game, so it could easily have been released in the 80s) and I was hoping you could all help me.
It was a hex-based space combat game, where players designed their fleets to a set number of points (and a desired Tech Level) before play. This box set had little cardboard counters for the ships, although there was a leaflet inside for ordering little cast model ships in various styles.
The most unique part was how the ship was described. It consisted of a bunch of letters in a row, each one representing a single module. Damage would typically involve crossing out letters from left to right, although some weapons had different rules.
An example (off the top of my head):

SSSSAAAHHPdGGOIIII

This would represent a ship with 4 units of shields, 3 armour, some holds, Point Defence and other gubbins, and finally four Ion Engines. So this ship would lose its Shields and Armour first and would lose the engines last.
Finally, I remember there was an expansion pack that brought a new faction along with rules for fighter craft.
Does anyone know what this game is called?

Could this have been part of the Starfire series?  Images show a hexagonal grid & ship counters and the description says:

A "word" makes up a ship. As damage is done between ships, letters are
crossed off from left to right within the "word" until the ship is
destroyed.


With Life and Limb do my forest's suffer from summoning sickness So from what I understand Life and Limb makes your forests into creature. So are you're forests then affected by summoning sickness, and therefore you are unable to be tapped for mana the turn you play them? If so is there a reasonable to animate you're opponents land like this to set them back?

They'll have summoning Sickness. So if your opponent is also in Green, you will set them back if all they have are forests to play.

From the Gatherer Rulings page:

  Forests that enter the battlefield while Life and Limb is on the battlefield will enter the battlefield as creatures. They'll have summoning Sickness.


What can be played during an opponents turn? What types of cards can you play on another players turn / i.e. sorcery or enchantments? Or can only instants/flash be played?

It seems foolish to us as new players that every card other then land can be sent straight to graveyard by an instant counter spell card but can you cast a sorcery based counter spell card during an opponents turn? this basically tells me that you can simply make a deck of counter spells and the opposing player can't play anything but land.....

When can I cast a spell?
Basically:

You can cast instants and flash spells — and activate abilities — whenever you have priority.

You can cast other spells during your main phase, when the stack is empty (i.e. there are no other spells or ability waiting to resolve) and you have priority (see the next section).

Some cards (e.g. Unexpected Results) will allow to cast spells at other times too.

From the Comprehensive Rules:

116.1a A player may cast an instant spell any time he or she has priority. A player may cast a noninstant spell during his or her main phase any time he or she has priority and the stack is empty.
702.8a Flash is a static ability that functions in any zone from which you could play the card it’s on.
“Flash” means “You may play this card any time you could cast an instant.”

There's no such thing as a Sorcery-based counter. It wouldn't work with the rules: you can only counter something when it's on the stack, and you normally can't cast a Sorcery spell when something else is on the stack.
Priority (the short version)
Priority is Magic's system for sequencing plays so that each player has time to think about their actions, when they need it. The most important things you need to know are:

Each player must give the other the opportunity to respond.
The active player always gets the first opportunity to cast something during the phases of his or her own turn.
Once we've begun to resolve a spell or ability, we must follow all the instructions in order before we can do anything else. (For example, if you cast Duress on me, we must do these three things in sequence: I reveal my hand, you pick a card, I discard it. I can't interrupt the game to cast the Lightning Bolt you just picked.)

See page 30 in the Basic Rulebook or section 116 in the Comprehensive Rules for a more detailed definition of priority.
How do I fight a deck full of counterspells?
Counterspells really aren't all-powerful. They're an important part of the game and central to some of the best decks, but, on their own, they really can't carry the day.

Counterspells are reactive. I can't kill you with a counterspell. All I do is disrupt your plays. I need to do something else to actually capitalize on that.

You can only counter something when it's on the stack. If I draw my Cancel a turn after you cast your Ember Swallower, there's nothing I can do; whereas if I draw a Doom Blade at any time, I can use just kill the creature.

In order to counter something you play on your turn, I have to have mana available. That means not casting much stuff on my own turn. I can work around that by building a deck that has a lot of cards I can play at instant speed (like Doom Blade, Sphinx's Revelation, Restoration Angel), but there is an opportunity cost there.

Counterspells are one-for-one. You play a card, I counter it. We're both down a card. That only keeps us at parity. I'll need something else to pull ahead.

So, why do people play counterspells instead of just Doom Blades, then? Counterspells have several things going for them:

Many counterspells can answer a broad variety of cards. Putting a few counters in my deck gives me the flexible cards that can interact with creatures, enchantments, sorceries, planeswalkers, &c.

Countermagic cancel out death triggers and "enters the battlefield" abilities, and can beat cards with protective abilities like hexproof. Casting Doom Blade on a Thragtusk feels a lot like losing; countering one is much nicer.

Most of the competitive decks that play counterspells play them as part of a general suite. They rely on countermagic for flexibility against a lot of deck types (such as decks that win without using creatures), but also use cards like Supreme Verdict, Doom Blade, and Wear // Tear because of the greater efficiency and timing flexibility that they offer.
"Proactive" decks that really want to curve out efficiently are generally better off using discard spells (Duress, Thoughtseize) rather than counterspells. These allows you to you mess with an opponent's strategy — particularly a combo deck — on your own timetable rather than having to wait for them to cast their most important cards.
This answer discusses some specific tactics you can use if you're having trouble against a deck with significant counterspells.
"But my counterspell says it's a Sorcery!"

There was an old Magic set called Portal. It was an attempt to create an easier-to-use introductory product for the game. This set didn't include Instants and really didn't talk about the stack. So instead they'd do stuff like print a Sorcery with special timing rules and bend over backwards to avoid using core game terminology like "counter," "target," and "spell."
I don't recommend using Portal to learn Magic. I very, very much don't recommend it. The terminology is all messed up, the cards are terribly wordy and unclear, and you really won't learn most of what you need to learn to play actual Magic. It's easiest to learn basic Magic using recent sets and the Basic Rulebook (PDF), or playing one of the Duels of the Planeswalkers video game.
Portal cards are playable in regular Magic, but you sort of have to read between the lines and figure out how the card is "really" supposed to be worded. (In general, when you see a card that's just like, "What the heck!?" you should look it up on Gatherer. Oftentimes you can find updated wording that's clearer than the original card text, as well as rulings that help explain common questions people have about the card.)


Can I peek at the cards under Bomat Courier whenever I search my library? Say I've attacked with Bomat Courier three times, and they're the only cards I have that are exiled face down. Therefore when I search my library, I am in principle able to deduce which cards are under Bomat Courier. This could matter a lot if, e.g., two of those cards are a Force of Will and a blue card to pitch to it (the Force of Will is even immune to targeted discard).

However, to figure out what's under Bomat Courier from searching my library is time-consuming. Therefore, can I just peek at the cards under Bomat Courier whenever I search my library?

You can't look at the cards under Bomat Courier. The card's reminder text even says so explicitly. The fact that you could deduce that information doesn't change it.

This is covered by rule 406.3:

  Exiled cards are, by default, kept face up and may be examined by any player at any time. Cards “exiled face down” can’t be examined by any player except when instructions allow it. [...]


What are the rules for "Level Up" cards? There are 5 cards that require you to spend some number of "Level Up" cards in order to play them. (DarkCannon, All About Endurance, Double Power, Infamous Dr. Wily, and Pink Pixel Brat)

The "Level Up" cards themselves come in 3 types - MegaMan, GutsMan, and Roll.

All of these cards were only distributed through tournament participation rather than through the regular card sets. Perhaps for this reason, I did not see any mention of these "Level Up" cards in the rulebooks, so I do not know how they are meant to be played. The Level Up cards have no text on them to explain how to get them into play.

I am looking for a complete explanation of the rules for these cards. This would include any deck building restrictions, when and how the Level Up card comes into play, and what happens when it is spent for another card's effect.

The "Level Up!" cards themselves do not go in your deck and do not count toward the 60-card size of your deck. You begin the game with your "Level Up!" cards in a pile to the side of your play area.
The three "Level Up!" cards (MegaMan, GutsMan, and Roll) are functionally identical. They are not restricted to use only by decks of the pictured character.
To spend a "Level Up!" card, you move it to a separate pile. The spent "Level Up!" card cannot be used again for the rest of the game.
You can start the game with as many "Level Up!" cards as you want.
In tournament play, the number of "Level Up!" cards you could use was restricted by "the level indicated on your tournament ticket". As the "Level Up!" cards were given out based on "experience points" gained by tournament participation, I believe the restriction based on "your tournament ticket" meant you were only allowed to use as many "Level Up!" cards as you had personally received as prizes through the Level Up tournament program.
The information contained in this answer comes from the article Level Up Your Game and Earn Exclusive Cards! by Dan Bojanowski, Manager of Organized Play.

Beginning July 2nd, gamers everywhere will get the chance to play Decipher's newest trading card game – MegaMan TCG. The gameplay and fast-paced action will be enough to draw players in, but we're taking it one step further with the organized play program.
Similar to Decipher's .hack//ENEMY TCG, MegaMan TCG tournament players will be able to 'Level Up.' Every time a player participates in a sanctioned MegaMan TCG tournament, they will earn Experience Points. These Experience Points will reflect both a players' skill and participation in tournaments. When your ranking reaches 1,000 points, you will receive an email with a special code from Decipher. When this code is entered on the Decipher website, you will receive a special Level Up! package. Each package includes a foil Level Up! card and a special foil promo card. Each time your ranking increases by another 1,000 points, you will receive a code for a new prize package.
The Level Up! card you receive is randomly selected from a pool of three different versions, each featuring a different character: MegaMan, Gutsman, or Roll. The only difference between versions is the character featured; there is no difference in gameplay.
The Level Up! card is a special card that doesn't count toward your 60-card deck. You can bring as many Level Up! cards to the game as you want, up to the level indicated on your tournament ticket. Before the game begins, place your Level Up! cards to one side of your play area. Level Up! cards are used to play the special promo cards.
The special promo card you receive is randomly selected from a pool of five different cards. The promo plays like a regular event or BattleChip card and follows regular deck construction rules (no more than four of any one promo card in your deck). These cards are exclusive to the organized play system. Click on the thumbnail to see Double Power, one of the tournament promo cards you can earn every time you Level Up! (The other tournament promos can be seen on the Tournament Card List.)
To play a promo card, you'll have to "spend" (remove from play) one or more of your Level Up! cards. Place cards you have removed from play off to the side in a separate pile. You can't use those cards in that game again, but they'll be available again when you start your next game.


Is the Go! action card ever worth playing? In Monopoly Deal, there is a Go! Card which uses one of your three plays for the turn in order to draw two additional cards. It seems the key to winning in this game revolve around emptying your hand to draw 5. Let's start from that scenario:

turn x  : draw 5, play 3, leaves 2 in hand
turn x+1: draw 2, play 3, leaves 1 in hand
turn x+2: draw 2, play 3, leaves 0 in hand

So with this we have 3 turns, 9 cards, or an average of 3 cards per turn.

Now let's say we play a go:

turn x  : draw 5, play 2 and a go, leaves 5 in hand
turn x+1: draw 2, play 3, leaves 4 in hand
turn x+2: draw 2, play 3, leaves 3 in hand
turn x+3: draw 2, play 3, leaves 2 in hand
turn x+4: draw 2, play 3, leaves 1 in hand
turn x+5: draw 2, play 3, leaves 0 in hand

So now, in six turns, we've instead managed to draw 17 cards over 6 turns, or 2.8 cards per turn. So we see FEWER cards per turn if we play a go, plus one less action.

Should I be using my goes for money instead to maximize the number of cards I see?

In addition to cards, it is very important to consider tempo when deciding what moves to make in a variable-hand-size card game... if your hand is strong enough on its own merit without having to draw additional cards, that's great, but you're going to run into situations where playing the 'Go' as a money card and playing another card already in hand is not going to be as good as playing the 'Go' card as an action card and then playing one of the cards that were drawn by the 'Go' action.

I would say that the only time that you should play the 'Go' card as money EVERY TIME is when it is the last card in your hand, and the last action you can take (but even then you're only betting that the 5 cards you'll draw at the beginning of your next turn are better than the four cards that you'd draw if you played the go card and drew two your next turn.)


What strategies are effective against a spot destruction deck? In Standard (Return to Ravnica, M14, and the first Theros set), a friend of mine is currently working with a tri-color RGB deck heavy on control via spot destruction: Abrupt Decay, Dreadbore, Ultimate Price, and other cards that follow the format of "Destroy target X".

Between those cards, said friend can fairly effectively keep our side of the board clear and pave the way for a powerful mid- to late-game creature (e.g. Polukranos, World Eater, which doubles as another destroyer) to end the game.

What strategies are generally effective against destruction-focused control decks like this? (Bonus points for strategies currently viable in Standard)

What's best against spot removal?

The absolute best decks against decks packed with spot removal is decks without any (good) targets for them. This will make those cards dead or bad draws. So how do you do that?

Play a deck without creatures. Maybe you can build a combo-, planeswalker- or mill-deck without creatures?
Creatures with hexproof, shroud or other protection. Their spells can't hit them, so they're useless.
Low values targets. Tokens and creatures with CITP effects comes to mind. It's not fun playing Dreadbore on a Lingering Souls token or on a Venser, Shaper Savant.

--

In your specific case: Is anyone playing control decks? The deck you describe tend to have a quite rough time against those.


A card game that has an ultimate skill for each character I can't really recall what is this board / card game.

I am not sure is it a werewolf, vampire, some other social deduction game, or it's a different one from what I have mentioned.

Each character card will have an ultimate skill. In order to use the skill, you need to reveal your role card.

Anyone can figure out what is this game?

Sorry for the small amount of details.

Sounds to me like you are thinking of Shadow Hunters. Its got some social deduction aspects to it, and each player has a special ability that they can use by revealing who they are.


Good counter to Possession in Dominon: Alchemy It seems like Possession in Dominion: Alchemy is one of those cards that only very experienced players really know how to counter. Heck, I tend to see myself as an experienced Dominion player and I don't really see any ways to counter Possession at all, besides for the obvious way of trying to accumulate more Possessions than the other player(s).
Does anyone have any idea as to a reasonable counter of Possession?

Disclaimer: I do not own Alchemy, (but have played with it before), and have heard rumors from friends who have played with Possession before that it is an exceedingly powerful card and incredibly difficult, if not impossible to counter

A good discussion with lots of tips to that exact same question is here: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=10001.0.

In general, more often than not you can just ignore Possession. It's really expensive, and on many boards, you can just get enough points without it that your opponent who is going for it will be too far behind. Remember that if you have $6 and a potion, then if that Potion had been a silver instead, you'd have $8 for a Province.

Attack cards are another good counter. If your opponent wants to make the best out of the extra turn, he'll have to play cards that hurt his own deck. Be careful to not build a super strong deck that can buy many Provinces each turn; but if your opponent can't do more than buy one Province or Duchy on the extra turn, then he's not getting a lot of use out of the Possession.

If the Kingdom makes it possible to have a deck that can play many Possessions per turn, then the best thing may be to get Possessions yourself and play as many as you can.