Killian, Ink Duelist; Target "Creature" Something I wondered about Killian, Ink Duelist was how this card's cost-reduction ability interacted with spells that interact with creature cards or spells and not creature permanents.
Spells like Empyrial Armor and Crib Swap can both target a creature permanent on the battlefield which allows these spells to cost less to cast if Killian is on the battlefield under your control while casting and targeting a creature with those spells.
However, something like Animate Dead targets a "creature card in a graveyard," so is it implied that with Killian on the battlefield under your control, Animate Dead costs less to cast because it targets a "creature" anyway?
How would Killian interact with Venser, Shaper Savant regarding  returning a target spell to its owner's hand if the spell targeted is a creature spell?
Does a spell targeting a creature not have to be a permanent on the battlefield for the spell to cost less with Killian out?

Killian's ability only affects spells targeting creature permanents.
Rule 109.2 says

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.

Killian's ability refers to "creatures", which is a card type, without using any of the specified words, so it means creature permanents.


Is there much strategy and planning in 7-Wonders or is mostly luck? I have played about 15 games of Seven Wonders now.

When I ask the winning player why they won, they tend to tell me what they did rather than why they did it, and rarely does it involve anything clever.  The smartest thing I've seen a winning player do was start with the board with Glass as a resource and bury to Glass cards to build up his wonder for the first two phases of his wonder.  But winning often is related to things out of your control, such as

Your neighbor builds up lots of resources so that you can use them for trading.
No other player goes for the same strategy as you so they don't build the cards you want.
Your neighbors build up little military, so you don't need to waste resources contending with them and can still get lots of points from beating them.
Your neighbors pick the same strategy as each other, so you can get a valuable guild.
You get access to resources needed to progress through building your wonder early.

In contrast, Dominion and Race for the Galaxy, both games that I really enjoy, a skilled player can exert a lot of control over the game.  I readily admit luck is a factor in both games, but there is a lot of room for skill to influence the outcome.  Whether its from picking a better strategy from the initial board setup and picking appropriate card counters as the game progresses in Dominion, or building a tableau to mitigate advantages in probable phase selections and choosing actions to counter opponents selections in Race, there is a big return on skill for both of those games.  I just don't see the same room for planning, strategic decisions and maneuvering in Seven Wonders.

What am I missing?

7 Wonders is a very different kind of game than Race or Dominion.  Race & Dominion are both "group solitare" games.  By that I mean that there is little one can do to affect one's opponent.  The game is mostly your own strategy.

7 Wonders is strictly an "adaptive" game. You cannot go in with any kind of strategy; even choosing wonders is random according to the rules.  Every decision you make affects all other opponents, neighbors more than the others.  If you don't take that into account, by, say knowing "I'm going to pass these 6 cards, and I know my left neighbor will likely choose this card, so I should choose to do X", then yes, the game will feel random.

My biggest criticism of this type of game is that weak players give other players big advantages.  If you want to enjoy 7 wonders, play with people who know the game well, start thinking about everyone's tactics not just your own, and stop worrying about strategy.


How do you pronounce "Hacan" in Twilight Imperium? One of the iconic races in Twilight Imperium are The Emirates of Hacan.  However, there is no pronunciation guide.

I can think of many ways it could be pronounced:

HA-KAN /hɑkɑn/, rhymes with "spa don"
HA-ken /'hɑkən/, rhymes with "glocken"
huh-KAN /hə'kɑn/, rhymes with "pecan" (for some people)
HAY-ken /'hejkən/, rhymes with "shaken"
HACK-ken /'hækən/, rhymes with "slacken"

and so on...

Official sources are appreciated.

Short answer: Ha- Kahn

Rationale:

There is no official pronunciation from Fantasy Flight as of yet (and I hope they don't release one, because this is one of the best things to argue about in the game).  That said, we have some theoretical basis to come up with one by considering that "proper" pronunciation will vary by language.

The first question we have to ask is whose word is "Hacan"?  Is that their spelling or the Anglicization?  I am assuming here that the language of Federation of Sol descends from English, which is not a perfect assumption since Sol is both the English and the Latin name for the sun, but they do at least use the latin alphabet.  I would further assume that "Hacan" is the Anglicization or at least "Solanization", since it is written in the latin alphabet.  A lion race probably has different phonemes than humans (due to their different anatomy and vocal chords) and the true pronunciation may not be easily expressed in the Latin alphabet.

The true pronunciation in Hacaneese is probably something with a growl or a roar in the middle, since this is a race of lions, and I assume that is what is implied by the heavy use of A's in the word.  Similarly, I assume that the Xxcha begins with a clicking of the beak that can only be properly made with a beak (that humans lack).

This then leaves us with the question of how close "Hacan" is to the actual word in Hacaneese.  There are three typical possibilities.  One is that it is very close.  For example, the typical English pronunciation of "Shanghai" is only off by one phoneme from the proper pronunciation in Mandarin (ignoring tones).  Another is that it is an approximation with some creative liberties, such as the English "Belgrade", which bears only mild resemblance to the Serbian "Beograd".  Finally, we could be in a situation where we use a totally different word, such as "Germany" instead of "Deutschland".

In any case, it is likely that "Hacan" follows at least vaguely regular English* pronunciation rules, or else the Federation would have spelled it differently.
 The fact that the Sol word for the Xxcha attempts to capture the sense of the word in the Xxcha language leads me to believe the same is true of the word "Hacan", meaning that "Hacan" being in the "Germany" category is unlikely (since it at least resembles the true pronunciation).  I would also contend that Hacaneese is different enough from future English that it is also unlikely to be in the "Shanghai" category since a near perfect phonetic analogue is unlikely to exist in English.  This means that the word is an English approximation of some lion word with a roar/grows in it, but is as concerned with having a regular English pronunciation as it is with mimicking the authentic pronunciation.

I think that "Ha - Kahn" would be the English word closest to the true pronunciation that is still consistent with the spelling and English rules of pronunciation.  There is precedent in English for a mid word "C" followed by an "a" to be pronounced "K" (ex. recap) and the hard C much more closely resembles a roar/growl than the soft "Ha- san".  I believe the A's have the same pronunciation as each other since this is still a reasonable English pronunciation that vaguely resembles lion noises.

* "English" being a stand in for "Future English or whatever other language the Federation of Sol uses"

Caveats:

We only have the Xxcha as the demonstration that "Hacan" is not in the "Germany" category.  We are also assuming that the language of the Federation closely resembles modern English, which it may very well not as even the same language changes a lot over thousands of years, so even if they use English, it may be a very different English (look up the Great Vowel Shift for an example of this).  Given these two things, you can make a case for basically any other pronunciation on the grounds that we use a totally different word from the one they use or that Federation pronunciation has migrated enough to defy our intuitions.  After all, Xxcha is a word that starts with a double "X", which no current English word does.


Full written card lists for sets MTG Is there anywhere where I can get a full card list just names for sets without all the mana costing and text or pictures. for example in the form:

  Card one
  card two
  card three

and so forth.

There are multiple places to obtain set checklists that approximately match your description:

Gatherer Advanced Search allows you to search by expansion. If you choose the output format "Checklist", the results page will be a list of cards with Collector's Number, Name, Artist, Color, Rarity, and Expansion Set for each.
Scryfall allows you to search by expansion with the search text set:[set code] or by using the advanced search. This output can be formatted as a checklist, which shows a variety of information about each card. This page also lists all of the sets in reverse chronological order, to easily find the one you want.
The Wizards Play Network has deck checklists for each set, which appear to be intended for use in limited events, but you could print them out and use them however you want. For each card, it lists just the Name, with box or two next to it. However, these lists appear to only go back to Urza's Saga, so if you need the earliest sets, you'll need to look elsewhere.
PucaTrade has a list of every Magic expansion set, and each of those links goes to a page that lists the name of each card along with the expansion symbol colored to indicate rarity.


In Scrabble, how to determine the main word if the player has just played one single tile but formed two different words? Suppose that a Scrabble player has just made his/her turn. He/she played just a single tile but made two different words. One of the newly formed words is horizontal and another one is vertical.

I am quite new to Scrabble, and I know there is a concept called the main word. I wonder how to determine the main word in the above case. Is it simply determined randomly?

Main words are not a concept of the game of Scrabble itself, only of the written Scrabble notation commonly used to record tournament games (and likely also found in some computerised versions of the game), although it has since been incorporated into some rule sets that also outline the notation system.

Since the notation system is used simply to track moves, it doesn't matter which combination in your example would be chosen as the main word - both words still score the same within the game, and the notated move would still create the same two words on the board if the game were to be replayed.

As such it doesn't matter if the main word is selected randomly, always horizontal, always vertical, alphabetically, or otherwise.


Why play Land Grant? When looking through recent results of Pauper daily events in Magic Online, I noticed that some of the Infect decks are using Land Grant.

For the life of me, I can't figure out what this card is doing in the deck.

It doesn't accelerate your mana
It doesn't find lands other than Forests
You have to reveal your hand to use it (or pay 1G, but I'm pretty sure that no one ever does that)

In other words, it's functionally identical to just having another Forest in your deck, except with additional downside. So why are they playing it? Pauper is a very competitive format on MTGO, so I don't expect people to put cards in their deck for no good reason... but I can't figure out what the reason is.

The card has a lot of uses, similarly to fetch lands and cantrip spells. Generally:

It lets you play less actual lands (like in 1-land Belcher Decks).
It lets you find the right land (when you are using dual lands).
It's a free way to shuffle your deck.
It's a free way to increase storm count.
It filters your deck making it slightly smaller. By using free cantrips
like Land Grant and Gitaxian Probe you make your deck virtually
smaller, thus increasing the chances of all the other cards showing up
during a match.

In this particular case, knowing how infect decks work in Pauper, I would say it's basically reason #5 (deck thinning).


Clue - getting suggestion right early on, what happens? My family and I were playing a "Nightmare Before Christmas" version of clue tonight. The rules were very similar to the original clue but seems to leave some parts pretty ambiguous.

We were about 3 rounds through and I had gotten into a room I wanted to make a suggestion on. I named a person and item and no one had any of the cards in their hands.

The rules said that you had to get to the center to make an accusation. However, since I happened to guess right (no one could prove me false) I wasn't sure what to do.

The players all knew that no one else had the cards so it became a race to the center to make the official accusation.

Anyone remember how the original clue works? Can you make a suggestion from any room, and if so and no one can prove you false, what happens?

Rule from the Game:

Starting a Rumor helps you try to determine which three cards are in the envelope. After moving into a Location, except the Fountain, you may Start a Rumor: name a Suspect; an Item; and the Location you are in. Move the suspect’s Suspect Mover and Item into the Location with you (if they are not already there)

PROVING A RUMOR TRUE OR FALSE

As soon as you’ve started a Rumor, the other players try to prove it false. The first to try is the player to your immediate left. If that player has one of the named Rumor cards in their hand, they show it to you and only you. If the player has more than one of the cards named, they select one (just one) to show you.

WHAT IF A PLAYER CAN’T SHOW ME A CARD?
If the player to your left has none of the named Rumor cards, then the next player to the left tries to prove your Rumor false. And so on until you have been shown one card.

If no one can prove your Rumor false, your turn is over. Leave the Suspect Mover and Item token you moved where they are.

Making an Accusation:

When you think you’ve figured out which three cards are in the envelope, go to the center location of the game board to Make An Accusation. Say your accusation out loud: “I accuse Sally with the Bear Trap in Oogie’s Lair.” Then, secretly look at the cards in the envelope.

WERE YOU RIGHT?
You win! Congratulations, you solved the mystery! Reveal the cards in the Mystery Envelope to everyone.

WERE YOU WRONG?
Oops! You’ve made a mistake and are out of the game. Secretly return the cards to the Mystery Envelope — don’t tell the other players which one you got wrong. Keep your cards hidden and keep answering other players’ questions. Do not ask further questions or make any further accusations.

An important strategy in Clue (and its variants) is to frequently use cards from your own hand as part of your Rumor. Doing this can give you more information, and it also means that the game doesn't degenerate in the way you describe: when no one is able to disprove your Rumor, they won't all race to the center (unless they're lucky guessers, or you don't have a good poker face) because they can't know whether the cards are in the center envelope or are in your hand.

However, original Clue (assuming these are the original rules) does also solve your problem by allowing you to make an Accusation on your turn from anywhere, including immediately after your Rumor turns up no disproof.


Can I activate abilities in response to spells? If my opponent plays Kill! Destroy! on my Caldera Kavu, can I activate its ability to turn it black?

Yes.  You can activate an ability (unless restricted) any time you have priority. Once the spell is on the stack, you place the ability of Caldera Kavu on top. That resolves first, so Kavu is black. Then Kill! Destroy! rechecks the targeting. Since it is invalid, it fizzles and is countered.

  112.3b Activated abilities have a cost and an effect. They are written as “[Cost]: [Effect.] [Activation instructions (if any).]” A player may activate such an ability whenever he or she has priority.


Should the core Battlestar Galactica game adopt the revised Cylon Resurrection Ship? In Battlestar Galactica, revealed Cylon players can use the Resurrection Ship location to pass their unrevealed loyalty cards to another player at the table.  This can be necessary when one player has drawn multiple "You Are A Cylon" cards or can be used to sow confusion by giving "You Are Not A Cylon" cards away.

In the Pegasus expansion, the Resurrection Ship location no longer passes loyalty cards.  Instead, when a Cylon player reveals himself, he always passes his unrevealed cards to another player as part of the reveal process.

It's not clear which situation happened during Pegasus development:

The passing was made part of the reveal process in order to address an imbalance, and the Resurrection Ship location was changed in response to this
The Resurrection Ship location was changed for other reasons, and the passing was moved to the reveal process in response to this.

Having just played a game where I happened to be dealt both "You Are A Cylon" cards, I'm starting to think that the base game should use the Pegasus card-passing rules.

The process of revealing is purposely built so that the Cylon player doesn't get to do any "Cylon actions" until the round after he reveals - for one thing, this prevents a player from revealing and immediately playing his Super Crisis card.

A Cylon dealt both Cylon cards, however, ends up having to wait 2 full rounds to get all the stuff he needs to do done:

He needs to pass the other Cylon card
He needs to play his Super Crisis

Now, he won't always NEED to play the Super Crisis, but in most cases that will probably be true, particularly since there has been only one Cylon player sabotaging things to this point.  Whichever order the Cylon chooses, it's not great for him.  If he passes loyalty cards first, it probably looks pretty suspicious that he didn't play the Super Crisis, but prioritized card-passing more.  The humans are likely to assume the card recipient is now also a Cylon.  On the other hand, if he plays the Super Crisis first, there is one more human available to help against it for a round until the card is finally passed.

This two-turn latency to get all his ducks in a row seems like a harsh penalty, especially on top of the minor penalty that he's been the sole Cylon to this point.  Automatically passing as part of the reveal gets things back to the more "normal" setup - 2 Cylons, and a 1 turn delay before Super Crisis can be played.  It also makes the passing of the loyalty cards something that is not inherently suspicious, since it always happens.

If this had come about in Pegasus through just a rule change listed in the instructions, it would be a no-brainer to apply it to the core game.  But since it involves changes to the board that are affected by other Pegasus-specific stuff, it's not clear how applicable this should be.

Since I haven't played Pegasus, it made me wonder: is there a reason why it would be bad to apply this rule change to the core game?

First, Pegasus allows a Cylon to pass his unrevealed loyalty cards only if they are at distance 6 or less, if they're at 7+ then he's stuck with the cards.

Second, there's no reason why you couldn't use the Pegasus version of the Ship, as long you are using the correct and full version of the Ship. Wherein you only draw one skill card and as an action you may draw a super crisis card.

Although I will point out that this logic that Cylons NEED to play their super crisis card, and spending a turn to pass the loyalty card would only be done if it was the other "You are a Cylon" card is just wrong. Super Crises are situational, no point in playing fleet mobilization if there's nothing on the board. And sowing suspicions is what you want the human players to deal with, otherwise they'll be able to freely XO and get stuff done.


Timing of Roma (B)/Catan (B) and Courtesan's Guild? 7 Wonders with Leaders extension (and optionally Catan wonder)

In the same turn (Alice and Bob are neighbours):

Alice builds the Courtesan's Guild

→ she can copy a leader

Bob builds 2nd or 3rd Roma (B) stage (or 1st Catan (B) stage)

→ he can recruit a leader

Can Alice place the Courtesan token on the leader card which Bob recruits in the same turn?

On boardgamegeek.com, Jacek Deimer says he has asked Antoine Bauza (the game author):

  If Courtesan Guild is built in the same turn that ROMA/CATAN recruits extra leader, can it copy leader recruited during the same turn?

Antoine answered:

  No

So Alice has to choose a leader card to copy (guild card effect) before Bob recruits his leader (wonder effect).


Does "defeat" trigger before/after battle abilities? Specifically in regards to Mawgarn's Axe which allows defeating a monster when moving through a dungeon area.

Unfortunately Defeat is not addressed within the Lexicon.

Dungeon abilities are resolved before battles.  Thus, this would trigger prior to any Before Battle ability.


How large are the zones? I've tried a few missions now but I'm a bit confused still with how large a zone really is. Is there any indication somewhere where one zone ends and the next one starts? (outside of buildings)

On the streets a zone is a variable-sized area edged by building walls and pedestrian crossings.
From the Zombicide rulebook (page 5):

ZONE
Inside a building, a Zone is a room.
On the street, a Zone is the area between two pedestrian
crossings and the walls of buildings along
the street. A single Zone may extend over two tiles
or even four tiles.

For example, in the following image, the red boxes identify the different zones of the map:


What's the etymology of the name Eldraine? Ravnica is based on a Serbo-Croatian word for plain.

And the other planes, like Phyrexia (basically "land of Phyresis") seem to have etymologies for their names...

So, what's the etymology of the name Eldraine?

I think the name comes from two words, Old and Land.

Eld is part of the word "elder". Other answers think that it relates to "Eldritch" but "Eldritch" also just means old.

Raine is like in "Ukraine" which literately translates to Borderland
From Wiktionary

  1651 Ukrain, 1671 Ukraine, 1688 Ucrania, Ukrania, 1762 Ocraine.
  Adaptation of Polish Ukraina, Russian Украи́на (Ukraína), or Ukrainian
  Украї́на (Ukrajína), from the specific use, originally meaning
  “borderland”

Now clearly Wizards took liberty with this. I am not sure the R in the world was taken correctly, but in our minds "-ania" is a place, and many fantasy writers use this.

So the game Land of Old fits perfectly for a place full of Arthurian knights and fairy tales


Pawn Promotion Limit? We bought a chess set in which the rules state that pawn promotion occurs when the pawn moves to the light square in the upper left corner of the opponent's first row. So, this cannot occur when the pawn reaches any square in the last row?  All the other answers to pawn promotion do not address a specific square rule.

Pawns promote when they reach any square on the back row.  The rulebook you got is either wrong or you are misreading it.


How to easily differentiate Catan expansion pieces? The only thing holding me back from playing Settlers with BOTH the Traders and Barbarians set and the Seafarers set at once is the thought of sorting the pieces out at the end and getting everything back into the correct boxes. Is there a marking method out there that does not mar the beauty of the pieces but makes packing-up easier?

For the tiles it's quite easy to write the expansion (or print it out on a sticker for a nicer look) on the bottom.


How to get pieces for my board game? I am creating a board game which requires 2 colors with 5 pieces each. As of right now, I use pennies and dimes. What is an easy way to get pieces for my board game?

Gamecrafter allows you to buy all sorts of pieces for your game.  If you use their pieces, you can even upload your game and have people buy it on demand.


Can the Pukka 1-shot the Fool? In Blood on the Clocktower, the Fool is immune to their first death:

The first time you die, you don't.

This ability, like all abilities, goes away if the character is drunk or poisoned.
The Pukka's ability seems like it could potentially counteract the Fool:

Each night, choose a player: they are poisoned until tomorrow night, then die. You act on the first night.

While the Fool is poisoned, they are not immune to their first death. However, this wording of the Pukka's ability (specifically the "they are poisoned until tomorrow night, then die") is unclear - "until" and "then" make me think that perhaps when the Fool dies to the Pukka, they are not at that moment poisoned, and therefore their ability would trigger to prevent that first death.
With no other interactions involved, can the Pukka kill the Fool on their first attack?

Yes, it appears the fool can be killed without their ability working if targeted by the pukka

If Pukka is in play, nobody is safe. The Fool and the Sailor can not be protected by their character ability etc. Also, since the Pukka chooses who to kill a full night earlier than normal, it is beneficial for all good players to reveal their characters and information to the group publicly as soon as possible. Sometimes, with other Demons, it can be beneficial for some good players to not reveal who they are, so that the Demon attacks certain players and leaves others alone - but with the Pukka, this is not the case. Reveal everything, and work as a team to bring that pesky poisoner to justice!


Do you get change from cards in Ascension? Say I have three cards in my hand Ascension, each worth two points.

Am I allowed to buy two cards worth three points each (As I had six total), or can I only buy a three point and a two point card as I've used two cards in my hand to pay for the three-point card?

Put another way, do I get change when I spend the points on a card?

You can buy 2 cards costing three runes each, but not because you get "change".

When you play a card worth 2 runes, what that does is adds 2 runes to the pool of runes you have available to spend. So when you play 3 cards like that, you now have 6 runes in the pool of runes to spend. It no longer matters at all how the runes got there. You have 6 runes to spend, and you can spend them however you like.


Love letter: If you discard a constable and lose, do you get an affection token? In the rules, if you are eliminated with the constable in your discard pile, you gain an affection token.

If I discard the constable, and then lose on points at the end of the round, have I been eliminated and thus get an affection token? Or did I just lose, and not get an affection token?

You must be eliminated before the end of the round.

Text from Constable:

  If this card is in your discard pile when you are knocked out of the round, gain an Affection Token.

(Emphasis mine)

In the rulebook for the original Love Letter, the phrase "knocked out of the round" is used several times, and in each case it is only referring to being eliminated while the round is still going. Example:

  If you discard the Princess—no
  matter how or why—she has tossed
  16
  your letter into the fire. You are
  knocked out of the round.

(Emphasis mine)

Under the rules for "End of a round", no mention is made of being knocked out:

  The player with the
  highest ranked person wins the
  round.

So being "knocked out of a round" is something that specifically happens from the effects of a card that was discarded.


Do I get to keep the 2nd Kalonian Twingrove when I got it via a Mimic Vat? Say I have this situation: I have a Mimic Vat out. An opponent's non-token Kalonian Twingrove dies during my turn and I choose to imprint it and put it as a copy token on my side of the battlefield.

Does the "When Kalonian Twingrove enters the battlefield..." trigger for me and thus I get 2 of them?
If 1. is true, do I only have to exile the first Kalonian Twingrove token by Mimic Vat on the next end step and get to keep the cloned token from it's "...enters the battlefield..." trigger?

The rulings on Mimic Vat say:

  Any enters-the-battlefield abilities of the exiled card will trigger when the token is put onto the battlefield. Any "as [this permanent] enters the battlefield" or "[this permanent] enters the battlefield with" abilities of the exiled card will also work.

This means that you will get one token copy of a Kalonian Twingrove, and one Treefolk Warrior token. The Treefolk Warrior token won't be exiled, as it wasn't created by the Mimic Vat.

This is assuming you have any forests in play. If you do not, then both tokens will immediately die for having 0 toughness and vanish!


Difference between a knight and a meeple What is the difference between a knight and a meeple in carcassonne? What about the big Meeple? Can he count as a knight?

The meeples are any of the roles in the game. Knight, thief, farmer or monk. The big one counts as two.


When can sea units support land battles, and vice versa? In the 1st edition rule book it is explained that ships can support an adjacent battle:

  Ship units may support adjacent combat in a sea area or a ...

But what if I'm attacking from a spot that touches water, into a spot that does not touch water? The rules don't ever specify what the battle area is. It makes intuitive sense that the ships wouldn't actually be able to cross land, but since the rules don't specify the answer it has become a question for my gaming group.

This would also be the question for land units. Do the units need to be touching the defending land/sea area? Or would they be allowed to be called in from areas adjacent to the attacking land area?

I'm only familiar with the 2nd Edition, but I believe it's similar. (This question doesn't list include support in it's list of differences.)

When thinking about support, it doesn't matter where you're attacking from. The battle takes place in the region troops enter to attack, and only units (ships or land units) bordering the defending region can offer support to either side.

This makes sense: you can't march your troops to the border and yell taunts until the defenders come to you, you have to go to them. Hence attacks are initiated by a March order. It doesn't matter at all what regions border the region your attackers came from. Only the regions bordering the one region where combat occurs--the region being attacked--can offer support to the combat.

Regarding your last point, land units can never support a naval battle. They can't swim well enough.

I bet this was a common confusion from the 1st Edition; the 2nd Edition rules seemed to really drive both of these points home.


duplicate bridge revoke not agreed upon A strange one, for sure.

After the hand was played, cards returned to board but before the next round was called, the defenders realized, in discussing the hand, that the declarer had revoked.

The declarer did not agree and the dummy couldn't remember (!).  One declarer (very good memory and very honest - ex-director of the club) explained card by card the play.

The declarer said "I don't remember it that way" but had no other explanation of how the cards had been played.  Both defenders agreed (of course) on the way things had gone.

The defender said:

  "10 of clubs lead, won by K in other defender's hand (agreed by all),
  Jack of hearts lead, ducked by declarer, allowed to win the trick
  (dummy had two small hearts).

  Next heart lead, trumped by declarer (diamonds trump).

  Next few tricks and then a heart lead again, won by declarer with the
  Ace he should have played on the first trick (he having only two
  hearts also).

So, 3 diamonds making 4.

Scored and then director called.  I believe that it is still a revoke since it was the last hand in a round and the next round was not called yet.  But the penalty?  Since the declarer doesn't agree?  But has no other explanation except "I wouldn't have let the first heart ride" kinda bewilderingly.

I thought a one trick penalty (since he seems to have revoked and later had the Ace left to play and win a trick) was in order with an adjustment if necessary later.

However, he made 4, would have made 4 if he had played correctly, so is making 3 fair when he doesn't agree?  I don't know what to do.  I am a fill in director and haven't had this come about before.

There is a standard pattern here that may be applied to numerous difficult decisions:

Politely inform Declarer that as he cannot contest the explanation of play provided by the defenders, you must tentatively accept their version, and thus are required by law to assign the normal revoke penalty. Inform Declarer that he is entitled to appeal this ruling, and that you will promptly assemble a suitable committee upon conclusion of play if he so requests. Ask declarer if he wishes to make such an appeal, and if he replies in the affirmative arrange for the three best and most respected players of the club to act as the committee.

Allow declarer a few minutes after the game to refresh his memory of the play with a (supervised) examination [of the board], to prepare a rebuttal to defenders' description of the play.

In order to ensure that the committee proceeds efficiently remind them that their prerogative is strictly to determining the facts, and that given a determination of the facts you will apply the rules by the book. You are the Judge, and they are the jury - not the other way around. Declarer presents his case first, followed by the Defenders, followed by a simple recap by Declarer. Committee members may then pose questions to both sides. Get a determination of the facts from the committee, and apply the Laws; politely explain the result to both parties.

Done correctly the entire process (for a simple determination of facts such as here) should be over in less than 10 minutes. Don't let either side or the jury waste time.

Remember to thank both side later for creating a situation that enabled you to practice your committee work.

Update:

The key here is that "I don't remember." is not a defence in any circumstances; but "I need time to refresh my memory in order to prepare a defence." is a valid request.


Are Raw Materials stored lost? You have coal stored at a power plant and then win a bid on an oil powered plant.  If you discard your coal plant to buy the oil plant and have no other coal plants, do you just lose the left over coal?

You have to either move them to an appropriate power plant or lose them, if you cannot store them. From the Rulebook, p. 3, emphasis mine:

  During the game each player can have only 3 power plants at any time.
  When a player buys a fourth plant, he must discard one of his other
  power plants. The player may move resources from the discarded power
  plant to his remaining three power plants, if they match the
  resources used by one or more of the retained power plants. If there
  is no capacity left or no matching power plant for the resources from
  the discarded plant, the player returns the resources to the
  supply (not the resource market).

Please note that, even if you can store the resources elsewhere, you are not obliged to. You may still want to build over that power plant and lose the resources, if you are planning to buy them out in this round. This has been clarified by the official 2F-Spiele FAQ:

  Q: May a player dump fuel that could be moved? A player was buying an oil plant, and discarding a coal plant along with its fuel. He
  didn't want to move fuel to his hybrid plant because he was going to
  corner the market in oil. Corollary: He could have transferred coal
  from the hybrid to the coal plant just to dump it.

  A: Yes. You are not obliged to move them.

Example 1: You have plants #04 (coal), #13 (eco), #21 (hybrid). The #04 plant has 2 coal tokens on it. You buy the #26 plant (oil), wishing to build over the #04. You may either:

Move first the coal tokens on the #21, thus preserving them, and then build over the #04.
Keep the coal tokens on the #04 and build over it, thus losing them.

Example 2: On the same token, if you have plants #04 (coal), #13 (eco), #14 (trash) and you build the #25 (coal) over the #04, you can first move any coal tokens from the #04 onto the #25 that you just purchased. You are not forced to do it, though. This has been discussed here.

Please take a look at the Power Grid FAQ on BGG for similar questions that might come up during gameplay.


In Robinson Crusoe, what happens when you lose an item that acts as an invention prerequisite? During the game Robinson Crusoe, you can "invent" items around camp, and some items act as prerequisites for others.  E.g. You cannot build a furnace without brick, and you cannot build a fireplace without fire.

Various events can destroy those items.  On page 16, of the Portal Edition rulebook it states that when flipping a item card over, that "If the Item had an additional effect, you should cancel it if possible.

Assuming that a player has already built the "furnace" invention, after building the necessary invention "brick", and that an event forces the player to destroy the invented brick invention (as a choice among those available), then does that mean the invented furnace is destroyed as well?  Or does the furnace remain available, even after the brick is removed, because it was already invented?

There isn't a direct answer for this in the rules, but there are a couple of very closely-related cases:

On page 16, under Unexplored terrain type, the rules note that when you lose access to the last tile of a particular terrain type, you lose access to that terrain type and cannot build items that still require it, but you also do not lose any Items that you have already built.

A little further down, under Turning Items to Invention side, the only changes noted are that

  If that item was required for building another Item or taking a specific Threat Action, you cannot do it now.

Combining those two sections, I reason that if you lose a prerequisite Item, you do not lose any Item you have already completed construction on as a result of that prerequisite Item. The main idea is that those prerequisite Items allow you to construct other Items; once you have constructed those other items, the prerequisite Item has no further function.

Think of it this way: the Brick invention means you have a source of Bricks; losing the Brick invention does not mean that any existing items suddenly cease to exist. (Also consider another case: the Shovel allows you to build a Cellar. Does losing your Shovel mean that your Cellar disappears in a puff of logic? It certainly isn't made of shovels.)


Outnumbering in Unknown The Outnumbering rule in Unknown states:

  If the survivors outnumber the enemies, enemy damage is reduced by 1 for every 2 excess survivors

We're reading this two different ways:

To reduce the damage of N enemies to zero, you need N*3 survivors
Damage from each enemy is treated separately, so for N enemies, you need N+2 survivors

The first ruling seems more correct, but we were convinced to use the second ruling last time we played. The outnumbering example in the rules only has one monster, so it isn't helpful.

I read the rule as enemies (plural) being outnumbered leads to an enemy (singular) having it's damage reduced.  So each enemy has it damages reduced the same amount by being outnumbered.  I would calculate the reduction in damage as follow, with S being survivors and E enemies.

Damage reduction = (S-E)/2

So if a enemies did 3 damage and you wanted to reduce it to 0 you'd need to outnumber the the group by 6.


Do you have to select a zombie before you roll a d6 for Shamble? One of the zombie cards, known as 'Shamble', has the following card text:

  Play this card to move a Zombie D6 spaces instead of its normal move.

  "Look out!"

Do you pick the zombie, then roll to see how far it moves?  Or do you roll a d6, and then pick a zombie to move that many spaces?

According to the game designer's response to the question on Board Game Geek, you should pick the zombie before rolling.

  When playing Shamble you should choose the Zombie and then roll to see how far they get to move.


Monopoly houses bidding? From the wiki books on monopoly:

Occasionally, when there is a housing shortage, it can pay to tear down houses on one colour group to immediately build them on a different colour group. However, if another player declares an interest in buying the houses you have torn down, you will have to outbid that player for them, so this tactic pays off only when you are buying the torn down houses for expensive properties anyway, and you have much cash, and the other likely bidders are cash poor.

I have played monopoly since I was a kid and I have never heard of bidding for houses; I thought sold houses reverted to the bank, and can then be bought again by other players if there is a shortage. What's the deal?

The rules for monopoly are pretty clear on this point (emphasis mine)

  BUILDING SHORTAGES: When the Bank has no houses to sell, players
  wishing to build must wait for some player to return or sell histher
  houses to the Bank before building. If there are a limited number of
  houses and hotels available and two or more players wish to buy more
  than the Bank has, the houses or hotels must be sold at auction to the
  highest bidder.


Scoring clarification for end of campaign/day of rest In Libertalia, the last paragraph of page 9 in the rulebook states:

  The players then move their score token a number of spaces equal to their total fortune (in doubloons) on the score track.  Their final score will be the sum of all doubloons won during the three campaigns.

Since you start each campaign with 10 doubloons, I can see this interpreted two ways:

Total fortune method: count all doubloons at end of campaign; this is your score for that campaign
Doubloons won method: count all doubloons then subtract the 10 starting doubloons (meaning you only score your 'winnings' or profit from the campaign)

As long as you keep the scoring method consistent, both seem to work fine.

My question is: are there any other references in the rules that would indicate one method should be used over the other?

The rules don't make the distinction between doubloons won and doubloons in your possession. Whoever wrote the rules probably didn't consider that someone might take this phrase extra literally.

Logically it makes sense to not subtract the 10 starting doubloons because:

1) Like you mentioned, it doesn't matter either way and
       subtracting doubloons each time is a completely unnecessary hassle.

2) You could end up with less doubloons than you started with. In this case you won't be able to subtract ten doubloons. Because it's possible to lose doubloons, it could be argued that any doubloons that you kept have been won.


Can someone explain me this furiten? Please explain to me why I can Ron the opponent's discard? (see screenshot)

I suppose I'm in furiten.

But I don't understand why - I tried to read the rules, it states that I can't win on an oppenent's discard when I have discarded the winning tile before. But I didn't discard a 2-character tile yet? Or are even other tiles involved for the furiten (chi'd on 6-bamboo)?

Well, the good news is that you are not in Furiten. The waits on that hand are 2-char, 5-char, and 8-char, and none of those have been discarded by either player, so Furiten does not apply.

What you DID fall victim to is the yaku requirement. That hand does not meet the requirements on account of it being open. It would need to be a concealed hand for a win by Tsumo OR reached (which requires a concealed hand) for a win by either Tsumo or Ron. Despite this, you would be tenpai should it come to that point because you only need one tile to "complete" your hand (despite the fact that you cannot go out with that hand).

Looking at the hand and the discards at that time, it would appear the best course of action is to hope your opponent discards a green dragon so that you can pon it (or hope you draw one yourself) and convert your 1-dot triple into eyes. Yakuhai (Triple of any dragon, seat wind, or round wind) is applicable even if the hand is open, so it would make the hand legal to win by Ron on a 2, 5, or 8-char (assuming I remember Furiten rules correctly).

Note that if you were to draw (or meld in) a 2, 5, or 8-char before completing this switch and discard a 1-dot, I'm fairly certain you would be in Furiten from that point because your waits would be a Green Dragon (which makes a hand you can go out on) and a 1-dot (which makes a hand you cannot go out on), and you would be required to win by Tsumo.

As goldPseudo also pointed out, the following related question is also pertinent to open hands in general:

Why couldn't this hand win with ron?


Is a player allowed to announce his intentions for their next turn? In a recent game of Hanabi we discovered that a helpful technique was to ask the person, usually to the left what they planned to do on their turn (ie. playing or discarding a certain card), and then choose to give them information or not based on that information.

Is this technique legal?

A lot of this will depend on your group and how you chose to look at the rules. Other than giving information about what is in another players hand there is nothing mentioned about players talking to each other. There is a note in an English translation of the rules that I found that does somewhat address this.

  Hanabi based on communication - and non-communication - between the Players. If one interprets the rules strictly then players may not, except for the announcements of the current player, talk to each other. Ultimately, each group should decide by its own measure
  what communication is permitted communication. Play so that you have fun!

I will note some things that my friends do when we play this game all of which are done without the active player asking for the information.

Inform the others what we know about our hand. This can be from what we have been told in the past and can in other peoples hands. For instance if I had a green five in my hand and was told I have a five and can account for all the other fives I would say I have a five and know the color.
If we have no or limited knowledge of our hands we sometimes will say if you tell me nothing I will discard from a certain side of my hand. This is used as a reminder that I have gotten no information about my hand lately and am assuming I have nothing but garbage.

While some of those may be breaking the spirit of the game they do make it more enjoyable for the group we play in. It all depends on what your group wants to do.


Can an instant spell be used before an upkeep triggered ability resolves? I am looking into a new card for my deck and I was curious if instants could be used before an ability triggered 'at the beginning of your upkeep' resolves.

Here is the potential situation:

I control a Cryptoplasm and have a Sudden Spoiling in hand. My opponent controls an Archetype of Endurance, which gives my opponent's creatures hexproof - but its controller doesn't have hexproof.

I want to use Sudden Spoiling to suppress the Archetype of Endurance's hexproof, and I want Cryptoplasm's upkeep ability to trigger and make it a copy of the Archetype of Endurance whilst it does not have hexproof.

Can instants be used before a 'beginning of your upkeep' ability resolves, and is this play legal?

No, you can't do what you're trying to do, unfortunately!

Yes, however, in general you can cast instants before a "beginning of your upkeep" triggered ability resolves. You cannot, however, do it before that ability gets triggered and goes on the stack, which is what messes up your plan.

The upkeep step is the first step in your turn when you receive priority (and can thus cast an instant), and it involves two steps:

  503.1. First, any abilities that trigger at the beginning of the upkeep step and any abilities that triggered during the turn's untap step go on the stack.
  503.2. Second, the active player gets priority. Players may cast spells and activate abilities.

What this means for the general case

The triggered abilities from 503.1 won't resolve before you have your chance to respond to them in 503.2, so in the general case, instants can be cast before "beginning of your upkeep" triggered abilities resolve.

What this means for your strategy

In your specific strategy, though, this isn't quite enough. You want Cryptoplasm to copy Archetype of Endurance. It can't do that, because things happen in this order:

503.1 happens. Cryptoplasm's triggered ability is placed on the stack. As part of this process, you choose your targets for that ability, which means choosing the creature Cryptoplasm will copy. At this point, Sudden Spoiling can't yet be cast, and Archetype of Endurance still has hexproof, so it cannot be legally chosen as a target.
503.2 happens. You receive priority and can cast instants. This is the earliest time you can cast Sudden Spoiling, but at this point it's too late to make Archetype of Endurance a legal target for your Cryptoplasm - a target's already been chosen.
Eventually, your Cryptoplasm's triggered ability resolves, and it becomes a copy of the creature you chose in step 1.

Clever thinking, but the order of events prevents this strategy from working.

Since you're playing black/blue, your options include using Lazav, Dimir Mastermind and destroying the Archetype, or using Willbender after Sudden Spoiling resolves so as to change the target you chose in step 1 to the Archetype.


duplicate bridge rules for revoke,and any penatly should be imposed In a recent game we found 3 players had  4 cards left and one player had 3 left. This was noticed on the 9th trick and no one knows when this happened.

What, if any, is the penalty?

The Short Answer: The Director finds which card is missing and restores the player's hand. This card is considered to have belonged continuously to the owner's hand, and as a result may have caused an accidental revoke, which is penalized as if it was any normal revoke.

The long answer:

The first step of a Director in this circumstance is to review each of the tricks, starting with the most recent, until a irregularity is detected. Most likely, the player with 3 cards left will eventually find a trick where they played 2 cards, at which point law 67: Defective Trick handles the rest:

  (a) When the offender has played more than
  one card to the defective trick, the Director
  inspects the played cards and requires the
  offender to restore to his hand all extra
  cards, leaving among the played cards the
  one faced in playing to the defective trick
  (if the Director is unable to determine which
  card was faced, the offender leaves the
  highest ranking of the cards that he could
  legally have played to the trick). Ownership
  of the defective trick does not change.

  (b) A restored card is deemed to have
  belonged continuously to the offender’s
  hand, and a failure to have played it to an
  earlier trick may constitute a revoke.

  The Director should avoid, when possible, exposing
  a defender’s played cards, but if an extra card to be
  restored to a defender’s hand has been exposed, it
  becomes a penalty card (see Law 50).

Should the rewind result in what appears to be normal play, then the card must be either on the ground/otherwise hidden, or it doesn't exist. Law 14 gives the solution for this problem:

  if the card is found elsewhere, it is restored
  to the deficient hand. Rectification and/or
  penalties may apply (see 4 following).
  if the card cannot be found, the deal
  is reconstructed using another pack.
  Rectification and/or penalties may apply
  (see 4 following).
  a card restored to a hand under the provisions
  of Section B of this Law is deemed to have
  belonged continuously to the deficient hand.
  It may become a penalty card, and failure to
  have played it may constitute a revoke.

The same concept is used if a card is missing during the auction/ just prior to the play: The hand is re-constructed by finding the card or using a new deck, and the hand continues as if the offender had the card all along. However, in any case, the fact that there was a missing card is unauthorized information should it happen after the first call, and Director should make sure that partner doesn't make any inferences based on the fact that some/all of the offender's calls or plays were made with 12 cards.

There's also the highly unlikely but amusing possibility that the problem isn't that one player is missing a card, but three players have an extra card. This results in a similar process, but a much harsher one, as a player who played no card to a trick would "complete" it by playing a card (following suit if possible,) but counting that play as an automatic revoke regardless. If it turns out they had an extra card before the play of the cards, then it's entirely up to a Director judgment call as to whether the situation can be rectified (usually no) or if adjusted scores are required.


How does "it's still a land" affect a permanent that would not otherwise be lands? The situation: I have a creature, and my opponent casts an Imprisoned in the Moon on it, which has this ability:

  Enchanted permanent is a colorless land with "{T}: Add Colorless to your mana pool" and loses all other card types and abilities.

Then I cast a card with Awaken (perhaps Coastal Discovery) and choose to Awaken that land. The Awaken ability has this text:

  If this spell’s awaken cost was paid, put N +1/+1 counters on target land you control. That land becomes a 0/0 Elemental creature with haste. It’s still a land.

After that, I remove the Imprisoned in the Moon. At this point, there is just one relevant continuous effect applied to the creature:

  It is a 0/0 Elemental creature with haste. It's still a land.

So, is the creature also a land, or is it just a creature? In other words, does the "it's still a land" clause actually change the permanent's type, or does it just mean that it retains any existing types

You have a non-land Elemental creature.
"It's still a land" does not give the land type. Instead, it prevents the land type (and any other type it might have) from being removed by Awaken because changing an object's type normally removes all of the object's other types.

205.1a Some effects set an object’s card type. In such cases, the new card type(s) replaces any existing card types. [...]
205.1b Some effects change an object’s card type, supertype, or subtype but specify that the object retains a prior card type, supertype, or subtype. In such cases, all the object’s prior card types, supertypes, and subtypes are retained. This rule applies to effects that use the phrase “in addition to its types” or that state that something is “still a [type, supertype, or subtype].” [...]


How can I clearly detail all possible destinations from every point of the map in my game? I'm making a game about traveling the world and I stumbled across one big problem, so I hoped you could give me some good suggestions.

In my game players can choose to which cities they want to go on the map in a limited radius. I thought I could just draw lines from each city to each destination, but I ended up with a really confusing map. My next idea was to write down all destinations where a player can go from a given city, but this approach wasn't illustrative enough so players couldn't think ahead where to move next.

What are your suggestions?

I would suggest putting hexes on the map.  Players can then know how far one city is from another by counting the hexes.  As long as the numbers are small such as 4 or 5 it would not provide too much complexity.
This is how Railways of the World solves this problem, and it works really well

The advantage of hexes over any other shape is that they remove any problems with diagonal movement.  Cities are a natural distance apart from any angle.  Counting the smallest number of hexes to get from one stop to another is always accurate.


Is this a legal Scrabble play? My sister played the three circled letters on her turn. Is it legal?

Nope.

From the official rules (emphasis mine):

  All letters played on a turn must be placed in one row across or down the board, to form at least one complete word. If, at the same time, they touch others letters in adjacent rows, those must also form complete words, crossword fashion, with all such letters. The player gets full credit for all words formed or modified on his or her turn.

So it is not legal to play those three tiles in a single turn, since they are not all in the same row or column.

Note, however, that "Fe" is a legal scrabble word.  Your sister could legally play "Fee" across and form "Fe" down.


How to bid and make a grand slam with 28 HCP between the partnership? The Common Game recently had this board in which the East-West pair usually ended up bidding and making a game contract of 3NT or 4 spades. Only 3 pairs of almost 1,000 bid and made grand slams; 42 pairs bid and made small slams. The question is, "How would you bid a slam with this hand?"

The answer is; you don’t.  Not with normal 2/1 methods, anyway; and even pretty out there methods would have a hard time finding this.
Why?  Because it’s dependent on so many things. The seven card heart fit AND the short jack. The spades splitting 2-2, or guessing the finesse.  The partnership has only eight top tricks, and the rest depend on distribution. In NT even a small slam is risky if you get a club lead!  No one would bid the grand knowing even every card in both hands for EW - you need 70% to bid a grand and you won’t get that here (hearts are 61% and spades are 46% roughly between the length and the finesse possibilities, so the grand is about 30-35%, plus some small chance for a club trick with a squeeze).  6S is probably the ideal bid double dummy (only the spade split is really a problem there, hearts don’t matter, and extra chances appear in clubs).
A normal 2/1 auction is simple here.
1NT - p - 2H - p
2S - p - 4S - pass out
Some would bid 3NT instead of 4S, and some would leave it there.  Some have ways of showing really good spades (superaccept), though KTx feels borderline to me for that. Could the spade hand see the slam?  I guess?  But 28 points and pretty average distribution beyond the one extra spade isn’t super exciting.
Some bidding systems are very control oriented very early on, for what it’s worth, and would find most or all of the eight trucks in the early going plus the space fit.  Things like this precision system would have a shot at the small slam I think.
Don’t assume that the few hands that bid the best score did so by being smarter than everyone else. Usually it’s that they were more risk-taking than usual, or misstated the strength of their hands, and got lucky. But for every top they get for this kind of thing they get four or five bottoms when they’re down 2 in grand slam and everyone else is making 4S+1.


Communication - Saying "Draw" My opponent was in his second main phase, sitting silently for about a minute. He finally gestured towards me and said, "Draw." I drew. My opponent then shouted, "Judge!" and told the judge that I drew a card on his turn. The judge listened to my side of the story. The judge asked, "Did the card that you drew touch your hand?". I said, "Yes." The judge subsequently gave me a game loss for drawing an extra card.

This occurred at a Competitive REL Standard event in late February of 2014. I did not appeal the ruling with the floor judge. I should have, but I was in shock and there was so much blood rushing to my head that I wasn't thinking clearly.

Should I have been given a game loss for drawing? Does "Draw." constitute a shortcut for "I would like to pass all priority until the next Draw step"?

The rules are not definitively on your side but you definitely should have appealed the ruling. According to the MTG Infraction Procedure Guide section 2.3, the default penalty for drawing an extra card is a game loss. However, it also says:

  If the player received confirmation from his or her opponent before drawing the card (including confirming the number of cards when greater than one), the infraction is not Drawing Extra Cards.

and your opponent's saying "Draw" and pointing to you arguably counts as confirmation that you should draw for your next turn. This argument might be difficult to make though because "Draw" is not listed explicitly in the Tournament Rules list of shortcuts (section 4.2) for passing priority until your opponent's turn.

However, there is another argument to be made that you should not have lost. The Infraction Procedure Guide Drawing Extra Cards section says

  A player illegally puts one or more cards into his or her hand and, at the moment before he or she began the instruction or action that put a card into his or her hand, no other Game Play Error or Communication Policy Violation had been committed.

One relevant piece of free information (as specified in section 4.1 of the Tournament Rules) is "The current step and/or phase and which player(s) are active", and the Infraction Procedure guide says in the Communication Policy Violation section:

  Players may not represent derived or free information incorrectly

I would argue that your opponent did just that when they said "Draw", which means that the judge should have followed the procedure in this section instead:

  If the situation is simple enough to safely back up without too much disruption to the course of the game, the judge may get permission from the Head Judge to back up the game to the point of the incorrect information. Each action taken is undone until the game reaches the point immediately prior to the error. Cards incorrectly placed in hand are returned to the location in the zone from which they were moved (if the identity of the incorrectly drawn card is not known to all players, a random card is returned instead). Once the game is backed up, it continues from that point.


MTG - Unsettled Mariner: When is the targeting checked? Unsettled Mariner counters spells and abilities targeting you or permanents you control unless the controller pays an additional 1 mana.

When is that targeting checked? As in if my opponent casts a spell and declares my creature as a target and I use something like Aether Vial to put an Unsettled Mariner into play at instant speed before the opponents spell resolves do they need to pay the additional cost? Are the casting costs checked again on spell resolution?

First of all, a little terminology: the casting cost is determined when casting a spell:

601.2. To cast a spell is to take it from where it is (usually the hand), put it on the stack, and pay its costs, so that it will eventually resolve and have its effect. Casting a spell includes proposal of the spell (rules 601.2a–d) and determination and payment of costs (rules 601.2f–h). To cast a spell, a player follows the steps listed below, in order. A player must be legally allowed to cast the spell to begin this process (see rule 601.3). If a player is unable to comply with the requirements of a step listed below while performing that step, the casting of the spell is illegal ; the game returns to the moment before the casting of that spell was proposed (see rule 721, “Handling Illegal Actions”).

So under no circumstances will Unsettled Mariner increase the casting cost of a spell.
Now, when does a permanent/player 'become a target'? This happens while casting a spell:

601.2c The player announces their choice of an appropriate object or player for each target the spell requires.
...
The chosen objects and/or players each become a target of that spell.

Only after the player is finished casting the spell, you get priority and will be able to vial in the Unsettled Mariner. That's too late to trigger the Mariner's ability; it simply doesn't 'see' the targeting.
To elaborate on what @Becuzz is mentioning, if the Mariner is already in play and your opponent targets it with Combust, the Mariner's ability will trigger, and give your opponent the option to pay {1}. If they don't, the Mariner's ability will attempt to counter Combust, but fail to do so, because Combust can't be countered.


Do crew receiving a better offer bring their gear with them? A Better Offer
Other players may hire Disgruntled
Crew away from you when in the
same Sector by paying their hiring
fee to the bank. The Disgruntled crew
joins their new Captain’s crew and the
Disgruntled token is removed.

Do crew receiving a better offer bring their gear with them?

There really isn't a definitive ruling on this anywhere within the rules or the FAQ.

However the FAQ does state

  The only time you may not switch Gear is during a Work Action. Other than that, you may change who is carrying what Gear freely.

Based on this I would rule that you are absolutely entitled to strip any Gear off a character before they are taken from your ship.


How much collaboration is reasonable for a Two-Headed-Giant draft? My friends and I have a regular MTG-drafting group. It's pretty informal, and after we draft sometimes a group of 4 people will play Two-Headed-Giant just for fun since it's not really a tournament and more just a way to get together and play. However, several of them want to play the entire 'tournament' as all THG matches the next time we play. I have no problem with this at all and understand how THG works, but I'm curious as to the best way to do this in a draft.

Assuming we pick teams before the drafting, do we allow players to collaborate in choosing their cards? It seems like this would take way too long and require far too much effort to make the decks work well together. Granted, the effort would make for better decks for each team, but I don't think the extra time is worth it. I suggested that we not allow anyone to help their partner make decisions during the draft so they are still building a deck that can stand on its own, and not having one player run 23 counterspells and removals while the other runs 23 creatures. However, my friends say this could easily result in decks that do not play well together at all.

After we've picked the cards I figure everyone would be allowed to collaborate with their teammate to build their decks, but doing so during the draft just seems like too much. Currently I think players should not be allowed to give the cards they picked to their partner for their deck.

What limits should we impose on collaboration during the draft to allow the teams to build decks that synergize well, without drastically increasing the time requirement of the draft? Perhaps a 3-minute interval between each booster? How can we find a good balance of collaboration and increased time requirements?

I recommend just straight-up reading the MTG Tournament Rules. You certainly don't need to do all of this stuff for a "casual" draft, but it'll give you some good ideas about how to run things.
As Two-Headed Giant draft is actually an officially supported format, the MTR includes specific guidelines on how to run it. DCI recommends drafting as a team, then building decks from one shared pool:

9.6      Two-Headed Giant Limited Rules
All the rules for Limited Tournaments (Section 7) apply, except as described below. The DCI
recommends that each team receive eight boosters per team for
Two-Headed Giant Sealed Deck tournaments and six boosters per team for
Two-Headed Giant Booster Draft tournaments. For the recommended
product mix for the current block, refer to Appendix E. Cards not used
in a team’s starting decks are considered a shared sideboard by the
two players that both players can access.
9.7      Two-Headed Giant Booster Draft Tournaments
Teams (not players) assemble into random drafting circles (called pods) of
roughly equal size at the direction of the Head Judge. Teammates sit
next to each other. Tournament officials then distribute identical
booster packs to each team in the pod. After opening and counting the
cards in their first pack, the team chooses two cards from the booster
pack then passes the remaining cards face down to the team on its
left. Selected cards may be placed into one or two piles. The cards
chosen are not assigned to a particular player; they become part of a
pool out of which both players will build their decks. The open packs
are passed around the drafting pod—with each team taking two cards
from each before passing—until all cards are drafted. For the second
pack, the direction of drafting is reversed as usual. Thus, the
overall draft direction is left–right– left–right–left–right.

Generally, there are no prohibitions on communication between teammates; tournaments instead use time limits to discourage analysis paralysis:

4.4     Team/Two-Headed Giant Communication
Members of the same team may, at all times, communicate between one another verbally. This
includes during play, during drafting, and during deck construction of
Limited tournaments. However, team members that have an opportunity to
acquire hidden information (e.g. by speaking to spectators following
their own match while a teammate is still playing), are restricted
from communicating with teammates for the duration of that match.
Prohibitions against written notes of any kind during drafts apply to
team drafts as well.

If you're playing without judges, I encourage working out some kind of procedure for handling slow play within your group.


Can you build a house on a colour group property while another property of that colour group is mortgaged? Say I have mortgaged Old Kent Road, can I still build a house on Whitechapel Road? Or would I need to unmortgage Old Kent before building a house on Whitechapel? Both of these properties are in the brown property group

No you are unable to build houses on any property in a color group where any property is mortgaged. While it does not mention it in the rules about houses it does mention that all hotels and houses must be sold prior to mortgaging any property of that color group. The rules also follow up with an explicit statement that you may begin to buy houses back once all properties in that group are no longer mortgaged.
Rules

MORTGAGES… Unimproved properties can be mortgaged through
the Bank at any time. Before an improved property can be mortgaged,
all the buildings on all the properties of its color-group must be sold
back to the Bank at half price. The mortgage value is printed on each
Title Deed card

When all the properties of a
color-group are no longer mortgaged, the owner may begin to buy
back houses at full price.


What happens in the event of a standoff in Magic? What happens in a game of magic if neither player can win or lose?

Examples:

Both players have empty libraries and control Dragon Appeasement on an otherwise empty board.
One player controls Platinum Angel and Abyssal Persecutor and neither player has a way to remove either from the battlefield.
Both players have empty libraries and control some lands and Words of Worship on an otherwise empty board.
Both players have some lands and a copy of Beacon of Immortality, but no other way to win.
One player has an empty library but is using Nexus of Fate to prevent themselves from being milled.

There are several variants of this situation that are quite different in the rules reasoning and outcome.  In all cases, the situation is a loop.

720.1b Occasionally the game gets into a state in which a set of actions could be repeated indefinitely (thus creating a "loop"). In that case, the shortcut rules can be used to determine how many times those actions are repeated without having to actually perform them, and how the loop is broken.

Case 1: players cannot win or lose the game because of mandatory abilities
The game is a draw.
Example 1: both players have empty libraries and control Dragon Appeasement on an otherwise empty board.
Example 2: one player controls Platinum Angel and Abyssal Persecutor and neither player has a way to remove either from the battlefield.
In this case, the game is a draw.  The game will eventually reduce to each player being able to do nothing but pass the turn.  This is a loop of mandatory actions.

720.4. If a loop contains only mandatory actions, the game is a draw.

Case 2: players cannot win or lose the game because of optional abilities
The game is a draw.
Example 1: both players have empty libraries and control some lands and Words of Worship on an otherwise empty board.
Example 2: both players have some lands and a copy of Beacon of Immortality, but no other way to win.
In this case, the game will eventually reduce to a loop of both players activating the ability that keeps them alive and then passing the turn.  This is a loop of optional actions that spans multiple turns.  The comprehensive rules do not cover the subject, so we need to go to the tournament rules*.  The tournament rules allow for multi-turn optional loops to be continued indefinitely and this causes the game to be a draw.  From the Tournament Rules section 4.4:

Loops may span multiple turns if a game state is not meaningfully changing. Note that drawing cards other than the ones being used to sustain the loop is a meaningful change. If two or more players are involved in maintaining a loop across turns, each player chooses a number of iterations to perform, or announces their intent to continue indefinitely. If all players choose to continue indefinitely, the game is a draw.

Case 3: only one player has an optional ability and is using it to forestall inevitably losing
The player with the optional ability loses.
Example 1: one player has Dragon Appeasement and the other has Words of Worship
Example 2: only one player has an empty library and that player is using Nexus of Fate to prevent themselves from being milled.
This is different from case 2 because only one player is involved in maintaining the loop.  From the Tournament Rules section 4.4:

If one player is involved in maintaining the loop, they choose a number of iterations. The other players, in turn order, agree to that number or announce a lower number after which they intend to intervene. The game advances through the lowest number of iterations chosen and the player who chose that number receives priority.
...
A player may not 'opt-out' of shortcutting a loop, nor may they make irrelevant changes between iterations in an attempt to make it appear as though there is no loop. Once a loop has been shortcut, it may not be restarted until the game has changed in a relevant way. Proposing loops as an effort to use up time on the clock is Stalling.

* The Tournament Rules specify: "Information in this document may contradict (or have information not contained in) the Comprehensive Rules. In such cases, this document takes precedence."


Is there a long-term scoring system for 4 or 5 players who have played the same game repeatedly? We are a group of 4, sometimes 5 players who have played Power Grid every week for nearly 2 years. For every game we have played, I have kept track of game dates and rankings (1st place, 2nd,..., 5th).

Is  there a scoring system which would allow me to award points for each rank in each game and possibly calculate the probability of any one player winning the next game?

There's a relatively direct translation of the Elo rating system to multi-players: just treat each game as a set of games between each pair of players, with each pair having a winner and a loser based on their relative final rank in the game.

See http://www.tckerrigan.com/Misc/Multiplayer_Elo/ for an example of an even simpler method: pairing each player only with the players directly ahead of and behind him or her in the final standing. That page also includes performance of this method.

Doing a full pairwise calculation is more work (more calculations), of course, but it seems warranted in my opinion. Restricting the score comparison to one's immediate neighbors in finish position seems arbitrarily restricted when attempting to measure skill.

One thing to consider when using either approach is how much the game score is (or should be considered) a measure of relative performance. For pure footrace kinds of games (multi-player solitaire, where each player's actions do not affect the scores of the other players), this system is absolutely fine.

At the other end of the spectrum, king-of-the-hill games where there's really just two levels of finishing: win or don't, you may be better off (i.e., get a better measure of skill) by treating every pair of non-winners as tied, even if there is some score kept to determine who wins that you might obviously use to rank two non-winners relative to each other. You might choose to treat them as tied to reflect the fact that a player, by employing the best strategy to win, may have to risk enough of his or her score so that, if the gambit fails, their score is reduced below other non-winners.

If you rank the non-winners according to score, you may find that the fact of keeping score affects the way they play (i.e., a player may play for second rather than risk a play for the win).

This is already true in the base 2p Elo system, where a player might, by virtue of the score being kept, play for a sure draw over a possible win (and possible loss). But it's more of an issue in multi-player games. It's just a matter of what you want your score to emphasize / what you want the players to play for (max score vs. max chance to win)

(The linked page also mentions another algorithm: TrueSkill by Ralf Herbrich et al. at Microsoft, which I hadn't heard of before now).


Blocking multiple creatures with multiple creatures Let's say I have a two 2/2s (A and B) and also Brave the Sand.
my opponent attacks with two 2/2s (C and D)

And C is blocked by A and B and D is also blocked by A and B.

Can I assign damage in such a way that A deals 1 damage to C and 1 damage to D and B also deals 1 damage to C and 1 damage to D?

I believe you choose for each creature how they assign damage and you can only assign damage to the second creature if the first creature has lethal damage assigned. Does this mean that this must be true at the end of all assignments or when I first decide for creature A how he assigns damage, and then he has to assign 2 damage to the first creature.

You can split the damage any way you like, as long as you follow the damage assignment order. The correct end result of the damage assignment is all that counts.

  510.1d [..] If it’s blocking two or more creatures, it assigns its combat damage to those creatures according to the damage assignment order announced for it. This may allow the blocking creature to divide its combat damage. However, it can’t assign combat damage to a creature that it’s blocking unless, when combat damage assignments are complete, each creature that precedes that blocked creature is assigned lethal damage.
  [..]


Does exchanging a dead card count as a move for loss of a card? I was recently playing Sequence at a friend's house. At one point in the game a player (player B) discarded a dead card and drew a new card before the previous player (player A) remembered to draw a card. Player A contended that since player B hadn't placed a token on the board yet they were still allowed to draw their card. The rules state:

Dead Card
If you hold a card in your hand which does not have an open space on the game board because both spaces representing that card are covered by a marker chip, you are holding a DEAD CARD and you may turn it in for a new card. When it is your turn, place the dead card on your discard pile, announce that you are turning in a Dead Card and take a replacement card (one card per turn). You then proceed to play your normal turn.
Loss of Card
Once you have taken your turn and placed your marker chip on the game board, you must take a card from the draw deck. If you fail to take a card before the next player makes a move AND takes his/her card, you lose the right to take a card and you must finish the game with less cards than the other players – a disadvantage.

In my mind exchanging a dead card counts as a move for the purposes of the "Loss of Card" rule. Otherwise the "Loss of Card" rule would have specified completing your turn. Is this the correct interpretation or should player A have been allowed to draw a card?

Based on the wording, Dead Card exchange is basically a free action that you can do before taking your normal turn. Losing your draw is a result of the next player placing and drawing, which is effectively them finishing their turn. This strongly implies that you have until the next player finishes their turn to draw your new card.

In the scenario above, A is a 100% right to draw a card because B hasn't moved yet. Generalized, though, is technically vague but I think what I've said is the intentions of the rule.


What kind of paper can I use for a game card? I really want to make game card that's similar to Monopoly cards or the like.
What kind of paper should I use for the cards?

If you are looking to prototype a game there are really three options, you'll want to weigh Expense vs Effort vs Polish. Obviously if you are just playtesting (especially early in the process) Polish is not important, and keep expense and effort low will probably be helpful if you're going to be iterating your design a bunch!

There are three main options:

Print on heavy weight cardstock

Pros: fairly cheap, very low effort

Cons: Not very polished, cards will exhibit wear fairly quickly.

Print on paper and sleeve w/ CCGs for stiffness

Pros: Sleeves are probably the expensive bit, as it's not too hard to find someone who'll hook you up with junk commons from a Collectible Card Game like Magic. You can print on regular paper, and if just a few cards need changing it's quick and easy. Great for iterative design

Cons: Not everyone has access to junk cards to use as backing. Not polished, especially for final version.

Print on Demand Example: Drive Thru Cards

Pros: Assuming you've got good art skills can look professional/polished.

Cons: Not cheap, also not cost effective except as a vanity run/final playtest/review copies.


Sinuous Striker query around pump in reaction to combat/defending So I heard a while ago that damage doesn't kill creatures, state based actions kill creatures. Not relevant but this was a judge who said it.

So I wanted to ask, is it possible for someone to attack with say a 4/4 Bitterblade Warrior and me to declare 2/2 Sinuous Striker as a defender then attacking opponent casts a spell or combat trick on another minion or maybe does nothing in this example, then I say before damage is dealt to pump the Sinuous Striker by two to be a 4/0 so that it's damage is enough to kill the 4/4 Bitterblade Warrior. Does a State based action check happen before damage is dealt or is the move I'm talking about legal to do at this stage? The finer points of movement between phases still eludes me as I'm getting my head around it.

If anyone can explain this as clearly as possible (as opposed to just saying 'no you can't do that') I would be quite grateful, I'm looking to also learn about phasing and how it works here and how each steps resolves as the stack steps through the corresponding actions.

From my own perspective this is how I imagine it would work:

Combat starts
Attacker declared
Blocker declared
Nothing from the opponent like spells etc,
Defender gets priority to respond before damage and pumps creature
Damage is then resolved
State based action happens then it sees the 4/4 attacker and the 2/2 defender are now 4/0 and 4/-4 respectively ergo they both die as their toughness is 0 or less.

Sinuous Striker will die without dealing combat damage.  Your opponent's creature will remain blocked, but will not be destroyed.

The problem with this combo is that there is no way to activate Sinuous Striker's ability without state-based actions being checked immediately afterwards.  State-based actions are checked immediately after any ability resolves.

Let's assume that the Declare Attackers Step is complete.  Here is the order of events:

You declare that your Sinuous Striker will block your opponent's creature.509.1
The active player (your opponent) gets priority.509.4
Your opponent passes, giving you priority.116.3d
You activate Sinuous Striker's ability twice.  You and your opponent both pass (twice) allowing both of those abilities to resolve.  Sinuous Striker is now a 4/0 creature.
The active player (your opponent) will get priority after the spell resolves,116.3b so a check for state-based actions is triggered.704.3
Sinuous Striker is destroyed by a state-based action.704.5f
Combat damage is assigned.510.1  Your opponent's creature remains blocked510.1c but takes no combat damage.


Caius the Mega Monarch if targets 2 cards inflicts damage twice? Caius the Mega Monarch:

  You can Tribute Summon this card by Tributing 1 Tribute Summoned
  monster. If this card is Tribute Summoned: Target 1 card on the field;
  banish it, and if you do, inflict 1000 damage to your opponent, then,
  if it is a DARK Monster Card, banish all cards with that name from the
  hand, Main Deck, Extra Deck, and GY of the player who controlled it.
  If this card was Tribute Summoned by Tributing a DARK monster, add
  this additional effect. ● You can target 2 cards, instead.

If targeted 2 cards, will inflict 1000 or 2000 damage to opponent's LP?

The opponent will take 1000 damage.

Think of it like this; if you tribute a dark monster, you modify the activation cost (i.e., instead of "Target 1 card on the field", it becomes "Target 2 cards on the field;"). The effect simply states "Inflict 1000 damage to your opponent." This means that the modified effect would become,

  banish them, and if you do, inflict 1000 damage to your opponent, then, if any of those monsters were DARK Monster Cards, banish all cards with the same name as those DARK Monster Cards from the hand, Main Deck, Extra Deck, and GY of the player who controlled them.

As the 1000 damage is not per card - simply an effect to itself - the amount remains the same.


Determining Naval Interceptions I have a complicated situation involving four major powers.  The below chart will summarize their relations.  Both sets of allies are using simultaneous movement.

         France   Russia    Spain   Turkey
France       XX   Allied      War      ---
Russia   Allied       XX      War      War
Spain       War      War       XX   Allied
Turkey      ---      War   Allied       XX

French and Russian fleets are blockading the Spanish and Turkish fleets at Cadiz.
Spain & Turkey wish to run the blockade together as one stack.  Who can intercept and why?

Check 6.3.1.2.

There is relevant errata published in The General #27.2.

Short: if France and Russia declare a combined movement, they can intercept and fight together against Turkey and Spain.
If there is no combined movement then in turn France and Russia can try to intercept and if they succeed can battle both Turkey and Spain, with an opportunity for France to DoW Turkey.


Can Teysa, Orzhov Scion sacrifice itself and still use its 2nd ability? What happens if I sacrifice Teysa, Orzhov Scion along with two other "white and black" creatures (in order to remove another creature from the game) - do I still get my 2 spirit tokens from the other two sacrificed white and black creatures, even though Teysa as well was sacrificed at the same time?

Or is it that when Teysa is sacrificed along with the other two, its 2nd ability doesn't count anymore?

You will still get the 2 spirit tokens. This is because when creatures die (are put into the graveyard from the battlefield), the game checks what the state of things was just prior to the creatures leaving the battlefield to see if there is anything that needs to trigger.

  603.6d Normally, objects that exist immediately after an event are checked to see if the event matched any trigger conditions. Continuous effects that exist at that time are used to determine what the trigger conditions are and what the objects involved in the event look like. However, some triggered abilities must be treated specially. Leaves-the-battlefield abilities, abilities that trigger when a permanent phases out, abilities that trigger when an object that all players can see is put into a hand or library, abilities that trigger specifically when an object becomes unattached, abilities that trigger when a player loses control of an object, and abilities that trigger when a player planeswalks away from a plane will trigger based on their existence, and the appearance of objects, prior to the event rather than afterward. The game has to "look back in time" to determine if these abilities trigger.


How difficult is Axis and Allies to learn and teach new players? Axis and Allies seems to be a very popular game to the point where I've even seen copies in Toys 'R Us! Before I jump on the bandwagon, I want to be sure I'll be able to get some use out of it.

How difficult is it to teach new people? Is it the kind of game you need to play several times before you really get it?
Would it be a good game to play with family?
Do you have to be a Game-Geek to have a chance at enjoying it?

Moderate Difficulty

I assume you're talking about A&A Revised or perhaps the 50th edition rules. I mention this because both are slightly more complicated in terms of rules than now obsolete 2nd edition (i.e. the new editions have more units and more special rules).

That said, the following observations should apply across all versions, with the newer ones being marginally more difficult. I'll address how hard it is to teach into a few key categories:

Rules complexity

Axis and Allies is rules intense. I would put the rules complexity about equivalent to Diplomacy. Consider it a full tier above something like Monopoly, Risk, or Clue, but not quite as bad as Arkham Horror. Furthermore, unlike a game like Dominion, where the base mechanic is fairly straightforward and most of the rules are revealed on the cards themselves (i.e. instructions at the point of need), in A&A someone is going to need to have good grasp of the game from the start, or you're all going to be buried in the rule book for the first few games. Be prepared for the first game to take extra time.

Strategy complexity

Although there is a steep learning curve between the novice and expert player, this should not be a problem for a play group learning together. There are optimal buys and well tested strategies, just like in chess. But if none of you know then you'll all learn together; years from now you'll all have a great laugh about the crazy stuff you tried when starting out. So yes, you need to play several times to get it, but unlike some games, I think A&A is fun when you're learning, so it's not like you'll have to put in four or five games for it to pay off.

Game geekery

I don't think you have to be a true game-geek to enjoy it. I've found its appeal is well calibrated with its rules complexity. Casual gamers who only like the most mass market of games will probably be intimated. But you don't have to be a hard core gamer who thinks Arkham or Twilight Imperium are too simple to like it. That is your group will need to want a challenge beyond the most common games, but being a geek not required. An interest in history in general, WWII, or war games helps as well, as the theme in this game is obviously very strong. If your group wish Risk wasn't so simple and boring, this might be a good option.

Family appropriateness

Assuming your family meets the criteria above (ready to graduate to slightly more complicated games) then it might be appropriate. It's a long game, so your family will need to be willing to spend a few hours doing this (or have a big table to leave it set up between sessions). That said, the game is robust to people with different learning curves because it's a team game (Axis vs. Allies). You can team up the strongest and weakest players and/or give the best player the most challenging country. The game is also easy to handicap with bidding.

I say go for it.


How can I tell what has changed in a Comprehensive Rules update? As an example, the Comp Rules were updated February 1, 2012.  I know that a reference to "Fateful Hour" was added to 207.2c since I know to search for fateful hour, but how do I know what else changed?  Does Wizards of the Coast release an official list of changes when they make a revision?

They put an article in their website written by the current Rules Manager (the main authority in Wizards for Magic rules).

This is the one that corresponds to the February 1, 2012 rules update.

If you search for more articles by the same author, you'll find the articles for older rules updates. Searching for articles of previous Rules Managers is trickier.


In Blood Bowl Team Manager, are Freebooter Stars supposed to be more or less powerful than their regular counterparts? According to the description in the Rulesbook:

  Star Player Cards:

  These skilled players really know their way
  around the pitch! These improvements include
  famous Star Players and up-and-coming
  freebooters – aspiring stars who haven’t quite
  made it yet.

it seems to me that a freebooter is less powerful than a regular star, however, the effect of the mechanism used to recruit the Stars:

  If a manager drafts a Star Player with the Freebooter ability, the manager
  searches his roster and chooses one player to return to the game box. Then he
  adds the Star Player with the Freebooter ability to his roster and shuffles
  it to create a new Team deck (see below for a full explanation of the Freebooter ability).
  If the manager drafts any Star Players without the Freebooter ability, he
  places them on top of his Team deck in any order.

leaves me with the impression than my roster is better improved when I recruit a Freebooter than a regular Star. Granted, the regular Star goes on top of the Deck, making sure that he will play the next game but on the other hand, the Freebooter allows you to remove a weak player from your deck and to shuffle your discard (potentially containing Stars) back into your deck.

So let's consider two Stars with the exact same abilities, is it better to recruit the Freebooter or the Regular Star?
What's the rationale behind this shuffling the discard back in the deck in this case?

  Freebooter: When you reveal this player from your improvement pile,
  you may remove any one Player card from either your Team deck or discard
  pile and return it to the game box. Then add the Freebooter to your roster
  and shuffle it to create a new Team deck. Resolve all Freebooters before
  placing Star Players without the Freebooter ability on top of the Team
  deck. (Unlike other abilities, the Freebooter ability only occurs during
  the turn in which this player was drafted.)

It makes a big difference when you gain the star player.  Gaining the average freebooter in the first round is better than gaining the average non-freebooter (there are always specific exceptions of course) because you will get to use that player statistically more often due to the smaller deck size.  Conversely, gaining a freebooter in the fourth round is potentially useless, as you want any star players you gain to come into play in the last round; only the ones put on top of your deck are guaranteed to do this.  The tipping point is somewhere in between.

One other consideration is how much sprinting your base deck has.  Decks with more sprinting have less use for freebooters because they can filter their deck mid-game.  Consequently, it is better to have more powerful characters to get the most value out of the sprinting ability.


Munchkin "Shrieking Geek" Bad Stuff If you lose to the Shrieking Geek and fail to run away, the Bad Stuff that happens is described as:

  Bad Stuff: You become a normal boring Human. Discard any Race or Class cards in play.

If I have both a race and a class, do I lose both or only one?

I would say both.

There is some room for interpretation here, due to ambiguities in the English language, but I would certainly interpret "any Race or Class cards in play" as equivalent to "all Race and Class cards in play."  (Note that you can have several of each, using cards like Half-Breed or Super Munchkin.)  This also matches the first part of the text, which says that you "become a normal boring Human"; if you didn't discard your Race cards, you would not become Human, and, at least arguably, if you did not discard your Classes, you would not become normal and boring.

If you were supposed to choose, it would most likely say something like "at least one Race or Class card of your choice," or maybe "either all Race or all Class cards in play."  But neither of those would really match the "become a normal boring Human" part.


Does ZU.13 Key Master confuse the MU rule? It is clearly stated in the rules that Memory Units (MU) only apply to 'installed' programs.  By 'installed' I mean installed on the runner's rig.

Then I read the ZU.13 Key Master card:

  [...] the memory cost of ZU.13 Key Master is 0, even if it is not installed.

This seems to imply that a program's MUs count even when not installed.  As if they would count in your grip. Nothing in the rules supports that.

Can someone explain this card please?

The reason for the "even if it is not installed" language is to allow you to install ZU.13 Key Master even if you are already at your MU limit. You are of course correct that cards in your grip do not count against your MU limit.

To explain formally: p. 6 of the rulebook states:

  Cards in the grip are inactive

and from p. 4:

  An inactive card’s abilities do not affect the game

So without that phrase, ZU.13's ability to not cost MU would not work until it was already in play, and if you were at your MU limit, you would still have to trash some other installed program before you installed it. With that phrase, the card's intent is achieved, which is that it "costs" 0 MU as long as you have at least 2 link strength.