Does playing a ko add a dimension to the game? Playing a game of Baduk I was thinking that playing a Ko adds a dimension to the Tree of possibilities. Meaning it at least double the number of next moves the player may think of.

Am I kind of right ?

"Ko" is effectively one of those situations where you can hope to get two moves in a row (e.g. if your opponent spends his next move filling, or otherwise removing the ko).

On the other hand, if your opponent chooses to allow you this, it means that the value of the ko is large. (Otherwise he would answer your ko threat and ignore the ko).

Balancing the value of a two move "ko threat" against a ko itself, adds dimension to the game. So does the art of creating these kos, that allow you to make these threats.


What does the Scrabble board look like in foreign languages? What does the Scrabble board look like in foreign languages?
I recently saw a 19x19 Scrabble board, which might be used in German, but I'm not sure.

The board is the same shape in every language as far as I know

What changes are letters and letter distributions:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scrabble_letter_distributions

Welsh is a notable one:

Edit: A 21x21 board apparently exists and seems to be a licensed variant of the game: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Scrabble

Credit: Kevin Marks from San Jose, USA - Super Scrabble, CC BY 2.0


MTG: Arena. Is there any way to use packs other than open them? I was expecting there to be someway to Draft with the packs I have, but I can't find anyway to do that.

Is there ANYTHING that I can do with packs other than open them and claim the cards.

If not, is there ever any advantage to delaying opening packs? (Any times when packs are more 'efficient' to open? Any advantage to having a surplus of packs etc.)

No, there is currently nothing that can be done with packs besides opening them and claiming the cards.

The only modifier to opening packs is that opening fifth copies of a common or uncommon card contributes to your vault. The vault is a hidden percentage that, once you reach 100%, awards you 1 mythic wild card, 2 rare wild cards, and 3 uncommon wild cards. Also, I believe that if you have every rare and/or mythic in the set, the rare and/or mythic spot will be replaced by gems.


Can I use the effect of the Winged Dragon of Ra from the Yu-Gi-Oh! anime in a real game? The anime says that the Winged Dragon of Ra's attack and defense is what is added up by the attack and defense of the tributes to summon it. From the Yu-Gi-Oh wiki:

  When Summoned by Tributing 3 monsters, the ATK and DEF of "Ra" become the combined ATK and DEF of the Tributed monsters.

The card that is legal for tournaments does not say that on the card. Is the anime effect OK to use in a actual card game?

Similarly, people are saying how you can give life points for the attack like in the anime, but I'm asking if we can use the effect in a duel.

Effects from the Yu-Gi-Oh! anime do not apply to the card game, especially not in a legal tournament. You can only use the text that is actually on the card (and any modifications due to errata or official rulings).

Of course, in a friendly game, you and your opponent are welcome use those affects if you agree. If you want to play that way, nothing is stopping you.


Uno Spin; going out using a Spin card According to the Spin Uno instructions, if the last card played is a Spin card, the next player must spin the wheel and that action must be resolved so that any cards drawn or discarded also affect the points totaled.

Notice the part that states "...so that any cards drawn or discarded also affect points totaled."  This tells me that if the person spinning the wheel lands on Almost Uno, then they discard all but their last two cards and only the points from the last two cards count.

If my opponent's last card is a Spin card, then I must spin the wheel and that action MUST be resolved.  So, my spin lands on Trade Hands.  That action MUST be resolved.  Does that mean my opponent has to take my hand, which resolves the action, and what happens to those points assuming the scoring method used is getting "caught" with points in your hand?

My opinion is that those points count against my opponent.  My opponent chose to use a Spin card as their last card, which required me to spin the wheel.  My spin landed on Trade Hands and the rules state I MUST resolve that action.  I have to trade hands with my opponent for that action to be RESOLVED; therefore, my opponent gets my remaining cards and I get no cards from them as they used the Spin card as their last card.  That means my opponent gets "caught" with those points.  Thoughts?

First let's look at the normal rules. The rules for scoring state that:

  The first player to get rid of their cards receives points for cards left in all of players' hands

If a player gets rid of all their cards first, they will be the scoring player even if they end up with cards and someone else does not.

The rules do not say that cards in your own hand count against you.

The rules specify "all of players' hands" and do not exclude yourself.

Thus you score points normally from any cards in your own hand at the end of the round. This statement is true in either variant.

In the "getting caught" variant, you only count the cards in your hand. If you have cards in your hand for any reason, they will count against you.


What is “looking for a place to resign” in go? In a number of commentaries on professional games I have read that one of the players was “looking for a place to resign”. My impression was that this meant that they considered the game lost, and just wanted to finish the game according to certain essentially stylistic conventions. Are there such conventions, in Japan in particular? What is considered a good place to resign? Are there different conventions in clubs, amateur tournaments and professional play or in different cultures?

If my impression is right, this is not a matter of whether the game is lost or how hopeless the position should be, but of style, of a certain sort of move and response after which resignation is thought appropriate.

I imagine one might try a few desperate looking things that (unless they work) make the situation more unambiguously lost, and then resign, but that one would want to avoid moves that appear to insult one’s opponent’s intelligence. Am I on the right track?

N.B. I have wondered about this for some time, and was reminded of it by the question Do go players play to minimize score difference after realizing they cannot win?.

Some examples

I have found the following examples of players’ attitudes to resignation (my emphasis):

Invincible, the Games of Shusaku, game 33 (1851–1852): ‘Black 49 is presumably just setting the scene for resignation, as Black cannot ignore White 48.’
Invincible, the Games of Shusaku, game 63 (1854): ‘Black 19 is of course too late, but actually Black is looking for a quick exit from an embarassing situation. White 30 gives Black his cue.’
1971 Honinbo Tournament, Sakata–Ishida: ‘The game was already decided, but Sakata does not like to resign, so he played it to the bitter end. Ishida had won by 9½ points.’
1971 Honinbo Sen, Third game: ‘… was the largest point, but Ishida realised that even if he played there he would lose the game … Ishida played 86, giving Rin a chance to end the game by playing 93. Rin coyly played 89 instead, waiting to see what … Ishida would try … Ishida tried … Ishida now resigned.’
Go World Number 46, p. 30 (41st Honinbo, game 4, 1986): ‘The game ends when Black lives up to 53, but White could have prevented this; he was just looking for a way to resign’
Go World Number 46, p. 36 (41st Honinbo, game 5, 1986): ‘[With 155, Black decides to go out fighting. He cannot hope to win the ko: White has too many ko threats.] Black resigns after White 202.’
Go World Number 50, p. 74 (Sakata – Kitani Minoru, 1958): ‘White 86 is a do-or-die move, but Black cuts it off with the brilliant sequence to 105. White resigns after Black 119.’
An Younggil commenting on Ke Jie vs Lee Sedol (2016-01-05) at gogameguru.com  says ‘White couldn't keep going, because White requires so many ko threats for this battle. White connected at 172 to finish the game, which means Park just gave up. Black 173 was the most simple way to finish the game, and White resigned here.’

Even if I had the time and skill to analyse the given positions this would not tell me the general conventions.

The delightful The Treasure Chest Enigma by Noriyuki Nakayama (© 1984, privately printed) has an 11-page essay on The Art of Resigning, but while he praises some players for the perfect timing of their resignations, castigates those (amateurs) whose refusal to resign means ‘he’s saying “You’re such an imbecile that I can easily catch up 100 points”’ and says how hard it is to strike the balance, he indicates neither the right moment nor the appropriate style of play for resigning.

Sensei’s Library explains under Looking for a place to resign that the expression ‘looking for a place to resign’ means choosing a move which obviously does not work and resigning when your opponent responds correctly.

Sensei’s Library also has an article on How to resign which sketches when to resign and enumerates ways of formally indicating that you do so. It also links to more extensive discussions of the etiquette, indicating in particular that it is a bad habit not to resign when you clearly cannot win.

I apologise for not having found this earlier; my mistake was searching without quoting the entire expression ‘looking for a place to resign’ — without quotes there is an enormous amount of noise, but with quotes Duck Duck Go gave four matches: this question, Tom Au’s answer and the above articles in Sensei’s Library.


Multiple questions about Betrayal at the House on the Hill We bought and played our first game of Betrayal at the House on the Hill and we had a great time. Our haunt scenario was with a mummy, I won't spoil more about it.

Whose turn is it when the haunt starts? Is it the turn of the betrayer (who just activated the haunt and who's the betrayer) or is it just normal and is it the player next to him?
In some haunts the betrayer can control multiple characters and/or monsters (like the mummy). Can the betrayer use both his explorer and all of his other minions in the same turn or is it one character per turn?
An explorer had found a clue in the library and took the "knowledge roll" token as proof. But then he got killed. We made a quick house rule where the dying explorer had the chance to yell out the clue to the survivors in the house doing a 3 dice 5+ roll. It wasn't clear if the clue token could be dropped and picked up, or even shared with other explorers. In a real life situation I would definitely share this information.

When the haunt begins, the player to the left of the traitor always takes the first turn. It doesn't matter who had the last turn (the person to reveal the haunt will not always be the traitor). There are a couple scenarios that change this, but they will specify their own rules in the haunt description. Rulebook, page 11:

  Haunt Turn Order
  The first turn always starts with the player to the traitor’s
  left and goes clockwise (further away from the traitor).

The monsters get their own "monster turn" after the traitor's turn. So the traitor does not control both himself and the monsters in the same turn, but he does control all the monsters right after he's done with his regular turn. Rulebook, page 11:

  After each hero has had a turn, the traitor gets his or hertraitor turn. After the traitor’s turn, any monsters controlled by the traitor get a monster turn. (One player gets two turns: one for the traitor and one for the monsters.

All information always openly shared between the heroes. So it doesn't matter which hero found the clue and has the knowledge roll token; all that matters is the total number of knowledge roll tokens found by all heroes combined. From the FAQ:

  If someone in the house makes a knowledge roll to find out a particular piece of information (a mummy's name, a room that needs to be visited, etc.), do all the other explorers know this information automatically?

    Yes. Perhaps they all have walkie-talkies.


How often can we use Tyr's Challenge? If all villages are pillaged, can we use the Tyr's Challenge card as our action?

Tyr's Challenge
You may pay 2 rage to repillage an already pillaged village

If we can afford the rage for the action, how often can we use it?

If you have the rage and you have the card, you can do it as often as you like.

The cards are not limited in their use except when specifically stated.

Note that if all provinces are pillaged, the round ends, and you can't use Tyr's Challenge even if you could afford it.


How can I keep track of things, in Discworld: Ankh-Morpork? I'm lost. Flummoxed and worse, confused by this game.

I consistent fail to set up any sort of set piece, or notice when someone else is doing even the least sneaky, sneak move. I'm often in last place because I can't think tactically or strategically in this game (though in others, I'm OK). The one time I won was due to bluffing my way through as Vimes.

I think my main issue is keeping track of all the players, their pieces, and everything else. How can I get better at doing this?

One of the best ways to see people sneaking up on their victory conditions is to think like them. Here are the win conditions and some tell-tale signs for which victories they might be chasing:

Areas controlled by a majority. This is the most common win condition, so you should always keep an eye on this. It's useful to tot-up after a player's turn when they've gained one or more new majorities.
Areas with a piece present. A great tell-tale sign that the player is Vetinari is that they're placing lots of individual pieces (especially in non-empty areas, where the piece does not give them a majority). Cards that move pieces are also useful for Vetinari who can turn one "controlled" area into two quite subtly.
Money. Chrysoprase needs a lot of money, but don't forget that buildings count as assets (and are harder to lose). Players who buy a lot of buildings tend to be using them to consolidate their money as well as people who just have a huge pile in front of them. A great starting move for Chrysoprase is to try to get an early building that generates money (though that will benefit most players).
Trouble. The Dragon King loves chaos in the streets, so watch out for people who play pieces into territories they have no chance of winning and where trouble would be added. Also, be wary of players who repeatedly discard Watch cards that reduce trouble.
Running out the deck. Vimes can be a tough one to watch, and you shouldn't worry too much about him. The best way to beat Vimes is to win after all! Still, if you want to spot Vimes, you should look out for people who seem happy to tie territories without ever controlling them and players who are discarding and drawing a lot of cards. (Discarding the Time Monks - which shuffles the discard back into the deck - is a great one to watch out for too, because it can vastly increase the "deck size" depending on when it's played and most other players would be happy to play it.)

Lastly a general tip: don't forget that each player has multiple opponents. If you notice that someone might be close to winning with a win condition, especially if they would win at the start of their next turn, don't stay quiet! Let it become the group's problem to stop them from winning instead of just yours.


What defines the curse type? I am making a homebrew expansion to Dominion and I want to include some more curse-type cards. However, what does the curse type mean for a card? Does it mean - VP, or just something undesirable to have in your deck?

Curse type is defined by nothing more and nothing less than having the word “Curse” on the card in the type line.

This is true of other types as well, such as “Attack”. Attack does not mean that the card hurts your opponent, it only means that it has the word “Attack” on the bottom. Mechanically and thematically though, it is better to only have Attack type on cards that hurt your opponent.

Certain types in Dominion, such as “Action”, do have special rules that come with them. But many other types have no rules. Curse has no special rules, the type doesn’t mean anything at all.

That being said, making another card with the type “Curse” is not good for a fan expansion. This is because “Curse” is both the name of a card and a type of card, and the only card with that type is the card named “Curse”. If another card with that type existed, then cards that said “gain a Curse” would be confusing and ambiguous... does “Gain a Curse” mean gain a card named Curse, or does it mean gain a card with the type Curse? There is no correct answer. That ambiguity is only ok because there is no other card with that type.

So, if you want a different card that will hurt players, whether by having negative VP or by clogging their deck, just leave off that type. You can see how Dark Ages did that thing by introducing Ruins.


How works exactly the bonus tile that gives you '+1 river shipping' There's a bonus tile with a +1 river shipping distance. On the official rules on appendix IV: bonus tiles, talking about the shipping half of the tile it reads (translated from Spanish) 'Moreover, your distance shipping value adds 1 during second phase. On last round, it doesn't counts on final point count'. It seemed quite clear untill we actually played it. The question is:

Does the uses of this tile means you add +1 automatically without investing resources?
Does this implies you must use one of your phase 2 actions in order to use it?

For the sake of gaming balance on our gaming group, we have established the house rule that you must use the first action on phase 2 using this tile, so you add the +1 for free.
But, there's an official position about using an action or not?

The tile simply gives you 1 more shipping value than you have from your shipping track for that round. So if you haven't upgraded your shipping at all, so you have 0 shipping, then for that round, you can dig and build in places that you can reach with 1 shipping. It does NOT advance your shipping track.


By how many points did alphago win against Lee Se-dol? Today, the computer program AlphaGo from Google won against the Go world champion Lee Sedol. I read that it won by resignation. If I understand correctly, it means that Lee realized he could not win and accepted his defeat without ending the game.
My question is, by how many point AlphaGo would have won approximately if Lee had fought until the end?

The DeepMind channel on Youtube has a short review of each game by Michael Redmond 9P.

At the end of the summary for game 1, Michael estimates that black is slightly ahead on the board. When you factor in the 7.5 point komi, it means that the final score would have been around 5.5 in favor of AlphaGo.

Note that

  AlphaGo does not attempt to maximize its points or its margin of victory. It tries to maximize its probability of winning.

[Source: wired]


Is there a technical (or slang) term for triggering a game loss due to attempting to draw from an empty library? Does a game-loss triggered by meeting the conditions presented by CR 121.4 have a particular name, or rather is there a technical (or slang) word that indicates a loss via this condition?

Yes, the slang term is "to deck" or "to deck out"
Decking, decking out
You can use the term transitively or intransitively, i.e. you can say "I decked (out)" meaning you lost due to drawing from an empty library, or "I decked (out) my opponent", meaning you won by milling your opponent to death.
Personally, I've only ever heard "to deck", but apparently both are used.


Which domino is heavier? I purchased a set of double-six dominoes. It has a manual which points to the heaviness of the dominoes. It says that a double-six is the heaviest domino and the double blank is the lightest. The same is said on this website (link) dedicated to dominoes.
I can't find on Google which is heavier: a 1-6 or a 3-4. Can an experienced player tell me the answer and the reasoning behind it?

Neither, both have a weight of 7.

Domino weight values are determined by counting the pips on bound sides. Heavier tiles left unplayed in hand, will earn your opponents more points in many Domino variants.

  The sum of the two values, i.e. the total number of pips, may be referred to as the rank or weight of a tile, and a tile with more pips may be called heavier than a lighter tile with fewer pips.


Sent from one Other World to another. Another encounter in the same turn? One of my characters was in The Abyss and had an encounter there, which stated to attempt a luck+1 skill check, which ended up sending my investigator to The Dreamlands. Do I get to immediately have another Other World encounter for The Dreamlands in the same turn, or is this only when the card specifically mentions "..and have an encounter there"? Also, does this sudden shift between Other Worlds mean that my investigator gets delayed, or is this also only if the card specifically says so?

Your character moves to the Dreamlands, no further encounter that turn.

As the card says "Move to the Dreamlands" the character is not delayed.  If it had said something like "A Gate Opens and pulls you to the Dreamlands" then the character would have been delayed.


Explanation for extended phase 10 5 sets of 2 in the same color I play the extended phases in phase 10 with my friends and phase 29 is 5 sets of 2 in the same colo. we use the standard deck and there is usually 3-4 of us playing. Do we add in another deck since there are only 2 numbers of the same color in each color or do we just play normally? It seems extremely hard to get it because its so limited and I can't find anywhere an explanation for that phase. any thoughts?

May not have been the original intent, but far more doable: "5 sets of 2, with one color shared between all the sets."

IE

R2G2
R3B3
R5G5
R7Y7
R9G9

would be a valid hand, since you have 5 sets of two and each set has a red card in it.

If it's the same set of rules as was linked above, #19 there is "19. 5 sets of 2 in same color - wild card color must match number color". The context on the site makes it clear they intended all 10 of the cards to be the same color. It does seem to be a bit restrictive, but note that the wild cards can smooth out the missing duplicate numbers.

Also, "Note: The above rules use Phase 10 cards with colored wild cards. In some newer decks all the wild cards are the same color. If playing with this type of deck, just disregard the restrictions on wild card colors."


What happens if you roll doubles 3 times then land on "Go to jail?" Do you have to serve two jail sentences? For example, you go to jail the first time and use your "Get out of jail free" card, and then go right back to jail for another sentence without rolling the dice.

You go to jail directly on rolling the third double, so there’s no opportunity to land on “go to jail”.

From the Official Monopoly Rules (Hasbro)

  If you throw doubles, you move your token as usual, the sum of the
  two dice, and are subject to any privileges or penalties pertaining to
  the space on which you land. Retaining the dice, throw again and move
  your token as before. If you throw doubles three times in succession,
  move your token immediately to the space marked "In Jail" (see JAIL).


What is the best resource for Card Trays? I'm looking for some card trays for a game I've been designing.

Ideally, they would be six-slot trays that hold standard playing card sized cards.
In my mind, they are similar in appearance and quality to the trays that are used to hold money in monopoly.  I've found some things that are similar, but nothing exactly like that.
I'd need one for each player.

Any recommended resources for something like that?
My best solution right now is pillaging thrift store games.

This could be expanded into a broader question -
what are the best websites and box stores for buying game-making materials?

Something like this tray is what I'm looking for:

Without parameters on shape, size, and cost, it's difficult to give a good answer.  However, if it were my game and I needed 4-5 6-slot horizontal card slots, I would consider making them out of folded cardboard.  With a little trial and error it should be simple to shape what you need from 7x3 (21) horizontal folds, and 3 vertical folds with 2-4 tabs to keep the shape.

If you want plastic, you likely want to purchase your own vacuum former.  Hobby versions can be had for as little as $120 (plus materials).  They work by laying a piece of plastic over a mold you create to form any plastic shape you want.

Random site selling a former


Is Duplicate Bridge (standard Matchpoints) a game of pure skill? I'm inclined to say "no" because because each of the following could be considered lucky:

A finesse can be tried 2 different ways and your partnership selects
the one that works
You play a routine, obvious hand against the strongest partnership of
the match
You play a challenging hand against the weakest partnership of the
match
You play a hand that better maps to your bidding system than that of
the other partnerships playing the same hand
You purposely pursue a poor risk/reward chance at an overtrick and
make it, earning top score, in order to avoid an average result

But in discussing this a few minutes ago, I got to wondering what if you controlled for most of these things - assume 2 human partners playing a Duplicate Bridge (standard Matchpoints) tournament against a bunch of expertly programmed robot bridge players, all at the same level, all using the same bidding system.

In these more controlled circumstances, would Duplicate Bridge be a game of pure skill?

Even with the same experts playing North-South, there will be luck involved.

For instance

When you have a pure guess in a two way finesse for a Q or distribution etc.
When you have a guess during bidding (sacrifice or not etc)
System wins/losses.
When you overbid/underbid/play incorrectly and hit a lucky lie of the cards.
Same hand could be played differently on different tables, because of different actions taken (during bidding or play) by the players. One might play like a bozo, but resulting in the expert to take the wrong inferences, handing you a win (it happens!) etc.

What you say will reduce the randomization of the field (some people call it field protection), but will not eliminate luck completely.

For instance, a world class level Matchpoint contest will have very little randomization (similar to your proposed situation), but to win you need to play well (skill) and need some luck.

Of course, most of the time it is your skill that matters, but luck does factor in, especially against equally matched opponents.


Purpose of needing 12 swords in Camelot to trigger end of game with no Traitor In the beginner rules, one is encouraged to play without a Traitor. Under these conditions, does it make sense to wait until the knights have 12 swords in Camelot before determining the winner? It seems that with 7 white swords earned, the race to finish enough quests to end the game is anti-climactic.

The only situation I can think of where Evil could still win without a Traitor would be if the Holy Grail quest were lost when the sword count is 7 white to 4 black. Those 3 black swords would result in a 7:7 tie and spell defeat. In our group, the Grail gets attention early and is completed quickly, so this is unlikely.

Please help me understand this purpose of this rule.

Remember the catapults

If there are 12 of them at any time you lose the game. So even with no traitor and 8 white swords, if you are too tight and lose the invasion quests (or simply draw the wrong black cards), you may lose because of catapults before completing the 12 swords on the table.


What options are available to make Diplomacy accessible to a blind player? I'd like to include a player who is blind in a game of Diplomacy, and am wondering about options to make the game more accessible.

One possible complication is that this is a classroom simulation with a large number of players, using the DipTool Java app to display the game. However, we could have a physical game board that duplicates the moves for this player.

Ultimately I think it would be like playing Chess blind, only more difficult because many pieces change positions at the same time. It would certainly be possible for a dedicated player to hold the positions of all pieces in their head, but would likely be extremely frustrating for a new player. It might be useful for the player to have an "adviser" who does not participate in direct negotiations or order placing, but is able to give information to the player throughout the turn about what the board state is, and what opportunities/threats might exist. They could also pass on other "visual" information, such as "Russia and Turkey spent 20 minutes talking in a corner before the first turn".


Can Alolan Muk use Tri Hazard GX attack even if opponent has no benched Pokémon? If the opponent only has the Active Pokémon left and no benched one, can the Tri Hazard GX attack still be used even if there is nobody on the bench?

There's an official ruling for this attack in The Rulings Compendium Black and White (the official ruling source):

  Tri Hazard GX (Alolan Muk-GX - Burning Shadows)

    Q. If my opponent has no Benched Pokemon, can I still use Alolan Muk-GX's "Tri Hazard-GX" attack?
    A. You can use it, but it won't have any effect, and it will count as having used your GX attack for the game. (Burning Shadows FAQ; Aug 3, 2017 TPCi Rules Team)

You can use the attack, but it won't have any effect except it counts as you've used your GX attack for that game. Switching 1 of your opponent's Benched Pokémon with their Active one is a required step to do the effect.


Hypergenesis and Triggered abilities If an opponent casts (or cascades into) Hypergenesis, starting with the caster each player takes it in turns to put a Creature, Artifact, Land or Enchantment onto the Battlefield. This can be repeated any number of times, and as a result potentially lead to some confusion.

1) I put an Emrakul, the Aeons Torn onto the battlefield, my opponent puts an Oblivion Ring onto the battlefield. Next, I put a Griselbrand onto the Battlefield, my opponent puts a Detention Sphere onto the battlefield. Finally, I put an Iona, Shield of Emeria onto the battlefield, My opponent puts an Island onto the battlefield. Can my opponent exile my Iona?

2) I put a Goblin Matron onto the battlefield, can I fetch a Goblin Ringleader and put that onto the battlefield in the next round of Hypergenesis?

When an ability triggers, all the game does is make a note of it. The triggered ability is only placed on the stack the next time a player would get priority. This is only after Hypergenesis has finished resolving.

  603.2. Whenever a game event or game state matches a triggered ability’s trigger event, that ability automatically triggers. The ability doesn’t do anything at this point.

  603.3. Once an ability has triggered, its controller puts it on the stack as an object that’s not a card the next time a player would receive priority. [...]

So 1) yes, and 2) no.


Zombicide Combat Rule - Multiple Dice I was playing Black Plague with my friends and we got into a misunderstanding about a very basic and fundamental rule.

For me it was clear that, when a weapon has several dice to be played (like 2), I can kill at most 2 zombies; each successful die kills one zombie in the zone I chose to attack (both melee and ranged).

However, my friend argued that we can only kill at most one zombie; the several dice help with the odds, but even if we get multiple successes, we kill a single zombie in the area.

I was pretty sure I was right, but scanning through the guide I found out it really doesn't make very clear in the Combat Section what is the case. The text is messy and a little hard to understand for me.

Can someone resolve this conundrum?

From the rules for melee combat,

Each die roll equal or higher than the Accuracy value on the
weapon’s card is a successful hit. The player divides his hits as
he wishes among the possible targets in the Zone.

This means that a melee attack landing three hits could target and kill up to three creatures.
Ranged combat works the same way, except there are limitations in the order in which you can target monsters (targeting priority).
Keep in mind that there's no point in assigning more than one hit per creature.

Fatties are killed with a 2 Damage hit (or more). It does not matter how many hits you obtain with a weapon that inflicts 1 Damage.  A Fatty will absorb the hits without flinching.
Abominations are killed with a 3 Damage hit (or more). As no weapon naturally has Damage 3 in Zombicide: Black Plague, you have to destroy the monster with Dragon Fire (see page 35) or with Samson using a Damage 2 Melee weapon in conjunction with his +1 Damage: Melee Skill.


Can I extort Launch Party with the creature I'm sacrificing? If I control exactly 1 Basilica Screecher, and I cast  Launch Party sacrificing my Basilica Screecher, can I still use Basilica Screecher to extort on Launch Party?

No. Basilica Screecher will no longer be on the battlefield when the spell becomes cast, so its ability will not trigger.

Casting a spell:

Placing it on the stack. [CR 601.2a]
Make choices (e.g. modes, targets) that need to be made to cast the spell. [CR 601.2b-d]
Determine the total cost to cast the spell. [CR 601.2e]
Activate mana abilities. [CR 601.2f]
Pay the total cost. [CR 601.2g]

Only once all of the above has happened is the spell cast, so only then would abilities that trigger on casting the spell trigger.

  601.2h Once the steps described in 601.2a–g are completed, the spell becomes cast. Any abilities that trigger when a spell is cast or put onto the stack trigger at this time. If the spell’s controller had priority before casting it, he or she gets priority.

However, you sacrificed Basilica Screecher back in step 5 (601.2g), so it's no longer on the battlefield when you completed the casting of the spell, meaning its ability will not trigger.


When do I play with the full board in Neuroshima Hex? I have just bought Neuroshima Hex and read the rulebook. It mentions just using the hexes in the centre of the board, but that the other spaces around the outside are included incase a scenario is played. What are these scenarios? And will I need to use the bigger board in a 3 or 4 player game?

Looking through the Neuroshima Hex 3.0 rules (pdf), I see the following:

So the extra hexes are for when there are five to six people playing. The rules suggest that if there are four people playing, you might decide to use the expanded board as well.

This rule book doesn't mention scenarios. However, I looked up one of the expansions: Neuroshima Hex: Babel 13 (pdf), and it mentions scenarios:

  A Neuroshima Hex scenario is a single game which applies additional conditions to the basic rules of the game. These can include Terrain, unequal distribution of forces, conditional events, etc. Campaigns for Neuroshima Hex consist of a series of interrelated scenarios.

This would imply that a scenario might make use of the extra hexes for, perhaps, unequal distribution of forces.


What got Yata Garasu banned? The rules for Yata Garasu are as follows:

  Cannot be special summoned. This card returns to the owner's hand at the end of the turn in which it was normal or flip summoned. When this card does damage to your opponent's life points, they skip their next draw phase.

I would agree that Yata Garasu's ability to stop you from drawing is OP. But however there are a couple things that make me question it.
1. It cannot be special summoned.
2. It only has 200 ATK. It's so weak even a puny Kuriboh is strong enough to destroy it.

So with these being the case, what got this card banned?

(Caveat: I am not at all an experienced YGO player.)

Don't think of it as a single card. Think of what the card does as part of an entire deck with a clear gameplan.

A bit of research shows that the original 2004 banning was because of a combo that would strip both players' hand and field, then break symmetry by allowing you to search up Yata-Garasu. At which point you've got a hard lock they can't break out of, since you're denying them the draw every turn.

Okay, whatever, that's just one deck, right?

But, more generally, what happens when you play Yata-Garasu? It means your opponent needs an answer for it right now or they will never be able to answer it (since it'll just keep eating their draw phase). The card's tiny stats just put some conditions on the lock, but "kill your opponent's stuff" isn't exactly a big deviation from what a good deck wants to do anyway.

It's not a card that will steal the game single-handedly, but it's very, very good at closing the door on an opponent's chance for a comeback. That makes it a ban-list contender, especially as part of a dominant deck. A secondary concern that may have also influenced the decision is the "feel-bad factor:" the rational response to a hard lock is to scoop rather than play out being pecked to death, but it feels much more like surrender than losing the game normally does.


Will Endless One still enter with X +1/+1 counters while Humility's in play? Humility says "all creatures lose all abilities and have base power and toughness 1/1" and Endless One comes into play with X +1/+1 counters.

According to a comment in How to understand Humility once and for all, triggered abilities don't get triggered with Humility, but I'm thinking Endless One's ETB "ability" doesn't count because it's not a triggered ability? Because it doesn't say "when it enters the battlefield X +1/+1 counters are placed on it"?

As of the Ixalan rules update, Endless One will not enter the battlefield with counters if Humility is on the battlefield. As other answers have mentioned, Endless One's ability is a replacement effect that modifies how it enters the battlefield. The new version of rule 614.12 says:

  Some replacement effects modify how a permanent enters the battlefield. (See rules 614.1c–d.) Such effects may come from the permanent itself if they affect only that permanent (as opposed to a general subset of permanents that includes it). They may also come from other sources. To determine which replacement effects apply and how they apply, check the characteristics of the permanent as it would exist on the battlefield, taking into account replacement effects that have already modified how it enters the battlefield (see rule 616.1), continuous effects from the permanent’s own static abilities that would apply to it once it’s on the battlefield, and continuous effects that already exist and would apply to the permanent.

Applying this kind of replacement effect involves checking continuous effects that already exist. Humility's ability is one such continuous effect, and applying it removes the ability that would add the counters.

The Ixalan Comprehensive Rules Update goes into some detail about how this rule changed, and it specifically mentions a similar situation:

  Humility causes creatures with modular to enter without their +1/+1 counters.

For reference, the definition of Modular is

  Modular represents both a static ability and a triggered ability. “Modular N” means “This permanent enters the battlefield with N +1/+1 counters on it” and “When this permanent is put into a graveyard from the battlefield, you may put a +1/+1 counter on target artifact creature for each +1/+1 counter on this permanent.”

The part of the Modular ability that affects how the permanent enters the battlefield has basically the same wording as Endless One's ability, so Endless One's ability is affected the same way by the rules change.


How does Haktos the Unscarred's protection ability work if no number was chosen? Haktos the Unscarred has an unusual pair of abilties:

As Haktos enters the battlefield, choose 2, 3, or 4 at random.
Haktos has protection from each converted mana cost other than the chosen number.

It is possible for a creature to have the protection ability without ever choosing a number. For example, Lazav, the Multifarious could become a copy of a Haktos in the graveyard, or Mirage Mirror could become a copy of a Haktos on the battlefield. In a situation like that, what will the ability do?

If no number was chosen, the ability does nothing.

This is a result of rule 706.7a:

  If an ability causes a player to “choose a [value]” and a second, linked ability refers to that choice, the second ability is the only ability that can refer to that choice. An object doesn’t “remember” that choice and use it for other abilities it may copy later. If an object copies an ability that refers to a choice, but either (a) doesn’t copy that ability’s linked ability or (b) does copy the linked ability but no choice is made for it, then the choice is considered to be “undefined.” If an ability refers to an undefined choice, that part of the ability won’t do anything.

This is also stated in one of the card's Gatherer rulings:

  If Haktos somehow has no choice made for its ability, its last ability grants it no protection abilities.


Doom: The Boardgame Scenario Guide for download? Does anyone know if the Scenario Guide for Doom: The Boardgame is available somewhere for download in English? Unfortunately it is not on the Fantasy Flight archive page.

I've got the game in German, but want to play it with an English speaker, and with the original Scenario Guide it would be much easier than translating myself.

I don't know a download site for this.  However, Fantasy Flight are extremely good about sending replacement components, so it may be worth just emailing their customer service and asking for one.


Is a Pokémon energy card with no numbers normal? I have a Pocket Monster (Pokémon) card in Japanese. It is a fire energy with no numbers in the bottom right corner. Is this normal?

In Japan, most Basic Energies ever printed don't have any set number, because they were unnumbered. This is in contrast to English cards, where all Basic Energies were numbered up to Call of Legends expansion. Since Black & White expansion, most Basic Energy cards are also unnumbered, with the exception of cards found in booster packs as they have a different illustration.

Bulbapedia has nice collection of Fire Energy cards, including some Japanese cards without set number (click to enlarge):


What is the meaning of "count your losers" at no trump, and "count your winners" for a trump contract? Are no trump bidders taught to "count your losers" because their 25-26 points represents enough material for nine tricks so that they should "play not to lose" (i.e. to prevent their opponents from getting five tricks before they get nine)?

And if trump bidders are taught to count your winners, does this mean that their 25-26 points are good enough for only 8-9 tricks and they need to "manufacture" the tenth and maybe ninth trick through trumps or otherwise so they have enough winner?

Typical advice is exactly the opposite. See:

https://www.google.com/search?q=count+winners+losers+trump+notrump

"In trump suit contracts, we count losers. (In notrump contracts, we count sure winners.)"

This is a simplification, but with a trump suit you can often ruff when you cannot win tricks with high cards or set up intermediate or long suit winners. Take for instance:

S 98765
H 2
D 32
C 65432

S AKQJT
H 5432
D 432
C 2

In a spade contract you have 1 heart loser, 2 diamond losers, and 1 club loser, so all being well you might come to 13 - (1+2+1) = 9 winners. If you draw too many trump, though, or your opponents realize that they should lead trump, you will come up short.

This might not be a realistic example since your opponents can take 12 tricks in hearts or diamonds...


What happens when you stack "unblockable" and "unblockable except by"? During a recent game meetup I used Teleportal to give all my creatures unblockable. Another player responded by targeting one of my creatures with Shriek of Dread to give it "can't be blocked except by artifact creatures and/or black creatures."

We decided (reluctantly in my case) that this might override the unblockable. Our reasoning was that because the revised wording of unblockable is so similar (can't be blocked) the exception would apply to both instances of it.

Are we right?

No, it's still just unblockable. There are two restrictions. One will prevent it from being blocked by most things, while leaving artifact creatures and black creatures unrestricted. One won't let it be blocked at all. If nothing blocks it, both restrictions are satisfied, so that's allowed. If a black creature blocked it, one restriction would be violated, so that's not allowed.


Using Event Cards to Move off Vine Walls When playing with a faction such as the Swamp Orcs who have vine walls, the rules state that units roll before moving off of vine walls to see if they take damage.

But do units still have to roll for damage when they are moved with an event card which says you can pick up a unit and "place" it elswhere? In other words, would an event that lets you pick up a unit and place it elsewhere on the board require a roll for damage when the unit is taken from a vine wall?

No, you do not have to roll for units that are removed from a Vine Wall if they do not move. The word move is a keyword in Summoner Wars, and unless the ability or event specifically uses it, the movement would not be considered a move. Note that during the movement phase, units move.

This thread over on the Plaid Hat Games forums reiterates this: "Note that this only applies to 'moving'. Abilities that place a [card] somewhere are not affected by Vine Walls."


Does killing Might Sliver before damage affect other slivers' power and toughness? I got quite confused on what exactly happens in this situation:

Opponent is attacking, he does so with three (3/3) creatures.

I declare blockers, which would be two unimportant (1/1) Slivers and a Might Sliver (2/2). The Might Sliver has a static ability: "All Slivers get +2/+2", so in fact I have two (3/3)'s and one (4/4) creature to block with.

If, after the blockers are declared and before the damage is dealt, the opponent destroys the Might Sliver with an instant (Murder), will my Slivers retain the +2/+2 bonus until damage is dealt, so I would lose three creatures, while he loses two, or is it lost and my defense crumbles and my defenders are all killed?

The ability from Might Sliver is a static ability: it functions as long as Might Sliver is on the battlefield.  When the sliver leaves the battlefield (dies in this case), its ability also goes with it.  Your other creatures loose the power/toughness increase.

At the time that your opponent played the instant, it was still in the Declare Blockers step.  During that step, you declare blockers, then both players have a chance to play instants before combat damage. Once your Might Sliver is dead, your other Slivers are 1/1 when you choose to move to damage.

  604.2. Static abilities create continuous effects, some of which are prevention effects or replacement effects. These effects are active as long as the permanent with the ability remains on the battlefield and has the ability, or as long as the object with the ability remains in the appropriate zone, as described in rule 112.6.


MTG: Ixidron vs Morph I couldn't find the answer to this but what happens if you have a face down morph on the field and someone plays Ixidron? Does my morph creature stay face down or do they get turned up?

The text printed on the Ixidron reads as follows:

  As Ixidron enters the battlefield, turn all other nontoken creatures
  face down. (They're 2/2 creatures.) Ixidron's power and toughness are
  each equal to the number of face-down creatures on the battlefield.

As morphed creatures are already face-down they are unaffected.
This is reflected in the Ruling made in 2006:

  2006-09-25 : Turning a face-down creature face-down typically has no effect; the creature’s status is unchanged.


Do things on the stack or state-based effects resolve between first strike and normal combat damage? I have two examples of different scenarios that are confusing to me.

First, if I have a 1/1 creature with first strike and deathtouch, and my opponent blocks it with a 2/2 creature, will my creature die? I can see two alternative ways this could play out and I'm not sure which is correct.

My creature deals his first strike damage, immediately killing the opponent's creature before he is able to deal combat damage as a state-based effect.
My creature deals his first strike damage, which would normally be lethal due to deathtouch, but state-based effects are not checked, and thus the opposing creature deals his damage and both die.

I'm almost positive in this case that it's the first option above.

What gets trickier is, for example, if a creature has first strike and a triggered ability "Whenever this creature deals combat damage to a creature, return that creature to its owner's hand."

This is not a state-based effect, but rather uses the stack. Similar to above, there are two possibilities.

My creature deals his first strike damage, and his triggered ability is placed on the stack. The stack waits to resolve until after all combat damage is dealt, so the opposing creature still kills mine.
My creature deals his first strike damage, and his triggered ability is placed on the stack. Both players now gain priority between first strike and combat damage (which I don't think normally happens, thus my confusion). The stack finishes resolving, and the opponent's creature doesn't have a chance to deal damage.

Can someone clarify this area of the rules?

You're right about #1 in the first case, and #2 is correct in the second place.
If any creatures have first or double strike, there are two combat damage steps. From the comprehensive rules about what happens within every combat damage step:

510.3. Third, any abilities that triggered on damage being assigned or dealt go on the stack. (See rule 603, "Handling Triggered Abilities.")
510.4. Fourth, the active player gets priority. Players may cast spells and activate abilities.

To end 510.4, both players must pass priority until everything on the stack resolves. When the stack is empty, play proceeds to the next step, which will be a second Combat Damage Step (if the first was for first strike) or the End of Combat Step (normally).


Why would someone want to use Pot of Desires, other than to draw 2 cards? Pot of Desires allows you to banish the top 10 cards of your deck, facedown, and then draw 2 cards.

Why would someone do this? Is gaining 2 cards worth it?

Why would someone do this? Is gaining 2 cards worth it?

Exactly.

Banishing 10 cards face down is the trade-off for drawing 2 cards; it's up to you (or the deck builder) to determine if this trade-off is worth it.

Having a card that just lets you draw 2 cards would be too broken. Such effect should have a trade-off to make it more balanced, and that is why this card requires banishing 10 cards.

In theory, no one wants to banish 10 cards facedown, because as they are facedown you can't recover them by any means (at least as far as I  know, as you don't know what card it is).

However, in practice, drawing 2 cards may be worth it, and even decisive for the game result.


Legend of Drizzt "Cavern Tile" triangle color In the D&D Adventure game, The Legend of Drizzt, the cavern tiles have small triangles on them used to tell the players which edge of the tile will face the exploring hero.  These triangles are either black or white.  The rule book says the colors are "used to distinguish between less dangerous and more dangerous tiles."  I could not find any more information on what this really means.  I noticed they are often on tiles with volcanic vents and tiles with lots of exposed edges.  Are the colors just to tell me that tile is generally more dangerous due to exposure to surrounding tiles or volcanic explosions, or is there some specific rule(s) I am missing that pertains to their color?

When you place a tile with a black triangle you are also supposed to draw an encounter card during the Villain phase, so tiles with black triangles definitely can be more dangerous than those with white triangles.

From page 6 of the rulebook (right column, top of page):

  Triangles: Each tile features a triangle. When you place a new
  tile, the triangle points toward the unexplored edge of the tile
  it is attached to. If the tile has a black triangle, you draw an
  Encounter card during the Villain Phase of your turn.

And from page 8, Villain Phase, point 1:

  If you didn’t place a Cavern tile in your Exploration Phase,
  or if you placed a Cavern tile with a black triangle, draw
  and play an Encounter card.


If a player loses, do any emblems they create for other players disappear? If one of my cards like Chandra, Roaring Flame creates an emblem on every opponent, do the emblems disappear from the game if I lose?

No, they do not disappear.

CR 800.4a reads (in part):

  When a player leaves the game, all objects (see rule 109) owned by that player leave the game.

And according to CR 113.2 (emphasis mine):

  An effect that creates an emblem is written “[Player] gets an emblem with [ability]...” The emblem is both owned and controlled by that player.

Therefore, the emblems do not disappear, because their owner(s) are still in the game.

The Gatherer rulings for Chandra state this interaction explicitly:

  Each player who gets Chandra’s emblem is the owner of that emblem. In multiplayer games, that emblem will remain in the game as long as its owner does, even if Chandra’s owner leaves the game.


Mafia type variant with 3-5 players I love mafia/werewolf/resistance/secret hitler type games, but my kids frequently want to play when there are too few people. Typically mafia is best when there's more than about 6 or 7.

So I thought about a variant aimed specifically at the 3-6 player range. Here's how it works:

Sit around a table and distribute secret roles with cards.
The roles are 1 x mafia, 1 x juggler, and the rest are villagers.
Everyone determines their own role in secret, and then tries to vote off the mafia.
If the mafia is found, that player loses and the rest of the players win.
If the person is not a mafia they show their card to the group to prove it, and then everyone places their card face down in front of them on the table so that everyone can reach everyone else's card.
At night time, everyone closes their eyes (moderated by anyone).
The mafia wakes up and swaps his card with someone else's. He can knock the table when done, or just be given enough time.
Then mafia goes back to sleep, and the juggler wakes up. The juggler swaps any two cards.
Then go back to 3 and continue from there.

My kids are playing this right now and seem to be enjoying it.

It would be nice to have a better theme. Perhaps a cursed item is being passed around and everyone is searching for it?

So my questions are somewhat open-ended:

  What themes make the most sense to make some more intuitive sense of the roles here?
  What improvements or suggestions do people have? What specific issues might come up?

I'm new to this forum, so apologies for any faux pas. Let me know how I can improve this question and what tags might be more appropriate.

That feels like a nicely simplified Werewolf-like game that can work with fewer people.
However, I can think of a pretty major drawback, and that is the start of the game.

In a regular game of Werewolf it starts with a night, giving the werewolf players time to know which other werewolves are in play and giving a narrative justification for the lynching that is about to start happening on a daily basis.

In your example you start out by having the players randomly vote to expose one of the other players, without any chance of having information at this point. This could lead to some very cheap-feeling losses if the player that is accused just so happens to be the maffia player.

I feel like it would make more sense to start with a night phase, resolve the passing along and shuffling of roles once and then start exposing people. This way two of the players already have secret information to work with.

I imagine that this will still be a quite hectic game of accusing and bluffing, especially since at the end of the night players get to check their current role again if I understood your description correctly (step 9 instructs to go back to step 3, which includes checking the role).

As for flavour, the only way to win the game is for another player to be caught with the bad thing (in the mockup the maffia card / role), so it's something that a player would want found but not found on them...

Hmm, I can imagine a classroom setting where one of the students 'accidentally' put the class hamster in his or her bag. Everybody wants to see the hamster returned, but nobody wants to be the one getting the blame.
The role cards can be different backpacks, with one of them clearly containing the hamster.
The juggler can be re-imagined as a student with a hall pass, or homework that he or she forgot to turn in so they have to rush back and accidentally rearrange some bags on the way.


How can I play Arkham Horror remotely? Having recently moved quite a long distance away from a friend who owns Arkham Horror, we have decided to continue playing games via telepresence (supplied by google+ hangouts).

My first go at playing remotely had me opening pages in tabs on the Arkham Horror wiki and tracking everything manually in a text editor.

Do there exist any software or web tools to reduce lookup times and unify all character bookkeeping into a single interface?

Short Answer: No?

Longer Answer: Not that I've used at least. The only Arkham-management-eqsue software I've used is the Arkham toolkit for iOS, but that only helps manage the location/OW decks and isn't really for distance play.

That said, there is a program/system called VASSAL that people can make modules for that allow network play of various games. I've never used VASSAL myself, but I know that it can be used to play rather complicated competitive games online, and a quick search reveals that there is a VASSAL module for Arkham plus every expansion here that got updated a few weeks ago. I see a note on the page that all of the common item cards are blank to make sure people own a copy, so I don't know what other modifications if any the modules would need after downloading to get it into a completely easily playable state. That may be your best chance at a good online method of playing Arkham. If you give it a shot, reply with your experiences in some fashion; it would be useful info to have here.


Protection, damage and Leyline of Punishment I was wondering about the following scenario:
I have a Leyline of Punishment on board.
My opponent has Auriok Champion
I cast Anger of the gods.

Will the damage from the Anger of the Gods still come through? As far as I'm aware, prevention by DEBT (Damage, Enchant/Equip, Block, Target) prohibits the damage according to rule 702.16e:

  702.16e. Any damage that would be dealt by sources that have the stated quality to a permanent or player with protection is prevented.

However Leyline of Punishment says damage can't be prevented. Or does the prevention by protection has priority over Leyline of Punishment? If so, by what rule is this applied?

The Champion will end up getting destroyed by the Anger of the Gods because of this rule.

  101.2. When a rule or effect allows or directs something to happen, and another effect states that it can't happen, the "can't" effect takes precedence.

So you have the Champion saying damage can be prevented, and the Leyline saying it can't be prevented so it isn't prevented.


What is the most mana that can be produced by tapping a single permanent in future standard? After Theros: Beyond Death is added to standard, what will be the most mana a permanent can be tapped to produce?

Rules:

Current standard sets and Theros: Beyond Death are legal
No infinite combos of any sort. This INCLUDES loops that could be repeated turn after turn
Your deck must contain exactly 60 cards
You have set-up time limited only by decking yourself (53 turns, less or more with shenanigans)
You may not use your opponent's deck at all. For the purposes of this challenge, your opponent does not have a deck.
Mirror March is a card that, depending on luck, can technically get any number of mana produced. This came up when I asked a friend about this challenge, but I forgot to put it in the rules before. Any card that creates an "arbitrarily large" amount is ruled out for this challenge (Apologies Arcanist Lupus, although thanks for reminding me)

Answer with the number and the set-up required to do so. After I get a few answers, if mine is still the largest, I will post it. (Hint: I can't express it as a straight number)

At least 3^(2^^^^39)

Decklist:

4x Nyxbloom Ancient
2x Thousand-Year Storm
1x Repeated Reverberation
1x Narset's Reversal
1x Quasiduplicate
1x Dance of the Manse
1x Wilderness Reclamation
1x Teferi, Time Raveler
1x Awakening of Vitu-Ghazi
4x Izzet Guildgate
4x Simic Guildgate
4x Boros Guildgate
4x Swiftwater Cliffs
4x Temple of Epiphany
4x Azorius Guildgate
3x Gruul Guildgate

Setup for combo

The setup involves the following:

Drawing cards until we have Wilderness Reclamation and 7 other cards in hand, and discarding Wilderness Reclamation to hand size.
Drawing cards and playing lands until we have drawn and played 4 Izzet Guildgate, 3 Simic Guildgate, and 1 Boros Guildgate and all other non-land permanent cards, and drawn all of the instants and sorceries.
Casting Dance of the Manse with X=6 targeting Wilderness Reclamation to put it onto the battlefield as a 4/4 creature.
Casting Awakening of Vitu-Ghazi targeting a

This takes 14 turns to draw all of those cards, and we can finish playing them earlier than that.

Combo

We have no way to untap lands, so we can construct a "loop" that is ultimately limited by the mana that can be generated by the lands on the battlefield.

A loop iteration is as follows:

Cast Repeated Reverberation. Allow all Thousand-Year Storm triggers, previous Repeated Reverberation triggers, and copies to resolve, but leave the original spell on the stack. This copies the next spell to be cast a number of times equal to 2 * (2 * storm count + previous RR triggers). This costs {2}{R}{R}.
Cast Narset's Reversal targeting the Repeated Reverberation card. By now, the storm count is at least 1, so both of the Thousand-Year Storm triggers make at least 2 total copies of Narset's Reversal. Have 1 copy target the Repeated Reverberations card, and the other target the original Narset's Reversal card. The result is that we get 1 more copy of Repeated Reverberation, and all cards on the stack return to the hand. This costs {U}{U}.
Allow all of the copies of Repeated Reverberation to resolve.

This loop iteration costs 6 mana in some combination of {U} and {R}, increases the storm count by 2, and makes twices as many of the next spell to be cast. For the loop, we tap a land for {U} and a land for {R} (both modified by Nyxbloom Ancients), and repeat this loop until we have 5 mana remaining. We spend that 5 mana to cast Quasiduplicate targeting Nyxbloom Ancient, allow all of the copies to resolve, and cast Narset's Reversal to return both cards to the hand. Then we tap another two lands for much more mana, and repeat the process.

When performing this loop on a full set of untapped lands, when spending the last mana on Quasiduplicate, target the awakened Izzet Guildgate instead of Nyxbloom Ancient. When performing the loop during the main phase, target the animated Wilderness Reclamation instead

Then, in a full turn, we do the following:

Activate Teferi's first loyalty ability so that we can cast sorcery spells at instant speed.
Perform the loop described above, copying Nyxbloom Ancient, and with the last lands, Wilderness Reclamation
For each Wilderness Reclamation trigger, perform the same loop, copying Nyxbloom Ancient, and with the last lands, Izzet Guildgate

In the long run, the doubling from Repeated Reverberation far outpaces the storm copies from Thousand-Year Storm, so we can approximately say that each loop iteration doubles the number of copies 8 times. So, after we tap a pair of lands for M =  2 * 3^N mana, where N is the number of copies of Nyxbloom Ancient on the battlefield, we can make approximately 2^((M-5)/6) copies of Nyxbloom Ancient. In the longer run, the multiplicative factors don't even matter that much, so we can say that the number of Nyxbloom Ancients we get from tapping one land is about 2^(3^N), where N is the number we previously had.

2^(3^N) is much greater than 2^(2^N), so we can say that every time we untap our lands, we get more than 2^...^K Nyxbloom Ancients and Izzet Guildgates or Wilderness Reclamations, where K is the number of Nyxbloom Ancients we untapped with and the number of 2s is equal to the number of Izzet Guildgates we untapped with. In Knuth's up-arrow notation, this is much greater than 2^^N, where N is the number of Izzet Guildgates. So, each turn we get 2^^N Wilderness Reclamations and repeat that process in response to each Wilderness Reclamation trigger. That gives us 2^^^(2^^N) Izzet Guildgates.

We repeat that process for the 39 turns it takes to draw the rest of the library, getting more than 2^^^^39 Guildgates, Nyxbloom Ancients, and Wilderness Reclamations. In the end, we tap the last land for more than 3^(2^^^^39) mana.

This cannot go infinite because every land in the decklist unconditionally enters the battlefield tapped, and we can only untap lands during the untap step and a bounded number of times each end step because of Wilderness Reclamation. So, creating more lands can only increase the amount of mana available the next time we untap lands, and the number of times we can untap lands each turn is bounded.

Credit to Arcanist Lupus's answer for the idea of using Wilderness Reclamation, and using Dance of the Manse to be able to copy it with Quasiduplicate.


Lifelink and fatal damage question My life is down to 1 and my opponent 4. I attack with a 4/4 lifelink creature, and my opponent answered with a Shock to deal two damage to me, will I lose or will lifelink save me first?

You will die first.

The attack phase is actually a series of steps, of which declaring the attacking creatures is only the second. After you have determined your attacking creatures, there are several opportunities for each player to play instant-speed spells (such as Shock) and abilities before the attacking creatures can deal their combat damage. So, unless you agreed to resolve combat first, if your opponent can reduce you to zero health or less, you will lose.

For reference, these are the steps of the combat phase:

At the end of the first main phase, when the stack is empty and all players have passed, combat starts. Every player can play spells and abilities now.
You declare with which creatures you want to attack, if any. You tap them, they now count as attacking.
Every player can play spells and abilities until the stack is empty and everyone passes. (This is where your opponent played Shock, which killed you right there).
The defending player declares with which creatures to block, if any. They now count as blocking.
Every player can play spells and abilities until the stack is empty and everyone passes.
Combat resolution starts. First, all creatures with First Strike and/or Double Strike now deal their damage, simultaneously.
Every player can play spells and abilities until the stack is empty and everyone passes.
All creatures with Double Strike and all creatures who didn't deal damage in the first damage step deal damage now (this is where you would have killed your opponent with the 4/4 and gained 4 life).
Every player can play spells and abilities until the stack is empty and everyone passes.
Combat ends.


Can I look at my hand after revealing my card and before I pass it to the next player? After playing a card face down and flipping to reveal, should I be allowed to survey my hand a few moments before passing it to the next player? The rules don't strictly disallow it, but I've noticed it seems to be a general habit for players to face their hand downward before flipping, and when someone then peeks and ruffles through their hand after seeing what everyone has played (probably to see what combinations can then be obtained), there's often a knee-jerk reaction to consider that cheating in spirit.  It does slow down the game some as well.

The rules state

  After revealing cards, pass your remaining hand face-down to
  the player on your left.

Technically, when you reveal your card, you should (or at least you're allowed to) still have your hand in front of you. It's safe to assume that it's not illegal to pause for an extra moment to look at your hand before passing.


If the president in Secret Hitler believes the law passed to have been a force will the call of cards matter? I play Secret Hilter a decent bit. Assume all players play the game perfectly.
When a law has been passed it is META for the President and Chancellor to "call" how many fascist cards they saw. My hypothesis is that if a fascist law has been passed, a regular "call" of the cards is not necessary.
Notation: I will refer to the calls the president makes and the Chancellor as (x,y).
If a fascist law is passed it will be via one of the following cases:
If the president receives 3 fascist cards. (3,2)
If the president receives 2 fascist cards and discards the liberal card. (3,2)
If the president receives 2 fascist cards and discards a fascist card and the chancellor plays fascist.

Either both are fascist, and it is in both player's best interests to lie. (3,2)
Chancellor is fascist and the president is liberal. (2,2). Not applicable to question

If the president receives 1 fascist card and discards a liberal card and the chancellor plays fascist.

Either both are fascist, and it is in both player's best interests to lie. (3,2)
Chancellor is fascist and the president is liberal. (1,2). Not applicable to question

Is this a correct assessment or have I missed anything here?
Hence, from my perspective, it seems that if a fascist law has been passed, a regular "call" of the cards is not necessary.

You are forgetting a key point. Lets say that the president passed 1 liberal and 1 fascist card there is still information to be gained. This revolves around the answers not only to this question but to previous ones as well.
Liberal president - fascist chancellor: Actual draw was 1 liberal, 1 fascist and one other and the pass was done to expose the chancellor as a fascist. In this case the president can use the fact that a choice was present to out the chancellor. However this can also be used by the chancellor to try and discredit the president and it all depends on how well you are keeping track of cards. It could also lead to people believing that both are fascist and the pass was done to get a fail rather than out one player.
Fascist chancellor - liberal president: 1 liberal, 2 fascist and passes both fascists. Learning the makeup of the cards (even if a lie is told) could help reveal the lies such as near the end of a cycle finding out that there are to many fascists cards drawn and that someone lied.
While it might not provide a lot of information it will still provide information and the act of not asking that question also provides information.


What do I say when an opponent asks if I'm "tapped out", especially if I still have a means of casting a spell? When my opponent asks if I am "tapped out" is it reasonable to assume they are referring to land only?

Say for example my opponent goes to declare attackers and asks if I am "tapped out". I have no land available but 3 untapped white creatures on the field and and Devouring Light in my hand. I might mention them as blockers, but if they could not block his creatures for some reason I might just say yes. Would that be considered dishonest? What is the best way to answer this question?

First, let me tell you about your obligations with regards to providing information.

There are three categories of information: free, derived and private.
Free information is information to which all players are entitled access without contamination or omissions made by their opponents. If a player is ever unable or unwilling to provide free information to an opponent that has requested it, he or she should call a judge and explain the situation. Free information includes:

[...]
The physical status (tapped/flipped/unattached/phased) and current zone of any object.
[...]

Derived information is information to which all players are entitled access, but opponents are not obliged to assist in determining and may require some skill or calculation to determine. Derived information includes:

[...]

Private information is information to which players have access only if they are able to determine it from the current visual game state or their own record of previous game actions.

[...]

Also,

At Regular REL, all derived information is instead considered free.

If he's seeking to know which of your permanents are tapped, you are obligated to answer.
If he's seeking for more than that, you are only obligated to answer when Regular Rule Enforcement Level is in effect. (This is the REL used at events such as FNM.) Determining which of your permanents are lands or which of them have mana abilities is derived information.
Whether you are obligated to answer or not, all answers must be truthful and without omission.

On to your question. Given that he didn't mention lands or mana, I see three alternatives.

You can could ask what he means.
You could overload him with information. For example, "I have many untapped permanents. J, K, L and M are untapped." For all you know, he's asking if you have any potential blockers. If not, "Oh, you just wanted to know about land? Dully noted."
You could misdirect while being fully truthful. For example, "only non-lands aren't tapped".


Will multiple Exquisite Archangels give me many extra chances, or just one? Let's say I've somehow managed to get two or more Exquisite Archangels out onto the battlefield:

(Possibly more. I apologise for making you see this.)

Something causes me to lose. Let's say it's just regular creature damage, and my life will reset just fine with no shenanigans.

What happens? Do all Archangels get exiled at once, or do I exile just one and have one more chance left for each extra Archangel beyond that one?

Only 1 Archangel gets exiled each time you lose. This is because the Archangel has a replacement effect, and when you have multiple replacement effects attempting to modify the same event you do it one at a time. The first Archangel replaces you losing with her effect. You are now no longer losing so the remaining Archangels don't have anything to replace so their effects do nothing.

616.1. If two or more replacement and/or prevention effects are attempting to modify the way an event affects an object or player, the affected object’s controller (or its owner if it has no controller) or the affected player chooses one to apply, following the steps listed below. If two or more players have to make these choices at the same time, choices are made in APNAP order (see rule 101.4).
616.1a-c These rules don't apply to this case.
616.1d Any of the applicable replacement and/or prevention effects may be chosen.
616.1e Once the chosen effect has been applied, this process is repeated (taking into account only replacement or prevention effects that would now be applicable) until there are no more left to apply.


Are there viable alternatives to a "three level pre-empt" with a good seven card suit? Some people I know would "pre-empt" three spades with a hand like the following:

(s) AKQxxxx (h) xx (d)xx (c)xx.

My preference, however is to open with a "weak two," (spades) basically treating my seven card suit as if it had six. With some partners, I might open one spade even with only nine hcps, because it has 12 points counting distribution, seven (probable) tricks, and should make game opposite an opening hand that has three tricks.

On another question someone asked me what I would do with KJTxxxx KTxx x x. Again I prefer a weak two in first and second positions, pre-empting only in third. (Take away the side king, and I would pre-empt three spades in the first three positions.) The reason is that my seven hcps (eight counting the two tens) is close enough to the "average" of 10, so that I don't want to take up bidding space that my partner might be able to use.

I would even open a "weak two" with Axxxxxx and nothing else in other suits. That's because the ace (unlike a K or KJ) has real defensive value, and I feel less need to pre-empt.

Are all (or most) of the above viable alternatives to pre-empting? Or should I be pre-empting more than I actually do?

I have a friend that preempts at the two level with defense and at the three level without. He doesn't get very good results from that treatment.

In my opinion, AKQxxxx xx xx xx should be opened 3S in any seat and vulnerability. If you were 7321 instead of 7222, you could consider 1S if your partnership opens light. If you're in third seat and RHO opened, you might consider 4S nonvulnerable.

The larger question is a question of philosophy. Preempts can be used primarily destructively (that is, as an attempt to interfere in opponents' auction), or as a mix of a constructive and destructive bid. If you preempt destructively, partner can never raise you to game (either 3NT or 4 of your major) based on power. If 2S could be anything from KJxxxx xxx xx xx to AKQxxxx xx xx xx, what is partner to do with xx Axxx AKQx Axx? If you have the first hand, 4S is dicey and 3NT is hopeless. If you have the second, 6S and 6NT are excellent contracts. Partner just has to raise you to 4S and hope. If a three-level preempt contains both KQ-seventh and out, and 7-low and out, then partner can never raise you to 3NT, and even extending your preempt with a 3-card holding in your suit is  a risky proposition.

It comes down to this: If your preempts are primarily destructive, you'll often be making the final decision for your partnership based on 13 cards, while your opponents will be using 26 during the auction. Your partnership will miss some good games and make some bad sacrifices. You'll make bad leads on defense more often and opponents will have more information about your distribution. Against that, opponents will get to the wrong strain or level a little more often than at other tables.

I don't think that's a good tradeoff, and few experts do either.


Can units join a character in combat? I know a character can join a unit.

Can a unit join a character?

Can a unit join a character that is in close combat?

From BRB p97.

A character must move into a unit to join it.  There is no rule that allows the unit to move to the character.

A character cannot join a unit in close combat.

You can however, simply charge into combat alongside the character.  This is often to your advantage for that particular combat, other than not being able to use the character's leadership.  (Two chances to catch the enemy if they flee, if one or the other of yours flees, the other may hold and prevent them form being run down, etc.)


What happens if your opponents never let you win the bid? In other words, they out bid you even if they have a very bad hand just to prevent you from getting any points above the line?

I will expand on Benjamin Cosman's answer by noting that:

The behaviour you are observing is bad bridge; and
The (scoring) line in Rubber Bridge is simply that, and a means (other than a time limit) for ending the match. The winner is determined by the total of points obtained both below and above the line.

However, to expand on point 1 above, learn to double the opponents to truly penalize them for their unsocial behaviour, and enhance your defensive skills to get those extra tricks that turn a collected penalty of 100 or 200 into 800 or even 1100. A couple of those should slow down your opponents penchant for stink bidding.

If collecting penalties is still insufficient, offer to play for a little pocket change. A one cent a point stake over 3 or 4 hours can comfortably net $40 to $80 profit over weak players. There are two common forms of scoring in money bridge: rubber and four-deal or Chicago. Tough money players will deliberately play rubber against weak players as it creates additional strategic considerations that those players fail to grasp. Only against players that they respect do they opt for Chicago scoring, as it reduces the luck element.

Finally, I will note that the scoring of doubled not vulnerable under-tricks was changed about 20 years ago. Formerly all doubled undertricks after the first were scored at 200 points each, but long experience revealed that this was inadequate. A change was made that the 4th and subsequent doubled undertricks not vulnerable undertricks  now became 300 points each, the same as when vulnerable. Make sure that you are using the current scoring table - and practice your doubling and card-reading skills.

Good luck!


What is considered suprise Assume the following situation:

Italy at war with France but not CW. Italian navy is in port in La Spezia, along with one German SUB and a German AA. CW DOWs Italy.

In the port strike:

Are the Italian units considered surprised if the German SUB is not included in the combat?
Can the German AA fire if the German SUB is not included?

Surprise rules on naval combat and port strikes say surprise occurs if only units of the surprised major or minor is involved in the combat.

Obviously, the Italians are surprised, and the Germans aren't - and the Germans decide whether to include the SUB or not.

Is a non-included SUB "involved"?

I got this answer anecdotally at my gaming club (sorry about the facebook link, I'll post the discussion here when it halts or reaches a conclusion):

  In a port-strike your subs are automatic involved in a minor port. You cannot choose to be non-included in port.

No reference, but at least it's a ruling of some sort.


Rolling One With Cowry Dice I am playing Parcheesi with cowry shells as dice. I am on the last square and need a roll of one to return the pawn to home. However, with cowry dice, only rolls of 10+grace, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6+grace, 25+grace are possible. An exact throw is required. What is the solution to the problem? Can the 10 throw also stand for 1 in cowry dice?

Hopefully you are playing Pachisi and not Parcheesi.  If yes, then this answer is accurate.

An ebook by Damian Walker here:
A Book of Historic Board Games

Page 25 - 1.2.7

  A grace counts as if were a separate throw scoring 1, in addition to
  the value of the cowries.  Graces are used for entering and moving
  pieces.

As long as you have a grace at then end of your set of rolls you can bring this piece home.


Does Saheeli Rai's (-2) targeting Riddleform make a creature? Consider Saheeli Rai and Riddleform.
Saheeli Rai's -2 says:

  Create a token that's a copy of target artifact or creature you control, except it's an artifact in addition to its other types. That token gains haste. Exile it at the beginning of the next end step.

So, turn 2, I cast Riddleform. Turn 3, I cast Saheeli Rai, a noncreature spell, and elect to have Riddleform become a 3/3 Sphinx creature with flying.

Though it would be a legal target, I don't think it is an intelligent target for the -2. Does the token come in only with the copiable values, making it not a creature?

As a tangent, suppose it's later in the game, with Saheeli Rai and Riddleform in play. I cast noncreature spell A, electing to make Riddleform a creature, and then use Saheeli Rai's -2 to make a token that is a copy of Riddleform. If I cast a second noncreature spell, can the token then become a creature?

You'll end up with an Artifact Enchantment.

When an object copies another, even if it never was anything else, only the copiable values are copied.

  706.2. When copying an object, the copy acquires the copiable values of the original object’s characteristics and, for an object on the stack, choices made when casting or activating it (mode, targets, the value of X, whether it was kicked, how it will affect multiple targets, and so on). The “copiable values” are the values derived from the text printed on the object (that text being name, mana cost, color indicator, card type, subtype, supertype, rules text, power, toughness, and/or loyalty), as modified by other copy effects, by its face-down status, and by “as . . . enters the battlefield” and “as . . . is turned face up” abilities that set power and toughness (and may also set additional characteristics). Other effects (including type-changing and text-changing effects), status, and counters are not copied.

[Emphasis added]

The token will also have the abilities of Riddleform, so yes, it can become a creature.


18xx Companies able to buy other companies, what will be the impact One of the fun parts of the 18xx games, is that its fairly easy to create your own (local) version. I like to create a dutch version (yes there have been two already but with limited availability). One of the main features in dutch history is that it stared with lots of small companies that merged into one at the end (although there are some new companies started the last couple of years).

1856 deals with the same situation, and they solved it with cash and loans (companies that couldn't pay their loan are merged into the national railway, which is fine but I like a different.

In 1870 companies can buy their own shares. But what if companies are allowed to buy shares of other companies. Would that be a workable solution. And how do the companies get enough cash to buy the shares.

The question is, is it a workable solution to allow (and even encourage) companies to buy other companies. Maybe only if the shares are in the lower part of the stock table.

Possible extensions could be:

use of station markers of the owned company (or at least be able to pass through them)
loan trains (only once per operation round so that a single train can't be run more than once).
completely eat the company if 100% of the shares are owned. (including cash, trains and station markers).

Possible problems could be:

two companies owing a third company
circular ownership (A owns B, B owns A) which can be solved by selling at least 50%(including the president share) at once.

I'd love to see a proper set of Merger & Acquisitions rules for 18xx.

I suspect I would start with something like this:

Companies may buy each other's shares with company cash.
Companies may not buy more than 20% of another company without making a takeover bid.
To make a takeover bid, a company must have enough cash to pay current market-price for all the shares it doesn't hold.  It first buys all shares of the target company that are not owned by players or other companies.  If that gets them >50%, then the takeover is successful.
If it doesn't get them >50%, then they offer current market price to the other shareholders.  If enough accept to get to >50%, then success, otherwise, they can raise the offer until they succeed, run out of cash, or give up.
Any remaining shares are then forcibly bought at the highest price reached in the takeover auction.
Once the company has been taken over, the new company has then eaten it.  It can issue the share certificates of the takenover company as additional shares, diluting its own shareholdings.

That's a hostile takeover system.

A merger would go more like this:

If two companies each own 20% of each other and both presidents want them to merge, then they should announce this.  They need >50% of the shares to vote in favour.  Shares owned by each other automatically vote yes.
There is now one, bigger company with all the station markers and trains.  If there are rules on the maximum number of trains a company can own, then this company can own twice as many.  Share certificates now represent half as large a percentage as previously.
The two Presidents' shares are combined into a single certificate, so that shareholding isn't diluted.  The new President will have to exchange some of his previous shares to get the shareholding right (ie Pres share is normally 20%, the President's certificate they had before is now only 10%, so they will have to hand over two other certificates to balance it out: if they don't have that many, then they can buy them from the company; it certainly owns at least 20% of itself).  If both of the Presidents of the pre-merger companies have the same shareholding in newco, then they have to agree when they announce the merger.
Any remaining shares that remain with the company after forced purchases by the new President and making change to the old President are now available to be bought on the open market.
The new share price is the average of the share prices of the two old companies.


How many Tokens does Sidisi, the Brood Tyrant make when multiple creature cards enter the graveyard simultaneously? If two creature cards are placed in the graveyard by one card effect, will Sidisi, Brood Tyrant make one or two tokens?

"Whenever one or more creature cards (...)" only triggers once when multiple cards are moved into the graveyard at the same time, like when you delve or when Sidisi enters the battlefield.

If it was meant to trigger for each individual card, it would say: "Whenever a creature card (...)".

See one of Sidisi, Brood Tyrant's rulings:

  9/20/2014: Any instruction, including Sidisi’s first ability, that tells you to put multiple cards from a library into a graveyard moves all the cards at the same time. For example, if Sidisi enters the battlefield and you put three creature cards into your graveyard, Sidisi’s last ability will trigger once and you’ll put one Zombie token onto the battlefield.

Bear in mind, one effect can have multiple separate instructions to move cards to your library: in general, if it contains multiple sentences, each with its own self-milling instruction, each sentence is a different instruction, and each instruction will move all of its cards simultaneously.

The current standard format doesn't seem to contain any examples of this, but imagine a Dampen Thought targeting yourself, spliced into another Dampen Thought, also targeting yourself. You'd wind up with, effectively, a spell saying: "Target player puts the top four cards of his or her library into his or her graveyard. Target player puts the top four cards of his or her library into his or her graveyard." — which will count as milling yourself twice, and trigger Sidisi twice.


Resource Monopoly when player only has one of the named resource Does the opponent have to give you the selected resource ONLY if they have 2, or do they have to give the selected resource EVEN if they have only 1?

They must give the one they have.

This is covered by the rules.

Resource Monopoly
Name a resource. Each player must give you 2 of that type of resource if they have them.
You may name any of the 5 resources (ore, grain, wool, lumber, or brick). Each player must give you 2 of the named resource if he has them. If a player only has 1 of that resource, he only gives you 1.

It's basically a version of the original game's Resource Monopoly (which forced other players to give the user all of their cards of the named resource) that has been capped to two cards.


Does Feast for Crows Expansion balance 4 player Game of Thrones? Feast for Crows expansion came out relatively recently for A Game of Thrones: The Board Game 2nd Edition. The core set is playable 3-6 players, however, 4 player was terribly unbalanced. The expansion makes the game only 4 player, so I was wondering if they did a good job balancing the game.

That is certainly one of the goals of the expansion.  Whether or not it succeeds is somewhat subjective, but it currently has 23 ratings on Boardgame Geek and is averaging an 8.61 out of 10, so I would say that most people seem to think it works pretty well.


Can I rebound a spell that exiles itself? There's a handful of cards from the game which also exile themselves as they resolve. For a straightforward example there's Restock:

  Return two target cards from your graveyard to your hand. Exile Restock.

That's fine enough. But what if I have Cast Through Time on the battlefield to give it rebound?

  Instant and sorcery spells you control have rebound. (Exile the spell as it resolves if you cast it from your hand. At the beginning of your next upkeep, you may cast that card from exile without paying its mana cost.)

Will Restock rebound out of exile?

There doesn't seem to be a ruling about this on Cast Through Time. The one part I'm confident about is that if it does rebound, it won't rebound a second time -- it'll exile itself again and it won't have been cast from my hand that time.

No, spells that exile themselves will not rebound.

This is supported by the definition of Rebound in the comprehensive rules: (emphasis mine)

  702.87a Rebound appears on some instants and sorceries. It represents a static ability that functions while the spell is on the stack and may create a delayed triggered ability. “Rebound” means “If this spell was cast from your hand, instead of putting it into your graveyard as it resolves, exile it and, at the beginning of your next upkeep, you may cast this card from exile without paying its mana cost.”

Rebound works by putting the card into exile instead of putting it into your graveyard after the spell is finished resolving. A card that exiles itself never goes into the graveyard, so Rebound dosen't have a chance to move it, and give you the chance to cast it for free at your next upkeep.


What happens when I try to exile more cards from my library than there is in my library? If I use Golos, Tireless Pilgrim's activated ability, which starts:

  Exile the top three cards of your library...

when my library has 2 or fewer cards, must I draw all 3 cards (and hence lose the game attempting to draw from an empty library) or can I just exile the 2 cards which are available?

You don't lose the game until you try to draw a card that doesn't exist.

  104.3c If a player is required to draw more cards than are left in their library, they draw the remaining cards and then lose the game the next time a player would receive priority. (This is a state-based action. See rule 704.)

Since Golos exiles cards it doesn't lose you the game, but that will probably happen on your next draw step anyway.

You can now exile your 2 cards to Golos's ability:

  609.3. If an effect attempts to do something impossible, it does only as much as possible.


Double Hardened Scales I'm having issues understanding how a possible turn would go which I'll try to explain best I can.

Say I currently had two Battlewise Hoplites currently on the board. One of them currently has Hardened Scales but the other does not. This would mean that the first which has the enchantment would have two +1/+1 counters currently. The first for its Heroic ability and another due to Hardened Scales.

Now say that I decide that I want to play an additional Hardened Scales to the other Battlewise that isn't enchanted and is still a 2/2? I'm unclear how two Hardened scales on the board at the same time would resolve?

I'm still pretty new to magic so excuse me if I'm using wrong terminology!

Thanks!

Not all enchantments attach to a creature (or any kind of permanent). In general, enchantments just sit on the battlefield like artifacts. Auras are special types of enchantments that do attach to things. They have a type line that says "Enchantment - Aura" and an ability in the text box that says "Enchant [object]," which means that it attaches to objects with the given description.

Hardened Scales doesn't target, and it doesn't just affect just one creature. As long as it's on the battlefield, any time you would put any number of +1/+1 counters on any creature you control, you also put an extra +1/+1 counter on that creature.

If you had two copies of Hardened Scales, every time you put +1/+1 counters on one of your creatures, each of the abilities modifies what happens and you add two extra counters.


In Jokers and Pegs Game can I use a joker to help my partner after all my pegs are home safe? Can I use a joker to help my partner after all my pegs are home safe?

I would say you can. It doesn't say you can't in the rules but it does say once you have finished you can help the team member to your left that is still going.

"Each player must play his own pegs until all five pegs are in the SAFE position. Then he can help his teammates. When playing with six players, you will help the teammate player to your left, if he still has playable pegs."

http://web.archive.org/web/20111028173900/http://www.1stingames.com/rules/pegsnjokers/rules.htm