Deviations from basic strategy due to the count in blackjack? Should you ever deviate from basic strategy due to the count? Lets take for example a situation in which the dealer's up card is a 4 and you have a 12. Basic strategy would tell you to stand and not hit. Now consider the count is extremely low, for the zen count, suggesting lots of '10' cards have been drawn already. Lets make it absurdly low like -14 or something. It makes it less likely then that the next card drawn should be a 10 value to have you bust. Should you hit in this scenario or is basic strategy always the way to go? On the other hand, a really low count makes it likely that the dealer then picks up a lot of lower value cards hopefully busting. I'm confused if card counting is simply for betting strategy or if it should be regarded as a way to alert you to opportune deviations from basic strategy.

The short answer to your question is YES.  This is the whole reason for counting, to understand how to change your bets and strategy to account for the count and to take advantage of the change in the odds.

This is also how casino's know that you're counting.  Once they are deep into the deck, you start betting higher, which is a signal to them that you're counting, in which case, they'll escort you out the door.


In Monopoly, Can I mortgage properties as I am bankrupted? Rules state that properties can be mortgaged at any time.  But if I can't raise enough money to pay rent, I am bankrupt and out of the game.
Mortgaging properties just prior to handing them over to the new owner would be a nuisance.  Since the new owner is required to pay a 10% fee to the bank.
As the player being bankrupted, am I allowed to reduce the spoils I turn over in this fashion?

Note a similar question about making deals with other players when going bankrupt.

Basically, you can mortgage properties to try to avoid bankruptcy. But when it is obvious that you can't, you are supposed to restore the status quo ante, (before you landed on the other person's property), and hand over your property to your creditor as they "were." That is, mortgaged or unmortgaged, as they were at the beginning of your turn.

  If your debt is to another player, you must turn over to that player all that you have of value and retire from the game. In making this settlement, if you own houses or hotels, you must return these to the Bank in exchange for money to the extent of one-half the amount paid for them; this cash is given to the creditor.


Is there a single player PC game with similar mechanics to Twilight Imperium? I recently started playing Twilight Imperium, and it's a blast. I really like the political aspect, technology aspect, and the mobilization of fleets. I really wish there was a PC game similar to this. I've been playing Civilization since Civ1 through Civ3, and that series is the closest PC game I can think of; however, it's not exactly what I'm looking for. I like how the production in TI is based on resources instead of production of a city. I also like how the politic cards change the rules as the game progresses. Does any one know of a PC game that has similar mechanics?

The Master's of Orion series is probably the closest PC game to Twilight Imperium, and a great game as well.

Other people seem to think this as well, see here, or here.

You could also go full circle, and say that TI ispired the Masters of Orion boardgame.


Can Rhys be played in a mono-green EDH deck? I was wondering if a card with a cost that is either green or white, for example Rhys the Redeemed, could be played in a mono-green deck led by a commander such as Ezuri, Renegade Leader?

No, you cannot play Rhys the Redeemed in a mono-green EDH deck. You can only play cards with hybrid mana costs if all of their colors are part of the commander's color identity.

The commander rules describe the color identity rules in rule 903.4:

  The Commander variant uses color identity to determine what cards can be in a deck with a certain commander. The color identity of a card is the color or colors of any mana symbols in that card's mana cost or rules text, plus any colors defined by its characteristic-defining abilities (see rule 604.3) or color indicator (see rule 204).

and the hybrid mana symbols are defined in rule 107.4e:

  Hybrid mana symbols are also colored mana symbols. Each one represents a cost that can be paid in one of two ways, as represented by the two halves of the symbol. A hybrid symbol such as {W/U} can be paid with either white or blue mana, and a monocolored hybrid symbol such as {2/B} can be paid with either one black mana or two mana of any type. A hybrid mana symbol is all of its component colors.

So, Rhys's color identity is green/white, which means that it can only be played in a deck with a commander that has both green and white in its color identity.


Psi 0, 1, or 2 games - are credits from thin air or player's pool? Psychic Field mentions spending credits. Are both players actually spending these credits from their credit pool, or are these imaginary credits?

If a runner has 0 credits, this is basically a guaranteed win?

Thanks

Yes, this card is an example of the Psi game mechanic, and credits are always spent from your credit pool. If aplayer has no credits, then they can only bid 0 during the Psi game (note: this is an excellent way of dealing with Caprice Nisei!).

From the manual (p.7),

  Credit Pool: Each player has a credit pool where he keeps the credit
  tokens he has available to spend. Spent credits are returned to the
  token bank.


Is there a real shift in balance if Blueprints players violate their blueprint? After being taught how to play Blueprints, I was told that building your blueprint was completely optional, with the only downside that you would miss out on the 6-point bonus if you don't follow it. I took this to mean that you could place and stack dice any way you wanted to on the card.

I later learned that, according to the written rules:

You cannot play dice on the filled-in spaces.
If you cannot legally place a die, you must take one from the supply, discard it, and re-roll a new one.

Before playing according to those rules, however, we never discarded dice; no matter what your blueprint, every player got to place six dice and score them accordingly.

Does playing this way disrupt the game's balance at all? To me, it seems negligible; you're still forfeiting your 6-point bonus by placing a die where it isn't planned to go.

Well, obviously if you can place your die on any of the 6 spaces of the card, even the filled-in ones, then of course you can always place your die. No re-roll needed.

However, a blueprints card usually has 3 or 4 spaces where you can place your die. I played this game many times and it never happened that we had to re-roll a new die. The only way this could happen is if you have high numbers on your card and ALL the remaining dice have smaller numbers. This is unlikely. But of course, if all players agree to purposely go for the highest numbers first, this might happen. But I don't see why you would do this. Even if glass dice with high numbers are available, the numbers are usually not so important for the other colors.

Thematic point of view

I know this game might be considered an abstract game, but do not forget there is a theme. You are an architect. You cannot build wherever you want. The filled-in spaces represent roads, other buildings and so on. You are restricted by the surroundings. You should respect that, otherwise nobody will hire you as an architect.

Technical point of view

I think the differences are very small. One thing I can think of is:
- it is slightly easier to have more connections for the orange dice (which gives point according to adjacent neighbours). With the official rule, you might have an orange die on the first layer next to a filled-in space and therefore you cannot use this space to have an orange neighbour and score more points. You will have to manage it by putting a die over the first one.

On some rare occasions you will be able to play a die that you would not if you follow the official rules. So, I think this makes the game slightly easier, but not by much.

But it also makes the game less interesting: what is the point of the blueprints if you can put your die where you want?

My experience with this game is: usually you tend to respect your blueprint (6 points is always nice to have), the only time when you don't is when you really cannot or when you go for "the tower" (all dice stacked together).


What can I do if I still do not understand an interaction from a DCI online test? The instruction pages for the online DCI Judges exams/practice tests (requires login) says:

  Before you start, it's important to note that, in order for the testing experience to remain relevant and give everyone a good gauge of their knowledge you may not disclose any of the content on any of the tests, anywhere.

If this is the case what should I do if there was a question/interaction I did not understand even after the explanation given?

You probably have some sort of judge-mentor, which is either a higher Level judge that might eventually take your judge-test or your regional coordinator.

If there was a question or interaction that you did not understand after the explanation, you can talk with this mentor in private about it.


Lion's Eye Diamond and madness Can cards discarded to activate Lion's Eye Diamond be played for their madness cost with the mana produced by Lion's Eye Diamond?

For example:

I play Lion's Eye Diamond.
I have Alms of the Vein in my hand.
I crack Lion's Eye Diamond, discarding Alms of the Vein, getting {B}{B}{B}.
Can I play Alms of the Vein with the produced mana?

Yes. Lion's Eye Diamond is a mana ability (it produces mana, it doesn't target, and it isn't a loyalty ability), so you don't have to wait for it to resolve. LED is special among mana abilities in that it has a timing restriction, but that only limits when you can activate it.


Ideas for handicapping strong players? My family enjoys playing Boggle. Usually it's all adults that play, but come the holidays it's not uncommon to have elementary and junior high aged cousins, nieces, and nephews interested in playing but lack the vocabulary (and practice time!) the adults enjoy.

Any suggestions on how to handicap the adults to make the game more balanced when younger players join?

Group the players according to skill level. Each of your words are eliminated if anybody in your group or below has a duplicate word. Players in groups higher than yours cannot eliminate your words, but you can eliminate theirs. I think there should be at least two players in the lowest group, but maybe you want to be really kind to the most junior player.

I haven't tested this, it might be too unbalanced. Try experimenting with the group sizes. I suspect fewer groups would be better.


Does War Stomp exhaust me before I am the defender? This question is related to the World of Warcraft Trading Card Game.

I have a Hunter, no allies out, and in my hand is a Frost Trap.

My opponent attacks with Himul Longstrider, who has War Stomp. He wants to target my hero with the War Stomp power.

Will my hero be exhausted before I am able to pay the cost of Frost Trap?  Put another way, does War Stomp exhaust my hero before my hero is "defending," thus preventing me from paying its cost by exhausting my hero?

Yes.

According to answers on the wowtcg.com forums, War Stomp triggers in two different places, depending on whether the character with War Stomp is attacking or defending.

  If attacking, then War Stomp triggers at the beginning of the Attack Window, just after the attacker exhausts for that attack.
  Since this happens before the Protect Point, you can exhaust a protector before they can protect with it.

  If defending, then War Stomp triggers at the beginning of the Defend Window, just after the Protect Point.
  You cannot use War Stomp while defending to stop the current attack, but you can exhaust another character to stop them from attacking that turn."

The upshot of this is that when you are attacked by an ally with War Stomp, the attacker can exhaust your hero before the Protect Point, when you are still just the proposed defender. Since you're not yet the defender, you can't respond by exhausting your hero to pay Frost Trap's cost.


9-player Advanced Civilization rules We're playing our yearly Advanced Civilization game this Saturday, and we may have 9 people.  Does anyone have any 9-player rules?

We have all the extension maps.

While I don't know any, you can easily figure it out and try if that works.

Official rules state:

pla  pan  tok
9    -
8    4/5  47
7    4/5  55
6    4    55
5    3w   47
4    2e+  55
3    2w-  47

(players, panels, tokens)

I find it odd it allows 7 and 8 players to play with either 4 or 5 panels without varying the amount of token to use. I read it "you must use it, but we have to provide rules to allow you to play even if you don't have it".

Assumed that, there are two ways to amend it.

pla  pan  tok
9    6    55
8    5    47
7    5    55
6    4    55

the more conservative approach is to just assume they meant the western extra panel to be used and keep the tokens as they were. Problem is you would need a sixth panel to add a ninth player, and it doesn't officially exist (nor unofficially, AFAIK). If you take this route, you'll automatically also get a 10-player version, using 6 panels and 47 tokens.

pla  pan  tok
9    5    47
8    5    55
7    4    47
6    4    55

the optimistic approach assumes they messed up the token amounts trying to allow 7 and 8-player games to work both with 4 and 5 panels, so you fix it as in this table.

They would both need testing; before actually testing them in the field, actually counting territories and population in each panel could help (I didn't, yet).


Does Cell Portal restart the run? Cell Portal has the following text:

  The Runner approaches the outermost piece of ice protecting the attacked server. Derez Cell Portal.

What happens after the Runner passes the outermost piece of ice: does it

Continue to the next ice after the outermost piece; or
Continue to the next ice after Cell Portal?

When the subroutine on Cell Portal fires, the Runner must encounter all ice (again), starting from the outermost.

Just be careful with terminology; the run doesn't "restart" (i.e. no "start of run" effects are fired again), the Runner is just teleported back to the first piece of ice and must continue from there.


Does Babylon's wonder count for scientific structure victory points? In 7 Wonders, do the science symbols on Babylon's wonder mat count for victory points? Say I've built the second level of the A side and I have no other science symbols. Do I get one point for each of the three symbols and seven for the 1 set of three symbols?

Babylon's A second stage (or B's third stage) allows you to get one scientific symbol of your choice at the end of the game, if you have built it. If you do, it counts for the scientific points. It works exactly like the Scientific purple card "Scientists' Guild".

Example: you have 4 "Gear" green cards and build Babylon's 2nd stage. You can convert it to a 5th "Gear" at the end of the game and earn a total of 25 points for 5 same green cards.


Can I block with my Llanowar elves and then tap it for mana immediately afterward? My opponent attacks with a 3/3. I block with my 1/1 Llanowar Elves, and have all of my land tapped from my last turn. Can I now tap my Llanowar Elves after it has been declared as a blocker to play Giant Growth on it, make it 4/4 until end of turn, and destroy my opponent's attacking creature when damage is dealt?

Yes, this works just fine. Once a creature is declared as a blocker, it remains a blocker until it is specifically removed from combat (e.g.  Regeneration) or the battlefield (e.g.  Cloudshift).

One thing to note: once a creature is blocked, it remains blocked even if the blocker is removed before damage is dealt. This works great against lifelinkers, since they deal no damage to a creature that is no longer there. It works less well on tramplers, since they just deal all their damage to the player instead.


How do I beat U/R control with Affinity? I play affinity and seriously struggle with control players and can't seem to find a way to win.

Blue Moon has become popular recently, and while  Blood Moon does not cripple my deck the constant counters to anything I do just stagnate the game.

Kolaghan's Command kills 2 artifacts at once, normally a  Mox Opal and creature.

My damage cards ( Arcbound Ravager,  Etched Champion,  Cranial Plating) are countered with spells like  Mana Leak.

My creatures are constantly hit with  Lightning Bolt, and  Jace, Telepath Unbound and  Snapcaster Mage lets them replay them. My land are also destroyed this way if I try to use them as creatures.

What strategy's can be used against a deck that mainboards more removal than I have playable cards and after the first round can add in specific artifact hate ?

  Decklist

  2x master of etherium
  3x signal pest
  3x etched champion
  4x arcbound ravager
  4x ornithopter
  4x memnite
  4x vault skirge

  4x galvanic blast
  4x thoughtcast
  4x mox opal
  4x spring-leaf drum
  4x cranial plating

  4x darksteel citadel
  4x inkmoth nexus
  4x blinkmoth nexus
  3x glimmervoid
  1x island

  Sideboard

  4x spellskite
  1x steel overseer
  1x torpor orb
  1x tormod's crypt
  2x gitaxian probe
  4x shrapnel blast
  1x blood moon
  1x glimmervoid

The answer really is to go fast. I say this as a long time UR player in Modern. By go fast, I mean you want to pressure your opponent's life total and build big creatures.

It looks like you have Master of Etherium in the main. That's a great card for you because it can often push your creatures out of Pyroclasm or Anger of the Gods range. UR decks are typically Snap/Bolt decks. They rely heavily on damage based removal, so if you can bump your creatures out of that range (~ 3-4 toughness), you'll be doing the most good. Etched Champion has protection from just about any removal UR has, aside from countering it. If you can land an Etched Champion you are in very good position.

Holding double black up to re-equip Cranial Plating at instead speed may be difficult, but it's a great way to get around targeted removal during the combat phase. They shoot your equipped Vault Skirge? Re-equip it onto your Ornithopter.

If you want to play around counterspells, be aware of what the opponent has already played that game (and round) and take note of their open mana. They have one blue open and haven't played Spell Snare all game? Don't play your 2-drop. You can also try waiting to play multiple spells per turn. Counterspells will typically cost more mana to play than your creatures will, so even if a creature or two of yours gets countered save your best for last to get it on the board.

Lastly, most blue decks (and UR especially) tend to board out counterspells against fast decks like affinity. They often bring things in like Shatterstorm, so don't over-commit to the board. Be weary of sweepers as well.

You are always the beatdown in this matchup, UR doesn't have Splinter Twin anymore, so as long as you can keep dropping threats you will likely come out on top.


Can Dead Weight be sacrificed after it kills a creature? When you cast Dead Weight on a creature, is there a time frame to sacrifice the dead weight to another instant speed card effect before the dead weight goes into the graveyard but after it killed the creature it was cast on?

No. Once a player would get priority, if Dead Weight reduces the toughness of the creature to a value less than 0, or if the damage marked on the creature is equal to or greater than its (new) toughness, State Based Actions will cause the creature to go to the graveyard.

When the creature goes to the graveyard, Dead Weight will follow since it is no longer attached to an object or player.


Can you pick up from the discard pile and hit in Phase 10? When playing Phase 10, can you pick up from the discard pile to hit yourself or your opponent?
Any rules related to that (i.e. add to hand first, etc.)

Yes, you may do that, based on the rules, here's what's relevant:
Hitting:

Hitting is the way to get rid of leftover cards after making a Phase. You make a hit by putting a card directly on a Phase already laid down. The card must properly fit with the cards already down.
Before you can make a hit, your own Phase must already be laid down. You may hit only during your turn. You may hit your own cards, another player’s cards, or both.

Turns:

On your turn, draw one card, either the top card from the draw pile or the top
card from the discard pile, and add it to your hand. End your turn by discarding any one of your cards onto the top of the discard pile.

So you may draw from the discard pile to hit only when:

It is your turn.
You already made a Phase.
The card properly fits the Phase you are adding it to.

Combining these rules means your turn sequence to do this would be:

Pick up from discard pile.
Add it to your hand.
(if you already made a phase) you may hit your own or another player's phase.
Discard to the discard pile to end your turn.

Since you can only hit on your turn, this means you can only use the discarded card from the player before you.


Could I use gryph-chargers for my Warhammer 40k space marines? And would they fit? When creating a custom space marine chapter i wanted to make something that was a little unique visually. Right now it doesn't really have anything that stands out so I decided to add a fast attack/cavalry like unit to add to my chapters knight like appearance.
I searched through existing Warhammer 40k mounts and found non that fit within my price range since they were pretty costly and the ones that weren't costly weren't what I was looking for visually.
I then broadened my search to the age of sigmar collection and found the vanguard-palladors.
What I wanted to know is, could a space marine fit on top of a gryph-charger from this set? And if so, would it be acceptable lore and game wise. (If I used them I would use the attack bike datasheet)

While 40K and Age of Sigmar are both technically 28mm scale models AoS tends to run a little larger than 40K.
That said the Stormcast models are a very close match to Primaris models in terms of size, so a waist up conversion for Vanguard-Palladors is possible.
Otherwise if you're wanting to use regular marines either the legs will look a little off, or they'll need more heavy conversion.


Can Kaalia of the Vast put Slumbering Dragon into play tapped and attacking? I was looking at Slumbering dragon on Gatherer and ran across this quote in the discussion forum:

  Finally a dragon that doesn't mesh well with Kaalia of the Vast

As I pondered this possibility, it occured to me that assumption might be wrong. Kaalia of the Vast puts a Dragon creature card from your hand onto the battlefield tapped and attacking.

My understanding of the rules of magic is that ability text on a creature card only applies once the card is on the battlefield, unless it specifically references another zone (exile, graveyard, in your hand). So by the time Kaalia puts it on the battlefield, the Slumbering Dragon is already tapped and attacking an Opponent, unfettered by its restriction that it cannot attack.

Or am I wrong? What if there was a dragon/angel/demon card with Defender? Could that also be tapped and attacking?

I'm going to do a bit more research on this myself, but if anyone has a solid comprehensive rules reference, that would be great!

After a bit of research, it seems my intuition is confirmed. I could quote 112.3d 506.4a, and 508.2a of the Comprehensive Rules, but the most explicit confirmation comes from the Tiller Nephilim rulings on Gatherer:

  The creature you put onto the battlefield from your graveyard is attacking, even if the attack couldn't legally be declared (for example, if that creature has defender or an effect says that no more than one creature can attack).

  Putting an attacking creature onto the battlefield doesn't trigger "When this creature attacks" abilities. It also won't check attacking restrictions, costs, or requirements.


Does Humility prevent Manifested creatures from being turned face-up? Related to Does Humility stop all creatures from being able to morph?: The question specifies morphs, but I wondered if this was true for Manifest as well? As Manifest is not an ability on the card, does Humility prevent it from being turned face up for its mana cost?

You can still turn a Manifested card face up even if it would lose all abilities from a card like Humility.

This is actually called out explicitly in a ruling on Manifest cards:

  Unlike a face-down creature that was cast using the morph ability, a manifested creature may still be turned face up after it loses its abilities if it’s a creature card. (2014-11-24)

This is because the thing that lets you turn a Manifested card face-up is not an ability on the card itself that it would lose. Instead, the thing that lets you turn a Manifested card face-up is the Manifest rules themselves, which just say you can turn it face-up for its mana cost any time you have priority.


Do you replace tokens moved to the Trade Route mat? With Trade Route in play, do you replace the coins on the victory cards after the first card is purchased?

Example: I buy a Duchy and move the coin to the Trade Route mat.  Do I put another coin token on the remaining stack of Duchies? Or is four the maximum number of coins on the Trade Route mat?

You do not replace the coin tokens. So with Colonies in the game, and no other extra victory cards, yes, four is the maximum number of coins on the mat. Remember that there potentially are other victory cards among the kingdom cards in the game, though, depending on what expansions you're playing with - like Gardens from the base game, and many others.

Why? Because the card doesn't say to. If you're ever having trouble with Dominion rules, just read the card carefully, and do exactly what it says in the order it says.


Who won this match of Go? Me and my girlfriend tried playing our first game of Go last night, but we're not sure we understood the rules so we can't determine who won this.

Can you understand or maybe mark this so that we understand whether we played correctly or not, and also which one of us won? We played until we ran out of stones.

Summary

You needed to finish the game, after which, assuming optimal play, White would have won by a very large margin (if it was their turn next) or a large margin (if it was Black’s turn).

The rules of go do vary a little, but it very rarely makes any difference to who wins, and certainly not in this case.

Contents

  Summary (above)
  Contents
  Your final position (diagram)
  Finishing the game
  If Black plays first
  Notes

Your final position

You can enter diagrams on this site (though a photo is sometimes easier); I have made one of your position.

$$Bcm1 Your final position
$$ +-------------+
$$ |XOXXXXXO.OOOO|
$$ |X..XXO.OOO...|
$$ |X.XOOOO.OOOOO|
$$ |XXXOOOOOO,O.O|
$$ |.X.XO..O.OO.O|
$$ |OOXX.O.OOOOO.|
$$ |..OXOOO.O...O|
$$ |OOOXXXO.O.OOO|
$$ |.OOOOXOO.OXXX|
$$ |..O,X.XXOX.XO|
$$ |..OO.XOOX.X.O|
$$ |.....OO.XXX.X|
$$ |X....O.......|
$$ +-------------+

Finishing the game

You pass at the end of the game when you do not think you can increase your score (explained below), and stop when both of you pass one after the other.
Your set should include enough stones for you to be able to get this far, but you may occasionally have to swap prisoners.
The winner is then the player with the higher score.

Since you did not finish the game, I have added the marked stones.
To keep things simple1 I assume White plays first at F45, which forces Black to capture at B12!2 After that I assume moderately good play from both players:

$$Wcm1 Final moves 1-10
$$ +-------------+
$$ |XOXXXXXO.OOOO|
$$ |X2.XXO.OOO...|
$$ |X.XOOOO.OOOOO|
$$ |XXXOOOOOO.O.O|
$$ |0X8XO..O.OO.O|
$$ |OOXX9O.OOOOO.|
$$ |..OXOOO.O...O|
$$ |OOOXXXO.O.OOO|
$$ |.OOOOXOO.OXXX|
$$ |..O.X1XXOX.XO|
$$ |..OO3XOOX.X.O|
$$ |.....OO4XXX.X|
$$ |X....O756....|
$$ +-------------+

and then (I fear this site only supports 10 moves/diagram):

$$Wcm11 Final moves 11-13
$$ +-------------+
$$ |X.XXXXXO.OOOO|
$$ |XX.XXO1OOO...|
$$ |X.XOOOO.OOOOO|
$$ |XXXOOOOOO.O.O|
$$ |XXXXO..O.OO.O|
$$ |OOXXOO.OOOOO.|
$$ |..OXOOO.O...O|
$$ |OOOXXXO.O.OOO|
$$ |.OOOOXOO.OXXX|
$$ |..O3XO..OX.XO|
$$ |..OOO.OOX.X2O|
$$ |.....OOXXXX.X|
$$ |X....OOOX....|
$$ +-------------+

These result in this final position:

$$Bcm1 After reasonable endgame
$$ +-------------+
$$ |XCXXXXXOwOOOO|
$$ |XBbXXOWOOOwww|
$$ |XbXOOOOwOOOOO|
$$ |XXXOOOOOOwOwO|
$$ |BXBXOwwOwOOwO|
$$ |OOXXWOwOOOOOw|
$$ |wwOXOOOwOwwwO|
$$ |OOOXXXOwOwOOO|
$$ |wOOOOXOOwOXXX|
$$ |wwOWMWMMOXbXC|
$$ |wwOOWMOOXbXBC|
$$ |wwwwwOOBXXXbX|
$$ |ZwwwwOWWBbbbb|
$$ +-------------+

Black territory (surrounded points) is marked b or a red O for a captured white stone, white territory as w or a red X for a captured black stone3.

Counting the score

There are two (nearly) equivalent ways to score the game:

The simplest rule is that you score a point for every point on the board you control, i.e. occupy or surround4.
It is usually easier to just count up the area you surround and subtract one for every one of your stones your opponent has captured. If you have played the same number of stones, this gives the same difference in scores and hence the same winner.

I counted 39 black stones and 72 white stones in your original picture, a difference of 33. For simplicity I assume White has captured 33 stones and Black none.

For White, I count 41 points of territory and 5 extra captives (at A13 and around F4). With the 33 previous captives that makes a score of 41 + 33 + 5 = 79.
For Black, I count 12 points of territory and 3 captives (B13, N4, N3). That makes a score of 12 + 3 = 15.
That means White has won by 79 - 15 = 64 points, quite a large margin.

To avoid subtraction and make counting easier, people usually put their captives into their opponent’s territory and rearrange the stones to make the territory into rectangles. Neither of these changes the score (difference), if done right. In your game, however, this would have completely filled Black’s territory, another way of seeing that White had won heavily.

If Black plays first

If Black plays first after your final position, we have, as noted in footnote 1, a somewhat more complicated sequence:

$$Bcm1 Black first 1-10: 4 retakes ko (J4), 6 connects (at ❶)
$$ +-------------+
$$ |XOXXXXXO.OOOO|
$$ |X3.XXO2OOO...|
$$ |X.XOOOO.OOOOO|
$$ |XXXOOOOOO.O.O|
$$ |.X.XO..O.OO.O|
$$ |OOXX.O.OOOOO.|
$$ |..OXOOO.O...O|
$$ |OOOXXXO.O.OOO|
$$ |.OOOOXOO1OXXX|
$$ |..O.X5XX4X.XO|
$$ |..OO7XOOX.X.O|
$$ |...08OO9XXX.X|
$$ |X....O.......|
$$ +-------------+

and then:

$$Bcm11 Black first 11-17
$$ |X.XXXXXO.OOOO|
$$ |XX.XXOOOOO...|
$$ |X.XOOOO.OOOOO|
$$ |XXXOOOOOO.O.O|
$$ |6X3XO..O.OO.O|
$$ |OOXX5O.OOOOO.|
$$ |..OXOOO.O...O|
$$ |OOOXXXO.O.OOO|
$$ |.OOOOXOOOOXXX|
$$ |..O4XXXXOX.XO|
$$ |..OOXXOOX.X7O|
$$ |...OOOOXXXX.X|
$$ |X....O21.....|
$$ +-------------+

In this case I count:

For White, 34 points of territory and 2 extra captives (at A13 and J5). With the 33 previous captives that makes a score of 34 + 33 + 2 = 69.
For Black, I count 12 points of territory and 4 captives (B13, J4, N4, N3). That makes a score of 12 + 4 = 16.
That means White has won by 69 - 16 = 53 points, still a large margin.

In fact I now believe that White would have done 1 point better by making their threat at E3 instead of G12, but I am afraid I do not have the time to redo the diagrams. In any case, Black is 10 or 11 points better off than when it was White’s turn first.

Notes

1 If Black plays first, they can capture at ⬤ J5, creating a ko, which makes the game a lot more complicated. White is not allowed to recapture at ◯ J4 because that would recreate the situation after their previous move, so they first have to make a threat, such as ◯ G12, after which ◯ C12 would capture 7 black stones.

2 This is probably not clear to you, but if White gets to play at ◯ B12, Black will be unable to get to separate eyes, and will be captured in the long run.

3 Although ⬤ A1 has not been fully captured, White could do so. This would not make any difference to the areas White and Black control. If Black tried and failed to defend it, territory scoring would give the same answer, because they would give White (almost) as many extra captives as White made extra moves. If Black just passed, some versions of the rules would require Black to give White an extra prisoner every time, to make territory scoring give the same answer.

4 Surround in the sense that (it is unoccupied and) there is not way from that point to one of your opponent’s stones (except perhaps one that they agree is lost, such as ⬤ A1 – see also3).

5 Actually, ◯ has a better but trickier play at B12, which (as per note2 forces ⬤ J4 to try to connect his stones, then ◯ E3 threatens to disconnect, but if ⬤ answers, ◯ retakes, ⬤ has no threat, so loses the ko and all his stones except those in the bottom right 5×5. So ⬤ cannot save his stones on the left, and should not answer the threat but rather finish the ko by capturing with ⬤ K6, then ◯ F4 captures – ⬤ is all but wiped out! In fact the score is roughly ⬤ 25 : 144 ◯ (i.e. 5×5 : 13×13 - 5×5).


Bridge auction: 3rd suit tells – 4th suit asks Subject: 3rd suit tells – 4th suit asks [in Bridge auction]
I occasionally used to hear the old fogies round my bridge club quote the above phrase. However, none of them could ever really explain it well.
As I haven't seen any of them since the pandemic started, I've searched online; but even there I find very little to advance my understanding of it.
If anybody reading this can help I would be eternally grateful.

This Aces on Bridge shows a good example of this.  Look in the "Bid with the Aces" section.
What this describes is an auction where you're exploring NT, and trying to figure out if you're comfortable with coverage in all four suits.
If you have an auction like:

N
E
S
W

1C
-
1H
-

1S
-
1NT
-

2D
-
?
-

2D there would be "asking" for diamond suit coverage.  It wouldn't show coverage, because that's pointless - if N is not worried about diamonds, N would just bid 3NT.
However, in this auction:

N
E
S
W

1D
-
1S
-

1NT
-
2C
-

?

Now you'd be showing a clubs stopper, and looking to see if North had a hearts stopper, since there are two outstanding suits.
All of this assumes fairly basic conventions, as there are other options for conveying this information of course.
It's also worth noting that this is distinct from "fourth suit forcing" - had South bid 2D in the initial auction, that wouldn't necessarily be "asking" for diamonds, it's a generic forcing bid.  As noted in comments, a common response to fourth suit forcing is still in line with this idea - showing the stopper in the fourth suit by bidding NT.


Can players use cards from a core set in a Block Constructed tournament? What are the rules regarding playing DCI sanctioned Block Constructed formats with cards from a core set such as M15? (I'm thinking of Innistrad-Avacyn Restored block).

Do all players in a game have to use the core set? Can they use blocks that are different from one another's?

None of the currently sanctioned Block Constructed formats include any core sets.

All players in a sanctioned Block Constructed tournament must be using the same block.

The list of currently available Block Constructed formats that can be sanctioned is in the Magic Tournament Rules, that you can find here:

http://wpn.wizards.com/en/resources/rules-documents


Can I put any ranged weapon on a Crisis Battlesuit? I've read the Codex (6th) entry for the XV8 Crisis Team and it says:

  Any Crisis Shas'ui may take up to three items from the Ranged Weapons
  and/ or Support Systems lists.

I can see only one list of Ranged Weapons in the codex (the one which lists all ranged weapons) so it seems that I can put any weapon on them. Is my interpretation of the rule wrong?

The Army List entry would be referring to the "Tau Empire Wargear List" on pg 95.

This lists 5 sections: Ranged Weapons, Signature Systems, Drones, Support Systems and Vehicle battle Systems.

So they could take up to 3 items from the Ranged Weapons and/or Support Systems lists on this page.


Does Prowler's helm effect makes an unblockable creature blockable by walls? Full question in title. Do equipment effects always override creature effects even tho the creature effects are superior?

You seem to be asking about a creature with

  [This creature] can't be blocked.

equipped with a Prowler's Helm that has

  Equipped creature can't be blocked except by Walls.

Each of these abilities creates a blocking restriction, and all blocking restrictions must be obeyed.

  509.1b The defending player checks each creature he or she controls to see whether it’s affected by any restrictions (effects that say a creature can’t block, or that it can’t block unless some condition is met). If any restrictions are being disobeyed, the declaration of blockers is illegal. [...]

So that means it's can't be blocked by any creature, and it can't be blocked by non-Wall creatures. The result is that it can't be blocked by any creature.


Warhammer 40k: Do 'decurion' style detachments comprised of multiple formations still count as one detachment for ITC purposes? Say I have a Hunter Contingent (the Tau 'decurion' style detachment) comprised of Hunter Cadre and an Optmised Stealth Cadre, will this count as one detachment against the ITC tournament limit of three detachments? Will I be able to add a formation detachment with a Riptide Wing and an allied detachment with an Assassinorum Operative?

“Decurion Style” Detachments comprised of multiple sub-detachments count as 1 detachment towards the 3 detachment limit.

Source: ITC 2017 FAQ and Format Guidelines  (linked from ITC2017 FAQ, Format and Scenarios)

A new edition may render this answer obsolete, but until then, this is the official ITC position.  Including full text for posterity:

  An army may duplicate a single Detachment, one time.

  Example: A list
  may include 2 CADs, but not 3 CADs. Or, a single CAD, and 2 Allied
  Detachments. Or, 3 Formations, 2 of which are the same Formation, etc.

  This includes “Decurion Style” Meta-Detachments which are comprised of
  multiple datasheets and Formations. They may only take a single
  duplicate Formation, one time within the Meta-Detachment, although
  they make take duplicate Data Slate units within the Detachment if
  permitted to do so. Example: Necrons may take the Decurion with 2
  Canoptek Harvest formations within it, but no other duplicate
  formations.

  Note: “Decurion Style” Detachments comprised of multiple
  sub-detachments count as 1 detachment towards the 3 detachment limit.


Do you have to play a (replaced) joker immediately with 2 tiles from your hand? I don't have the paper rules here as a reference, but I grew up playing Rummikub with the rule that, if you replaced a joker on the table you must immediately replay the joker in a run or set with at least 2 tiles from your hand. This rule could make the endgame particularly interesting. We also played that the joker froze whatever group of tiles it was in--they couldn't be manipulated without replacing the joker. However, I just looked up the rules online to settle a dispute about making the initial meld, and noticed that both of these special joker rules are missing.

I'm pretty sure that way back when they were official, not house rules; were they? If so, when (and for bonus points, why) were they changed?

According to the official rules, your house rule (which I also used to play) IS currently official:

  Once a player replaces a joker, they must use it in the same turn as part of a set.

Although it specifically contradicts your other house rule about manipulating sets containing  a Joker:

  Sets containing jokers can be split and manipulated like regular sets.

FWIW, I used to play that Jokers didn't have to be replayed in NEW sets, but could alternatively be played in existing sets (e.g. I replace a Joker, and then add it to a 6-7-8 run as a 5 to allow me to play a 4). I infer from your question that your house rules require Jokers be replayed into new sets, but I may be misunderstanding your explanation.

Source: http://www.rummikub.com/info/Rules.aspx


Why does Archfiend of Ifnir mention cycling, if it already mentions discarding? On a recent promo called Archfiend of Ifnir, there is an ability that states:

  Whenever you cycle or discard another card ...

Why does it say “cycle or discard”? Since cycling involves discarding, wouldn't it be sufficient if it said “whenever you discard another card”?

With the current card pool, and under current rules the 'cycle or' part is unnecessary. It is most likely there as a reminder so that players don't need to remember that cycling involves discarding (for the cards that don't have reminder text for it). (It is possible for it to matter, if for example something replaces the discard, but there are no cards that do that currently)

I am unable to find a quote at the moment but I know people at Wizards have stated that they don't always try to make the shortest rules text they can. They are willing to make it longer if it improves clarity.

And now we have the Amonkhet Release Notes which state (emphasis added):

  An ability that triggers whenever you "cycle or discard" a card triggers only once if you cycle a card. The ability "Whenever you discard a card" is functionally identical to this ability; cycling is mentioned for clarity.


Do I choose my Annihilator sacrifices during resolution? It was suggested to me recently that Annihilator sacrifices (such as  Emrakul, the Aeons Torn's) are only chosen during resolution, rather than while they're going on the stack.

Do I choose those sacrifices during resolution? What part of the comprehensive rules backs that up?

I can't find any clarity on the internet, in the rules, on the MTG Salvation wiki for Annihilator, or in the ability's rulings. It seems reasonable, but I'd like to know what's behind it. Plus, if I can choose and then later Cloudshift some stuff, all the better.

Yes, you do choose what to sacrifice when the ability is resolving. You only choose 3 things when putting a triggered ability on the stack: modes, targets, and distributions. The choice of what to sacrifice to Annihilator is none of those things, so you make that choice during resolution instead.

Rule 608.2d says that in the process of resolving an ability

  If an effect of a spell or ability offers any choices other than choices already made as part of casting the spell, activating the ability, or otherwise putting the spell or ability on the stack, the player announces these while applying the effect. The player can’t choose an option that’s illegal or impossible, with the exception that having a library with no cards in it doesn’t make drawing a card an impossible action (see rule 120.3). If an effect divides or distributes something, such as damage or counters, as a player chooses among any number of untargeted players and/or objects, the player chooses the amount and division such that at least one player or object is chosen if able, and each chosen player or object receives at least one of whatever is being divided. (Note that if an effect divides or distributes something, such as damage or counters, as a player chooses among some number of target objects and/or players, the amount and division were determined as the spell or ability was put onto the stack rather than at this time; see rule 601.2d.)

Rule 603.3c says

  If a triggered ability is modal, its controller announces the mode choice when he or she puts the ability on the stack. If one of the modes would be illegal (due to an inability to choose legal targets, for example), that mode can’t be chosen. If no mode can be chosen, the ability is removed from the stack. (See rule 700.2.)

603.6d says that the rest of the steps for putting a triggered ability on the stack follow the steps in 601.2c-d. Those rules say

  601.2c The player announces his or her choice of an appropriate player, object, or zone for each target the spell requires. A spell may require some targets only if an alternative or additional cost (such as a buyback or kicker cost), or a particular mode, was chosen for it; otherwise, the spell is cast as though it did not require those targets. If the spell has a variable number of targets, the player announces how many targets he or she will choose before he or she announces those targets. In some cases, the number of targets will be defined by the spell’s text. Once the number of targets the spell has is determined, that number doesn’t change, even if the information used to determine the number of targets does. The same target can’t be chosen multiple times for any one instance of the word “target” on the spell. However, if the spell uses the word “target” in multiple places, the same object, player, or zone can be chosen once for each instance of the word “target” (as long as it fits the targeting criteria). If any effects say that an object or player must be chosen as a target, the player chooses targets so that he or she obeys the maximum possible number of such effects without violating any rules or effects that say that an object or player can’t be chosen as a target. The chosen players, objects, and/or zones each become a target of that spell. (Any abilities that trigger when those players, objects, and/or zones become the target of a spell trigger at this point; they’ll wait to be put on the stack until the spell has finished being cast.)
  601.2d If the spell requires the player to divide or distribute an effect (such as damage or counters) among one or more targets, the player announces the division. Each of these targets must receive at least one of whatever is being divided.


Interaction between Teferi Time Raveler and Enduring Ideal Does Teferi, Time Raveler's static ability, which limits opponents' spells to sorcery 'speed', stop Enduring Ideal's Epic ability which functions during the upkeep?

No, it doesn't stop it. Teferi says:

  Each opponent can cast spells only any time they could cast a sorcery.

(emphasis mine)

But copying a spell is different from casting it:

  706.10. To copy a spell, activated ability, or triggered ability means to put a copy of it onto the stack; a copy of a spell isn’t cast and a copy of an activated ability isn’t activated.

Therefore, Teferi doesn't affect the Epic ability.


In Bridge, How do I Differentiate Between My Partner's Signals on Defense? On defense, there are attitude, suit preference, and count signals. My guess is that the play to the first trick would represent an "attitude" signal for a suit. Beyond that, how do I differentiate between this, and one of the two other signals. Is it mainly the context of the play? Are some signals more useful in no trump hands, and others in defending suit contracts?

It's a good question - in Bridge we spend a lot of time memorising the precise significance of all sorts of bids and responses in our chosen systems, and then when it comes to the much more uncharted world of defence, we feel lost without strongly prescribed, objective meanings for the plays we make and the responses we receive!

I don't have a perfect, systemic answer, but what I would say is: think about what information you NEED from your partner, and then about the ways he may have at his disposal to communicate that information.  After the dummy is laid down, you and your partner will probably have some idea what course the game is likely to take thereafter.  If this suit is a non-starter, then watch partner for an indication of which suit he'd like you to switch to.  If you're winning the first trick and hope to carry on leading it, watch partner for negative or count signals so you don't get trumped when it's most inconvenient.

Long story short: it is context-dependent.  So don't agonise about what a single played card means in isolation (that way madness lies - it could just be a singleton after all!)  Instead ponder what information would be useful to you to help you defeat the contract, and watch partner like a hawk for any unusual plays that may be trying to give you that information.  As time goes by your partnership will hopefully develop a rapport that will enable you to communicate effectively in various situations - and that's the route to playing great Bridge!


Can Expansion Combining "Break" the Game? There are a lot of different Carcassonne expansions available and I'm curious if anyone has any insight in to telling if combining them may break game play?

Recently we've been using Inns & Cathedrals with Cult, Siege and Creativity. It seems to have drastically changed the balance so that it's very dangerous to try and build a city of any size. Most cities end up being 2-3 tiles, putting a ton of them in the field. Sieged cities make being a farmer even more attractive. Last game, every big meeple was a farmer and three players had 5 meeples each in one large field.

Is there any general advice on combining expansions? Are we just experiencing different game play thanks to different tiles?

In my opinion you can combine any of the expansions (except possible the Catapult) together to make a decent new game.  In fact we often combine different parts of different expansions if we want to avoid having too many rules.  We might play with the inns, pigs and mayors for instance.

Also we sometimes want a longer game but without too many extra rules.  For example, by playing with Traders and Builders we get a lot of extra tile shapes, which can be very satisfying if you like to fill in holes, but we might agree before the game that we won't use the resources associated with those tiles.

One expansion which we never use alone is the Princess and Dragon.  We like to play with the dragon on a large board, as this helps to encourage more long-term strategies.  For example on a small board (with the dragon) you are unlikely to risk making a large city, or placing a farmer early.  If the board is bigger then the dragon is less likely to come near your meeples, so there is a bit more margin for prospective play.

In your example it sounds like you are using a sensible number of rules.  If you're not a fan of small cities then you could maybe try playing without the siege tiles?  However at this stage it becomes a question of personal taste.


How does targeting limitation work for Wild Ricochet? I use Wild Ricochet on an opponent's spell that says "target creature you control" (A not overloaded Dynacharge for example).

What are valid targets for the spell and the copy? If I can only choose their creatures could I choose to redirect it nowhere as a roundabout counter or do I have to pick valid targets?

The original instance of Dynacharge is controlled by your opponent, so the only valid targets are creatures that that player controls. You must target a creature they control; you cannot choose an invalid target or target nothing.

You control the copy of Dynacharge, so you may choose one of your creatures as a target for the copy. If there are no valid targets or if you choose not to change the target, the copy will be countered as it would resolve for having an illegal target. Rule 706.2 says:

  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).

And rule 706.10c says:

  Some effects copy a spell or ability and state that its controller may choose new targets for the copy. The player may leave any number of the targets unchanged, even if those targets would be illegal. If the player chooses to change some or all of the targets, the new targets must be legal. Once the player has decided what the copy’s targets will be, the copy is put onto the stack with those targets.


What cards or types of cards are substantially more/less useful in Two-Headed-Giant than in 'normal' Magic? I'm just getting into Two-Headed-Giant games, and have noticed that some cards become far more powerful while others become much less powerful. For instance, landwalk cards become better because your opponents control more land, mass damage prevention cards like fog improve because your opponents attack with more creatures, and cards that require a longer amount of time to work better improve because the matches tend to last a greater amount of turns. On the other hand, weanies become slightly weaker because it's more likely your opponent has at least a few blockers than can kill them off, and cards that counteract a specific color tend to weaken because your opponents are very likely to have other colors that are immune to its effects.

What cards or types of cards become significantly better or worse in THG than in 'normal' magic? How can I recognize a card that will be strongly affected by the switch to THG rules? What factors of THG tend to cause these changes in usefulness?

Any cards that care about any aspect of the game that is likely to increase due to there being more Lands, Cards in Hand, Creatures in Play, Higher Life Totals, turns, attack phases, etc.

The above is just a generalization of course. THG is similar to multiplayer in this respect. Aggro decks don't work as well, and Combo and Control decks get better. Some interesting examples are listed below, but in general you should be looking at cards that count things that there are likely to be more of. Truthfully though, most THG decks are built as two puzzle pieces (unless playing draft/sealed). Cards are specifically chosen to complement the other deck. While generalities are useful, they aren't the whole picture.

Life Totals start at 30, and are shared by both players. Any card that counts Life Totals will behave differently. Some interesting examples are:

Heartless Hidetsugu - Instantly kill all even life teams.

Serra Ascendant - Starts off with +5/+5 bonus.

There will be more lands in play, interesting examples are:

Impending Disaster - Almost sure to trigger, and cheaper than Armageddon.

Limited Resources - Broken for Multiplayer, and bad in THG with decks built to exploit it.

There will be more Hands. Interesting examples are:

Unnerve - 1:4 your opponents isn't bad.


Can I cast spells in the middle of another spell resolving? Say I had Vedalken Orrery and I used Cloudshift on something, could I respond to Cloudshift bringing the creature back into play with Day of Judgement or something similar?

No, Cloudshift is resolved as a single, atomic event.  There is no time in between the parts of its effect in which anyone has a window of opportunity to cast a spell.

From the Comprehensive rules:

  116.2e Resolving spells and abilities may instruct players to make choices or take actions, or may allow players to activate mana
  abilities. Even if a player is doing so, no player has priority while
  a spell or ability is resolving. See rule 608, "Resolving Spells and
  Abilities."


shapesharer and verdant force Say I have a Shapesharer copy an opponents Verdant Force. The Verdant Force puts a 1/1 green Saproling creature token onto the battlefield at the beginning of each upkeep. The Shapesharer becomes a copy of target creature until your next turn.

So if I copy my opponents Verdant Force on my turn I'm going to assume that I only get one saproling token and not two? ie. I'd get one for his upkeep but not for mine?

The earliest chance you would have to activate Shapesharer's ability is in the Upkeep step[1]. Since the beginning of your upkeep step has already gone by, the ability gained from Verdant Force will never get a chance to trigger on your turn[2].

The Untap step comes first, but you do not gain priority during the Uptap step, so you do not get to activate abilities in the Untap step.
If you have more than one Upkeep steps for some reason (e.g. Paradox Haze), and if you activated Shapesharer's ability in the first Upkeep step, the ability it gained from Verdant Force would trigger in the second and subsequent Upkeep steps.


Checkmate but confused why Could someone please let me know why this is checkmate, could I not have captured that queen with my king?

The queen is protected by the bishop on c5, i.e. the one on the dark square. Therefore you can't capture it. As the king has nowhere else to go, and no other piece can capture the queen or interpose, it's checkmate.


New Player and Returning Player New Card Recommendations I'm a new player learning the game with my spouse's old decks from 1994-2001. We plan on just enjoying MTG at home.  We have no plans to play competitively.

I'd like invest in some of the new cards just for fun as a surprise for my husband. I would appreciate any recommendations for what to purchase, the best "bang for the buck" as it were, to thank him for introducing me to the game.

Thank you for any help. I'm really enjoying learning MTG!

If you want a ready to play deck, than Wizards sells these so called "Planeswalker Decks". These are not competitive, you won't win a tournament with them, but they are quite cheap, include cards from newest expansion and will play well against each other.

You might still find older products called "Duel Decks". These contain two decks, which are designed to be played against each other. Again, these are not competitive decks but are well suited for "kitchen table" Magic. Goblins vs Merfolk is one of the latest product in these category.

If you want something more powerful and expensive, then you might still be able to find "Challenger decks". These are build around archetypes found in current Magic tournaments, but since they are designed for the "Standard" format, many cards in them will not be tournament legal since October. Here you can find more information about them.

If you want to try a format designed for casual Magic, then preconstructed Commander decks might suit you. These contain 100 cards and may contain only a single copy of each card except for basic lands. The decks are designed for multiplayer magic, so you might want to try them with friends. Wizards releases them yearly with Commander 2018 being the latest.


Can humans play Connect 4 perfectly? Is it possible for a human to play Connect 4 perfectly? Have there been such players?

I am actually a Connect 4 enthusiast, but find it increasingly hard to memorize so many initial positions. Is it possible for a human to memorize some basic rules and tricks, as well as starting positions, and win atleast 80% of the games (starting 1st) against a perfect player?

Are there any simple rules that I've happened to miss, or any shortcut to memorizing the starting moves?

Connect 4 has been solved and it is a first player win, provided that player plays first in the middle column.

That paper I linked above has some heavy-duty analysis of board positions and expert play. I suppose it would be possible to memorize them, but I couldn't say whether you'd reach the 80% goal.


Could Cemetery Puca copy a Primordial Hydra? If I kill my opponents 4/4 Primordial Hydra, will I be able to use my Cemetery Puca's activated ability on the Hydra, and have it become a 4/4 Primordial Hydra, or will my Puca die because the Hydra is considered a 0/0 creature when it is put into the graveyard, due to the X part of its mana cost?

Your initial thought is correct. It will get copied, become a 0/0 creature, and die (unless you have a way to save it through a static effect, like Anthem or Caged Sun).

Relevant rules:

  706.2. When copying an object, the copy acquires the copiable values of the original object's characteristics ... 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 "as . . . enters the battlefield" and "as . . . is turned face up" abilities that set characteristics, and by abilities that caused the object to be face down. Other effects (including type-changing and text-changing effects), status, and counters are not copied.

So your Puca does have the "~ enters the battlefield with X counters", but that's irrelevant because it's not entering the battlefield anyway. The object already exists, it's just getting a facelift. (The X would be 0, but that doesn't matter because it isn't triggering.) As for the existing counters, the final clause states that counters are not copied. So you basically get to kill your own Puca by doing this. Which I suppose isn't so bad if you have a  Blood Artist or something. =)


Are cards exiled with Ashiok revealed? Ashiok, Nightmare Weaver has the following abilities:

  +2: Exile the top three cards of target opponent's library.

  -X: Put a creature card with converted mana cost X exiled with Ashiok, Nightmare Weaver onto the battlefield under your control. That creature is a Nightmare in addition to its other types.

  -10: Exile all cards from all opponents' hands and graveyards.

When I use the +2 ability, do I exile the cards face up so that my opponent gets to see them, or can I hide that information?

Comprehensive rules:

  406.3. Exiled cards are, by default, kept face up and may be examined by any player at any time. Cards "exiled face down" can't be examined by any player except when instructions allow it. However, once a player is allowed to look at a card exiled face down, that player may continue to look at that card as long as it remains exiled, even if the instruction allowing the player to do so no longer applies. A card exiled face down has no characteristics, but the spell or ability that exiled it may allow it to be played from exile. Unless that card is being cast face down (see rule 707.4), the card is turned face up just before the player announces that he or she is playing the card (see rule 601.2).


What is a "dead hand"? This book states that "If a claimed tile is not taken within the next two opponents’ turns, i.e. before another two discards has been made, the player has a dead hand."

What is a dead hand, and how does it affect the game?

"Dead hand" has a few different meanings. It's hard to tell just from that one sentence, but it sounds like the one you're describing is the case where somebody forgets to take a tile, so their hand ends up short tiles (it's also a dead hand if the player forgets to discard and thus has too many tiles). A dead hand cannot be used to win the round, but the player still takes their turns as normal until the round ends.

"Dead hand" also sometimes refers to a declared mahjong that turns out to be invalid (like above, that player cannot win anymore, and play continues), or a round where all tiles are drawn from the wall and nobody makes mahjong, but neither seems to be what you're referring to in this case


What color are Nissa, Worldwaker's lands? Nissa, Worldwaker turns lands into 4/4 Elemental creatures. My question is...  what color are these tokens? Are they green, the color that the land in question produces, or are they colorless since the card doesn't specify?

Normally lands are colorless (there is currently only one exception). Nissa does not assign a color to the lands she turns into elementals, so they would remain colorless.

Also worth noting, there are no tokens created. I am not exactly sure what you mean by this. What happens when you use Nissa's ability is that a land becomes a 4/4 Elemental creature, while also retaining its previous properties as a land (tapping for mana, having the "Land" type, etc).


Is there a good tic tac toe strategy for the second player? The assumptions here are that your opponent will block whenever you could win on the next move, and also that given the opportunity to force a win (by creating two different directions with two in a row) your opponent will take it, but that otherwise, your opponent's moves are random.

In that setting, your best strategy if you go first appears to be (1st move) take the center, (2nd move) move opposite your opponent, (3rd move) create two directions of two in a row (which will always be possibly unless your opponents first two moves were corners, in which case the game will tie - this is even true if your 3rd move is actually blocking - blocking will create a forced win for you).

What is your best strategy if you go second instead? Is there an opening move your opponent can make which would allow you, as second player, to force a win, instead of just a tie?

As you know, tic tac toe is a solved game that end in a tie with optimal play.  And it's too short to really get any initiative as the second player, even for children.  Going second there is no way to force a win without 2 misplays from the first player.  So if you want a "strategy" for player 2, it really comes down to just not losing.

As for going first, I often liked taking a corner first because it offers more opportunities for my opponent to mess up (any square but the middle is a win for the first player with perfect play).


Priorities at End of Turn So I announce the end of my turn.

My opponent responds with a lightning bolt to my head. It resolves so I take 3.

Do I still have priority to do something else, eg to play instants that says do this when you take this much damage etc~?

In your case, you do have priority and you can cast the instant in question. However, an instant that says "When you take [some amount of] damage, [do something]" won't really do much because the damage has already been done, so to speak. However, if you had responded to the lightning bolt with your instant, then it would have worked as intended.

You ask specifically about the end of the turn and responding to damage, but you also seem to not completely understand the priority system in general. There are several points during a turn (upkeep, end of draw step, main phase, beginning of combat, attack step, block step, end of combat step, end step) when the active player (the player taking the turn) gains priority. Whenever a player has priority, they can either do something (play a spell, activate an ability) or they can pass priority. Spells and abilities don't resolve and steps don't end until every player has passed priority. Usually, people take the shortcut that if somebody doesn't say anything, they are assumed to be passing priority.

The important thing is that every player gets priority every step (as long as someone gets it) and before anything resolves (so you always get an opportunity to respond). You can read the comprehensive rules entry about timing and priority for more information.

In your specific case, when you say "I end my turn", it really means "I propose a shortcut that we skip to my end step" (there is also a comprehensive rules entry about Shortcuts and when your opponent cast the spell, they were implicitly accepting your shortcut, casting the spell during your end step, and then passing priority to you.


How many attacks does a liberator get? If I arm a Liberator (http://www.games-workshop.com/resources/PDF/AoS_Warscrolls/warhammer-aos-liberators-en.pdf) with two warblades how many attacks do I get?

I see I get to reroll hit rolls of 1 but I'm unclear on whether I get 2 attack (because that's what it says on the profile) or 4 (because I have two warblades each with two attacks).

The second warblade only grants you the reroll, it doesn't add additional attacks. Similarly a Prime w/ 2 warblades would get 3 attacks with rerolls, not 6 or 5 or 4.


Help identify this game with four divided concentric circles I inherited the a wooden game from my parents. Probably date from 1960-1975. No box, no instruction. Can you help me identify it and locate rules for it?

It's a 9.5" square with 4 indented concentric circles. The outer ring is divided into 12 sections, the next into 8 sections, the 3rd into 4 and the center - approx 1" diam. is not divided.White and black dots are in seemingly random sections. Inside the black leather pouch are 6 brown wooden marbles and two chrome cylinders. One cylinder has 3 raised concentric circles on one end, the other has 2 concentric circles, the innermost indented. "Skjode Skjern Danmark" is etched on the bottom.

It is a Morra board game.
You will find details here on Board Game Geek :
https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/41679/morra-board

Here is their explanation of it:

  From the instructions: Morra-board builds on an ancient game - renewing and varying it by linking it to a board.
  The old game on which Morra-board is based is in Danish called 'Klunse', in English 'Odds and Evens'. Each of the two players presents a clenched fist containing a few small stones, coins or matches - both players taking turns at guessing if the sum of the objects in the two hands is even or uneven.

  Players pieces move around the track based on how many total marbles the two players reveal. If the inner track has a marking on it, the piece advances. The goal is to be the first to advance all the way to the center.


Magic card has clear deformity, options? I recently pulled a Padeem, Consul of Innovation from a Kaladesh booster box, and placed it into a deck I was working on. When playtesting the deck with some friends, I noticed a card with a clear visual marker on the card on the top of my deck. When I pulled it my next turn, it was my Padeem I had recently obtained.

Its a very, very clear marker, a white oval on the backside of the card. If it was on the front, I would just live with it, but I don't want to bring these cards to a LGS event and get accused of marking my cards, or having one of my friends always know whats in my hand. The frontside of the card is completely clean.

Do I have any options here? Can I get a refund or sell this type of card to someone who collects misprints? Am I just going to have to fill in the circle, and hope its not noticeable?

Your best option is going to be to buy sleeves for your deck, just make sure that they are completely opaque since with some sleeves you can still see a little bit of the background of the card. Sleeves will not only prevent your card from being considered marked, it will also help protect your deck from getting damaged as much. Some of the most popular brands are Ultra-Pro, KMC, and Dragon Shield.

For your other ideas you can try talking to your local game shop and see if they are willing to exchange it, or Wizards of the Coast customer service, but I wouldn't expect either of them to do anything. For misprint collectors I do not believe this sort of error is the kind they look for, Starcity Games has an article about valuable misprints. As for filling it in yourself, unless you are an amazing artist there is no way you would be able to fill it in without it still being noticable so I wouldn't both trying that.

From the Magic Tournament Rules

  3.11 Marked Cards
  Players are responsible for ensuring that their cards and/or card sleeves are not marked during the course of the
  tournament. A card or sleeve is considered marked if it bears something that makes it possible to identify the card
  without seeing its face, including (but not limited to) scratches, discoloration, and bends.

  If a player’s cards are sleeved, the cards must be examined while in the sleeves to determine if they are marked.


Are there any turn 1 win decks? So the question is in the title:
Is there any deck that can(in the very best case) win in turn 1?
It should not be tournament legal, it should not be legacy legal, but it should follow the basic deckbuilding rules:

Constructed decks must contain a minimum of sixty cards. There is no maximum deck size; however, you must be able to shuffle your deck with no assistance. If a player wishes to use a sideboard, it must have fifteen or less cards.
With the exception of basic land cards, a player’s combined deck and sideboard may not contain more than four of any individual card, counted by its English card title equivalent. All cards named Plains, Island, Swamp, Mountain, and Forest are basic.

Without the second limitation a deck of 15x Black Lotus and 45x Ancestral Recall would possibly be a turn 1 win deck:

15x Lotuses would give you 45 blue mana to cast 45 Ancestral Recalls
45 Ancestral Recalls can force you or your opponent to draw up to 135 cards
if you start with 6 cards(after mulligan), you have 54 left in the library, so you would want to use 18 Ancestral Recalls on yourself to get all you library in your hand
Then you can just mill your opponent to death

But, unfortunately, this deck is just not legal. Nowhere.
Without the first limitation the following deck would potentially be a turn 1 win deck:

2x Laboratory Maniac
4x Black Lotus
2x Ancestral Recall

So here's how it would work:

You will certainly have 1x Maniac, 3x Lotus and 1x Recall in your hand when you start.
Play 2x Lotus, Maniac and Recall on yourself which will result to forcing yourself to draw cards while you can't. This would make you lose the game, but Laboratory Maniac's ability would trigger and you would win the game instead.

But again, this deck is not legal either.
The only deck that I can think of that's capable of turn 1 win with these conditions is:

3x Black Lotus
4x Ancestral Recall
4x Fluctuator(for higher chance of getting it earlier)
1x Laboratory Maniac
48x cards with Cycling

In best case you would get Fluctuator, 3x Black Lotus and 3x Ancestral Recall as your starting hand. Then you could:

Play 3x Black Lotus for 9 blue mana (9 {U} in mana pool)
Play 3x Ancestral Recall targeting yourself (6 {U})
Play Fluctuator (4 {U})
Play last Ancestral Recall (3 {U})
Cycle like crazy(since you have Fluctuator all your cycles are free)
After drawing the last card cast Laboratory Maniac (0 mana left)
Cycle again
Win

Is there any other deck that could possibly win in turn 1?

Yes, there are all sorts of decks that can win on turn 1, including ones that are tournament legal.  Trying to list them all would not be a good use of the site.  This question has an example of a turn 1 win by milling your opponent.


MTG Doomsday card, cast at 1 life Doomsday reduces your life total by half, rounded up. If you're at 1 life and play this card, would that not deal 1 damage and kill you?

First of all, Doomsday doesn't deal damage (so it won't be stopped by effects that prevent damage). It causes life loss.

Secondly, the amount of life you have when you cast Doomsday is of no relevance; it's the amount of life you have when you are instructed to lose life when it resolves that matters.

Half of one rounded up is one, so you drop to zero life if you have one life when the spell resolves. If you still have non-positive life the next time a player would get priority (probably right after the spell resolves), you will lose then.


Does the initiative from flux missiles apply to just the missiles or the whole ship? Does the initiative from flux missiles apply to just the missiles or the whole ship? We had a question about this because if they did apply to the whole ship, then that would be 2 initiative for no power which seems too overpowered.

I believe that they are intended to apply to the entire ship. I've come to this conclusion for two reasons:

First, the text of the ROTA rulebook reads:

  Two modified Ion Missiles capable  of warping the flux grid, giving two Initiative.

If they were intended to apply only to the missiles, it seems likely that it would be indicated in this text.

Second, the energy cost is only one of two costs related to a technology: you should also consider the research cost. The research cost of a Plasma Missile is 14/7, whereas the Flux Missile is 11/8. Comparing this to the Ion Cannon (no research cost) and the Plasma Cannon (6/4) shows us that the price difference on the missiles is half that of the cannons. That, it seems, is where you're paying for the increased initiative.


Choosing same color after Wild (+4) Playing Uno this weekend, one of the players played a Wild+4 but chose the same color that was in play (this led to a successful challenge). I had thought that, regardless of what's in the player's hand, the player could not choose the same color after playing a Wild+4 - it had to change to one of the other 3 colors. A player could choose the same color after playing a regular Wild, though.

Looking at the rules, though, I did not see this restriction; only that the player playing the Wild+4 must not have any cards of the same color in play. Given that my Uno deck is a fairly recent version, I'm wondering if older versions did have that rule? Or maybe it was just a house rule. If so, is that a common house rule? Or maybe it just stemmed from the need to not have the current color in your hand...

These rules appear to be from 2001, and these rules appear to be from 2003. Both sets of rules do not indicate any restrictions on the choice of colour after either wild.

The points from both rules about Wild Draw 4 are:

  You play it and choose the colour to continue.
  The next player draws 4 and misses their turn.
  You can only play this if you don't have a card of the matching colour.
  You can break the above rule.
  The person drawing 4 may challenge you. If they win, the you draw 4 instead. If they lose, they draw an additional 2. (Note that they still miss their next turn)

Neither set of rules have any limitation on the colour choice.

For further reference, there's this question regarding the history of UNO rules. The 1983 rules found there follow the same draw 4 rules as the more recent rules printings.


Does lifelink still trigger if I concede before damage? In a multiplayer game one of my opponents has a felidar sovereign and is at 39 life and I am at 2 life. He attacks me with a 2/2 lifelink creature, but before damage is dealt I concede. Does the lifelink still gain my opponent enough life to win with felidar sovereign at the beginning of his upkeep, thereby letting my other opponent lose the game or do I only lose and do my opponents still need to continue the game to determine who wins?

The lifelinking creature does not deal damage, which means your opponent does not gain life, and the rest of the table will need to keep playing.


Ora et Labora. Ideas for an alternative 2 player game ending rule? I love the game "Ora et Labora" by Uwe Rosenberg. It is has especially a nice 2 player mechanism.

In 3 and 4 player mode the game ends after a certain number of rounds. Which I like very much.

However in the 2 player variant the game ends, when there is only one building left to built. I find this troublesome. My first problem here is that if both player focus on the production of goods, the game can be very long. Moreover, some of the buildings (yellowish) have to connect to your main building complex. If you have been not careful, it can be costly or impossible to get rid of these building-cards.

I am interested in alternative ending rules. What about stopping after a fixed (how many?) number of turns. Should there be a final settlement phase in the end? What was the intention of the game designer to have a completely different 2 player game termination rule?

The "extra turn" mechanism in Ora et Labora is something Uwe carried over from Le Havre. The intention is to avoid the The Kingmaker Dilemma, where a 3rd player is unable to win himself, but is able to choose between two actions that decide the winner. During the "extra turn", players can't be blocked out of actions, so each player acts in his own best interest to put the finishing touches on his board. There's a big stochastic factor in 3-4 player, where other players just happen to get in your way by accident; this is largely missing in 2 player.

Most of the points in the game usually come from buildings, and building them in a checkerboard pattern with settlements. Late-game buildings can be as many as 15-20 points just by sitting on your board between 2 or 3 settlements. If you're finding that 2-player games tend to find cycles which create lots of points (through relics, or wonders), you could try limiting them. Wonders are already limited at 8, but you could limit the relics (and pottery, books, and ornaments) to 16.


Is Pandemic Legacy as good with 3 players as it is with 4? I have gathered 3 players (including myself) for Pandemic Legacy and we are eager to begin, but I'm wondering whether I should take the time to find a 4th. I've played Risk Legacy with 4 and it was a great experience. I'm somewhat concerned that the 3-player version of Pandemic Legacy won't be as deep or engaging as the 4-player version. This is just speculation, however, I have no evidence to back this up. Hence this question. Thanks!

We've played the game with both 3 and 4 in the same campaign.  It didn't affect the feel of the game either way.  For a variety of reasons you likely won't play the same characters in every mission anyway, so there is no reason that you can't add or drop someone part way through.


Does the medic remove cubes of the final cured disease (and thus eradicate it) before the game ends in a win? Consider a scenario in which your group is doing absurdly well. Three diseases have been eradicated, and while the fourth disease — Red — has not yet been cured, it has been contained to a single city, in which the Medic is already present.

Then it happens. The Operations Expert, holding three red cards, moves to a Research Center where the Researcher, holding two red cards, is already present. The Operations Expert takes those two red cards and then cures the final disease. You've won!

But since the Medic is in the only city still infected by the (now cured) Red Fever, that one is instantly treated as well.

Have you now won with full eradication? Or did the game already end once the fourth disease was cured?

Yes, according to Matt Leacock (one of the game's designers) on a BGG thread for Pandemic Legacy Season 1, the disease is eradicated. The medic's ability is immediate, so the cubes are cured and the disease eradicated. Pandemic Legacy Season 1 has rules very similar to those of Pandemic, so I wouldn't hesitate applying this ruling to the regular Pandemic.

Note that in Legacy, unlike vanilla Pandemic, eradicating a disease has consequences in terms of game-end upgrades, so the timing of things is quite important.


bridge question regarding answering opening of 1 of a major If opener opens 1s how many hearts does responder need to respond with 2h (has 10 points).  If opener opens 1h how many spades does responder need to respond 1 spade (6-9 points)

I infer from the phrasing of your question that you are playing a 4-card Major  natural system such as Goren. If that is not the case please specify what system you are playing.

First, it is vital to correct your statement on the strength of the 1S response to 1H; it is not a limited strength bid of 6-9 HCP but an unlimited strength bid of 6-20+ HCP. It is absolutely forcing for one round on Opener, who is obligated to ensure that you get a second opportunity to call. While there are some unusual circumstances where an expert might make this call as a prepared bid with only 3 Spades, I would strongly recommend that you now forget I ever said that, and always treat it as showing 4 or more Spades.

Second, the principle of bidding 4-card suits up the line is a fundamental tenet of natural systems. Don't go bidding your best or strongest four card suit first; that will cause you to subsequently be lying about your overall hand shape. Bidding is a language and, just as in English, you cannot be scrambling the word order of your sentence and expect the meaning to be unchanged. "That is your cat." and "Is that your cat?" have different meanings in English, and reversing the order in which you show two suits also changes the meaning of your calls. When looking to see which denomination is the best to play in, total number of trumps is much more important than trump quality.

That being said, the 2H response to a 1S opening almost promises 5 Hearts; because, due to the above, it denies any other 4-card holding. It promises 10-20+ HCP, and either a 5-card Heart holding or a 3-4-3-3 hand shape for which either of a 1NT or 2S response was distasteful. With a flat 10 HCP I would prefer a 1NT or 2S response to bidding 2H with only 4, choosing between the two on whether my high cards were concentrated in one or two suits including spades or well distributed over at least three.  Update: In summary, when responding 2H over a 1S opening have either 5 Hearts or an extra point or two above the 10 HCP minimum.

Again - none of this applies unless you are playing a natural 4-card major system such as Goren. I suspect much of it applies to ACOL though never having played (or read much on) that system I am less familiar with it. In particular, if you are playing any of a 5-card Major system (whether Hardy or K-S style), a Forcing Club system, or Canape style responses none of the above will apply as written.


Can Axis and Allies be played with two players, and does it require all countries to be picked? I had just recently bought the game and I was wondering if we needed more than two players to control all the countries. We had already decided that I would take the UK and USA while he would take Germany and Japan. Do we need somebody to play as Russia or could we just play without Russia?

Axis and Allies only works well if all five countries are in play, on their correct teams.  If you have five players, this is easy to do.  If you have fewer than five, here are the recommended sets:

4 Players

Soviet Union, United States (Allied)
United Kingdom (Allied)
Germany (Axis)
Japan (Axis)

3 Players

Soviet Union, United Kingdom, United States (Allied)
Germany (Axis)
Japan (Axis)

2 Players

Soviet Union, United Kingdom, United States (Allied)
Germany, Japan (Axis)

If you insist on playing without one of the countries in the game, you'll be in for quite an unbalanced game.  Assuming that unplayed countries cannot be entered, here's some of what you're in for:

Soviet Union

With the Russians out, most of Germany's industry is freed up to:

attack Britain itself,
maraud the Atlantic,
and take out all of Britain's colonies in Africa, India, and further east

This would be a devastating game for the British player in particular and the Allies in general.

United States

Without the industrial might of the Americans, Britain would face Japan alone, leaving them no resources to throw against the Germans.  (This one I've actually tried -- it's a mess.)  The war tends to break into two separate wars: Britain vs. Japan in the east, Germany vs. Russia in the west.  Both of those wars are imbalanced in favor of the Axis Powers.

United Kingdom

This might be the closest to a balanced game with one power removed.  Taking Britain out of the game would remove the entire rim of the Indian Ocean: Africa, India, Australia, and all the various places in between.  The US would miss having a staging point in Great Britain, but they can use Morocco or Norway instead without too much difficulty.  Japan wouldn't have the British harassing their southern flank, but they also wouldn't have as many production points to gain in the south, either.

Germany & Japan

Removing either Axis Power completely unbalances the game.  Without Germany, Russia has nowhere to go but east into Japan's holdings.  Without Japan, Britain has no threat to their eastern territories and can easily focus all their firepower on Germany.


When a treasure is recovered do you remove those treasure cards from the deck? When using your four cards to get a treasure item do the treasure cards (and any extras that may be drawn or in another's possession) get removed from the game? This seems to drastically increase the number of times Waters Rise is drawn since the deck gets thinner.

No.

  When you capture a treasure, discard cards to the Treasure discard pile and move the
  figurine in front of you.

This is also where encountered Waters Rise! cards are placed.

  Discard the Waters Rise! card to the Treasure discard pile.


If an encounter card requires me to discard a card under my control, can I choose to discard from my hand or my in-play area? Under Ownership and Control it says

  A player controls the cards located in his or her out-of-play game areas (such as the hand, deck, discard pile).

Also under In Play and Out of Play, it says

  The cards that a player controls in his or her play area are considered in play.

If an encounter card then tells me to discard an asset under my control, can I choose a card from my hand that has not been put in play, as well as a card in my Play area?

Cards in your hand are not in play, and cannot be discarded in this way. For example, if the mythos card says "discard 1 asset you control", it must be under the investigator's control (so on the table).

This is from the FAQ, under Rules Errata:

  Rules Reference page 7, column 1, “Costs” The third bullet point
  should read: “When a player is exhausting, sacrificing, or otherwise
  using cards to pay costs, only cards that are in play and under that
  player’s control may be used...”


Can a Seafaring race attack the land from a sea or lake region? As a seafaring race if I conquer the lake in the middle of the map, do the regions adjacent to the lake become vulnerable to my attack?

Yes, you can attack these new adjacent regions after conquering the seas or lake. The Seafaring rules state that the seas and lake are considered empty regions for you:

  Seafaring

  As long as your Seafaring race is active, you may conquer
  the Seas and the Lake, considering them as 3 empty Regions. You keep
  these Regions even once you go into Decline, and continue scoring for
  them for as long as you have tokens there. Only Seafaring races may
  occupy the Seas and the Lake

Since they are just regions, the rules for subsequent conquests apply:

  The active player can repeat this process to conquer as many new
  Regions as he wishes during his turn, provided he has enough Race
  tokens left to accomplish these successive conquests. Each of the
  newly conquered Regions must be adjacent to (i.e. sharing a border
  with) a Region already occupied by his active Race tokens, unless
  permitted otherwise by his Race and Special Power combo.

Go forth and conquer!


Do enchantments of Crew carry over to Vehicles? If I crew a vehicle with a creature that has an enchantment that does something such as "Whenever enchanted creature attacks, its controller loses 2 life" would that transfer to the vehicle it crews? Also, would enchantments such as a +1/+1 counter move to the vehicle?

No to both. Crewing a creature doesn't cause he vehicle to be related to the creatures that crew it in any way unless the creatures have an ability that triggers when they crew a vehicle. Crew means nothing more than what the ability says; that you tap creatures  to make the vehicle into an artifact creature until end of turn.

From the gatherer rulings on Smuggler's Copter:

  Creatures that crew a Vehicle aren’t attached to it or related in any other way. Effects that affect the Vehicle, such as by destroying it or giving it a +1/+1 counter, don’t affect the creatures that crewed it and vice versa.

Also note that "enchantments such as a +1/+1 counter" makes no sense. A counter is a completely different thing from an enchantment. If you meant an aura enchantment that gives the creature +1/+1, this is unrelated to a +1/+1 counter.


Is a player required to ship on a wharf if they are able to? In Puerto Rico, a player is required to ship as many of one good as they can in turn order.

If a player has a wharf, goods available to ship, and is otherwise unable to ship goods on the available ships, is that player required to use their wharf to ship all of one of their remaining goods?  Or are they allowed to, say, hang on to their coffee to sell during a later trader phase?

No,
Using the Wharf is optional, and a player is not required to use it each turn.  Here are a couple quotes from the rules.
The Violet Buildings (page 9)

A player is not required to use the special function of an occupied violet
building if he does not want to (important with the wharf, see below).

The Wharf (page 11 - emphasis, mine)

The wharf can only be used once per captain phase by its owner, but he
may choose when to use it, if at all.


In Ticket to Ride, when completing a route do you replace the cards you used with new ones? In Ticket to Ride, when completing a route do you replace the cards you used with new ones?

No. Drawing cards, both for destinations and trains, is a separate action. Finishing a route gets you points, but you need to replenish your hand manually.

The rule book says nothing about drawing cards in the section on claiming a route, if you were meant to draw cards, it would be here:

  Claim a Route – The player may claim a route on the board by playing a set of Train Car cards that match the color and length of the route and
  then placing one of his colored trains on each space of this route. He then records his score by moving his Scoring Marker the appropriate number
  of spaces (see Route Scoring Table) along the Scoring Track on the board.

Or a little later on in the section about claiming routes:

  Claiming Routes

  To claim a route, a player must play a set of cards equal to the number of spaces in the route. A set of cards must be of the same type. Most routes require a specific type of set. For example a Blue route must be claimed using blue-colored Passenger Car cards. Some routes – those that are Gray colored – can be claimed using a set of cards of any one color.

  When a route is claimed, the player places one of his plastic trains in each of the spaces of the route. All the cards in the set used to claim the route are then discarded.

  A player may claim any open route on the board. He is never required to
  connect to any of his previously played routes. A player may only claim
  a maximum of one route, hence connect two adjacent cities, never more,
  on his turn.

  Some cities are connected by Double-Routes. One player cannot claim
  both routes to the same cities.

The only way to draw cards is by taking the Draw Train Car Cards action for your turn instead of the Claim a Route action:

  Draw Train Car Cards – The player may draw 2 Train Car cards. He may take any one of the face-up cards or he may draw the top card from the
  deck (this is a blind draw). If he draws a face up card, he immediately turns a replacement card face-up from the deck. He then draws his second
  card, either from the face up cards or from the top of the deck. (See Train Car Cards for special rules for Locomotive cards).


What are the preconditions for a trump promotion in bridge? My understanding is that there are two main conditions. The first is that the defense has a long suit with which they can set up a "ruffing finesse," usually against the declarer's trumps by leading through a newly created void (usually after a lead or two).

The second condition seems to be when the defense has a number of "intermediate" trumps, typically ranging from Q to 8. (If the defense had four trumps 5432, a promotion wouldn't work, and if the four defensive trumps were AKQJ, it wouldn't seem to matter.) With a promotion, a defender uses an intermediate trump to force out a higher trump to promote partner's intermediates.

Is this second precondition in fact the right one? And if so, how do you, a defender, detect the precondition either when making an opening lead (West) or responding to one (East)? Is it because you see a lot of low trumps in dummy and some intermediates in your own hand? And then do you infer that if partner has one or more trumps that they are likely to be intermediates?

The Bridge Encyclopedia identifies 4 situations in which trump promotions ("the creation of trump tricks by forcing the premature use of trump cards by the opposition").

Uppercuts - ruffing high to force opponent to overruff, thus promoting a trump trick in partner's hand.
Establishing long tricks in trumps by forcing opponent to ruff - as in a forcing defense.
Coup en passant to create a positional trump trick. Example:

      K
      -
      -
      2
A           Q
-           -
-           A
A           -

      J
      -
      2
      -

With spades as trumps and the lead in the south, if declarer (south) leads a trump, they lose both tricks. But if they lead a diamond, the spade King will be scored en passant - either west will trump and declarer will discard from dummy, or west will discard and declarer will ruff with the king.
A positional overruff threat. For example, if south holds KQx in trumps and west holds AJ, playing on trumps will lead to west taking a single trump trick. If instead east plays on a side suit in which south and west are both void, south must ruff high to prevent an overruff with the J, but this establishes the J as a second trump trick (as long as west does not overruff with the ace!).


What hand scores are impossible in Cribbage? It's very well known that 19 is an impossible score to achieve when counting your hand.

What are the other impossible to achieve scores?  I've read 25, 26, 27.  Does anyone know the answer authoritatively?

All scores from 0 to 29 are possible with the exception of 19, 25, 26 and 27, as already mentioned.


Counting a surrounded non-alive carpenter's square I was playing against Crazy Stone and we ended up with (essentially) this corner situation:

$$W
$$ -------------
$$ | . . 5 X O .
$$ | 4 1 3 X O .
$$ | . 2 , X O .
$$ | X X X X O .
$$ | O O O O O .
$$ | . . . . . .

This certainly taught me (black) a valuable lesson about what I learned is called the "Carpenter's Square" and how I should not let W1 happen.

What I did not understand was the counting of this situation. I would have expected this to be counted under seki rules (as far as I can tell, Crazy Stone uses Japanese scoring), which in my understanding means all stones are alive and the four empty intersections are dame, so this corner is worth zero for either player.

The program however marked the black stones as dead and counted the corner as white territory, making the above diagram worth 22 points for white.

Is my understanding incorrect? Or the computer's? How should this situation be counted?

During the game

$$
$$ -------------
$$ | a b O X O .
$$ | X O O X O .
$$ | . X , X O .
$$ | X X X X O .
$$ | O O O O O .
$$ | . . . . . .

The corner is not settled yet, as both players can choose to:

either start a ten thousand year ko, white by playing at a and black by playing at b
or settle for a seki, if black plays at a or white plays at b.

At scoring time

If no move has been added in the corner, I would expect this to be considered a seki under Japanese rules (see example 12).

Under Chinese rules, both players would have to agree on the seki, or keep playing (in which case a or b will eventually be played).