Identify card game similar to Kalookie Several years ago I was taught a card game that was called "Oh Sh*t."
Recently I looked it up online and found another card game with the same name, but completely different rules, so I'm hoping someone on BG.SE knows what the game I was taught should actually be called.

Overview

Cards - 2 x Standard 52 card decks + Jokers
Jokers and 2's are wild cards
Each round, players are dealt 11 cards.

A full game consists of 8 rounds, with the ending condition for each round being the first person to play (lay down) all their cards.

Play within each round is regulated based on a contract to which each player must conform, before they are able to play their hands:

Round 1 - 1 set of 3 cards
Round 2 - 2 sets of 3 cards
Round 3 - 1 set of 4 cards
Round 4 - 2 sets of 4 cards
Round 5 - 1 set of 5 cards
Round 6 - 2 sets of 5 cards
Round 7 - 1 set of 6 cards
Round 8 - 2 sets of 6 cards

A "set" is a series of cards of the same rank, but runs of values are not permitted (eg, a set of 7, 8, 9 is not allowed) - wild cards (the jokers and 2's) can substitute for any card needed to complete the set, but there must never be more wild cards in the set than actual value cards.

Players are also issued 10 buys/lives at the beginning of the game, with which they can purchase additional cards from the deck at the beginning of their turn.

At the end of each round, scores are tallied, and accumulated until all rounds are completed.

If you can shed some light on the real name for this game, it would be appreciated.

There's a contract rummy game called Farmer's Rummy that sounds like what you're describing.


What all does Blood Moon affect? 1: If Blood Moon is on the battlefield, will Back to Basics, Burning Earth, etc. have any effect?
2: What about Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth?
3: Will a nonbasic with Wild Growth get an extra green mana?
4: What about Awaken the Ancient on a nonbasic mountain?
5: Can a nonbasic with Abundant Growth still tap for any color?

Yes, the will work normally. Blood Moon only changes the subtype to mountain, it doesn't add the supertype "basic". "Mountain" as a card name and "mountain" as a subtype of land are different things.
Urbog will have no effect. Urbog will be turned into a mountain, so it will lose its ability to make other lands into swamps. Urbog's effect depends on Blood Moon effect because of rule 613.7a, so Blood Moon effect is always applied first, and Urbog's ability is lost.
Yes, that mana is added because of Wild Growht's ability. Blood Moon doesn't affect it.
Awaken the Ancient can be played on a non basic land if Blood Moon is in the battlefield. If Blood Moon leaves the battlefield, Awaken the Ancient will be put in the graveyard (unless the original land had the moutain subtype, like Stomping Ground).
Yes, the lands still have the extra ability granted by Abundant Growth.


Tic-Tac-Toe card games? My family is developing a game based off of Tic-Tac-Toe. Only the objective is the same though. Are there any other games out there with similar goals and objectives based off of Tic-Tac-Toe?

There are, in fact, already card games where you try to get three of your symbol in a row.

Tic Tac Toe: jeu de réflexion, for example.


Replacing ships after taking control of enemy ports Page 25 of the rulebook states:

  Taking Control of Enemy Ports - If the land area connected to a Port
  is successfully attacked and taken control of by another player, that
  player may immediately replace any enemy Ship units in the Port with
  an equal number of his own available Ship units (or as many Ship units
  as he has available, he desires, or is allowed by supply limits).
  Excess enemy ships are simply removed from the board.

What does available mean in this context? Available as in a player has ships left that (s)he has not yet mustered or available as in ships that have already been mustered?

Where do the own ships come from? Are they existing ships on the board that simply move into the port now or are new ships mustered instead?

Available here means ships that are still in your supply. Use only those ships, not ones from the board.

You may find this useful from Page 4:

  Exceeding the Components Provided
  Each House is provided a limited number of units,
  tokens, and cards. If a player is using all his components of
  a particular type, he may not bring additional components
  of that type into play. Units that are destroyed in combat (or
  removed from the board for any other reason) are available to
  be mustered again.


Rules of MTG Dive Down and spells priority I'm playing MTGArena and I have one issue with the Dive Down spell. I have a Guttersnipe on battlefield, then my opponent cast Lightning Strike on it. I cast Dive down on Guttersnipe. And then my opponent cast another Lightning Strike that kills my creature. Why? I already used Dive Down. Why can the second Lightning Strike destroy my creature? Please explain.

This goes to the basics of how the stack works. After a spell or ability has been played, but before it resolves ("takes effect") it goes on the stack. Then all players have the opportunity to play instants, spells with flash and activated abilities. If anyone does, that spell or ability goes on the stack on top of everything already there.

Only when all players pass on the opportunity to play anything does the top object on the stack resolve (or if the stack is empty, the game continues to the next phase / step instead). Then all players once again have an opportunity to play things.

So this is what happens in your case:

Your opponent plays Lightning Strike, targeting your goblin.
Before the Strike resolves (the damage happens), instead of passing, you play Dive Down, targeting your goblin. It goes on top of the Lightning Strike on the stack.
Guttersnipe triggers, and you put its ability on the stack on top of Dive Down.
Before the goblin's ability resolves, instead of passing, your opponent plays a new Lightning Strike, targeting your goblin. It goes on top of the stack.
You both pass, and the topmost spell on the stack resolves. Your goblin takes three damage and dies.
You both pass.
Guttersnipe's ability resolves, and your opponent takes two damage (the ability, once on the stack, doesn't care at all what happens to the Guttersnipe).
You both pass.
Your Dive Down tries to resolve, but all its targets are gone, so it just fizzles (does nothing, is removed from the stack).
You both pass.
The first Lightning Strike your opponent played tries to resolve, but all its targets have disappeared so it fizzles.

Note that your opponent can, if they choose, wait until Guttersnipe's ability has resolved before they play the second Lightning Strike, and the end result will be the same. This will matter if they, for instance, have an ability which lets them draw cards when they take damage. In that case they would want to see what the drawn card is in case it's a better card to use instead of the second Lightning Strike.


What happens if you get lost while rescuing Jenny? In scenario 3 of Robinson Crusoe, your task is to build a raft to rescue Jenny, and then build a lifeboat to escape your deserted island before a hurricane arrives. (Let us not consider the wisdom of "sailing through a hurricane in a cobbled-together lifeboat" too much.) Until you rescue Jenny, she takes some damage every round; after you rescue her, she does nothing but rest and eat your food.

As a result of Jenny's terrible post-rescue utility, my last game involved abandoning Jenny for quite some time before getting around to constructing a raft. As it happened, she had exactly one wound remaining when we rescued her, and we rolled the dice and got a random event when we did. The random event was "you're lost and will be outside the camp tonight."

Does this mean Jenny is outside the camp, or could she plausibly have returned to the camp while you remain lost? (In this case, being outside the camp would cause 3 wounds: 1 from lack of shelter, and 2 from lack of food.)

(The first explanation is the most obvious, but I argued for the second on the theory that Jenny is, in every important way, a separate character, and that the event happened to the character who explored, rather than to Jenny.)

I would say that there is room for interpretation. Clearly, once Jenny is in the camp she is affected from cards effects, weather, having no shelter etc. However, I would say that Jenny is not in the camp in your situation, but neither on the rock. Remember that if a character has to spend the night outside of the camp, then all the resources he got in his action are not available for the whole group, but only for the character himself. So in this case I would say that Jenny is kind of a gathered resource.

It happens often in the game that you run in situations like this. As a rule of thumb, take the action that does the most harm.


Adding additional weapons to rock-paper-scissors Many of us are probably aware of the classic 'Rock-paper-scissors' game. I'm looking for an expansion with as many weapons as possible.

One popular alternative is 'Rock-paper-scissors-lizard-Spock'. Is there any longer expansion available?

Well, I think your need is probably satisfied by RPS-101: 101 gesture Rock-Paper-Scissors. There are apparently 5,050 possible outcomes to this game, which should keep you entertained for a while...

For something slightly less mindblowingly hardcore, the same author has also developed 7, 9, 11, 15 and 25 gesture variants. These get complicated quickly! As an example, the 15 gesture version looks like this:


What is the significance of a Scene ending in the Extraction mission? The Extraction mission notes where Scenes end, but doesn't say what happens when a scene ends.  What is the significance of even saying the Scene ends, then?

There are two main purposes to a scene in the game and while what happens when a scene ends varies based on the mission the basics are the same. In the case of an extraction you have a set round limit instead of a number of scenes to complete. In this case the scene end does two things, first is it heals all runners and the client, second is to provide reset of certain abilities. This is in addition to the normal addition of new obstacles.

Rules

  Most Missions:

  Are divided into “Scenes” with small rewards, breaks,
  or changes of play mode between Scenes. Each Mission
  sheet will describe what happens during a Scene
  and when a Scene ends.

  Some upgrades are usable once per Scene. Once used
  during a Scene within a Mission, they can’t be used
  again during that same Scene. When a Mission changes
  from one Scene to the next, these abilities become
  available for use again.


Does Zombie link trigger when out of models? In Zombicide, if you have a character with the "zombie link" ability, does that ability trigger only when a spawn card says "all X 1 extra turn" or does it also trigger when you activate zombies due to a spawn where you don't have enough figures?

The rules as written state: The Survivor plays an extra turn each time an
extra activation card is drawn in the Zombie pile. (source).

This explicitly states that the extra turn is only gained when an activation card is drawn (those that say "all X 1 extra turn").
Note: this ability would also trigger at blue threat level, even though the zombies do not get an activation.

As stated in the comments though, it is your Zombicide game, so you can adjust the rules as you please. If you do decide to allow gaining extra turns from extra activations from having run out of zombie miniatures, I would recommend limiting the number of extra turns a surviver can get to 1 per round.


Should the information on match slips be protected? At my LGS they have started used match slips for bigger events such a prereleases. After the event the store has been placing these slips in their scrap paper bin. So they can use the back for notes, life total sheet, etc..

These match slips contain a certain level of information about players, their name and DCI number and signature. I've been thinking about it and there is a possibility this information could be considered sensitive. Thus the store should not reuse these slips there to protect people's information. I've looked through all the rules documents I can find but I can't locate any guidance on this.

What information are you worried about being exposed on this scrap paper that has your name and dci number? If you are really concerned the only thing you can do is ask that the shop destroys them. But it would be much better to not have that information on the slips in the first place. If this is a privacy concern after the fact it should also be a privacy concern during the event as well.

During a tournament like this there is no reason whatsoever for the match slips to need to include the players name and dci number. All of that information can be kept in a separate list by the organizers and each player is given a randomly assigned number that can be linked back to the name/dci number after the event for any updates that are needed.

In reality there is no need for your dci number during the event at all as it is just needed during signup and at the end for administrative purposes.


Why Do People "Pre-empt" With Seven Of A Suit In Bridge? One advantage of a "pre-empt" is quite clear: You take two levels of bidding away from your opponents with a "three" bid. But could that be cutting off your nose to spite your face?

Recently, I had something like KQxxxxx, and a side queen (I forget how the other suits were distributed but was told it didn't matter). My partner was disappointed I didn't "preempt" (in "third" seat). My response was "with seven points?"

My understanding is that people often bid three of a suit with seven cards and this little. Sometimes even less, particularly when non-vulnerable vs. vulnerable. In its extreme version, the mantra is "with any seven (suited) cards."

Isn't this risky? What if we're doubled and only make three or four tricks?

Generally speaking, if you have only seven points as in the example hand, your opponents will have the preponderance of strength.  Pre-empts are designed to eat up the bidding room that your opponents could otherwise use to zone in on the right contract.  If, as it sometimes happens, your partner has the strength  instead, the pre-empt is still good, as it paints a very accurate picture of your hand that your partner will use to determine the right contract.

If you get doubled and go down three or four, think about what your opponents will have.  They will usually have missed a slam, and your result will compare favorably.

It will happen, but it is very rare that your pre-empt will be a total disaster.


Can the robot play other expansions? Can the robot used to play the single player variant added by The Gather Storm expansion be used to played with other expansions (or the base game without the addition of the Gather Storm cards), or can it only be used to play The Gathering Storm?

The two other expansions in the first arc (Brink of War and Rebel vs Imperium come with a few additional components that allow the Robot to use starting worlds from those expansions.

There is no official rules for the robot for playing with the Alien Artifacts expansion, however there are non-official rules available on Boardgamegeeks.


Can you counter a spell with indestructible? Can you counter an indestructible enchantment spell? For example, I cast Kruphix, God of Horizons. Can you counter the spell with a spell like Dissipate while it's on the stack?

Yes, you can.
The entirety of the rules for indestructible is that a creature with indestructible cannot be destroyed:

702.12a Indestructible is a static ability.
702.12b A permanent with indestructible can’t be destroyed. Such permanents aren’t destroyed by lethal damage, and they ignore the state-based action that checks for lethal damage.

To destroy a permanent is not related to countering a spell in any way.
To get even more technical, the spell does not have indestructible until after it resolves and becomes a permanent:

112.6. Abilities of an instant or sorcery spell usually function only while that object is on the stack. Abilities of all other objects usually function only while that object is on the battlefield. The exceptions are as follows:

(None of the listed exceptions apply here).


If I "play" a card, does it count as casting it? Fires of Invention has this line of text:

  You can cast spells only during your turn and you can cast no more than two spells each turn.

Golos, Tireless Pilgrim has this line of text:

  2WUBRG: Exile the top three cards of your library. You may play them this turn without paying their mana costs.

If I activate Golos's ability with Fires of Invention on the battlefield, do the non-land cards that I play count as spells for Fires of Invention?

My intuition says "yes", making these two cards a nonbo. However, Magic's wording is very strict, e.g. "put [card] into your hand" is different from "draw", so I'd like to make sure that "play" and "cast" are indeed the same thing, with the only difference being that I can "play" a land, but cannot "cast" it.

In the case of Golos, "play them this turn" means that you can either cast them if they are spells, or play them as lands, whichever is appropriate (subject to normal rules of the game and other cards in play). For example, you can't use Golos to play an extra land that turn, and you can't use Golos to cast more than 2 spells if Fires of invention is in play.
So in your case your intuition is right.

Casting Spells

601.1. Previously, the action of casting a spell, or casting a card as a spell, was referred to on cards as “playing” that spell or that card. Cards that were printed with that text have received errata in the Oracle card reference so they now refer to “casting” that spell or that card.
601.1a Some effects still refer to “playing” a card. “Playing a card” means playing that card as a land or casting that card as a spell, whichever is appropriate.


Pandemic Legacy, February, and Epidemics In Pandemic Legacy, February gives you

   Quarantine tokens. During the infect phase, if a city card is pulled and there's a quarantine token on that city, you remove the token instead of placing a disease cube.

But what happens if you have an epidemic outbreak on a such a city?  That is, when you draw a card from the bottom of the deck to infect,

   You normally place 3 cubes in that city.  But what if the city has a quarantine token in it?

What happens?

   Does the epidemic take effect as normal? Do you place 1 fewer cube per quarantine token? Does the epidemic simply not take effect and remove the quarantine token instead?

Remove the marker.  That is the only effect.

   The Quarantine rules state (2nd paragraph) - When a player is instructed to add any amount of disease markers to the city (or any color), remove the quarantine marker instead of adding disease markers.

Of course,

   If the Quarantine Specialist is in the city, do not remove the token!


What is a good strategy for using the Doomsday card? Doomsday - The card text reads as follows:

  Pay half your life, rounded up: Put your graveyard on top of your library, then remove all but five cards of your library from the game. Put the rest on top of your library in any order.

I have never managed to do anything useful with this card. Ever!

What could I do to use it successfully?

For half your life, you get to stack your deck and set yourself up for a number of combos.  There's a combo going around that involves Shelldock Isle/ Doomsday/ Emrakul, the Aeons Torn to pop out the Emrakul for free.

In addition, cards such as Serra Avatar, Beacon of Destruction, and other cards that shuffle back into your library afterwards can be used to stall running out of cards.  Platinum Angel can help keep you from losing the game.

That said, it's a pretty hard card to build around.


Who wins when both teams score above 500 in Double Deck Pinochle? In Double Deck Pinochle, the game ends when at least one team scores 500 or above.

Suppose the two teams scores are 510 and 520 after the hand is over. Who wins?

I had read at Pagat's Double Deck Pinochle page that "If both sides reach 500 on the same hand, the bidding side wins." I interpreted this to mean that the bidding team was used as a tie-breaking decision. But later someone told me that this is always applied, even if the teams have different scores. I asked about this at the Power Pinochle forum, and someone posted that this "Bidder Out" rule applies for single deck Pinochle.

I'd like to know the definitive answer for Double Deck Pinochle.

There are many different sets of rules for Pinochle, most are the same but almost every household I've played at has something 'different'.

However, my understanding of the winner (in what ever variation being played) was the one who won the bid will be the winner regardless of the scores if both are winning scores.  This is because it forces each bidder/team to make a serious attempt at the final bid.  The one who wins the bid is putting their money where their mouth is so to speak.  If I win the bid and just make the min score, and you only needed 1 point so you are much farther ahead, you could take it easy and assume a win and not bother trying to bid your hand.


If a creature planeswalker is dealt damage by a creature with infect, what happens? If a planeswalker than has been turned into a creature (not a planeswalker that turns itself into a creature with "prevent all damage" like Gideon) takes Infect damage, what happens?

I know that Infect damage is applied as -1/-1 counters, and I know that the planeswalker will have both damaged marked on it, as well as have it's loyalty reduced, but what I'm unsure of is if the -1/-1 counters further reduce the loyalty or if they only impact the power / toughness.

As a follow-on, do the -1/-1 counters stay on the planeswalker when it is no longer a creature? And if so, could this be used to prevent a Gideon from using it's "become a creature" ability (or at least kill it if it does)?

Loyalty counters are different and separate from the -1/-1 counters produced by infect. -1/-1 counters affect power and toughness only. If an infected Planeswalker reverts to a non-creature, the -1/-1 counters will have no effect. They will remain until otherwise removed, or until the permanent changes zones.
Non-creature Planeswalker vs Infect Damage

Lose loyalty equal to the infect damage per rule 119.3c.
Do not gain infect counters. Rule 119.3d only applies to creatures.

Creature Planeswalker vs Infect Damage

Lose loyalty equal to the infect damage per rule 119.3c.
Gain -1/-1 counters equal to the infect damage per rule 119.3d.

Example
Gideon, Champion of Justice has five loyalty counters and five -1/-1 counters. If he resolves his zero ability to become a creature, Gideon will die the next time state-based actions are checked.
Planeswalkers are not subject to the same state-based action where a player with ten poison counters automatically loses the game. Planeswalkers cannot gain poison counters.


When units are destroyed by sword icons on house cards - how are the units chosen? Say I have combat against an enemy that has two infantry and a knight on his territory. I use a house card that has two swords, and win the fight, and so two units are destroyed.

How the units chosen - do I choose which units are destroyed, or does the loser?

The loser choses. From the rules, page 21:

When a player suffers casualties, he decides which of his units are removed (unless stated otherwise by the text ability of a played House card). Remember that supporting units can never be taken as casualties in combat.
Note: Each casualty suffered destroys a single unit, regardless of Combat Strength. In other words, removing a Knight unit as a casualty still counts as only one casualty even though its Combat Strength is 2. For this reason, it is generally best to remove Footmen units as casualties, if able.


In Duplicate Bridge, does the person holding a particular set of cards open the bidding in all times that particular deal is played? Say the same deal is played by 5 different pairs of people. Is the person opening the bid each time that particular deal is played have the same set of cards in his hand? Or is the dealer/opener also changed?
For e.g. take a deal where North has
AKQxx
Axx
xx
xxx
Now North opens the first time this deal is played.
Now every other time this deal is played by 4 other people, is the person who has this same set of cards or not?

In pair competitions, yes absolutely ; everything about each hand is identical every time it is played. The dealer and vulnerability is determined by the board number usually - a sixteen board rotation covering all combinations of dealer and vulnerability. The holder has a number and the dealer and vulnerability marked on it.
See this picture from wikipedia:

The red sides indicate Vulnerable, and the dealer is marked as well.  Here NS are vulnerable and E deals. It will be played that way at each table.  Board 2 always has that configuration every time you play anywhere, as would board 18 and 34.
In Swiss teams it’s similar except you’d make sure the other team plays the opposite direction- so team A is NS at one table and EW at the other table, but the board is played the same. Thus one player is designated as Dealer (by the Board markings) at one table; and a player of the other team sitting in the same seat will be the designated Dealer when the Board is played at the other table.
Board-a-Match team games work the same as Swiss.


Fluxx - Monty Python: Finger of God & Play All I've just encountered a situation playing this with my daughter where she has played the Finger of God and there's a Play All card in the table. Does this mean she can keep Playing Finger of God until there are no more Creepers on the table? Seems to be a loop.

Based on the wording of the card, and a strict interpretation of the rules, yes.

To be more specific, if the rule "Play All" is in effect and your daughter has played the "Finger of God", she may choose to smite a Creeper in play and, in doing so return the FoG to her hand, where she must, at some point in her turn, play it again.

At which point, she can again choose to smite a Creeper, and so on until either there are no Creepers left, or she chooses to not use the FoG's ability, or for some reason she is not able to play the card again (e.g. the rules change back to "Play 1", or she trades her hand with the FoG in it).


Are there any websites for keeping score of various boardgames? My friends and I are pretty competitive.  We play a lot of various games with various scoring systems used by each (i.e. 7-wonders, Catan, Dominion, etc...).

Does anybody know of any website or system that can be used for keeping track of who won which game and by how much?  Doesn't need to be applicable to all games, but would be nice to keep a record.

Boardgamegeek (http://boardgamegeek.com) has a play reporting feature which can include who played, what position each played, their score, and additional notes. Play notes can be publicly accessed. (It can be a bit of a pain, tho, to find someone else's plays.)

It does exactly what you're asking for. If the same person reports every time, it's readily viable to find it.

Further, one can create a private geeklist which lists the games, instead of using the play reports feature.


Euchre Call for partner In Euchre Call for a partner with 6 people playing...if you are playing to 31.  One person has 28, and another has 29.  If they pair up and both go out winning a 4 bid trick, who wins...the person with the most points or the bidder (considering they are different people)?

I have looked but not seen any rules for call your partner games in general where they discuss who wins when multiple people on the same winning hand break the mark for ending the game.

In general when I have been playing we have handled it in the following ways. In a friendly atmosphere it is considered a tie and anyone who hits the mark is considered a winner. In a more competitive atmosphere it is highest score wins. If there is a tie and the bidder is involved in the tie than the bidder wins. If the bidder is not in the tie the win is than considered a tie.

The reasoning for the bidder breaking ties is because they took the action and risk to make the bid. If they are not in the bid it gets a lot harder to determine a tie breaker other than another hand where they are the only ones who can win.


"Brigand Attack" (when upgrading Settlement --> City) I just bought this game last week and had a question (and BGG couldn't help...)

When read at face value, it would seem that

  "Each player who has more than 7 resources must discard all excess resources"

would require discarding down to seven cards when this event occurs. The official rules (.pdf) don't really say anything to enforce (or refute) this.

But having played Settlers, I wonder if the intent is to discard half (rounding down)...

How should this be treated?

The card is poorly worded. It should probably say, "Each player who has more than 7 resources must discard all resources in excess of 7."

At the Official Catan Game Portal:

  Brigand Attack: Players who have more than 7 resources cards discard all cards in excess of 7. Afterwards, the destiny card is flipped.


Sacrifice a dead creature? I have Plagued Rusalka and Grave Pact on the battlefield.

I use Plagued Rusalka's ability and sacrifice it for its cost in order to kill a 1/1 creature an opponent controls by giving it -1/-1. He controls two creatures altogether.

Can the opponent use the very creature I killed with the -1/-1 effect to sacrifice a creature as Grave Pact demands, or can he only sacrifice his second creature to fulfil the demand?

Will one or two creatures on the opponent's side end up leaving the battlefield?

Your opponent can sacrifice the targetted creature before the ability resolves

The exact chain of events is this:

You activate Plagued Rusalka's ability, choosing your opponents' 1/1 creature as a target
While paying its costs, you sacrifice Plagued Rusalka itself, which triggers Grave Pact
Plagued Rusalka's ability is put on the stack, and Grave Pact's ability is put on the stack on top of it - you do not get to choose the order because of the way triggered abilities work

  603.3. Once an ability has triggered, its controller puts it on the stack as an object that’s not a card the next time a player would receive priority. See rule 116, “Timing and Priority.” The ability becomes the topmost object on the stack. [...]

At this point, everything's been put on the stack, but nothing has resolved yet. Assuming no player takes any other actions, all objects on the stack will attempt to resolve one after another:

Grave Pact's ability resolves, giving your opponent the choice to sacrifice any of their creatures
If they chose the creature targetted by Plagued Rusalka's ability, that ability will be countered by the game rules when it would resolve for not having any legal targets, and no creature will get -1/-1 until end of turn. This is usually referred to as a spell or ability fizzling.

  608.2b If the spell or ability specifies targets, it checks whether the targets are still legal. A target that’s no longer in the zone it was in when it was targeted is illegal. [...] The spell or ability is countered if all its targets, for every instance of the word “target,” are now illegal.

If they chose the other creature, the creature originally targetted will get -1/-1 until end of turn as expected, and put in the graveyard because of that.

Assuming your opponent knows about the rules of the game, there's not a lot of incentive to not sacrifice the creature targetted by Plagued Rusalka here.


Do I get more cards if my hand is empty at the end of my turn? What do I do if I have zero cards left in my hand at the end of my turn?  Do I wait until the end of my turn then draw the usual one card at the beginning of my next turn or do I draw a new seven card hand?

When you get to your draw step, you must draw a single card, unless some effect lets you draw more or less. If you attempt to draw a card when your library is empty, you lose the game.

Even if your hand is empty, the rules remain the same, and you still only draw one.

Here is how the comprehensive rules states it.

  The draw step is the third step of the beginning phase.

  Draw Step

  504.1. First, the active player draws a card. This turn-based action doesn't use the stack.

  504.2. Second, any abilities that trigger at the beginning of the draw step and any other abilities that have triggered go on the stack.

  504.3. Third, the active player gets priority. Players may cast spells and activate abilities.


Is there a site to solve tsumego online? I'd like to solve tsumego online, not having to install a program or app locally. Are there any sites that allow this? How about for smartphones?

GoProblems

http://www.goproblems.com/

The traditional problem site. Has many user contributed problems. Personally I'm not too fond of it, since the problems often vary in style getting me out of the problem solving flow.


Damage distribution with Banding and Trample This actually pertains to a deck I played long (about 15 years) ago, but I've always wondered as to the correct ruling.  The deck in question had lots of banding and trample creatures, so that in the end I would attack with a band that had a large amount of trampling creatures in it.  For sake of argument, lets say my band has 15 points of trampling damage and 5 points of non-trampling damage.

These bands would typically be blocked by more than one creature. Let's say I was blocked by a 1/1 and a 8/8. My rule of thumb for banding was that an attacking band get to distribute damage as it likes.  So I would assign all damage to the smallest creature (1/1).  That creature would absorb the 5 points of non-trampling damage and my opponent would take all 15 points of trampling damage.

Trampling specifies that only leftover damage after dealing lethal damage to  all blocking creatures would then trample over to the player, and banding is... complicated.

My question is: does the banding ability to choose how damage is assigned trump the trampling requirement that all creatures must be assigned lethal damage first?

When attacking with creatures that have some combination of Banding and Trample you must still deal lethal damage to all blocking creatures before you can deal damage to the defending player (or the Planeswalker you attacked).
Rule 702.21k explains how banding affects combat damage when attacking. Basically it allows you to ignore the damage assignment order the defending player chooses, and you assign damage to your creatures as you choose. It does nothing for how you assign combat damage to the defending creatures (or players or planeswalkers).
Rule 702.19b explains how trample works. This rule doesn't change the rules for assigning combat damage to creatures, but allows for once all blocking creatures have been dealt lethal damage any remaining damage may be assigned to the player or planeswalker that creature is attacking.
So when you have an attacking band (at least 1 of which has trample), and the band gets blocked by multiple creatures you must assign lethal damage to all blocking creatures before you can trample over any damage.

702.21k During the combat damage step, if a blocking creature is blocking a creature with banding [...] the active player (rather than the defending player) chooses how the blocking creature’s damage is assigned. That player can divide that creature’s combat damage as he or she chooses among any number of creatures it’s blocking. This is an exception to the procedure described in rule 510.1d.
702.19b The controller of an attacking creature with trample first assigns damage to the creature(s) blocking it. Once all those blocking creatures are assigned lethal damage, any remaining damage is assigned as its controller chooses among those blocking creatures and the player or planeswalker the creature is attacking. [...] The attacking creature’s controller need not assign lethal damage to all those blocking creatures but in that case can’t assign any damage to the player or planeswalker it’s attacking.
510.1d A blocking creature assigns combat damage to the creatures it’s blocking. If it isn’t currently blocking any creatures (if, for example, they were destroyed or removed from combat), it assigns no combat damage. If it’s blocking exactly one creature, it assigns all its combat damage to that creature. If it’s blocking two or more creatures, it assigns its combat damage to those creatures according to the damage assignment order announced for it. This may allow the blocking creature to divide its combat damage. However, it can’t assign combat damage to a creature that it’s blocking unless, when combat damage assignments are complete, each creature that precedes that blocked creature is assigned lethal damage. When checking for assigned lethal damage, take into account damage already marked on the creature and damage from other creatures that’s being assigned during the same combat damage step, but not any abilities or effects that might change the amount of damage that’s actually dealt. An amount of damage that’s greater than a creature’s lethal damage may be assigned to it.


Shogi Notation explained I tried to find a shogi game that I could follow on my shogi board. however I am having difficulty following the notation. For example I found http://www2.teu.ac.jp/gamelab/SHOGI/amaryu93.html via google. The game starts with

1.P7f P8d
2.S6h P3d
3.S7g ..

Now I think that Move number 1 should move a pawn, however on the board http://www.shogi.net/rjhare/pieces/start.gif 7 f does not hold a pawn. Also, moving it to 8d would mean that it had to move diagnoally, which does not make much sense. So what I came up with is that it could mean that it was the target of a pawn move, which would mean that black moved the pawn from 7g to 7f and white from 8c to 8d. is this the right interpretation?

Shogi Notation notes which piece is moving, and where they are moving to. So P7f means that a Pawn is moving to square 7f. If there is ambiguity as to which piece is moving then the starting location is added to the front (ex. G6i-5h when there is more than one Gold piece that can move to the 5h square)


How to use 'Nisei MK II' free 'End the run'? From the 'Nisei MK II' card:

Place 1 agenda counter on Nisei MK II when you score it.
Hosted agenda counter: End the run.

Does this really means that you get a free 'End the run' that the corporation can use a any time?

Yes, you get one 'End the Run' ability, because the card has one hosted agenda counter. From the rule book

Cards can also host counters and tokens. Hosted counters or tokens can be spent, or leave play, without affecting their host. If a trigger cost requires one or more hosted counters, those counters must be spent (retuened to the token bank) from the card that the ability appears on. (page 22)
Paid Abilities - Some card abilities have trigger costs that a player must pay before the effect of the ability can be resolved. These abilities are called paid abilities. A card’s trigger cost is always listed in its text box before the effect, following the format “cost: effect.” (page 11, sidebar)


How does Double-Strike work, is it comparable to Windfury in Hearthstone? I am transitioning from Hearthstone to Magic. Some abilities sound the same but might not do the same thing.

Is double-strike equal to Windfury (Hearthsone)? Or does it only double strike a creature?

My question is: Does he only double-strike creatures? With no creatures on the battlefield from the opponent side can I double-strike him? If I kill his creature in the 1st strike is the 2nd strike directed to the opponent?

Combat with double strike works like this:

Declare attackers (i.e. the active player says what creatures they are attacking with).
Assign blockers (i.e. the defending player says which attackers they are blocking, and for each attacker which creatures they are using to block).

At this point, all attackers that have legal blockers assigned to them are considered to be blocked.  (A blocked creature cannot damage a player, unless it has trample.)

Assign "first strike" damage, i.e. any creatures involved in combat that have either first strike or double strike deal their damage.
Assign main combat damage, i.e creatures without first strike deal their damage.

So creatures with double strike actually deal their damage in two bursts. If the creature was blocked, then (in the absence of other effects), it can only deal its damage to the creatures assigned to blocking it.  This is true even if the blocking creature has already died - the attacking creature is still blocked, and will deal no more damage (Unless it has trample or a similar ability). If the creature wasn't blocked, then it deals its damage directly to the player (or planeswalker) that was being attacked.


Does Wrath of God really destroy creatures with shroud? I heard - (from an official MtG judge) - that Wrath of God ("Destroy all creatures") destroys creatures with the Shroud ability, because it doesn't target a single creature, it targets all creatures.

Is this really true? In my opinion it is very illogical.

Yes, Wrath of God will kill all creatures with shroud.  It will also kill all creatures that have protection from white.  It won't kill creatures that are indestructible.

To understand why this is, you have to look at the definitions of the terms.

Shroud means: "this creature can't be the target of spells or abilities".

Protection means (among other things): "this creature can't be the target of spells or abilities of the colour in question".

Wrath of God just says "Destroy all creatures".  No mention of targets at all.  And I think this is where your confusion is arising.  Wrath of God doesn't "target all creatures and destroy them".  It doesn't target anything.  It just destroys them, whether they're slippery customers or not.  Boom!

Indestructible creatures survive a Wrath because their ability ("cannot be destroyed") specifically interacts with the word "destroy" on the card Wrath of God.  Creatures with Shroud only interact with, and care about, the word "target" on a card.  If you can't find "target" written anywhere on the card, then Shroud won't have any effect on what that card can do.

As an interesting side point, take a look at a card like Copy Enchantment.  This puts into play a copy of an enchantment already on the battlefield.  But note that nowhere on the card does it say "target".  This means that if you copy an Aura on the battlefield, you can put that copy onto a creature with Shroud... even if the original Aura would have been unable to enchant that creature when it was cast!  Sometimes Magic does some pretty counter-intuitive things, but it's very internally consistent.

Hope that's clarified things more than it's confused them, for you!


What is the one-turn win combination, using Zada, Hedron Grinder, that requires the least number of cards and external effects, in Modern? Having only been playing for a bit over a year I am not very knowledgeable on cards outside of standard. I recently got smashed at FNM by a Zada deck which prompted me to look into this for modern (and commander?)

I was thinking this may involve something like Arcbond

What is the one-turn win combination, using Zada, Hedron Grinder, that requires the least number of cards and external effects, in Modern?

The only interesting guaranteed (assuming no external effects) one-turn win combination I can find that uses Zada, Hedron Grinder is the Arcbond combo described in this question, or some variation of it. Basically, you need the following:

Zada, Hedron Grinder
Any creature with Lifelink (e.g. Ajani's Sunstriker)
Arcbond
Any spell that makes a creature indestructible (e.g. Ephemeral Shields)
Anything that deals damage to a creature (e.g. Lightning Bolt)

When you control the mentioned creatures, and then cast and resolve each of those spells in turn targeting Zada, the result is an arbitrarily large amount of damage dealt to each creature and player, and the combo's controller gaining large amounts of life, until every other player has lost.


Can I capture threatening chess piece? I’m a newbie at chess and I was wondering why I am unable to capture the black rook threatening my king?

You're in check.
The black bishop on B7 is currently putting you in check, which means that you must stop that attack on your King.
Your only two legal moves at this time are

Qf3 - blocking the bishop
Kg1 - moving the king away from check


End of turn special powers Just a bit of confusion associated with how exactly the end of the turn would be scored.

Let's say hypothetically I start with ghouls+spirits and put them into decline and get wizards+forest as my next combination.

When counting points, would ghouls standing on a forest receive a point or is this exclusive to the wizards.

Your Active race and your In Decline race(s) are scored independently of each other. A race's Special Power only applies to that race. From the rulebook (section II, p8):

  Each Special Power badge gives a unique benefit to the race it is
  associated with.

(emphasis added)


Name of 60's Milton Bradley racing car game? Looking for the name of 60's Milton Bradley racing car game?

The game involved one wind up car, on the floor, no track, and each kid would have a pole that reached to the floor with a semi-circle piece of plastic on the end that would you 'catch' the moving car, it would go around the semi-circle, and go back to the other person.

I believe it may have also had a board.

(Was it just a dream? I have no more info but I do have good memories of it. Came in a standard board game size box.)

After a bit of googling I think you might be looking for Crash Canyon

It's publish by Milton Bradley and its has wind up cars.

It doesn't really fit the rest of the description but its possible you might have been playing your own game with the component cars.


vedalken orrery, aura of silence in reponse to opponents enchantment If I have a Vedalken Orrery in play, and my opponent attempts to cast an enchantment, can I flash in Aura of Silence in response and force them to either pay 2 more mana or have their spell fizzle?

No, it generally doesn't work like that.

If your opponent has priority (i.e. the right to cast spells, activate abilities, and take special actions), and all other required conditions are also met, he can start casting his enchantment. In that case, you can still respond with Aura of Silence, but it will not have any effect on that particular enchantment. The Aura already has to be on the battlefield to have an effect on spells, because once a spell is on the stack, its costs can no longer change in any way:

  601.4. Casting a spell that alters costs won’t affect spells and abilities that are already on the stack.

So in the classic case with no rules-lawyering going on, you are out of luck.

That being said, in a tournament setting with strict rules enforcement, you might be able to use the shortcut rules and your opponent's sloppiness in your favor.

Shortcuts are being used in almost every turn of every match of Magic ever, and that is no exaggeration. The simple act of untapping, drawing a card, and saying "Go" to end your turn is actually a large shortcut you propose to skip over all the usually required steps and phases of a turn, and usually your opponent will accept that proposal. However, he is not required to and can demand to go back to your draw step and propose a different shortcut, which you in turn have to accept and so on.

So what does this mean for your question?

Let's say your opponent starts his turn, untaps, draws a card, then immediately starts casting his enchantment. What he actually did was he silently proposed for both of you to pass priority and continue into the first main phase, and assumed you would accept. However, it is your right to demand that both of you play out all the necessary steps, and after your opponent has drawn a card and passed priority to you, you get the opportunity to cast and resolve your Aura of Silence. Your opponent has to wait until the main phase, so if he still wants to play his enchantment, he would have to pay 2 more.

You get another opportunity to do the same thing at the end of combat. At various points during that phase, and notably at the end of combat step, players can cast instant-speed spells and activate abilities. So when creatures did attack and combat is over, and your opponent wants to cast an enchantment spell, it's clear that he has skipped to the second main phase, and you can then deny that shortcut and play your own spell at the end of combat step.


Word of Command recursion Let's say I cast Word of Command, and during its resolution I see that my opponent has a Word of Command in their hand, and I decide to cast it (as my spell that I make them cast due to my WoC, let's call it WoC1) targeting myself. Who controls the resolution of the second WoC, let's call it WoC2? Them or me? Do I have restrictions on what I can do to cast the spell I would choose for WoC2, since I'm not myself but I'm myself controlling myself through control of my opponent, and WoC1 and 2 would impose restrictions on how I can cast a spell? Let's say the only cards left in my hand are lands and Lightning Storm, can I or my opponent discard lands while it is on the stack or do I still control my opponent? Can my opponent counter Lightning Storm?

The rules don't actually address how multiple player control effects interact, so strictly speaking, it's ambiguous how this works. Logically, the player control effect created by Word of Command 1 encompasses the entire resolution of Word of Command 2, including the effect that has your opponent make decisions for you while playing the card for WoC2, so you will make those decisions. However, once you have played that card, no more player control effects from WoC1 apply, so if that last card is a spell, your opponent will control you while it resolves.

As for Lightning Storm, Word of Command specifically says that you control your opponent while casting the spell and while it is resolving. In between those two times, no player control effect is active, so either player can make their own choices to activate Lightning Storm's ability.

To sum up, with the ambiguous part in bold:

You cast Word of Command 1. No player control effects apply, and you make your own decisions.
Word of Command 1 resolves. You choose for your opponent to cast Word of Command 2. While casting it, you control your opponent and choose what mana abilities they activate.
Word of Command 2 resolves. You control your opponent while this spell resolves. You choose the Lightning Storm to cast. While casting it, your opponent controls you but your control effect is broader, so you have overall control. You choose what mana abilities to activate and what the spell's initial target should be.
While Lightning Storm is on the stack, no player control effects apply, and each player can choose to activate Lightning Storm's ability.
Lightning Storm resolves. Your opponent controls you while this spell resolves. There are no meaningful choices to make while the spell resolves.


Where can I find reviews of a set once it's established? The only set reviews I can find are when the set first comes out. Does anybody know of a reputable site that reviews the cards after a few months when the cards are more established? I am more interested in limited (draft) reviews.

Channelfireball.com LSV makes a scaling from 1-5 after a few weeks the set is released gives his opinion to each card.


Settlers of Catan: Building Roads 'Through' Settlements I think that this idea is a bit ridiculous but my friend insists that: because of ambiguity in the rules, it is perfectly legitimate to build roads 'through' settlements. In case 'through' is unclear, let me explain through an example:
So, say that we have our hexagonal board piece. Now, we have two settlements, one towards the top, another towards the bottom. Now, the bottom settlement wants to build roads, so it starts building around this same hexagon. Now, my question: can you build a road that 'passes through' the other settlement to complete the loop?
Also, can you please reference the language in the rules? (My friend is extremely stubborn)

I am trying to get a visual example, sadly I am nowhere near a board. I'll get the picture ASAP. Thanks in advance.

The reason it is no, is because when you build something new (except for the set up rounds) you need to build roads and settlements connected to something you have already built.

When you reach someone else's settlement with a road, it 'fills' up the intersection and by building a road past you would be trying to build onto their settlement not your road.  It works the other way too, if you have a long road and someone build a road to an open intersection on your road they can build a settlement on the end of their road and thus split your road into two.  So this is a reason not to go crazy building roads without settlements.


What happens if a creature has no toughness defined? Dominaria introduced Merfolk Trickster, which causes a creature to lose all abilities, without setting a power and toughness.

What happens if a card such as Tarmogoyf loses all abilities?

Would Tarmagoyf become a 0/0 in this case, because a number not defined is treated as 0? Or would it possibly be a 0/1, because the printed toughness on the card is "*+1", and only the "*" part is undefined? What about a card like Boneyard Wurm, would it just become 0/0 (and thus die)?

There seems to be a possible contradiction between the comprehensive rules and the Gatherer rulings. The Gatherer rulings say:

  If the target creature has power and toughness written as / with an ability that defines its power and toughness, it’s 0/0 when it loses all abilities. If its power and toughness are written as */*+1, it’s 0/1, and so on.

Rule 208.5 deals with this situation:

  208.5. If a creature somehow has no value for its power, its power is 0. The same is true for toughness.

It seems to me that a Tarmagoyf that loses all abilities has no toughness defined. It's toughness is written as "*/1+*", which according to 208.2, its toughness should be defined by its abilities.

So, while it is clear that a */* creature will be a 0/0 if it loses all abilities; what happens to a */*+1? Is it 0/0 or 0/1?

Also, I find it interesting, though not likely relevant, that Tarmogoyf is written "*/1+*" (with the 1 first), while the Gatherer ruling references cards that are "*/*+1" (with the * first).

With the introduction of Vehicles in the set Kaladesh, this situation is now possible and explicitly covered by the rules.

  208.5 If a creature somehow has no value for its power, its power is 0. The same is true for toughness.


Precursor Golem + Saheeli's Artistry + non artifact golem Suppose I have a Precursor Golem and a non-artifact Golem, (let's say Moonglove Changeling) on the battlefield, and I target Precursor Golem with both modes of Saheeli's Artistry. What happens? The Changeling would be a valid target for half of the spell, but not the other half, so it's not clear to me whether it will be copied or not.

The Saheeli's Artistry would not be copied to target a Moonglove Changeling.

Rule 706.10 says

  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. A copy of a spell or ability copies both the characteristics of the spell or ability and all decisions made for it, including modes, targets, the value of X, and additional or alternative costs. [...]

and rule 706.10d says

  Some effects copy a spell or ability for each player or object it “could target.” The copies are put onto the stack with those targets in the order of their controller’s choice. If the spell or ability has more than one target, each of its targets must be the same player or object. If that player or object isn’t a legal target for each instance of the word “target,” a copy isn’t created for that player or object.

Since the Moonglove Changeling isn't a valid choice for "target artifact", the copy of the spell is not created targeting it.


Does the "unnatural" blackjack after splitting push with the dealer? If I split aces, and get an "unnatural" (as they say in casinos), does the ante push if the dealer draws into a blackjack too, or does the dealer win?
I know, that it usually pays 1:1 at the casinos in this case. But what if it's a draw?
The word `unnatural' just confuses me.

It depends on the house rules, which may be either determined by law (or subordinate regulation) or by the casino by publication.
The dealer will often make the rule explicit by stating that splits aces don't become blackjacks. In this case they cannot push on the dealer's blackjack, because they only have a 21 at best.


Can Scientific Cooperation happen when there's no science to share? The text for the Scientific Cooperation Pact reads:

  Every time one of the civilizations plays a technology, it pays 2
  science less and the other civilization pays 1 science.

What happens if the other civilization has zero accumulated science? Does the tech-playing civilization still get the 2 science discount, or does the pact have no effect?

I actually fell into this trap in a game, and was surprised at the rules.  If the other civilization can't pay, you can't develop.

The question was asked on BGG, and the rule that covered it was also discussed there- it's on the last page of the rules, i.e. on pg. 20 under Scientific Cooperation:

  If one civilization has no science points, neither civilization can
  play a technology.


Does Mewtwo-EX's Damage Change exchange or move damage counters? Mewtwo-EX from BREAKthrough has a Damage Change attack:

   Damage Change
  Switch all damage counters on this Pokémon with those on your opponent's Active Pokémon.

The Damage Change attack states that the damage counters are switched onto that of the opponent. Does that literally mean exchange or put the counters on?
I think the former, but the phrasing is ambiguous.

The wording says "Switch all damage counters on this Pokémon with those on your opponent's Active Pokémon". The word "switch" indicates it's exchange. So your interpretation is correct.

Example: Mewtwo has taken 50 points of damage, while opponent has taken 20 points. After using Damage Change, Mewtwo has taken 20 points of damage, while opponent has taken 50 points.


Why did devotion decks dominate PT Theros? Pro Tour Theros was full of successful devotion decks, with mono-black, mono-red, Gruul, and mono-blue all represented in the top 8, and the finals being decided by a blue mirror.

Conventional wisdom is that multicolor decks are optimal in competitive Magic due to their broader access to powerful cards, with the occasional exception of an ultra-fast consistent mono-color aggro or combo deck (like RDW or High Tide). And Theros Standard is a format mainly consisting of a multi-color block full of powerful gold cards like Loxodon Smiter and Sphinx's Revelation, and decent multi-color manabases based on shocklands, scrylands, and guildgates.

But the dominant decks at PT Theros all seem to be rather midrange-y de-facto-mono-color lists. Why did that happen?

What aspects of the Standard card pool and metagame made Pro Tour Theros an ideal environment for devotion-powered decks?

Conventional wisdom is that multicolor decks are optimal in competitive Magic due to their broader access to powerful cards

Part of it is that devotion breaks that conventional wisdom, because it actively rewards you for playing lots of cards with identically colored mana symbols. The power level of the main devotion engines — Master of Waves, Gray Merchant of Asphodel, and Fanatic of Mogis — is high enough (when you have significant devotion) that it overwhelms the benefit of running multiple colors. For example, if you already have 5 devotion to blue, then Master of Waves gives you 6 2/1 creatures for four mana. Nothing in RTR block is nearly that good, even when you can put multiple colors together.

Of course, the high potential power level of e.g. Master of Waves wouldn't matter if you had to run otherwise terrible cards to enable it. But the cards that have lots of colored mana in their mana costs, like Nightveil Specter and Boros Reckoner, tend to be reasonably powerful anyway, which is related to the fact that they're normally so hard to cast. Devotion was just the extra benefit these cards needed to elevate them from fringe playables to core cards of the format.


Can you win at level 8 in Munchkin? A friend played Munchkin Deluxe the other day and told me he won at level 8 when he killed a monster which granted 2 levels. To my understanding, I thought you NEED to kill at level 9 in order to win.

Can anyone explain if this is correct or not?

From the Munchkin Rules:

  The first player to reach Level 10 wins . . . but you must reach Level 10 by
  killing a monster, unless a card specifically allows you to win another way.

The only requirement it gives is that you kill a monster to reach Level 10, it doesn't say you have to be Level 9 when you kill it. The only other rules about winning say you can't reach Level 10 by selling loot or playing a Level Up card.

From the Munchkin FAQ:

  Note also that ANY level gained as a result of killing a monster counts as the winning level. If you have a Race or Class ability that lets you get an extra level after winning certain combats, that level can be the winning level.

This supports the idea that you don't have to be Level 9 when you kill a monster, you just have to get to Level 10 as a result of killing a monster.


What happens when a fortified land stops being a land? Darksteel Garrison is like an equipment but for land - it can fortify a land, giving it an extra ability. The Westvale Abbey is a land but once it transforms, it's no longer a land.

What happens when a land such as Westvale Abbey equipped with a Darksteel Garrison transforms?

When the fortified land stops being a land, the fortification unattaches.
From Magic Comprehensive Rules (emphases mine):

301.5c An Equipment that’s also a creature can’t equip a creature. An Equipment that loses the subtype “Equipment” can’t equip a creature. An Equipment can’t equip itself. An Equipment that equips an illegal or nonexistent permanent becomes unattached from that permanent but remains on the battlefield. (This is a state-based action. See rule 704.) An Equipment can’t equip more than one creature. If a spell or ability would cause an Equipment to equip more than one creature, the Equipment’s controller chooses which creature it equips.
301.6. Some artifacts have the subtype “Fortification.” A Fortification can be attached to a land. It can’t legally be attached to an object that isn’t a land. Fortification’s analog to the equip keyword ability is the fortify keyword ability. Rules 301.5a–e apply to Fortifications in relation to lands just as they apply to Equipment in relation to creatures, with one clarification relating to rule 301.5c: a Fortification that’s also a creature (not a land) can’t fortify a land. (See rule 702.66, “Fortify.”)


R&D's Secret Lair + Ashnod's Coupon Ashnod's Coupon has the ability:

{T}, Sacrifice Ashnod’s Coupon: Target player gets you target drink.
Errata: You pay any costs for the drink.

Meanwhile, R&D's Secret Lair says:

Play cards as written. Ignore all errata.

Ignoring the fact that R&D's Secret Lair now has errata to make its mana producing ability still work (which is baffling to think through), how does R&D's Secret Lair interact with Ashnod's Coupon?  The issue with Ashnod's Coupon is that the Coupon's errata is printed on the card.  Thus, it is errata (so you should ignore it) but is also part of the card as written (so you should use it).  Which one happens?

While R&D's Secret Lair is on the battlefield, you should not ignore the "errata" printed on Ashnod's Coupon. The Coupon's controller still pays any costs for the drink. Mark Rosewater, the official silver-bordered rules manager, published the following ruling:

kingdavidofisrael asked: Does R&D's Secret Lair remove the errata from Ashnod's Coupon, or will I still have to pay for the drink?

R&D Secret Lair contradicts itself as it asks you to play “all cards as written” and “ignore all errata”. Ashnod’s coupons errata is written on the card.
This means I can basically rule either way so I have opted to rule in favor against dumb shenanigans. (Note I’m all for regular shenanigans when playing with Un-cards.) Owner of the Ashnod’s Coupon pays for the drink.

The first linked article, authored by Mark Rosewater and published on the Wizards of the Coast official website contains the following statements:

I wear many hats at Wizards of the Coast, one of which is that of silver-bordered rules manager.
Most of the time, being silver-bordered rules manager is easy—I just get the occasional question on Twitter or my blog.
If you have a question I didn't address, you can write to me at my blog for an answer.

Therefore, Mark Rosewater's role as silver-bordered rules manager is officially sanctioned by Wizards of the Coast, and when he answers ruling questions about silver-bordered cards he is doing so in his official capacity as silver-bordered rules manager. So, his rulings on his blog have the same force of authority that the main rules manager's rulings have on the main game.


I am trying to remember the name of a card game Here's everything I can remember about it:

I believe I first found it on the Pagat website.

I think it's a trick taking game, there are 5 (perhaps less or more?) different hands of play and I think the dealer chooses one of them based on his hand and throughout the course of the game the dealer must pick each of them once, being unable to choose the same one twice.

Each player has there turn choosing one of the "hands" to play until all players have picked each hand once then the game would end.

The one other thing I remember are the rules stating something about making a chart for each hand and player and marking off when each hand gets played to keep track of what's been picked and what's left to play.

Barbu has somewhat of the ideas here but that's not the game I'm looking for.

I think the game is Trex, also known as Trix, Tricks, or Ticks.

The game is played by four players and consists of four cycles of five games each. During each cycle, a new player is the dealer. The dealer chooses in which order the five contracts are played (one in each game).

The Wikipedia article notes that it's similar to Barbu.


In 2-3 player Citadels, can your second character buy a destroyed building using Graveyard? In Citadels you have a card that permits you to buy buildings (Graveyard) destroyed by the Warlord. But the Warlord cannot buy the destroyed building. In the 2-3 players variant you select 2 characters.

Can your alter ego buy the destroyed card then?

No. Machiavelli, a.k.a. Citadels, has a purple building called Cemetary/Graveyard. The Warlord or (Condotaire) is not allowed to buy the destroyed building. You don't really have an alter ego, you have two turns during each round. You can only destroy a building during your Warlord turn, and during that turn you are the Warlord and will not be able to use the Graveyard/Cemetary ability.

Graveyard - When the Warlord destroys a district, you may pay one gold to take the destroyed district into your hand. You may not do this if you are the Warlord.
In a two- or three-player game, all players play with two characters each. The game is played normally, except that each player has two turns each round (one turn for each character). Players do not have to separate their gold or their districts between their characters, as the players still only have one city.
Each character has a special ability, also called its power. You may use your character’s
power once during your turn.


Merchants and Marauders NPC Combat Decisions I played my first game last night with my son and we had a blast even though we really didn't have a good understanding of the rules until we were almost finished.  I'm really looking forward to our next game.

In this game there are non-player captains (NPCs) that may engage in combat with player-controlled ships.  Combat decisions for the NPC are decided by the player(s) not engaged in that combat as described in the following rule.

  NPCs in combat are controlled by another player with an interest in
  doing his or her best to secure victory. If there are any issues over
  who gets to control an NPC, then the player to the left of the player
  fighting the NPC controls it.

In the first sentence, does secure victory refer to winning the game, sinking the player ship at all costs, fleeing a losing battle, or other?

For example, suppose player A is controlling an NPC in a battle vs. player B.  Player A might want to avoid sinking player B because player A wants to attack player B on their next turn to gain a glory (victory) point.  This seems like a gamey tactic that goes against the spirit of the rules.  What do you think?

This is quite a controversial question that has already been extensively discussed on BGG [1][2]. The general consensus is that you should play the NPC as if you were the NPC captain and it was your own ship, even to the detrimental of your own captain. Examples:

The NPC neither plays no politics nor it has any knowledge of the scoring board. You should try to sink it even if that means letting another player win.
Boarding "should" only occur when the NPC is "sure" that they can win. Otherwise, if you just roll for boarding without good chances, just to let the human player inflict damage or escape, then you are not trying "hard enough" to win.
Remember that the official rules state that an NPC can only try to flee if either their cannons or their crew are less than the respective stat of the human player. Therefore, it's perfectly fine to try to flee at that point, albeit should the NPC be on the verge of sinking the human player, then such a decision may be controversial.

Controlling the NPC is, overall, a delicate situation. In a single phrase, it can be summarized as do your best to sink/board the enemy ship, even if it means going against your own captain (you were planning to attack that player) or letting a third player win.


Which version of solitaire this is? Setup: single deck, all cards are laid face up in 4 rows of 13.
Goal: to get all cards into one pile.
Moves: only cards that are next to each other or 4 spaces away.

I believe you are talking about Gaps (or some variant of it).

  The cards are dealt into four rows of thirteen. The aces are removed and discarded from further play. The gaps that they leave behind are filled by cards that are the same suit and a rank higher than the card on the left of the gap. (For example, 4♣ can be placed beside 3♣.) However, any gap at the right of a King is considered dead and no card can fill it.

Quote from: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaps


Will a copy of a flashed-back Increasing Vengeance still make two copies? Increasing Vengeance says

  Copy target instant or sorcery spell you control. If Increasing Vengeance was cast from a graveyard, copy that spell twice instead. You may choose new targets for the copies.

If I flash back an Increasing Vengeance, and then I copy it (possibly with another increasing Vengeance) does the copy still make two copies, or does it only make one because spell copies aren't cast?

No, it will not make 2 copies. See the ruling on Increasing Vengeance.

  When Increasing Vengeance resolves, it creates one or two copies of a spell. You control each of the copies. Those copies are created on the stack, so they're not "cast." Abilities that trigger when a player casts a spell won't trigger. The copies will then resolve like normal spells, after players get a chance to cast spells and activate abilities.

The copies were not cast from the graveyard, so the replacement effect doesn't apply.


Dominion Prosperity play out treasures I have a question regarding the dominion extension prosperity, especially the new treasure-cards
Venture: "When you play this, reveal cards from your deck until you reveal a Treasure. Discard the other cards. Play that Treasure"
I really don't understand these instructions, let me explain how I understand the buy-phase

I take a card from the stack, e.g. a market for 5 money
I pay the money for the card, e.g. and play out a venture and two silvers, other treasure-cards on my hand I ignore.

Now the venture-card doesn't make any sense, as well as most of the other treasure cards in the expansion. If I have already bought a card, why do I need the venture? Am I right that this card only makes sense, if you have more than 1 buy?
Or am I completely wrong about how the buy-phase works. My SO thinks that you first play out all the treasure-cards in your hand and then take a card from the stack .... but what if I have e.g. 10 idols ("When you play this, if you then have an odd number of Idols in play, receive a Boon; if an even number, each other player gains a Curse.") and only buy a silver from it, does my opponent have to take a curse (because I have 10 idols) or do I get a boon (because I have paid 3 of them to buy a silver)?

You are playing the buy phase incorrectly.
In the buy phase, you always play all of your treasure cards, one at a time, before you buy any card. In fact, you are not allowed to play any more treasure cards after you buy a card.
You never play specific treasure cards to buy specific cards. Don't think of treasures as the currency you use to buy cards. Rather, treasure cards are just cards like action cards are, except that you play them in your buy phase rather than in your action phase. When you play a Silver, it produces $2, just like how playing a Festival produces $2. After you have played all of your treasures, you will have some total amount of money available, produced by all the actions and treasures that you have played. Then you proceed to spend that money on cards you want to buy.
So when you play Venture, you first get $1 added to your pool of money, and then you reveal cards until you reveal another treasure card and play that as well.
If you play 3 Idols, you play them one at a time and fully deal with each Idol when you play it. So the first one will give you a boon, the second one will give your opponents a curse, and the third one will give you another boon. Only after you are done playing all of your treasures and dealing with all of their effects do you buy cards. The treasure cards and the instructions on them never care if you actually buy anything. You can play a bunch of Idols just for the extra benefit and then never buy a card.
From the base-game rulebook (second edition):

First you can play any number of Treasure cards from your hand, in any order. Treasure cards say "Treasure" on the bottom and have a yellow banner. You play one by moving it to the "in play"
area; you probably will not announce your Treasures, though you can if you want. The Treasures have no text, just a big coin with a number on it. You get that many coins to spend this turn - one coin for a Copper, two for a Silver, three for a Gold, indicated as $1, $2, $3. The amount is also in the corners at the top of Treasures. You do not have to play every Treasure in your hand (but only get $ this turn for the Treasures you play).

Then, you can buy one card, costing as much as you have or less.

You cannot go back and play more Treasures after buying a card; first play Treasures, then buy.

The treasure cards in Prosperity follow the same rules as the treasure cards in the base game; it's just that in the base game; no treasure cards have effects other than producing some amount of money.


What effects can modify mana abilities and be affected by Mana Relfection and Nyxbloom Ancient? Considering the following:

Mana abilities come in two forms, Activated and Triggered
Nyxbloom Ancient/Mana Reflection only works with Activated abilities of a permanent being tapped
Triggered abilities like Utopia Sprawl and Nikya of the Old Ways don't work with this ability.
Abilities that tap other permanents like Urza, Lord High Artificer or Heritage Druid are mana abilities that tap permanents but do not get multiplied with Nyxbloom Ancient*
Effects like Liliana of the Dark Realms making swamps tap for BBBB get multiplied by Nyxbloom Ancient add another mana ability but do not modify the abilities the land has.

Similar to the way Winding Constrictor does X counters + 1, versus Doubling Season X * 2, are there any effects that modify the amount of mana produced by a source, aside from the mentioned Nyxbloom Ancient and Mana Relfection?

Based off this question.

Mana Reflection and Nyxbloom Ancient are the only cards that increase the amount of mana produced by other mana abilities. Some cards decrease the amount of mana produced.

In order for one card to modify the result of an ability on another card, it would need to use a replacement effect, which would contain the word "instead". So, we can look for cards with this effect by searching for cards with the words "mana", "produce", and "instead". Of the cards we find there, only Mana Reflection and Nyxbloom Ancient increase the amount of mana produced, and Contamination and Damping Sphere decrease the amount of mana produced, and change its type.


Digging without cards Can someone dig without any books of knowledge using only shovels (therefore taking out only a few tokens)? If not, why?

You cannot dig unless you have at least 1 point of specialized knowledge in that region. From the rules, page 5:

  If the player fulfills the requisites below, he can execute an excavation.

  The minimum requirement

    • The player has a valid excavation permission for the area.

    • The player has at least 1 point of specialized knowledge for the excavation area, either from a researcher card or found item.


How does the bloodstone work? I just lost a game with the villain using the bloodstone on everyone else's turn as well as there own to power up their rolls. How is that card supposed to be used. It says once per turn but doesn't specify the players turn or not.

Assuming bloodstone is an item or omen, the traitor used this incorrectly. Items are explicitly listed as being usable “once during your turn”. Some confusion may arise from the fact that later in that same section (Rulebook, page 11), it lists the five potential things that you can do with an item (use, trade, drop, steal, pick up), only one of which you can do a turn. While this does not explicitly state your turn, it can be inferred from the section.  Also, on page 6, “Use item and omen cards” is listed under a heading of “ON YOUR TURN...”.

I could not find the rules for the Widow's Walk expansion online, but I don't recall them changing this aspect of item use.


Identify a card game where you need to play a higher card or pickup the discard pile? The first time I played was elementary and no one remembered the name so we've called it "the game with no name" for years.
Setup: The game starts with three cards dealt to each player, face down on the table, these will be the final cards a player uses. Then five cards to each players hand.
Play: The lowest card goes first, players draw to always have 5 cards in their hand, until the draw pile is empty. Players go around the table discarding higher cards or picking up the discard pile when they can't play. After the discard pile is empty, a player wins when they play their three cards on the table.
Special cards: 2's reset the discard pile, Aces are the highest, 10s or four of the same card in a row "blow up" the pile and those cards are out of play for the rest of the game.

I believe you are describing Shithead, or one of its MANY variants.
I played this at school in 1990's and when I went to University people from different places had the numbers special powers have slightly different names.  But what I played broadly matches your description.  As stated in the wikipedia link the game does have many regional variations. I am describing this from UK.
In the version of Shithead I played there were 3 cards face down to each player.  3 face up on those cards and players could then swap those face up cards with ones in their hand.  In the version I played all cards were dealt out and sometimes we played with multiple decks in a large group.
In the version I played 2's reset the deck.  7's were transparent and could be played on anything and 10s 'burnt' the stack removing them from the game.
Once a player had emptied their hand they would play with the 3 face up cards and then finally the 3 face down cards were played blind on a players turn.


Do Token Creatures go to the graveyard? Does a token creature when it dies satisfy the criteria of Fresh Meat? Text of card as follows:

  Create a 3/3 green Beast creature token for each creature put into your graveyard from the battlefield this turn.

Yes. Per Comprehensive Rules:

  110.5e A token is subject to anything that affects permanents in general or that affects the token’s card type or subtype. (...)

So the token is put in the graveyard like other creatures. There is one difference, but this doesn't matter for Fresh Meat:

  110.5f A token that’s in a zone other than the battlefield ceases to exist. (...) (Note that if a token changes zones, applicable triggered abilities will trigger before the token ceases to exist.)

It won't be in the graveyard at the time Fresh Meat resolves, but it will still count as a creature put into your graveyard.


"Diplomacy" rule clarification, unit under attack Referring to the original game.

If a unit is under attack from Province X, can it still interfere with the actions of a unit on Province Y?

For example:

English fleet unit on "English Channel" ordered to convoy an army unit
French fleet unit on "Mid Atlantic Ocean" ordered to move to "English Channel"
English fleet unit on "Irish Sea" ordered to move to "Mid Atlantic Ocean"

I think that the order #3 should keep the fleet unit at "Mid Atlantic Ocean" busy in the stand off and thus not able to interfere with the convoy. I've been told this is not the case but we could not find verification in the rule book. Can someone please explain?

Here is an image of the Diplomacy board if it helps:

All good. Only way to disrupt a convoy is to dislodge the convoying fleet unit. So even if order #3 was not present, the convoy action would proceed


When does a sacrifice on entering the battlefield happen? My opponent plays Vexing Devil which states:

  When Vexing Devil enters the battlefield, any opponent may have it deal 4 damage to him or her. If a player does, sacrifice Vexing Devil.

When does this sacrifice happen? Is he able to play Collateral Damage on the Vexing Devil before the sacrifice resolves? My current interpretation is that the sacrifice resolves instantly on entering the battlefield so the creature is never there to use Collateral Damage on, but we wanted to verify that this was correct.

You do have a chance to cast Collateral Damage. Vexing Devil's ability is a triggered ability, so the ability goes on the stack when the creature enters the battlefield, and you can respond to it before it resolves. You can tell that it's a triggered ability by rule 603.1:

  Triggered abilities have a trigger condition and an effect. They are written as "[Trigger condition], [effect]," and begin with the word "when," "whenever," or "at." They can also be expressed as "[When/Whenever/At] [trigger event], [effect]."

Here's how it plays out:

You cast Vexing Devil.
Vexing Devil resolves and enters the battlefield. Its ability triggers and goes on the stack.
You cast Collateral Damage and sacrifice Vexing Devil.
Collateral Damage resolves, and deals 3 damage to something.
Vexing Devil's ability resolves. At this point, your opponent can choose whether or not to take the 4 damage. If they do choose to take the damage, you would sacrifice the Vexing Devil, but it is already dead.

Note that there is no time to respond during step 5. Once an opponent chooses to take damage, the damage is dealt and you make the sacrifice without doing anything in between.


Under which controller does a stolen permanent come into play after being exiled? Here's what I did on MTG Arena:

Opponent exiles my The Immortal Sun with Hostage Taker, then plays it.
On my turn, I cast Ixalan's Binding targeting Immortal Sun, and then Demystify my own Ixalan's Binding. The Immortal Sun then entered the battlefield under my control.

Question 1: I thought it might work, that's why I tried it, but I don't understand why it worked. I read the rulings of Ixalan's Binding, and couldn't find something that could explain why it returned from exile under its owner's control, and not under the last controller's control. Can anyone explain the rulings behind this?

Question 2: Would flickering a stolen permanent work the same?

Immortal Sun enters the battlefield under your control because Ixalan's Binding creates a special one-shot effect that has its own rules treatment. When flickering an object as a regular one-shot effect, its subsequent controller depends on the card used to flicker; both "you", the controller of the effect, and "the permanent's owner" are possible, and are always specified by the card.
Ixalan's Binding doesn't specify under whose control the permanent returns to the battlefield, so by default it's the owner of the exiled permanent, namely you:

610.3. Some one-shot effects cause an object to change zones “until” a specified event occurs. A second one-shot effect is created immediately after the specified event. This second one-shot effect returns the object to its previous zone.
610.3b An object returned to the battlefield this way returns under its owner’s control unless otherwise specified.

For Flicker effects, it depends on the specific card/effect that does the flickering, both variants are possible: you, or the owner, who may or may not be you


Token creator gets countered? When a creature that produces tokens is countered, does it still produce tokens?  I.e. if  Wurmcoil Engine is countered before it hits the battlefield, does it still produce tokens when it goes into the graveyard?

It depends on the trigger condition.

Wurmcoil Engine triggers when it dies. Dies means something very specific in Magic: the Gathering:

  700.4. The term dies means “is put into a graveyard from the battlefield.”

If Wurmcoil Engine is countered, it goes straight from the stack to the graveyard, bypassing the battlefield entirely.

  701.5a To counter a spell or ability means to cancel it, removing it from the stack. It doesn’t resolve and none of its effects occur. A countered spell is put into its owner’s graveyard.

If the trigger condition were different, like "Whenever Wurmcoil Engine gets countered, [...]" or "Whenever Wurmcoil Engine is put into the graveyard, [...]" then it would trigger.

A commentor helped me find a creature that would still give you a token even if it were countered. Desolation Twin triggers when you cast the spell. Once triggered, the trigger exists independently of the actual spell. Even if Desolation Twin gets countered, the trigger will still resolve, and you will still get a token.


Evaluating Agricola as a 2 player game: how long would it take, how competitive is it, complexity, etc. I've been thinking about getting Agricola for a while, primarily due to how much the gaming world seems to love it. But I want to make absolutely sure that the investment will be worth it. Currently my Mom and I end up playing games together fairly frequently, just the 2 of us. Usually we play Dominion, Carcassone, or Blokus. When I saw it ranked highly in this thread for 2-, I realized that even if all of my other friends end up hating it, I'll still get to play with 2 people fairly often, making it well worth the money.

Here are the main questions I'd like to pose:

Playing time. I've heard 1/2 hour per player from a wide variety of sources. Is this true? I don't care if our first several games take longer, but once we've played it 5+ times, will we be able to get through a game in an hour or less without rushing?

Aggressiveness. Take this scale:

No aggression. You win by building yourself up faster than your opponent and rarely if ever do something that hurts them. Each turn you try to figure out what helps you the most. (Group Solitaire, Dominion with no attack cards)
Occasional aggression. You're trying to build yourself up, but putting down your opponent is often a good idea as well. You have to compromise between building yourself up and hurting your opponents.  (Dominion with attack cards, Puerto Rico, Citadels)
Frequent aggression. You're often trying to find out how to hurt your opponents as badly as possible, but it's not the entire goal of the game. Some fighting over resources. (Settlers of Catan, Carcasonne)
Purely Aggression. The only way to win is by hurting your opponent. Each turn you try to figure out how to put your opponent in the worst position possible. (Chess, Risk)

Where do you think Agricola ranks on this scale? How 'aggressive' do you need to be to win?

Complexity.

Complexity of rules scale:

blokus
Ticket To Ride, Bohnanza
Carcassone, Settlers
Pandemic, Diplomacy
Puerto Rico
Arkham Horror

Complexity of strategy scale:

Go Fish
Ticket To Ride, Bohnanza
Carcassone, Settlers
Dominion, Puerto Rico
Chess, Go

Where does Agricola rank on each of these? I know the scales aren't great, so feel more than free to add your own opinions and comments.

Finally, what's your overall experience with Agricola as a 2-player game? Do you think it will work well for my Mom and I? Thanks!!! :D

Agricola is an excellent two-player game. In fact, I find that I prefer the two player version of the game to higher numbers of players. I originally bought the game so I would have something less aggressive to play with my wife, and it works brilliantly for that purpose, both because of the game mechanics and because the theme is quite peaceful - Agricola is about building, not destroying or dominating.

It does take about 30 minutes per player, so yes, around an hour to play once you've got the hang of it is a reasonable estimate.

Agricola would probably be 'occasional aggression' on your scale. You are mostly concerned with improving your own farm, but there's a strong strategic element where you consider what actions you need to perform before your opponent. Usually it's more about making sure you get what you want, rather than deliberately trying to make your opponent's game harder, but you can definitely play it several ways. I know one friend who likes to try and deny animals to the other players, and constantly picks them up, even when he doesn't need them. What you tend to find though is that this type of behaviour is sub-optimal for your own game. In other words, if you concentrate on making your opponent's lives harder, you will have a tougher game yourself, because in general you will make less productive actions.

Agricola is quite a complex game, if you play the full rules with the occupations and minor improvement cards. Your first few games will probably be quite overwhelming. I would rate it as a 5 on your scale without the cards, 6 with. It's as complicated as Arkham Horror, but in a different way. The rules are much more precise, in my opinion, so I found once I'd learnt the game I very rarely have to actually look anything up.

Agricola is a pretty deep game. There are many different strategies, and one of the best features is that the random cards you draw each game often mean you are incentivised to play a strategy other than your preferred one. I have played Agricola hundreds of times, and it's one of the very few games in my collection that I don't really get bored with. It's much more strategic than Carcassonne or Settlers of Catan. However, no game I know is as deep as chess, so I guess that makes it a 4 on your scale.

Summary: If you like interesting board games, I don't see how you could not like this. There's a reason everyone loves Agricola. And for the amount of replayability this game holds, I think it is excellent value for money.


WH/40k - The age-old instant death and multiwound models question I'm asking this because I can't find an up-to-date and credible source of information on the subject (since it has apparently changed at least once over the years). My question is, when does instant death take place during wound allocation in close combat (and shooting for that matter)? Do you allocate wounds and THEN apply instant death (meaning some of it could potentially be wasted), or do you allocate a wound, apply instant death, then allocate another and apply instant death, and so on?

For example, say we have a 3 Centurions in CC with a Bloodthirster. The BT scores three wounds, one of which being ID. Do we, (a) apply the ID wound to the first Centurion, apply the ID rule and remove him, then apply the next two wounds to the second Centurion and remove him too, or (b) apply the ID wound and another wound to the first Centurion and remove him (essentially wasting the ID) then apply the third wound to the second Centurion, leaving him alive?

The last time I played, years ago, you would choose path "b" and waste the ID. But now I'm being challenged and can't find up-to-date evidence to support my argument.

6th edition

When rolling with a weapon with the instant death rule, the wound itself delivers instant death.  The rulebook advises:

  Remember to use different coloured dice or otherwise distinguish
  between the Wounds that have different special rules attached to them
  (like those inflicting Instant Death....)  (p. 25)

In short, since the die itself is the vehicle for Instant Death, you would be able to (in order to maximize your damage), apply your Instant Death wound first (assuming compliance with normal wound allocation rules), and allow all additional wounds to be distributed to other enemies.

  If there is more than one eligible candidate, the player controlling the
  models being attacked chooses which model it is allocated to. (p. 25)

7th edition

Follow the above rules, except when dealing with Gargantuan creatures:

  UNSTOPPABLE

  Any attack that normally inflicts Instant Death or says that the
  target model is removed from play inflicts D3 Wounds on a Gargantuan
  Creature or Flying Gargantuan Creature instead

Other notes:

Instant Death effect is voided by the Eternal Warrior special rule; when this occurs, only the -1 wound applies, but not the "reduce to 0 wounds and remove from play".

In short, you can choose your path 'a', which is well within your rights and is supported by both rulebook editions.


In Settlers of Catan, is there a transition/evolution between "building" and "development" phases of the game? By "building," I refer to those activities such as roads and settlements that are heavy on wood and brick requirements.

By "development," I refer to those activities that require the other three commodities, ore, grain, and wool, such as buying cities and development cards.

Is it possible to be "too good" at the building phase of the game, to the detriment of the development phase of the game? Conversely is it possible to be so focused on development that you fall critically behind in building?

How do you avoid these pitfalls? Is there a transition/balance between building and development, and if so, how do you manage it?

It depends

In general, the first few rounds are focused on expanding to a new settlement or two. You start the game with two free roads, but to build a new settlement you need to be a minimum of a hex vertices away. If don't expand your road and build a settlement, these free roads are wasted. It isn't unusual to build roads towards the Harbors so you have favorable trades.

It is possible to win the game by not expanding at all though, although this is rare. With good access to Rock, Grain, and Wool you can buy Development cards and build Cities. There are 5 yellow Victory Point cards and 2 bonus points for the Largest army. Those combined with your starting two Settlements, one of which needs to be upgraded to a City is sufficient to win the game. The reverse is not true, since you can only receive 5 Settlements and a bonus 2 for the Longest Road, you would be 3 points short of winning.


How should the "and/or" text of a card be interpreted? How should the "and/or" text of a card be interpreted? For example on a card like Nahiri's Wrath the text reads:

  Nahiri's Wrath deals damage equal to the total converted mana cost of the discarded cards to each of up to X target creatures and/or planeswalkers.

For the remainder of this question, let's fix X at 2 to keep things simple.

Should the "and/or" be interpreted such that the effect is applied to a combination of targets the player chooses. That is to say for Nahiri's Wrath the player could perform one of the following options:

Nahiri's Wrath deals damage to each of two target creatures.
Nahiri's Wrath deals damage to each of two target planeswalkers.
Nahiri's Wrath deals damage to each of one target creature and one target planeswalker.

Or should the card's effect be expanded and applied to both sides of the "and/or". With this interpretation the player would have to the following two options when playing Nahiri's Wrath:

Nahiri's Wrath deals damage to each of X target creatures and Nahiri's Wrath deals damage to each of X target planeswalkers
Nahiri's Wrath deals damage to each of X target creatures or Nahiri's Wrath deals damage to each of X target planeswalkers

The confusion stems from comments on the Pinnacle of Rage's discussion page (which was formerly formerly worded using the same phrasing) where some commenters have said things like:

  So this lets you do a total of 12 damage? 3 each to 2 target creatures AND 3 each to 2 target players, one of which could be a planeswalker? That's how the "and/or" works, right? You can choose. Otherwise it would just be "or"...

You must choose X different[1] targets, and the targets can be creatures and/or planeswalkers. With X=2,

You can target two different creatures,
You can target two different planeswalkers, or
You can target a creature and a different permanent that's a planeswalker.

This is confirmed by a ruling for Pinnacle of Rage: "You must choose two legal targets to cast Pinnacle of Rage." (The ruling dates back to when Pinnacle of Rage still used the same wording about which you are asking.)

Notes:

  114.3. The same target can’t be chosen multiple times for any one instance of the word “target” on a spell or ability. [...]