Is there a traditional card game with similar rules to "Lost Cities"? It's often pointed out that the excellent Reiner Knizia card game, Lost Cities, could be played with a standard deck of cards if there were one extra suit.  Thinking about the simplicity and elegance of the rules made me wonder if there might exist a traditional card game with similar mechanics but just four suits/cities?  (I don't know many traditional card games, so I'm not even sure if there's a broad category that Lost Cities might fall into.)

I don't think I've ever heard of such card game. To me it's pretty clear that Lost Cities were developed and designed using standard card deck, but I don't suspect it's actually based on some truly similar traditional card game. Maybe the basic idea was to design a 2-player game with simple rules, something a little like Solitaire, but competetive, with  piles shared between the players?

I heard Lost Cities being described as 2 player Solitaire with an extra portion of suspense - source. If there was more similar game to Lost Cities, maybe such descriptions would mention it.

I guess this isn't the answer you were looking for, although I can't give you any game title that would have the feel of Lost Cities. This is the interview with Reiner Knizia in which he mentions origins of Lost Cities. You also may want to take a look at this interview and this one.

  It started out as a two-player card game. I then tried to develop it into a larger game that would accommodate between two and four players. In the end, I came to the conclusion that I wanted to leave it as I originally had it [as a two player game]. When I start out with a game, it is usually unclear where I will end up with it. If you build up internal obstacles and say "this has to be a card game" or "this has to be a tile-laying game" then you restrict yourself. I think you need to do the game justice -- you need to let it develop. Lost Cities developed into a two-player game: it is clean, it is pure, it is simple, it is challenging, and it is fun.

You might also try checking Patience category on pagat.com


Why is Morph not considered an ability? Reading FAQs concerning Muraganda Petroglyphs and morph cards, a face down morph creature will get the +2/+2 bonus from Muraganda Petroglyphs.

What I don't understand is why. Since the face down creature gets +2/+2 form the glyphs, that implies the creature has no abilities. Yet the creature can be turned face up by its morph cost. If that is not an ability, what is it exactly?

The face down morph cards don't have an ability whose effect turns the card face-up. Instead, the rules allow you to turn them face-up.

  702.36d If you have priority, you may turn a face-down permanent you control face up. This is a special action; it doesn’t use the stack (see rule 115). To do this, show all players what the permanent’s morph cost would be if it were face up, pay that cost, then turn the permanent face up. (If the permanent wouldn’t have a morph cost if it were face up, it can’t be turned face up this way.) The morph effect on it ends, and it regains its normal characteristics. Any abilities relating to the permanent entering the battlefield don’t trigger when it’s turned face up and don’t have any effect, because the permanent has already entered the battlefield.


What is the penalty for lying about a face-down card? Let's say someone deliberately casts a sorcery card as a face-down morph creature hoping to win the game with it (not knowing that at some point in time it will always be revealed). What is the penalty for it at the different Rules Enforcement Levels (REL)?

Cheating is not tolerated at any REL and must always result in disqualification.
The current Rules Enforcement Levels (REL) are Regular, Competitive, and Professional.
The Tournament rules state about cheating:

5.1 Cheating
Cheating will not be tolerated. The Head Judge reviews all cheating allegations, and if he or she believes that a player has cheated, he or she will issue the appropriate penalty based on the Infraction Procedure Guide or Judging at Regular REL document. All disqualifications are subject to DCI review and further penalties may be assessed.

The rules for Judging at Regular REL state:

Serious Problems
Certain actions will not be tolerated under any circumstances. Every effort should be made to educate players before and during events; however, ignorance is not an acceptable defence of these actions. Any player engaging in the following must be removed from your event and, at the Organizer's discretion, removed from the venue entirely:

Aggressive, violent or abusive behavior (physical or verbal).

Intentionally and knowingly breaking or letting an opponent break game or tournament rules, or lying. (“Bluffing” about cards opponents can't normally see is permitted).

Determining match outcomes by incentives, coercion, or outside-the-game methods, or gambling on any part of a tournament.

Theft (including things like replacing a card in a draft with one from a player’s binder).

Removing players in this way is called a Disqualification, and we must always try to educate our players on why these actions are unacceptable. Also let the player know that while your decision is final, the Judge Program would still like to hear his or her side of the story. You can contact your local Regional Coordinator, high level Judge, or WPN Representative to guide you through the process of a Disqualification.

The Infraction Procedure Guide is used for penalties at Competitive and Professional REL and states:

4.8. Unsporting Conduct — Cheating
Definition
A person breaks a rule defined by the tournament documents, lies to a tournament official, or notices an offense committed in his or her (or a teammate's) match and does not call attention to it.
Additionally, the offense must meet the following criteria for it to be considered Cheating:

The player must be attempting to gain advantage from his or her action.

The player must be aware that he or she is doing something illegal.

If all criteria are not met, the offense is not Cheating and should be handled by a different infraction. Cheating will often appear on the surface as a Game Play Error or Tournament Error, and must be investigated by the judge to make a determination of intent and awareness.
Penalty: Disqualification


Catalyst Field third effect I have some questions regarding Catalyst Field's third effect. It reads "Once per turn: You can target 1 card your opponent controls; banish 1 Gemini monster you control, that is treated as an Effect Monster and has gained its effects, until your opponent's End Phase, and if you do, destroy that card."

The questions would be:

1) At what point does my opponent's card get destroyed? When I banish the Gemini monster or when it returns at the end phase of my opponent's turn?

2) If my monster is banished by this effect and my opponent destroys Catalyst Field while the monster is banished, will it come back at the end phase or will it stay banished?

3) The banishing of the Gemini monster is a cost? For instance, if my opponent activates something that would negate the activation of a spell effect (not card) in response to the banishing effect of catalyst field, would my monster get banished anyway (as a cost)? Or would negating the activation of the effect stop the banishing of my monster altogether?

I will answer your questions in order,

1) At what point does my opponent's card get destroyed? When I banish the Gemini monster or when it returns at the end phase of my opponent's turn?

It will be destroyed after you banish your card as the banish until your opponents end phase is a condition applied to the effect, and then the destruction happens in the effect resolution.

2) If my monster is banished by this effect and my opponent destroys Catalyst Field while the monster is banished, will it come back at the end phase or will it stay banished?

If Catalyst Field is destroyed while your monster is banished yes it will still come back providing there is an available zone for it to return to as I stated above it is a condition of the effect. This is similar to PSY-FrameLord Omega who banishes himself and an opponents card, providing there is an available zone for him to return to he will return.

  Once per turn, during the Main Phase (Quick Effect): You can banish
  both this face-up card from the field and 1 random card from your
  opponent's hand, face-up, until your next Standby Phase. Once per
  turn, during your opponent's Standby Phase: You can target 1 banished
  card; return it to the GY. If this card is in your GY: You can target
  1 other card in the GY; shuffle both that card and this card from the
  GY into the Deck.

3) The banishing of the gemini monster is a cost? For instance, if my opponent activates something that would negate the activation of a spell effect (not card) in response to the banishing effect of catalyst field, would my monster get banished anyway (as a cost)? Or would negating the activation of the effect stop the banishing of my monster altogether?

Banishing a gemini is not cost for this effect, in yu-gi-oh cost is indicated by a semi colon (;) so in this instance the cost is to target an opponents monster, then if the effect is allowed you will be able to banish your monster and destroy your opponent's. Cost in yu-gi-oh cannot be negated as it happens before the effect attempts to activate it is what needs to happen first. Indicated by a popular scenario in the current game with Pot of Desires and Ash Blossom & Joyous Spring
 .

Pot of Desires.

  Banish 10 cards from the top of your Deck, face-down; draw 2 cards.
  You can only activate 1 "Pot of Desires" per turn.

Ash Blossom

  When a card or effect is activated that includes any of these effects
  (Quick Effect): You can discard this card; negate that effect.

  Add a card from the Deck to the hand.
  Special Summon from the Deck.
  Send a card from the Deck to the GY. You can only use this effect of "Ash Blossom & Joyous Spring" once per turn.

Pot of desires can be activated and then the player performs to action up to the semicolon which in this case is Banish 10 cards from the top of your Deck, face-down; then your opponent has the opportunity to respond where they will discard Ash Blossom which negates the rest of the effect to draw two cards, so in this scenario the turn player has lost 10 cards from their deck to gain no cards back as the effect was negated.


What are the causes (and cures) for bridge experts' mistakes? As an amateur, I will probably make (numerous) mistakes, through ignorance or lack of technical knowledge. Experts, by definition, don't have this problem. Yet bridge books that I have read report that even an expert will likely make a mistake or two during a session of bridge.

Why is that? Is it a fatigue/stamina issue after counting too many hands? Is it a matter of it being easier to "know better" after the fact? Is it because even experts can't calculate probabilities in real time in unfamiliar situations, so they choose a (slightly) inferior line of play?

And what about cures? I would guess that better physical conditioning might fix some stamina issues. And perhaps "drilling," particularly in areas of known weakness might make it easier to come up with the right answers.

Have I identified the most serious causes and cures of expert mistakes, or are there some that I have missed?

First, let's be clear on terms - no world class player makes the mistakes that you or I make: such as failing to count the hand or forgetting last week's amendment to our bidding system. The mistakes they make are far more subtle, and would be regarded as merely second-best actions by you or I, if we were even capable of analyzing the best action.

The bidding mistakes by experts are of forgetting a conversation multiple years earlier about the particular situation that has again come up, for only the second time in our long partnership. They are failing to draw the sub-sub-sub inference from the failure of an opponent to act in the bidding.

That being said, ultimately the source of all errors is human imperfection - and as we all are imperfect in different ways, the errors of world class bridge players arise from different imperfections. Barry Crane was infamous for refusing to allow many of his partners to eat between sessions, lest an overfull stomach interfere with clear thought in the first rounds afterwards; yet others of his partners regularly enjoyed between-session dinners as his partner.

Eddie Kantar's mis-defence on board 92 of the 96 board final in the 1975 Bermuda Bowl is an example of such unique human imperfection: failing to false card the CK from KT doubleton as West, when dummy comes down in the North with CAQ. You or I would likely never even note that the falsecard will induce a strong declarer to go down, or only long after the session with pen and paper in hand.


Uno Flip - What color do you play when a person flips? I just bought a new Uno called Uno-Flip and in this game, we have a Light Side and a Dark Side. When we use one of the Flip Cards, we have to (according to rulebook)

  When you play this card, everything flips from the Light Side to the Dark Side (or vice versa). Once the Flip card has been played, flip over the Discard Pile (the card just played will now be on the bottom), then the Draw Pile, then everyone's hands must flip to the other side. This new side will remain in play until another Flip card is played, changing it again. This card may only be played on a matching color or on another Flip Card.

Think of this scenario, when we start the game, we put a card in the Discard Pile from the Draw Pile. On the dark side of this card (light side starts face-up) it is a teal 5.
After a couple of rounds someone plays the Flip Card. We flip the Discard Pile and the teal 5 on the dark side is face up.

My Question

What should our next card be based on?
The teal 5 or the yellow Flip Card?

https://service.mattel.com/instruction_sheets/GDR44-English.pdf

  Whether playing the Light Side or the Dark Side, on your turn, you must match a card from your hand to the card on the top of the DISCARD pile, either by number, color or symbol (symbols represent Action Cards; see FUNCTIONS OF ACTION CARDS).

The teal 5 is on top of the DISCARD pile, therefore the next play should be on the teal 5.


How to handle dummy's revoke due to a hidden card? A final bid of 3 spades is made. The opponent leads a club and dummy lays down a hand showing no diamonds. Declarer wins the lead trick in hand and leads a diamond  trumping it in dummy. Declarer then returns to hand and leads a second diamond trumping again. He then plays a club from dummy and in moving it reveals a hidden diamond. Since there is no penalty if declarer revokes, how is this managed?

I am not a TD, but I am a qualified Club Director, and this situation is actually a fairly clear one. Under the Laws of Duplicate Bridge , laws 61-64 govern revokes. It is a common misunderstanding that there is no penalty if the dummy revokes. There is no automatic adjustment in such cases, but the Director should attempt to restore equity, and a proper rectification should be made.
I quote only the relevant sections of the laws below, for reasons of space. Please see the full laws linked above (2017 version).
Law 61 A defines revokes:

Failure to follow suit in accordance with Law 44 or failure to lead or play, when able, a card or suit required by law or specified by an opponent when exercising an option in rectification of an irregularity, constitutes a revoke.

The situation described is indeed a revoke.
Law 63 A provides:

A revoke becomes established:

when the offender or his partner leads or plays to the following trick (any such play, legal or illegal, establishes the revoke).
when the offender or his partner names or otherwise designates a card to be played to the following trick.
when a member of the offending side makes a claim or concession of tricks.

The revoke described in the question has indeed become established.
Law 64 B provides:

There is no automatic trick adjustment following an established revoke (but see Law 64C) if: ...

the revoke was made in failing to play a penalty card or any card belonging to dummy.

Law 64 C provides:

When, after any established revoke, including those not subject to trick adjustment, the Director deems that the non-offending side is insufficiently compensated by this Law for the damage caused, he shall assign an adjusted score (emphasis added)

Such an ADJUSTED score would be appropriate and required in the case described.
Law 12 A provides:

On the application of a player within the period established under Law 92B or on his own initiative the Director may award an adjusted score when these Laws empower him to do so.

The Director may award an adjusted score in favor of a non-offending contestant when
he judges that these Laws do not prescribe a rectification for the particular type of
violation committed.
The Director awards an artificial adjusted score if no rectification can be made that will permit normal play of the board (see C2 below).
The Director may award an adjusted score if there has been an incorrect rectification of an irregularity.

Law 12 B provides:

The objective of score adjustment is to redress damage to a non-offending side and to take away any advantage gained by an offending side through its infraction. Damage exists
when, because of an infraction, an innocent side obtains a table result less favorable than would have been the expectation had the infraction not occurred.

Law 12 C1 provides:

(a) When after an irregularity the Director is empowered by these laws to adjust a score and is able to award an assigned adjusted score, he does so. Such a score replaces the score obtained in play.

(b) The Director in awarding an assigned adjusted score should seek to recover as
nearly as possible the probable outcome of the board had the infraction not occurred.

(c) An assigned adjusted score may be weighted to reflect the probabilities of
a number of potential results, but only outcomes that could have been achieved in
a legal manner may be included.

(d) If the possibilities are numerous or not obvious, the Director may award an artificial adjusted score (see C2 below).

and 12C2(a) says:

When owing to an irregularity no result can be obtained [see also C1(d)], the
Director awards an artificial adjusted score according to responsibility for the
irregularity: average minus (at most 40% of the available matchpoints in pairs) to a
contestant directly at fault, average (50% in pairs) to a contestant only partly at fault, and average plus (at least 60% in pairs) to a contestant in no way at fault.

The director could attempt to go back to trick 2 and determine what would have happened had the revoke not occurred. Presumably the declaring side would have then lost trick 2. But it may not be at all obvious what the defense would have led or how the declarer would have played on such a lead. If the declarer has the remaining winners such that they can be cashed no matter what the defense does, the director could simply transfer trick 2 to the defense. But if there is significant uncertainty about the result in such a case law 12 C (1) (d) would most likely be applied, and the director would assign an artificial adjusted score.
Both sides have a degree of responsibility for the dummy, but the declaring side has the primary responsibility. Specifically, under Law 41 D the dummy player is responsible for properly displaying the dummy's hand. I would, in such a case, assign the declaring side an average minus, but assign the defense an average, not an average plus. There is an argument for giving both sides average, and for giving the defense average plus, but I think the defense is at least "partly at fault" here. So that would be my ruling on the facts stated above, if the outcome with the diamond loser were not rather clear-cut.


Can you re-equip equipment to the same creature? Murderer's Axe has an equip cost: discard a card, and since madness runs off discarding, this can be rather useful.
Can an equipment card be re-equipped to the same creature that already has it equipped?

Yes, you can choose the currently equipped creature to target with the equip ability since it doesn't require the target to be a different creature.

Note that if you have other cards that care about things becoming (un)equipped or (un)attached they will not trigger since the equipment never actually stops being equipped, and it doesn't gain a new timestamp.

  702.6a Equip is an activated ability of Equipment cards. “Equip [cost]” means “[Cost]: Attach this permanent to target creature you control. Activate this ability only any time you could cast a sorcery.”


For Flashpoint... can you "share" the victim POI marker? Like, lets say for example,
Orange firefighter had to end their turn with a victim POI marker right in front of the door leading to the outside. The player going next has their yellow firefighter right outside that door.
O | y  <- makeshift diagram where 0 is orange and y is the yellow one that is outside the building.

Can the yellow firefighter move into the building on the square with the orange firefighter, take the victim POI marker and move back outside with the POI marker?

Yes.

You can consider the cost in dealing with victims having to do with moving them, not so much carrying and holding onto them.  So if one firefighter moves a victim to square, there is no cost for picking up or dropping the victim, simply a cost to transfer the victim from one location to another.  With this in mind, you can walk up to a square where a firefighter has just moved a victim and continue to move that victim into a different square, assuming you still have enough action points to bear the load.


Can starbases be pinned? Typical situation: you fly into an enemy sector and pin some ships there with your ships. Now the enemy builds some starbases to pin your ship and let them be pinned so he can move his ships out of the sector (and into yours). Is this legal?

Starbases are classified as "Ships" (see page 6 of the manual), and despite their lack of a drive they work exactly like any other Ship as far as the game mechanics are concerned.  This would include being able to pin, or be pinned by, opposing Ships. (see also this response by one of the game designers to a related question)

As per page 14, the relevant rules for pinning are,

  If your Ships move into a hex, or out from a hex, containing other players' or Ancient Ships, at least one Ship per each opposing Ship must stay (the Ship is said to be "pinned")...
  ...
  If you later on move or build more Ships to the hex, you may change which Ships are pinned.  The original Ships may move, as long as one Ship per each opposing Ship stays pinned.

As the rules clearly specify "Ship" without qualifying it further, they would apply to Starbases as they would any other Ship.  So yes, the move was legal.


Cribbage. Run of 5 or more I get that 4,6,5,7 is valid and scores 4 points.

If it was a run that goes past the four cards played, e.g. 4,6,5,7 then a 3 is played and then a 2.

Do the 3 and 2 continue the run and score 5 points and then 6 points?

Yes. Each card that makes a run during play scores the run.

From https://www.mastersofgames.com/rules/cribbage-rules.htm

  Similarly, if anyone lays a card such that with the three or more preceding cards, a run can be constructed, the number of cards which would make up that run are scored. e.g. suppose cards were laid in the following order: 8,6,4,5,7. The fourth card would score 3 points, the fifth card would score five points.

See for more: http://cribbagecorner.com/node/536


Power Grid - Korea : How are resources purchased? From the Power Grid - Korea map rules :

Phase 3 : Buying Resources
In reverse player order, each player chooses one of the two markets
from which he will buy resources this round. He must buy all resources
for the round from the market he chooses. If the market chosen has no
more of a resource he wants, he will not be able to buy that resource
this round.

Source : Power Grid Korea Rules
Questions
Note : All of the following actions would be done in reverse turn order.

Case 1 : Do all players choose, each in turn, a market and then, all players, again each in turn, buy their resources?
Case 2 : Do all players choose a market and immediately buy their resources from that merket before the next player chooses a market and
buys resources?

The reason for my question stems from the aformentioned rule :

If the market chosen has no more of a resource he wants, he will not be able to buy that resource this round.

One has to admit that a reasonable player would not choose to buy from an empty market.
The only justification I can find for this rule is the following :
A non-empty market becomes empty after the player has selected it.
The only way for that to happen is that the previous player has bought all the remaining resources.
That could reasonably only happen in Case 1.

Case 2, as confirmed by the publisher.
https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/2029922/korea-does-everyone-choose-their-market-anyone-buy


Can Arkham Horror be played with both The King In Yellow herald, and The King in Yellow ancient one? When playing Arkham Horror, and using The King In Yellow expansion and herald, can The King In Yellow be used as the ancient one as well, or does using it as the herald mean it should not be the ancient one?

If both can be used at together/at the same time, are any special modifications needed to the gameplay?

As far as I can tell, there is no specific King in Yellow great old one.

If you're talking about Hastur as the great old one, that's a different story.  Thematically, The King in Yellow is actually Hastur's avatar.  So, in that sense, it might make perfect sense to use both of them in conjunction.  Mechanically, they're just two parts of the game board that don't need special treatment to use together.


Is putting a Draw 4 card on top of a Draw 2 card legal? Is it within the UNO rules to put a Wild Draw 4 card on top of a Draw 2 card, as it is a 'higher' card?

We've ALWAYS played that you can, but my new friend is adamant you can't.

A common Uno variant allows the recipient of a draw 2 to avoid drawing (and being skipped) by playing their own draw 2.  The next player either needs to skip their turn and draw 4 cards, or play their own draw 2.  If they play their own, the next player must either draw 6 cards or continue the sequence.  Some variants allow similar behavior with draw 4 cards.

Assuming you're talking about this "stacking" draw cards, you aren't going to be able to get an official answer, because it isn't an official rule.  This would explain why you and your friend are both adamant about it working in different ways.  You're just going to have to come to an agreement on how you will play.

For what its worth, every place that I've seen this rule described you have to play the exact same card, so you cannot "stack" a draw 4 when receiving a draw 2 in order to make the next player draw 6.  So I expect that is the more common way of playing the variant.


How to build / ideas for a multiplayer lifegain control deck? I'm more of the dueler type, but sometimes I play multiplayer with my friends. At this point my decks are just not viable.

I want to build a multiplayer deck for this purpose. When I check online multiplayer decklists I see a lot of 1 or 2 singles of the same cards in a heavely not consistent deck rather then lots of 4 of making a solid and constant deck. Is there a reason for that?

Also, I would like to build a life-gain/control deck. is it possible for a fun deck to play in multiplayer? If yes, I would be glad to have some ideas from experienced multiplayer players.

Thanks in advance!

There are a couple main reasons you might see a lot of multiplayer decks with 1 or 2 of each card.

First and foremost, multiplayer is a pretty casual format, so people are playing with the cards they own, and trying not to spend all their money. They probably only have 1 or 2 of a lot of cards, so they're just building the deck they can build.

Along with that, casual games tend to be about fun, not just winning, and a lot of people do like the excitement and variety of having a lot of different cards. There's something to be said for getting to cast a bunch of different spells, even if they're not quite as good as the 4-ofs you might put in the deck if you wanted to perfect it. People obviously really like this; Commander is getting pretty popular, and the entire format is built around the idea of having only one of each card.

As for your specific deck idea, sure, it's possible!

First of all, remember, lifegain is in general a weaker mechanic than it seems at first, because unless you actually deal with the things that keep making your life go down, it only buys you a little time. So you really need to make it count - find the most efficient life gain you can. This means both getting the most life you can out of it, and hopefully getting an extra benefit. Happily, extort and Gray Merchant (mentioned in the comments) do both. They gain life for each opponent, so lots of lifegain. But they also drain your opponent, and give you an extra creature. (Or in the case of Blind Obedience, slow down aggro decks.)

Depending on your constraints (and your collection) there are probably a lot more cards in that vein - try searching for "each opponent" gain life or even just "gain life equal to", and you'll find some more potential candidates.

Beyond that, it does depend on the kinds of decks your friends play. If you're surviving to the late game but still losing, maybe you just need better win conditions. If you're getting killed early before you can get your cool stuff online, maybe you need some faster removal, or in general faster answers to the kinds of things they're trying to do. The control side of your deck needs to be strong and efficient too, not just the lifegain. But it's hard to give terribly specific advice here; we don't know what kind of decks you're playing against, or what kind of cards you have at your disposal. I think about the best general advice is to look at what's killing you and figure out ways to address it efficiently.


Can I Mindslaver my opponent and then cast his Panglacial Wurm and have it come under my control? If I Mindslaver my opponent and I play one of his rampant growths can I cast one of his Panglacial Wurms and have it come under my control?

No.

You seem to misunderstand what controlling another player does. It doesn't allow you to take their turn, or use their cards. It instead allows you to make all decisions they would make. This means that if they have a Rampant Growth, you can force them to play it. You do not actually get to play it; you would not get the land. They would still be the controller of Rampant Growth.

Similarly, any creature they cast (because you forced them to) would be under their control just like normal. Panglacial Wurms is no different. Its ability lets your opponent cast it at a time other than normal, from a place other than normal, but it still is just like any other creature spell once cast, and would enter the battlefield under the control of the player who cast it (which would be your opponent, even if your opponent is controlled by you).

  Controlling Another Player

    714.3. Only control of the player changes. All objects are controlled by their normal controllers. A player who’s being controlled during his or her turn is still the active player.

    714.5. While controlling another player, a player makes all choices and decisions the controlled player is allowed to make or is told to make by the rules or by any objects. This includes choices and decisions about what to play, and choices and decisions called for by spells and abilities.

And from the rulings on Mindslaver:

  You don’t control any of the other player’s permanents, spells, or abilities.

and

  You choose which spells the other player casts, and make all decisions as those spells are cast and when they resolve. For example, you choose the target for that player’s Shock, and what card that player gets with Diabolic Tutor.

From a strategic point of view, the reason you want to control a player isn't that you get to steal any permanent spells that they could afford to cast. It's that you could do things such as attack with creatures that will easily die, cast harmful instants and sorceries targeting themselves instead of you, maybe sacrifice all of their good creatures if they have an ability that allows them to do so, etc. So you can still do a lot of powerful things with the ability, but you can't just take their creature spells as your own.


Which effect takes precedence? I was in an Arkham location when I drew an encounter that stated:
'Go to the Dreamlands,  have an encounter there and then immediately return'

The encounter in the Dreamlands required a skill check,  which upon failure stated that I had to stay there for my next turn.

I failed the check.

Which of these takes precedence?  Do I return immediately,  regardless of what the second encounter said or do I stay there?

I doubt there's an official rule to cover this. The possibilities I can think of, with my favorite bolded:

You aren't delayed at all - you just return. Seems too...nice for Arkham, like you're cheating your way out of the bad effects of an encounter.
You are delayed, so you stay in the Dreamlands one more turn then return to your original location. I think this makes the most sense in terms of the ideas of the cards - you fall asleep, end up in the Dreamlands, and you wake back up as soon as you're done with whatever you find yourself doing there. In this case you find yourself stuck there, so you have to wait until you stop being stuck there to be done and wake back up.
You are delayed and also return immediately, so you're stuck in your original location for an extra turn. If you squint at the rules, this seems totally logical: "stay here next turn" = "delayed" = "skip your next movement". It just feels a little weird flavor-wise.
You are delayed so you miss out on your chance to return to Arkham so you're stuck in the Dreamlands. If you really want to go by the spirit of "the worst possible thing always happens to you in Arkham", this is your option, but turning a mostly-benign Arkham encounter into a waste of several turns (delayed, stand up, move, try to return and get lost in time and space...) seems pretty excessive.


Hadana's Climb / Winged Temple of Orazca - how to apply The Layer System? A friend and I were trying to work out how to apply the Winged Temple of Orazca's ability: "Target creature you control gains flying and gets +X/+X until end of turn, where X is its power."

We're both quite new to MTG, so were wondering whether "where X is its power" meant:

Power value printed on the creature card (aka Base Power); or,
Power based on all combined effects currently applied to the creature.

We settled on Power based on all combined effects. But since then, I found out about the Layer System aka Interaction of continuous effects. If I'm reading this correctly, it says that +1/+1 Counters are applied after the +X/+X ability of Winged Temple of Orazca (because the ability would come under "Effects that modify power and/or toughness" in Layer 7c, whereas Counters are Layer 7d)...

Here's an example, listed by time of casting:

Creature      Thrashing Brontodon           3 /  4
Aura          Oakenform                    +3 / +3
Equipment     Short Sword                  +1 / +1
Counters      from Hadana's Climb     3 x (+1 / +1)
Ability       Winged Temple of Orazca      +X / +X where X is power

So, if we assumed +X/+X is applied based on all combined effects, the Brontodon would be 10/11 at the point the Ability takes effect. So X would equal 10 and the Brontodon becomes 20/21.

But, if the Counters aren't applied until Layer 7d - and the Aura, Equipment and Ability are all in Layer 7c - then the Brontodon is 7/8 at the point the Ability takes effect. X equals 7 and the Brontodon becomes 14/15. Then the three +1/+1 Counters are applied and the Brontodon ends up as 17/18.

Is that a correct interpretation of the Layer System?

Your Thrashing Brontodon will get +10/+10 and be a 20/21.

  611.2d If a resolving spell or ability that creates a continuous effect contains a variable such as X, the value of that variable is determined only once, on resolution. See rule 608.2g.

  608.2g If an effect requires information from the game (such as the number of creatures on the battlefield), the answer is determined only once, when the effect is applied. If the effect requires information from a specific object, including the source of the ability itself, the effect uses the current information of that object if it’s in the public zone it was expected to be in; if it’s no longer in that zone, or if the effect has moved it from a public zone to a hidden zone, the effect uses the object’s last known information. See rule 112.7a. If an ability states that an object does something, it’s the object as it exists—or as it most recently existed—that does it, not the ability.

The affect of the Winged Temple of Orozca is calculated when you use its ability, and it does so looking at the power of the target creature after all existing affects are applied to it.

Once the static affect is created, it will be applied in the layers exactly as you say.  But by that point the size of the bonus is fixed.

Even if one of the other bonuses is removed (for example, a Naturalize on Oakenform), the +10/+10 from Orozca will remain.


If a creature takes non-lethal damage, turns into a non-creature, and then back into a creature, does the damage remain? Sort of a follow-up to Can Hour of Devastation kill Heliod, Sun-Crowned?

Let's say my opponent has two Benalish Marshal and Heliod, Sun-Crowned. I cast Hour of Devastation. Per murgatroid99's answer, Heliod survives.

If my opponent next plays some flash creatures or enchantments that turn Heliod back into a creature, does it still have 5 damage marked on it (+ is no longer indestructible)?

Yes, Damage is marked on a permanent even if it is not a creature.

Comp rules:

  119.6. Damage marked on a creature remains until the cleanup step, even if that permanent stops being a creature.

Heliod will also not be indestructible in the given scenario, since he was a creature while Hour of Devastation was resolving, which is all that HoD cares about. Changing or losing permanent types does not cause Heliod to regain indestructibility.


Is it common practice to publish/sell online versions of board games? I bought the Ticket to Ride: Europe game by Days of Wonder, and it included an online registration code. Visiting the website, I noticed that some of the games had a free online preview available.

I have tried the Ticket to Ride one. It was a (Java) version of the original TTR game in not a very good quality.

My question is: Is it common practice for publishers to provide online versions of their games? Are they usually free, provided you bought the board game, or do they have to be bought separately?

It's actually quite rare. I've never encountered any other company doing so for free or even reduced cost on their own dime, save for the "instructional" modes. I've heard there are a couple others doing so, but I've not encountered them.

Several 3rd party developers have made money by paid subscriptions to their sites and hosting lots of games under license, and others by advertising supported free online play of various games.

I've often seen companies link to such venues.

Days of Wonder used to only give you 6 months access to their online lobby with a game, but it allowed access to all games. Now, they provide access to just the games purchased, but noting that a few unsupported games are able to be accessed free (Including Queen's Necklace online...).

Also note: Many electronic versions of various games are unlicensed - there are a few dozen free versions of Monopoly that are actually not licensed; the official version isn't free.

Keep in mind: most boardgame companies are not staffed with programmers; DoW is an exception.

Update 3/5/2012: I've since noticed others doing so. Amarillo Design Bureau licensed a programmer to create and maintain SFB-Online. A couple other companies have likewise placed electronic versions of their games up as pay to access; most of the "unfree" access now is advertising supported or is in-game payments.


What are the requirements for the achievements in Ticket to Ride: Europe? In the electronic 'pocket' version of Ticket to Ride: Europe, I would like to acquire all the achievements, but I must have misunderstood some of them. Even when I think I've accomplished them, I do not get them. In particular:

"win while connecting all 4 surrounding countries"- which 4 countries are we talking about, surrounding what? Each other? Like Austria, Hungary, Italy and Croatia e.g.?
"win without claiming any tunnel route". I've won many times without using a single tunnel, but still no achievement. A route can be finished with or without tunnels, but does this requirement mean that when I get the map, there is no possible tunnel involved between the two cities?

The basic requirement is to purchase the Switzerland map expansion as an in-app purchase and complete the achievements using that map.

For the achievement Chocolate Exporter you must connect all four countries (France, Germany, Austria, and Italy). To complete this, priority number one is to actually connect the four countries. This will take most of your trains and many of your turns. Try and grab as many country tickets as you can, but don't push it, they're relatively high value. Avoid non-country tickets as you probably won't have enough trains to complete them.

Here is an example board showing a victory with all four countries connected

and here is the achievement

For the achievement Valley Commuter you must not claim any tunnel routes on the Switzerland map. To complete this, grab as many tickets as you can that can be completed without a tunnel. It's relatively easy to connect most of the cities that don't require tunnels, at which point many of the tickets you will grab will be already completed.

Here is an example board showing a victory with no tunnel routes claimed

and here is the achievement


Why don't players draft the week before a new set releases? I'm a new player, and I enjoy draft -- I went to my local card shop this week and draft didn't happen, though it always has before. The store owner explained it's because a new set is coming out next week - but I think I'm missing the point. Why does that affect if players want to draft, this week?

I believe it's because of how the store stocks itself, and because of the economics of a draft/prerelease.

Stores only have so much they can spend per week on their product. Given that they know they will have a lot of customers interested in the new set coming up, it would make sense to spend a large amount of budget on product for the upcoming set. (Or if they can't buy the product yet, save up for a larger spending the following week.) The store might have packs for sale right now they could use, but they probably want to save those to remain stocked on specific sets. They don't want to appear out of stock of certain things if they can help it!

Additionally, they want to make sure there's a large turnout when they do a draft. Most drafts will effectively sell packs for less at a prerelease, when you account for prizes (At my store, a pack usually costs $4. A prerelease gets you 6 packs and costs $25, and the store gives out an average of ~1-2 prize packs per person.) Thus, during a prerelease, each pack is effectively sold for ~$3.12. Also, the store probably has to have more employees present to accommodate many players during an event for handing out packs, enforcing rules, etc. A store might normally get by with just one or two people working, but an event might require 3-4 employees (or more, depending on store size). More employees means more money spent paying those people for their time.

To make it worth their while, a store will want to pack people in to sell a lot of packs.  (If each item sells for less, you need to sell more items to make the same amount.) Many customers don't have the time or money to go to events every weekend, and are more likely to prefer going to an event with the new set that is hyped up then with an ordinary draft of an older set. The store doesn't want to put on the event that risks having only a mediocre turnout because everyone is waiting for next weekend.

Last thought: it's probably pretty tiring for the workers. A lot of events can stretch into late hours, and even if they don't it's still a lot of time to be working directly with customers. More people means more picking up and restocking afterwards, more cleaning the bathrooms, etc. A weekend off is nice, and helps make sure the employees are refreshed and ready to give their A-game next weekend at the prerelease.


Necromunda: what happens to plague zombies when they go down? My brother and I play the skirmish game Necromunda (made back in the '90s by Games Workshop, its a spin-off of Warhammer 40k).

My question is, what happens to zombies when you have wounded them and they get the 'down' result (roll a 6 sided dice, 1 has no effect, 6 taken off the board, 2-5=?).

This relates specifically to damage from anything other than close combat, i.e. shooting, but also fall damage, seeing as any down result is out in close combat, unless its a multiple combat.

So, do zombies start to crawl after the damage, like a normal ganger? Or do they shrug it off?

Downed zombies act the same as any other downed ganger: their movement is a 2" crawl (the plague zombie's owner chooses the direction), and they make the same end-of-round injury check as any normal ganger. The only exception is that if a plague zombie rolls a "1", it doesn't take the flesh wound as it stands up. This makes plague zombies about as tough as any other ganger: with the exception of close combat, it takes an injury roll of "6" to take them out.

If a downed zombie "charges" into combat, it simply gets taken out automatically, just like any other ganger that crawls into combat (unless there are multiple combatants, of course).

As a side note: in the fluff, plague zombies are still alive – just brain-damaged by the plague. So it makes sense that all of the rules of living gangers apply to plague zombies, with the exception of the rules that apply to pain or psychology.


Voice of Ra: does "all skill checks" apply to all players or just the caster? Voice of Ra states

  You may cast and exhaust to gain +1 to all skill checks for the rest of this turn.

Is that all skill checks for the caster, or for all investigators?

It's just the caster, i.e. the "you" at the beginning of the sentence. Same way casting Wither or wielding a weapon only helps your combat checks.


Rescue from the Underworld on an unearthed creature With Sedris, the Traitor King on the battlefield, I pay the 2B cost to unearth a creature. Then I cast Rescue from the Underworld and sacrifice the card that was just unearthed. I understand that the creature will go to exile instead of in the graveyard, but will it still be returned to the battlefield later ? Do you know other cards that could "save" a unearthed creature to go into exile ? Thank you very much.

You will get the card back after it goes to exile because it doesn't say to return the card from the graveyard, rather just return 'that card'. From the Gatherer rulings on Rescue from the Underworld:

  However, if the sacrificed creature is put into another public zone instead of the graveyard, perhaps because it’s your commander or because of another replacement effect, it will return to the battlefield from the zone it went to.

The unearth creature going to exile instead of the graveyard is a replacement effect.

Normally, effects cannot find objects that change zones. There are eight exceptions to this rule, and you found one of them:

  400.7. An object that moves from one zone to another becomes a new object with no memory of, or relation to, its previous existence. There are eight exceptions to this rule:

  [...]
  400.7h If an effect causes an object to move to a public zone, other parts of that effect can find that object. If the cost of a spell or ability causes an object to move to a public zone, that spell or ability’s effects can find that object.

Other ways of getting around the exile part of Unearth involve other cards that are worded like Rescue (specifically ones that do not specify the zone the card needs to be in to move), and ones that 'blink' or 'flicker' a creatures like Cloudshift that exile the creature and return it either immediately or at some time in the future.


How to break a Tie for a 3-of-a-kind In a particular scenario where there is a tie for same three of a kind.

Two players -

User1 with 10h and 6d

User2 with 10d and 4c

On table 10c, 10s, Kc, 3h, 2d

Who wins?

Note: h/d/s/c = Hearts/Diamonds/Spades/Clubs

When figuring out who wins in Texas Holdem you take the best 5 card hand a player can make using their 2 cards plus the 5 community cards on the table. That gives us:

Player 1: 10, 10, 10, K, 6
Player 2: 10, 10, 10, K, 4

Since they both match on the 3 tens you look to the highest kicker card, in this case they both have kings so you need to look at the next highest card. For this card Player 1 has a 6 and Player 2 has a 4 so Player 1 will win the hand.

Reference: Texas Holdem Rules


Can Harpie Dancer re-summon a monster on the turn it was returned to the hand? Recently, some buddies of mine were having a duel, and one of them used Harpie Dancer’s effect to remove a Wind Monster from the field, then used its second effect to re-summon it.  Is this move legal? None of the rulings on this card are relevant to this question, so I figured I’d take it to stackexchange.

Is this move legal?

Yes it is.
In no place in Harpie Dancer's effect indicates that you can't summon the monster you returned to hand (emphasis mine):

You can target 1 WIND monster you control; return it to the hand, then you can Normal Summon 1 WIND monster. You can only use this effect of "Harpie Dancer" once per turn. This card's name becomes "Harpie Lady" while on the field or in the GY.

As we can see the only requirements you mus fulfill are (1) target a WIND monster to return and that (2) the monster you Normal Summon is also WIND.... Pay special attention to the "you can"... that means you may chose not to Normal Summon after returning.
In fact, doing this is one of the strengths of her effect, allowing you to return/re-summon even if you only have one other monster (so you can trigger Harpies' Hunting Ground, Divine Wind of Mist Valley, etc.).
What's more, you can even return and re-summon Harpie Dancer herself... or just return her and summon nothing...
Remember that, when a card returns to the hand, it "resets" and loses all memory of who it was on the field (similar to MTG I recall??), so for the purposes of the resolution, the effect doesn't care who that card is, as long as the requirements are met (it is a WIND monster that you can Normal Summon).
As a side note, I'm a main Harpie player :)


Can one ask for a "time out" to study the hand in bridge? "West" (the opening leader) has to lead before seeing the dummy. Both declarer (South) and partner (East) ought to study the dummy before playing. But often they do not.

Suppose South wins the trick, and leads back quickly. Can West ask for a timeout to study the dummy? Does it have to be before South makes the lead?

Can any player ask for a timeout to study the hand at a critical juncture (say, if a squeeze play is on)?

One reason I ask this question is because it appears to be unethical to hesitate at certain points (e.g. representing an honor, when you don't have one).

This is a "companion" to one of my other questions.

In Bridge, Is There A Way To Shorten "Reaction Time" For "Real Time" Play

Victor Mollo addressed this problem in one of his books (I forget which). His suggestion, if you wished to stop and think at your turn of play, was to place the card you plan to play face down on the table, announcing that you were playing that card, and then do your thinking. Provided your thinks don't take inordinately long, no-one will complain.


Adjacency of non-corner connecting spaces in Escape from Innsmouth We had an argument about an adjacency question in the board game Mansions of Madness. In the "Escape from Innsmouth" scenario the upper left corner of the map looks like this:

The question is whether you can move from B to C directly, in other words whether those two spaces are adjacent. I argued that they are separated by a gray border (meaning a border between outdoor spaces), so they are adjacent spaces and a player or creature can move directly between them.

Everyone else in the group took the position that even though the curvy line did not match up to the corner with the library, that it was the intention of the game designers for it to be considered a mutual corner. Therefore, a player can only move between A and B or between A and C, and that it is not allowed to move directly between B and C.

Who is right?

From the Rules Reference, regarding "Adjacent".

  Two spaces are adjacent if they share a border, a door, an impassable border, or a wall.

And from "Movement"

  When an investigator or monster moves a set number of spaces, it moves one space at a time, moving from one space to an adjacent space.

The tile sizes are standardized.  They only come in two sizes.  Square, as in your pier, or rectangular, like the alley.  The drawing of the borders is not done expecting somehow a squished down alley to fill only that part of the open space for A, and it's also not presented as somehow offset to only match A in the app (I've played through this too).  It may, in a different scenario or placement, have a door only bordering A or one of the Pier spaces instead, and in that situation would be different.

In your scenario and drawing however, A, B, and C are all adjacent to each other, and therefore B and C can be moved between directly.


Do effects that remove abilities also remove counters? I have a creature in play that has several +1/+1 counters on it. My opponent plays a card that has "remove all abilities from target creature".

Does this also remove the counters? What's the rule that clarifies this?

Abilities and counters are different things. Effects that remove abilities do not remove counters, and effects that remove counters do not remove abilities.

Abilities are defined in rule 112:

  112.1a An ability is a characteristic an object has that lets it affect the game. An object’s abilities are defined by its rules text or by the effect that created it. Abilities can also be granted to objects by rules or effects. (Effects that do so use the words “has,” “have,” “gains,” or “gain.”) Abilities generate effects. (See rule 609, “Effects.”)

and counters are defined in rule 121:

  121.1. A counter is a marker placed on an object or player that modifies its characteristics and/or interacts with a rule, ability, or effect. Counters are not objects and have no characteristics. Notably, a counter is not a token, and a token is not a counter. Counters with the same name or description are interchangeable.


How Has The Fluxx Core Game Changed Over The Years? While researching Fluxx for a different question, I came across this chronology for editions of the game in Wikipedia:

Fluxx 2.0 (new card layout, use of color, bridge-sized cards)

Fluxx 2.1 (reprint of 2.0 with minor changes)

Fluxx 3.0 (many cards removed and added, to improve balance)

Fluxx 3.1 (two cards removed, one card added)

Fluxx 4.0 (card number increased to 100, all color, introduction of Meta rule and creepers)

I am now officially intrigued by the way Fluxx has evolved since its earliest incarnations.  Can anyone provide a rundown?  In particular:

What were the differences been Fluxx 2 and Fluxx 3?  What unbalanced cards or combinations existed in 2.0 and 2.1?
What were the minor (but clearly vitally important) changes to the lineup between 3.0 and 3.1?

The Fluxx Wiki has lists of the composition of the various decks linked off this page.
Here's my attempts at answering your specific questions:
Cards in v2 not in v3:

Doughnuts

The Eye

The Pyramid

Taxes

Coffee & Doughnuts

Death & Taxes

The Great Seal

The Mind's Eye

Money (No Taxes)

Pilfer the Trash

Trash Hand Limit

Trash Keeper Limit

Brain Bonus

Final Card Random

Government Cover Up

Hand Limit 3

Money Bonus

Secret Data

Tax Bonus

Time Bonus

New cards in v3:

Sleep

Baked Goods

Bed Time

Dreamland

Hearts & Minds

Rocket Science

Squishy Chocolate

Winning the Lottery

Empty the Trash

Go Fish

I Need a Goal

Jackpot

Let's Do That Again!

Let's Simplify

No Limits

Rotate Hands

Double Agenda

Reverse Order

First Play Random

No-Hand Bonus

Poor Bonus

Rich Bonus

Inflation/X = X + 1

The Looney Labs newsletter from Nov 14, 2002 explains the changes in v3.0 this way:

1.) What will be different? Roughly half of the cards in the deck have changed in some way, but in many cases the revisions are so minor that only a few people will notice them. Over 25% of the cards have been radically changed or are completely different.
2.) Can you be more specific about what's changing? The 4 "Bonus" rules have been replaced with a trio of stronger ones, called the Rich bonus, the Poor Bonus, and the No-Hand Bonus. The 3 new rules which we made into promos for Origins 2002 (X=X+1, Double Agenda, and Reverse Order) have all been added. Those annoying "hide a Keeper" rules are all going away, and we're getting rid of 4 rather wimpy Actions and putting in 7 better ones. We thinned the Keepers down a bit, increased the number of Goals, and made sure no Keeper was useful for only 1 thing. The 5 Keepers being dropped are the Eye, the Pyramid, Coffee, Donuts, and Taxes, but in their place we're adding 2 totally new ones: Sleep and Dreams. Changing the Keeper mix required us to drop a number of Goals that no longer made sense, but of course others were needed for the new Keepers. A couple of Goals also got renamed. Other minor changes included replacing the artwork for War (as I described a few weeks ago) and for Chocolate (since we've learned that a certain powerful Chocolate Corporation has strong attitudes about their trademark on a little slip of paper sticking out of a piece of candy). Final Card Random has been changed to First Play Random (it works better), the blank card has been eliminated (it's obsolete), and the rules insert will be larger (featuring the cartoon shown here). The tuckbox will be the same size, but it will look a bit different; the 6-pack display carton will change only slightly. To sum up: it's way better than before.

Looking further at the v3.x page, I think these are the minor changes:

The chocolate keeper has a kiss in 3.0 and a bar in 3.1
The 3.0 "The Sun & the Moon" goal is called "Night & Day" in 3.1
The "Go Fish" and "I Need a Goal" actions are only in 3.0
The "Jackpot" action is only in 3.1
The 3.0 "X = X + 1" rule is called "Inflation" in 3.1
The 3.1 Fluxx packaging included another card to "Join the Fluxx Fan Club"


What happens if Saheeli, Sublime Artificer's target is removed? Suppose my opponent has Saheeli, Sublime Artificer, a Servo token, and another creature in play, and uses her ability to make the Servo a copy of the creature. In response to the ability going on the stack, I cast Murder on the other creature. Does the Servo still become a copy of that creature when Saheeli's ability resolves?

The ability will resolve, but it will fail to do anything:

  Resolving Spells and Abilities

    608.2b If the spell or ability specifies targets, it checks whether the targets are still legal. A target that’s no longer in the zone it was in when it was targeted is illegal. Other changes to the game state may cause a target to no longer be legal; for example, its characteristics may have changed or an effect may have changed the text of the spell. If the source of an ability has left the zone it was in, its last known information is used during this process. If all its targets, for every instance of the word “target,” are now illegal, the spell or ability doesn’t resolve. It’s removed from the stack and, if it’s a spell, put into its owner’s graveyard. Otherwise, the spell or ability will resolve normally. Illegal targets, if any, won’t be affected by parts of a resolving spell’s effect for which they’re illegal. Other parts of the effect for which those targets are not illegal may still affect them. If the spell or ability creates any continuous effects that affect game rules (see rule 613.10), those effects don’t apply to illegal targets. If part of the effect requires information about an illegal target, it fails to determine any such information. Any part of the effect that requires that information won’t happen.

So the information for the copy effect will be missing, and that effect will not happen.  The Servo will still be a Servo.


Where can I purchase extra wood pieces for Settlers of Catan? I have two full sets of Settlers of Catan plus one 5-6 player expansion pack. Originally the second set was bought to replace the older one, which was missing a few pieces and cards.  However, the epicness of the possibility of a huge SoC game entranced me, and I decided to use all three game sets to make one very large game. By cutting three frame pieces, I was able to craft a 48-hex island, suitable for up to 10 players. (Apologies for the cell-phoneness of the photo.)

So now I have two sets each of blue, orange, white, and red wooden pieces, and one set each of green and brown.  By marking half the double sets (dots with a Sharpie), it is possible to differentiate one half of each double color from the other, resulting in ten sets. Sets can also be combined for fewer players.  The development and resource cards which were missing were minimal, so that's not an issue.  But sometimes the wooden pieces pose a problem.  Sometimes, with four players, the green and brown sets are used as backup pieces for the remaining four double sets which are missing a few.  But if I ever want to play with 10 players, I'll have to come up with substitutions, which I'd like to avoid.  Where can I find extra wooden pieces for the original Settlers of Catan?

Replacement parts can be found from Mayfair Games, although this will match your 4th Edition color pieces. (Older editions came in different colors). If you want Seafarer's , or other sets they have those too.

  Settlers of Catan- Pieces - Set 4 player -White Blue Red and Orange with Robber ( MFGP3061-41 ) Price: $12.00

If you wanted some approximate replacements, PnP Productions has wooden ships (Seafarer's), wooden blocks (Knights & Cities, city walls), plastic hotels & houses (settlements/cities), and wooden cubes (roads?) in quite a few colors that differ from the original 4th Ed. colors.


Monopoly : Is buying properties second time round a house rule or official rule? Just wondering that when playing a normal game of monopoly, can I buy a property when I haven't passed go yet. Anything will help. thanks!

From what I gather from your question the rule you are talking about is a house rule. In the basic rules it is intended for all properties to be sold the first time anyone lands on them. Either from the person that landed on it making the purchase or it being sold in auction.

In general the basic rules tend to make the game faster.


Can I search for Etched Champion with Enlightened Tutor? Can a creature in my library with protection from all colors, like Etched Champion be the target of my search spell Enlightened Tutor?

Yes, it can; for no less than three reasons:

Enlightened Tutor (like all other 'search your library' cards printed so far) does not target a specific card in your library, so protection doesn't play a role here.
Protection from X only functions when a permanent is on the battlefield. (Though players can have protection from X as well.)
Etched Champion's Metalcraft ability only works while it's on the battlefield, so it doesn't have protection to begin with.

(not 100% sure about the third one, actually)


Go software for studying/reviewing sgf games I got a great review of my game from another player on GoKGS. So I got this *.sgf file with lots of variants (tree branches) with lots of comments... So now I am looking for a good piece of software that would:

Allow me to browse through all the variants and not get lost (it would be great if it could distinguish the variants I've already seen or something, otherwise I can get lost easily...)
There were certain situations (like in move 51) where the reviewer told me "this is the key point to kill the opponents group". I would like to experiment with this. It would be nice if the software could tell me if the group is alive or dead - i.e. some help in the analysis, since I am (as a beginner) not always able to find the optimal move for either side... (I've heard of GoTools, but 1) I've also heard that they have lots of bugs, besides of being closed & paid only and 2) I don't know how they comply with requirement 1).

Thanks in advance!

I'm afraid I can only partial answer your question, but since there are no other replies yet, here goes:

To browse SGF files I use cgoban3 (the KGS client), which has a reasonable tree view and allows for browsing with arrow keys instead of the mouse. It has a few bugs, but it is generally easy to navigate around them.

There does not seem to be any editor that can determine L&D status. This is already very (very) difficult for advanced specialized Go playing bots and requires a lot of computing power. You'll probably not find anything really usable, much less in a general purpose SGF viewer.

Also, from the SGF specification it is implied that an SGF file has no way to keep track of which variations or text messages were added in which order (please correct me if wrong), so you won't find any tool that can display everything in the right order. This is quite annoying sometimes (and one of the reasons I don't regard SGF exactly highly).


What does a damage number of "<1" mean in Warhammer 40k? I recently bought the Dark Imperium starter set for Warhammer 40k. This set includes two "mini-codices" for both Space Marines and Death Guard, covering only the units that are in the set.

What baffled me was the damage rating for the Bolters for the Space Marine Intercessors. They are written as "<1".

I could not find any information regarding this, neither in the core rulebook, nor in the Space Marine booklet. Furthermore, I could not find a relevant errata for the Space Marines or the Dark Imperium set.

What does "<1" as damage mean? Is this simply a typo and should be regarded as 1?

I finally managed to take a picture of the booklet:

As can be seen, the "Boltgewehr" ("Bolt rifle") has a damage value of "<1".

I believe you are right, this is a typo. Elsewhere the D for such weapons is 1 (space marine codex etc). The other notations are typically a static number or a random value e.g. D6.

I think GW typically write out the full text: "a value greater than" rather than use > etc.


What happens when a creature with "Whenever a creature dies" dies simultaneously with multiple other creatures? Marchesa, the Black Rose has the following ability:

  Whenever a creature you control with a +1/+1 counter on it dies, return that card to the battlefield under your control at the beginning of the next end step.

I had a number of creatures on the battlefield, including Marchesa herself, with one or more +1/+1 counters on them when Supreme Verdict was played, destroying each creature on the board.

When Marchesa and several other creatures would be killed simultaneously,

Does Marchesa's ability trigger for herself?
Does Marchesa's ability trigger for the other creatures under my control with +1/+1 counters?

In attempting to resolve the issue, we tried to look things up, leading to this forum post, which cites Rule 603.6d as proving that Marchesa's ability should trigger both for herself and for each other creature with +1/+1 counters.

Unfortunately, none of us could actually understand Rule 603.6d, aside from this example:

  Two creatures are on the battlefield along with an artifact that has the ability Whenever a creature dies, you gain 1 life. Someone plays a spell that destroys all artifacts, creatures, and enchantments. The artifacts ability triggers twice, even though the artifact goes to its owners graveyard at the same time as the creatures.

The example certainly seems analogous to me, but without understanding the actual rule, rather than just the example, we weren't too sure.

A complete answer has to not only answer the question, but back up that answer with citation and explanation of the official rules on the matter.

Yes, Marchesa's ability will save herself if she dies with a +1/+1 counter, along with other creatures who died at the same time as her that had a +1/+1 counter. You are correct that rule 603.6d is the reason for this.

Basically, 603.6d says the in normal circumstances, whenever something changes, all objects that now exist are checked to see if any of them trigger. BUT, it says that leaves-the-battlefield triggers work differently. With leaves-the-battlefield triggers, the game must look at what the gamestate was like just before the event took place to see if the event caused any triggers to go off.

In this case, after all creatures die, the game checks to see what things were like just before they died. And now that the game is looking back in time, to just before the event happened, it sees Marchesa as an object that has a triggered ability that should trigger as a result of this event; in fact one that should trigger multiple times, once for each creature with a +1/+1 counter that died.

Hope this clears it up!

603.6c is how you know that "dies" triggers count as "leaves-the-battlefield" abilities:

  603.6c Leaves-the-battlefield abilities trigger when a permanent moves from the battlefield to another zone, or when a phased-in permanent leaves the game because its owner leaves the game. These are written as, but arent limited to, "When [this object] leaves the battlefield, . . ." or "Whenever [something] is put into a graveyard from the battlefield, . . . ." An ability that attempts to do something to the card that left the battlefield checks for it only in the first zone that it went to. An ability that triggers when a card is put into a certain zone "from anywhere" is never treated as a leaves-the-battlefield ability, even if an object is put into that zone from the battlefield.

(Note that "dies" means "Whenever [something] is put into a graveyard from the battlefield".)

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


Can you ever get a player down to just 2 ships? Alien Frontiers has been carefully designed to prevent any player from being reduced to two ships: you can't use the Terraforming Station (which converts one of your ships into a colony) if you only have three ships, and you can't use the Plasma Cannon to destroy somebody's ship unless they have at least four.

Can you use the Plasma Cannon on someone with four ships, if one of those ships is sitting on the Terraforming Station (thus reducing them to three ships when their turn comes around, or two if you use the Plasma Cannon)? Are there any other ways to reduce someone to two ships?

No, David MacKenzie of Clever Mojo Games clarified this point in a FAQ on BGG.

Q: The RED player has four red ships on the board...one on the Lunar Mine, two on the Orbital Market, and one on the Terraforming Station. GREEN discards his Plasma Cannon card and removes the red ship from the Lunar Mine.On RED's next turn, the ship on the Terraforming Station returns to the shipyard stock and RED is left with only two ships.
This is a legal move by a strict reading of the rules.. [...] However, it breaks the intent of the rules, which is to insure that no player has fewer than three ships of their own color. During play testing we found it nearly impossible to recover after being reduced to only two ships, so we tried to insure that it would not happen. It now seems that we missed one situation that could lead to this exact problem. The cure is to adjust the wording of the Plasma Cannon's discard power as follows...
Plasma Cannon - You may discard a Plasma Cannon to return one ship belonging to another player to the ship stock. The target player must not be reduced to less than three ships of their own color for use on their next turn.

And a rule book edit

RED has four ships on the board...one on the Lunar Mine, two on the Orbital Market, and one on the Terraforming Station. GREEN would like to discard a Plasma Cannon to attack RED and removed the RED ship from the Lunar Mine, but cannot because doing so would leave RED with only two ships after the RED ship on the Terraforming Station returns to the shipyard stock next turn.


Can I respond to Elesh Norn's ability? I have yet another timing question:

Elesh Norn, Grand Cenobite enters the battlefield under my opponent's control. I have Teysa, Orzhov Scion on the field with three other white 1/1 creatures.

Normally, the three white ones would die due to Elesh Norn's ability (-2/-2).

BUT can I first sacrifice them with Teysa's first ability in order to remove Elesh Norn from the game?

I am not sure about the timing. Elesh enters the battlefield and his ability resolves. Can I react to that with creatures that would be affected by this ability (-2/-2)?

No, you cannot do that.

You cannot target Elesh Norn with Teysa before Elesh is on the battlefield. However, as soon as Elesh is on the battlefield, its static -2/-2 ability is in effect, and your tokens will die as a state-based effect, before anyone gets priority and the opportunity to use regular spells or abilities. Note that Elesh's ability does not resolve, because it does not go on the stack. As long as Elesh is on the battlefield, the ability is permanently active.


What tools are being used by companies producing connectable floor tiles? After seeing more and more games like Zombicide using large floormaps that can connect to one another (either by being layable side by side without a hitch or even having connecting parts so that they can't be ripped apart too easily again), I've begun to wonder there a bit.

With video games the companies are using their own engines to create their games most of the time. With board games I dare guess that is not the case. So I'm wondering what is being used there to create the floor tiles. So what tools are they usually using there?

(I have troubles thinking that it is all "just" photoshop and printing, but could still be, thus curious there and didn't find any info anywhere)-

Graphics on printed tiles (like Settlers of Catan) are done with the same technology as static game boards -- printed on thin paper, which is applied to the backing board with adhesive.  For tiles that have no border (like those for Settlers), or need to interlock, after printing, the tiles, and interlocks if present, are cut with dies -- the same kind of dies used to cut counters for traditional war games, parts for balsa model airplanes, and the pieces of jigsaw puzzles.

Of course, the image printed on the tiles is, as noted in comments, produced with common graphic editing software, either aimed at the graphic arts industry, or at the printing sector.  There are specific methods of ensuring that (for instance) ground texture matches up from one tile to the next, if that matters -- it can be done "manually" with nothing more than copy/paste operations (S. John Ross has a good tutorial on his Risus web site on making maps with very basic graphic software; the same techniques apply to tiles), or there are semi-automated tools for the job.


Scrabble computer version that uses the new dictionary? (OSPD4/OTCWL2) Is there a version of the computer Scrabble game that uses the new dictionary (not really new anymore, came out in 2006)?  I know about ISC, but we're looking for something that my technophobic mother-in-law can use to play against her computer.  Any suggestions?

Facebook Scrabble uses the new dictionary.

This can also be played via your iPhone (connects to the same same servers, so players on different platforms may play).  The iPhone version has single-player.

Quadplex is another site that hosts Scrabble.


"Each" and Targeting I played with a group recently who was convinced that an effect like "each creature" will target (while "all creatures" does not).

I consider rule 114.9a good enough to prove that it must say "target" or have a keyword whose rule says target or... it doesn't target.

But they are so sure that I think I will get some push back.  Is there anything besides rule 114.9a that I could use to clearly show that "each" does not target?  (Assuming I am right and it doesn't.)

To quote 114.9a, with bold for emphasis:

  114.9a Just because an object or player is being affected by a spell or ability doesn't make that object or player a target of that spell or ability. Unless that object or player is identified by the word "target" in the text of that spell or ability, or the rule for that keyword ability, it's not a target.

That really seems as straight-forward as possible. Does the spell or keyword rule use the exact specific word "target"? No? Then "it's not a target". The only other thing I can think of that may help is to show them gatherer rulings from any number of cards. Look at any card with Overload, for example: Cyclonic Rift, Blustersquall, etc. Both of these have Gatherer rulings that specifically state "If you pay the overload cost, the spell won't have any targets."


Axis and Allies 1941 planes and industry I recently played axis and allies 1941 for the first time with a friend and at one point during gameplay he took over my capital with a bomber by destroying my only tank and used its last movement to take it over later I was doubtful so I looked in the rulebook days later and confirmed that planes can never take over enemy territory I brought this to his attention and he agreed that he shouldn't have took it over but then argued that I would have lost my economy anyway because his plane destroyed my capital making it neutral territory until I took it back I don't think this is the case but just to be sure can planes or any unit destroy your economy in such fashion. To simplify my question can industry be destroyed.

An air unit cannot capture a territory; since the territory is not captured it would retain whatever control marker was on it.  There are no rules to "destroy" a capital or industrial complex.  A territory cannot become neutral; the only neutral territories are already defined on the board.
http://axisallies.com/rules/axis-allies-rules-1941.pdf


Has there been known of a board game that co exists with a GM? I was curious to know if there was a RPG themed boardgame (or a RPG in a box)
that could use GM's as a primary mechanic, or just in there.
Kinda like to GM as much as I like to play a board game doing both would be amazing, even if what you narrate is decided by dice or cards.

Would you know of any titles by any chance?

(the reason for mice and mystics is that its commonly known as a RPG in a box)

I think games like Descent is what you're looking for. It's a boardgame where a GM plays against a group of adventurers, and you can add as much roleplay as the group sees fit.
If Star Wars is your thing, Imperial Assault is basically Descent re-themed.


There seem to be several different scoring systems for fields/cities in Carcassonne -- which is correct? It seems that the scoring for fields and cities in Carcassonne varies -- has this changed over the years, or is this a difference between the US and international versions? Are there generally-accepted correct scoring rules for fields and cities?

The third edition scoring is now what is shipped by both Rio Grande Games(US distributor) and Hans im Glück(Original, German publishers)

Rio Grande Games made the changes for the english version of the game (1st and 2nd edition scoring).

Here are a summary of the scoring rule changes by edition

1st Edition

Small City scoring (Completed 2 tile cities only score 2)
Farmer scoring:

Select a city
Count the farmers in fields touching that city
The player with the majority of farmers on all farms touching that city scores 4
Repeat for each city.

2nd Edition

Small City scoring (Completed 2 tile cities only score 2)
Farmer scoring:

Pick a farm
Count the farmers on that farm
The player with the most farmers scores 3 for each city touching that farm
Repeat for each city.  However, each city can only be scored once

3rd Edition

All city scoring is 2 points per tile, no small city exception
Farmer Scoring:

Pick a farm
Count the farmers on that farm
The player with the most farmers scores 3 for each city touching that farm
Repeat for each farm.  Each city can be scored multiple times.

Rio Grande Games only recently (2009) starting shipping the 3rd edition rules, while Hans im  Glück issued them in 2004.  The reason given is that RGG prefers not to issue rule changes when reprinting a game. This meant that they had to rewrite the rules of most expansions issued to ensure they were compatible.

I do not believe that Jay Tummelson (Head of Rio Grande Games) has stated why the switch was made in 2009.  I think there are two possible explanations.

The Abbey and Mayor expansion introduced the barn piece.  The barn piece is scored essentially like a farm (it scores and eliminates all farmers in the farm).  This is easily understood for those familiar with the 3rd edition rules, but confusing for those using 1st.
All electronic editions of the game use 3rd edition scoring.  This could have forced RGG's hand.  When everyone in the US was playing just the RGG version it was easy to maintain a consistent rule set.  Now, a lot of us play on our Xbox or Ipad as well as using the board game.  This makes the differences more noticeable.


Attacking with Dimir Spybug and Nightveil Sprite Dimir Spybug gets a +1/+1 counter every time I surveil. Nightveil Sprite lets me surveil 1 when it attacks. If I swing with both, when do I surveil and when does Dimir Spybug get pumped, during or after combat? Thanks in advance for any clarification you may provide.

Your Dimir Spybug will get pumped in time to be stronger during the same combat.

The combat phase is divided into several steps.

Beginning of combat
Declare attackers
Declare blockers
Combat damage
End of combat

Nightveil Sprite will trigger when it is declared as an attacker, during step 2. This is when you will surveil, and that will trigger Dimir Spybug. So by the time blockers are being declared, Dimir Spybug will already have the +1/+1 counter.

  Declare Attackers Step

    508.1. First, the active player declares attackers.[...]

      [...]

      508.1m Any abilities that trigger on attackers being declared trigger.

    508.2. Second, the active player gets priority. (See rule 116, “Timing and Priority.”)

      508.2a Abilities that trigger on a creature attacking trigger only at the point the creature is declared as an attacker. They will not trigger if a creature attacks and then that creature’s characteristics change to match the ability’s trigger condition.
      Example: A permanent has the ability “Whenever a green creature attacks, destroy that creature at end of combat.” If a blue creature attacks and is later turned green, the ability will not trigger.

      508.2b Any abilities that triggered on attackers being declared or that triggered during the process described in rules 508.1 are put onto the stack before the active player gets priority; the order in which they triggered doesn’t matter. (See rule 603, “Handling Triggered Abilities.”)

Step-by-step of what happens:

Nightveil Sprite's ability triggers as it is declared as an attacker.
Before you get priority in "Declare attackers" step, that trigger is put on the stack.
Assuming no responses, the ability resolves; you surveil.
Dimir Spybug's ability triggers, and is put on the stack.
Assuming no responses, the ability resolves; Dimir Spybug gets a +1/+1 counter.
Blockers are declared.
Combat damage is dealt. Dimir Spybug has the +1/+1 counter by this time, so it will deal an extra damage (and have an extra toughness).


History of “Aggravation” board design The Wikipedia page is kind of vague on when the different board designs were produced.

I’d like to know more specifically when the original 4-player board with a backing was replaced by the folding 6-player board that did not have a backing?

Also, does anyone have photos or recall for sure what color was the face of the board?  I do recall that the outside edges of the side of the box were a sort of pale gold.

Did it come with a specific color and size of die?  I recall a transparent green die but that might not have been original.

At the BGG website the various versions of the Aggravation game are listed on the following webpage:

https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/2272/aggravation/versions

Although Wikipedia states "Aggravation ... was first produced in 1960 by CO-5 Company," the first BGG version is listed as being produced (published in BGG lingo) in 1962. BGG lists two versions by CO-5 Company for 1962, one of which was for 6 players. There is also a Canadian version published in 1962.

4 player version for 1962
https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgameversion/33017/co-5-square-box-edition

6 player version for 1962
https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgameversion/33015/co-5-edition-1962
Clicking on the picture shows that version with a pair of white dice.

Does this information answer your question?


Missions in Risk -- is Australia really an island? For some reason, I agreed to play Risk with my wife and her friend the other night, and we decided to try the Mission cards in Risk because no one wanted to go for global domination.  I would soon be reminded why I don't play this game.

One of the mission cards states "Control two islands".  While there is nothing in the rules that states what exactly is an "island", to me, islands would be any of the following countries:

Great Britain
Iceland
Greenland
Indonesia
New Guinea
Madagascar
Japan

However, our friend also claimed Australia was an island, albeit a "very big island".  Pulling up the Wiki Answers article as well as the Wikipedia article state that Australia is a technically a continent and not an island, partly due to being on its own tectonic plate.  The Wikipedia article does mention that Australia has been dubbed the "island continent", which was enough to give our lawyer friend something to hold on to.

Barring common sense, are there any rulings as to which countries count for the mission card?

Australia is not an island.

The rules for the 2003 edition define an island as follows:

  A mission may require you to control an island. An island is a territory completely surrounded by water and only connected to other territories by sea-lines, for example Indonesia.

See page 18 of the rules here: http://www.hasbro.com/common/instruct/Risk_2003.pdf


Battle Fader vs Majesty's Fiend Majesty's Fiend:

  Cannot be Special Summoned. Monster effects cannot be activated.

Battle Fader:

  When an opponent's monster declares a direct attack: You can Special
  Summon this card from your hand, then end the Battle Phase. If
  Summoned this way, banish it when it leaves the field.

If Majesty's Fiend on field, can Battle Fader be special summoned and end battle phase by its own effect? I'm not sure if Battle Fader's effect is active or passive effect?

It does more than just special summon, so it cannot be an inherent special summon.
That makes it a special summon by effect, which cannot be activated due to majesty's fiend.


Do Get Out of Jail Free cards "have value"? When going bankrupt in Monopoly the rules state that you must either turn over to that player all that you have of value and retire from the game if going bankrupt thanks to another player, or turn over all assets to the Bank if going bankrupt thanks to the Bank.

Versions of the game with Rules for a Short Game state that after the second player goes bankrupt:

  Each remaining player then values his/her property.

  Cash on hand
  Lots, Utilities and Railroads owned, at the price printed on the board.
  Any mortgaged property owned, at one-half the price printed on the board.
  Houses, valued at purchase price.
  Hotels, valued at purchase price including the value of the
  three houses turned in.

  The richest player wins.

This mentions nothing about Get Out of Jail Free cards.

Despite being a sell-able item, do these not have "value"?
If not, do these get returned to the board after a player retires from the game with one or both in their possession?

The rules do not explicitly tell us what happens.

But it makes sense to say that they have 'value' and that they are transferred during bankruptcy.


Removal of red camp cards from the camp board In Castaways, the red camp cards stay in the camp board until they are "dealt with". There are some camp cards, such as #51 (Argument), that have no clear condition stating how to "deal with" the card. Does this means that the card stays forever in the camp board, or that after a player triggers its effects it should be removed?

Got an answer from the BBG forum. There is no explicit information about this in the manual, neither in the spanish FAQ. Without specific rules, it is reasonable to admit that red cards that do not explicitly define a removal condition (such as #51) stay in the camp board until the end of the game.


Do you receive the Mortgage value of a property every turn? My cousin mortgaged his property and he says every time it’s his turn he has to receive the mortgage amount on back of his card.

Eg: Illinois Ave Mortgage is $150 , he claims he gets $150 every time it’s his turn.

That's not how a mortgage works in Monopoly or real life!  A bank does not give you a perpetual income and ask you pay that amount plus 10% back once.  A Mortgage is a one-time loan based on the property value.  It is not a perpetual income.

The rules you need are all here. There is no reference anywhere that you get a mortgage value every turn.

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

  No rent can be collected on mortgaged properties or utilities, but
  rent can be collected on unmortgaged properties in the same group. In
  order to lift the mortgage, the owner must pay the Bank the amount of
  the mortgage plus 10% interest. When all the properties of a
  color-group are no longer mortgaged, the owner may begin to buy back
  houses at full price.

  The player who mortgages property retains possession of it and no
  other player may secure it by lifting the mortgage from the Bank.
  However, the owner may sell this mortgaged property to another player
  at any agreed price. If you are the new owner, you may lift the
  mortgage at once if you wish by paying off the mortgage plus 10%
  interest to the Bank. If the mortgage is not lifted at once, you must
  pay the Bank 10% interest when you buy the property and if you lift
  the mortgage later you must pay the Bank an additional 10% interest as
  well as the amount of the mortgage.

Also think of the effect this would have on the game.  No one would ever lose.  Turn one I buy a property,  I then Mortgage it and I've an income every turn meaning I can't go bankrupt.  Every player would have all their properties mortgaged getting richer and richer so it would never end.


Rummikub Joker Rules On the board:

Black 1
Black 2
Joker (Black 3)
Black 4
Joker (Black 5)

On my rack:

Black 3
Black 5
Yellow 2

The play I want to make: Swap out my Black 3 and Black 5 for the two Jokers & use them with my Yellow 2 as a run or set.

Is this legal? or since I am buying two jokers am I required to use two tiles (i.e. one for each joker)?

Sorry for the confusion (I am new at this) ...

What my opponents are saying is that I can't use just one tile from my rack with the two jokers I bought ... I must use two from my rack (one for each joker)

It may or may not be legal, depending on which rules you're using. Some rulesets require you to match a joker retrieved from the board with two tiles from your hand for the new meld -- prohibiting you from using both jokers from the board together with only one tile from your hand.
See the discussion of "Variations" under https://www.pagat.com/rummy/rummikub.html

A lot of confusion has been caused by the rule from the "Official Rummikub® Book" that says that when a melded joker is replaced it must immediately be used in a "new" meld. What restriction, if any, does this place on the way the retrieved joker has to be used? The rules supplied with various editions of Rummikub® sets have interpreted this rule in different ways.

A still stricter interpretation, which seems to be preferred by many players, is that the joker must be reused in a new meld formed by combining it with two tiles from your hand. I have seen two sets of rules which support this view. The J W Spear & Sons rules (1988) say: "A joker that has been picked up in this manner must be used in that player's same turn, as part of a new set, along with tiles from his rack." The Pressman Toy Corp rules (1987, 1998) say even more explicitly: "A joker that has been replaced must be used in the player's same turn with 2 or more tiles from his rack to make a new set." But even this is ambiguous: it is not clear whether the new set can also contain tiles from the table. Some players allow this. For example: on the table is a set of four 4's and a run of blue 8-7-joker; in your hand you have two blue sixes and a blue three; you may substitute one blue 6 for the joker and make a new blue run of 6-joker-4-3, stealing the blue 4 from the set of 4's. The new run uses two tiles from your hand, along with the joker and one other tile from the table.


MTG Mirage Mirror copying Medomai the Ageless Hey guys just a quick question. Last night I played an EDH game and I have a Medomai the Ageless onto the battlefield. It's my opponent's turn and he uses Mirage Mirror to copy Medomai.

He used Chainer, Dementia Master as the commander. So on his turn he copies Medomai with Mirror, use Chainer to bring back Gary and deals X damage to me and another opponent, he attacks my opponent with Mirage which is a copy of Medomai, the person doesn't have flying blockers so damage gets through triggering Medomai ability to get an extra turn. Then after finishing his turn he sacrifice Gary with a sacrifice outlet and Mirage Mirror becomes the artifact again. Now he starts the extra turn doing the same thing (copying Medomai, bringing back Gary with Chainer, attacking the opponent with Mirage, damage gets through and gets an extra turn, sacrificing Gary, Mirage becomes the artifact again) and the loop goes and goes.

In this scenario Mirage Mirror copying Medomai over and over and getting combat damage through does not get affected by Medomai's second ability (Medomai the Ageless can’t attack during extra turns.)?

"[Cardname] can’t attack during extra turns" places an attacking restriction on the card.

  508.1c The active player checks each creature he or she controls to see whether it’s affected by any restrictions (effects that say a
  creature can’t attack, or that it can’t attack unless some condition
  is met). If any restrictions are being disobeyed, the declaration of
  attackers is illegal.

Therefore, any creature with that restriction can not be declared as an attacker during extra turns. It does not matter how the extra turn was created.

Note that Medomai has two separate abilities. They happen to work together by design (or rather against each other), but they are not connected ruleswise.

Now the restriction only applies while declaring attackers. If Mirage Mirror was somehow attacking before it turned into Medomai (e.g. March of the Machines), that player would continue to get extra turns from Medomai's first ability. Similarly, it will also work if Medomai or a copy thereof is put onto the battlefield tapped and attacking (e.g. Ilharg, the Raze-Boar).


Looking for rules to a card game called "Wild Cards" This game is played with several tables of four in which winning partners in one round move to new table.  Wild cards/rules change with each round.  It's great for getting to know people.

I lost my set of rules

Actually, after commenting above, I discovered that you can play Bunco using cards instead of dice.  Check out some of the card-based variants on this page - maybe one of them will be close enough (at least in spirit) to the game that you remember.

http://www.ehow.com/info_12101194_bunco-card-games.html


The Phantom Knights of Cloven Helm; can it activate more than once? Does The Phantom Knights of Cloven Helm gain 500 attack every time a phantom monster is sent to the graveyard or just once whilst its on the field?

Each time

The Phantom Knights of Cloven Helm you mention reads in its text:

  If a Phantom Knights card(s) is sent to your Graveyard: [gains 500 atk]

So that means the effect will trigger each time something sends one or more of such cards to the GY.

Worth noting the "card(s)" part: that means that if you send more than one card to the GY simultaneously, the monster will only gain 500 ATK (not 500 per card)