What are common strategies for beating the robot in Race For The Galaxy? I recently got the The Gathering Storm expansion to Race For The Galaxy and I've played solo against the robot about twelve times, winning only once.  I consider myself a competent player (consistently mid-50s or higher) but the robot seems impossible, even at the easiest level (I have yet to graduate to medium or hard).  I find that the robot typically gains lots of victory points (usually 80-90% of the available 24 points) and my usual strategy of Consume-Trade exacerbates the problem.

What are some common strategies for playing solo against the robot?  What are some common pitfalls of using player-verse-player strategies against the robot?

From http://hiewandboardgames.blogspot.ca/2008_12_01_archive.html

  To beat the robot you need to understand how it works and know how to minimize the chances of indirectly helping it. Knowing that sometimes it "copies" your actions, you need to think twice before selecting Consume x 2 if the robot's economy size is 5 (i.e. it would score 10VP if it also does Consume x 2). The robot's main ways of scoring are the 6-cost development tiles and the victory points. I find that usually it doesn't score much from worlds or normal developments. The 6-cost dev tiles (as opposed to dev cards) are a mechanism to adjust the difficulty level. The robot most of the time will be able to play all of its 6-cost dev tiles, unless you are really really quick in ending the game. So when you decide to play with 1 6VP tile (easy), 2 6VP tiles (medium) or 3 9VP tiles (hard), you are more or less already deciding that the robot will at least have 6VP / 12VP / 27VP.

  You need to watch the robot's economy size closely. It's kind of a countdown timer. The robot's economy will grow, sometimes quickly sometimes not, and the bigger it grows, the more dangerous it will be. You cannot allow it to do Consume too many times, especially when its economy size is big. It can earn lots of VPs this way, and also end the game very quickly by exhausting the VPs.


Exiling Creatures: When is the card face up and when face down? An opponent's Banisher Priest exiled my Goblin Shortcutter.

As I was reading some rules, I came across the fact that in some situations exiled cards face upwards and sometimes downwards.

What factor determines whether the card gets exiled face up or face down? The text on the card?

If the ability says to exile the card face down, you exile it face down. Otherwise, you exile it face up. Banisher Priest doesn't say to exile the creature face down, so you exile it face up. Rule 406.3 says

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

One thing to keep in mind is that the point of exiling a card face down is to keep players from knowing what it is. It wouldn't make sense to exile a card face down if everyone already knows what it is. The only abilities that say to exile face down are abilities that exile from hidden zones: the hand and the library.


When do I attack if complete my battle line with a card stolen by Venemous Creeps? Playing a green card ends the turn so do I attack the turn I play the Venemous Creeps, or the following turn?

From the Venemous Creeps section of the Chaos Marauders card reference:

  If a player completes a battle line with a stolen card, he may still
  attack an opponent’s battle line as normal.

So the normal rules apply, that is to say: "As soon as a battle line has been completed, it can attack any opponent’s incomplete battle line" [assuming the completed battle line is strong enough].

Therefore, yes, you do attack on the current turn, not the next turn.


Buying 36 booster packs for a magic the gathering set On amazon, there are plenty of listings for 36 booster packs that are part of the same set. Given that there is one land card in each booster, and each pack comes with 15 cards, you would receive 14*36 = 504 non-land cards. Given there are generally 180-275 cards in a set and the distribution of cards is mostly skewed towards commons, isn't there a very high likelihood of getting more than 4 copies of the same card in a purchase like this, especially for sets with lower card counts?

If so, do folks typically buy these sets for reasons other than deck building (drafting perhaps, or other reasons?) or would these boxes still be good purchases for those looking to get into deckbuilding for kitchen table games?

The first part of your question can be answered.  Yes, you may end up with more than 4 copies of the same card, and the chances of doing so obviously go up the more packs you buy.  People that buy packs in bulk are doing so to get the rare cards, of which there are only one card per pack.  You need to buy quite a few packs to get a play set (4 copies) of each rare.  The extra cards you get in the process could potentially be traded or sold to help recoup the cost (though you'll only get back a small percentage of what you spent).

As to why people do this, there are too many reasons to list.  Drafting, collecting, searching for a specific card, gifting, etc.  Buying a bunch of packs is a good way to get a random sampling of cards.  If you're trying to just have one strong deck, you're better off buying singles and/or preconstructed decks.


How much money would I have to spend to play in tournaments? In posing this question, I realize that it may be out of scope for boardgames.SE; this question could be subjective and the monetary costs vary quite a bit between cheapest and most expensive decks. Having said that, I think this could have value if it falls within the Q&A format appropriately.

I've been a casual player for awhile, but I've rarely dabbled in tournament formats. I think I spent some time between Mirrodin and Ravnica playing Standard, but beyond that I have had very little exposure. I am realizing that I'd like to start participating in the more competitive tournament side of Magic, but I'm concerned about the cost.

I get the sense that it is a much larger initial investment to start in Vintage and Legacy because there is a solid base that most decks use in land and mana artifacts, and the upkeep may be minimal as new cards come out that fit a deck, whereas the initial cost in Modern and Standard is lower, but there are continual costs as new sets come out that consistently change the format. Beyond that, I don't have a great sense of how much these costs are, and the average costs of these would partially determine what style of tournaments I'm likely to be attracted to.

What is the average cost of a deck for each of the major tournament types? These would at least include Vintage, Legacy, Extended, Modern and Standard, plus any others I may be unaware of.

The easiest way to compile the information you're looking for that I know of is with tcgPlayer's deck search:

http://magic.tcgplayer.com/db/deck_search.asp

Choose a "Format"

Choose "Places Finished" : 1st, 2nd, 3rd-4th, 5th-8th

Choose "Deck Origination" : Event and Article Decks Only

Only took me a minute or two to compile that for the most recent star city games legacy open the top 8 decks had a min price of $1100, max of $2500 and median around $1600.


Can I steal an opponent's aura by changing the target while it is on the stack? My opponent casts  Eldrazi Conscription on a creature they control. Before Eldrazi Conscription resolves, can I redirect it onto my creature using  Shunt, for example?

Yes.

  114.1b Aura spells are always targeted. These are the only permanent spells with targets. An Aura’s target is specified by its enchant
  keyword ability (see rule 702.5, “Enchant”). The target(s) are chosen
  as the spell is cast; see rule 601.2c. An Aura permanent doesn’t
  target anything; only the spell is targeted. (An activated or
  triggered ability of an Aura permanent can also be targeted.)

  608.3a If the object that’s resolving is an Aura spell, its resolution involves two steps. First, it checks whether the target specified by
  its enchant ability is still legal, as described in rule 608.2b. (See
  rule 702.5, “Enchant.”) If so, the spell card becomes a permanent and
  is put onto the battlefield under the control of the spell’s
  controller attached to the object it was targeting.

As long as you have a creature to change the target of the aura to, you can have it attach to your creature instead of the one your opponent intended, since changing the target of the aura spell changes what it enters the battlefield attached to.  However, there is a catch. The aura will be attached to your creature but you will not be its controller. Your opponent still controls the spell so they will still control the aura permanent, as mentioned above in 608.3a and reaffirmed by the following:

  303.4e An Aura’s controller is separate from the enchanted object’s controller or the enchanted player; the two need not be the same.

This doesn't make a difference for Eldrazi Conscription, since Eldrazi Conscription modifies the creature directly.  But in the case of  Armadillo Cloak, you opponent would still control the triggered life gain ability and consequently would be the one to gain life for the damage dealt by your creature.


What are the most effective action combinations in Dominion? I've only played a few games of the base set, but I already noticed some very powerful combinations:

Laboratory can be repeatedly combo'd with itself to draw a massive amount of treasure from your deck early in the game.
Remodel can be used on Gold to quickly convert it to provinces during endgame.

Share your favorite powerful combinations.

Nobles

Nobles combine very well with themselves, or with action multipliers like Throne Room, King's Court or Golem.


What is the meaning of the starting player rules in Tzolk'in? The rules of the board game Tzolk'in state (page 4, bottom left): "Give the Starting Player Marker to the player who most recently sacrificed something.  In case of a tie, give the Starting Player Marker to the player who volunteers for the next sacrifice."

My question: What does this mean?

Probably this is a joke?  (But then, who starts the game?)  Or does this refer to some part of the game which I haven't discovered yet?

It's a joke, referencing the fact that many games these days have means of determining a starting player that are somewhat arbitrarily related to the theme of the game but where there's nothing stopping you from choosing the starting player however you like. For example, the player with the pointiest ears is meant to be the start player for Small World, while Chrononauts has everyone guess the time and the person closest to the truth gets to start.


Quarriors' Deathdealer and expert culling When we started using the expert culling rule in Quarriors, we found a confusing interaction with the Deathdealer. It's special ability is:

When Deathdealer scores, you may trade Deathdealer for one die from any other player's Used Pile.

However, the expert culling rule says that you can only score a creature if you cull that creature's die. How can you swap it and cull it?

The consensus on BGG is summed up in this post:

when scoring the death dealer, you would have two "when deathdealer scores" effects that would trigger. 1) cull for points. 2) trade dice.

If two "when x scores" effects happen at the same time, the active player has to choose which one resolves first. In most cases, this should not be a problem, but for deathdealer the choices are mutually exclusive. If you trade first, you no longer have a dice in your possession to cull. If you cull first, you no longer have a dice in your possession to trade. Thus, you either trade deathdealer or cull it for points.


Will Return to Duty get someone out of the Brig? The other day, when playing Battlestar Galactica, we had all (bar the CAG) been brigged, and someone drew the crisis Return to Duty card.

  Turn 5 Crisis: Return to Duty

  CAG Chooses

  Any character on Galactica with piloting in his skill set may immediately launch himself in a viper. Then: Basestars Launch Raiders

  OR

  Basestars Attack Galactica
  Raiders Activate

Can the CAG pick the top one and get the character out of the brig? We ruled no, as it made it too easy, but it does sort of make sense to me (and comes with its own downside).

No, the rules are fairly explict about getting out of the Brig.

  Players may move out of “Sickbay” without difficulty, but not the “Brig.” They may only move out of the “Brig” by passing the skill check listed on the location.

Piloting Vipers

  A player who wants his character to pilot a viper simply moves his character to the “Hangar Deck” location and uses the action listed there.

Also from the BSG Errata, although it doesn't mention your particular example, it is a similar move a character from the Brig to some other location.

  Q: If a character is in the “Brig,” and a card sends him to “Sickbay,” is he moved from the “Brig?”
  A: No. This reflects a change from previous rulings.


How do the Flames work? I'm a little unclear on the wording of the Flames. What does "Empty" mean? Does it ignore mountains? Shields? I'm fairly certain it ignores troops.

Side question (maybe this should be a separate question?!) can Flames travel through the Great Brass Pipe?

Empty does not mean "needs 2 critters to conquer" it means without monster or race tokens.

From the rules, bottom of page 9

  A Region is deemed non-empty if, and only if, it contains at
  least one Monster or Race token (Active or In Decline). A Region
  that contains a Black Mountain marker, a Popular Place or a
  Righteous Relic but no Monster or enemy Race token is
  considered empty.

The Great Brass Pipe considers spaces adjacent for the purposes of the owning race, so Flames should be continuous through it.  This is confirmed in the FAQ.


Is there a way to play the mafia party game online ? Is there a way to play the mafia party game online ?

I have previously played on Epic Mafia (which is linked to from the Wikipedia page in the question).  They have the largest set of player characters I have seen, some of which makes the game extremely complicated!


Can boars go inside the cave in Caverna? So there is some ambiguity in the rules about Boars where the example seems to conflict with the rule statement.  This leads to the question:

Can Boars go inside the cave (For example in the base room or the mixed dwelling)?

Evidence that any kind of animal may live in the starter dwelling:

The text says 'pair of animals'

Evidence that only 'farm animals' may live in the starter dwelling:

p20 example says 'The entry level room of your cave can hold 2 Farm
animals of the same type.'

These seem to contradict each other mildly (farm animals or any animal?).  This inconsitency may indicate possible errors in rules diagrams.

More evidence for inconsitency in diagrams:

Dogs are counted as farm animals in the example on page 6
It is stated on page 10, 'Dogs are not considered farm animals'

These two pieces of information explicitly contradict.  Therefore we must conclude there may be errors in the diagrams on the rules.  However, if boars are explicitly farm animals, there is no issue.  So this ruling depends on what is actually a farm animal.

Evidence for Boars as Farm Animals:

They are in the house diagram on p10.
On p10, they are indicates as breeding animals, and it is stated that
only farm animals breed.
They are in pastures on pp 6,20

Evidence against Boars as Farm Animals:

They are called Wild Boars on Page 1 of the Rules book.  Farm animals
are not wild in the common language usage of the term farm and wild.
On Page 5, picture, states 'A forest stable can hold 1 Wild boar, but
no other animals'  This differentiates boars from the other animals.
There is no 'boar farming' action (which also true of cattle).
On p20, an explicit distinction is made between a stable in a meadow
and a stable in a forest.  'Boars may be in forest' which is
presented in the context of an exceptionary clause to farm animals
being able to be stored.
It is not explicitly stated anywhere that 'wild boars are farm
animals'

In summary:

There is an implication that boars are farm animals.
There is an implication that boars are not farm animals.
There are clear and explicit errors in exemplary diagrams which may
weaken the strengths of either side of these implications, and also
possibly, the authority of the diagrams as opposed to the text.

So, absent a clear, congruous and consistent set of words, the original question becomes valid:

Can Boars go inside the cave?

The rules state explicitly that Wild Boars are Farm animals on page 6:

  Each animal is worth 1 Gold point. There are Dogs, and the Farm animals Sheep, Donkeys, Wild boars, and Cattle.

As you can see, Dogs are not included in the set of Farm animals. There is no inconsistency.

Wild Boars are indeed differentiated several times from other Farm animals within the rules, but this is just because they have special rules that apply to them as opposed to Sheep, Donkeys, and Cattle. They are still Farm animals.


In Betrayal at House on the Hill, what happens when a player owns the Holy Symbol and turns into a vampire? We were playing a game of Betrayal at House on the Hill when one of us triggered the Dracula Haunt and turned into a Vampire. He picked up the Holy Symbol before so surely he would have to either toss it or roll every turn if he's able to move at all.

There are no rules dealing with this specific interaction, so we have to make conclusions based on the specifics of the rules that are there. By a literal reading of the rules, the traitor would be unaffected by the Holy Symbol in this case.

The rule states:

  Each time any Vampire
  tries to enter the Chapel or any room with an
  explorer who has the Holy Symbol, it must
  attempt a Sanity roll of 6+ to enter that room. A
  Vampire who fails that roll can't enter that room.

In general, to "enter any room with an explorer who has the Holy Symbol" would mean that the room you are trying to enter already contains an explorer who has the Holy Symbol. Especially given that it is talking about "trying to enter" a room. Meaning, before you have entered the room, you check what's in that room. If it is the Chapel, or if it contains an explorer who has the Holy Symbol, you must roll.

In this case, the Holy Symbol is not in that room, because it is with you in the room you are currently in. So you are not trying to enter a room that contains an explorer with the Holy Symbol.

Thematically you can think of the Holy Symbol as needing to be "activated" by an explorer to have the negative effect on the vampire. This would explain why it doesn't effect the vampire if it isn't just sitting on the floor of a room; it had to be with an explorer. So while it's simply sitting there in the vampire's pocket; it would have no effect.

You can also see it as thematically, it should effect the vampire, because it is a Holy Symbol. If you prefer this interpretation, then I recommend the house rule that the vampire automatically drops it when he becomes a vampire. As Betrayal at House on the Hill is a very theme-driven game, sometimes coming up with rules that make sense thematically is fine. And I don't see that rule as causing much of an imbalance.


Among good players, should one base one's play on the assumption that the opponents will play deceptively? Here is another Frank Stewart example. I am showing only the N-S hands since this is a declarer problem.

N-S vulnerable, the bidding could have been 1NT-3NT; E/W pass throughout (but the actual N-S bid 1c and 1d before going into NT).

The  opening lead was the Jack of spades. Declarer had five tricks in the majors, and needed four more from the minors.

K4
AJ7
KJ873
J42

A6
KQ8
T95
AQ763

My choice of play is to win in the dummy, lead the jack of clubs and let it ride, then finesse to the AQ of clubs. This wins the four needed tricks when clubs are split 3-2, and also when the clubs are 4-1 with the king in East.

Declarer chose to win in hand, and finesse for three diamond tricks, in addition to the ace of clubs. This play works best when West has the diamond queen (it doesn't matter who has the ace). It also has "additional equity" when East has the queen and plays it on the first trick. Then South will revert to the club finesse (which wins as the cards lie).

But in the problem, one of two Easts played the ace of diamonds on the first finesse, concealing his Qx. South lost time by taking the "marked" finesse and lost the "race" for tricks.

Questions:

Against a good player who will routinely false card, should I train myself to ignore potentially false signals, or at least limit them to the values from the principle of "restricted choice"?
Should I consider using a "mixed" strategy against a good player, randomly "observing" him at some times, and sometimes getting "caught," while ignoring him at other times and not reacting?
Should Stewart have pointed out that the club finesse was the superior play? (I didn't get that message from the  article but believe this to be the case.)

First, let's address some vital points:

East has a nearly complete picture of the hand as soon as his partner plays the D6 at Trick 2:

South has exactly 3 Diamonds because Partner is echoing to show on even number.
West has 5 Spades because Declarer didn't hold  up the suit at Trick 1.
All missing high cards are in South for his 15-17 rebid of 1 NT.
East knows that West holds Club Nine because that is why the Diamond suit is being played at Trick 2 instead of the Clubs.
The only outstanding question is whether South is 35 or 44 in the round Suits (Hearts & Clubs). However this is irrelevant at this time because South requires at least two Diamond tricks for his contract; unless East wins with the Q to alert Declarer to the bad Diamond lie.

Hence East's win of the Ace at Trick 2 is  a mandatory falsecard; all near-expert and better players will make the play, as it is the only way to set the contract. An expert East will still make this play, smooth as silk, with doubleton AQ of diamonds.

Let's answer these questions one at a time:

No. Count the hand and learn (at least the common) mandatory false card situations. The Diamond line illustrated here is 67% (50% for the D finesse + 68%/4 for all onside Kx Club holdings).
No. See above. There are times to adopt a mixed strategy in Bridge play, but this is not one of them. Such cases are most common when holding two equivalent cards (such as a QJ holding), and one should be prepared to decide, smoothly, which one to play in a way that your opponent cannot predict. See Restricted Choice.
No - because that requires a column of its own. CA followed by low to the CJ is 74% (68% for a 3-2 break + 30%/5 for all singleton CK in a 4-1 break). Leading the CJ for a finesse is just the same 68% as the Diamond line, but with risk of additional undertricks.

Finally, to answer your question: East's play is a mandatory false card. When playing against experts, you must expect mandatory false cards to be made.

However, even World Champions occasionally miss a mandatory false card if pressured early enough in the hand, as this hand from the 1976 Bermuda Bowl Final demonstrates. After leading a Heart to South's low ruff. West failed to rise with KC on the low Club lead by Declarer.


Will Elesh Norn kill creatures if I don't pay the extra cost for Flash? Suppose I use Flash to bring  Elesh Norn, Grand Cenobite into play, then choose to sacrifice her rather than pay her mana cost. Will my opponent's creatures with two or less toughness die?

No, Elesh Norn's static abilities have no effect on the battlefield in that case.

Bringing Elesh Norn into play with Flash and deciding whether or not to sacrifice it is all part of Flash's resolution. Killing creatures with her -2/-2 would require state-based effects to be checked, but that only happens after Flash has finished resolving, at which point Eles Norn is already gone.

If you sacrifice a creature brought into play with the spell Flash, basically all you get are "enters the battlefield" and "leaves the battlefield" effects.


Does move priority come first when deciding option card play? If you started in Dock 1, but my move has higher priority than yours, and my option cards involve my movement while your option card involves your movement, does the higher movement priority allow me to execute my option first (then allow you to take your move and then execute your option), or does the ruling on page 8 on resolving option card priority imply that the docking bay priority rules overtop of each 'complete registers' or 'robots move' segment (and in this case the dock 1 player, you, goes first)?

My understanding is that the option card priority rules only apply when decisions about option cards would otherwise be made at the same time, for example, if you're both firing lasers and deciding whether to use options. But if you're moving, you already know who moves first, and you decide whether to use the option card as you move, so the option card priority rules never come into play.


What is the African board game in this picture? What is the name of the board game in the picture below?

Any article/document about the game would be very appreciated.

I'm pretty sure it's ZAMMA:

I'm seeing the 9 x 9 board there, and two different types of pieces equivalent to black and white.  Also, I'm no expert, but that scene does look a bit North African to me.

From this page: "When played in the Sahara, the men are represented by short sticks, whilst the women are pieces of camel dung."  That certainly looks like what's going on in the picture, unpleasant though it sounds!  I don't think camel dung meeples will catch on outside Africa...


Vampiric Link on opponents creature Suppose I cast a Vampiric Link on an opponents creature. Does the opponent gain life when this creature does damage or do I gain that life?

Vampiric Link says:

  Whenever enchanted creature deals damage, you gain that much life.

"You" on a card refers to the controller of the card - and regardless of what Vampiric Link is enchanting, you (the person who cast Vampiric Link) will always* control it. So you'll always be the one gaining life, not your opponent.

*barring any control changing effects that occur


Where to play Go online? I used to play regularly on KGS but have been inactive for several years. I am frustrated by the Catch-22 of the KGS system: in order to play rated games, you must have a solid rating. Solid ratings come from playing many rated games.

Does anyone have advice for an enthusiast who wants to play competitively online? Where should I go and how do I establish a rank?

KGS

http://www.gokgs.com/

IMO the best server for lower level games.

It as an active English speaking community
Ranking system is relatively meaningful, even in the lower ranks
Many features in the client, such as game reviews


Untapping a Creature that has "does not untap during its controller's untap step" If I have a creature enchanted by Ice Over

Enchant artifact or creature
Enchanted permanent doesn't untap during its controller's untap step.

Can it be untapped with Initiate's Companion?

Whenever Initiate's Companion deals combat damage to a player, untap target creature or land.

If it can untap, does Ice Over go away?

Can it be untaped with Initiate's Companion?

Yes. Ice Over only prevents the enchanted permanent from untapping during its controller's untap step. Players don't get priority during the Untap step, so this only prevents the normal untapping of permanents at the start of your turn. It doesn't prevent the permanent from being untapped at any other time (e.g. by Twiddle or Initiate's Companion).

If Ice Over's second ability was "Enchanted permanent can't be untapped", it would be a different story. I can't find such a card.

  If it can untap, does Ice Over go away?

No. Ice Over can legally enchant untapped creatures.

In contrast, Entangling Vines has "Enchant tapped creature", so untapping the creature it enchants would cause it to fall off.[CR 303.4c]

  303.4c If an Aura is enchanting an illegal object or player as defined by its enchant ability and other applicable effects, the object it was attached to no longer exists, or the player it was attached to has left the game, the Aura is put into its owner’s graveyard. (This is a state-based action. See rule 704.)


Who goes next after a double auction card with no auction? Let's say that I've bought 2 Nex and another player has bought 1 Nex. On my turn, I reveal a "double auction" card from Nex, but I don't add the second card.

Everyone passes, because the second card would instantly end the round in my favour with Nex in the lead. As a result, I get my Nex for free. Is it now:

My turn (because "players who have not added a card effectively lose a turn")?
The next player's turn?

I only have access to the translated rules, so I'm not sure if losing a turn is only when somebody actually adds a card. 1 would be insanely strong as it would then allow me to play the final Nex, ending the round while having gained an extra painting for free (but that doesn't mean it's not a quirk of the rules). I'd houserule to 2 regardless, but what do the rules actually say?

From checking the rules in front of me the next player clockwise would be next auctioneer.

In the 'running and auction rules' it states :-

  When an auction ends, the player who made the highest bid pays the
  auctioneer the amount of the bid.  If the auctioneer made the highest
  bid the money is paid to the bank instead. If you win an auction, take
  the painting and place it face up in front of you. (...) The player to
  the left of the last auctioned now offers a painting card from his
  hand for sale.

In the double auction rules it states :-

  If it goes back around to you, with no player offering a second
  painting, then you get the double painting for free.

Whilst the word 'won' isn't in the rules that player did win the auction and paid nothing to the back and place it in front of them so the next player clockwise becomes auctioneer.

Also I think the idea that the player who played a double auction card had had nothing goes again is unlikely.  This kind of exception to a rule is likely to be explicitly clarified so it feels even more likely that play would just go clock wise as in all other parts the auction rounds.


"If you end your turn on this tile gain X stat." Power farming? So i was playing Betrayal at house on the hill, and there's several tiles that say: "If you end your turn on this tile gain X stat."

I couldn't find any rule preventing the players from just standing on that tile and ending their turn as soon as their turn begins. Is this a legal move?

I had a game where we were 4 people playing and 3 of them were just standing in the gymnasium while i was walking around finding items and such. Then i ended up being the traitor and i got madman, so my character an all my items was lost. While all of the others had max Knowledge, Speed and almost max Sanity to fight me with.

Is this legal moves? I tried reading through the Rule book but couldn't find a rule that was against this. And it's no fun being the only one exploring the house.

The FAQ/Errata, found here, clarifies that these rooms can each only be used once per player per game.

  Chapel, Gymnasium, Larder, Library -- Can you stay in one of these rooms turn after turn to increase an attribute?

    No. Each character can receive the benefit from each room just once per game (one boost for each trait for each player, if all four rooms are in play). Most players find this easy to remember, but if someone gets argumentative, keep a simple, written record.


Cribbage scoring for a run player 1-card 5, player 2-card 7, player 3-card 6 so he gets points for a run of 3, Player 4-card 7 states when he plays a 7 that he breaks the run so player 5 who follows him plays a 5 doesn’t get any points for his run of 5,7,6.
Please advise if this is correct or incorrect.

If the three most recent cards form a run (with the total still at or below 31), the player who played the last card gets one point per card in the run.  Any combination of 5-6-7 as the most recent three will do this, regardless what any player might have said about "breaking the run."


When can I cast Glyph of Destruction? Glyph of Destruction was originally worded: "Target wall you control gains +10/+0 when blocking." To me, that indicates that you could cast it any time, i.e. outside of combat.

However, the Gather wording is:

  Target blocking Wall you control gets +10/+0 until end of combat. Prevent all damage that would be dealt to it this turn. Destroy it at the beginning of the next end step.

Since Gatherer now says "Target blocking Wall", does that mean I have to declare the Wall as a blocker before I cast the Glyph? I'm trying to come up with some Glyph/Fling shenanigans for a deck and I need to know if I have to block before I use this trick.

Yes, your wall has to be declared a blocker before you can target it with that glyph. Your wall remains a blocker (and thus a legal target) until the end of that combat phase, though you'll have to target it before the Combat Damage step if you want it to actually deal that +10 damage in combat.

A creature is only considered blocking or attacking once it is declared as such, and ceases to be those things once combat is over. There is no such thing as a blocking or attacking creature outside of combat.


Golden Guardian removed before death related trigger Golden Guardian says:

  (2): Golden Guardian fights another target creature you control. When
  Golden Guardian dies this turn, return it to the Battlefield
  transformed under your control

If an opponent targets Guardian with a kill spell, and you activate it's ability in response; it will return transformed. That's great.

But if you activate it's ability to fight another creature, THEN in response your opponent kill-spells it. Does the ability fizzle or will it still revolse returning the Gaudrian to the battlefield transformed?

Golden Guardian will stay dead.

Since the ability doesn't resolve until after Golden Guardian dies, it won't "see" the Guardian die, and therefore won't trigger.

There is a Gatherer ruling that states this specifically:

  If Golden Guardian leaves the battlefield before its activated ability has resolved, it won’t be returned to the battlefield when the ability resolves.


Lazav and Clever Impersonator Lazav, the Multifarious is activated to become a copy of Clever Impersonator, with Caged Sun out, so it doesn't die. It is now simply a 1/1 with the name, "Lazav, the Multifarious," Lazav's ability, and is legendary. I play Mercurial Pretender, choosing to have it enter as a copy of Clever Impersonator, and so I choose to have it enter as a copy of my opponent's Terastodon, with the intent of destroying some stuff.

Does the Mercurial Pretender turned Clever Impersonator turned Terastodon changing to a copy of certain cards "overwrite" the Legendary supertype from Lazav/Clever Impersonator? Pretty sure this is a yes, but just checking.
If it is "entering the battlefield as a copy" of another creature, than wouldn't it have to enter the battlefield to be able to do anything specific to the creature? Specifically, the Mercurial Pretender would have to enter, become Clever Impersonator, and then, being on the battlefield already, would be unable to become Terastodon. Am I correct on this?

The Mercurial Pretender will enter the battlefield as a copy of Terastodon, without Lazav's name, ability, or Legendary supertype.
After Lazav's ability resolves, it is a 0/0 (plus the +1/+1 from Caged Sun) Legendary Shapeshifter Creature named Lazav, the Multifarious with the following text:

You may have [this creature] enter the battlefield as a copy of any nonland permanent on the battlefield.
{X}: Lazav, the Multifarious becomes a copy of target creature card in your graveyard with converted mana cost X, except its name is Lazav, the Multifarious, it's legendary in addition to its other types, and it has this ability.

These characteristics are the result of the copy effect from Lazav's last ability, so they become its new copyable values. This is specified in rule 706.9:

702.9a Some copy effects cause the copy to gain an ability as part of the copying process. This ability becomes part of the copiable values for the copy, along with any other abilities that were copied.

[...]

706.9c Some copy effects modify a characteristic as part of the copying process. The final value(s) for that characteristic becomes part of the copiable values for the copy.

Mercurial Pretender's ability, and Clever Impersonator's, are enters-the-battlefield replacement effects. When applying replacement effects, you follow the process in rules section 616:

616.1. If two or more replacement and/or prevention effects are attempting to modify the way an event affects an object or player, the affected object’s controller (or its owner if it has no controller) or the affected player chooses one to apply, following the steps listed below. If two or more players have to make these choices at the same time, choices are made in APNAP order (see rule 101.4).
[...]

616.1c If any of the replacement and/or prevention effects would cause an object to become a copy of another object as it enters the battlefield, one of them must be chosen. If not, proceed to rule 616.1d.

[...]

616.1e Once the chosen effect has been applied, this process is repeated (taking into account only replacement or prevention effects that would now be applicable) until there are no more left to apply.

So, as the Clone enters the battlefield, you follow that process like this:

Mercurial Pretender's replacement effect applies. You choose to copy the Lazav with the characteristics above. So, the Mercurial Pretender becomes a 0/0 Legendary Shapeshifter Creature named Lazav, the Multifarious with Clever Impersonator's ability and Lazav's activated ability, and the activated ability added by Mercurial Pretender's copy effect.

Lazav's first ability (from Clever Impersonator) applies. You choose to copy Terastadon. So, this Lazav becomes a 9/9 Elephant Creature named Terastodon with Terastodon's ability. This copy effect overwrites all of the creature's characteristics, so it is no longer Legendary or named Lazav and it no longer has Lazav's ability.

No more replacement effects apply, so the Terastodon enters the battlefield and its ability triggers.


Why Do People Use "Precision" Bidding in Bridge? As I understand it, in the "precision" bidding system in bridge, you open one club with 16+ points (a greater than minimum opening hand), while all the other "one" level bids show 13-15 (a minimum). That includes 1NT, making it a "weak" 1 NT.

I was taught that "higher bids mean higher points." Precision blatantly violates this rule. Besides, I don't like the "weak" 1 NT because it's too hard to have all suits adequately covered with 12-14 points.

If you feel the system has merits, what are they? Or do you see a lack of merit like I do?

I think Precision is - with some caveats - an absolutely brilliant system, and one that everyone should try out at some point.

I used to play Bridge with, not to put too fine a point on it, a group with players of various different levels of skill.  Playing with standard systems, some of them would just not get it quite a lot of the time.  Presented with anything other than a balanced 1NT hand, they just wouldn't really know how to bid it, much less respond, or deal with an overcall!

The beauty of Precision is that it takes a lot of the mystery out of at least the early game.  A junior player can't fail to alert you to their strong hand if they are in first seat with 20 HCP.  Likewise, they tend to have less trouble finding the correct suit and level, because of Precision's tightly circumscribed bids.

Is Precision better than other systems in the long run?  No, because once you have a genuine feel for the game you don't really need a system with so little room to maneuver.  Your talent and ability to think quickly will fill in any games in a looser, more economical system.  But don't underestimate Precision's value to beginners.

As for your problems with the 1C opening bid to indicate a strong hand, you might as well say you have problems with conventional bids in general.  Conventional bids are shortcuts to success, taking the place of bids that would otherwise have little value.  1C is a terrible bid, in a literal sense - I have not especially good points, no good majors, and strength in clubs?  Well, that's not going to get me very far, really, is it?  Unless I have 80 below the line or something.  It's almost never useful in actual practice though.  So being able to indicate a strong hand while retaining a whole level of bidding space is usually much better.  It gives you an extra bid and response to accurately describe your hand to partner, and reach that slam that a 16+HCP hand is often capable of making!


Can Debt tokens be taken to pay any coin costs? According to the Cities rules, players can lose coins and incur debts. The rules mention that a player can either pay coins or take Debt tokens.

Does this allow a player to choose to take Debt tokens in lieu of paying coins in general (for example, if a card has coins in its cost)?

Alternatively, is it only possible to incur debts when a card explicitly requires a player to discard coins?

You may only take Debt tokens if a card with the Debt icon would cause a loss of coins for you.

So you may not decide to take Debt tokens instead of paying for a building (or for anything else).

Source

The rules for the Cities expansion explain the Debt mechanic on page 4. The first paragraph starts with "A card with the [Debt icon] symbol", and no other condition is mentioned.

The FAQ (also linked from the answer linked above) contains this Q & A:

  Q: Can a player chooses to gain debt tokens?
  A: No, only the black cards with this symbol [Debt icon] can cause players to incur debts.


How does the "Taken Over" event card impact buildings and zombie movement? I played Last Night on Earth for the first time and I was playing the zombies.  I pulled the Take Over event card which states:

  Roll a Random Building and place a Taken Over marker on it.

  Place a Zombie from the Zombie Pool in each empty space of this
  building.  No Hero may enter this building or Search here.  If the
  building has already been Taken Over, Re-roll. Zombies placed here may
  not move this turn.

I have a couple of questions:

Does the building remain "Taken Over" even if all the zombies leave the building on subsequent moves?
How does Zombie Hunger effect the event rule of "Zombies placed here may not move this turn"?

The building remains taken over even if it has no zombies in it. The Last Night On Earth wiki covers the similar situation of drawing the My God, They've Taken the... card when all your zombies are already on the board:

  with ‘My God, They've Taken the...’ the building is always Taken Over even if no new Zombies are placed.

I think the zombies you place stay put for a turn even if there's a hero in an adjacent space, the Zombie Hunger effect doesn't override the no movement rule.


Can I go for both Tichu types in one round? The rules seem to imply that people cannot call two or more tichus of the same kind. Doing this would also take the fun out of the game, as the first player to have a strong hand simply calls for enough tichus to reach the limit and win (or lose, if unlucky) the game.

The grand tichu, however, is presented as an additional mechanism. Does this mean that I can go for both and score 300 bonus points in a single round?

No, you can only call one type of Tichu per hand.

Honestly, I spent an inordinate amount of time looking at different rules (here, here, here, and here). Ultimately, none of these explicitly state whether a player is allowed to call both types of Tichu, but all of them imply it. I finally found one source with this wording after Grand Tichu:

  A single player may not call both a "Grand Tichu" and a standard "Tichu".

This seems to explicitly call out what the other rule sets imply: after calling a Grand Tichu, you cannot call a small Tichu, and vice versa (assuming you're calling a small Tichu before you see nine cards). The website these rules come from also has some strategy documents that appear to support it's claim that two Tichus cannot be called by a single player.

On a separate note, part of the reason this might not be explicitly called out in many rule sets is because they are translations. I don't read German, but someone might be able to verify that the rules as originally written indicate that only one Tichu can be called, and translations failed to pick up on this.


Can I fight a monster during charity? During Charity, the rules state to play or give away cards until there are only 5 in your hand.  Can you play a monster card and fight it at this point?

From the rules "When To Play Cards" (page 5):

  Monsters

  If drawn face-up, during the “Kick Open The Door” phase, they
  immediately attack the person who drew them. If acquired any other
  way, they go into your hand and may be played during “Looking For
  Trouble,” or played on another player with the Wandering Monstercard.

Monster cards can only be played during the "Kick Open The Door" phase or by other cards like Wandering Monster which explicitly allow them to be played. Thus you cannot simply play and fight them prior to charity.

Theoretically if you happened to also be holding a card that allowed you to play a monster as part of its effect, then you could play that card and the monster, depending on the conditions of the card. For instance, Wandering Monster itself doesn't help here as it is played on a player already in combat, but there could come along a new card someday (or there could be one in some expansion I don't have) that could allow it.


What's the timing on Warrior en-Kor's damage redirection? Say I have Warrior en-Kor out and use its ability to redirect the next 5 damage it would get. I leave it as-is, and then in combat resolution a creature would deal 6 damage to it, leaving all but 1 damage redirected. Would I be assuming correctly that I cannot redirect that 1 damage later?

You cannot redirect damage after it has been dealt. The only card that ever did this was Simulacrum which now lets you gain the life lost from damage dealt to you back and then simulacrum deals damage to a target instead.

Redirection creates a replacement effect, all of the en-Kor creatures had this effect. It's been reworded to no longer talk about redirection, which is considered obsolete, the new en-Kor ability is written this way:

  The next 1 damage that would be dealt to ~ this turn is dealt to target creature you control instead.

The new wording makes it much more clear that you have to activate the ability before the damage is dealt, since it refers to the "next" damage. So timing is the last time you have priority when the spell that would do the damage is on the top of the stack (other than Sudden Shock and Molten Disaster, which you would need the redirection active before it is cast due to split second) or when you have priority after blockers are declared but before damage is assigned (no priority to activate between assigning and dealing damage).


Is a 'Can't be countered' ability the same as 'protection From' or 'Can't be targeted?' Abrupt Decay, Loxodon Smiter and other Return to Ravnica cards have an ability that reads '{card name} can't be counterd by spells or abilites'. Does this mean it is not a legal target for a counter spell?

this rule:

  112.6f An object's ability that states it can't be countered or can't be countered by spells and abilities functions on the stack.

Simply states those abilities function on the stack, it makes no mention of giving the spell with the ability protection from spells.

So can they be targeted by counter spells?

"Can't be countered" spells are still legal targets for counter-spells.  They just won't actually get countered

and this was already answered earlier today with the gatherer Rulings from Render Silent

  4/15/2013     A spell that “can’t be countered” is a legal target
  for Render Silent. The spell won’t be countered when Render Silent
  resolves, but that spell’s controller won’t be able to cast spells for
  the rest of the turn.

and here's another ruling which will help illustrate the difference between illegal targets of a spell and can't be countered

  4/15/2013     If the spell is an illegal target when Render Silent tries
  to resolve (because it’s been countered by another spell, for
  example), Render Silent will be countered and none of its effects will
  happen.


Oath of Teferi targeting Oath of Teferi? So I know that ETB happens before the legendary rule kicks in, and you have to choose a target for sacrifice before ETB. So if I play a new Oath of Teferi, I first choose to sacrifice the old Oath of Teferi, then target Oath of Teferi for exile until , then would the legendary rule fail? And if so, can I just sit there and juggle the Oath of Teferi's until I find a better target for it?

No.

So I know that ETB happens before the legendary rule kicks in

Well, the ability triggers as soon the object enters the battlefield, but nothing else happens just yet. Specifically, it's not placed on the stack just then, so its targets aren't picked just then.[CR 116.2a]
The next time a player would get priority, state-based actions are first performed, and then triggered abilities are added to the stack.[CR 704.3]

State-based actions (SBAs) are what enforce the Legend Rule. As such, you need to move one of the Oaths to the graveyard before the new Oath's triggered ability is placed on the stack, and therefore before the triggered ability's target is chosen.

Even if we pretend SBAs are performed after triggered abilities are placed on the stack, the answer is still no.
Once the old Oath is moved to the graveyard, it becomes a new object. Objects don't really move between zones; it's more accurate to say that they cease to exist, and a new object is created in the new zone. This means that when the triggered ability gets to resolves, it wouldn't be able to find the Oath you targeted since it doesn't exist anymore.[CR 400.7]
Instead of resolving, the ability would be removed from the stack with no effect because it only has illegal targets.[CR 608.2b]

116.2a Triggered abilities can trigger at any time, including while a spell is being cast, an ability is being activated, or a spell or ability is resolving. (See rule 603, "Handling Triggered Abilities.") However, nothing actually happens at the time an ability triggers. Each time a player would receive priority, each ability that has triggered but hasn't yet been put on the stack is put on the stack. See rule 116.5.
704.3. Whenever a player would get priority (see rule 116, "Timing and Priority"), the game checks for any of the listed conditions for state-based actions, then performs all applicable state-based actions simultaneously as a single event. If any state-based actions are performed as a result of a check, the check is repeated; otherwise all triggered abilities that are waiting to be put on the stack are put on the stack, then the check is repeated. Once no more state-based actions have been performed as the result of a check and no triggered abilities are waiting to be put on the stack, the appropriate player gets priority. This process also occurs during the cleanup step (see rule 514), except that if no state-based actions are performed as the result of the step's first check and no triggered abilities are waiting to be put on the stack, then no player gets priority and the step ends.
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 nine exceptions to this rule: [None are relevant here]
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.


Can one player put more than one of his agents at Waterdeep Harbor? In Lords of Waterdeep, can I place more than one of my agents at Waterdeep Harbor?

For example, at the end of the round, can two of my agents occupy two spaces at Waterdeep Harbor?

Yes, you can place more than one of your agents at Waterdeep Harbor to play multiple Intrigue cards. At the end of the round, the agents there are placed onto other spaces in order, regardless of who they belong to.

On Page 9 of the rulebook (emphasis mine):

  Waterdeep Harbor has three action spaces instead of the usual one. You can assign more than 1 of your Agents to Waterdeep Harbor if it still has an open action space (but you still can't assign more than 1 Agent per turn).


Is there any difference between double strike and oubleday ikestray? The card Atinlay Igpay has the ability oubleday ikestray. Is this functionally different from double strike?

Nop, it's the same.
Keep in mind, Atinlay Igpay is a card from the unhinged set. Meaning you can't normally play it except for casual play (and then usually you have to agree on it specifically).
The card is actually called Latin Pig in Pig-latin rules:

Juvenile "code" language created by the rearrangement of sounds in a
word such that the first sound is moved to the end and "ay" is added.
In the case of a vowel as the first sound, "ay" is simply added, with
an hyphen if necessary.

This is also how Double Strike turns into Oubleday Ikestray.


How does "casting without paying mana cost" work with additional costs? Cards with cascade like Maelstrom Wanderer say "...You may cast it without paying it's mana cost." Does this include mana costs added from sources like Sphere of Resistance, or would it always be cast for free, regardless of additional costs?

You must pay additional costs separately, so you would still have to pay {1} for Sphere of Resistance.

Casting without paying is an alternate cost:

  117.9. Some spells have alternative costs. An alternative cost is a cost listed in a spell's text, or applied to it from another effect, that its controller may pay rather than paying the spell's mana cost. Alternative costs are usually phrased, "You may [action] rather than pay [this object's] mana cost," or "You may cast [this object] without paying its mana cost." Note that some alternative costs are listed in keywords; see rule 702.

Additional costs are added separately from alternate costs:

  117.9d If an alternative cost is being paid to cast a spell, any additional costs, cost increases, and cost reductions that affect that spell are applied to that alternative cost. (See rule 601.2f.)


Do I add all Mask monsters from the base game and expansions when Nyarlathotep is the Ancient One? Of all the Mask monsters in Arkham Horror, there are 5 in the base game, 1 in Dunwich Horror, 2 in Kingsport Horror, and 2 in Insmouth Horror. If Nyarlathotep is the Ancient One, do I add all Mask monsters from the base game and any expansions I am playing to the cup? Or do I cap them at a certain number (say, pick 5 random Mask monsters)?

You use them all.

The closest the rules get to directly saying this is things like this from the Dunwich Horror rules:

  As with the “Mask” monster markers from Arkham Horror, do not place the Spawn monsters in the monster cup (unless the Ancient One sheet instructs otherwise).

That strongly suggests that you're expected to use them along with the original ones if the Ancient One says to. The Mask monsters are also referenced a few other times in the rules, and similarly in the Innsmouth Horror rules, every time just implying they're treated the same as the original ones. If they wanted you to randomly select 5, I think they'd have to spell that out, the way they very clearly did with Ally selection.

Also, this makes sense. The idea of having 5 masks in the base game was to give them a certain probability of being drawn. The expansions all add additional monsters to the cup, and if they didn't also add Masks then the odds of drawing a Mask would go down.


TI3 - Why go for Spec Ops Training? In Twilight Imperium, the Federation of Sol have been given this as their secondary race tech:

  Spec Ops Training (5)  Each time you roll a 1 during Invasion Combat,
  you  may reroll the die. You must use the second result.

Notice that this is not the same as e.g. +1 to all Ground Forces combat rolls. With a smashing price of 5 additional resources, I am looking for the reason why this race tech is even in the game...

I have some questions to add to this:

It's not worded for combat rolls specifically. Does this apply to Gen Synthesis and Dacxive Animators rolls too (since Federation of Sol seem to be taking good care of their ground forces)?
Does this apply to Mechanized Units?
Will this apply to Fighters as well, when Sol gains the Graviton Negator tech?

If it's only half a +1 to Ground Forces, why would anyone buy it?

Dacxive Animators happens at the end of combat but Gen Synthesis happens at the end of each round of invasion combat. Thus, it's possible that Special Ops training would work with Gen Synthesis.


Casual trick taking penalties for illegal plays I want to know if there is any standard penalty for when someone breaks a rule in a trick taking game, especially failing to follow suit when required.  I know the penalty would depend on the game, but all I could find is this Wikipedia article, which suggested some rather harsh penalties, especially for new players.
I'm looking for more lax penalties for less experienced players, especially for Spades and Hearts.  The best I've come up with is trying to reverse play when possible, but that doesn't always work, especially when the error is discovered many tricks later.

Generally when I play games like that and a miss play is caught before the next trick is played then the play is corrected.  However if it is caught later then the player that messed up losses the hand. In hearts for example they would take all 26 points and everyone else would get 0. In a game where you want points they take the penalty for not getting the minimum bid or whatever they bid. This seems to be a quick and fair way to handle miss plays that you can't correct.

It may sound harsh but following suit in a card game should be a very simple strategy.

Only other option is to throw out the hand and redo it.


What Talisman expansions give a PvE end goal? I picked up Talisman awhile ago and am enjoying it as are my friends. However we aren't much of ones for the "PvP" (player versus player) encounters which works fine until the end game and reaching the Crown of Command. We of course finish the game but it's just not as enjoyable for us. I tried looking up information on the expansions and possibilities of alternate non-PvP endings, where we do not have to kill each other in order to win, but descriptions on the expansions don't give many specifics on alternate endings. The only one that really seemed like it had a PvE (player versus environment) ending was the Dragon expansion. My question basically is, what Talisman expansions offer a PvE end goal and what are they?

I am going to assume that you only are considering the Fourth Edition Expansions by Fantasy Flight Games, since I assume that the Games Workshop editions are incompatible. The Dragon and Sacred Pool Expansion should fit your needs with all 3 alternate endings being PvE.

Talisman: The Reaper Expansion (2008): No alternate endings.
Talisman: The Dungeon Expansion (2009): No alternate endings.
Talisman: The Frostmarch Expansion (2009): Crown and Sceptre, Ice Queen and Warlock Quests
Talisman: The Highland Expansion (2010): Battle Royale, The Eagle King, and Hand of Doom.
Talisman: The Sacred Pool Expansion (2010): Demon Lord, Judgement Day, and Sacred Pool
Talisman: The Dragon Expansion (2011): Dragon Slayers, Dragon King, and Domain of Dragons
Talisman: The Blood Moon Expansion (2012): Horrible Black Hole, Lightbearers, and Blood Moon Werewolf.
Talisman: The City Expansion (2013): Merchant's Guild, ??? (not released)


Can boats move through sea monsters in Survival: Escape from Atlantis? This should be a common sense that you can't move boat through when it is blocked by sea serpent or whale, but I don't see the rule include this situation.

Can a boat move pass through a tile that is occupied by a sea serpent or whale safely? The boat does not stop on the occupied tile.

The boat is destroyed if it's occupied.

  If you move a Ship containing one or more Explorers into a sea space containing a Sea Serpent or a Whale, the Ship is immediately removed from the game, it's passengers become Swimmers (don't forget that if the sea space contains a Shark or Sea Serpent, these Swimmers are immediately removed from the game).

A similar rules exists for Swimmers.

  If you move a Swimmer into a sea space containing a Sea Serpent or a Shark, the Swimmer is immediately removed from the game. Consequently, Swimmers cannot cross that kind of sea spaces.


How do multiple Raging Rivers interact? Raging River requires players to divide their creatures into a "left" and "right" pile when the active player attacks:

  Whenever one or more creatures you control attack, each defending player divides all creatures without flying they control into a "left" pile and a "right" pile. Then, for each attacking creature you control, choose "left" or "right." That creature can't be blocked this combat except by creatures with flying and creatures in a pile with the chosen label.

What happens if the attacking player controls multiple Raging Rivers? I can see 3 scenarios happening:

Multiple RRs are redundant, only the last one to resolve matters.
Each RR adds an additional pile, one pile for each (ordered) distribution of "lefts" and "rights". Would also make the most sense flavor-wise - n parallel rivers makes for n+1 "lanes" between the rivers.
Each RR doubles the number of piles, one pile for each distribution of lefts and rights.

Your third option is the right one. What will actually happen is that each Raging River will trigger separately, and as each one resolves, the defending player makes a left and a right pile (independent of what has been done on previous resolutions), and for each time, you go through all your attacking creatures and give them additional restrictions of the type "This creature can't be blocked by that creature".

Example: You have one attacking creature, your opponent has two non-flyers, and there are two Raging Rivers in play. The first River resolves, and your opponent makes one creature left and the other creature right. You choose "left", so the right creature can't block.

Then the second River resolves. Your opponent divides the same way, and this time you choose "right", so the left creature can't block. In total, none of his creatures can block yours, because the first River hinders the right creature, and the second River hinders the left creature.

In practice, this means that the net effect of several Rivers (say X of them) is your third option: the defending player divides his non-flyers into 2^X piles, one for each sequence of "left" and "right" which is X long (for X=2, that's the four groups "left-left", "left-right", "right-left" and "right-right"). For each attacking creature, you pick one such sequence, and only the defending creatures corresponding to that sequence (as well as flyers) will be able to block that creature.

However, it is important to note that the Rivers do not actually interact directly in any way to double the number of effective piles. It's just a side effect of the separate triggers from each of them. It's not actually one big effect with 2^X piles, but many small effects with two piles each. This may be relevant in case you control other things which trigger as you declare attackers, and you for some reason want to interleave the resolutions.

It's also important for the order in which choices are made, which may be relevant if your opponent has 2^X or more non-flying blockers. Your opponent does the first division into two piles, then you decide which can't be blocked by which. Then your opponent may use that information to inform his next pile division, and so on. This is conceivably advantageous to your opponent compared to directly dividing into 2^X piles. Theoretically it makes no difference if you only have one attacker. But if you have two or more attackers, knowing whether you chose the same or different modes for your attackers might affect how your opponent wants to divide the piles in the second go.


Can big miniatures share their square in Arcadia Quest? Normally, at most two miniatures can occupy a square. Some miniatures are larger than others. Do the larger miniatures such as the minotaur fill a square by themselves, or can they share the square with another miniature?

In the rulesbook on page 15 (Full or blocked spaces) it's said:

  Each Space can contain a maximum of two Characters at a time. A Space with up to one character in it is still considered to be free, since other characters, enemy or allied, can still enter it and shoot through it normally.

There's no mention of monster size here. Moreover in the same chapter, the example pictures a space with a lone troll (which is a big miniature) in it as free.


What should I be trying to do strategically in Through the Ages? I played Through the Ages for the third time last night and am struggling to come up with a decent strategy to assist in winning. I am not sure if my problem is due to the random nature of the events and tech upgrades, or if my strategy is just wrong.

My strategy was

have the strongest military
use a leader to give 1 extra civil action to replace military
produce a lot of resources, to build upgrades and wonders easily.

My downfall was that due to my leader allowing only one military action, I had no defense/colonisation bonus cards, so struggled to win territories, which came up a lot. The bonus on one was 11 points of culture, so effectively that could have been a 22 point swing!

I only lost by 4 culture, so no idea if my final score was the result of poor decisions/strategy, or just luck of the card draw.

I would love to hear more experienced player's views.

First, it sounds like the leader you are describing is Hammurabi, but he only applies for Age A and 1 (he will die at the end of age 1), so there's no way he should have been impeding bids for Historic Territory 2 (an Age 2 event card that by definition couldn't have come out by then).  Are you sure you're playing everything right?

Also, you don't mention if you're playing the Advanced Game or the Full Game, but it's important, because there are significant differences between them in what works and what doesn't.  I'll try to highlight some of the important differences.  But here are some things to think about:

Science is probably the most important thing in the game, barring your final culture score (of course).  Not resources, food, CAs or anything else, but science.  You can work around most other things, but science is the wellspring from which all the advances you can make are.  Also, unlike almost everything else in the game, you can't really have too much of it.  The first strategic question you have to answer is "where am I going to get more science income".  It can be from Alchemy, it could be from Printing Press (which is only so-so but is sometimes necessary), it could be from the Universitas - whatever it is, figure it out.  Alchemy is probably the card I reach deep for early most often in the game, and if it's the last one, it's almost a must grab.  I can't emphasize this enough:  when in doubt, do something to increase your science.
Next, of course, comes CAs.  Civil Actions give you a lot more options and control over your fate.  Science is what allows you to gain CAs (mostly), so that's one of the reasons for science's supremacy, but if you don't increase your CAs, you can't troubleshoot effectively.  And that's what TtA is, in the full game:  you're troubleshooting problems from turn to turn, keeping your civilization as efficient as possible.  Try and plan out what you're going to do here.  Early Monarchy?  Were you lucky enough to draw Pyramids?  Are you going to reach for the first age 2 government that slides out and revolt to it?  Whatever you do, try and keep your science balance at a point that will allow you to make your governmental switches efficient.  And don't worry about losing some resources to corruption!  A couple rocks is a small price to pay to switch to something like ConMon.
Probably the next thing I look at is military.  Trying to win with military is a crapshoot.  You just might not draw the cards you need to make it work, and if you overinvested, somebody else is going to clobber you on points.  But while you can't be sure about winning with military, you sure as heck can lose the game with it.  I always check, every turn, what my relative position is, how many D/C cards I am back of the leaders, how many cards they've been drawing and how many I'm about to draw and everything else.  If I am vulnerable, I have to fix this problem.  If there's only one person that's in a position to whack you, maybe you can get away with it - especially if there's a juicier target out there!  But you have to be aware of your position with everybody else and then take steps to fix things.
Now, you get to make progress on other stuff.  Try and increase your resource production first, because that enables you do do most other stuff (although you can use a high CA civ with yellow cards to cover for a lack of rocks pretty well).  Food, you just want to keep at a reasonable level, you can over-invest in it pretty easily.  Try and see how many cards people are seeding in the event deck and guesstimate if you need to keep some troops available for colonization.  But if you've fixed those other problems, you can start applying your discretion here.
A word about events:  don't just seed them with no good reason.  Don't put something in you think you might benefit from.  Just put it in if you're reasonably confident.  And if you're behind on military, particularly early in the game, don't seed anything!  You're just helping your opponents get gnarly stuff like Border Conflict, Uncertain Borders, Raiders, Foray and all that other stuff out faster.  Don't help them out, make them do all the work.  Then, maybe when you get back on top on military, there will be some of that junk still left in the deck to take advantage of.

Note that nowhere in there did I mention culture.  That's because, by and large, culture is an accident not a goal up until mid-to-late age 2.  That's not true if more than one person sprints early, then you might have to invest some just to not fall too far behind, but if there's only one clear culture leader, I don't worry about it.  Don't build Dramas or the Taj Mahal - those rocks are better spent on Bread & Circuses and the Universitas.  Invest in infrastructure, infrastructure, infrastructure and then when you hit age 3, you'll be able to crank out a ton of culture (and slaughter them on impacts).

Hope this helps.


How can I learn to play chess blindfold? I'm an intermediate-level amateur chess player. How would I go about learning how to accurately play a complete game of chess, blindfolded? What skills are needed, and how are they practiced?

In particular, how can I maintain an accurate representation in my head of the board state over time? Whenever I've tried this, I get a dozen or so moves in, and it all starts to fall apart. Are there specific techniques or representations to help with this?

I think you have to take a closer look at mnemotechnics. Probably Memory Palace technique in particular. You can read about it here, for example.

Here is a discussion about techniques used with Chess games. Mainly about memorizing them. A book called How to develop a perfect memory is suggested reading.

If you know Derren Brown (he's British mentalist, a "mind-reader", if you like), he has done a bit about playing 9 simultaneous chess games with top English players. You can watch it on youtube with explanation on how he did it.

Of course, he only had to remember 8 moves at a time, but it's still pretty tricky not to get confused. If you are interested, you can read Derren's book Tricks of the Mind, it has whole section about Memory.

Best of luck!


Does Underrealm Lich's replacement effect activate Gaea's Blessing's triggered effect? While considering an off brand Golgari deck, I'm looking closely at Underrealm Lich and Gaea's Blessing.

Underrealm Lich's first ability is a replacement affect that turns your draws into a very Sultai/Golgari themed choose a card and fill the graveyard effect.

If Gaea's Blessing is among the three cards that Underrealm Lich lets me look at, and I don't choose it, will the activated effect of Gaea's Blessing trigger?

Yes, Gaea's Blessing will trigger

701.15b Revealing a card doesn’t cause it to leave the zone it’s in.
...
701.15d Some effects instruct a player to look at one or more cards. Looking at a card follows the same rules as revealing a card, except that the card is shown only to the specified player.

Revealed cards are considered to be in the zone they were revealed from.  Therefore, when Underrealm Lich's ability causes you to look at cards and then put them in the graveyard, they have moved from the library to the graveyard, triggering Gaea's Blessing.


Is it possible to not pay a conditional counter with the cost set at 0? For example, there's a Cephalid Shrine on the field and someone casts a spell with no copies in any graveyards.  Can someone choose to counter their own spell by not paying 0 mana?

I don't think there's anything in the rules preventing this, but I do know that things like 0 power attacks can't interact with combat damage triggers.  Is there a similar case for costs of 0 being automatically paid?

Rule 117.5 states:

  117.5. Some costs are represented by {0}, or are reduced to {0}. The action necessary for a player to pay such a cost is the player’s acknowledgment that they are paying it. Even though such a cost requires no resources, it’s not automatically paid.

So, it is possible to refuse to pay an optional payment with a cost of 0 mana, and a person can counter their own spell by refusing to pay the cost of 0 mana.


How to show turn order when turn order can change during the round I'm working on a game where the order of players' turns matters quite a bit, and I'm having trouble coming up with a way of showing the order.

During the round, each player will take their turn.  These turns happen in a specific order.
During a player's turn, they can take actions that will push themselves up or down a single place in the turn order for the next round.  This pushes them past the adjacent player in the turn order.
You can't push yourself earlier if you're already going first.  Likewise, you can't push yourself later if you're already going last.
You only get to take one turn per round.
Whatever is used to show turn order needs to show which player goes next during the current round.

An example might help.  Round one, the turn order is Jim, Steve, then Betty.  On Jim's turn, he does something that causes him to fall back one step.
Round two, the turn order is Steve, Jim, Betty.  On Betty's turn, she does something that causes her to move up one step.
Round three, the turn order is Steve, Betty, Jim.

How do I show the turn order in a way that allows this behavior naturally?

No matter what method you decide on, you will need to keep track of two things, the current turn order and the next turn order. I have a few options you could try:

Two Tracks

You can simply have two tracks that will show current and next turn orders. This is a simple solution, players can all stay in their seats and the turn will just jump around the table, this is good for certain games where the "player to your left" or "player to your right" kind of abilities do not exist.

Musical Chairs and Chips

This is good for games where "player to your left" or "player to your right" kind of abilities do exist. You have the players sit clockwise in turn order. And they will start each round holding a chip with their number on it. When switching turn orders throughout the game, players just switch these chips. At the start of each round, players will reseat themselves according to turn order.

Infinite Stacking Track

This is a bit complex, but the idea is that each player has a token with his color/team on it. And there is an "infinite" track, (this could just be a very long track) Initial turn order is decided and tokens are placed in that order on the track, whenever a player modifies a turn order, you simply move the token up or down the track, if a token already exists on that you place yours below that token.

This way, when a new turn is started, going from the first tile in the track towards the end and working from the top-most token down. You get an extra little mechanic where some tiles are blank, which means players after those tiles would need to work extra-hard to get ahead of those that are already passed them. The difference a regular track is that in a regular track you would just replace the tokens instead of stack them.

Double Secret Cards

This is a good method if at some point the turn order might be randomized, or you want to keep the turn order secret, similar to the Two Tracks suggestion you would have 2 sets of cards, one for the current turn, one for the next turn (maybe a different color on the back?) Players would start the game where both cards are the same number (turn order) and only when it's that players turn, he would reveal that he is the player with that number, (revealing the current card color) in this way, players can manipulate the turn order in secret (which adds an interesting element to the game).

The only pitfall is that players need to remember who they gave the next turn cards to, so they can also give them the current turn cards at the end of the turn.


What board game was found in this Viking tomb? I was reading an article on the first genetic proof of female viking warriors, which mentions the inclusion of a game in the tomb:

  Furthermore, a full set of gaming pieces indicates knowledge of tactics and strategy, stressing the buried individual's role as a high-ranking officer.  SOURCE: A female Viking warrior confirmed by genomics | American Journal of Physical Anthropology

The image in the paper is too small for me to make out much detail.  A good assumption would be it is a hnefatafl game, but wondering if anyone has more info or a confirmation.

See also: Tafl games

The game is most likely Hnefatafl, the ancestor of a family of derivative modern games referred to as tafl games. Hnefatafl was the most popular board game in early-Medieval Europe, having accompanied the Vikings (who invented it) around Europe during their conquests and raids, until displaced by chess later in the era.

I was able to find Whittaker, H. (2006). Game-boards and gaming-pieces in funerary contexts in the Northern European iron age. online, one of the citations in the original article. It discusses (in English) the context, analysis, and conclusions derived from the frequent association of board game pieces and equipment with high status, usually male, individuals from iron age Nordic burial sites.

  The game-boards and gaming-pieces found in northern European graves of this period are usually considered to have been used for playing Hnefatafl, a game which is well known from textual evidence. Hnefatafl was clearly a game of war, and it would seem not unlikely that playing the game was regarded as useful to the development of warrior abilities.

The older citation from van Hamel (1934) appears to not be available in English.

Although no description of the board or of the pieces has yet been obtained in answer to this question note the following:

Numerous tafl variants, on various board sizes and with different numbers of men for both sides,  have been described in the Nordic Sagas and discovered in Viking graves.
The tafl variant most commonly mentioned in saga literature, and most commonly found in Scandinavian graves, seems to have been Hnefatafl itself; as noted above by Whittaker.

Hnefatafl is an asymmetric game, with a designated attacker and defender of unequal strength. One of the defender's pieces is a King, and the object of the game is, respectively, to capture the King (attacker) or rescue the King (defender). Typically the Attacker would have about twice as many pieces as the Defender, not counting the King.

The old 1960's era game Goldfinger, by Milton Bradley, is similar and would impart some of the flavour for this style of game, for those old enough to remember. Certainly my brother and I spent many enjoyable hours playing this game in our pre-teens.

  Goldfinger is hiding in Fort Knox (the center of a 9X9 grid) guarded
  by 8 henchmen (blue). 16 agents (red), under the guidance of Mr. Bond,
  have been sent to apprehend him.

  Movement of pieces is easy... move any one of your men any distance
  along a straight line. If you can trap an opponent's piece between two
  of yours, it is captured and removed from the board. Goldfinger
  requires all four adjacent points occupied before he is captured.

  The object for the red player is to capture Goldfinger; for blue to
  win, Goldfinger must escape.


How should one access HQ cards with the "Legwork" In the case of successful run via the Legwork how the runner should access cards? Should he take them all at once? Or he should take one, return it back into the Grip, and take another two attempts?

You access the cards one at a time, but they don't go back to HQ until you're done.

Essentially, you draw one from HQ, decide what to do with it (if anything), then set it aside as you draw the next card. Once you're finished, the cards go back to HQ (unless they don't for whatever reason).

From the FAQ, page 3:

  When the Runner accesses multiple cards from HQ, the cards are accessed one at a time, and do not return to HQ until the Runner is finished accessing.

If you want to trash the cards, you must do so as you access them one at a time, not after you've accessed additional cards.


Do opposite counters coexist or cancel each other out? Nuance abounds nowadays; whereas it was commonplace to mentally coalesce opposing counters on a permanent, I imagine doing so is incorrect.

Scenario 1
Suppose one Sengir Vampire has amassed five +1/+1 counters from having sent five creatures to the graveyard, and it is now blocking a Regeneration-enchanted Putrefax, a 5/3 whose infectious damage is dealt in the form of -1/-1 counters.
Does Sengir Vampire have zero counters, or ten counters?

Scenario 2
Rabid Wombat, green 0/1, which gains +2/+2 for each enchantment on it, enchanted with Unstable Mutation, which gives it +3/+3, and gives it a -1/-1 counter during controller's upkeep. Is this accurate?

Consecutive Turns:
0/1. Rabid Wombat cast.
5/6. RW+Unstable Mutation. 3/4 + a 2/2 counter
4/5. 3/4 + a 2/2 counter + -1/-1 counter
3/4. 3/4 + a 2/2 counter + (2 x -1/-1 counters) no cancellation here?
2/3. 3/4 + a 2/2 counter + (3 x -1/-1 counters) ...
.. etc. correct?

Scenario 3
Rock Hydra comes into play with casting-time X +1/+1 counters, and receives damage in the form of loss of the counters. If it becomes infected by Putrefax, which deals damage as -1/-1 counters, is the infection essentially redundant to Rock Hydra's normal life cycle? Or does the state-based action's removal of the counter count as damage which then removes another head?

Is reduction of a creature's toughness due to counter-based actions considered damage?

Zero counters. They cancel each other out.

  121.3. If a permanent has both a +1/+1 counter and a -1/-1 counter on it, N +1/+1 and N -1/-1 counters are removed from it as a state-based
  action, where N is the smaller of the number of +1/+1 and -1/-1
  counters on it.


Did the British employ a reasonable strategy in "Bismarck"? This is a reference to another Avalon Hill Board game, this time the chase of the German superbattleship Bismarck.

The British put out "hunter groups" of two surface capital ships, for instance, the battleship Prince of Wales and the battle cruiser Hood, the battleship King George V and the battle cruiser Repulse (supported by fleet aircraft carrier Victorious), the battleship Rodney and the battle cruiser Renown (supported by aircraft carrier Ark Royal), etc. This reflected their "real life" strategy.

The dynamics of the game were such that the British could win if they sank the Bismarck at the cost of one ship, but would lose if it cost them two or more.

Was this an adequate strategy that would give the British a chance to win? Or should they have used a different strategy (groups of three battleships instead of two, etc.)?

(I played one indecisive game, and therefore have the experience of playing, but not winning.)

Given the assumptions they were working under, yes.  Those assumptions proved incorrect,  but in real life you don't get to check the rulebook and the numbers on the counters before you decide on a strategy.  The assumptions, roughly speaking, were:

Crippling the Bismarck was as good as sinking it.  This is roughly the equivalent of the victory conditions; losing a battleship was acceptable provided that the German ship was damaged enough to be finished off by reserve forces, aircraft, or submarines, and the British remained in contact so those forces could reach her.  One battleship obviously could not guarantee this, but two or more probably could, assuming that

One battleship is much like another.  That's obviously the heart of the strategy; how many ships are necessary in a group? To be completely safe, you would need all your ships in one group, which would mean you would never actually have a battle.  The assumption that any two battleships would be enough to destroy any one was not unreasonable, given that a series of treaties in the 1930s had ensured that every battleship should be on the same displacement, and so should be of roughly equal ability. Actually, the Germans had built a heavier ship than allowed, and lied about it; but that isn't something you can ask an Admiral to decide, and in any case the final showdown, between a Bismarck with steering damage but unimpaired fighting ability and two normal British battleships, ended in success.  The unexamined, and flawed, assumption here was that

One British capital ship is much like another.  The Prince of Wales was admittedly not the best-trained ship in the fleet, (she went to sea with dockyard workers still working on the turrets), so the Admiralty teamed her with the 'Mighty Hood', heaviest and most prestigious ship in the Navy.  A good plan, except that Hood wasn't a battleship at all. There was a clear distinction when Hood was built between 'Dreadnought battleships' and 'battlecruisers'; the latter, the same size as the former, had better engines but less armour, in order to support friendly cruisers and catch raiders.  'Jane's Fighting Ships' (1908 edition I think) welcomed the idea, but warned of the danger that battlecruisers would be treated as battleships and asked to face enemy battleships, which they would not be able to do.  Sadly, this proved prophetic.

If you're asking purely in game terms, the obvious answer is that each hunting group needs to be strong enough to sink or cripple the Bismarck while losing no more than one capital ship, but no stronger (since you need as many groups as possible).  How many ships is that?; you're the player, you tell me.


Triggered ability of another card when two legendary creatures with the same name enter to the battlefield at the same time If I have a Temur Ascendancy and a Savage Knuckleblade in the battlefield then I use See the Unwritten and put 2 Dragonlord Atarka into the battlefield. Do I draw one card or two cards?

I know that only one Dragonlord Atarka would trigger the damage ability and I should sacrifice one. But what happens with Temur Ascendancy?

From See the Unwritten, two creatures with a power greater than or equal to 4 have entered the battlefield. Each is sufficient to trigger the conditional statement of Temur Ascendancy's triggered ability, creating two effects that can be placed on the stack. You get the option, twice, to draw a card.

You're wrong about Dragonlord Atarka: in order for it to trigger the Legendary rule, the second creature must enter the battlefield. Since it has entered the battlefield, the triggered effect occurs to be put on the stack. Reference:

You've simultaneously created 4 effects, two draw effects and two damage effects. As the controller, you decided the order in which they enter the stack.


Does a Sengir Vampire survive when blocked by four 1/1s? I attack with Sengir Vampire which is a 4/4
My opponent declares four 1/1 blockers

Would Sengir Vampire die or would it gain counters from the three 1/1 creatures that died before attacking the last 1/1 blocker? Thus allowing it to survive while killing the four 1/1 blockers.

All of the creatures will deal their respective damage at the same time. Since Sengir Vampire's +1/+1 ability is a triggered ability, it uses the stack, and before any of the +1/+1 counters go onto the Vampire, it will die.

State-based actions (like death from damage) will happen before the triggered ability on the stack can resolve.

If any of the creatures involved have first strike, however, this changes things:

If the Sengir Vamire has first strike, it will deal it's damage before the blockers, killing them before they have a chance to deal damage, giving it the +1/+1 counters
If the blockers have first strike, they deal damage to the vampire before it deals damage to them, killing the vampire while they remain alive
If all parties have first strike, the outcome is the same as if none of them did.


History of board games Is there a good book about the history of board games?

Preferably the book would cover all the way from the ancient games to the newest fads in the market.

The Oxford History of Board Games is a very thorough book that discusses board games from their ancient inception to the (almost) present-day dividing into Race Games, Space Games, Chase Games, Displace Games, and War Games (such as chess).


Does this mining mechanic add genuine choice to my game? To be concise, I am designing a game based on resource/risk/conflict management. Units will be carrying around several piles of resources, which also power and boost actions like movement, attacking and mining.

I want the resource acquisition to be tactical/exciting as well. My current idea is going up to a resource node, setting its difficulty to a 2-6 number, and expending resources to roll as many dice as resources expended. Dice that come up greater than or equal to the difficulty yield difficulty resources each.
As such, a roll of [6 5 2 2] against a node of diff 5 yields 2*5=10 resources, with 4 expended to roll. A net gain of 6.

My question: Does resetting a node's difficulty provide a genuine "steady stream vs risky motherlode" choice?

I've modelled this process, and the means vary less than expected while the maximums and deviations burst up as difficulty goes up. Does this mean there is genuine choice?

The modelled process

Instead of modeling you can compute these results exactly. If you roll n dice at difficulty d, the variance will be [d * n * (d-1)/6 * (7-d)/6], and the mean net gain will be [d * n * (7-d)/6 - 1]. Both scale linearly with n, so here are the mean (measured in Net Gain Per Die) and variance for each value of d:

-----------------------
| d | Mean | Variance |
-----------------------
| 1 | 0    | 0        |
-----------------------
| 2 | 0.7  | 0.3      |
-----------------------
| 3 | 1    | 0.7      |
-----------------------
| 4 | 1    | 1.0      |
-----------------------
| 5 | 0.7  | 1.1      |
-----------------------
| 6 | 0    | 0.8      |
-----------------------

As you can see, there's definitely some actual choice here. 6 looks pretty useless (and 1 is entirely pointless - even if you didn't explicitly disallow it in the rules, no one would have reason to pick it), but the others are all somewhat reasonable and come in pairs - e.g. assuming you want the maximum average output (1 resource), do you want the lower variance that 3 offers or the higher one of 4? And are you willing to pay a little in expected output (down to 0.7) to get the extreme consistency of 2 or the extreme variance of 5? I'm not sure how much practical difference this will make to your game though; I'd have to know more about the game first and it'll also be a matter of opinion.


Could you use Twincast to counter Cryptic Command? If your opponent casts Cryptic Command to tap all your creatures and draw a card, can you use Twincast to counter it and draw a card?

From the Twincast's rulings:

  If the spell Twincast copies is modal (that is, it says “Choose one —” or the like), the copy will have the same mode. You can’t choose a different one.

From Comprehensive Rules (thanks ikegami):

  706.2. When copying an object, the copy acquires the copiable values of the original object’s characteristics and, for an object on the stack, choices made when casting or activating it (mode, targets, the value of X, whether it was kicked, how it will affect multiple targets, and so on). [...]

(Emphasis mine.)

So, no.
Twincast has the same modes that your opponent chose. If they chose tap and draw, Twincast will also tap and draw.


How does Dig Through Time work with Courser of Kruphix? When Courser of Kruphix is on the battlefield and I resolve a Dig Through Time, do I reveal the top card of my library AFTER I pick two cards from the seven I get to look at, or does the top card become revealed while I am looking at my seven cards?

The new top card is only revealed after you are done resolving Dig Through Time and the two cards are in your hand. This is because the cards you are looking at still count as being in your library while you are looking at them.


In King of Tokyo, which turns does Monster Batteries' effect happen on? Monster Batteries states the following:

  When you purchase this put as many [Energy] as you want on it from your reserve. Match this from the bank. At the start of each turn take 2[Energy] off and add them to your reserve. When there are no [Energy] left discard this card.

Does this mean at the start of only your own turns or at the start of every player's turn?

It's at the start of each turn, including opponent turns (assuming the designers are consistent in their wording).
We can use the text on some other cards to work this out. First, we can look at cards that specify an action on the player's turn, which are very specific. This includes cards such as Herbivore and Metamorph (emphasis mine):

Herbivore: Gain 1[Star] on your turn if you don't damage anyone.
Metamorph: At the end of your turn you can discard any keep cards you have to receive the [Energy] they were purchased for.

We can then look at other cards that use the terminology of "each", which are abilities you would only use on an opponent's turn. Two such cards are Super Jump and Psychic Probe (emphasis mine):

Super Jump: Once each turn you may spend 1[Energy] to negate 1 damage you are receiving.
Psychic Probe: You can reroll a die of each other monster once each turn. If the reroll is [Heart] discard this card.

In the first case, you'd negate damage during an opponent's turn, and in the second you would choose to reroll a die on an opponent's turn. So the phrasing "each turn" in Monster Batteries indicates that it occurs at the beginning of each turn around the table, whether it is yours or not.


Dead of Winter Exiled Player In Dead of Winter does an exiled player still draw a crossroads card?  Does the player on his right draw a Crossroads card the the exiled player?

Yes, the exiled player still draws a crossroads card and the player on the right still draws one for him/her.

Since they can't have any survivors in the colony, they can't vote on any cards that require survivors in the colony.

One of the designers clarified this in a reddit thread https://www.reddit.com/r/boardgames/comments/2kt5fn/dead_of_winter_question_probably_dumb/