Lose Calm, if you make a creature attack does it become tapped? Lose Calm says

  Gain control of target creature until end of turn. Untap that creature. It gains haste until end of turn and can't be blocked this turn except bye two or more creatures.

So it says untap the creature, but that is so I can attack them with it, so do I tap the creature when its back in their control if I used it to attack them?

A creature being tapped or untapped is completely independent of who controls it. When Lose Calm resolves, you become the creature's controller and the creature untaps if it was tapped. Then you can do whatever you want with it, including attack with it. After that, once your turn ends, the creature returns to your opponent's control, in whatever state it is in.


Non-disclosure agreement or no? I told some of my friends and co-workers about a board game I designed, and we're hoping to play it sometime soon. However, I am not sure if I should let everyone sign a non-disclosure agreement or not.

It is a board game that I have put a lot of time into. I haven't made anybody sign an agreement so far (Played various times with friends and family), but as the game is getting closer to a finished product, I feel like it would be professional to do so.

What type of agreement/document would be appropriate, if I do get an NDA?

The answer is no. I've played early and late prototypes from dozens of published boardgame designers including several who are successful enough to do it for a living and I've never been asked to sign an NDA by any of them. Boardgame ideas just aren't worth stealing.

The only time I've been asked to sign boardgame NDAs is by unpublished designers who were inordinately fond of their ideas (no insult intended). Most ideas don't actually turn into publishable games, and even when they do, a very small percentage of them actually get published.

Worse, boardgame ideas aren't actually protectable: the only law that protects ideas is a patent, and no boardgame patent has been successfully defended in court (the only exceptions are games with mechanical designs, like Hungry, Hungry Hippos or MouseTrap). If you want to see money wasted search the patent office for boardgame patents: I've paged through hundreds and have yet to find one that actually became a recognizable published game. I know of two examples of patented games that were published, and only one of them, Magic: The Gathering went on to make any money.

Don't worry about your idea being stolen. Focus on playing the game with as many people as possible, and then when you think you've got something publishable, get as many people as you can that you don't know to play it without you there, just with rules and a prototype (called "blind playtesting").

If your idea survives all of the changes you'll discover you need to make after you work through the results of blind playtesting, then start approaching publishers. You'll discover that none of them will sign NDAs either, though for a more practical reason: they may well have something in development that is astonishingly like your game, and they'd lose the ability to publish it due to the NDA. That, or they've already received submissions that are remarkably similar to yours, with the same problem.

It turns out that most ideas, including game ideas, build on what already exists, consciously or not, and that very similar or even identical ideas come to multiple people at about the same time, as they're exposed to much the same things. It doesn't mean it's not worth pursuing, it's just a matter of the reality of ideas.

Anyway, I don't mean to discourage you; rather, I encourage you to go forth and test, redesign, and test some more until you've polished something really great. And then I look forward to playing it!

Note: I am not an attorney, so do not take what I've told you as legal advice. I am relaying what I've learned from publishers and designers while involved in the game design world over the last ten years.


What game is shown in this stock photo? I found this on Shutterstock, which is full of traditional family games and abstracts so this stood out. The image is blurry, but I figure there's enough here to recognise the game, although I don't. Anyone know what it is?

Although my initial theory didn't hold up, the Crystal track led me to this BGG thread. Afterwards it was elementary.
Mystery is solved: your game most definitely is Istanbul.


What are the differences between the various version of Nosferatu? I am struggling to find the difference between the various version of Nosferatu.
New version

Old Version

There is this one also but I know nothing about it

(source: lapouleapois.fr)
What are the difference between the old and the new version of Nosferatu? Is it just the box?

There are differences between all three editions - what they are exactly I do not know
From the Board Game Geek page, your first image appears to be the 2017 edition, while the second image is the 2014 edition.  The third image is listed as the "English/French first edition (2013)".
I found a thread called Which version to buy asking about the different editions.  The thread dates back to 2015, meaning that it is likely comparing the 2014 and 2013 editions.  There are evidently noticeable game-play differences between them.
From the thread:

The new version plays much better imo, as the race against the rituals allows the vampire to be much more strategic than the throne card from the original version. In the original, the vampire regularly had to make very risky plays just to avert crisis when then deck ran out. In larger games, this was a huge downside that often relieved some people of suspicion too early in the game.
The only downside to the new version is that the publisher removed the graphics from the cards for whatever reason. This makes it a little harder to remember what's going on, as new players might forget what bites do, what the rituals do, etc.

Finding information on possible changes in the 2017 version was a bit trickier.  Among the publishers listed on BGG I could only find the newer version being displayed by one publisher - the Brazilian publisher Conclave Editora.  Conclave lists the 2017 edition as Nosferatu 2nd Edition, and includes downloadable rules for both that edition and the 2014 edition.  Alas, I do not speak Portuguese, so I cannot tell you whether the rules have changed substantially.  There are at least some differences - the newer version includes 7 Vampire Hunter cards instead of 6 and 2 vampires instead of 1.  The listed player-count has changed from 4-8 to 4-10.
The rulebook has been significantly changed in appearance and layout between the editions, further challenging my ability to find discrepancies between them.  However the art on the game pieces illustrated in the rulebook do not seem to have changed at all.
The 2017 edition appears to be able to accommodate two extra players that the 2014 edition could not.  I suspect that there are no other significant changes, but cannot confirm that without the ability to read Portuguese.


Is it possible to have a full house and straight flush in same hand with only two players? In Texas Holdem, Is it possible to have a full house and straight flush in same hand with only two players?

Certainly.

Player 1 : 5h 6h

Player 2 : 8c 9c

Community cards: 7h 8h 9h 8d 9d

Player one has 5h 6h 7h 8h 9h

Player two has 8c 8h 9c 9h 9d


Safari / ecology childs board game, collecting animal cards As a child (UK, born 1989 so playing it mid-to-late 90s I guess?) I played a game which (IIRC) centred around collecting animals from different environments.

The physical playing board was square, with I think 2 crossed pieces of card in the centre representing a mountain. In terms of playing space, the board was a circular set of playing spaces, split into quadrants representing different environments (jungle, dessert, ?savanna?, ?something else?) (possibly with playing spaces going up into the central mountain area).

I don't at all remember the nature of the game play except that it involved collecting animals from the different environments.

If anyone can identify the game, so that I can look online for a copy of it, for the nostalgia rush, I'd be really grateful :)

I also used to have it. Spent a while looking for it but I'm 90% sure this is the one you're looking for.

https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/34016/explore


Will Boartusk Liege give +1/+1 to Goblins if Dralnu's Crusade is in play? Say I have Boartusk Liege and Dralnu's Crusade in play. Boartusk Liege gives all other red creatures +1/+1 and Dralnu's Crusade says "all Goblins are black and are Zombies in addition to their other creature types". I assume that means that Boartusk Liege does not give +1/+1 to Goblins?

You are correct: when both cards are in play, Boartusk Liege does not give Goblins +1/+1. A ruling on Dralnu's Crusade says

  The Goblins are both Goblins and Zombies and they are black (they lose their previous color(s)).

Since they lose their previous colors, they are not red.

In regards to how this works in general, rule 105.3 says

  Effects may change an object's color or give a color to a colorless object. If an effect gives an object a new color, the new color replaces all previous colors the object had (unless the effect said the object became that color "in addition" to its other colors). Effects may also make a colored object become colorless.

The reason that the Goblin doesn't get +1/+1 from Boartusk Liege before you change its color to black is that Magic uses a layer system to determine in what order effects get applied. Effects that change color are on layer 5 and effects that change power and toughness are on layer 7, so the color changing effects get applied first.


Following directions on pairs in exploding kittens? I haven't seen a clear answer to this: if you play a pair or three of a kind of cards with instructions (advanced rules) do you also follow the instructions on the cards as well as perform the card steal ?

For example, if I played three skip cards do I not only get to take a card of my choosing from my opponent AND skip the draw at the end of my turn ?  Or only take the card of my choosing ?

Most of what I've found are like this one: Playing pairs of non-cat cards - just a reiteration of the 'advanced rules'.

As per the VERY first paragraph in the "Special combos (for advanced play)" section on the rules:

  When you play combos, ignore the instructions on the cards and do the following instead:

Therefore, in the situation you presented, you would still be required to draw a card to end your turn as you played a Three of a Kind, not a skip card. If you had the remaining skip card, you could play it separately to end your turn without drawing a card.


What do you do when you get stuck in an Eastern Crows loop? What do you do when you get caught in an Eastern Crows loop? There are three Eastern Crows cards that get shuffled back into the encounter deck every time they're defeated (supposing none are drawn as shadow effect cards). If you go all the way through the encounter deck you will be left with these cards, and then you're stuck in and endless Eastern Crows loop because you never technically empty the encounter deck so you can't reshuffle the discard pile. If you're playing with Thalin it's even worse, because if he's committed to the quest, then he deals one damage to every enemy as it's dealt. So... Eastern crows comes out > gets dealt one damage > goes back in the deck. But it also has the surge keyword:

So one more card is drawn from the deck, and it's Eastern Crows again... and the cycle starts over again...

THALIN
Dwarf. Warrior.
While Thalin is committed to a quest, deal 1 damage to each enemy as it is revealed by the encounter deck.

EASTERN CROWS
Creature.
Surge.
Forced: After Eastern Crows is defeated, shuffle it back into the encounter deck.

What's the solution here? Do you just play with Eastern crows until the end of the quest?

Thalin's ability fires before the "Surge" keyword can resolve, here's the official FAQ entry:

  When an enemy card is revealed from the encounter
  deck, Thalin’s ability resolves before any keyword or
  “When Revealed” card effects on the encounter card


In Blackjack, does the dealer reveal his hole card if you bust? I specifically like to know whether the dealer reveals his hole card when you bust in Atlantic City casinos (if the dealer doesn't have Blackjack).

Or does the dealer just pull the card away without turning it over?

I've never played in Atlantic City, but I have played in casinos in several other places, and I have never encountered a game where the dealer doesn't show the hole card every time, even if there are no player hands in play due to busts or blackjacks. I'm pretty sure gaming laws or regulations require this in most places.


Can I play a Beer to no effect in Bang? Is it legal to play a Beer card in Bang! even if I am at full life?  Some scenarios where I might want to do this:

I don't want someone else to "Panic" it from my hand
I'm Suzy Lafayette and I want to empty my hand so I can keep drawing more cards

To the best of my knowledge...

You can play a beer card on your turn, even if it has no effect.

You can only play a beer card off-turn if you've taken a lethal hit.


What happens if a target for removal becomes ineligible after a card has been cast? When you have a card like Complete Disregard which reads "Exile Target Creature with power 3 or less", as I understand it, it becomes untargetable if the opponent's creature power increases thanks to a pump spell like Brute Strength.

But what if the Disregard is already on the stack and targeting; and they respond with Brute Strength? I'm pretty sure (and my opponent with Brute Strength was certain) that it won't exile the creature, but I don't know which rule states this, and there's no gatherer ruling on the spell.

At resolution, Complete Disregard will instead leave the stack and be put into its owner's graveyard without doing anything, because all its targets have become illegal.
Targeting spells and abilities check the legality of their targets twice; once as you put them on the stack, and again just before they resolve. If all their targets have become illegal at the time of the second check, it doesn't resolve at all.
If some, but not all, of its targets become illegal before the second check, the spell or ability resolves but does not affect or obtain information about those illegal targets.

Resolving Spells and Abilities

608.2b If the spell or ability specifies targets, it checks whether the targets are still legal. A target that’s no longer in the zone it was in when it was targeted is illegal. Other changes to the game state may cause a target to no longer be legal; for example, its characteristics may have changed or an effect may have changed the text of the spell. If the source of an ability has left the zone it was in, its last known information is used during this process. If all its targets, for every instance of the word “target,” are now illegal, the spell or ability doesn’t resolve. It’s removed from the stack and, if it’s a spell, put into its owner’s graveyard. Otherwise, the spell or ability will resolve normally. Illegal targets, if any, won’t be affected by parts of a resolving spell’s effect for which they’re illegal. Other parts of the effect for which those targets are not illegal may still affect them. If the spell or ability creates any continuous effects that affect game rules (see rule 613.11), 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.


How would first strike and deathtouch interact with multiple blockers in this scenario? How exactly would the following work?

I have a creature with first strike and deathtouch, it's enchanted to be able to block any number of creatures (Entangler). Lets say its a 2/2 and it blocks five 3/3's - what exactly would happen?

Suppose the same creature is instead enchanted with Lure:

  All creatures able to block enchanted creature do so.

Lets say I attack with that 2/2 and my opponent has five untapped 5/5's that are forced to block. Again, what exactly happens?

I'm hoping to build a green/white/red deck based off of these combos but I'm a little confused about the mechanics of it all.

You would only be able to destroy two of the blocking creatures.  For deathtouch to have an effect, you must do damage to a creature. On the plus side, an attacker with deathtouch only needs to assign one damage to each blocker.  In your scenario, your creature is only a 2/2, and so even with a team of blockers, only two damage can be shared among them.
Based on your scenario's here is the change needed to leave your creature alive yet destroy all blocking or attacking creatures: your Entangler must be at least a 5/1.  I say a 5/1 because toughness can't be 0 and you must be able to deal at least 1 damage to all blocked or blocking creatures. Using a card such as Giant Growth would allow your creature to live assuming it has both first strike and death touch.  Without the first strike as long as you have 1 power for all attacking or blocking creatures you would be able to take them out as well.

702.2b Any nonzero amount of combat damage assigned to a creature by a source with deathtouch is considered to be lethal damage, regardless of that creature’s toughness. See rules 510.1c–d.
704.5h If a creature has toughness greater than 0, and it’s been dealt damage by a source with deathtouch since the last time state-based actions were checked, that creature is destroyed. Regeneration can replace this event.


Does completing "Establish a Temple to Ibrundul" count as taking Piety quests? I came across a situation while playing Lords of Waterdeep with the Scoundrels of Skullport expansion.
I had completed the Sanctify a Desecrated Temple plot quest, which provides a white cube whenever I take a Piety quest. Later in the game I completed the Establish a Temple to Ibrandul quest, which as the reward has me take all quests from Cliffwatch Inn.
If any of those quests are Piety quests, do I get a white cube for each of them as a result of the plot quest?
I don't have images, but I imagine there are similar plot quests for when you take the other quest types and this same situation would apply.
My thought is that since both cards use the word take, then the plot quest reward would be triggered and I'd get white cubes for each Piety quest present, but is this the case?

I haven't been able to find an official answer for you but I would say that yes, you're interpreting it correctly. The wording in Lords of Waterdeep is usually quite clear and the keyword is the same on both cards. Due to the first card you get a cube each time you take a Piety quest and the second card instructs you to take a number of quest cards. This means that you will get a cube per Piety quest taken.


Neutralize All Threats - Am I required to trash the second card accessed if I was not able to trash the first one? I've got the Neutralize All Threats and one credit. I make a run, say on a remote server, and access Space Camp. Since it costs 3 credits to trash, I can't afford the cost to trash it. Then I make a run, say on another remote server and access the Melange Mining Corp. Does Neutralize All Threats force me to trash it?

No, it doesn't force you. Neutralize All Threats triggers "the first time each turn you access a card with trash cost..." and whatever you did with that card is irrelevant for next accesses same turn.


In the Pokemon Card Game what is a group of Pokemon called? There is...

herd of cattle
pride of lions
murder of crows
school of fish
colony of ants

... and a [something] of Pokemon?

A group of Pokemon is called the same as group of animals.

So for a cattle-like Pokemon it's "herd", for lion-like Pokemon it's "pride", and so on.


Can I switch two pawns that are right next to the safe zone? If I drew an 11 while my opponent is on the safe zone entry (the the space right before you get into the safe zone) and my pawn is right after it (between the start and my opponent's pawn) can I switch them? And if I can what can my opponent do after?

Yes, you can switch them (the opponent's pawn is not yet safe; see rules below).

And what the opponent then "can do" doesn't change. The opponent plays from that position as normal. Clockwise, as normal. If they can back up a few spaces (e.g., with a 4, see rules quote below), then they would find that helpful. Or switch back with you with another 11. Or similar. Otherwise, that pawn is faced with going around clockwise again.

Rules:

You may target that pawn with your 11:

  You may only use 11 for pawns in play on the open track — not
  at START, HOME or in a SAFETY ZONE.

and they can move backward from there:

  However, you may pass the entry space on a backward
  move (4 or 10 card) or as the result of a “SORRY!”
  or “switch” (11) card played against you.


Why is 21 damage from a commander lethal? In commander, there is the extra rule:

  903.14a A player that’s been dealt 21 or more combat damage by the same commander over the course of the game loses the game

I am wondering as to the origins and intent of this rule.  Why is commander damage tracked separately per commander and why is 21 the particular number chosen to be lethal?

Motivation for the question:

This rule is incredibly cumbersome from a game tracking standpoint.  Even with just 4 players, it means that in addition to 4 life totals, there are 12 commander damage totals to track as well (or possibly even 16 commander damage totals if control changing effects are prevalent).  This takes the number of things that need tracking well out of range of most magic tracking apps and counter methods, making pen and paper or large dice piles the only good tracking options.

My playgroup finds this so cumbersome that we ignore the commander damage rule almost entirely (we consider 20 damage from a commander in a single hit as lethal, and otherwise don't care).  This decision was made under the key part of commander philosophy:

  House rules or "fair play" exceptions are always encouraged if they
  result in more fun for the local community.

But this piece of philosophy also suggests that the commander damage rule originally was to create fair or at least interesting play.

Also, the number 21 is very odd in the context of magic.  Magic game constants, aside from starting hand size, are usually multiples of 10: 20 life in a normal game, 30 life in two headed giant, 40 life in commander, 60 card minimum deck size in a normal game, 40 card minimum deck size in limited, 100 card deck size in commander...

[I'm posting my speculations as an answer, but I would love an answer with authoritative or historical sources.]

The original rules for Elder Dragon Legend Wars had the following as part of the rules:

players choose (or select at random) an Elder Dragon Legend as their army's leader. The dragon must be supported by creatures and spells corresponding to each of the Dragon's three specific casting colours.
Players designate and announce three of their creatures as "Warlords" and two creatures as "Captains". If an opponent destroys a Captain, the Captain's controller takes 2 damage, and the destroyer gains 2 life. If a warlord is destroyed, the controller takes 3 damage and the destroyer gains 3 life. And for an Elder Dragon, the controller takes 4 damages, the destroyer gains 4 life.

I'm not sure when or how the rules where modified to add the 21 damage rule, but I found an interesting thread on the MTG boards. Someone who goes by the handle TheTrueNub posted this:

  Well, I can tell you why the 21-damage rule was put in place, anyway. It didn't start out as anything to promote certain archetypes like voltron. "Commander" as we know it was once "Elder Dragon Highlander," the reason being that you'd choose one of the five Elder Dragons of Legends block (Arcades Sabboth, Chromium, Nicol Bolas, Palladia-Mors, or Vaevictis Asmadi) as your commander. Each of these dragons are 7/7, therefore three successful swings equals 21 damage. Though nowadays you don't have to use an Elder Dragon as your commander, the "21 Elder Dragon damage rule" is still preserved to this day.

This makes sense to me. I imagine he "three swings rule" was a flavourful rule added to ensure a large multiplayer game didn't drag out for too long and that aggro strategies were viable. Without this rule, it's too easy to build a lifegain and/or control deck that wouldn't give combat-oriented decks a chance.


Returning from exile at end step I've been playing magic on and off for a long time. The most recent time, however I've been taking a closer look at rules and action orders.

The main thing that I've been doing now is cloudshifting allies in and out of play. I need explanation on returning to exile at the end step. Blessed vs. Cused spotlighted a card that exiles all creatures I want that I control and sends them back at the end step. I didn't know it was any different from returning during the rest of the turn, until a buddy said something about it being different. He basically said that instead of returning one by one and triggering separately each time, they all hit at once and only trigger once.

Is this true? If it is can someone explain the ruling and process?

Yeah, they all enter the battlefield at once, but each trigger will be triggered.
When they enter simultaneously, they 'see' each other. If you have an Ally who gives lifelink, one who gives +1/+0 and one who gives +1/+1, the net result of them entering the battlefield at the same time would be +6/+3 and three instances of lifelink (which doesn't make any difference to just one instance, since it's not additive) for your three allies


what does "you control enchanted creature" mean I'm confused. Corrupted Conscience has an ability where it says you control enchanted creature. Does that mean you can put it on an opponent's creature and use that creature to attack the other player? Can I use it to capture a Humble Defector and gain its draw 2 cards ability?

It creates a continuous effect that changes the controller of the enchanted creature to you. As long as the continuous effect exists (i.e. as long as the creature is enchanted by Corrupted Conscience), and only as long as the continuous effect exists, you will be the creature's controller. As its controller, you can activate its abilities, you can sacrifice it, you can attack with it, you can block with it, and any reference to "you" or "your" in its abilities refers to you.

Note that changing a permanent's controller doesn't cause it to change zone, so it doesn't trigger abilities that would trigger on it leaving or entering the battlefield, it doesn't lose attached permanents (be they Auras, Equipment, or Fortifications), it doesn't lose counters, etc. However, it does regain "summoning sickness" (since it stopped being "under its controller's control continuously since their most recent turn began").

Note that Humble Defector's ability also creates a change of control effect. The most recently created change of control effect that still exists wins out, so using a stolen Humble Defector's ability will cause you to lose control of it. See this for details.


Poisoning as an attack in Pokemon TCG The item card Bent Spoon prevents all effects of attacks apart from damage.  Toxapex GX had an attack that causes 100 damage instead of 10 between turns. Does this damage class as an effect of an attack or, direct damage as an attack?

The Super Intense Poison attack of Toxapex-GX says:

   Super Intense Poison
  Your opponent's Active Pokémon is now Poisoned. Put 10 damage counters instead of 1 on that Pokémon between turns.

Special Conditions (including Poisoned) are considered an effect of an attack. It is not related to damage in any way. The second sentence alters the number of damage counters that are put on your opponent's Active Pokémon between turns, but this is also not considered damage.

Bent Spoon is a Pokémon Tool with this effect:

  Bent Spoon - Item - Pokémon Tool
  Prevent all effects of your opponent's attacks, except damage, done to the Pokémon this card is attached to. (Existing effects are not removed.)

Because the effect of Super Intense Poison is just creating an effect (Poison) on the targeted Pokémon, Bent Spoon prevents this effect from happening.

As a result, if your opponent's Active Pokémon has Bent Spoon attached, your Toxapex-GX's Super Intense Poison attack does nothing.

The "Put 10 damage counters instead of 1 on that Pokémon between turns." part is also prevented, so if your opponent's Active Pokémon is already Poisoned, the Poison does not get changed into 10-damage one.


Do permanents reenter the battlefield tapped with Brago, King Eternal? Let's say I have Brago, King Eternal, and a tapped artifact on the field, and I deal combat damage to the enemy player. Brago's ability reads:

  Whenever Brago, King Eternal deals combat damage to a player, exile any number of target nonland permanents you control, then return those cards to the battlefield under their owner's control.

So, using Brago's Ability, I exile and return the artifact I control. Would it still be tapped, or would it return untapped?

Permanents changing zones have no memory of their previous state (meaning tapped or untapped):

  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. [...]

Due to Brago's ability not invoking any additional state changes to the blinked cards, they will enter the battlefield as they normally would. This means that a Sol Ring will enter the battlefield untapped, while a Worn Powerstone would enter the battlefield tapped.

Note that other cards, such as Eldrazi Displacer, do set the state of the card re-entering the battlefield, so those cards will always enter the battlefield tapped.


Magic: The Gathering - Are there behavioral rules for sanctioned MTG games? FNM is least stringent Rule Enforcement Level (REL) sanctioned Magic game there is.  My question is that at that REL, are there any behavioral rules, and if so, what are the consequences?

Example: Your opponent gets pissed that he didn't notice one of your viable blockers, you double block and kill his creature creating an outcome he didn't prepare for and decides the proper course of action is to accuse you of cheating and sweep your non-deck cards (sideboard and Dual-Faced Cards) off the table in a huff.  Should you call a judge in this case?

Yes, there are behavioural rules, and yes there are consequences.

Chapter 5 of Wizards official tournament rules outlines Unsporting conduct.

  5.2. Unsporting Conduct — Major

  Penalty: Game Loss

  Definition

  Unsporting Conduct — Major infractions fall into three categories:

  Failing to follow a direct instruction from a tournament official.
  Insulting another person based on his or her race, color, religion, national origin, age, gender, disability, or sexual orientation.
  Aggressive or violent behavior that is not directed at another person or another person’s property.

  Examples

... snip ..

  D. After losing a match, a player throws his cards onto the table and knocks his chair over in anger.

... snip ...

  Additional Remedy

  The player must correct the behavior immediately, and can expect to be removed from the tournament venue upon further offenses. As with Unsporting Conduct — Minor infractions, if the offense occurs at the end of a game, it is acceptable for the judge to apply the penalty to the next game instead.

... snip ...

  5.5. Unsporting Conduct — Aggressive Behavior

  Penalty: Disqualification

  Definition

  A player acts in a threatening way towards others or their property.

  Examples

... snip ...

  D. A player tears up a card belonging to another player.

  E. A player intentionally turns over a table.

  Philosophy

  The safety of all people at a tournament is of paramount importance. There will be no tolerance of physical abuse or intimidation.

  Additional Remedy

  The offender should be asked to leave the venue by the organizer.

Depending on the ruling of the judge, your opponent could either be disqualified or assessed a game loss. I believe in this case, if he touched your cards and threw them on the floor, that would fall under 5.5 and he should be disqualified.

Edit:

AHA, just noticed you asked about REL events. Well this is what the Judging at Regular REL document has to say:

  There are also certain behaviours that will not be tolerated in any event. Any player engaging in the following must be disqualified from your event;

  Aggressive, violent or abusive behaviour (physical or verbal)
  Cheating, lying or intentionally making illegal game actions or trying to avoid penalties
  Influencing Match outcomes (by incentives, coercion or random methods)
  Theft (this includes things like replacing a chase rare in a draft with one from their binder)

  If you do have to hand out a Disqualification, let the players know that while your decision is final, the DCI would still like to hear their side of the story. Contact your WPN representative directly, and they will advise you further.

So they tournament organizers would be well within their rights to disqualify this person for aggressive behaviour, but they have more leeway. In any case, it certainly is grounds to call over a judge.


Can your opponent counter the exert ability of Champion of Rhonas? Can your opponent counter the exert ability of Champion of Rhonas, either as a spell or an activated ability? Does it count as a spell being cast?

Champion of Rhonas's ability is a replacement effect followed by a triggered ability. You will be able to counter it during the Declare Attackers step by effects which counter triggered abilities. In the current Standard format, there is one card that does this: Disallow. (If the Exert effect has targets, you could also optionally make all of its targets illegal: this makes the rules counter the ability, and doing so is colloquially known as fizzling.) Currently this is true of all creatures with an Exert effect.

It is not an activated ability, and abilities are never spells and never count as a spell being cast. You will not be able to counter it with an effect which requires an activated ability or a spell as a target.

Activated abilities follow a specific format, which is (quoting the rules themselves):

  [Cost]: [Effect.] [Activation instructions (if any).]

That : following a cost (including {0}, as in Kazuul's Toll Collector) in an ability's text is the way to tell it's an activated ability. If there is no cost & colon, it's not an activated ability.

The Champion's exert ability comes in two parts as mentioned earlier: it starts as a replacement effect (because of the "as"), which modifies how declaring attackers works by giving the controller the opportunity to exert it. It is followed by a triggered ability that occurs if it is exerted. This triggered ability carries the "when you do..." portion of the effect, and it goes on the stack during the Declare Attackers step after attackers are declared.

All current creatures with an Exert effect work this way. Battlefield Scavenger and Trueheart Twins are slight exceptions in that their triggered ability is a separate ability, but it will still trigger in the same way.


Why is Royal Flush ever listed separately from Straight Flush? Many sources (including here, here, here, and here) explicitly list Royal Flush as the highest poker hand. This seems unnecessary - it's the highest hand anyway as the highest Straight Flush. When designing a ruleset, unnecessary is harmful (e.g. it gives new players more to remember). So is there a good historical or game-mechanics reason why we treat the Royal Flush as a special case?

There are a number of different hands that have a specific name. For example, A-2-3-4-5 is called a Wheel. The Royal Flush obviously gets its name from being the highest hand, and specifically having royalty in it (although one could argue so does a King high.)
As for the mistake of ranking of Straight Flush being lower than 4 of a kind, this is easily dispelled by looking at the math behind them. There exist only 40 straight flushes (of which 4 are Royal) and there are 624 unique hands that rank as four-of-a-kind.
One reason for it persisting would be in Video Poker where a Royal Flush tends to pay out significantly higher than the other Straight Flushes. This doesn't answer the question about how it managed to still exist before Video Poker was around, though.
I have had it conveyed to me recently that it's listed separately potentially due to wild-cards and how they affect the math - that perhaps a straight flush is not as difficult to acquire anymore where a Royal flush is. However I have not had an opportunity to run the math on it. I would welcome an addendum if someone does.


What story does "Love Letter" tell? I heard about the game Love Letter from some board game blogs. I have read its rules, although I haven't really started playing it yet. It is a very interesting game indeed. But what puzzles me is:
What story does Love Letter tell?
The Wikipedia article on Love Letter says that

Each player aims to deliver a love letter to the princess with the assistance of collaborators.

But it doesn't explain what role the player plays, or what story each game tells.
What does it mean when a particular card is in your hand?
I have some confusion about this.

For example, when a King in your hand, what does it mean?
Does it mean you are playing as a king?
No, that's impossible... Because you can discard the King; then you are not a king anymore.
Or does it mean your love letter is in the king's hand?
If that is true, why doesn't the king give the letter to the princess directly and let you get married?

Another interesting example:
What does it mean when you have a Princess in your hand?
Does it mean that the princess has got your love letter?
Or you have eloped with the princess? And then caught by guards?

The game is a bit abstract, when it comes to the theme connection with mechanics, but I don't think it's quite that confusing.
Quoting from Premium Edition Rules (emphasis added)

In the wake of the arrest of Queen Marianna for high treason, none was more heartbroken than her daughter, Princess Annette. Suitors throughout the City-State of Tempest sought to ease Annette’s sorrow by courting her, seeking to bring some joy into her life.
You are one of these suitors, trying to get your love letter to the Princess. Unfortunately, she has locked herself in the palace, so you must rely on intermediaries to carry your message.
During the game, you hold one secret card in your hand. This is who currently carries your message of love for the Princess. Make sure that the person closest to the Princess holds your love letter at the end of the day, so it reaches her first!

The card you hold out of your turn would represent who's currently holding your love letter. At the end of the round, the closer that closest person to the princess is the one to deliver that suitors letter first. Apparently its first come, first served, but lets not dwell on that.
On your turn you have a chance to have one character exert their influence over the other suitors or at least the people happening to hold their letters, while the other gets your letter passed to them.
How exactly are you getting all these people, all the way to the king, to help you out with this? We don't really know, maybe you're just so sweet with your words.
As for the princess, you have somehow managed to get the letter directly at her hands. However, she doesn't read it immediately but instead...

[...] Obviously, you want the princess to carry your letter. However, she is self-conscious about matters of the heart, and if confronted, will toss your letter in the fire and deny looking at any correspondence.
If you discard the Princess — no matter how or why — she has tossed your letter into the fire. [...]


In Trajan, can a player get a bonus tile with zero votes on the senate track? In Trajan, if nobody advances on the Senate, do the top two discs get the bonus tiles?

Yes

From the Rulebook, page 9:

  Ties are broken in favor of the player with the higher
  position on the senate track, in case of the same position
  in favor of that player whose disc is higher up in the
  stack.

So, if all discs are still at the starting point, the order of discs on the stack matters for determining Consul and Vice-Consul.


Diplomacy: What happens when two units attack each other with unequal support? In a game of diplomacy I am playing, a Turkish army in Moscow is attacking Warsaw with support from Ukraine, Galicia, and Silesia. A Russian Army in Warsaw is attacking Moscow with support from Livonia and St. Petersburg. Finally, A Russian Army in Prussia is attempting to move into Warsaw. What happens?

Moscow is moving to Warsaw with strength 4 (itself + 3 supports). Warsaw is moving to Moscow with strength 3 (itself + 2 support). The Army in Prussia moving into Warsaw is irrelevant (It's of strength 1, which is also less than 4). The MOS-WAR move has greater strength, so succeeds and the Army in Warsaw is dislodged. The Prussian army remains in Prussia.


Cities and Knights: Lose to a barbarian attack, but no settlements. The barbarians come, and the player with the least amount of active knights has a city and 5 settlements on the board.

What happens?

The city would normally get knocked down to a settlement, but all of his settlements are already on the board.

You turn your city marker, and treat it as if it were a settlement. From the Catan FAQ:

  FAQ - Frequently Asked Questions Barbarians III: Players are Defeated
  - What happens if I have to downgrade a city to a settlement but don’t have another settlement in stock?

  Answer Turn one of your cities on its side and treat it as a
  settlement until you have upgraded it to a city again.


Can equipment be activated twice? Could I use the ability of this weapon multiple times to consume different infusions on the same attack?

No,  That symbol is spend 'any' element once.

page 24 of rules here states

  This multi-colored circle represents any single uses of the six element

This means you can not spend multiple elements to boost the attack.

Note the card does not have the 'refresh item symbol' or 'consumed' symbol  see page 8 of rules.

  if a card depicts neither of these symbols there are no restrictions on the number of times if can be used during a scenario other that was it written in the text of the card

As the card has the symbol to use just one element that is all you can use.

Its also worth looking at this BBG thread on the difference between 'single attack' and 'attack action'.  The item above can only be used on single attacks.  Not on those with an Area Of Effect of targeting more than one enemy in other ways.


Should spiderines be allowed in 'A Dig Too Far?' I was playing the Small World Realms scenario 'A Dig Too Far' with some friends the other night.  The map has 'veins of gold' that must all be dug from top to bottom, simultaneously.  Strategically placed chasms force players (or should) to work their way down the veins into 'monster races' that are working their way up the veins.

The third player to pick got the first shot at spiderines and immediately grabbed them.  Spiderines (as we read the rules) are able to pop up out of any chasms no matter where they are on the board, so the thing that is supposed to inhibit movement along the veins actually helps him get there faster and more efficiently.  He got all three of the first layer on his first turn (good for 7 bonus coin) and then he abandoned the regions and let the monster races flood out.  On his next turn, he was able to easily take over 2 of the three 'B' layers, and immediately got two relics for his trouble (stinky socks and the welcome mat... a deadly combination.)  From then on (the second or third turn), he was basically unstoppable and beat the rest of us handily.

I controlled the Balrog, but could never get close to him because he could always pick up and pop out of a different chasm.  He could also guarantee that the monsters (even when they were numerous) would never attack him by making sure he had more heavily defended squares when near monsters (they always choose to attack weaker spaces first.)  Basically, they seemed insanely overpowered for this specific map / scenario.  Has anyone else noticed this?  The instructions explicitly say to take flames, sorcerers, mummies, and skeletons out of the game, but it seems to me that spiderines are almost as overpowered as flames in this game type.  Was this just an oversight on the designers' part?  Does anyone have a good strategy against early spiderines on this map?

From the rules (p.7)

  Troop Redeployment:

  Once a player's conquests for the turn have ended, he may
  freely redeploy the Race tokens he has on the board, moving
  them from one Region to any other Region occupied by his race
  (not necessarily just an adjacent or contiguous Region), provided
  that at least one Race token remains in each Region under his
  control.

At the end of the Spiderine player's turn there should be at least one token per region, which means that

He cannot "abandon the regions and let the monster races flood out"
Other players should be able to attack that player, giving him losses and thus forcing him to go into decline eventually.


7 Wonders (Cities Expansion): War from both sides due to Peace Tokens Just played my second game of 7 Wonders, after I impulse purchased it along with the Cities Expansion. As we play in a group of four, its not uncommon that two grab Peace Tokens during the same Age, resulting in only two people at the end to fight the war.

What happens in this situation? Does the war happen twice (IE loser gains two losses and the victor gains two wins)?

Once only. According to the cities rulebook, p. 5:

  If there are ever only 2 players left during a conflict resolution, they only face each other once and each take a single token.


Can Bunker's Grenade Launcher be used on the same target 3 times? Bunker's Grenade Launcher power says "Deal 2 damage to a target, may deal 2 damage to another target, may deal 1 damage to another target." Does that imply that each target would have to be unique? Or could it hit the same target multiple times since it doesn't say a DIFFERENT target.

I always played it as 3 different targets, but I'm wondering if the card is intended to give the option to be like a card that reads "Deal 1 target 1 melee damage and 1 fire damage" OR you can split that damage up among multiple target.

No, you must select different targets for each set of damage.

In the Sentinels of the Multiverse app developed by Handelabra Studio in cooperation with Greater Than Games, playing Grenade Launcher asks you to select a target for each instance of dealing damage and does not give you the option for selecting the same target(s).

This matches the usual definition of "another". From dictionary.reference.com:

  Another (adj):
  1.
  being one more or more of the same; further; additional:
  another piece of cake.
  2.
  different; distinct; of a different period, place, or kind:
  at another time; another man.
  3.
  very similar to; of the same kind or category as:
  What we need today is another Thomas Jefferson.

In general, Sentinels of the Multiverse cards are very literal in their instructions: if it were intended to have an OR, it would have an OR.


In Gin-Rummy, how likely is that a round ends in a Draw? In Gin-Rummy, when the deck reach the last two cards and no player have knocked, the rounds end in a draw.  In games of experts, or at least experienced players, how often a round ends in a draw?

I would like to get an estimation of an experienced player.

EDIT: Some terminology:

A game consist of several rounds
a round consist of several turns.
A game can never end in a draw, since in each round only one player receive points.  Thus the first answer is incorrect.

I have played Gin often with my family, at least several hundred rounds. I do not recall ever having participated in a game which ended in a draw.

I will note that I have primarily participated in two-player games, logic indicates that games with additional players would have a higher probability of ending in a draw as there would be fewer rounds per player and each additional player results in one card per round that cannot be accessed.


Why didn't my Deathtouch creature kill my opponent's Protean Hydra? I'm trying to learn the new MTG; I haven't played since the original Beta set. I'm playing on PS3 so I can learn how to at least last a few rounds against my son. :)

So here's the scenario: My opponent had a 12/12 Protean Hydra out. I had a 2/7 Spider with Deathtouch. The Spider blocked the Hydra. The Spider died and the Hydra became a 13/13. Why didn't the Hydra die? Am I misunderstanding Deathtouch?

Protean Hydra has two abilities that say

If damage would be dealt to Protean Hydra, prevent that damage and remove that many +1/+1 counters from it.
Whenever a +1/+1 counter is removed from Protean Hydra, put two +1/+1 counters on it at the beginning of the next end step.

And the rule for how Deathtouch damage works is 702.2b:

A creature with toughness greater than 0 that’s been dealt damage by a source with deathtouch since the last time state-based actions were checked is destroyed as a state-based action

So, here's the sequence of events in your scenario:

We get to the combat damage step, and the Spider is assigned to deal 2 damage to the Hydra.

The Hydra's ability prevents that damage, and instead 2 +1/+1 counters are removed, making it a 10/10. Since the damage was prevented, the Hydra wasn't dealt damage by a source with Deathtouch, so it doesn't die.

At the beginning of the end step, because of the Hydra's other ability, 2 +1/+1 counters are put on it for each one removed earlier, making it a 14/14.

You said that the Hydra ended up as a 13/13 instead. That could happen if the Protean Hydra was actually a 11/11 originally, or if the Spider actually only had 1 power, or it could simply be a bug in the game.


Do cards that say "Each player..." still affect players with Shroud? I have a True Believer out which gives me shroud. My opponent has an enchantment that says that each player must sacrifice whenever he sacrifices a card. Does the enchantment target me, thus allowing me to avoid the effect, or does the enchantment still have its effect despite me having shroud?

"Shroud" means "This permanent or player can't be the target of spells or abilities."

Unless the ability specifically uses the word target, it is not affected by shroud.

I'm not sure which enchantment you are talking about, but if it says each player, like Grave Pact, then it is not affected by shroud. If it says target opponent or target player, then it is affected by shroud.

Note that there is a subtype of Enchantment, Curse, which have the line Enchant Player. These Enchantment Aura spells do target a player when they are on the stack, so they are affected by shroud.


Companions lost on death in same room as other explorers I understand the general ruling on companions lost on death. Essentially it says "whomever enters the room first gains custody of the companion". However, this doesn't quite make sense for the scenario I'm in right now: two heros and the traitor are in a room. One hero has the madman, and dies fighting the traitor. Now the madman, last hero and traitor are all in the same room. Who gets the madman? We eventually decided that you had to move out of the room and back into the room to take the madman, since that's what the rules seem to say, but that seems illogical.

Tl;dr if a companion is in the same room as two explorers, who gets the companion?

The rules as written do seem to imply you have to leave the room and re-enter. However I agree with you that this is silly - the spirit of the rules as I read them is that the lost companion gloms on to the first available explorer. So to resolve the ambiguity I would house-rule the relevant section:

  If another explorer enters the room or starts their turn in the room, he or she gains custody of that companion.

Or if you prefer more instantaneous glomming,

  If one or more other explorers are already in the room, the next in turn order gains custody of that companion immediately. Otherwise, the next explorer to enter the room does.


Does a card with "put into play" trigger an "enters the battlefield" effect? Say I have a card which says:

  when a horse enters the battlefield give it +1/+1

and a card that says:

  put two horse tokens into play

Do my horse tokens get +1/+1 even though it says they are put "into play" and not "enters the battlefield?

Short answer: yes.

Long answer:
Your confusion stems from a change in terminology that took place in July 2009:

The in-play zone is now the battlefield.
This was the single biggest Oracle change. A lot of cards—no, seriously, a lot of cards—do something when they enter the battlefield, or do something when they leave the battlefield, or enter the battlefield with counters on them, or put a token onto the battlefield, or so on. It stands to reason; the battlefield is the primary game zone. A total of 2,417 cards now say "battlefield" in their Oracle wordings.
There are a number of variations in the wordings. "Put [something] into play" became "Put [something] onto the battlefield." "When [something] comes into play" became "When [something] enters the battlefield." "From play" and "in play" became "from the battlefield" and "on the battlefield," respectively. There are others, but you get the idea.

Oracle is a database of all tournament-legal cards, which includes the up-to-date wordings that take rule changes into account.  If you had looked up your token-creating card on Gatherer after this change, you would have found that the Oracle wording of the card said something like "Put two horse tokens onto the battlefield."
Note that the wording used for this changed again in 2016. The release notes for Kaladesh explain the new terminology:

Starting with Kaladesh, you're going to see a new rules term on cards: create. This new bit of templating is a new way to say "put a token onto the battlefield." This isn't a functional change in any way. The tokens still enter the battlefield like they always did.

As with the previous update in 2009, older cards once again received Oracle text updates to reflect the new wording. You can see the difference on cards like Advent of the Wurm.


Codex vs Chapter Approved I am finally getting around to doing my Death Guard in Warhammer 40k.  In the Dark Imperium, the Lord of Contagion, was listed at 137 points, in the Codex it is listed at 120 points, but in Chapter Approved it is 100 points.

There are no corresponding errata for Dark Imperium and the Codex for adjusting the points.  Now, chapter approved is after Dark Imperium of course, and I assume that it is also after the Codex, so should the point value listed in chapter approved be used?

This would apply to more than just the Lord of Contagion of course.  And, how would you determine when chapter approved supersedes the codex; eg. the Tau codex (which came out after chapter approved)?

Following that, how would someone find out chapter approved changes if there is none listed for the specific codex, without purchasing the book?  Seems rather schmuckish for GW to expect you to ALWAYS purchase chapter approved for updated points and rules

The codex is law.

It's expected you follow the codex if it's available, otherwise the Index (with many races on it), otherwise the rulebook (if datas specific to an army are in it), otherwise previous codex, rinse and repeat.

Chapter approved are, like erratas, supplementary materials aimed to balance the game. Sadly, Chapter approved can be outdated. If your codex/index is more recent than the Chapter approved, the codex's price is the right one, otherwise it's Chapter approved.

If you do not own the Chapter approved and play in tournaments or whatever, they should be able to give you the correct prices for the units you want to play.

About the "GW are schmucks", they are a business company trying to make money out of your hobby. To do so they have to make it balanced (not funny when someone stomp you because his army is strictly better than your army), they have to make new releases often, and a lot of other things.

By releasing a lot of new things, they have to make sure it's balanced, why not make profits of it?

Also, Chapter approved ends up in erratas and in reprint, usually.

EDIT : Death Guard Codex released in September 2017, Chapter Approved released in December 2017, therefore Chapter Approved's rules should be used, if any. In your example the price tag should be 100. I also went to my local store and they assured me that if it's printed in your Codex and you do not own chapter approved, you can use your Codex's pricetag.


How do multiple copies of Merrow Commerce interact? If I have more than one copy of Merrow Commerce in play, they both trigger during my end step. Can I take actions after the first one resolves, but before the second one does? I'm thinking of something like tapping my Silvergill Douser and Merfolk Thaumaturgist to pick off an opponent's creatures, then having them untap again.

Well yes you can. These are triggered abilities

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

Multiple triggers are put on the stack, and after one resolves, you get priority as the active player.

  116.3b The active player receives priority after a spell or ability (other than a mana ability) resolves.


Must a "target creature" be on the battlefield? If an ability says "target creature," does the creature have to be on the battlefield? I think I found a loophole that depends on the answer.

Yes, it does.  The rules say:

  109.2. If a spell or ability uses a description of an object that includes a card type or subtype, but doesn’t include the word “card,” “spell,” “source,” or “scheme,” it means a permanent of that card type or subtype on the battlefield.

i.e., "creature" can only mean a creature permanent on the battlefield.


Erasable yet bold crayon for Empire Builder Games (e.g. Eurorails)? We have kids, so we have lots of types of crayons in the house.  Everything from airline freebie to crayola.  None of them are very satisfactory for Eurorails (and related games).  Either they are too light to see or they won't erase easily.  The original factory crayons are long since gone/lost.

What crayon do people recommend for Eurorails?

I don't think you will get a definitive answer, but probably just lots of suggestions. There has been.discussion about this question before on BGG. You are going to get a range of answers:

Crayola Washable Crayons.
China Markers.
Dry Erase Markers
Wet Erase Markers.
Standard Crayola Crayons


Is it OK to mix Colony Wars and Frontiers for a 2 player game? Is it OK to mix Colony Wars and Frontiers for a 2 player game? Would there be any balance issues?

One main worry is that the trade row might just have high value cards for a while and you are just sitting there buying explorers for a long time

"Balance" typically refers to each player's relative chances of winning.  There isn't any inerrant balance changes from the expansions because the trade row is shared between the two players.  Even if the trade-row gets full of high-value cards, the game does not favor one player over the other.  Unaffordable trade rows happen even with just the base game (I've seen it happen), and Explorers exist for this very reason.

Balance issues aside, all of the Star Realms expansions have a spread of card costs.  I do not believe any of them significantly increase the chance of an un-affordable starting trade row.


What is the name of the following chess opening? What are its pros and cons? At some point, when I was young, I learned an opening that involves the following moves: possibly after moving queen's pawn to the centre (d4), move out king's knight to above the bishop (Nf3), move knight's pawn up one (g3), move bishop up behind knight's pawn (Bg2), castle on king's side (O-O).  This results in a very tight and turtle-like defensive formation that was sufficiently aesthetically pleasing to my young self that, in the years since, I've found it quite hard to get out of the habit of using it as my opening.  (I'm not a chess expert in any way, I hasten to point out if it's not already obvious, though I do usually beat other casual players.)

Is this a well-known opening and does it have a name?  Given my apparent overwhelming predilection for playing it, what are its advantages, and what weaknesses does it have that I should watch for my opponent being able to exploit?  Any recommendations for taking my opening game to the next level would also be appreciated!

Moving your bishop like that is called a fianchetto.  There are a lot of openings which fianchetto the king's bishop; what you are describing sounds somewhat like the King's Indian for white.

The advantage of fianchetto-ing your bishop is that it very quickly puts the bishop on the long diagonal, its most powerful position.  However, it takes two moves, and weakens your kingside (specifically the f3 and h3 squares), giving your opponent potential areas to attack.  For example, a common plan for black in many openings (if his pawn structure allows it) is to force the trade of bishops by Bd7, Qc8, and Bh3.  Once the bishops are traded, your king would be very vulnerable to attack.

Traditionally (beginning with Steinitz), it was taught that one of the goals of the opening phase was to control the center by occupying it with pawns.  However, Nimzovich introduced hypermodernism, which states that the center should be controlled from a distance by pieces, not occupied by pawns.  Neither view is more correct than the other - even today, both have very strong Grandmaster supporters, and accepted opening theory draws from both sides.  I mention this because yours is a hypermodern opening.


MTG: Modal cards and graveyard targeted effects In regards to modal double-faced cards there are many effects which allow you to "Cheat" in one side or another.

If an effect allows you to play a land or cast a spell from among a group of cards, you may play or cast a modal double-faced card with any face that fits the criteria of that effect.

However does this effect apply to targeting abilities? If one has a Birgi their graveyard (Birgi, God of Storytelling / Harnfel, Horn of Bounty). Her flip-side is an artifact. Would one be able to Sacrifice an artifact (a Myr token lets say), with something like Goblin Welder or Daretti, Scrap Savant 's -2 to reanimate either side of Birgi?

No, if you reanimate a double-faced card (modal or transforming), or otherwise do something that isn't casting it, you can generally only operate on the front face.
The most important rule here is 711.4a:

While a double-faced card is outside the game or in a zone other than the battlefield or stack, it has only the characteristics of its front face.

If you are trying to target a double-faced card in the graveyard, you can only target the front face, because that face is the only one it is considered to have there.
The other important rule covering reanimation is 711.10:

A double-faced card put onto the battlefield from a zone other than the stack enters the battlefield with its front face up by default.

Casting is different because modal double-faced cards have a special rule that allows you to cast either face, in 711.7:

If a transforming double-faced card is cast as a spell, it’s put on the stack with its front face up. A player casting a modal double-faced card as a spell chooses which face they are casting before putting it onto the stack. See rule 601, “Casting Spells.”


Newport has no costs on UK PowerGrid map - A misprint? On the UK & Ireland / Northern Europe expansion map, the town of Newport has no 10 15 20 pricing.  The Expansion rules sheet makes no mention of this place having any special meaning.

I assume this is simply a misprint rather than that these sites are 'free' to occupy.

Is this a correct interpretation?

Yes, it's a misprint. From the game publisher:

  Oh, that is a misprint. As far as I can check this, all three numbers
  are missing in Newport. Of course this city should have the same
  numbers as all normal cities (10/15/20).

  Sorry!

  Henning (2F-Spiele)


Are there any cards capable of modifying the mana symbols? Are there any cards - old ones, or newest ones - capable of modifying the mana symbols?

For example Shivan Dragon has the ability "{R}: Shivan Dragon gets +1/+0 until end of turn". Can this ability be transformed, for example, into "{W}: Shivan Dragon gets +1/+0 until end of turn"?

It should be noted that, obviously, I am not referring to either "Sleight of Mind" card - which can only modify the text of a card containing a color, but not mana symbols - nor to "Magical Hack" card - which is able to modify the basic land types, but not mana symbols.

Crimson Hellkite has an ability that uses the phrase "red mana". In a case like this, would Sleight of Mind be enough to change the type of mana required in the Helkite's activated ability?

You cannot change the actual mana symbols; however there are cards that would allow you spend mana "as though" it were another color. Mycosynth Lattice is one example. Among other things, it has:

  Players may spend mana as though it were mana of any color.

With this in play, you could spend any color of mana to activate Shivan Dragon's ability.

Celestial Dawn would allow you to spend white mana as though it were any color; Sunglasses of Urza allows you to spend white mana specifically as though it were red mana.

Sleight of Mind would allow you to change the text of Crimson Hellkite; it refers to "red mana"; so you can change that text to something like "white mana".

Note that in general; gaining access to other colors of mana is called "mana fixing". It can be in the form of lands or other objects that can add multiple colors of mana; or objects that allow you to spend one type of mana to get another type. You can read all about it here: https://mtg.gamepedia.com/Mana_fixing.


Are rooms drawn because of tiles and cards always considered 'discovered' and thus the symbol on the card executed? Page 10 of the rules say

  If you discover a new room because of a tile's or card's effect, and that new room has a symbol on it, you draw the appropriate card for that new room.

Disclaimer: I haven't played the game at all and could probably read through all the tiles to answer this, but don't want to spoil the game.

My question is as follows. What does it mean to 'discover' a new room? Does the character have to enter the room, or do some tiles/cards have effects that will cause a room to appear without the character walking into it? If so, does this mean we do not draw for the symbol?  If all added rooms always result in the character entering the room, then I guess this question is pretty useless.

Any time you enter a newly-drawn room, you must resolve the symbol in that room if it has one.

The only way a room can appear in the house without having you enter that room at the same time is during a Haunt's setup instructions. During these setup instructions, you will ignore any symbols in the rooms, because there is no player entering the room to resolve the symbol.

The events that can cause you to need to draw a new room tile will also tell you to move into that room, and when you do so, you must resolve the symbol. Note that if you ever ignored symbols in this way, you could end up with a game where the Haunt never begins (you ignore an Omen symbol, and then you only have 12 Omens instead of 13 to resolve. And it is possible, though very unlikely, that you will still pass the Haunt role with 12 Omens. But with 13 Omens, it is impossible to pass the role so the Haunt begins).

The closest the rules get to being clear about this is here:

  A room may have a card symbol on it. The
  first time you discover a room with a card symbol, you must
  end your move in that room and draw the appropriate card.

It doesn't specifically define "discovering", but it seems that the only assumption where the game makes sense is that discovering is any form of drawing a new tile and entering that room.

Note that in the first edition, the event Revolving Wall specifically tells you to ignore any symbols in the new room, but this is a mistake due to the never-ending game problem and was fixed in the second edition. See the errata for the game:

  Revolving Wall -- This states, "Icons in [the newly drawn] room do not affect you this turn." Does this mean the icons affect you (thus ending your movement) on the next turn?

    Errata: Any icon in the new room does affect you when you enter. Otherwise it is possible (though unlikely) to have a game with no Haunt.


A&A surprise strike on loaded aircraft carrier In Axis and Allies 1941, submarines can make a surprise attack

  surprise strike: Each attacking submarine conducting a surprise strike rolls one die, scoring a hit on s roll of 2 or less. After an attacker has rolled for all attacking submarines, the defender chooses one sea unit for each hit and moves it behind the casualty strip (submarines cannot hit air units). The each defending submarine conducts surprise strike rolls, scoring a hit on a roll of 1. After the defender has rolled for all defending submarines, the attacker chooses one sea unit for each hit scored and removes it from play.

That seems straightforward enough, but what if it's the first round of combat and a loaded aircraft carrier is taken out (let's say one sub vs one carrier with one fighter on it)?

There appear to be no rules to the contrary, so it would seem that the fighter remains in play, assuming it was launched - especially as the carrier is placed on the casualty strip, not removed.

However, it makes me wonder if the fighter had time to launch. After all, this was a surprise strike, so the fighter shouldn't have taken off at least on the first round.  Should it be on the casualty strip with the carrier?

The fighters are considered, for the purpose of the game, to already be in the air, so the surprise strike will not put the fighters behind the casualty line.

At the end of combat, defending fighters have a range of one. If at the end of combat there are no carriers with available capacity in the combat zone, or an adjacent sea zone, or an adjacent land square that is controlled by an allied power where they can land, they are destroyed.


Mystery cards in Magic 2015 card list If you look at the full card list for Magic 2015, at Gatherer or elsewhere, you'll see a bunch of cards listed with collectors number 270-284. What are these cards, and why are they listed as being part of Magic 2015? I played enough M15 Limited to be pretty sure that they aren't actually present in packs, and they're listed after the basic lands, which is very unusual. Is there some secret, bonus release of M15 that had these extra cards?

You are correct, these cards are not in booster packs. For the past few years, Wizards has put out 30 card sample decks to introduce new players into the game. This year they decided to put into these packs a number of reprinted cards not actually present in M15: see here for decklists. Like the article mentions, the Deck Builder's Toolkit for M15 also has the extra cards.

Since putting two of these sample decks together gives a basic 60 card, two-color deck, Wizards expects a number of people to do just that to build their first standard deck. They made those extra cards explicitly standard legal to allow people that option; most people would assume by default that such a deck is playable.


Skulk Hollow: what information is available in a discard pile? Knowing what has been discarded already can be beneficial to both players.
Is the rulebook maybe going with a standard definition of "discard pile" that I'm not aware of?
This sponsored how-to video shows it as having the top card visible. But I'm thinking that might just be for the sake of the camera frame, and conciseness. (i.e. Rodney didn't feel a need to explain this.)

EDIT:  I posted the question on BGG here and game designer Eduardo Baraf has clarified.  Discards are face up and both piles can be reviewed by either player at any time.
A discard pile is almost always face up. (this is based my own experience over last 15 years so so of attending UK based games clubs and conventions)
If a discard pile was face down then you run the risk of a player drawing a card from discard pile by mistake. If a discard pile was meant to be face down and its contents secret I would expect this to be specified by that games rules
However, there is an argument that Skulk Hollow should be played with a face down discard even though this isn't explicitly stated.
The Prepare action allows a player to discard a card a draw two cards. It might be the intention to not let your opponent know what card you discarded.  Also the recall ability says:-

A hero unit with the RECALL ability may spend one power to allow the
hero player to examine the contents of their discard pile, choose one
card, and return it to their hand.

Even though the rules don't explicitly state you may not examine your discard pile this ability explicit states you may when taking that action.  You could infer from that that normally you would not be able to.
The difficulty here is the the rules are not specific about this.   Personally I would play with a face up discard as that's what I'm used to in other games but in your situation I would suggest agreeing with who you were playing against first how you play it.


Riddleform and Hadana's Climb I have the card Hadana's Climb and Riddleform in my deck, if I add the +1/+1 counter on Riddleform while it's on it's creature form from my Hadana's Climb will it stay there until the next turn that my Riddleform changes or will the +1/+1 counter disappear after then end of turn?

Yes, your Riddleform will keep the +1/+1 counters on it.

Permanents don't generally care what counters are on them unless they have and effect that says they should care. So even when your Riddleform turns back into an an enchantment it will still have it's +1/+1 counters on it (even though those counters won't do anything).

One special case to note is that your Hadana's Climb can only place +1/+1 counters on creatures. So even if your Riddleform has already received a counter or two, you will not be able to place additional counters on it with Hadana's Climb (and then cause the transform) if it is not currently a creature.


Can I have two planeswalkers with the same planeswalker type out on the field? Can I have two versions of Huatli out at the same time even though they are the same planeswalker, just with different names?

Yes, you can have multiple Huatli planeswalkers on the battlefield at a time.
This is a recent change when it comes to magic, but planeswalkers are now Legendary permanents so planeswalker type is no longer considered for determining if it gets to stay on the field.

306.4.: Previously, planeswalkers were subject to a “planeswalker uniqueness rule” that stopped a player from controlling two planeswalkers of the same planeswalker type. This rule has been removed and planeswalker cards printed before this change have received errata in the Oracle card reference to have the legendary supertype. Like other legendary permanents, they are subject to the “legend rule” (see rule 704.5j).
704.5j: If a player controls two or more legendary permanents with the same name, that player chooses one of them, and the rest are put into their owners’ graveyards. This is called the “legend rule.”

So as long as the two planeswalkers don't have the same card name, you can have them both on the battlefield simultaneously.


Why are there fewer board games with a triangular grid? Many games have a rectangular grid, some even use hexagonal but it's quite rare to see triangles. I have heard the argument that hexagons confuse players. Is that true? Is there any evidence to suggest it?

My inner game designer thinks that hexagonal games have more choices. So a casual player might be paralyzed by so many options compared with what he "knows as normal". So a 'hardcore' player will love it, again for the extra choices. If that's true, and not just a rationalization I made up, then will a triangular board feel constricted to both demographics?

Is that line of reasoning sound? Is there something I'm missing?

A hexagonal grid and a triangular grid are duals of each other; that is, if you put a dot in the center of each hexagon, and connect them to each adjacent one, then you get a triangular grid:

Thus, playing on the vertices of a triangular grid is equivalent to playing in the spaces on a hexagonal grid, and likewise playing on the vertices of a hexagonal grid is equivalent to playing in the spaces on a triangular grid. An example of this is the game Hex, so named because of the hexagonal grid it is played on; however, you can also play it on a triangular grid by playing it like Go, on the vertices instead of the spaces.

One of the big difference between playing (in the spaces) on a hexagonal grid and a triangular grid is that in a hexagonal grid, each space is connected to six spaces around it; in a triangular grid, each space is connected to only three. This can significantly limit the number of options, if for instance you are only allowed to move to adjacent spaces, or only are allowed to make connections to adjacent spaces. A square grid gives you four connections, or eight if you can move or connect diagonally. A hexagonal grid gives you six. In many game designs, only have three moves or connections available is likely to be fairly limiting, though it may be possible to do something interesting with that.

There are games played with triangular grids. One example that comes to mind is Blokus Trigon. This is an interesting case, as each piece consists of triangles joined by their edges, but you join your pieces together by their corners, with the restriction that each piece must touch another of the same color on a corner but not on an edge. In the traditional square version of Blokus, this means that only two of the pieces which touch at a given intersection may be the same color; while in the triangular version, you have 6 spaces around each intersection, and thus can fit three pieces of the same color in. In this way, it manages to take advantage of both the triangular and hexagonal properties of the triangular grid.

Another example of using triangular and hexagonal boards is attempting to play Go on both. Xah Lee has some notes on how that works. As Go is played on the intersections, not in the spaces, each piece connects to only three others on the hexagonal board, and thus each piece has only three liberties, while on the triangular board, each space connects to six others. In the hexagonal version, only three spaces means that each piece is very vulnerable to capture; the game is very unstable. In the triangular version, each piece has lots of liberties, and is quite hard to capture. It sounds like for Go, 4 connections really is the ideal balance for just enough risk to have good tactical battles, while enough stability to be able to form live groups and be able to think more about strategy.

In summary, triangular grids are used occasionally, but I believe that in many cases they provide too few options or connections to provide interesting strategic play. However, if you're interested in designing games, perhaps you should take that as a design challenge; try to design a game that takes good advantages of the limited number of options a triangular grid gives you.

Image credits

Dual of hexagonal grid by Antal S-Z of StackOverflow. Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike 2.5
Hex board by Tiltec of Wikimedia Commons. Released into the public domain.
Go-style hex board by Twixter of HexWiki. Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike 3.0.
Blokus Trigon by Gangster 1930 of BoardGameGeek. Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Share-Alike 3.0.


MTG. Using goblin chirurgeon's ability only for sacrifice I had a Goblin Sharpshooter, sixty-some goblin tokens, and a Goblin Chirurgeon on the field (all with haste). My opponent had an enchantment that kept me from directly attacking him (2 life or {W} for each attacker), so I wanted to use my Chirurgeon's ability ("Sacrifice a Goblin: Regenerate target creature") to kill a creature which will untap my Sharpshooter. Do I NEED a regenerate target to sacrifice a goblin?

Yes, you must choose a valid target when activating a targeting ability. The ability says "target creature", so you must target a creature. Any creature will do[1]. Fortunately, you have plenty of valid targets (i.e. creatures), including your Goblin Sharpshooter and Goblin Chirurgeon (or even the token you are sacrificing, although that won't save it).

The following describes what happens in detail:

Activate Goblin Sharpshooter activated ability targeting your opponent.
Goblin Sharpshooter activated ability resolves

Goblin Sharpshooter deals one damage to your opponent.

Activate Goblin Chirurgeon's ability targeting Goblin Sharpshooter, sacrificing a token.

Goblin Sharpshooter's triggered ability triggers.

Goblin Sharpshooter's triggered ability is placed on the stack.
Goblin Sharpshooter's triggered ability resolves.

Untap Goblin Sharpshooter.

Goblin Chirurgeon's ability resolves.

Goblin Sharpshooter gains a regeneration shield.

Repeat.

Regenerating a creature grants it a shield that replaces its destruction the next time it would be destroyed that turn, if any. There's no requirement that you think it will be needed.

Unless an ability prevents it (e.g. "Protection from Red").


Do I have to "choose" when not targetting? This is related to this question, but without the targeting. Let's say I have Penance and Narset, Enlightened Master on the battlefield, my opponent having nothing but (colorless) lands. It's my turn, combat phase, I attack with Narset, and with her triggered ability still on stack I want to activate Penance in order to put a non-creature, non-land from my hand on top of my library to free cast with Narset.

Do I have to choose Narset for Penance's damage prevention?

If Narset is the only Red or Black source you will have to choose her when the ability resolves if you activate Penance. The only way you could not make a choice is if there are no Red or Black sources to choose, but you would still be able to activate the ability. Note that the source you choose doesn't have to be something that will ever deal damage, it can be something like Doom Blade or Aggravated Assault.

  608.2d If an effect of a spell or ability offers any choices other than choices already made as part of casting the spell, activating the ability, or otherwise putting the spell or ability on the stack, the player announces these while applying the effect. The player can’t choose an option that’s illegal or impossible, with the exception that having a library with no cards in it doesn’t make drawing a card an impossible action (see rule 120.3).

  119.7. The source of damage is the object that dealt it. If an effect requires a player to choose a source of damage, he or she may choose a permanent; a spell on the stack (including a permanent spell); any object referred to by an object on the stack, by a prevention or replacement effect that’s waiting to apply, or by a delayed triggered ability that’s waiting to trigger (even if that object is no longer in the zone it used to be in); or, in certain casual variant games, a face-up card in the command zone. A source doesn’t need to be capable of dealing damage to be a legal choice. See rule 609.7, “Sources of Damage.”


Game for a blind person A friend of mine is blind and she said she'd love to play something. And she meant something non-trivial. Do you know any games where you actually don't need to see? I thought about diplomacy kind of game where all you need to do is talk (political/historical background seems interesting), but could you please give me some solid examples of such games?

EDIT:

Let me narrow it down a little bit: AFAIK my friend does not know Braille yet. She's an adult, so simple games just won't cut it. It would also be her first game after becoming blind so it can't be too complex. I see the simple/complex contradiction - by "not simple" I mean with interesting storyline or background and by "not complex" I mean mechanically easy without many elements to remember (I suppose it's easier to remember an ongoing story than a set of cards and/or various numerical values, that's why I'm pushing it a little bit towards spoken games). And maybe one more, minor thing: it's definitely not a must, but I'd appreciate if it was available in Poland or was easily adaptable to polish language.

I see three kind of games:

1. Just for fun games

In these games, there is no point in winning, just having fun is enough. What comes in mind is Aye, Dark Overlord!, where the goal is to explain to your Overlord, as a minion, why you totally screw up the very important mission he just gave you. It's basically a speaking-only game and there is absolutely no harm in seeing her cards and telling her what she's got in hands. Plus, the players only have 3 cards in hand, which means she basically have 3 names to remember.

2. Non-hidden games Need a better name

In these games, everything is public, no one has anything to hide. It's most of the time only strategy. In these, it's easy to ask what color is a piece without revealing your strategy. She can play most of them as long as you are willing to sacrifice your game by marking the pieces (each color with a different material). I'd say Quarto! fits the description, simply mark the dark pieces with Play Doh, for example.

3. Co-op games

In those, a strategy can be discussed and the other players can tell her "your idea is good, but there is a detail you obviously can see". I recommand Sherlock Holmes Consulting Detective, in which the players read a kind of gamebook, each chapter being a bit of investigation. She can simply let someone else read when she's supposed to and still decide what is to do with the clues you've just collected.

NOTE

As a colorblind person myself, I do something with my games: each time there are colors that are hard to see for me, I ask someone to mark all the cards, pieces or tiles of one color with a marker. It doesn't bother the other players but helps me differenciate the colors. It can be possible to do the same with little holes (in braille?) or any other kind of marking. But this marking might be permanent.


Are copied spells cast from the graveyard? If you copy Increasing Confusion or any other "cast from the graveyard" spell with Increasing Vengeance, does the copy act like it was cast from the graveyard? Or, since the copy technically was not cast from the graveyard, would it just have the normal effect?

Your instincts are correct. Copies of spells are just placed on the stack, they are never cast.

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

Cards on the other hand, can be copied and cast. For example, if Increasing Vengeance was enchanted by Spellweaver Volute, the copy of the card would be cast from a graveyard.


Two Experiment Kraj are on the battlefield, what are their abilities? Through the use of e.g. Sakashima the Impostor, Mirror Gallery, or Helm of the Host, there are two Experiment Kraj on the battlefield, each with a +1/+1 counter on it. How many additional copies of their activated abilities does each Experiment Kraj have: one, infinite or some other number?

Apart from curiosity about the rules interaction, it actually matters for abilities that can only be activated a limited number of times per turn.

In addition to their own abilities, the first Experiment Kraj will have 1 set of copies of applicable abilities, while the second Kraj will have 2 sets. Ultimately, the total number of copied abilities will grow exponentially.
The rules to look at are found in

Interaction of Continuous Effects

An object's characteristics are determined through a system of layers. Ability-modifying effects are handled in layer 6. This is where the continuous effect of Experiment Kraj's static ability is applied:

613.1f Layer 6: Ability-adding effects, ability-removing effects, and effects that say an object can’t have an ability are applied.

When 2 Kraj are on the battlefield and they try to add each other's activated abilities, their effects are dependent on each other:

613.7. Within a layer or sublayer, determining which order effects are applied in is sometimes done using a dependency system. If a dependency exists, it will override the timestamp system.
613.7a An effect is said to “depend on” another if (a) it’s applied in the same layer (and, if applicable, sublayer) as the other effect (see rules 613.1 and 613.3);

True because they are the same ability.

(b) applying the other would change the text or the existence of the first effect, what it applies to, or what it does to any of the things it applies to;

True because applying one ability influences what the other would do.

(c) neither effect is from a characteristic-defining ability or both effects are from characteristic-defining abilities. [..]

True, because both add abilities to the creature it's on. Abilities (card text) are a characteristic.

613.7b An effect dependent on one or more other effects waits to apply until just after all of those effects have been applied. If multiple dependent effects would apply simultaneously in this way, they’re applied in timestamp order relative to each other. If several dependent effects form a dependency loop, then this rule is ignored and the effects in the dependency loop are applied in timestamp order.

The 2 abilities would form a loop, because each depends on the other. Therefore, they are instead applied once, in timestamp order.
Therefore, the Kraj with the lower timestamp would be applied first. It gains all abilities of other creatures with a +1/+1 counter on it. Next, the other Kraj is handled. It also gets all activated abilities of other creatures with a +1/+1 counter on it, including the already handled first Kraj.
Example: There are 2 Experiment Kraj and an Avizoa on the battlefield. All creatures have a +1/+1 counter on them.
After continuous effects are handled, the first Kraj will have its own activated +1/+1 counter ability, the other Kraj's counter ability, and the Avizoa's "{0}: +2/+2, use once per turn" ability.
The second Kraj will have its own counter ability, the two counter abilities from the first Kraj, and two of the Avizoa abilities (one from the first Kraj, the other from the Avizoa)
Each Experiment Kraj on the battlefield will have the sum of copies of all other Krajs, some of which will already have been handled by the continuous effect rules. At 2 Krajs, the total is (2+3) = 5. At 3 Krajs, the first will have 3, the second 5, the third 9. At 4 Krajs, the last Kraj to be handled already has 25 total. Here are some diagrams for visualization:

This shows the total number of abilities each Kraj has with 1, 2, 3 Krajs etc. on the field.

The triangle completed upwards.

A little more info.
Mathematically speaking, if there are n Krajs on the battlefield, the m-th Kraj to be handled will have a total of

1 + (n-1) * 2(m-1)

sets of copies.


Limits to cities of a given resource in Antike Duellum? In a current game on Yucata.de (http://www.yucata.de/en/Game/CasusBelli/4606422), both my opponent and I have tried to build gold producing cities and failed. We have a total of 10 gold cities on the board, which doesn't seem like it would trigger a limit and we can't find anything about it in the rules (http://www.yucata.de/en/Rules/CasusBelli). Is there a limit to the cities you can found to produce each resource?

The rules on Yucata state that when founding a city: "The player takes a city token out of the bank’s supply (marble, iron, or gold), and puts it at the place of the newly founded city on the board." It doesn't say anything about limits on these city tokens.

There are 10 Gold cities, 12 Marble and 12 Iron cities in the physical game.  These tiles are all double sided to mark which player owns them.  So 10 Gold cities is the maximum limit.


Does ice ever break in Netrunner? I recently learned how to play Netrunner and it seems to me that the corporation has a large advantage because ice doesn't break if bypassed. As a corp I can just keep piling on ice and the runner can't really get past my defenses. It will require large amounts of coin/runs to get through something they will eventually not be able to afford.

Is there a rule or part of the game that I am not playing correctly?

Are you remembering to pay the extra 1C per existing ice on a server when you install? If you install the 3rd ice, you have to pay 2C installation costs as well as the rez cost to then rez that ice.

There are also many cards which the runner has which can derez or trash ice once it is installed, Parasite being the most used example from the Core set.

The runner also doesn't have to get through every time; if they sit there gaining cash the corp won't be able to keep them out indefinitely. This means a rich runner puts the corp under a lot of pressure, since if the corp tries to score an Agenda, the runner can break into the remote server. If the corp doesn't try to score, they will soon have an HQ full of agendas which will be very profitable for the runner to run against.


Can you use jokers to change which noble visits at the end of turn? A player cannot refuse a visit from a noble.

But can you choose to use jokers to change which noble visits if you don’t have the gem colors required at end of turn?

No, you cannot.

From the rules:

  At the end of their turn, a player automatically receives the visit from a noble if that player has the amount of bonuses (and only bonuses) required.

(emphasis mine)

A visit from a noble is determined only by the bonuses printed on the development cards.  Tokens, including the Joker token, cannot be used to get a visit from a noble.


Am I required to correct my opponent's assumptions about my morph creatures? The comprehensive rules state that

  You must ensure that your face-down spells and permanents can easily be differentiated from each other. You’re not allowed to mix up the cards that represent them on the battlefield in order to confuse other players. The order they entered the battlefield should remain clear. Common methods for doing this include using markers or dice, or simply placing them in order on the battlefield

If my opponent makes an assumption about a facedown card based on public information that is wrong, am I required to correct his assumption?

For example, suppose I'm using a red, green, and blue markers to differentiate my morph creatures. I have a blue marked, red marked, and green marked creature on the field. I turn the red marked creature face up, triggering Deathmist Raptor's ability. I choose to return it to the battlefield face down, and put the red marker on it. Since it came from a public zone, my opponent knows that Deathmist Raptor is the red marked card.

Later, I attack with all three morph creatures and my opponent is thinking out loud when blocking. If he says something like "Deathmist Raptor is the blue marked creature", am I obligated to correct him? Alternatively, is he allowed to ask, "when Deathmist Raptor entered the battlefield face down, what color marker did you put on it?"

You are required to say which card was the Deathmist Raptor when asked, and you are required to correct their mistake if they get it wrong.

The Magic Tournament Rules define free information as follows:

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

  Details of current game actions and past game actions that still affect the game state.
  The name of any visible object.
  The number and type of any counter that isn’t defined as status information.
  The state (whether it’s tapped, attached to another permanent, face down, etc.) and current zone of
  any object or player.
  The game score of the current match.
  The current step and/or phase and which player(s) are active

Putting the Deathmist Raptor onto the battlefield face down was a past game action that still affects the game state. The details of that action include the name of the card that was moved from the graveyard (which was free information at the time), and which face down permanent that card became (because you need to distinguish which face-down permanent is which as mentioned in the question). You must provide that information when asked, and you must correct them if they get it wrong so that you are not hiding the information by omission.

Strictly speaking, the current identity of the face down Deathmist Raptor probably counts as private information, because that information is not explicitly listed as free or derived information:

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

  Any information that is not status, free or derived is automatically private information

There is no rule against misrepresenting private information, but the distinction between "This permanent is currently a face-down Deathmist Raptor" (private) and "This permanent was previously a visible Deathmist Raptor card that was put onto the battlefield face down" (free) is so small that I suspect that most judges would not look kindly on using it as a reason to misrepresent or omit that information.