Would Bonds of Mortality overrule a creature equipped with Darksteel Plate? If my opponent has a creature equipped with Darksteel Plate, and I play a Bonds of Mortality enchantment. If I activate the enchantment, does it overrule the Darksteel Plate? Or does this only effect creatures with Indestructible as an ability.

This is covered by the section of the rules titled "Interaction of Continuous Effects".[CR 613]
In short, whenever the game needs information about an object, determine it's current state by starting with the initial characteristics of the object and applying the continuous effects in order of layer. Effects in the same layer (effects that do similar things) are applied in timestamp order (from oldest to newest).
The two effects in question are both applied in the same layer.

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

As such, they are applied in timestamp order.

613.2. Within layers 1-6, apply effects from characteristic-defining abilities first (see rule 604.3), then all other effects in timestamp order (see rule 613.6). Note that dependency may alter the order in which effects are applied within a layer. (See rule 613.7.)

The effect created by Darksteel Plate was created first, so it's applied first, then the effect created by Bonds of Mortality is applied second. This means that the creature is "destructible" until the effect from Bonds of Mortality expires at end of turn.
If the creature were to become equipped with Darksteel Plate after Bonds of Mortality resolves, the effect created by Darksteel Plate would have the later timestamp, and it would have Indestructible.

613.6b A continuous effect generated by the resolution of a spell or ability receives a timestamp at the time it's created.
613.6d An Aura, Equipment, or Fortification receives a new timestamp at the time it becomes attached to an object or player.


Do you have to reveal your hand when using Treasure Map and not trashing a TM from your hand? Since the golden rule of Dominion is to do as much as you can, when you can, shouldn't you have to reveal your hand to prove you cannot trash a Treasure Map from your hand? Treasure Map doesn't say may or Choose 1, so I doubt that you are supposed to have a choice in whether you trash a Treasure Map from your hand, if you have one.

  Treasure Map - Trash this and another copy of Treasure Map from your hand. If you do trash two Treasure Maps, gain 4 Gold cards, putting them on top of your deck.

The rules actually cover an interesting case. Imagine that this is your hand:

Throne Room, 3xTreasure Map, Copper

The rules explain what you do in this situation, and it doesn't mention that you have any choice in the outcome. It would be possible for a cheater to Throne Room the first TM, Trash one from their hand, then when the 2nd copy of TM from Throne Room resolves claim that they don't have one in their hand (if they don't have to reveal their hand), then at the end of their turn hide the TM under the Copper when discarding.

  if you Throne Room a Treasure Map, with two more Treasure Maps in hand, then the first time Treasure Map resolves you trash it and another one and gain 4 Golds, and the second time it resolves you trash your other Treasure Map but gain nothing (since you didn't actually trash the played Treasure Map that time).

Is the proper way of resolving Treasure Map when you don't Trash a Treasure Map from your hand to reveal your hand. Is this how they handle this in tournaments or in online implementations?

A very similar question was posed on DominionStrategy.com (although now of course I can't find the link to the specific discussion). The thread was about paradoxes in which you aren't required by the rules to reveal your hand, but then your opponent couldn't verify that you in fact followed the directions on the card. The Treasure Map scenario was one of the examples mentioned in that thread; another example was Moneylender (which requires you to trash a Copper from your hand but has not clause about revealing a hand with no Copper).

Having said that, let me first walk through what must happen in the scenario you outline, and what Donald X. (the game creator) has said about the potential for cheating in that scenario.

Your scenario is having a hand of Throne Room, three Treasure Maps, and a Copper. If you play the Throne Room, you are required to choose an Action card from your hand. The only choice is a Treasure Map, so you play that card twice. Both times, the card directions tell you to trash another Treasure Map from your hand, so you must do so both times because you have Treasure Maps in hand. The if clause is only satisfied the first time, though, so the second play of the original Treasure Map (from the Throne Room) does not cause you to gain the Golds a second time.

As to the potential of cheating, Donald X.'s response (in paraphrase) is that it would be ridiculous to specify absolutely everything about the game, such as what constitutes valid shuffling (yes, this has been an intense discussion on DS.com), what the penalty is for breaking the rules, etc. In short: if you cheat, you're already breaking the rules; what would be the benefit of having a rule for what to do if someone breaks the rules?

The way the Isotropic server implements these situations is that the server requires you to take the actions that a card demands, and so it provides an objective enforcement of the rules. Because Treasure Map doesn't say to reveal your hand if you don't have a second Treasure Map, Isotropic doesn't show your opponent your hand. What your opponent would see is something like:

X plays a Throne Room
…and plays a Treasure Map
……trashing the Treasure Map and a Treasure Map from his hand
……gaining 4 Golds on the top of the deck
…and plays the Treasure Map again
…trashing a Treasure Map from his hand

If you're playing in an environment in which player's honor is not enough of a guarantee to avoid cheating, then that environment could specify additional procedures (such as having an ombudsperson to verify that the hand was played legally or using Isotropic, which would enforce the rules). You could specify a house rule of "reveal the hand if you can't follow part of the directions," although that could potentially give the opponent additional information that they wouldn't have otherwise. But, that's all up to you. What the rules require is that, if you play the Throne Room, all three Treasure Maps will be trashed and if you don't do that then you're cheating.

Do note that, unlike what some posters below have said, the Treasure Map card should not have been written with a "may." Donald X. deliberately made the effect non-voluntary. He is very careful about getting card directions right, and that's one area where there's no ambiguity. Claims about the "templates" for other cards in the set miss the point; when Donald wants an effect to be voluntary, he uses, "You may." Because he has a clear template he uses for other cards, you can rest assured that, since he didn't put that into Treasure Map, he didn't want that direction to be optional.


Are Awoken lands actually instantly-dead 0/0's? I have some friends that play mtg, and one had an extremely good awaken/landfall deck. Then his dreams of succeeding with that deck were destroyed when a friend stated that technically, it's a 0/0 AFTER the +1/+1 counters are applied, rendering the deck useless. That deck was a fun challenge, and it hurts to have that deck taken apart after that comment. I would like to know whether or not awoken lands are a 0/0 after the +1/+1 counters.

The Awoken land is 0/0 but the +1/+1 counters will give it a toughness greater than 0 so it won't die.

  704.4. Unlike triggered abilities, state-based actions pay no attention to what happens during the resolution of a spell or ability.

  704.5f If a creature has toughness 0 or less, it’s put into its owner’s graveyard. Regeneration can’t replace this event.

However these cards are worded in such a way that even if 704.4 wasn't true the land creature would still survive because the counters are added to the card before it becomes a creature.


Jace, Telepath Unbound and Casting a Spell from the Graveyard I was playing MTG Duels.

I had Jace, Telepath Unbound on the battlefield and activated its second ability:

  You may cast target instant or sorcery card from your graveyard this
  turn. If that card would be put into your graveyard this turn, exile
  it instead.

The target was Adverse Conditions in the graveyard. However, there was no effect and it wasn't exiled either.

Why was there no effect?

I don't know how MTG Duels exactly works but my guess is this, the card says

  You may cast target instant or sorcery card from your graveyard this turn

Which means that you are able to target a card in your graveyard but decide to not cast it. After this ability resolves you still have to manually cast it from your graveyard. You have the entire turn for that. It doesn't automatically get cast when the ability resolves.


Do creatures with Defender ability die? If Angelic Wall (0/4) blocks a creature with a power of 5, would Angelic Wall die? My brother is playing Magic 2013 on his iPad, and basically when his creatures with Defender (the ability) blocks a stronger creature, the defenders never die.

I keep telling him they do die in the actual card game but every reference I find just says they do not attack but not whether or not they die. His reasoning is that they just absorb damage to lessen the affect of trample, for example.

The short: Yes any creature that suffers leathal damage 'dies' including those with Defender.

A wall as they were previously known, is a creature with defender.

If it takes 5 damage it is destroyed.(Dies)

Rule 119 all parts but this one in particular:

  119.5. Damage dealt to a creature or planeswalker doesn't destroy it. Likewise, the source of that damage doesn't destroy it. Rather,
  state-based actions may destroy a creature or planeswalker, or
  otherwise put it into its owner's graveyard, due to the results of the
  damage dealt to that permanent. See rule 704.

And the state based action is what sends the creature to the grave yard:

  704.5g If a creature has toughness greater than 0, and the total damage marked on it is greater than or equal to its toughness, that
  creature has been dealt lethal damage and is destroyed. Regeneration
  can replace this event.

And Defender:

  702.3. Defender

  702.3a Defender is a static ability.

  702.3b A creature with defender can't attack.

  702.3c Multiple instances of defender on the same creature are redundant.

So a 'Defender' is simply a creature with an ability. Any creature that has damage marked on it that is greater than it's toughness, is destroyed as a state based action.


Disembarking meeples in scenarios that begin in the sea In the solo expansion of Archipelago, there are some scenarios (for instance, the Barbe Bleu) where you start with some meeples and a ship in the sea. Since the rules say you skip Turn #0, the only moment when you're allowed to disembark the meeples when you find land, how are you supposed to move those meeples to the land?

It's not an official answer, but it seems that disembarking all meeples after exploring is the only reasonable thing to do. See http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/921800/first-action-when-starting-on-the-plain-sea-hex.


Clarification for Secret warehouse Scenario.
Alice has played in previous turns the following cards:

Timber yard (brown card) - gives 1 resource: stone OR wood.
Secret Warehouse (black card)

From the rule book for Secret Warehouse:

  Each turn, the card produces a resource of the
  player’s choice from among those that their
  city already produces through its brown and
  gray cards or the initial resource of their board.
  Clarification : the Secret Warehouse doesn’t
  allow players to double the production on yellow,
  white, or black cards (Forum, Caravansary,
  Bilkis and Black Market).

Alice has not played any other card that produces stone or wood.

Question
Can Alice use one stone AND one wood to play a card that requires both?

Additional info:
In our "7-wonders group" we don't allow this since we kind of assume that the secret warehouse "doubles" a resource as its symbol suggests. So we interpreted it as "You pick either stone or wood and you can use 2 of them".
But the mobile game app allows the use of one stone AND one wood.
I'm asking here because I don't trust how the rules are implemented in the mobile app since I found other bugs / inconsistencies in it in the past.

Yes, she can.

The game's creator weighs in a few posts down at this BGG thread

  Secret Warehouse & Black Market depend of your resource icons present
  on your "board"

  So if you have a STONE or CLAY brown card (and nothing else) :

  SW can produce either a STONE or a CLAY
  BM can't produce neither a Stone or a CLAY (none of them)

  SW & BM don't depend on the use you make of the resources on turn T,
  it depend on what resource are present on your brown cards.


Is there a tool that will help me construct a list of games with a more specific game mechanic? I would like to construct a list of games that have a particular mechanic, but with a twist. Dice rolling is the mechanic I am interested in but specifically with Non-numeric, partially numeric, or otherwise numbered dice (essentially, anything different from the ordinary 1 to n numbering with n being the number of sides of dice).

Obviously asking for such a list is outside of the rules, but if possible I would like to find tools to help me find them for myself. Unfortunately BGG, while it has search by game mechanic, does not allow easy drilling by specifics, and with one as broad as Dice rolling, searching through a list of pictures of 18k+ games looking for odd-looking dice would be a fool's errand.

Does anyone know of any site that categorizes games by this admittedly obscure mechanic, or anything else that might help me in this?

How important is this to you? Is this something you are simply curious in? Or is this something you want to put real effort and time into accomplishing for a task or job of some kind?

If it is just a hobby, you could go to your local game stores with a notebook and ask the people there, look at the games there. Repeat at a few other game stores and you should have a nice list. (similar to just browsing games on BGG)

If it is something you want to do more seriously. You could try to contact some of the big board game manufacturers (like Fantasy Flight for instance) And directly ask them which games use non standard N-sided dice.


Why does a run of 4 in Cribbage score only 4? Cribbage scoring is fairly logical.  There are card combinations worth a given number of points and you can score every unique subset of cards independently and total up the score.  Except for runs of 4 or 5.

For example, a pair is worth 2.  Three of a kind is three different pairs (3 choose 2 is 3) and scores 6 (called a "pair royal").  A run is 3 or more cards in a row (e.g. 4, 5, 6) and scores one point per card.  It seems to me that in keeping with the other scoring rules, a 4-card run should score 6 (2 3-card runs each made by dropping the end cards) and a 5-card run should score 9.  Instead, a run scores one point per card.

Is there a logical reason I'm missing or is this just an inconsistency in Cribbage?

(afterthought:  a 5-card flush would score 20, which is a little too much)

First off, taken one way this might be an unanswerable question

I'm struggling with the question. It seems to be asking folks to guess on what they think the rationale might have been for scoring 4-card runs as 4-points instead of 6 (or some other number); however, since the game was invented in the 17th century its inventor is long-since dead, and absent some comprehensive history on the game and its inception that I'm not aware of the real answer to the question is not knowable. In other words, we can come up with some reasons that seem logical to us, but we will probably never understand the thought process of the game's inventor.

That said, here's why I like the rule as-is (and incidentally I like your question because I've had the same thought):

The best possible hand in cribbage is 29, which involves the Jack that counts for nobs and all of the 5s. Now although hands with lots of fives are always good, often retaining just one or two will only result in a mediocre score where you count a few 15s, a pair, and are done.

In contrast, a strategy that relies on runs, pairs, and 15s will have a lower maximum score, but will get more points if the up card is not exactly as desired.

For example if you're drawing for the best possible hand failing to get that last 5 as the up card will cost you 14 points, as you'll only score 15-8, a pair royal for 6 and 1 for his nobs for 15.

Consider now the runs, pairs, and 15s strategy, say for example, 6-7-7-8-9. Based on the rules this hand scores: 15-2 (7-8), 15-4 (7-8), 15-6 (6-9), run for 10 (6-7-8-9), run for 14 (6-7-8-9), and pair for 16 (7-7). A super solid hand. In the previous example there is only one card in the deck that gets you the extra 14 points. In this hand the best draw is one of the 4 nines, but the drop-off in points isn't that much if you draw another 8, or a 7, or a 6, or a 5. Less upside potential, but a much more robust hand statistically speaking.

Now here's why scoring runs differently breaks things.

If runs of 4 were scored as 6--or more precisely, if you got to count for 3 points every unique run of 3 that you could make, this hand scores much higher. The count to 15-6 is unchanged, but then: run for 9 (6-7-8), run for 12 (6-7-8), run for 15 (7-8-9), run for 18 (7-8-9), pair for 20 (7-7). Or perhaps a much simpler but more dramatic example is a hand of 5-6-7-8-9, where the score for just the runs would go from 5 points to 9.

If the value of runs is increased, this incentivises players to only go for the much more likely (and now also relatively more lucrative) run hands instead of the larger payoff but higher risk 15 hands. This would make the strategy of the game more myopic and because everyone would be playing the same way because the relative payoff of going for the knock-out blow would be much reduced.

I don't want to make too much of all this (too late probably) because ultimately a players freedom is highly restricted by their cards (you only get to discard 2 after all), but the incentives of changing the rule appear to be to be tilted in the wrong direction.


What are the names for Magic's different deck colour splashes? Occasionally, a deck becomes famous which is a colour combination + a 'splash' of another colour.
One good example is 'Moist Jund', which is Jund (Black, Red and Green) plus a small amount of blue (which gives the Moist part of the name).
What are the names of the other splashes? That is, splashing for White, Black, Green and Red.

I'd say the realistic answer to the question is "those terms are not commonly used". Looking back through some recent tournament decks on the official Wizards site:

Simon Görtzen's Boros-splash-blue-splash-black deck at the October 2020 League Weekend is simply described as "Four-color Cycling"
All the Temur-splash-white decks in the Top 8 at the October 2020 Season Grand Finals are described as "Omnath Adventures" after their namesake card, Omnath, Locus of Creation.
The Temur-splash-white decks in the Top 8 at the July 2020 Players Tour Finals are described as "Four-color Reclamation".


Purpose of Legolas' affliation to the Elves What is the purpose of Legolas' affliation to the Elven Nation?

Each companion of The Fellowship has a nation shown on their card which indicates that the character can activate that nation by visiting a settlement of that nation.  Legolas is linked to the Elven Nation; however, the Elves already begin the game activated, seemingly making this pointless.

Is there any other significance to Legolas' ability to activate the Elves?  Can the Elven Nation somehow become inactive and need to be re-activated?  Are there event cards that make mention of a character's national affiliation in some other useful way?

No, a nation cannot become inactive once it is active.
Legolas just has the nation symbol for thematic purposes. He is an Elf, so he has the Elven symbol.
This is consistent with the other Companions: Gimli has the Dwarven symbol, Boromir the Gondor symbol and Strider the North symbol. But for game purposes Legolas' symbol is indeed pointless.
Similarly, the Shadow characters also have a nation symbol, which are also pointless for game purposes.

However, the expansion, 'Lords of Middle Earth' makes him inconsistent with the others.
The expansion has alternate versions of the Companions who don't have a nation symbol. They can only activate their respective nation with an ability using an Action Die. But because the Elves start the game active, they did not remove the nation symbol from the new Legolas. It is still pointless for him to have it.


How does Energy Field interact with effects that say you lose life? How does Hissing Miasma affect a player protected by Energy Field if their creatures are attacking?

Additionally, how does Tainted Remedy affect Energy Field if same player does something to gain life?

In both cases Energy Field does nothing because both Hissing Miasma and Tainted Remedy cause loss of life and not damage, so Energy Field can't prevent it.
Damage to players causes them to lose life (assuming the source doesn't have infect), but loss of life isn't always damage.

118.2. Damage dealt to a player normally causes that player to lose that much life. See rule 119.3.
118.3. If an effect causes a player to gain life or lose life, that player’s life total is adjusted accordingly.


Does non-combat damage affect Commander damage? Do the effects of a Commander that deal (non-combat) damage, such as  Obzedat, Ghost Council, count towards Commander damage?

I have not been able to find whether or not it has to be, specifically, combat damage, or simply damage dealt by the Commander.

Per the official rules on mtgcommander.net,

  If a player has been dealt 21 points of combat damage by a particular Commander during the game, that player loses a game.

"Combat damage" refers only to damage dealt in combat as a result of attacking and blocking; direct-damage abilities don't count. Note also that Obzedat, Ghost Council's triggered ability doesn't deal damage: it simply causes your opponent to lose life.


4-4 pincer variant - not in joseki dictionary I am 4K and played against 2K in handicap game (2-stones).

The point of B3 was to prevent a double-wing shape for white (along the right and bottom)

So W4 pincer leads us into this joseki variant.  Josekipedia suggests alternatives.

$$ ----------------
$$ . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . 4 . 8 6 . . |
$$ . 9 . . 1 7 . . |
$$ . . . 5 . . . . |
$$ . . . . . 2 . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . 3 . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . |
$$

Josekipedia suggests playing this way:

$$Wm10
$$ ----------------
$$ . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . |
$$ . 1 O . O O . . |
$$ 2 X . . X X . . |
$$ . . . X . . . . |
$$ . . . . . O . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . X . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . |
$$

Instead we played where I lost a large corner altogether with unstable shape outside.

$$Wm10
$$ ----------------
$$ . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . O 9 O O . . |
$$ . X 8 3 X X 1 . |
$$ . . . X 6 5 4 . |
$$ . . . . . O 7 . |
$$ . . . . 2 . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . |
$$ . . . . X . . . |
$$ . . . . . . . . |
$$

For unrelated reasons, I won the game (SGF) against this 2K.

Was the pincer at 3 and kosumi at 5 the right choice? How could I have prevented the loss of the corner?


Where can I find a copy of Betrayal at House on the Hill Every board game store I've gone to has been sold out since last year and they don't know when they'll have it in stock again.

Online, I can't find any copies for under $150 (and I'm not ready to spend that much money on a board game).

This is a really popular game, so why is it so hard to find?

The game is not currently in print; so the only copies that exist are ones that were printed before, and people have bought.

Unless you get extremely lucky, and stumble upon a game store that has a random copy sitting around that hasn't sold (not very likely at all), then the only options are to go online to places like Ebay, BGG Marketplace, Amazon, etc, where you will have to pay an increased price because of high demand.

You can follow this thread for updates and details; it seems like they are keeping that up to date with info about a possible re-re-release (it was already re-released once).

Also, keep checking constantly online! Check Ebay and Amazon at least once a day; every once in a while you get lucky and find one for a reasonable price.


Should a judge fix a solution agreed to by players? Alice and Nathan are playing in a Competitive REL tournament.
Alice mulligans to six cards but accidentally draws seven cards. Alice and Nathan agree to not to call a judge, and instead apply their own solution where Alice mulligans to five cards. After drawing her five cards, Alice has a change of heart. She calls a judge to get an official ruling.
If Alice had called a judge before applying the solution she and Nathan agreed to, then the judge would have applied the remedy described in the Infraction Procedure Guide.

If the player has too many cards in hand, he or she may choose to reveal his or her hand, and his or her opponent chooses a card from it to be shuffled back into the library. If more than one excess card was drawn (for example, eight cards drawn during a mulligan to 6) his or her opponent continues removing cards until the correct number has been reached.
If cards are not removed from the hand this way (either due to an error that didn’t lead to too many cards, or by the player choosing not to reveal), that player takes an additional mulligan.
Players may continue taking mulligans after the remedy has been completed.

Should a judge fix or partially fix a solution that was implemented by the players, or should the judge let the situation stand?

Players cannot make rulings, that should be obvious; only judges can.

From the Tournament Rules:

  Judges do not intervene in a game to prevent illegal actions, but do intervene as soon as a rule has been broken or to prevent a situation from escalating. More information on floor judge responsibilities can be found in the Magic Infraction Procedure Guide.

So if a rule has been broken but the game has continued, whether or not the players are aware that a rule has been broken, the judge will intervene as soon as he or she is aware of the situation.

Players can only make decisions regarding how to play the game, and if it comes to the attention of a judge that game rules have been broken, the judge will try to restore the game to a correct state as best as possible up to and including restarting the game, and/or will issue the necessary penalties according to the Judging at Regular REL rules or the Infraction Procedure Guide after evaluating all the evidence and assessing the situation.


Does Yidris, Maelstrom Wielder's cascading reoccur with cascaded spells? The new Commander 2016 set comes with a deck commanded by Yidris, Maelstrom Wielder, who can apply cascade to cards his player casts.

My friend has been playing with Yidris, and it seems insanely powerful! He casts a spell from his hand, then cascades into one from his library, then that cascade reoccurs with another card from his library, and another, and so on. He can easily cycle through a third of his deck each turn eventually! Is this really how it's meant to work?

This is a common mistake and misreading with Yidris. His ability says:

  as you cast spells from your hand this turn, they gain cascade.

When you cascade into another card to cast it for free, that new card is not cast from your hand; it is cast from exile. This means it will not be given cascade by Yidris. Normally each card you cast from your hand grants you just one extra card and no more.

You'll cast a card from your hand.
You'll find one new card while cascading through your library, cast that one from exile. It isn't given cascade, so you'll be done here.

... unless you happened to find a card that did have cascade in its own rules text. (In Yidris's preconstructed deck this will be Etherium-Horn Sorcerer, Bloodbraid Elf, or Bituminous Blast.) You'll cascade again, but that's because of the card itself, not because of Yidris.

Your spells will resolve in reverse order: the one you cascaded down to most recently resolves first, and the one you actually originally cast from your hand resolves last.

If you cast a second card from your hand, you'll repeat this process again, getting one (but probably only one) new card from your cascading.


Can I use predict on a basic land card? There is this card "Predict" that reads

  Name a card, then put the top card of target player's library into his or her graveyard. If that card is the named card, you draw two cards. Otherwise, you draw a card.

Reading its text on Gatherer.Wizards.com, the Oracle text reads as

  Choose a card name, then target player puts the top card of their library into their graveyard. If that card has the chosen name, you draw two cards. Otherwise, you draw a card.

My doubt is, can I name a basic land card?

Yes. Basic land cards are cards, so you can choose their names when instructed to choose a card name.

Rule 201.3 governs choosing card names:

  If an effect instructs a player to choose a card name, the player must choose the name of a card in the Oracle card reference. (See rule 108.1.) A player may not choose the name of a token unless it’s also the name of a card.

Basic land cards are in the Oracle reference, so you can choose them.


Pathfinder ACG: When do I use the Character Add-On cards? I recently bought the Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, and liked it so much that I then also got all the Add-Ons in quick succession. But I am a bit unsure when to add the cards from the Character Add-On to the Base Set.

Do I

only include them when playing with more than 4 characters
only include them when playing one of the additional characters from the set
or can I just leave them in the box, shuffled in among the Base Set?

The Character Add-On pack adds 4 more character classes and additional monsters, weapons, and equipment. It allows you to play with up to 6 people (as opposed to the 4-player limit without it). You don't need to reserve those character classes for games with more than 4; use them in any session you want.

The rest of the cards are indeed meant to be added to the main set, so go ahead and shuffle them in.


I bought the Dixit Odyssey standalone game and was wondering which expansions would best match up I bought the Dixit Odyssey standalone base game and was wondering which expansions would best match up. I want to keep the expansion by the same artist (So not Journey). I also want the cards as abstract as possible. I do not want to purchase the original Dixit as I have forked out extra money for the Odyssey base game, I just want the best expansion. Any advice would be hugely helpful.

When it comes to the differences between various Dixit games, I'm hoping you've already read this question (and its answers).

But to answer your question, I'm not sure there are really that many choices to make. Dixit 1, 2 and 3 are meant to provide similar experiences but with different cards, so there's no real difference there in terms of abstraction or complexity. They are each equally apart from the Oddyssey game. And maybe I haven't noticed the way to do it, but once the cards are shuffled together, you can't really tell the decks apart. (truth be told, I haven't really tried it. The more cards, the merrier)

The only real choice is between those three expansions, and Journey. Sadly I haven't played Journey but I've read it feels similar to Odyssey (so I'm guessing less abstract, but that's speculation on my part).

Some people advise you to look at the cards of each expansion so you can decide which one to purchase. To me that always felt like spoiling on the fun. I've never browsed through the decks, not even once, and on very rare occasions I still get cards in my hand that I thought I'd never seen before.


Which comes first: Illness in the Ranks or Cathars' Crusade? Suppose I have an Illness in the Ranks out and my opponent has a Cathars' Crusade out. If 1/1 creature token comes into play under the opponent's control, does the token die due to the effects of Illness or does it get the counter first before Illness's effect activates?

It will die.

Illness in the Ranks creates a continuous effect, which applies constantly. From the moment the token enters the battlefield, it has -1/-1. Cathars' Crusade, on the other hand, has a triggered ability, signified by the word "whenever" in its text. When the token enters the battlefield, that triggered ability goes on the stack. Before it can resolve and add a +1/+1 counter, the token dies. (Players get priority, so state-based actions are checked first, and since the token has zero toughness, it dies.)


can i have multiple copies of a single pokemon? i was looking to build an Eevee deck for my niece, who is really into pokemon tcg at the moment- and i know you can only have 4 copies of any card, but saw somewhere that the exception is if it is a GX card. So in theory could i have 4 basic eevee, 4 eevee GX, and 4 eevee V? does the same apply to sylveon and sylveon GX? thanks in advance everyone!

Yes.  Eevee GX, Eevee V, and Eevee are different Pokémon, and you can have four of each in your deck. (Also, if they existed, Eevee EX, Eevee Vmax, Eevee prism star (1 copy), etc.). Most but not all of the ‘suffixes’ count as separate Pokémon.
That’s true for any Pokémon, so yes, Sylveon and Sylveon GX count separately. However, if the names are the same then they count as the same even if they’re different types or otherwise very different - Quagsire for example you can only have four total, even if they are fighting and water types individually.
Note that evolution also works that way - so something that evolves from Eevee cannot evolve from Eevee GX, unless it has an ability that says it can (as I think the GX does?).

Rules notes:  From the Compendium:

Q. Can you have 4 Electabuzz and 4 Electabuzz-EX in the same deck?

A. Yes, you can play 4 Electabuzz and 4 Electabuzz EX in the same deck, as they are considered different cards (similar to the ruling for Trainer Pokémon). (Sep 11, 2003 PUI Rules Team)

but

Q. Can you have 4 Electivire and 4 Electivire Lv.X in the same deck?

A. No, Lv.X Pokemon are considered the same as other pokemon with the same name. You may only have a maximum of 4 combined in your deck (i.e. 3 Electivire, 1 Electivire Lv.X). (Sep 25, 2008 PUI Rules Team)

GX and V and VMAX and Mega are all considered different, by the same rule as EX is.  Lv.X is not, for whatever reason that I can't entirely explain (I guess it's just the 'level' of the Pokémon?).


Doctor Who Fluxx - do Dalek cards affect all doctors Dalek card says "if the Doctor is anywhere on the table, during your turn you can discard both him and this".

So player 1 has Doctor #2, player 2 has Doctor #3, I have the dalek.  Can I discard the dalek and both Doctors?

Does The Doctor and him mean all the doctors on the table?  After all, they are all "The Doctor".  (I would read it differently if it said "if a Doctor is anywhere on the table, during your turn you can discard both him and this", but it doesn't).

The text on the Dalek creeper is not exactly clear: "if the Doctor is anywhere on the table, during your turn you can discard both him and this". But all doctors are "the doctor" (The third doctor, the nineth doctor etc..) so you can safely assume this counts for a single "the doctor" card.

If you look at the the FAQ:

  Q: Can I trash someone else’s Doctor to get rid of my Dalek, instead
  of my own?

  A: The Dalek says you can discard the Doctor from anywhere on the
  table. You’re not required to kill your own Doctor first, so, it makes
  the most sense, strategically, for your Dalek to target someone else’s
  Doctor.

There is no indication that you can discard both. It just discards one instance of "the Doctor". It is up to you to decide Who.


If I am Lost in Time and Space during a reckoning effect resolution, do I continue to resolve remaining reckoning effects? Being lost in time and space leaves you immune to reckoning effects, but what if the reckoning effect of a mythos card is what causes you to become lost in time and space, and you still have a few other conditions to resolve (for the reckoning effect)? Can you stop as soon as you become lost in time and space?

I have changed my mind but I have no official ruling on this.

In general, you have to resolve all the reckoning effects and order should not matter.

However, during a reckoning: If you are devoured, that would end your turn right there. If you are either killed or driven insane, that does end your turn. Thus, it would seem logical that Lost In Time and Space would end your turn as well.

Thus you would not be doing any reckoning events after those ones.  You dodge those bullets for this turn.

Lost In Time And Space was added in an expansion, I am not sure if this is covered by the FAQ or not.

Even going by the golden rule of cooperative games: If a rule can be interpreted in several ways, the right one is the least helpful to the players, the reading would be that yes, you stop doing any reckoning events once you are Lost In Time And Space.


When should you side lands in and out? Some Magic writers advise players to side out a land when on the draw in Limited, in order to improve the probability of drawing a strong starting hand.

Is it reasonable to do the same (side out a land on the draw) in Constructed? And, if so, why isn't it commonly done?
Assuming you have a good reason to have land in your Constructed sideboard in the first place (usually cards like Wasteland), when is it strategically beneficial to bring in extra lands instead of only making spell-for-spell substitutions?

A recent case of this was in pre-Avacyn Restored Standard. There were some versions of UB Control that had 3 Nephalia Drownyards main-deck and another one in the sideboard.

In a control mirror with both decks full of reactive cards, the player who has mana advantage usually wins the game, because he or she can play many spells in one turn (e.g. play a threat, counter a removal spell against it, then counter the opponent's counter).

With lands in the sideboard, this deck could side in an extra land, taking out a removal spell. This way they would hit their land drops more easily and have another win condition in the deck, since milling was the best win condition in UB mirrors.

For reference, the 2nd place finisher of GP Baltimore 2012, as Hackworth pointed in the comments, used 2 lands in his sideboard. Its player goes so far as to say that Nephalia Drownyard is "the only card that matters in the mirror."


What is optimal robber placement in Settlers? Every time I think I've mastered Settlers, I discover yet another novel tactic or strategy. This time it's Robber placement.

I've usually selected robber placement based on a combination of factors, including who is winning, which hex reduces the most dots worth of production (x2 for cities) that isn't mine, several variations on which resources are scarce, whether a 2:1 port for an abundant resource is occupied, and trying to take a card I need from a player I think likely to have it. Which of these factors to emphasize for any given robber placement is a fairly complicated decision that depends on what stage of the game you're in, how much the leader is winning by, and what you're needing next.

All this is standard stuff for those who have played more than a few games. But I just ran across an idea I hadn't heard before:

When not trying to stop someone close to winning, nearly always place the robber on the most valuable hex of the person on your right only. The reason for this is that this person won't be able to retaliate for at least 3 rolls of the dice (in a 4 player game), while the other players may be more favorably disposed to you for not getting them. And if this player (to your right) retaliates, it is immediately your turn next giving you a chance to possibly roll a 7 or play the robber (if you have it). So assuming robber retaliation is somewhat predictable, this seems to be a sound strategy.

I don't have a strong opinion yet on how well the person-to-the-right robber placement strategy works - as I don't know how predictable retaliation is in general or with the specific groups I play with. But I do now wonder:

For advanced Settlers players, what is optimal robber placement? Is it this player-to-the-right placement method (because retaliation is mostly predictable)? Is it the standard tactics I listed above? Or are there different and perhaps more subtle tactics for Robber placement I haven't even thought of?

I can't figure out if you are asking one overly broad question, or many smaller-scoped questions... in any case:

The "player to the right" strategy ignores a few possibilities, including:
 - one or both of the two players after you roll a seven,
    - one or both of the two players after you play a soldier,
    -  your victim is known to (not) have in a particular resource in hand.

Retaliation is predictable in the sense that good players will make decisions based on cost/benefit/probability analysis (including "dots" on the chits, scarcity of resources, etc.), while poor players will be swayed by subjective reasoning (retaliation, etc.).

We play with promises of immunity, bribes -  you name it. This makes it harder to pin-down a specific strategy, but I will say that it's mostly the analytical approach that you mention.


How do I identify non-English Magic cards? In my collection is a Magic card printed in a language other than English. How can I determine which card this is?

First of all, if you are able to type in the name, just search for the name using Scryfall. It accepts non-English names (in part and in whole). Typing the name without accents works.
If you can scan or photograph the card, another easy way of identifying the card is to submit it to Google Image Search (click the camera). This will find pages about that card, and these will surely tell you its name. (In fact, you might very well get the card's Gatherer page.)
Otherwise, determining to which set it belongs would greatly narrow down the search space. For at least 15 years, Wizards has been placing a set icon on the card. Wizard maintains a list of the icons for the proper sets, but this doesn't include the special sets (e.g. duel decks). A quick search reveals that TCGPlayer maintains a comprehensive list. If you have a card that predates the set icon, this earlier post will allow you to determine the set to which it belongs.
Armed with the set, obtain the card number from the small print at the bottom of the card. Locate the set (in the appropriate language) on this page and locate the card by its number.
Tips:

If the number is illegible, you can still easy locate the card by looking at all the cards in the set with the correct casting cost.

This approach may fail for promo cards. If this is what you have, the copyright date can help you narrow down the search.

If all else fail, please provide a scan of the image.


Rule guidance on Defending Pokemon The Absol Doom News attack states that the Defending Pokemon is knocked out at the end of the Opponent's turn. If the Active Pokemon is switched, does the Defending Pokemon stay the same, or does the new Active Pokemon become the new Defending Pokemon? Is this attack unstoppable?

Like most effects that are applied to the Defending Pokémon, this effect is removed if the Defending Pokémon leaves the active slot (or is evolved/devolved).  So if you retreat/switch Pokémon, no pokémon is knocked out by the effect.
From the Compendium:

Doom News

Q. When I use Absol [G]'s "Doom News" attack, is my opponent's Pokemon still Knocked Out if they retreat it during their next turn?
A. Since it is an attack effect on the Defending Pokemon, it is removed if that Defending Pokemon is no longer Active. (Supreme Victors FAQ; Aug 27, 2009 PUI Rules Team)

If the intent was for it to apply to whatever Pokémon was in the active slot it would say something like, Next turn, knock out your opponent's Active Pokémon.


Can you choose NOT to activate a trap card? For example, I have played Widespread Ruin, which reads:

  When an opponent's monster declares an attack: Destroy the Attack Position monster your opponent controls with the highest ATK (your choice, if tied).

Do I have to activate it the next time my opponent attacks, or can I wait and activate it on any future occasion of my choice where my opponent attacks?

Do I have to activate it the next time my opponent attacks, or can I wait and activate it on any future occasion of my choice where my opponent attacks?

You can decide to activate it anytime "an opponent's monster declares an attack".

On normal conditions*, nothing is making you activate this card the immediately next attack your opponent declares; you can hold its use for whenever you feel like it or well if you think it would be optimal strategy to use it there.

The things you have to have in mind before attempting to activate (along with your game strategy, that is) are:

Trap cards and Quick-play spell cards cannot be activated the turn they are set (other spell cards can, though). If you just set this trap card you will have to wait until your opponent's turn to be able to activate it.
That you meet the card's activation conditions. In this case your Widespread Ruin indicates: "When an opponent's monster declares an attack". This is telling us that only when that happens is that you may decide (or not) to activate this card.

*The only example that comes to mind about forcing you to activate something is Bait Doll (quite an old card actually). From its description we can read:

  Target 1 Set card in the Spell & Trap Card Zone; reveal that target, force its activation if it is a Trap Card, then negate its effect if the activation timing is incorrect, and if you do, destroy it. (If it is not a Trap Card, return it face-down.) When this card resolves, shuffle it into the Deck instead of sending it to the Graveyard.

We can see its effect revolves around the target to have an incorrect timing; if we played this card to a set Widespread Ruin we would effectively destroy it, as the card would not have correct timing (i.e.: attack was not declared).

On a further note, it is worth recalling that there are some effects that you are actually forced to activate, that is, they are not optional. Some examples of that are usually found on cards with continuous effects (either monster or spell/trap), or well some that are obligatory when a condition is met. One example is Dark Room of Nightmare:

  Each time your opponent takes damage from a card effect, except "Dark Room of Nightmare", inflict 300 damage to your opponent.

As you can see, this effect has to be activated every time you inflict effect damage to your opponent. Another case is Doomcaliber Knight, which has to be activated on the moment a monster effect is activated (even yours, so careful):

  Cannot be Special Summoned. During either player's turn, if a monster effect is activated: Tribute this face-up card; negate the activation, and if you do, destroy that monster.


Do Fireplaces and Cooking Hearths count as a Bake Bread Action Space? Does the Fireplaces and Cooking Hearths count as a Bake Bread Action space? Can I put a worker on those cards to bake bread or can I only bake bread using the respective action space on the main board?

During the Work Phase your family members perform Actions that are selected from those currently available on the board.

Stage 1 has the Sow and/or Bake Bread Action which will show up sometime during the first four rounds (Other bake actions are also available depending on how many players there are). To use the Bake Bread part of this action you must have an Improvement that bakes the Bread like the Fireplace, Cooking Hearth or an Oven.

These Improvements are not Action Spaces themselves, they are just the tools you will use to make your Actions more efficient. You will put your worker on the Action space that bakes bread, then use an improvement to determine the outcome of the baking action. You may use every baking improvement you have as many times as it allows per Bake Bread action.

Note that the fireplaces and hearths can convert multiple grain while the ovens are limited to 1 or 2. The Clay Oven and Stone Oven, and some others like the Baker's Oven, allow you to Bake Bread immediately when they are purchased. Some Improvements, like the Windmill, allow you to convert grain to (more than one) food at any time without using a Bake action.


In Star Wars: Imperial Assault, what information should be revealed to the Rebel players in the campaign? The last time I played Star Wars: Imperial Assault with my friends, I played as the Empire.  If I recall correctly, during the first campaign mission (after the tutorial mission), the mission ends after round 6 if the Rebels haven't yet achieved their goal.  The Rebel players were understandably miffed when the mission ended unexpectedly.  This, however, conflicted with my reading of the rules, which state that the game is a game of hidden information.  I know, for example, that if an Imperial deployment can be triggered by a Rebel action, such as the opening of a door, the Rebels should not be aware of this.  The rules are not entirely clear on which parts of the mission scenario are "read-aloud" text and when those rules should be read.  Some things are explicit ("Read this section in it's entirety when X happens") while others are not.

So, exactly what mission details should the Rebels be made aware of? Should they have been made aware of the "lose" condition so they weren't blindsided by the mission ending as abruptly as it did?

I am looking for either A) a canonical or errata-based answer that explicitly states what pieces of information should be read out loud to the Rebel players from the campaign scenario and when that information should be read, or B) information from an experienced Imperial player that has dealt with this situation and can explain to me what pieces of information should be read and when.

The rules as they are written are not entirely clear, and there was nothing I could find in the errata or the FAQ that clarified this detail.

Things the Rebels can know
The mission briefing

The Imperial player reads the “Mission Briefing” section of the mission’s rules aloud to all players.
— Rules Reference: Mission Setup

The full effect of any triggered events (both story text and effects)

Each event can contain any combination of story text and additional rules that apply to the mission. When an event is triggered, all of the text and rule information within that section is read aloud and resolved, in order.
— Campaign Guide: Mission Events

Note that mission effects are either instant (marked with a ▶) or ongoing (marked with a ◆). The non-italicized text after the mission briefing is almost always an event of this sort, so should be read out loud.
Rules referencing the mission ending or progressing (which are followed by the Rebel Alliance symbol)

Certain rules reference the mission ending or progressing, followed by the [Rebel Alliance] symbol. This indicates that the preceding text is an objective that the heroes are attempting to fulfill, which should be emphasized to the Rebel players by the Imperial player.
— Campaign Guide: Mission Events

Any previously stated rules

[Rebel players] are always allowed to ask the Imperial player to repeat any current or previous rules.
— Campaign Guide: Hidden Information

Things Rebel players aren't supposed to know
Event summary

This section is used for the Imperial player's reference only and contains abreviated versions of event triggers.
— Campaign Guide: Event Summary

Effects not chosen when the Imperial player gets to pick an effect

In some cases, an event will require the Imperial player to choose one of a number of effects, which can be instant or ongoing. When he chooses one, he reads the effect aloud and resolves it, but he does not read or resolve any of the unchosen effects.
— Campaign Guide: Mission Events

Anything in the Campaign Guide not read to them by the Imperial player

Rebel players are not allowed to read any of the information found within this Campaign Guide, but they are always allowed to ask the Imperial player to repeat any current or previous rules.
— Campaign Guide: Hidden Information

In other words, the Rebel players are allowed to listen to what the Imperial player reads from the Campaign Guide, but cannot read the Campaign Guide for themselves (since that would allow them to read something they weren't supposed to know). Note that this clearly says that they can ask the Imperial player about rules that have previously been revealed, so the Imperial player must have been allowed to tell them something.
This seems to have been the rule you were rather hung up on. I agree it's probably bad wording, so I'd like to suggest this rewrite that goes with what I think is the spirit of the rules:
Rebel players are not allowed to directly read any of the information found within this Campaign Guide, but the Imperial player must read aloud any information that they are instructed to reveal from it. Rebel players are always allowed to ask the Imperial player to repeat any current or previous rules.

Your particular situation

If I recall correctly, during the first campaign mission (after the tutorial mission), the mission ends after round 6 if the Rebels haven't yet achieved their goal. The Rebel players were understandably miffed when the mission ended unexpectedly.

Unfortunately, this was something the players should have known. As shown above, the rules says that the Imperial player should read aloud:

The mission briefing
All triggered effects
Rules that include the Rebel Alliance symbol, marking the mission progressing or ending in the Rebels' favor

All three of these are present in Aftermath, the first mission:

Mission Briefing
[...]
◆ The mission ends when all terminals are destroyed [Rebel Alliance symbol], at the end of Round 6, or when all heroes are wounded.

So the Rebels should have been informed of this point because it was in the Mission Briefing, was an effect, and had the symbol indicating that it was for mission progress and should be emphasized to the Rebels (in this case, that the terminals needed to be destroyed). And of course, the players are allowed to ask you to repeat it whenever they want to.

I know, for example, that if an Imperial deployment can be triggered by a Rebel action, such as the opening of a door, the Rebels should not be aware of this.

You are correct that in Aftermath the Rebels should not be made aware of this ahead of time because it was not part of the Mission Briefing or any other previously revealed event. But once the trigger for the event happens (in this case, the door being opened), the entire event text must be read aloud to the Rebels.


Power Grid deluxe - Winning Condition I read the rules on the winning condition and I check on forums for that also.
What are the winning conditions of a game of "power grid deluxe"?

  In the following Phase 5 (Bureaucracy) players do not earn money for powering cities. Instead,
  they check to see which player supplies electricity to the most cities in his network using the
  resources and power plants he has. This is the number of cities he normally earns cash from
  during this phase. This player that can power the most cities wins the game! If there is a tie,
  the player with the most remaining money wins. In rare cases, a player may win the game with
  more cities in his network than necessary to end the game

There's a confusion on the "supplies electricity" conditions that I see on forum and in the manual. Because there's 2 supply electricity measurement, there's the raw supply electricity and there's the effective one.

What I mean is that you could power up to 20 cities (raw) but if you only have 13 cities on you end up powering 13 cities ( effective).

So what measurement is the right one? The raw or effective one? I will leave an example and you tell me who should win the game:

  P1, 20 power supplies capacity, 12 cities connected, can power up to 20 cities.
  P2, 15 supplies capacity, 13 cities, can power up to 14.

It's the number of powered cities you are actually supplying. Taking a look at the rules you quoted (p. 10, Winning the Game), I am emphasizing a few phrases:

  In the following Phase 5 (Bureaucracy) players do not earn money for
  powering cities. Instead, they check to see which player supplies
  electricity to the most cities in his network using the resources and
  power plants he has. This is the number of cities he normally earns
  cash from during this phase. This player that can power the most
  cities wins the game!

So, it's evident that you follow the usual procedure of powering cities, but instead of earning money, you just count how many you powered. And what's the "usual procedure" for powering cities? Rulebook, p. 8, "Bureaucracy":

  A player may choose (or only be able) to supply fewer cities than he
  has in his network. The player is paid only for the supplied cities.
  If a player produces more electricity than he has cities in his
  network, the surplus is wasted.

Therefore, in your example, assuming that all players have adequate resources: (I am rephrasing it to avoid confusion and adding a 3rd player)

  P1, 20 capacity, 12 cities connected; P2, 15 capacity, 13 cities; P3,
  14 capacity, 17 cities

P3 wins! The game ends because P3 has built 17 cities, the number required to trigger the end of the game in a 3-player game. Even though P1 has a capacity of 20 and P2 has a capacity of 15, their scores are 12 and 13, respectively. On the other hand, even if P3 has 17 cities, her score is 14, therefore she wins the game.

What happened in the example? Apparently, P1 and P2 spent too much money on Power Plants and didn't have enough money to connect extra cities. Therefore, P3 ended the game, as she was supplying one more city than her opponents. You can win with less or more than 17 cities (the number to end the game in a 3-4 player game). One more than your opponents is enough.


Is it possible to cast 2x Final Payment while sacrificing just one creature? Situation:

Player A controls 2 creatures.
Player B controls 1 creature.
Player B plays 1x Final Payment and declares his creature as additional cost.
Before resolving the spell, Player B plays another Final Payment, once again declaring his creature as additional cost.

What happens here?

Option 1: Only the second Final Payment is executed since the additional costs for the previously casted spell aren't paid.
Option 2: Both creatures of Player A are destroyed while Player B only sacrificed one creature.

I suppose it's option 1 but we had a draft the other day where my opponent claimed that option 2 would be correct.

Step 4. is not possible; sacrificing the creature is part of the cost of the spell, so it is done while the spell is cast, not when it resolves. Player B just cannot play the second Final Payment and the card stays in his/her hand; only the first Final Payment is executed.

  117.8. Some spells and abilities have additional costs. An additional cost is a cost listed in a spell's rules text, or applied to a spell or ability from another effect, that its controller must pay at the same time they pay the spell's mana cost or the ability's activation cost. Note that some additional costs are listed in keywords; see rule 702.

  601.2. To cast a spell is to take it from where it is (usually the hand), put it on the stack, and pay its costs, so that it will eventually resolve and have its effect. Casting a spell includes proposal of the spell (rules 601.2a-d) and determination and payment of costs (rules 601.2f-h). To cast a spell, a player follows the steps listed below, in order. A player must be legally allowed to cast the spell to begin this process (see rule 601.3). If, at any point during the casting of a spell, a player is unable to comply with any of the steps listed below, the casting of the spell is illegal; the game returns to the moment before the casting of that spell was proposed (see rule 721, "Handling Illegal Actions").


Trying to remember card game I played a few years back I still remember the rules pretty well, the name escapes me though. The cards look a lot like Phase 10, so I'm hoping my grandma didn't just make it up.

Each player is dealt a hand of 6(?) cards
Each player is also dealt a stack of 30 cards that is face down except for the top card which can be flipped
And the remaining cards become the draw pile.
The goal is to get rid of your whole stack of 30, by placing your cards on one of 4 spots around the draw pile.
Each spot around the pile your trying to place cards in order of 1-12, once it reaches 12 the spot is restarted.
You are forced to always place a card, and if no spot on either of the 4 piles is available, you have 4 rows by you that you can stack. You can take cards from it on your turn, but only in the order they're placed so you had to be careful.
There were a couple of Free cards that you could place anywhere.

Even though it sounds complicated written out it was played pretty simply, and was a lot of fun. Hoping to find it again through some help on here, thank you!

This looks like Skip-Bo or Spite and Malice:

Each player is dealt a stockpile of 30 cards. The winner will be
whoever manages to empty their stockpile first. Cards are played onto
four shared building piles in numerical sequence from 1 to 12. On each
turn, a player draws until they have five cards in their hand, and
then plays cards from: their hand, a top card of their discard piles,
or their stockpile. At the end of their turn, a player must discard
onto one of their four personal discard piles. Strategy involves the
organizing of cards into the discard piles, care in not setting up the
next players for good plays, knowing when to play from which option,
and especially the timing of playing a valuable "Skip-bo" wildcard.
Skip-bo is based on Traditional Card Games: Spite and Malice.


Vorinclex, does my opponents land untap if they were tapped before i summoned him? If I summon Vorinclex, Voice of Hunger and my opponent already had lands tapped before hand, do they untap on his turn or do they stay tapped?

Whenever an opponent taps a land for mana, that land doesn't untap
  during its controller's next untap step.

This is a triggered ability. If your opponent already had tapped lands before you played Vorinclex, his ability will not trigger. Conversely if your opponent taps lands while Vorinclex is in play, and Vorinclex then leaves play, Vorinclex's ability will have already triggered and your opponent's lands will not untap during your opponent's next untap phase.


Does Athreos work on countered or discarded creatures? So I know that if I have Athreos, God of Passage on the field and a creature spell is countered, it still counts as dying and Athreos's effect still kicks in. I was told it's because the creature (even though it never officially hit the battlefield) will still go into my graveyard. Would this also be true for discarded creatures, since they will go into the graveyard and not exile? I am using Athreos with Pack Rat and I was wondering if it would give me the ability to clone Pack Rat for basically free so long as he is on the field.

What you were told about Athreos triggering for countered creature spells is incorrect.

The official definition of "dies" in the comprehensive rules is:

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

Since a countered creature spell is never a creature on the battlefield, it didn't "die".

Similarly, a discarded creature card would not trigger Athreos either.

In fact, note the terminology here: "creatures" only exist on the battlefield; they are "creature spells" when on the stack, and merely "creature cards" or "creature tokens" elsewhere.


Do Obosh and Brash Taunter together cause quadruple damage to an opponent? With the recent spoiling of Brash Taunter in M21, what would be the interaction for a combination like Obosh, the Preypiercer and Brash Taunter?

Obosh causes Odd CMC (Coverted Mana cost) spells to do double damage.

Brash Taunter is an odd CMC creature that deals damage to target player equal to the damage dealt to it.

Let's say I have Brash Taunter fight a red creature I control that also has an odd CMC, let's just say it's Obosh, on the field. What is the damage Brash Taunter would be dealing out at that point? Would it be 6 or 12?

If your Brash Taunter would fight your own Obosh, the Preypiercer, Brash Taunter would deal 12 damage to your opponent.

Fighting means two creatures deal damage equal to their power to each other:

  701.12a A spell or ability may instruct a creature to fight another creature or it may instruct two creatures to fight each other. Each of those creatures deals damage equal to its power to the other creature.

Obosh doubles all damage from sources with odd CMC. Obosh is such a source, so it deals 3 damage to Brash Taunter, doubled to 6. Taking damage triggers Brash Taunter, so it deals 6 damage to a target opponent, again doubled to 12.

Obosh's doubling ability is a replacement effect, which can only apply once to any given event.

  614.5. A replacement effect doesn’t invoke itself repeatedly; it gets only one opportunity to affect an event or any modified events that may replace that event.

However, the damage from Obosh to Taunter, and from Taunter to opponent are two separate events that can both be replaced by Obosh's ability, so you end up with quadruple the total damage to your opponent.


Spark Double copying my planeswalker - do I have to sacrifice? So when I play Spark Double and copy one of my own planeswalkers, do I have to sacrifice one of them because they are the same planeswalkers or do I keep both because it says the copy is not legendary?

You get to keep both. It would be a pretty useless ability if it didn't. The "legend rule" still applies to the original, but you need two legendary permanents with the same name for it to apply, and Spark Double (which isn't called Spark Double then) is not legendary itself.

  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.”

Planeswalkers used to have their own "legend rule" checking their subtypes, which Spark Double does not provide for, but it's no longer in effect:

  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).


What happens if The Grand Calcutron leaves the battlefield after players hand cards have already become programs? When The Grand Calcutron enters the battlefield, each player's hand becomes a program (an ordered row of revealed cards).
Players can only play the first card of their program.
If a card would be put into a player's hand from anywhere, that player reveals it and places it anywhere within his or her program instead.
At the beginning of each player's end step, if that player's program has fewer then five cards, he or she draws cards equal to the difference.

Assuming The Grand Calcutron enters the battlefield, it's first ability triggers and eventually resolves, and later in the game, it leaves the battlefield again - what happens to the cards in a player's program? Where will cards be put from this moment forward that would be put in a player's hand? Are there any other special interactions?

Mark Rosewater, the Un-set rules manager, has answered this question directly:

What happens to a program without the Grand Calcutron? Does it returns to hand? Can I play cards from it? Do I still need to follow the order?
If The Grand Calcutron every leaves play, the cards in the program return to your hand.


Whats the perfect set for Agricola solo series using E, I, and K decks? Agricola solo series is all about your occupations.  Often I have a great card that will help my current game, but I am always thinking about what is the long term significance of keeping it forever.  I've found the biggest problem with solo series games is the lack of wood.  Without a fence builder or extra wood card, you will never be able to build 15 fences and 4 stables (which you need to keep the max number of animals).

Ideally, these are the best categories of cards I've found so far:

Tutor (played first) - worth up to 6 bonus points
Lord of the Manor - worth up to 8 bonus points
Church Warden - worth 3 bonus points and gives 4 free wood to start the game
Merchant (critical to give opportunity to play as many improvements as possible)
Either Hedgekeeper, fence deliveryman, forester, or some other sort of extra wood, extra free fences, or free stables card
At least 1 card giving additional actions (like Adoptive Parents, which gives an extra 3 actions throughout the course of the game for the low cost of 3 food)
1 card that provides either extra goods (like pieceworker) or extra plowed fields (like field watchman) or extra goods on your fields (like fieldsman).  These cards save actions which I consider to be the most valuable currency in the game
Extra stone is very very helpful through stone carrier or similar
Extra clay is very helpful or a card that makes all clay improvements and rooms cheaper (like clay mixer, clay deliveryman, or bricklayer)

As you can see I'm listing 9 categories, and we only get 7 so you can't obviously do EVERYTHING and you may get improvements that take the place of these occupations from time to time.

Any thoughts?

The way I like to play Agricola campaign mode is to pick 7 occupations and then play through sequentially. Each game I leave one more in play as permanent and leave the others in my hand in future games.

Probably my favorite seven to start with are:

Field Watchmen
Wet Nurse
Church Warden
Lord of the Manor
Manservant
Grocer
Pieceworker

I generally like them in this order (and leave them in descending order, too, so the first permanent one is Field Watchmen). First game get the Stone Oven for food production, doing double baking bread, by sowing 3 grain fields before the first harvest.

My first turns normally are something like:

Occupation (Field Watchman) / Take 1 Grain
Take 1 Grain / Day Laborer
Take 1 Grain / Sow
Clay (4) / Fishing (for 4 food)

At this point you've got 3 sown fields of grain, clay, and your next turns can look like:

Fireplace / Wet Nurse (with grain-->food)
Wood (12) / Reed (6)
Sheep to food (7x = 14 food) / build rooms (+2 people)

At this point you have some leftover food from the sheep still (only needed 8 that round) and are pretty setup. The rest is pretty straightforward.

Also, I normally setup the board slightly, forcing:

Sheep = round 1
Stone = round 5

The rest don't matter as much.

This combined with the above normally lets you get 65-70 points your first game, which then gives you 10+ food for your next starting game.  Wet Nurse is critical  in the campaign because once you get food supplies you can always add two rooms to your house on Turn 5.

Once you start getting significant quantities of food at beginning - which you will after your first game because it's pretty easy to have 15+ points over the game point values initially  and you get 1 food for every 2 points over -  the Pieceworker/Grocer become very useful and powerful, because you can buy extra resources earlier in the game (such as vegetables and stone).

After a few games of occupations, Manservant becomes very useful - it's easy to get a Stone House with 5+ turns remaining in the game after a few solo rounds so you get basically 15 food for this.

Generally, I like to also leave all the animals on the board until the last round (except I normally take sheep for food around turn 6/7, early enough when the food is helpful but also can let them replenish to 7 by the game end). Your first game this is often harder because you normally need to raid one of the animals for food and often can't swing the 4x Stable/3x pasture combination to give you space for all of them.

There are a lot of minor improvements that can make this strategy go on steroids too (like Axe, which means you can reliably add family members prior to the first harvest if you start with Church Warden and get the 4 immediate wood). Or Straw Thatched Roof which gives you three extra rooms with people pretty early with Church Warden, Wet Nurse, and Pieceworker.


Playing Pokemon TCG with more than two players I want to play Pokemon with my brother and sister. The only problem is that there will be three people playing,  which means it would be hard to alter rules so that they do not give other players an unfair advantage.  What additional rules do I have to incorporate in order to play this way?

Note that I would like it to discourage teaming, and it is FFA. Also, as mentioned below, I would not like two headed giant as there is only three decks between us.

The closest that I have found that meets your criteria and also only uses three decks (thus excluding "Two-Headed Giant") is a 3-player variant from BoardGameGeek, which was an improvement to a suggestion another gamer had made.

The three players are arranged in a circle.
A player can attack the player to their right for full damage.
A player can attack the player to their left for half damage, rounded up to the nearest 10.
Special effects (e.g. not being able to use item cards due to Dragonite's "Deafen" attack) can only be applied to the player to the right. (It seems that you are allowed to deal damage to the left player and have an effect apply to the right player).
The game is otherwise played as normal, and the first player to get all their prizes wins.

The advantage of this variant is that while teaming up is still possible, it's sub-optimal since one player will be doing less damage if they gang up, so it's only likely to happen at critical moments.


Can instants be played after I decide not to block? My friend has a green Infect deck. When he declares a creature to attack and I allow it to go through unblocked, he suddenly plays all these Instants that 'pump' the creature up, and because of Infect, it's an instant loss most of the time. We solved that issue (without really understanding the full rules) that it wouldn't make sense to pump his creature up for an instant win without allowing me to block, although recently, my friend told me that 'Instants' can be played 'anytime' so once I allow a creature to deal me damage, technically, he's allowed to play all those Instants.

I'm really confused about it all, and would like to get an answer once and for all for this.

Also, once he has stacked all the pumps for his creature and attacks me (after I initially let it pass to hit my life because I did not expect the pumps) am I allowed to play Holy Day?

I think the best way to answer your question is to give a brief outline of the rules regarding the game steps, and timing of playing spells and abilities

Game Phases and Steps

In a nutshell, here are the phases and steps in a turn of a game of Magic.

Beginning (3 steps: Untap, Upkeep, Draw)
Precombat Main
Combat (5 steps: Beginning of Combat, Declare Attackers, Declare Blockers, Combat Damage, End of Combat)
Postcombat Main
Ending (2 steps: End Step, Cleanup Step)

At the end of each step (except untap and cleanup*), any abilities that trigger at the start of that step are put on the stack, and then the active player (whoever's turn it is) receives priority.

Priority means you can cast spells, activate abilities or play a land. (Keep in mind that casting non-instant spells, activating some abilities and playing lands can only be done if it's your turn, if it's a Main phase, and if the stack is empty.) If a player is done, they may pass priority. Then, the next player gets priority to play spells and activate abilities.

When all players pass priority, any spells on the stack resolve. After each spell or ability resolves the active player receives priority again. He may play new fast effects (instant spells or activate abilities.)

If the stack is empty and all players pass priority, the game moves to the next step or phase.

* — Players don't receive priority during the Untap or Cleanup Step, with one exception during the Cleanup Step. Check the comprehensive rules 514 for more info.

The Stack

The stack is a holding area for spells and abilities that have been cast or activated (including pumping a creature or playing a spell like Holy Day.) After a spell has been played or an ability activated, it is put on the stack.

Once everyone has passed priority, the last-played spell or ability on the stack resolves. It's like a stack of dishes or paper. You deal with the one on top first. After each spell or ability resolves, the active player receives priority again. When all players pass, the next spell on the stack resolves, and so on, until the stack is empty.

Conclusion

You always have a chance to respond to your opponent casting spells and activating abilities to pump his creature (ignoring Split Second.) And your opponent can choose to pump his creature during phase 1 & 2, but usually it is most advantageous to do it during the Declare Blockers step of the Combat phase, after blockers are declared.

I hope that makes sense. I've tried to boil it down "When can I play instants?" to the essentials and a minimum of caveats and exceptions. Magic has many card interactions and rules to deal with these nitty-gritty details; browse the comprehensive rules if you really want to get into those!


Does the Thief card work for a dwarf with broken equipment in Saboteur 2? The rules for Saboteur 2 specifically state that the Theft card does not work for a dwarf who is Trapped!. Does the Theft card work for a dwarf who is not Trapped! but who does have broken equipment?

Yes,

There is no reason per the rules to suspect that Theft does not work for someone who is trapped.  As one exception for Theft is explicitly listed (Trapped!), someone would need to make a compelling argument as to why broken equipment should keep Theft from working.


Responding to a dynamic value trigger which could change the same value If I attack with a Thundering Djinn, and in response to its trigger with something that would draw me additional cards (let’s say +2 cards and have only drawn your Draw step prior.).

Will the damage of the Djinn’s ability increase by the new drawn amount? Or will it only use the value of card prior to the trigger going on the stack?

It would include any cards drawn before the ability resolves.

There are only a few specific things that are set when an ability is put on the stack: Modes, targets, choices required in order to cast a spell or activate an ability (what value to chose for "X" for example; which doesn't actually apply to triggered abilities). The amount of damage it deals is not determined until the ability resolves.

  603.3. Once an ability has triggered, its controller puts it on the stack as an object that’s not a card the next time a player would receive priority.

    603.3c If a triggered ability is modal, its controller announces the mode choice when putting the ability on the stack. If one of the modes would be illegal (due to an inability to choose legal targets, for example), that mode can’t be chosen. If no mode is chosen, the ability is removed from the stack. (See rule 700.2.)

    603.3d The remainder of the process for putting a triggered ability on the stack is identical to the process for casting a spell listed in rules 601.2c–d.

  601.2c The player announces their choice of an appropriate object or player for each target the spell requires.

  601.2d If the spell requires the player to divide or distribute an effect (such as damage or counters) among one or more targets, the player announces the division. Each of these targets must receive at least one of whatever is being divided.

And under Resolving Spells and Abilities:

  608.2g If an effect requires information from the game (such as the number of creatures on the battlefield), the answer is determined only once, when the effect is applied. If the effect requires information from a specific object, including the source of the ability itself, the effect uses the current information of that object if it’s in the public zone it was expected to be in; if it’s no longer in that zone, or if the effect has moved it from a public zone to a hidden zone, the effect uses the object’s last known information. See rule 113.7a. If an ability states that an object does something, it’s the object as it exists—or as it most recently existed—that does it, not the ability.


Why did Wizards of the Coast change the minimum deck size for Constructed from 40 to 60 cards? In the beginning, Magic: the Gathering decks had to have at least 40 cards. Later, the developers changed the deckbuilding rules in two ways:

The minimum deck size went from 40 cards to 60 cards in Constructed.
You could only have up to 4 copies of each card in your deck that wasn't a basic land.

I totally understand the decision to limit you to 4 copies of any one card; this needs no explanation. However, why did they change the minimum deck size? I can find conflicted references to when it happened, but I have yet to find why it happened. So: why did it happen? What motivated Wizards of the Coast to make the change?

I'm aware there's multiple possible gameplay or sales reasons or benefits. What I am most interested in is the serious reasons that actually motivated the change, and the serious reasons why this minimum remains the case to this day and has not yet been increased or decreased in over 20 years.

Good answers to this question will demonstrate that Wizards of the Coast was and is motivated by the issues that answer describes. This is to ensure this question can have an actual demonstrably objectively correct answer, and avoid it becoming and endless list of possible reasons and impacts. A good answer must clear this bar before it also engages in speculation, and should delineate what is speculation and what is certain.

Mark Rosewater wrote a very interesting article a while back called, "20 things that were going to kill Magic the Gathering."

This is the first thing that was going to kill magic at the time.  Here's all he states in that article, but it's the best I can find to answer your question:

  R&D realized that the rules were a problem, so they introduced two
  changes. First, the minimum for Constructed decks was changed from
  forty to sixty. It remained at forty for Limited formats. Second,
  every card but basic lands was limited to no more than four copies.
  Four was chosen because it allowed some consistency for deck building
  but wasn't too much to ensure that the card would always be drawn
  every game.

The second item that was going to kill magic, was the addition of the banned/restricted list.  The first line of that discussion reads:

  The four-of card limits and the increase in deck size helped, but it
  didn't stop the degeneracy...

So, it's pretty clear, that 60 was introduced to limit the "degeneracy" of decks.  If you've ever tried to take your favorite 60 card deck, and squeeze it down to 40 cards, you realize that it's significantly faster at 40 than at 60.


What are the official rules of Jenga? Specifically, we are running into the following points of contention:

When a piece is removed, do you have to place it neatly on top to build a new complete layer, or can you build incomplete layers?
Are you allowed to remove and/or place tiles with both hands?

Welcome to StackExchange!

You must complete each layer before starting a new one (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jenga#Rules)
Only one hand at a time may be used to remove a block; both hands can be used, but only one hand may be on the tower at a time. (see the rules at BoardGameGeek.com)


Is there a mis-print on the Grabby Guts card? In Munchkin Zombies, the Grabby Guts card says "You have one extra Hand", but in the bottom right corner, it says "-1 Hand".  Shouldn't it say "+1 Hand" in the corner?

It's a little counter-intuitive, but "-1 Hand" is actually correct.  You aren't allowed to use more than 2 hands-worth of items; to check this, you can add up the number of "hands" on all your used items.

If you have two 1-hand items, "1 hand" + "1 hand" = "2 hands".

If you have two 1-hand items, plus Grabby Guts, you'll have "1 hand" + "1 hand" + "-1 hand" = "1 hand", leaving you with one hand left.


Manland and Sentinel of the Eternal Watch Sentinel of the Eternal Watch says, "At the beginning of combat on each opponent's turn, tap target creature that player controls."

Can the opponent activate a manland after this ability and attack with it to prevent getting the manland tapped?

Yes, you can get around the Sentinel this way with a manland. I'll assume you have the Sentinel, and your opponent has an untapped Mutavault.

At the the Beginning of Combat step in the Combat phase, all abilities that trigger at that point go on the stack. As part of putting the abilities on the stack, you have to choose a target, and that target must be a creature at that point per the ability text. So, by the time that ability's on the stack, the target is set, and can't be changed — and it isn't the manland.

Then, the active player, and the non-active player, will each get priority at least once. Your opponent can activate their Mutavault's abilty while the triggered ability is still on the stack, or they can let that triggered ability resolve and then activate their Mutavault. (The latter is probably safer, in case you have something like Redirect, such as the standard-legal Insidious Will.)

Then we move on to Declare Attackers, and their Mutavault is a Creature at this point, not tapped, and able to attack.


How can I tell if a card is likely to have "functional errata"? Apparently there was a period in Magic's history when cards received significant "errata" between printings — not just templating updates or clarifications, but straight-up changes to what the cards do.

The most recent example I can think of is Loxodon Warhammer, which officially has lifelink even though the original printing had the triggered-ability version (like Spirit Link), due to some messiness with the redefinition of lifelink while the card was reprinted. Most of the others are significantly older.

Without looking up every single card a player plays in Gatherer, is there a quick way to figure out which cards are likely to have Oracle text that wildly diverges from what's printed on them? (For example, are there certain old-timey abilities that got errata-ed away en masse?)

There aren't many cards in magic that have actual so-called "power level" errata that fundamentally changes what they do, with the exception of the ones that were reprinted in physical form with new wording.  However, there are a few things that make you think "Hey I should check the oracle" because it may not be entirely clear how it was updated to work in modern rules.

1) Wording that would generate a really weird replacement effect, may now be a trigger:

e.g.,  Black Vise   There are obvious patterns to a lot of them, like with this one "if during upkeep" will generally become "at the beginning of upkeep" but then there are ridiculous things like Animate Dead that will you never ever "get right" trying to infer current functionality.  So the presence of what would be replacement effects if playing it literally as written is a good cue to check the Oracle.

2) Does it target?  Use of the word target is inconsistent on pre-6th edition cards.  If it just says "opponent" or "player" something you should check if it's "target" or "choose."

3) Creatures with only a "Class" and Artifact Creatures with no creature type.  e.g., if you see "Summon Warrior" it is likely now an "Elf Warrior" or "Goblin Warrior" or whatever as appropriate.  Artifact Creatures cards with no subtype will also have one in the Oracle (mostly "Construct.")


How does double strike work? If I have a creature with 4/4 double strike, does it kill each blocking creature with toughness 4 or less due to first strike?

Creatures always deal damage equal to their power. Creatures with double strike do this twice.

Specifically, a creature with double strike deals damage equal to its power once during the first strike damage step, and once during the regular combat damage step. Creatures with first strike deal damage just once during the first strike damage step, and regular creatures deal damage just once during the regular combat damage step.

When your attacking creature is blocked by multiple creatures, you pick an order to assign damage. Your creature deals lethal damage to the first, then if there's still damage left over, goes on to the second, and so on. It never gets to deal more damage than its power, though - it's just a question of how it's spread across the blocking creatures.

So for example, if your 4/4 with double strike is blocked by two 4/4s (without first strike or double strike), during the first strike damage step your 4/4 would deal 4 damage to of your opponent's 4/4s (killing it before it has a chance to deal damage), then during regular combat damage your 4/4 and your opponent's remaining 4/4 would deal 4 damage to each other (killing each other). End result: you traded your 4/4 double strike for two regular 4/4s.

Similarly, if your 4/4 were blocked by three 3/3s, during first strike damage it'd deal 3 damage to the first (killing it) and deal one damage to the next one, then during regular combat damage it'd deal two damage to that one (finishing it off) and two damage to the last one, taking 6 damage in return (killing it). End result: you traded your 4/4 double strike for two regular 3/3s.


Games that have no element of luck. Most of my favourite games, such as Diplomacy, have little or no element of luck - either via dice rolls, hands dealt, or other methods.

What other games can you recommend that rely on 'skill' alone?

One game per answer, game name formatted as header and link to more information. Vote for your favourite if it exits already.

Go

Go is an ancient game; at least 2500 years old, and possibly as old as 4500 or more. Originally from China, it is now most popular, and professionally played, in China, Japan, and Korea, though there are strong and growing amateur communities in Europe and the Americas.

Go is a simple, pure abstract strategy game, with no element of luck or hidden information. The rules are quire short and simple; the simplest expression of the basic rules is 10 sentences long, though rules that cover a few extra conventions for ending the game sooner and making scoring easier, and provide more detailed explanation, are a little longer.

Despite the simplicity of the rules, it is extremely strategically deep.

The starting player has a slight advantage in Go, which would give a slight luck-based advantage to who goes first, but because winning is based on total territory scored, you can even that advantage out by giving the second player a few extra points; generally somewhere between 5 and 8 extra points, with the number having drifted upwards a little in recent years as people have discovered that the original amount was still a bit too low.

One of the great features about Go is that it allows you to play handicapped games against strong or weaker players. By letting one player start with a few extra stones on the board, you can even out a difference in skill, and still have an interesting game even though one player is considerably stronger than the other. This is great for small clubs or tournaments, when you don't have enough players of roughly equal level to compete against each other; instead you can play handicap games, and everyone has a chance to win while playing at their own skill level.

Go is a beautiful game, with a great balance between whole board strategy and local tactical battles. It has been studied deeply for centuries, and new innovative ways of playing are always being discovered. In recent years, mathematical analysis of the endgame using the theory of surreal numbers has yielded insights that have helped even top professional players, who have devoted their life to learning the game, and have teacher lineages going back hundreds of years.

I could wax poetic about Go for hours, so I'll stop here, and invite you to check it out. The Wikipedia article gives a good overview, while Sensei's Library is a wiki devoted to Go. There are hundreds of books on Go, a manga and anime series about it, professional players and teachers, schools devoted to teaching young Go players, servers for online play, Go clubs all over the place, and more.


Can you cast Polymerization on your first turn? Reading the text of the card, it seems you could cast an insanely powerful creature on your first turn. Is there anything stopping you? If you happen to have the fusion materials in your hand, can't you put out something very strong the second the game starts?

Maybe that's normal for Yu-Gi-Oh? Coming from MTG it seems really odd to be casting a game ending creature on turn 1.

Yep, you can actually do that given you had the cards. Do note that some cards may have other restrictions that may prevent you from doing that, so make sure to be aware of such possible restrictions.

Compared to MTG, Yugioh is quite faster. It is not rare to see First Turn Kills (FTK) on top tier decks, or well One Turn Kills (OTK, basically same as FTK but not on first turn, just 8000+ damage in one turn) on any tier deck.

This is part of the Yugioh game format and strategy, as it is designed for "faster" duels. This is one of the reasons why in championships players compete by Match, which is a Best of Three sequence of games. This is also, perhaps, why one mistake in Yugioh can be more harmful than one mistake on other TCGs, so be sure to watch out for these sort of moves that can wipe you out in an instant.


If a creature takes lethal damage and would also get a +1/+1 counter, does it die? I have an attacking 4/4 creature blocked by an Ajani's Pridemate and a Bishop's Soldier.

Is the attacking order relevant? I.e., does it make a difference to the outcome of the fight whether I attack the Pridemate first or not?
Will the Pridemate die, or will the lifelink of the Bishop grant it a +1/+1 counter, ensuring it survives the turn?

The order in which you assign damage does not matter here, and the Pridemate will die before it gets the counter from the Bishops Soldier lifegain.
Note that you do not attack individual creatures - you attack players and planeswalkers only. You probably meant the right thing though, namely that you can determine the order in which your attacking creature assigns damage to the blocking creatures. Just remember not to confuse the two things, as it may confuse others also.

508.1b If the defending player controls any planeswalkers, or the game allows the active player to attack multiple other players, the active player announces which player or planeswalker each of the chosen creatures is attacking.

Unless first strike or double strike is involved, all combat damage is dealt simultaneously, so if the attacking creature has enough power to deal lethal damage to all blockers, the order of blockers does not matter,

510.1. First, the active player announces how each attacking creature assigns its combat damage, then the defending player announces how each blocking creature assigns its combat damage. This turn-based action doesn’t use the stack. A player assigns a creature’s combat damage according to the following rules:
510.2. Second, all combat damage that’s been assigned is dealt simultaneously. This turn-based action doesn’t use the stack. No player has the chance to cast spells or activate abilities between the time combat damage is assigned and the time it’s dealt.

As for your second question: You gain life from Bishop's Soldier as soon as it deals damage, but Pridemate's ability is a triggered ability, so it does not immediately take effect. It only goes on the stack the next time a player would gain priority, i.e. the right to cast spells and activate abilities:

510.3. Third, the active player gets priority. (See rule 116, “Timing and Priority.”)
510.3a Any abilities that triggered on damage being dealt or while state-based actions are performed afterward are put onto the stack before the active player gets priority; the order in which they triggered doesn’t matter. (See rule 603, “Handling Triggered Abilities.”)

Only when Pridemate's ability would come to resolve would it get the +1/+1 counter. However, by that time it's already moved to the graveyard because it received lethal damage.


What are these games? What are the three games seen above and to the right of Tom Vasel, between Twilight Struggle and Goa? Looks like a series called Ancients or with "Ancients" in the title.

Looks like games from the "Commands and Colors: Ancients" series.

I would assume that one is the base game and the other two are expansions, likely Rome vs. Barbarians and Roman Civil War