How semi-cooperative games handle players who have nothing to lose? After watching Jumanji I wondered if the eponymous game was meant to be a co-op or a competitive game. Having difficulty figuring it out on my own, I have asked that question on a different stack exchange, and that's how I found out about games that are semi-cooperative: where one player might win, but all players can also lose.

I used to think this kind of games would be unplayable, as the cooperative part can quickly crumble once players whose assistance is required realise that they have no chance to win ("If I can't win, what's the point of me trying just to give you the win?" etc). Turns out, however, that those games do exist, as shown in the list above.

How do they circumvent the problem?

Out of all those mentioned I have only played Arkham Horror and for the life of me I was sure that it's pure co-op (wasn't the goal to defeat the Old Ones together?). Jumanji itself isn't much of help either - it basically forces the players to metagame and doesn't seem to give any reward of note to the winner (turning it into a co-op game in all but the rules).

The social contract does most of the heavy lifting

The social contract is an unspoken agreement between all the players of the game as to how the game should be played to maximize the enjoyment of all the players.  (Sometimes it's a spoken agreement, especially in tabletop roleplaying games.  Regardless, it's always present.)

The goal of a game isn't to win.  The goal is to have an enjoyable play experience.  That's why Cards Against Humanity is a much more popular game than Rock-Paper-Scissors, even though your odds of winning are lower.

Of course, winning generally contributes to the experience of a game.  For some people, in some games, it contributes a great deal.  But in other games, victory takes a back seat to the process of the game itself.

Semi-cooperative games are almost exclusively highly thematic, highly variable games.  These are not the sorts of games that attract players whose primary method of enjoying games is to 'win'.  Instead these games are designed to reward players who enjoy creating a narrative together, who want to do things just to see what will happen, and have a good story to tell at the end.

This means that players are less likely to feel dissatisfied because they aren't winning as much as one of the other players, and are still incentive to avoid the big loss conditions.

Also, even if a player does decide to tank the whole thing out of frustration, that doesn't necessarily mean a negative play experience for everyone else.  There's a reason that LEEROOY JENKINS! became the battlecry of the internet for a while.  Dramatic disaster can be just as fun as dramatic victory.

Which is not to say that a discontented player can't ruin the experience for other players.  The mechanical structures that Volker talks about are built in to reinforce it against this sort of behavior, and they're there for a reason.  But the bulk of the heavy lifting is done social contract, by making the focus of the game be about something other than victory.


Nahiri, the Lithomancer + Skullclamp + Cathar's Crusade The following situation came up in an EDH game and I'm not sure what is supposed to happen. I control a Cathars' Crusade, Nahiri, the Lithomancer and a Skullclamp on the battlefield.

I activate Nahiri's +2 and equip the Skullclamp to the 1/1 Kor token that is created. Does the 1/1 get the passive +1/+1 bonus from Cathars' Crusade before or after the Skullclamp gets equipped? This determines whether I get to kill my own token to draw cards or not.

You will lose your token because the equipment is attached when instructed, but triggered abilities use the stack. On the plus side, you will be able to draw cards.

You activate Nahiri's +2. It goes on the stack.
[Players get priority]
Nahiri's +2 resolves:

Put a 1/1 white Kor Soldier creature token onto the battlefield. Cathars' Crusade's ability triggers.
You may attach an Equipment to the Kor Soldier at this point. Say you attach Skullclamp to it.

The Kor Soldier with Skullclamp equipped dies here. Skullclamp's triggered ability triggers.
Cathars' Crusade's ability and Skullclamp's triggered ability are placed on the stack in the order of your choice. The order doesn't matter here, so say you place Skullclamp's triggered ability on the stack first.
[Players get priority]
Cathars' Crusade's ability resolves:

Put a +1/+1 counter on each creature you control.

[Players get priority]
Skullclamp's ability resolves:

Draw two cards.

Glorious Anthem would have saved your token since the token would be affected by Glorious Anthem's continuous effect at all times both are on the battlefield.


What happens if the last Shadow and Hunter die at the same time? What happens win condition wise if the last shadow and hunter where to die at the same time? This could happen if a dynamite was to go off and kill them both or a neutral had the machine gun and did enough damage to kill them both with one attack. Would this mean that both hunters and shadows lose or would it mean they both win?

Since Shadow have the win condition of all Hunters dead and Hunters have the win condition of all Shadows dead--they don't specify that at least one Shadow/Hunter has to be alive.

By a strict reading of the rules, the only requirement is that all of the opposing faction are dead, regardless of whether you or anyone else in your faction survived. Therefore, unless there is an official clarification to contradict it, all Hunters and Shadows win in this scenario.

Not much of a source, but this BGG thread agrees.

This would also mean that if a Hunter kills the last Shadow but also a third neutral at the same time, the Shadows would still win at the same time as the Hunters.


What is a positional game in chess? What does it mean to have a positional game, or to play a positional game?
What is the opposite?

Every position has both positional ("theory") aspects and tactical aspects.

Positional aspects would include the various imbalances in the position:  pawn structure, space, center control, knights-vs-bishops, and pretty much anything else that would generally fall under the category "theory".

Tactical aspects are just what they sound like:  tactics.  I move here, he moves here, and in 4 moves I win his bishop.

A positional game is one that is primarily dominated by positional aspects.  Of course, every game has aspects of both, but in positional games the theory is much more pronounced.  I hear the term "positional game" especially often in conjunction with a closed center - a game in which pawns occupy the center, so attacks have to be mounted on the flanks (sides of the board), usually with pawns rather than pieces.  These games tend to be slower and less intense; it is not uncommon for a player to spend half-a-dozen moves or more moving his knight to its optimal position before pushing a pawn one square.  Because of this, many players consider positional/closed-center games boring.

"Positional game" may also refer to a game where an early endgame was reached, causing most of the game to be dominated by endgame theory.

Tactical games, on the other hand, are dominated by tactics.  For example, see the Fried Liver Attack or the Danish Gambit, which always lead to very tactical games.


What's this round token depicting a knight? I found this token while cleaning up.

The size and shape looks like it's from Small World, but I looked through my game and expansions and didn't see anything missing or any descriptions of a token matching it.

Any ideas?

This is a token from Small World: Realms. You can see it listed on page three of the Realms rules (PDF) in the top left. They're listed as: “1 Rusted Throne & 7 Miscellaneous Tokens to use in Scenarios of your own creation”. I'm not sure whether you ought to have multiple or just the one Knight token in Realms.


Is there a "good" ratio of card types to have in an MTG deck? In practice do competitively viable decks have approximately similar ratios of card types? There are CCGs in which this is empirically observed, such as Pokémon (2-3 trainers: 1 Pokémon: 1 energy) and Yu-Gi-Oh (2 monsters: 1 spell: 1 trap).

Note: "type" in this context is not intended as the MTG technical term, unless that interpretation would give an affirmative answer. Essentially the question is whether any pie-chart generalisation for structure is applicable in practice.

Deck construction varies greatly from format to format, and even counting in formats that are more commonly played competitively with constructed decks (Modern, Standard, maybe Legacy) or limited formats (Sealed, Draft), you will find a great difference in deck lists.
Limited formats
Limited formats have the unique feature that you have to work with which cards you open or pick, meaning that while you might get lucky and draw some mana fixing, it will very likely not be enough to alter your mana base significantly because of it.
This will also largely depend on the edition you're playing with - while for most editions you're not too bad off playing 17 or 18 lands, Kaladesh is an edition where you will be suggested playing only 16 lands, due to the overall lower mana curve and speed of the format, and as far as I've noticed it, this is what highly competitive players actually opted for.
Due to the relatively low chance of building combo decks (due to not all editions featuring combo-enabling cards, as well as you not always drawing them), most Limited decks will have a great number of creatures compared to other nonland cards, as those are able to threaten damage over multiple turns, as compared to an Instant or Sorcery.
Constructed formats
Constructed is any entirely different animal. Not only do you get many different decks due to the different win conditions - you also can substitute card types you would normally use with others.
The consensus of comments and the first answer seems to be that lands, other than other card types, do have a recognizeable, repeating amount among decks. I would dispute that, due to the fact that MtG provides many different ways to come by the same resource.
To name an example, while you would normally produce red mana with a Mountain or other land card, you might opt for a Simian Spirit Guide (Creature) or Lotus Petal (Artifact), while other decks may still play the basic land, even for one and the same deck concept.
Another factor is how much mana your cards actually require to cast, and how long you intend to play before you win. Modern Affinity is notorious for dropping large portions of the starting hand into play on the first turn for having many cards that cost no mana to cast, resulting in a land base of 16 or even less lands (such as 12 back in 2011). Whichever conclusions you draw from that, and whichever average number you include it in, you will end up with a number that has nothing to do with reality, as the right number is not the average between 24 and 16 - it's 24 for one deck, and 16 for another.
As for other types, you're just completely entering random number territories. Decks will play their combo pieces, which can be any random card type - they are included because they're a part of a combo and do their job, not because the deck needs an arbitrary amount of a certain card type.
To again name an example, if you look at Splinter Twin deck lists, you will commonly find 4 copies of Splinter Twin, which is an Enchantment/Aura card. It's the key card for this very deck, but even considering adding a set number of Auras to a deck because it works for a single deck is ridiculous, as they make you weak to get "2-for-1-ed", meaning that you lose two cards to a single removal spell, for example. Not just including this card in a deck, but deciding to build entirely around it is what makes the deck strong and playable, but all of this is entirely independent of the card type - what matters is the card function.
Conclusion
I don't think you can create an accurate and purposeful diagram over the entire span of MtG competitive formats or decks. What you can attempt to create such a statistic for an individual format, but that will likely give you an average number with no practical purpose, since after all, you're likely not looking for a diagram with decorative qualities, but one to look at it and say "I should probably play n of that type to be successful", and I do believe such a diagram cannot exist for the entirety of the MtG universe.
Since you mentioned other TCGs in your question, let me also mention that MtG has a lot more formats that any other card game I'm aware of, making the issue of a general analysis even more of a complex dilemma, and the lack of this diversity in other formats may well be the reason that such a simple breakdown is possible for those games, but not MtG.
In this answer, the mentioned formats from my introductionary paragraph are the only ones I even considered - there are other formats played competitively, but not to an extend that makes their mention particularily worthwhile or representitive. Whichever numbers you might come up, once you enter Vintage Two-Headed Giant Commander (a format entirely covered by the official rules, mind you, yet not particularily tournament-viable), you will realize they won't work out even by a long shot.


Does double strike work whilst blocking? I'm attacking with a 1/1 Satyr Grovedancer. My opponent blocks with a 1/2 Two-Headed Cerberus with double strike. Does double strike still apply when the creature is blocking? I understand my Satyr will die either way but say it were the case with a 4/4 creature, what would happen?

Yes, double strike and first strike work while blocking.

Effectively, there is a "first strike combat damage step" in which one set of double strike damage is dealt, and then a normal combat damage step, where all other combat damage is dealt.

So whether attacking or blocking, that phase always occurs, and damage is dealt simultaneously within it.

So in the case of your Grovedancer:

  First strike damage step

  Two-Headed Puppy deals 1 damage to the Grovedancer
  Grovedancer dies

  Normal combat step

  Grovedancer already dead, can't hit back

In the case where you attacked with a 2/1 Golden Hind

  First strike damage step

  Two-Headed Puppy deals 1 damage to the Hind
  Hind dies

  Normal combat step

  Hind already dead, can't hit back

In the case where you attacked with a 2/2 Travelling Philosopher

  First strike damage step

  Two-Headed Puppy deals 1 damage to the Philosopher

  Normal combat step

  Philosopher deals 2 damage to the Puppy, Puppy deals another 1 damage to the Philosopher
  Philosopher and Puppy both die

In the case where you attacked with a 4/4 Rumbling Baloth

  First strike damage step

  Two-Headed Puppy deals 1 damage to the Baloth

  Normal combat step

  Baloth deals 4 damage to the Puppy (Yipe!), Puppy deals another 1 damage to the Baloth
  Puppy Dies, Baloth has taken 2 damage, so will now die to a Shock if it gets hit before end of turn, otherwise it'll heal up during
  cleanup

Hope that helps


How do the Dragon and Monster Packs affect Monster Deck size? There are two bonus packs which affect the monster decks in Margraves of Valeria.
Are they purely additive, to the original monster decks? That would be a 40% increase in deck size, so it seems extreme to me, but maybe it's balanced to account for that?
(The Monster Pack rules note to "just shuffle them into the four Monster cards above the Lair card in each monster stack". And the dragon rules, which are not online, also don't mention removing anything.)
Alternatively, should some original monsters be removed, when playing with at least one of these packs?

As written, they're additive.
The event pack is purely additive explicitly, lending further support for this interpretation of the monster pack(s).
Also the dragon banner is confirmed additive in this BGG thread, lending further support for the idea.
As to whether they have been balanced for that, well, that's a subjective call. In some cases, the questions of balance either don't come up or are not sufficiently weighted against other questions of marketing and so on. Whether that's the case here I cannot say.


Big expansion boards for ticket to ride I enjoy giving anniversary or otherwise "nicer" editions of games to family and friends.  Last year for Christmas, I got my sister and brother-in-law a copy of Ticket to Ride 10th Anniversary Edition.  It was a bit more expensive than the basic version, but I felt it was well worth it.  They have played the game on a regular basis ever since and have not yet seen the (much) lower quality pieces of the basic releases.

That being said, I have been looking towards the future and what the next gift will be and I would love to find some of the additional maps (such as Asia, Legendary Asia, India, etc...) in the larger size as to accommodate the larger pieces.

Are there such larger maps available anywhere?  (even if only as pnp)
Are the regular sized maps too small to use the anniversary pieces?

This image from bgg would make it seem that the answer to the second question is an unfortunate yes, but have people tried using them anyways and have any experience with doing so?  Allowing the pieces to either hang off the edge or placing them slanted, etc...?

Getting your own made, could work.

You would likely need a high quality image.

The other potential issue would be the legality of it, but if they/you already own the map it could be legal in the UK and the EU (I am not a lawyer, and cannot give advice on this issue and, besides, I don't know which country's laws are most relevant to you).


Can I use plurals in scrabble? Can plural form of words be used in the scrabble? For example, table, obviously can. But can I extend it to the "tables" for example?

Yes.

  Any word that is found in a standard English dictionary can be used in the game of Scrabble. There are also Official Scrabble Dictionaries that can be purchased for more word options. (Rules source)

Any word found in a standard English dictionary is allowed, which includes plural words.

You can look up a word to see if it is legal here, and searching "tables" shows it is legal.


Does "Income tax" count as a Curse or Bad Stuff that will remove "Chicken on your head"? If I choose to lose my headgear due to Income Tax, does that qualify as an event that would take the chicken with it?

The cards say:

  Income Tax:
  Discard one item of your choice.
  Every other player must now discard an item or items, totaling at least as much value as the item you discarded. If they don't have enough to pay the full tax, they must discard all their items and lose a level.

  Chicken on your head:
  -1 to all die rolls. Any Curse or Bad Stuff that removes your Headgear will take the chicken with it.

Yes.
The question boils down to: Does "that removes your Headgear" mean "that specifically instructs you to remove your Headgear", or does it mean "that causes you to remove your head gear".
Since no cards specifically instructs you to remove your headgear —they instruct you to lose it— I would favour the looser interpretation.
This is supported by a an official ruling (in reply to this).

Any Curse or Bad Stuff that removes your Headgear will take the chicken with it.
This means that any Curse or Bad Stuff that (a) specifically targets Headgear or (b) has the effect of removing the Headgear you are wearing, whether specifically targeting it or not, will remove the Chicken.

Since Income Tax is a Curse that has the effect of removing the Headgear you are wearing (even though it doesn't specifically targeting it), it will remove the Chicken.


Do "flat" hands devalue a 4-4 trump fit? The advantage of a 4-4 trump fit is that you can ruff in either hand, and use the other one as the master hand. But if one or both partners have little ruffing value, then might that advantage be minimal?

Neither vulnerable, South dealt and bid 1NT. West passed, and you, North, hold:

(s) AJ4 (h) KJ32 (d) J63 (c) 953.

The columnist wrote that: "North could have judged to bid 3NT with his flat hand instead of using Stayman; South probably would have made nine tricks." I concur.

But North bid 2 clubs, South 2 spades North 3NT and South bid 4 hearts, inferring that North had four hearts.

North knows that his hand has a 4-3-3-3 shape, and can infer that South's hand is likely 4-4-3-2 or 4-3-3-3, with 5-3-3-2 being the other main possibility. Does it make sense under the circumstances for North to avoid Stayman since the likely ruffing gains are minimal? Or should South have left North in 3NT inferring that North had 3-4 in the majors, and 3-3, or possibly 2-4/or 4-2 in the minors?

Here's the relevant bridge column for further reference, but of course people don't see each other's hands while bidding.

Two separate questions:

Should N have bid 3NT straight off the bat? In my opinion, yes, at any form of scoring, for the reasons you mentioned, and also to conceal information about N and S's shape from West (think about how much easier the lead is after a Stayman auction than after 1NT - 3NT).
Given that N initiated a Stayman sequence, should S have developed a sufficient picture of N's hand to figure out that 3NT was the best spot anyway? No. From the auction, as far as S knows, N could have any number of spades between 0 and 3. (Experienced partnerships will probably have a way to show spade shortness here, by way of showing long minors, but doing this on middling hands that are likely to wind up in 3NT anyway is again a mistake, giving too much information to West.) Even if S could know that N has 3 spades, he still knows that N chose to initiate a Stayman sequence and should respect N's opinion that N's hand has ruffing values. (S has no information about shape that N doesn't have.)


Can a runner trash ICE or Operation cards after a run on the HQ? A sneaky runner managed to make his way into my corporate HQ. I let him pick a card at random from my hand (I had no upgrades), and it just happened to be a piece of ICE or an Operation or maybe even an Agenda.

Does the runner have the option of trashing the card? There's no listed trashing cost, so if they are allowed to trash the card, what does it cost?

No, Runners do not have the option of trashing cards that have no trash costs. They may trash cards with trash costs. Special care should be taken when accessing multiple cards (see page 18). From page 18 of the rules, under Access Phase:

HQ: The Runner accesses one random card from HQ and any upgrades in its root. Any cards the Runner does not score or trash return to HQ.
Trashing Cards - If the Runner accesses a card with a trash cost, he may pay credits equal to its trash cost in order to trash it to Archives faceup.


How do you protect your Munchkin cards? I love playing Munchkin, but haven't found a good way to protect the cards. So, how do you protect your beloved Munchkin cards?

While I hate the Munchkin game...

the cards are of one of the standard card sizes.

Mayday Games makes sleeves intended for card game play. In about 100 hours of play, I've shed 2 sleeves on my dominion set, and both of those because someone riffle-shuffled lengthwise. You'll need to shuffle sideways, rather than lengthways, but sleeving the cards is your best option. Their data sheet says the purple size are correct for Munchkin, and the green size for Munchkin Quest. It also says you'll need two packs per munchkin 168-card box.


Can you play any amount of lands with future sight? If you play Future sight, you have already played a land during your turn, and you have a land on top of your library, can you play the land that is on top of your library without infringing the "one land per turn" rule?

No you can not

This is covered in the Rulings on the Gatherer Page for Future Sight.

  If the top card of your library is a land, you may play that land only if you have any available land plays.


How do I prevent cheating on my token based card game? I have created a card game in which one of the mechanics relies a lot on trust, and would be very easily cheated.

The game is played in 5 rounds, and has a total of 15 tokens to spread as you wish through these rounds. The amount of tokens selected needs to be private until both players reveal them at the same time.

Knowing how many tokens your opponent uses would allow you to either let them waste their tokens, or make you win the round.

What would be the best method to prevent cheating?

You simply need a mechanic that makes it impossible for a player to see the other players' token counts until they are all simultaneously revealed.  There are quite a few ways to do this, so you have the freedom to choose something that fits with the theme of your game.

Many games (ex: Robo Rally, The Resistance) use cards for this mechanic.  It is one of the simpler methods.  Each player puts a card face down in front of them, and removes his or her hand from the card to show that the decision is final.  All players then reveal their cards simultaneously.  The cards can either be discarded or returned to hand based on the rules of your game.
A single token or tokens that can represent multiple values could be used.  For example, in Pizza Theory, each player has a 6-sided die that is use to signify their decision.  The players cup their hands over the dice until they are revealed.  This may not be practical for your game if each value from 0 to 15 must be possible; while you could use multiple or larger dice, it does increase the chance of a player accidentally bumping them on reveal and changing the values.
In games where multiple pieces of information are revealed simultaneously (rice counts in Shogun) or the pieces are impractical to hold in hand (Puzzle Strike), each player has a screen which can be used to hide their secret information until the reveal.


In the Epic card game, when is event damage resolved during the attack? In the Epic card game I understand that damage taken and received as part of an attack is resolved simultaneously at the end of the battle.

However, if I attack with two creatures and both receive enough damage via events to kill (break) them, before the defender selects blockers, are the creatures killed instantly, or do they still need to decide whether to defend or take the damage from the attack?

From the Complete Rules:

  5.16.3 If a champion has taken damage equal to or exceeding its defense in a single turn, it is immediately broken.

Thus the defending player will take no damage from the attack. It looks like technically there is still a "Choose Blockers" step even if all attackers are dead, but you can just block with nothing. (Description of Battle Phase: Rulebook p12, or Complete Rules 4.4)


How do Pitiless Plunderer and Bontu's Last Reckoning interact with each other? Would Pitiless Plunderer create treasure tokens if you had two other different creatures on the battlefield when a board wipe like Bontu's Last Reckoning is cast?

Yes.

Triggered abilities trigger once per event, and the trigger conditions defines the event.

"Whenever a creature dies" will trigger every time a creature dies.

Since Pitiless Plunderer is phrased similarly to this, it triggers twice.

"Whenever one or more creatures die" will trigger every time one or more creatures die simultaneously.

Since Pitiless Plunderer isn't phrased similarly to this, it doesn't trigger only once.


Can I tap land for mana AFTER opponent tapped those lands if it's in the same stack? The other player plays a spell which makes me tap 3 lands.  I want to play another instant on top of his instant using the 3 mana from the lands that will be tapped. Can I?

To simplify:

me: I have 3 lands
opponent: plays instant, taps 3 lands
me: Wants to play instant on the same stack
me: instant needs those 3 mana he is going to take

It sounds like your opponent played a card like Early Frost, which taps (up to) three target lands. (Side note: lands are not mana, they produce mana.) When this happens, it doesn't resolve immediately; it goes onto the stack. At that point, you have the opportunity to respond with things that can be done at "instant speed", activating abilities and playing instants.

So yes, you can respond by playing an instant, tapping those three lands for mana to pay for it. You can also simply respond by tapping the lands for mana and leaving it in your mana pool, if you'd like to play something later during the current step and phase. Either way, when Early Frost actually resolves after your spell resolves, it will still tap those three target lands, but they're already tapped, so nothing really happens.

If your opponent really wants to stop you from playing an instant with that mana, the only way they can really do it is tap your lands down at a time when you wouldn't want to play your instant. For example, if it needs to get cast during combat, they could tap your lands before combat. But it's a lot more straightforward to use it to prevent casting a non-instant spell, by tapping down lands during upkeep.


How compatible are the two versions of Netrunner? I have a stash of the original Netrunner game. If I were to play a game against someone with the Android:Netrunner game, what changes/adjustments would we need to make?

The powerlevel of cards has changed, quite a lot of cards from the original netrunner have been increased in cost or decreased in effect.

The main difference is that the new netrunner has factions and identities. When building a deck you are allowed as many neutral and your faction cards as you like, but you can only include up to 15 (normally) of other faction cards. Each identity has a influence allotment, minimum deck size and some ability. You are also only allowed 3 of a given card in your deck at most, in contrast to the original netrunner which had no limits.

Some key words have changed, Wall is now barrier. Black Ice is now Illicit, and gives a BadPublicity when rezzed. Icebreakers have types Fracter instead of Worm/Noisy and Decoder instead of nothing for Code-gate breakers. Icebreakers which can break any ice is now called AI, and a new Icetype of Trap exists, which currently no breakers can break, other than AI and special icebreakers matching Destroyer or AP keywords on the trap. These Trap ice self-destruct as part of their effect.

Base link cards have been removed from the game, now each runner identity has a base link on it (either 0 or 1). Traces are now open bid, with the corp bidding first. Trace(n) now means the trace starts from level n, and the corp can pay xC to boost this value by x. Then the runner takes their link (from base link + any from cards in play) and bids yC. If the values are equal the trace has failed, if the corp's values is higher than the runner's then the trace was successful.

Bad publicity is no longer a win condition, instead the runner gains 1C for each bad publicity the corp has at the start of each run. If these credits are not spent during the run, they are lost.

Virus counters are now placed on the virus, instead of being given to the corp. This means destroying the program will also remove the effects. Virus purging now requires 3 clicks to be spent, rather than forfeited. This means you cannot purge viruses easily without it taking your whole turn.

Agendas are now forfeited as a whole, rather than forfeiting agenda points.

Stealth has changed, there are no Noisy icebreakers any more. Instead stealth icebreakers get special benefits from spending credits from stealth cards.

Regions no longer have to be rezzed immediately when installed, but you are still not allowed more than 1 region per server at any time, rezzed or unrezed.

Because of these changes the cards aren't really that compatible balance-wise, but a lot of cards are the same so you could check to see what changes have been made and adjust accordingly. You could play a game with them easily enough, but it might not be very balanced!

Example of changes, increased cost, change in virus mechanics:

The icebreakers are generally less powerful at breaking big ice in Android Netrunner, so the very useful Pile Driver has no real equivalent in Android Netrunner.
 compared to  and


Scrabble - What if any "House Rules" work to even the playing field with more and less experienced players? Related:What is a fair Scrabble handicap

Scrabble is a great game for competitive type A types and the learning curve is STEEP at first. Great game. Like most games, house rules vary and are fine as long as everyone agrees.

I enjoy introducing new people to the game, but it's not fun for anyone if I win the first game by 250 points. One thing I find helpful is giving everybody a list of 2 letter words. It's just not fair otherwise because of course I have them memorized, yet a newbie isn't going to know that QI and ZA are legal plays.

Assume relatively equal mastery of the English language. What else can be done to help those first few games be competitive?

Time limit and patience for the experienced player.

If the experience player limits self to 15 to 30 seconds per play and is very patient with new players, the game levels without house or extensive rule changes.

For new players to get-into-the-game, competition is not needed so much as enjoyment.  For a seasoned competitor, obliging a quick play (and maybe forgoing QI & ZA) is a challenge.  The senior player should not look up words, but tolerate first timer's usage of such.

Other limitations require the senior playing with 5 or 6 or letting others play with 8 or 9.  (I prefer the limits (time, tile count) on the experienced player rather than mess up the fundamentals for the new player.)

See Jolenealaska


What happens when you need to tear-down a hotel but no houses are in the bank in Monopoly? Strictly following the rules of Monopoly will show that just because you have the cash to out-right buy hotels for your properties, you cannot if there are not enough houses in the bank to support an even build (ie, there are less than 12 in the bank for a 3 property street).

Likewise, when tearing-down hotels, there need to be an appropriate number of houses available to support the even tear-down (at least four houses to remove one hotel, and 8 more if you want to remove all of the improvements on a 3 property street).

What happens if you cannot tear-down your hotels because there are fewer than four houses in the bank (or fewer than 12 for the whole street)?

The scenario is not that far-fetched - a property group has been fully improved, some large rent is now due, and the player needs to recoup the sunk cost of their improvements to pay the rent due.

If they cannot tear-down the hotels, they cannot pay the rent. But property cannot be traded between players if improvements are on it.

What is the appropriate resolution to this case?

The rules state:

  When the Bank has no houses to sell,
  players wishing to build must wait for some player to return or sell
  his/her houses to the Bank before building.

and

  Houses and hotels may be sold back to the Bank at any time for
  one-half the price paid for them.

and

  All hotels on one color-group may be sold at once, or they may be
  sold one house at a time (one hotel equals five houses), evenly, in
  reverse of the manner in which they were erected.

I would say that if it is NOT possible to break up a hotel into four houses, you must sell all hotels at once, at half-face value for the entire purchase of each hotel and four houses, thus satisfying the condition "all hotels on one color-group may be sold at once".


"If a creature would enter the battlefield and it wasn't cast..." Can someone explain precisely what this means (i.e. all the technical details)? I'm referring to cards like  Containment Priest and  Hallowed Moonlight. I don't understand this mechanic at all.

It means exactly what it says, if a creature would enter the battlefield and it wasn't cast it will get exiled instead. It doesn't matter how it was cast, or where it was cast from, as long as it was cast instead of just being put onto the battlefield.

Some examples of things that will cause a creature to be exiled due to those abilities are Rise from the Grave and Æther Vial. These cards put creatures directly onto the battlefield without casting them, thus they will get exiled.

Some examples of things that will not cause a creature to be exiled due to those abilities are casting your commander from the command zone, casting Gravecrawler from your graveyard using its ability, and casting cards with Suspend that had their last time counter removed.

Note that Containment Priest specifies nontoken creatures, and Hallowed Moonlight does not. This means that the Priest will never exile token creatures and Hallowed Moonlight always will, since while you can cast a spell that produces tokens like Lingering Souls the tokens themselves were not cast.


What if Magic gives the second player a Lotus Petal, similar to what Hearthstone does? In Magic, the player who goes first doesn't get to draw a card on the first turn, i.e. the player who goes second plays each turn with an extra card. This typically isn't enough compensation since the player that goes first wins slightly more than 50% of time (53% of the time according to this limited study). In Eldraine Standard, some decks win up to 18% more often on the play, according to this article.

In addition to this mechanic, Hearthstone also allows the second player to start with a "Coin", which is effectively Lotus Petal. Can Magic adopt this mechanic as well?

Obviously Magic is more complicated than Hearthstone and Lotus Petal introduces new risks, e.g. Lotus Petal is a permanent (e.g. counts for City's Blessing), an artifact (e.g. counts for Improvise), can be sacrificed (e.g. counts for Revolt), and so on. However, I can't think of any way this lets the second player do really degenerate things like win on turn 1. Instead, this would let the second player counter the first player's turn 1 win attempts by e.g. casting Spell Pierce. Conversely the first player is already able to interact with the second player with cards like Thoughtseize before the second player ever reaches a main phase.

Is there any dangerous combo that could be enabled by letting the second player start with a Lotus Petal in play? If so, what combo could it be?

There are already decks that win on turn one, giving one extra mana on that turn enables these decks to be more reliable.

One example of a deck that wins turn one, and already wants to be on the draw, is Flash Hulk. While Flash has been banned in legacy and restricted in vintage, the combo only needs two mana, one of it blue, to win turn 1. This two mana is usually accomplished with Gemstone Caverns, Elvish Spirit Guide or Simian Spirit Guide and the land drop for the turn, usually an Island. Adding one free mana would mean you no longer need one of those three cards, just Flash and Protean Hulk and your land for turn in the opening hand.

Flash is used to put Protean Hulk into play, which must be sacrificed since you can't pay the 4 generic mana required by Flash (creature's CMC-2), triggering Protean Hulk's death effect. That effect could search for many things, 4 Disciple of the Vault and X cost artifact creatures like Phyrexian Marauder and Shifting Wall, using the 0 toughness artifact creatures dying to trigger the Disciples, or 4 Virulent Sliver and a Heart Sliver to swing 5 poisonous 4 hasted creatures turn 1, doing double the lethal poison count.


Babylon (B), 2nd step: Can you use this ability only one time? The wonder Babylon (B) has a special ability on step 2: You can play your last (7th) card instead of discarding it.

These two questions cover if you'd have to play both cards in the 6th round or if you get a 7th round:

Can a resource card be used more than once in a turn when allowed to build more than one structure?
How does Babylons's second stage wonder work for building/discarding your last two cards?

I wonder: Can you use this ability in all Ages (if built)? Or can you use it only in the Age you built the wonder?

I assumed that you can use it every Age, but then I noted that the special ability of Olympia (A), which can be used in all Ages, has "I, II, III" written on it. This clarification is missing on Bablyon's (B) second step, though.

You may use it once per age.  The description of symbols page shows that symbol as (emphasis mine).

  The player can play the last card of each age instead of discarding
  it. This card can be played by paying its cost, discarded to gain 3
  coins or used in the construction of his or her Wonder.


Multicolored lands for a rainbow deck There are 10 two color combinations for land in magic. Black-white, black-blue, black-green, etc. For any one color, 4 of those 10 will contain that color. I.e. four of these two color combinations contain black. That's almost half.

My question, then, is why not run a rainbow (5 color) deck with twenty dual color lands, two from each color permutation? I assume for the sake of simplicity a 20 land 40 non-land split but the principal is the same.

One of the arguments against rainbow decks is that you can easily find yourself in a position where you don't have the land you need. But in this construction, 40 percent of lands will give you any single color, which seems pretty good to me. Am I missing something?

This question is kind of the mirror image of this one: "Why would you want to play with a deck that had 3 or more colors in it in Magic?"

Playing multi-color decks is desirable because it lets you make a powerful and versatile deck by cherrypicking the best cards (for your strategy) from multiple colors.

So, why are 4- and 5- color decks so comparatively rare?

A lot of the strongest spells of a color have deeper mana requirements.

Make a list of your favorite powerful cards. A lot of them probably have costs like 2WW rather than 3W, huh? This drastically alters the math of consistent color access. If you look at this number-crunching article by Frank Karsten, you'll see he figures 12 sources are enough to consistently cast a 2C-cost spell on turn 3, but you need 19 sources to get the same quality of access to a 1CC-cost spell on turn 3. 19!

This is an active, purposeful design decision to make these cards easier to cast on-curve and on-time in a deck that's dedicated to those colors, and harder to include in a deck that only splashes a color.
Cards are strongest when you play them on time. A mana base that's heavy on comes-into-play-tapped lands or requires casting land-selection spells like Borderland Ranger to set up your mana introduces notable lag before you can start playing spells that will really interact with your opponent.
Opponents can disrupt your mana base. Consider how much tighter mana requirements become when you're playing against a deck with 2x Rishadan Port and 4x Wasteland.

All these serve as a damper on the greediest multi-color decks. On top of that, because:

The color's "pie slices" overlap (e.g. green or white can both play effective enchantment removal, so you only need one of those colors to get that ability in your deck).
Not every color in a format will meaningfully support the specific synergies / strategies you're trying to exploit. (Maybe there just are no red cards worth playing in your midrange deck, even with perfect mana.)
A stable 5-color manabase can lock you out of playing amazing utility lands like Academy Ruins.

— there's often very little to gain from building a full four- or five- color deck instead of one that's "just" three colors.

Exceptions, such as Chapin's Cloudthresher + Cruel Ultimatum Lorwyn control deck (example decklist), are typically the result of slower formats with multi-lands that support greater color depth than simple dual lands.


Replenish internal sensors when the computers are offline When the computer is offline, we have no skill deck. I assume this impacts the crew (e.g. the tactical officer) when their ability says to draw from the skill deck in certain situations.
What I can’t find explicitly documented however, is where the internal sensors are replenished from.

If the computer is offline, can the internal sensors be replenished from the skills discard?
There is no other instance I know of where one system going offline cripples another.

The internal sensors do draw cards from the skill deck as needed to ensure that there are always 3 cards available when it and the computers are online. Once the computers go offline the cards that are currently in the internal sensors remain but there is no longer any skills for it to draw.

The rules are pretty bad about explaining how all the systems work but in this case the card itself talks about drawing cards and the only place you draw cards from is the skill deck which can't be done when there is no skill deck do to the computer being offline.

The reason why you don't see any other examples of one system directly impacting another is because the other systems are not as closely related as these two are in dealing with the same end result (skill card) in a slightly different manner.


Chaos Emperor Dragon vs materials Chaos Emperor Dragon - Envoy of the End:

  Cannot be Normal Summoned/Set. Must be Special Summoned (from your
  hand) by banishing 1 LIGHT and 1 DARK monster from your GY. You can
  pay 1000 Life Points; send as many cards in both players' hands and on
  the field as possible to the GY, then inflict 300 damage to your
  opponent for each card sent to the opponent's GY by this effect. You
  cannot activate other cards or effects during the turn you activate
  this card's effect.

Does material cards attached to monster are counted to inflict 300 each?

No, the Materials Will Not Count Toward the Damage Inflicted

Let us examine the effect of Chaos Emperor Dragon again, this time with a bit more scrutiny (emphasis mine):

  You can pay 1000 Life Points; send as many cards in both players' hands and on the field as possible to the GY, then inflict 300 damage to your opponent for each card sent to the opponent's GY by this effect.

The specific wording of the highlighted text is crucial to understanding why the materials are not included. Importantly, no matter the chain of strategic causality (i.e., "Without activating that effect, those materials would never have been sent to the GY"), it is not the effect of Chaos Emperor Dragon that is sending the materials to the GY.

Any materials attached to the XYZ monster are sent to the GY due to the XYZ monster leaving the field - NOT due to Chaos Emperor Dragon's effect.

Think of it this way: at the moment prior to the effect's resolution, there is an exact set of cards existing on the field and in the hand(s) - this is the set of cards which will be considered sent to the GY by Chaos Emperor Dragon, per the wording in its own effect. Note that any materials on any XYZ monsters on the field are not a part of this set. This is due to the way Yu-Gi-Oh treats XYZ materials with respect to Zone habitance:

  Xyz Materials are not treated as being on the field

Again, I cannot emphasize this enough, it does not matter that the XYZ materials were sent to the grave during the resolution of the effect - they were not sent by the effect of Chaos Emperor Dragon. They will not be counted toward the damage inflicted.


What is the best way to play with someone in another location? I'd like to play board games with friends who live in other states.  I thought I could use Skype to communicate and a webcam to send out a picture of the board.  Does anyone have suggestions on how to handle cards that are dealt to different players?  For example, if I were playing Risk, how could a player be dealt a Risk card without someone else knowing what card was dealt?

Play by Email (PBEM)
There are lots of board games around which a play-by-email communities have sprung up. This site appears to have a list of hundreds of games that have been adapted to distance play and links to help you get started.
Personally I've played A&A by email over at AAMC.net, which has a entire player ladder, ranking system, and server that logs games and rolls dice (to eliminate the tedium of documenting real rolls and the problem of how to prevent cheating).
Most of these communities have established combat nomenclature for communicating moves and other information to the other player(s)--somewhat akin to chess or go notation. Furthermore, they typically have message boards to help PBEM newbies get started and/or find people to play with.


Do Cylon Leaders in Battlestar Galactica (Daybreak expansion) draw an extra card in sickbay? I recently played a game of BSG with some friends and we ran into a situation wherein the Cylon Leader was in the sickbay and their turn came around. The sickbay states that you draw only one card, but they argued that the infiltration card from the Daybreak expansion gives them an extra card.

The rule book text is not so clear on this situation, so I'm hoping someone can clarify.

Thank you!

No, Cylon Leaders are restricted to one card in Sickbay.

From the Daybreak rules

  An Infiltrating Cylon Leader draws one extra Skill Card from
  within his Skill set during his “Receive Skills” step for a total of
  three Skill Cards.

Hence, they only receive an extra card if they are receiving their normal 2 cards.  Sickbay overrides it to only allow one card per character in Sickbay.

The rules also note that the Infiltration card is a "summary" of the Infiltration rules.


When and which board game was the first to be ever invented? Which board game is the first to be ever invented, when was it invented and where?

According to oldest.org, the oldest board game was Senet, invented ca. 3500 BCE in Egypt.

Some other ancient games that are popular are Checkers (c.3000 BCE, Ancient Mesopotamia), Go (c.c.2000 BCE, Ancient China) and Chess (c.600 AD, India or China)


When are Mice and Mystics encounter cards flipped & discarded? In Mice and Mystics, I understand that encounter cards are intended to be flipped when the mice enter a tile for the first time and that tile does not have a special encounter.  I also understand that the encounter card is supposed to be discarded when there's a surge and that tile does not have a special surge.

Are there any other times when encounter cards are flipped or discarded?  For example, what if we have not actually had a surge and we go to a new tile, which has a special encounter?  Should the previous encounter card be discarded?  Similarly, what if we have a surge on a tile that has a special surge, but we already have an encounter card present?

What if we have not actually had a surge and we go to a new tile, which has a special encounter, should the previous encounter card be discarded?
Yes, the previous encounter card is discarded. From the rule book

Encounters - Each time a mouse explores an area that has not already been explored during that chapter, the mice will have an encounter. Unless otherwise stated in the chapter being played, draw a card from the encounter deck. Each encounter card has multiple potential encounters based on how far the chapter has progressed. Use the encounter that matches the page space that the hourglass marker currently occupies on the story control board. Place the new minions using the placement rules below, then determine an initiative order. Once the minions are placed, place the encounter card face-up on top of the encounter deck. If there is still an encounter card face up from a previous encounter, discard the old card. This new face-up encounter card will now determine the next non-chapter-specific surge effect.

What if we have a surge on a tile that has a special surge, but we already have an encounter card present?
You perform the special encounter, but you don't discard the encounter card.

Room tile rules: some room tiles that are being used in a chapter will have specific rules that apply to that room. Each room tile that has special instructions [...] or special surges that instruct players on what minion(s) to place when a surge happens in that room (special surges take place instead of a surge listed on an encounter card). (page 5, Story Book)
[Step 3] If there are no chapter-specific surge instructions, follow the surge effect on the face-up encounter card that is on the encounter deck and then discard that card. (page 15, Surges)


Tri-dimensional board games: How does the additional dimension extend possible player requirements & game structure? Recently I saw the Star Trek chess game in a serial and looked it up on wikipedia. It exists as a real game, but it seems it's not too popular, too tricky, too unwieldy to carry and play everywhere, and the rules are too complex (?). There seem also to be no world-wide championships or other questions on boardgames.SE ;)

Does anyone know of a good scientific site/report (maybe a topic in neuroscience experiments) describing different rule sets for e.g. 3D-chess which covers a bit the theory how in general 2D games differ from 3D games? Differences might include more possible game moves, the role of spatial perception (afaik men and women have different strong faculties here - so maybe 3D games are not gender-neutral and less popular besides hardly portable/digital playable?), or mappings of well-known game strategies from 2D.

PS: My first question here. I have no idea if this question is too open, so please reformulate if so. I'm more asking for some good links shedding some light on the general differences in game theory/structure between 2D and 3D.

While I've not seen serious work on it... I have played trek-style 3d chess

Take the pawn. In 2d, it has one move option. in 3d, given the start locations, it has 2, sometime 3, options Twice that many "covered" squares it can attack to.

The 3D has several effects:

increasing piece movement options
different board shape reduces flat move options for many pieces
perception of good versus bad moves is more difficult
occasional adjustment of board results in different dynamic (small boards are mobile)

this al means a direct comparison is difficult as the needed strategies change.

3D tic tac toe, however, merely gets more move options - the same strategies apply.
 So it varies by how the 3D is done.


Creating an "Everyone but me knows my role" mechanic I am trying to design a game where there are X citizens + 1 saboteur.  Unfortunately for the saboteur he does not know that he is it.  All the citizens know that one of them is replaced, and they all have a "guess" as to who the saboteur is, but they can't be sure if their guess is correct of if they are themself the saboteur.

I want every person to know that it is either a specific player or themselves. Everyone's "guess" for the saboteur is correct, except for the saboteur, whose guess is another player at random.

My initial thought was to deal out role cards, and have everyone reveal their cards to everyone else but not look at their own card.  This unfortunately does not work.  The saboteur would just not see any saboteur cards and know he is it.

Is there any way to set this up without using a moderator?

Working Solution:

For n players, you need two identical decks of cards, each with cards numbered 1 to n-1. Keep the first deck ordered from 1 at the bottom, to n-1 at the top, and add a random card from the second deck to the top of the first deck. Set the rest of the second deck aside. Each player will get a single card from the first deck, telling them the relative position of the (alleged) saboteur. For example, if you get a 2 that means the saboteur is the 2nd person to your left (or yourself). Because the cards are ordered, all the cards from the first deck will point to the same person. The one card from the other deck points to another player at random.

To distribute the cards, the order must be maintained but the starting point can be anywhere in the deck. So, the deck is "shuffled" by repeatedly cutting it, which preserves the order but randomizes the start. If the cards are dealt clockwise (to the left), then the relative positions will be also be clockwise.

Characteristics:
Everyone has equal probability of being the saboteur, and the civilian the saboteur is mistakenly suspicious of is chosen with equal probability. Equipment is relatively simple, you only need 2*(n-1) cards where n is the maximum number of players. Two decks of playing cards with the same backs could be used in a pinch. (With a bit of preparation, a single deck could be used. Separate out A through n-1 in two suits, and pick one of each rank at random to separate the two "decks".) The only drawback I see is that mis-shuffling will mess things up, but if players are careful it shouldn't be a problem.

For a worked example of this scheme see TTTPPP's answer.

I'll save my previous solution attempts below, none work completely as the one above does.

Almost Solution: Lots of ranked cards

Have many more uniquely ranked cards than players, e.g. cards numbered 1 to 100. Every player is dealt one card, and whoever has the lowest number is the saboteur. Players reveal their cards, as you suggest, to everyone but themselves (maybe Indian Poker-style, card on forehead). It generalizes: need more than one saboteur? Use the two lowest cards. Need a unknowing "citizen leader"? Whoever has the highest card.

You could even do it with a regular deck of playing cards. Just determine a rank order (make sure everyone knows if Aces are high or low) and a suit order to breaks ties in rank (such as Clubs, Spades, Hearts, Diamonds, as in Sheepshead--which is where I got this idea).

Pros:
Everyone has a guess to who the saboteur is. Everyone except the saboteur is right about their guess. It can be implemented with standard supplies.

Cons:
The non-saboteurs can't be 100% sure that they aren't the saboteur--but I really don't see a way around this. It requires a large number of cards that probably won't have another use in the game. During the reveal, there's a danger of people accidentally giving it away by asking questions clarifying the ranking of cards/staring/asking another player to confirm who they think the saboteur is.

It also enables people to make some educated guesses--if no one else has a particularly low card, you might get suspicious that you're the saboteur. My guess is people will overthink this and it will actually throw people off more often than it will give a good hint, which might end up making things more exciting.

Other Brainstorming: Cards numbered from 1 to n+1

This has a slightly different result, but it might be on to something so I'm recording it here in case it inspires someone else: If you have n players, have n+1 cards labeled from 1 to n+1. Deal each player one card, with the remaining card remaining hidden (call it the hole card). The saboteur is whoever holds the card one above the hole card, with the 1 card considered one above the n+1 card. As above, everyone reveals their card to all but themselves. Let's say we have n=5 players, so 6 cards, and the 3 card is the hole card. The two people adjacent to the hole card (including the saboteur, who is 1 above the hole card) see a "big hole", so they know that their card is either 1 above or 1 below the hole card, so they know they have a 50% probability of being the saboteur, and that whoever is above the big hole is the only other possibility. The people who are not adjacent the hole card see two small holes, so they can also narrow the saboteur down to two possibilities, but they know for sure that they themselves are not the saboteur.


What do I need to consider when creating a new card game variant? I came up with a card game variant, combining Texas Hold 'Em and Cribbage, with a friend.  You basically follow Hold 'Em play mechanics, and the best hand at showdown is the 5 card hand (2 hole cards + 3 board cards) with the highest cribbage score (counting runs, pairs, 15s, and 1 point for having any Jack.  4 and 5 flushes are allowed if both hole cards are used).

I ran several Monte Carlo simulations and there are definitely advantages to certain starting hands.

So, the questions:

What else do I need to think about/test to call this game final?
How can I determine the optimal betting structure, one that promotes skill over luck (limit/no limit/pot limit)?
How can I best share my game with people who will play it?

I'll try to answer the two first questions :

What else do I need to think about/test to call this game final?

Try to keep it simple. The more complicated your rules are, the less entertaining it will be. Remember this famous phrase about poker : "It takes five minutes to learn, but a lifetime to master."

Generally this can be applied to every popular board and card game. Introducing too many variables will also confuse the players, who will find it harder to think about the current hand.

Don't give too much informations. If there are too many cards shown (like in 5-stud) the strategy will be easy, and boring. But if there are not enough cards shown (like in 5-draw) then there is no real strategy at all. Visible cards are not the only source of informations, there is also the number of common/private cards, the number of betting rounds, ... Texas Hold'em became popular because it achieves a very good balance here.

How can I determine the optimal betting structure, one that promotes skill over luck (limit/no limit/pot limit)?

Just try them all. But I don't think you have to choose now. Your players will choose it for you, and the optimal betting structure will become the popular one. Think about Omaha, which was first played in no-limit. Now almost everyone plays Omaha in pot-limit, because there is a better skill/luck balance.


Can the owner of the largest army move the robber every turn? Someone told me that in catan the possessor of the largest army card can move the knight each time it is their turn.  Is this a common house or tournament rule?  I could find no such statement in the rule book.

This is not an official rule; that is why you didn't find it in the rule book.

The reason this isn't a rule is because it would detrimental to the game experience. The player with the 'largest army' has already moved the Robber at least three times and has 2 victory points. Giving the player the power to move the Robber each turn, without a roll or playing a Knight card, allows them to squash the efforts of the other players.

Thusly empowered, the player with the Largest Army could 'attack' the other players who are trying to gather resources. It would be hard to build the Longest Road, or upgrade their villages to Cities for Victory points, the robber keeps shutting down the resource tile you're depending on. From here, the optimal strategy would be to create and maintain the Largest Army, than hold down your opponents while racing for the other eight Victory Points.


Do face-down creatures with death trigger activate normally? If a face-down creature has a "When this dies [...]" effect (i.e. because of Ixidron), will that effect activate when it dies?

Short answer: Yes, if it had one, but the creature lost that ability when it was turned face-down.

"When this dies" is a leaves-the-battlefield ability [603.6c], and leaves-the-battlefield abilities trigger based on their existence, and the appearance of objects, prior to the event rather than afterward [603.3d].

So it doesn't matter what abilities the creature would have if it was face-up or will have in the graveyard; all that matters is what ability it actually does have. Only leaves-the-battlefield abilities the face-down creature has just prior to dying will trigger when it dies. Normally, that wouldn't be any, but some cards (such as  Cauldron Haze) could grant them some.


Is the total damage dealt from a source effectively parceled out across any number of assets? When damage (or horror) is dealt, do I effectively take those N units of damage and get to spread them out however I like as long as the distribution doesn't exceed the remaining health for any particular asset?

This is detailed in the Rules Reference Guide (relevant section below, from page 7 under "Dealing Damage/Horror"), but the short answer is that damage is allocated in two steps - first it is assigned and then it is applied. The only restriction for assigning damage is that you cannot overload it (so if you have an ally who can take 1 sanity and 1 damage, you cannot put a 3 sanity tokens on it).
But yes, otherwise, damage or horror can be split among your investigator and any assets as you deem fit.

When an investigator or enemy is dealt damage and/or horror,
follow these steps, in order:

Assign Damage/Horror: Determine the amount of damage and/or horror being dealt. Place damage and/or horror tokens equal to the amount of
damage and horror being dealt next to the cards that will be taking
the damage/horror.
Apply Damage/Horror: Any assigned damage/ horror that has not been prevented is now placed on each card to which it has been assigned,
simultaneously. If no damage/horror is applied in this step, no
damage/horror has been successfully dealt.


Does Femme Fatale target exactly 1 ice, or all with same name? If the corp has multiple copies of the same ice, Wall of Static for example, and the runner plays Femme Fatale and chooses a Wall of Static for its special ability, does that mean the runner can use Femme on all Ice named "Wall of Static", or just the one specific piece of ice that they chose?

It's just the one. When a card in Android: Netrunner is referring to multiple cards of the same name, it'll refer to them as copies, e.g. Copycat. There are also other examples.


Giving an Exploding Kitten to another player's hand through Barking Kitten Barking Kitten allows me to give cards of my own hand to another player's hand after they chose half of their own cards to give to me. Holding a Streaking Kitten together with an Exploding Kitten in my hand, this would allow me to give the other player an Exploding Kitten into their hand that would explode directly.
In the case that I was the one to successfully play Barking Kitten (either having both of the Barking Kittens or playing it while another player holds the second Barking Kitten card) I guess it is correct to say that the Exploding Kitten given to another player needs to explode.
My question is what happens if another player plays Barking Kitten(s) successfully against me while I'm holding a Streaking Kitten and an Exploding in my hand, and I give him/her my Exploding Kitten. The rules of Barking Kitten says that the player using its effect can choose which cards of the other player they want to add to their hand. Does the other player have to defuse my Exploding Kitten that he got from me, or can he directly give it back to me without adding it to his hand?

The Barking Kitten FAQ states:

must give you half their cards (rounding up). Combine them with your hand, then choose and return the same number of cards back

Whereas Streaking Kitten says:

If another player steals or receives an Exploding Kitten from your hand, they explode. They must defuse it or lose the game.

I'd interpret this as the Exploding Kitten being received from your hand, which is anyway illegal without holding a Streaking Kitten. Therefore I'd say the receiving player must Defuse the Exploding Kitten before completing the "combine them with your hand" part and moving on as usual.


Which city is the one being searched for the virologist? Question in spoiler tags below

    In July, searches are introduced. The Search for the Virologist indicates that if there is a quarantine marker in the city you are searching, advance the search party one additional space. Elsewhere on the card, though, when instructing how many spaces to advance, it refers to "your city". Is the city you are in the one you are searching, or is the city on the card you discarded the one you are searching?

The actual text of the card can be seen in this image

Relevant text copied below as well

   Take the search action if you are in a faded city with a research station
 Advance 1 space for each card you discard matching the color of your city
 If there is a quarantine marker in the city you are searching, advance the search party 1 additional space per search action.

Frankly, I don't see how you could entertain the second interpretation at all! From this picture: https://boardgamegeek.com/article/20687079#20687079

  ADVANCE 3 SPACES IF YOU DISCARD THE CARD MATCHING YOUR CITY

There is clearly a distinction between the [city listed on the] discarded card and the city where the active player's pawn is located. Furthermore, since you are able to discard multiple cards, it doesn't make any sense that the cities on those cards would be "yours".

"Your city" is the city where you are.


Why are there multiple version of Magic The Gathering Game on Steam? I'm new to this famous card game. I searched it on steam and found multiple version e.g. 2012, 2015, etc
I'm planing on purchasing this online version of the game to see it but I got curious. Does the game has a new version as an entire new game every year? If so do I have to purchase the 2016 version next year to stay up to date?
Thanks

You appear to be talking about Duel of the Planeswalkers, a game based on M:TG where you start with a number of decks and you unlock cards to add to those as you progress in the game. There were different versions for the past few years. Each version had new decks and features. You can compare it to several sport games (NBA 2k15, WWE 2k15), they all get newer and sometimes better versions each year.

You can, however, keep using the older versions. But newer versions contain newer (and sometimes more) cards, new enemies, new battle types etc.

There is also Magic: Online, a true digital equivalent of Magic: The Gathering. This is a version which stays up to date with newer cards, but can be more expensive than the DotP versions you can buy (eg) in Steam. In MTGO, you create your own collection and play against other players, not against AI opponents.


How should DJ Fenris be played? I can't catch how DJ Fenris should be played in terms of the game rules? I just bring all 13 g-mod ids, put them somewhere on the table and choose one of them when the Fenris is installed? Or this ids should be part of the deck?

You can't have ID cards in your deck;
so any ID hosted on DJ Fenris is not part of your deck, it's similar to Rebirth in that regard.

You don't have to bring all eligible IDs, only ones you ever plan to use.
You also don't have to show which additional IDs you have to your opponent until you actually play Rebirth or DJ.

You are still limited by the IDs legal in the format you're playing,
so for Standard; Noise and other rotated runners as well as draft IDs are out.
Your faction will limit choices too.


What happens when a 5/5 blocks a 6/4? I was playing MTG with my friend. I attacked with a 6/4 and he blocked with a 5/5. He says my 6/4 should die because its toughness is less than its block even though my creatures attack (a 6) is bigger than his creatures toughness (5).

Unless one of those creatures has First Strike or Double Strike, they will deal combat damage simultaneously. The following will happen:

Your 6/4 will deal 6 damage to your opponent's 5/5. (Note that 6 ≥ 5.)
At the same time, your opponent's 5/5 will deal 5 damage to your 6/4. (Note that 5 ≥ 4.)
State based actions kick in, see that both creatures have damage greater than or equal to their toughness, and both creatures die.


Can Charon move the opponent whatever the height? Charon allows you to move an adjacent opponent to the space directly opposed (using your builder as mirror point), before moving.

While playing Charon :

Can I move the opponent accross different heights ? (for example, he's on a height2 space, I move him to the ground - It's a legit move usually)
Can I move the opponent on a space he should not be able to move directly from the space he's in ? (from ground to height2 for example - not a legit move usually)

Looking at rules here its seems to be absolutely fine regardless of levels.

Full rules for Charon are :-

  Before your Worker moves, you may force a neighboring opponent Worker to the space directly on the other side of your Worker, if that space is unoccupied.

Note it does not say you are 'moving' your opponents worker.  It's 'forcing' them.   To me this would imply that usual movement rules do not apply so its possible to jump from ground level up 2.  Also the word 'move' is used in several other gods powers but not Charon.

The rules are also have a link to explaining each power in detail.  The Video for Charon also specifies that it is 'forced' and in the video example shows the forced worker being raised two levels.


Can anyone help my identify this card game It's a game about capitalism and I cannot remember it's name for the life of me

The card game Pit had a version that was released under the name "Billionaire" circa 1984, which is where your card comes from. This image contains the full set of cards including the one you showed.


Can Pawn Sacrifice deal 6 damage to a single creature? If my opponent plays Pawn Sacrifice while he and I each have one creature, mine being power 5, first he sacrifices his creature, then he deals 3 damage to mine. Does the second instance of damage also go to my creature, or does it fizzle because "each" implies 2 different targets?

No, it cannot deal 6 damage to a single creature. Here's the response from Brad Andres (developer at FFG):

  The second instance of damage does indeed “fizzle” because pawn
  sacrifice indicates with the “each to 2 creatures” phrase that you
  must choose 2 creatures and not the same creature twice. Hope that
  helps!


Survival of the Fittest Please clarify I am playing Survival of the Fittest properly.

Two of the bases in play both have two creatures on them, one is strength 3 and one is strength 2. I play Survival of the Fittest and both strength 2 creatures are destroyed.

You are correct.

The card text :

  Destroy the lowest-power minion(you choose in case of a tie) on each
  base with higher-power minion.

So the Lowest minion (even yours) on each base with a higher minion (from anyone) die.


Do players have to discard when a Knight card is played? In Settlers of Catan, when a player plays a Knight card ("Solider" card in older editions), do players with 8 cards or more in their hand have to forfeit half their hand to the bank?

This is causing a huge row in our family as I think that this forfeit rule only applies to rolling a seven and not to playing a Knight card.

No, you don't lose half your hand if a knight card is played.
The rules for 'rolling a 7 and activating the Robber' state

every player who was more than 7 Resource Cards must select half (rounded down) of his Resource Cards and return them to the bank.
The you must move the robber Proceed as follows.....

then steps 1 and 2 are stated for stealing a resource.
The rules for a solider cards state

you must immediately move the robber.  See activating the robber and and follow steps 1 and 2

It does not state everyone loses cards if they have 8 or more.
To clarify the rules for losing cards if you have more than 8 are only triggered for rolling a 7 and in no other way.


When should I add life gain cards to my deck in MTG? One common mistake in MTG is to overvalue life-gain cards (at least in 2 player games) because they don't do anything to actually help you WIN the game, and only make you lose slower. This makes them seem like the kind of card that's good in any deck, but not great in any either.

But are there any decks where cards whose primary purpose is life gain really shine? In what type of decks are they significantly better or worse than other types of cards? What combos or strategies upgrade them from average cards to truly great ones? How can I tell if I should add some life gain cards to my deck?

Have you ever seen any of the decks that were popular a few years ago circa Coldsnap, that centred around the Martyr of Sands/Proclamation of Rebirth engine?  If you're going to gain a lot of life, then a combo that can realistically get you 10-20 life every turn is what you need to be looking at.  A lot of decks - any deck that wants to win by beating down with creatures and burn spells - have no defence against such a strategy.  (Of course, not all decks are like this.  You'll need to have a different route to victory against other combo decks.)

Here's a sample budget Martyr list that I found on the official Wizards site, in an article from 2009:

  4 Adarkar Wastes, 7 Island, 10 Plains

  4 Martyr of Sands, 3 Ranger of Eos

  4 Muddle the Mixture, 2 Proclamation of Rebirth, 4 Thopter Foundry, 4
  Sword of the Meek, 4 Thirst for Knowledge, 4 Condemn, 1 Journey to
  Nowhere, 1 Ghostly Prison, 4 Path to Exile, 4 Fieldmist Borderpost

Lifegain is a good strategy to consider in any environment where fast red decks are dominant - and this is not actually that uncommon, given that fast red decks tend to be a cheaper option in Magic terms.  If rival decks are happy to spend a card and one red mana to aim a Lightning Bolt at your dome, you will be very happy with anything that efficiently gains life against them, as this efficiently undercuts their strategy and makes it very difficult for them to win.  Just be sure that your lifegain kicks in pretty quickly, as left to their own devices many red decks can easily deal you 20 points of damage by turn 4...


How does Valakut trigger with a card like Harrow or Scapeshift putting multiple mountains into play? Valakut, The Molten Pinnacle has an effect that triggers when mountains enter the battlefield.

  When a mountain enters the battlefield, if you control 5 or more other mountains, Valakut deals 3 damage to target creature or player.

If a player has for example 4 mountains and 3 forests in play, and casts a spell such as Harrow, sacrificing a forest to fetch 2 mountains, bringing the total count up to 6, does Valakut trigger?

How does this work with a card like Scapeshift, which would allow you to sacrifice all of your lands and fetch a valakut and 6 mountains?

Valakut, The molten Pinaccle's trigger uses an "intervening if" clause to control the trigger. this means that the condition of triggering is checked both when the trigger condition is met (when a mountain is played, check if there are 5 other mountains) and when the trigger resolves (if there are still 5 other mountains when the trigger resolves, nothing happens)

If at either point there are not 5 other mountains in play, then the trigger does nothing. this gives opponents an opportunity to destroy some of your mountains to prevent the trigger from dealing them any damage.

With regard to the actual question, in the situation where multiple lands are put onto the battlefield at once - 2 by harrow, and as many as are sacrificed in scapeshift - the situation is always resolved in the same way.

All the mountains finish entering the battlefield before any of the mountains have an opportunity to "trigger" valakut's ability. When the mountain enters the battlefield as part of a spell, valakut "remembers" to trigger its ability the next time a player would get priority, after state based actions are checked. by this point, all of the other mountains (and all of the other triggers) are also on the battlefield and queued up ready to trigger.

This means that when you put any number of mountains onto the battlefield at once through a spell or ability, as long as there are 5 other mountains on the battlefield when you are finished, all mountains put onto the battlefield that way will trigger valakut's ability and deal 3 damage.

in the specific examples,
Harrow will put 2 mountains onto the battlefield as it resolves, when the valakut triggers are checked each mountain's trigger acknowledges there are 5 other mountains and is put onto the stack (and targets for each are chosen). When they come to resolve, providing there are still 5 other mountains left on the battlefield, they will deal damage to the chosen targets totalling 6 damage in 2 triggers.

Scapeshift sacrificing 7 lands to find 1 Valakut and 6 mountains - in this situation all 6 mountains and Valakut enter at the same time, but the resolution is still the same, each mountain waits to trigger Valakut the next time a player would get priority, sees 5 other mountains on the battlefield at that point, and thus 6 triggers are put onto the stack. These 6 triggers then resolve, and providing there are still 5 other mountains, they all resolve and deal damage to their targets, totalling 18 damage in 6 triggers.


Where online can I post my (free) rules and materials for games I've created? I'm looking for websites that specialize in providing rules and digital resources for card/board games online. Recently I've been creating lots of simple games for my design classes and I would like to post my work online for others to play (or ignore if they so choose). To be clear I'm not looking for a place to sell games nor am I looking to create an online computer version of the game. I simply want to post the rules and materials online where someone who is interested in indie games can find them.

I'd say the first place that jumps to mind for me is boardgamegeek.com

This forum seems like an appropriate place to post your rules and materials:
http://boardgamegeek.com/forum/26/boardgamegeek/board-game-design

You might consider setting up a tumblr or some other website you control and link the materials and information in the forum.


When does Adam choose and install Directives? Adam's ID ability is, "You start the game with 3 different directive cards installed (these cards are not considered part of your deck)." Now (since Escalation) that there are more than 3 options for Directives to install, when does the Runner choose which ones to use, especially in a tournament situation? Must it be consistent between games? Can it be done after seeing the Corp ID?

Android: Netrunner lead designer Damon Stone has confirmed on Twitter that Adam's directives are chosen and revealed after players' IDs are revealed.


Can Strionic Resonator re-direct Ulamog, The Ceaseless Hunger's exile ability? Let's say I have 15 copies of Strionic Resonator for a total of 16 triggers and I attack with Ulamog, the Ceaseless Hunger and copy its triggered ability to exile 20 cards from the top of defending players deck. Can I choose a different player or players to exile from or does it have to be defending player's deck?

You cannot choose any other player than the defending player. Ulamog, the Ceaseless Hunger says:

  Whenever Ulamog, the Ceaseless Hunger attacks, defending player exiles the top twenty cards of their library.

As you can see, there is no word 'target' in the ability. That means that when copied with Strionic Resonator, it doesn't allow you to choose another player.

The number of Strionic Resonators is irrelevant in this case. The ability works the same. You get more triggers though.


What happens if you are unable to draw because your library is empty? In Magic the Gathering, what happens to a player if they get their draw phase, but are unable to draw a card because their library is empty?

They lose the game.

120.4. A player who attempts to draw a card from a library with no cards in it loses the game the next time a player would receive priority.
104.3c If a player is required to draw more cards than are left in his or her library, he or she draws the remaining cards, and then loses the game the next time a player would receive priority.
704.5b If a player attempted to draw a card from a library with no cards in it since the last time state-based actions were checked, he or she loses the game.


After I finish my match in a draft, is it okay to observe other matches? In a draft or sealed event I often finish my match before everyone else in the event is done with theirs. Is it impolite to walk around and observe the matches still in progress, given that I may be playing against these decks in future matches and may gain insight into what cards they are playing?

I often see others doing this, but I usually refrain because it seems to be bad manners. However, I've never seen anyone get upset about this behavior.

It is perfectly acceptable to observe other matches.

If you are not currently playing, and you are not a judge, then you are a spectator by definition. There are a few rules governing spectators mentioned in the Tournament Rules.

Players may request (via a judge) that you not observe their matches. You may not make notes while drafting. You may not place bets on any portion of the game. You may not provide assistance to players in a match.

You are allowed to collect and share information in order to gain an advantage. This is called scouting. Some people dislike this behavior, but it is legal nonetheless.

Finally, I want to note that at Regular REL (which includes Friday Night Magic) the "continuous construction" option is allowed unless the tournament organizer explicitly says otherwise. This means that you can sideboard between matches. This rewards scouting. However, it also makes the game more fun for newbies who may want to improve their deck as the evening goes on. Talk to your tournament organizer and explain the upsides and downsides. Help them make an informed decision.


Can I select which ability to use on my second card after using the first card? Say I pick the two ability cards for my turn in Gloomhaven. One of them has an attack action on top and the other card has an attack action on the bottom. I'd like to perform the top action first and there's a chance it will kill the monster I'm targetting, but this could still be prevented by the ability modifier deck.

Is it possible for me to use the bottom ability conditionally? To use it as an attack action if my first action doesn't kill the monster, but use it as the standard Move 2 action if it does kill the monster?

I had a look at the rule book (p 18) to see if it would be of any help, but couldn't find anything addressing this situation:

  On a character’s turn, he or she will perform the top action of one of the two ability cards played and the
  bottom action of the other. The leading card designation used to determine initiative is no longer significant.
  Either card can be played first for its top or bottom action. When playing a card’s action, the abilities of the
  action must be done in the order written and can’t be interrupted by the action on the other card. As soon
  as the action of a card is completed, it is immediately placed in the appropriate area (discard pile, lost pile, or
  active area) before anything else happens. Players are typically free to choose not to perform any part of the
  action on their card, however, they must perform any part that will cause a negative effect (e.g., reduce hit
  points, lose cards, or cause a negative condition) on themselves or their allies.

The next section on the Move 2 and Attack 2 actions isn't much help either:

  Players can also use any card they play as an “Attack 2” action
  on the top half or a “Move 2” action on the bottom. If a card is
  used this way, it is always discarded, regardless of what is printed
  on the card. On their turn, before, during, or after performing
  their two actions, players can use any number of items they have
  equipped.

Is there any more information clarifying this?

Yes, I believe you can believe you can choose to use Move 2 instead of the attack on the bottom half.

Like you I've struggled to find anything explicit to state this but I'm going back it up by things the rules don't say.

Firstly players reveal cards for initiative.  There is nothing here about stating what card abilities you will you.  I've have experience of planning to use two actions but by the time my turn came around it was more beneficial to use the opposition actions of what I originally planned.

Then on your turn, you will then choose to play the top or bottom half of one card in either order.   Again the rules are clear here this can be the printed ability or attack 2 / move 2.  You will then play the opposite side of the other.  Again this could be attack 2 / move 2.

What is important here is the rules is the following,

  Either card can be played first for its top or bottom action.

and

  As soon as the action of a card is completed, it is immediately placed in the appropriate area.

also

  When playing a card’s action,

So you completely resolve one card, and then the other.

The rules DO NOT SAY you must declare what actions you are doing on both cards at the start of your turn.  They infer you only decide what action to take (either the printed ability or the attack 2 / move 2) 'when playing' that card.

So say you choose the top half of one card "when playing" that cards action you can chose if you use printed ability or Attack 2.  You then move that card to the appropriate discard area.

Then you activate the bottom half or the 2nd card so 'When playing' that card you can again choose if you printed ability or Move 2.

How you ask is certainly how I've played it.  If the top half attack kills a monster then using the bottom half for move 2 instead of the originally planned attack is probably a sensible thing to do.


Can I tap a card after I assign it to block? During the combat phase, after I assign a blocker, can I then tap that blocker for its activated ability? What would happen? For example, say that a 1/1 Saproling token equipped with Healer's Headress is assigned to block an attacking 3/1 Blade of the Sixth Pride, but after it's assigned, the Saproling is tapped to prevent one damage to it. Is that legal? Would anything change if the attacking creature had first strike, like Ambush Party?

During the combat phase, after I assign a blocker, can I then tap that blocker for its activated ability?

Yes.  Blockers only need to be untapped when they're actually declared as blockers; after that, tapping & untapping have no effect on blocking or any other parts of combat.

  506.4b Tapping or untapping a creature that’s already been declared as an attacker or blocker doesn’t remove it from combat and doesn’t prevent its combat damage.

  What would happen?

The activated ability would go on the stack, like normal.

  For example, say that a 1/1 Saproling token equipped with Healer's Headress is assigned to block an attacking 3/1 Blade of the Sixth Pride, but after it's assigned, the Saproling is tapped to prevent one damage to it. Is that legal?

Yes.

  Would anything change if the attacking creature had first strike, like Ambush Party?

No.


Monopoly - Community chest paying for houses On community chest card, I was told to pay 400 per each house I own due to insurance price hike.
I owned 12 houses, so this adds up to 4800.

Now - as I didn't have enough money, I mortgaged some other properties, and sold 3 houses back to the bank (leaving me with 9 houses).
Do I still have to pay 4800 for 12 houses, or is it only 3600 now as I only own 9 houses now?
Bit silly paying insurance price hike for houses I don't own anymore.
Any thoughts?

You can sell property to raise the amount that needs to be paid. The amount was 4800.

Think of it as paying in arrears


What Crazy Bridge Bidding Systems Actually Work In Practice? There's been a lot of talk about bridge bidding in these parts lately.  A lot of people like to play "straight down the line", to the point where they're mortally offended when you suggest something "risky" but actually fairly commonplace, like a weak no trump, falsecarding, or even (apparently!) pre-emptive bidding.

My question is, is it wise to cleave very closely to a standard systems of bidding, that have been refined through the ages and proven themselves time and again?  Or is it well worth it to introduce a bit of craziness into the mix, in the hopes of bamboozling opponents who may be too set in their ways?  It seems obvious to me that putting opponents in situations they haven't encountered millions of times before in the course of playing against standard systems might be a good way of gaining an advantage over them.

If odd bidding systems are a good idea, then what examples of them can you give, and how did they confer an advantage?  I have a couple of anecdotes of my own, but I'll provide them as an answer...

Always Play The Nine

The great and not a little anarchic British player Zia Mahmood - and correct me if any of this is wrong, as I'm recounting it from hazy memories - was once saddled with a partner who wasn't the greatest.  After trying and failing to get her to understand the basics of leads and so forth, he finally gave up, and invented a new system.  If she had a nine, she should always play it.  Apparently a middle-of-the-pack lead like this was much less likely to instantly compromise the contract than various of the other options.  Zia's partner was pretty happy to have so many fewer confusing options to deal with, and apparently they were able to do a lot better at the Bridge table for the rest of the evening!

Strong Pass System

I can't claim to be as interesting and funny as Zia Mahmood, but once, a slightly insane friend of mine and I cooked up a strong pass system and played it online.  Sitting in first seat, a pass meant a huge whack of points and was incredibly forcing... all other bids were an increasingly elaborate attempt to build on that.  Yes, it would have all fallen apart if we'd told our hapless opponents what we were playing, but as a one-off joke it was wonderful.  Our crowning glory was managing to go down just a couple of tricks undoubled against a partnership who had 30 points between them - in first and third seats our repeated aggressive bidding (signifying of course that we had nothing at all) completely impeded any ability they had to take control of the bidding, and then their defence was deeply confused by the fact they thought we had completely different hands to the actual truth, at every turn!  I still feel a bit guilty that at the end of that game our opponents congratulated us for some of the most amazing play they'd ever seen at the Bridge table... we were being so naughty, and they were so nice!


Online Scrabble Handicaps I manage a scrabble group online, the ELO is set by Mattel but that is not a handicap just a grading Mattel gives.

In my group we run a weekly League , Monthly Lottery type game (who you play is based on numbers drawn) Tournaments for three different sections of the group and numerous friendlies. The group is holding at 80 members with ELO from 950 up to 2200. To make it fair and so that the big ELO are not always smashing the little players I have tried to devise a handicap based on the ELO but its causing problems because the bigger end are now losing games because of the handicap but are still winning the Mattel game which is increasing the ELO further. I attach what I have tried to use but can anyone suggest a tweak of the upper levels that are fair to the player but still give the little man a chance to win?. Thank you

You can record your matches - including handicaps, so that the winner is the winner - on our platform rankade. It's a free ranking system for sports and games, suitable for Chess, Go, Scrabble, and more. Rankade doesn't use Elo, but its algorithm (called ree algorithm), although more complex (here's a comparison), is similar to Elo if you play 1-on-1 matches only.