Why isn't MU shown on Runner identities? The fact that Runners have a default 4 memory units is absent from all printed data, and I'm curious if there's a specific design reason why. I can see how, thematically, the MU is not really a Runner trait, and that it's really more of a hardware thing to increase their memory slots. But Chaos Theory, for example, has +1 MU. Why not have her with a printed 5 MU?

Without answering for the designers, I'd say that it's simply because the Runner's MU is a basic game rule. It's not something that typically changes with Runners, but it's a resource to use.

Similarly, the Runner identities don't tell you how many cards are in your starting hand, or how much money you start with, but that doesn't prevent there from being a Runner identity that does these things differently.

Because, in most cases, the Runner identity doesn't play around with MU (compare to Link; most Runners have 0 but a lot have 1), it's just not useful to spend card space and player attention on the Runner's starting MU. It would be more distracting to see starting MU on the card, as if it were an important factor in how the Runner works, even though [almost] all of them are identical in that regard.


What happens when a card with undying dies that has a +1/+1 counter put on it by something other that undying? For example, I have a Howlgeist that I enchanted with Oath of Ancient Wood so it has a +1/+1 counter on it, when it dies does it not come back because of the +1/+1 counter even though it wasn't put there by Undying?

Undying doesn't care how the +1/+1 counter got there. Undying won't trigger.

Conversely, if Undying previously placed a +1/+1 counter on a permanent, but the counter got removed somehow before the permanent died a second time, Undying will trigger and bring the card back a second time.


Ambuscade Shaman + Warstorm Surge Say you have Ambuscade Shaman and Warstorm Surge out on the battlefield and you cast a 1/1 creature. Does it deal 1 damage or 3?

1 damage or 3, it's up to you

Both Ambuscade Shaman and Warstorm Surge trigger at the same time, when your 1/1 creature enters the battlefield. Since you control both, you get to decide what order they're put on the stack.

If you put Ambuscade Shaman's trigger on the stack first, then Warstorm Surge's trigger on top, then the damage trigger will resolve first and deal 1 damage to target creature or player. Then, Shaman's trigger will resolve giving the creature +2/+2 until end of turn.

If you put Warstorm Surge's trigger down first, then Shaman's trigger will resolve first, giving the creature +2/+2 until end of turn, and then Surge's trigger will resolve, dealing 3 damage to target creature in player.

Suffice to say, it's likely that you want the second scenario to occur most of the time.


Sacrifice enablers for EDH I'm building my first EDH deck and have chosen Thraximundar (Grixis) as my general.

My deck has a lot of synergy centered around sacrificing creatures.  I find it easy to benefit from sacrificing and have plenty of targets for sacrificing but I need more ways of enabling the sacrifice triggers.

So far I have Viscera Seer, not much to go on.

There are tons of options:

Attrition or Blood Rites, while requiring to pay mana, would kill your opponents creatures (or the opponent himself in the case of the rites). If you need something that doesn't require mana to activate you could try Bloodthrone Vampire, Carrion Feeder or Devouring Swarm.

Hell's Caretaker can be an interesting choice, because it gets creatures back when sacrificing others, but can be activated only once per turn.

Lyzolda, the Blood Witch can be sweet, drawing you cards when sacrificing black creatures or dealing damage when sacrificing red ones.

There are lots more, here you have Magiccards search of creatures that have an activated ability which requires to sacrifice a creature and are black, blue or red.


The extension is meant to attack the upper white group.

Looking at the whole board, the only solid territory black has is the upper right corner (the left side is open at the top and has an overlong extension at the bottom for territory-making purposes. The position is strong, which means it's good for fighting but not so good at making territory). The white, on the other hand, has a small but solid territory and influences on two sides. If black captures, white gets to attach at M18 and settle the weak group, in which case the strong black formation on the left side would be devalued by the lack of anything to attack. In that case, my intuition tells me, black would be behind (over-concentrated top-left, top left corner wall against a living group, the extension on the left closer to the stronger group versus the perfectly reasonable spread for white). The white group on the right would be slightly vulnerable, but not to peeping at 1 (see diagram below. Heavy ko with white capturing first).

$$Bcm1 Counter-attack
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O O O X . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O X X X O . . O . X . . X . . . . |
$$ | . O X , . X . . . , . . . X . X X . . |
$$ | . O X . . . . . . O . X . O X 4 O . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . O 3 O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , O . . |
$$ | . . . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------

However, after black extension at 33, a white attachment at M18 can be ignored by black indefinitely. J16 in particular looks like a counter attack. If white J17, black H16; white is dead (I might be wrong on this):

$$Wcm1 Counter-attack
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O O O X . . . . . 1 . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O X X X O . 3 O . X . X X . . . . |
$$ | . O X , . X . 4 2 , . . . . O X X . . |
$$ | . O X . . . . . . . . X . O X . O . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . O . O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . O . . . . . , . . . . . , O . . |
$$ | . . . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ ---------------------------------------

Had black captured instead of extended, white gets the hane at N17, which significantly increases white's eyespace:

$$Wcm1 With capture, white has eyespace
$$ ---------------------------------------
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O O O X . . . . . 1 . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . O X X X O . 3 O . X 5 . X . . . . |
$$ | . O X , . X . 4 2 , . . . X . X X . . |
$$ | . O X . . . . . . . . X . O X . O . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . O . O . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
$$ | . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |

In summary, aji is extremely important when you are attacking.


Thunder Drake second spell of the turn If I play Thunder Drake as my first spell of the turn, then cast another spell, will it get a +1/+1 counter?

Yes, if Thunder Drake is the first spell you cast in a turn and then you cast another spell, that spell is the second spell you cast that turn, so Thunder Drake's ability triggers.
You're not supposed to think about it as though Thunder Drake is counting the spells, and only triggers on the second spell it sees you cast. Rather, it's simply a fact that whichever spell is the second one you cast that turn, independent of Thunder Drake.


Could Japan's and the US fleets meet on another battlefield than the North Pacific In Axis and Allies? In World War II, the US and Japanese navies battled it out in the north Pacific. That's understandable because Japan controlled the western edge, the US the eastern edge, and the ocean was the route from one to the other.

But maybe one or both of them of them could have benefited by employing their fleet and airpower elsewhere. And if "elsewhere" happened to be the same place, might they more logically meet at "that place"? And where might that be?

Japan can use its battleships to capture the Soviet Far East, Australia, and other places. Its aircraft might do better service against Chinese armies than American ships. Soon they could all head for India, then to Africa to support the Germans.

Maybe the U.S. would prefer to take on the Japanese fleet in a war of "mutually assured destruction" in the north Pacific (particularly if the Japanese player is better than the German). That actually happened. But it might have delayed the invasion of Normandy by a year (four turns).

Perhaps the US battle fleet should support Allied operations in the Mediterranean or Europe instead. And maybe that would lead to a direct clash with the Japanese fleet trying to do the opposite.

Would you rather fight the opposing fleet in the north Pacific, around Africa, or at another locale of your choice as Japan? The US?

If you're playing Japan and want to meet American on a field other than the mid-Pacific, the first step is having a fleet, and the easiest way to keep you fleet is to stay away from Pearl Harbor.

As Japan, I rarely attack Pearl Harbor. Many seem to consider this sacrilege; however, I've found this opens up options for me as Japan:

The best case, if Japan attacks Pearl, is that it wipes out the US fleet and doesn't lose much. That's obviously good, but even in this scenario, the opportunity cost is high: it requires the use of one if not two aircraft that could have been used in Asia--setting back Japan one if not two territories on the first turn. Having taken these territories would mean a few more IPCs, but more importantly can make the construction of Allied factories in mainland Asia very unattractive. Lastly, the power at Pearl can't be used to threaten India or to help take the Soviet Far East on turn 2. Japan's focus needs to be on mainland Asia, and they should only dabble elsewhere if they have units with nothing else to do. The navy, on turn 1, has better things to do than attack the US at Pearl.

Worst case, the US can get lucky and do a lot of damage to Japan's navy, or worse still, it could force a retreat and survive. If this happens Japan is in trouble. They are severely hampered in taking Asian coastal territories and the US can use it's fleet to threaten any transports built to ferry troops from the islands to Asia (practically forcing a factory-based strategy).

With no Pearl attack, Japan has a strong fleet and air force that can be used in Asia on turn 1, and that is left in position to attack anywhere on the coast on turn 2. The only downside is that I've left the American fleet intact. But is that really a downside? Consider what the US can do with it's intact Pacific fleet:

They can send it to the Atlantic, except the Atlantic is turns away; by the time it arrives the US and UK will already have a fleet to big to be attacked by Germany. The battleship isn't even useful in amphibious assaults unless France is being attacked, which is idiotic as long as there are too few ships to send armor (air power is at risk from AA guns and from not being able to retreat and should only be used in France when it can be taken with little risk). As Japan, this strategy does not have me shaking in my boots, and as Germany I'm shaking either way.
They can keep it moored. If they don't move it, then it's not a threat. It's like the fleet was destroyed, except that I didn't have to risk my fleet to do it.
They can move it towards Japan, except that my fleet will be consolidated, and is bigger, and is on defense. Plus, because of the distance I'll have one-turn of warning and can just buy a sub or two to turn the odds even more in my favor. Direct attack is stupid for America to try.
They can take it South to pick off islands. This is probably the most effective option, and one I sometimes use as the US when Japan doesn't Pearl me. The downside is that the US only has one Atlantic transport (and can't afford to let up on Germany to build more in that theater). So they can use the infantry from Wake and Hawaii and the one-shot on the battleship to try and pick off some islands. They might even take a few while Japan is too busy on the mainland to care much. But it takes turns to get into position, it is only a swing of a couple of IPCs, and then can be easily taken back by Japan in the mid-to-late-game. Plus, when that battleship doesn't hit it doesn't take much luck for the defender to knock out one of the two infantry, which can't be replaced because America is so far from home.

So assuming I've convinced you that Japan can forgo Pearl...

Once they have solid control of the coast, Japan's carrier, battleships and subs are no longer useful near the homeland, giving them lots of options for other places to take on the US:

Attack Alaska. The US typically puts very little there, so it can easily be taken by two battleships and two infantry. It can be done from the Japan sea zone so is often not anticipated, and if the US is using shuck-shuck, their forces are all in the Eastern US and Canada, where they can't immediately counter-attack (giving Japan time to reinforce or retreat). Shuck-shuck requires careful calibration of transport capacity and buys, so forcing the US to divert units to re-take Alaska messes with their mojo. It's only worth 2 IPCs per turn, but it really screws with America.
Take the British South Pacific. Also ripe for the taking are Australia and New Zealand. Slightly further away than Alaska and risky for the same reason that makes it hard for the US to take Indonesia: a couple good defensive rolls and Japan is out of infantry. However, Japan has the unique advantage near-by replacement infantry on the islands. The Australians and Kiwis are only worth a few IPCs per turn, but the UK has no feasible means of taking them back so it's a swing of 6 IPCs per turn for the rest of the game. It adds up.
Africa. Africa is closer to India that Japan often realizes, and a few troops there are often all that's necessary to help Germany hold on an extra turn or two--or better yet, it can force the Allies to skip a turn of reinforcing Finland and provide some breathing room for Germany in Europe.
We'll always have Rio. Typically I only do this after taking New Zealand, but only two moves away is Panama--the Alaska of the South. American tanks in Eastern US can't reach immediately and taking Panama disrupts the shuck-shuck. If Japan manages to save 3 IPCs they can waltz South through Columbia to take Brazil. They don't have to hold any of these territories, just mess with America. Plus, if they get really lucky, America will over-react and split their fleet to bring capital ships South to deal with Japan. But they have to take Panama first and if done too aggressively, this could leave the North Atlantic Allied transports under-defended enough for German attack. At this late point in the game it would be worth sacrificing the German air force to destroy the transports, as this likely buys enough time for Japan to finish off Russia.

So Japan has good options for taking the fight to America, but in my experience the opportunities rely on the non-canonical choice to leave the American fleet alone.


Do you move a surveyor when they are already on the westmost tile? In Carcassonne: New World, you need to move the eastmost surveyor one tile to the west every time a feature is completed and scored. However, it is quite possible to finish a feature while both surveyors already are on the westmost tile(s). How to proceed?

I see several possible options:

Move a surveyor one step to the west, to where the next column is going to be.
Do not move a surveyor.
Draw an extra tile, place that to the west of the westmost tile and place the surveyor on it.

This situation is not found in the rules, at least not in my version (in Dutch, where the game is called Carcassonne: Mayflower).

The FAQ at BoardGameGeek says that option 2 is the correct one. It does seem the most likely, but is there an official source for that?

While searching a bit more, I came across the rules of the American version. They state quite clearly that surveyors don't move if they can't.


Fabulous Wealth as Sultan Does being Sultan bypass the special requirements for being Fabulously Wealthy?

When gaining the Sultan status, a player automatically moves their wealth counter directly to fabulous (the highest option).  However, being Fabulously Wealthy also has a requirement that the player must possess a treasure.  Does being Sultan supersede this rule, or would a Sultan without any treasure be immediately moved back down to Princely regardless of their status?

Why would it? Nothing in the Sultan status says you can't lose wealth. It simply raises your wealth like so many other effects, and the rules clearly limit your wealth to Princely if you have no treasure.


40k - Ork Mob Rule vs Psychic Shriek I think I know the answer to this but was just hoping someone could prove me wrong... Let's say you're casting Psychic Shriek against a mob of 15 Boyz. Psychic Shriek states "Roll 3d6 and subtract the target's leadership," while Mob Rule states "...may always choose to substitute the number of Orks in their mob for their normal Leadership value." Do you roll the 3d6 against their Ld value of 7 (for Boyz), or can they choose (per the mob rule) to substitute Ld 10 for this? It's not a Ld test, nor does it require any intervention by the Ork player which might give them an opportunity to decide to substitute it, but the wording of mob rule is just vague enough that it seems they can do it, literally, whenever they want.

The counter-example is that they should be able to do it whenever their intervention is required, such as for a morale/pinning test, but not when something is comparing to their base leadership stat. I know that's pretty weak, but it holds just enough logic that I feel clarification is in order.

BONUS QUESTION: Does Mob Rule still apply to a character in a challenge? Granted I've heard rumors that the new codex will make Orks immune to challenges but figured I'd ask anyways.

In the Letter of the Law:
Psychic Shriek asks you to evaluate the target unit's Leadership value. It does not say that it causes them to make a leadership test, so it can still apply to things that ignore/auto-pass leadership tests.

Ork Mob Rule says you (meaning the Ork player) may always choose to substitute the number of Orks in the mob for their Leadership value. It does not have a limitation of when this can be done (so technically, randomly in the middle of the shooting phase, you can just declare "oh, and because there's 9 of them left, their leadership is 9").

In the Spirit of the Law:
Orks are either so dumb they don't know they should be afraid of things even if they out number them, or so incredibly brilliant and powerful that we mere 'umies are unable to comprehend their courage. This invigoration seems to come from a quick head-count of their numbers and the raw logic that US > THEM == VICTORY. So when attempting to scare the spores out of a group of Orks, you have to consider that either they get a little scared, but after looking around for help find themselves in sufficient quantity to handle the threat, or they realize they are confident in the prowess and abilities of their compatriots and simply dismiss the threat.


What happens to a Curse when the Enchanted Player dies? This question is regarding the 'Curse' Auras from Innistrad block, such as Curse of Exhaustion. When the player enchanted by the Curse dies, what happens to the Curse. Does it remain in play with no actual target or effect?

The Aura is put into your graveyard due to 303.4b.

  303.4b If an Aura is enchanting an illegal object or player, the object it was attached to no longer exists, or the player it was
  attached to has left the game, the Aura is put into its owner’s
  graveyard.

Also, if you had two Curse of Exhaustion in play enchanting two players that somehow died simultaneously, both Auras would be put into the graveyard simultaneously, due to this rule:

  704.3. Whenever a player would get priority [...], the game checks for any of the listed conditions for state-based actions, then performs all applicable state-based actions simultaneously as a single event. [...]


Can a Djinn host a Parasite? In Android: Netrunner, Djinn is a program that reads:

  Djinn can host up to 3 [Memory Units] of non-icebreaker programs.
  The memory costs of hosted programs do not count against your memory limit.

Parasite is a (non-icebreaker) program that reads:

  Install Parasite only on a rezzed piece of ice.
  Host ice has -1 strength for each virus counter on Parasite and is trashed if its strength is 0 or less.

I'd like to play and install a Parasite such that it is hosted on an opponent's ICE (for it's main benefit of reducing that ICE's strength) AND hosted on Djinn (to reduce MU costs).

Is this legal? Can one card be "hosted" on two other cards at once?

No, a card can't be hosted on two different cards at the same time. From the Netrunner FAQ on Fantasy Flight's website:

  Can the Runner install Parasite on a piece of ice but host it on
  Djinn?

  No. A card or counter can only be hosted in one place at a time.
  Parasite has the restriction that it must be installed on a piece of
  ice, and therefore it cannot also be hosted by Djinn


What happens, when you immediately draw Exodia as Player 2? I'm not too familiar with Yu-Gi-Oh, but I was wondering, what happens, when Player 2 (the one going second) draws all Exodia, the Forbidden One pieces in his opening hand?

Does he win automatically, before Player 1 goes into his Standby Phase, or does it have to wait, until the Draw/Standby phase of Player 2?

Does he win automatically, before Player 1 goes into his Standby Phase, or does it have to wait, until the Draw/Standby phase of Player 2?

Exodia's win condition (note the word, it's not an effect), triggers immediately and not only in your turn, so you would win during the start of the Draw Phase of player's 1 turn.

Do note that this is not so common to happen, but it could eventually.

From Exodia's rulings, emphasis mine:

  At the start of the Duel, if the player going second starts off with all five pieces of "Exodia the Forbidden One" in his hand, then he wins the Duel before the first player draws his card. The same applies if the player going first starts off with all five pieces. If both players have all five pieces of "Exodia the Forbidden One" in their hands at the start of the Duel, then the Duel ends in a DRAW.[13]


What sets are legal in Momir Basic? What sets does MTGO randomly chooses cards from for the Momir Basic format?

I'm pretty sure things like Unglued and Unhinged are out, but what about Commander?

Also how are banned cards dealt with? An example would Stoneforge Mystic, this card is banned in Modern, but is legal in Legacy. Could I have this be a two drop?

As far as actual legality goes, the only cards legal to have in your deck are Momir Vig, Simic Visionary, as well as Plains, Island, Swamp, Mountain, and Forest.

This is hinted at on the Wizards page, as well as stated clearly in this article:

  (...) your deck contains 61 cards. One is the Momir Vig, Simic Visionary Avatar and the other 60 cards are basic lands. (...)

For cards to be randomly chosen, this article describes it as follows (original links omitted):

  (...) the random creature you get is picked from the entire Online Classic card pool. This even includes premium cards from sets that have not been released online, such as Preacher from The Dark, or Serra Avatar from Urza's Saga.

Naturally, this only applies to games on MTGO - if you play Momir Basic any other way (for example using a random generator like MTG Familiar to determine the random creatures), no particular limits apply, and your group of players should decide which cards or editions to exclude, and whether to allow cards that are banned in certain formats.


3 Parcheesi Use Cases Not Covered in the Rules - Help! I have 3 use cases that I need help on to solve a family debate since none of these are covered in Parcheesi rules.  I would love it if someone can give a definitive answer:

If another player has one of their pawns on your entry (safe) space, and you roll a 5 to get one of your pawns out while they are there, does the other player get bumped, or do you both sit on that space together?

Same situation as above, but when you have one of your pawns on your entry (safe) space and another player has one of their pawns and you roll a 5 to get another one of your pawns out, does the other player get bumped?

If you have 2 of your pawns (a blockade) on your entry space and you roll a 5 on one die and another number on the other die (let's say a 3 for this case), can you move one of the existing pawns on your entry space 3 spaces FIRST to "make room" to use the 5 to get another pawn out?  Or do you have to use the 5 for something else?   We have a "house rule" that if you have a blockade of 2 of your pawns on the entry space and then you roll any 5's, you can't use them because we say that 5's for entering a pawn always have to be the first thing you do on a turn if you get them.

Since there are no specific rules in the Parcheesi game to cover the above, how can we substantiate your answers?  Thank you all so much.  Looking forward to your responses!

They get bumped. Covered in the rules:

A piece may not be placed on a safe space (generally colored light blue) if it is occupied by an opponent's piece.1 The exception is the safe space used when a piece leaves its nest — a single piece occupying such a safe space is sent back to its nest when an opponent's piece leaves the nest and occupies the space.[3]

Can't happen (see above)

Yes, you can move one of the existing pawns on your entry space 3 spaces FIRST to "make room" to use the 5 to get another pawn out. Covered in the rules:

In the case of a non-doubles roll, a player may move one or two pieces, either one piece by each of the numbers on the two dice or one piece by the total. If no move is possible, the turn is forfeited.1


Begginer question about lifelink and Evra I have Evra, Halcyon Witness on my deck, she has lifelink and I know that I gain hp from the amount of damage she deals.

Generalizing lifelink I have 3 simple yes or no questions:

If I attack with her and the opponent blocks me does she give me hp for the amount of damage she deals to that creature?
If the opponent attacks and I block with her, is the damage she deals returned to me as hp even if she is blocking?
Do creatures with lifelink only transform damage dealt into hp gain when they only attack the opponent?

And 1 about Evra?

If I activate the ability to exchange my hp for her power and i get countered with an instant giving -4/0, like "Befuddle" does, does the exchange still happen and I instantly die?

Lifelink on a creature causes you to gain life whenever that creature deals damage in any way. In combat, unblocked creatures deal damage to the defending player, and blocking creatures and blocked creatures deal damage to each other. So if Evra is in any of those situations then it will deal damage and you will gain that much life. One common exception is if Evra blocks or becomes blocked, then the other creature is removed from combat before the damage is dealt. Then Evra will have nothing to deal damage to, so it won't deal any damage and you won't gain any life.

Regarding Evra's other ability, you are correct that if Evra's power somehow becomes 0 before the ability resolves, the ability will make your life total 0 and you will lose.


How do we assign Game of Thrones houses? In Game of Thrones the assignment of each player to a house has a drastic impact on the way the game plays out.

What are the different ways to assign houses to players, and what are their advantages or effects?

Where a player sits around the table has little influence on the turn order of the game. Straight out of the rule book, on page 7 (emphasis mine):

  Your house position on the Iron Throne influence track abstractly represents the strength of your claim to be king as seen among the minor nobles, knights, and people of Westeros. In the game, the Iron Throne Influence track determines the Order of Play, and the highest bidder also gains control of the Iron Throne token after all the bidding is resolved.

The turn order is determined by the Iron Throne track, so it changes over the course of the game, and the player that starts at position one of the Iron Throne track is determined by your starting House. If the concern is House picking, that is also covered by the rules on page 3 (emphasis mine):

  6) Each player now randomly draws a House Start Card to determine which house he will control for the rest of the game.

House draw is supposed to be random, so following the rules here should prevent any shadiness among players. Randomization shouldn't favor any one player, so this should solve any problems with assignment.

As such, feel free to sit anywhere around the table you want, as it won't impact the flow of the game too much. Although sitting closer to your starting location on the board is always a good idea so you don't have to reach across the table for everything you do.


Is responders suit change after 1NT rebid by opener forcing? (System: simplified SAYC) Auction: 1C - 1H - 1NT - ? (opener has 3 hearts, 12 pts ; responder has 5 hearts, 13 pts)

In case of responder having 13+ pts yet lacking NT distribution, how does partnership get to game with 13+13 total points and 3+5 major fit, after 1NT rebid by opener?

P.S. This is an unfinished question, I might edit it in the future to further elaborate my inquiry on partnership getting to game with 12+13 points by both partners and 1nt rebid by opener.

P.S.2. The inquiry is about the very basics, as this page says: http://larryco.com/BridgeArticles/ArticleDetails.aspx?articleID=462 -- paraphrasing: "The worst mistake I see: Not reaching game when there is enough for game.  If your partner opens the bidding and you have 14 points, please don't ever make any bid which your partner can pass"

This link outlines the system behind SAYC in fairly simple terms. The bottom of page 7 notes that on the auction of interest, responder must reverse or jump shift to create a game force. However, a simple new suit bid should be treated as a one-round force, 10+, game invitational.

Most established partnerships now play some form of either Check Back Stayman (CBS) or New Minor Forcing (NMF). Both of these are predicated on the requirement that Opener's 1NT rebid categorically denied 4-card support for Responder's major suit response.

If partner rebid 1NT over your 1H response with 4-card Heart support, rightly take that as a gross insult to your card-play. Find a new partner promptly , before this one ruins your bidding.


Is there a limit to the number of locomotives used to build a route? When playing Ticket-to-Ride USA, is there a limit to the number of locomotives used to build a route? It seems unfair to create a 3-space-route with one Train Car card and two Locomotive Cards.

No, there is no limit. You could even complete a route using only locomotives. Remember that even though Locomotives are Wild and can be used freely like that, it is harder to collect them. Rather than being able to pick up TWO cards on your turn (i.e. two yellows), when picking up a Locomotive, you can only pick that ONE card. The only way you can collect TWO Locomotives on your turn is if you draw both randomly in succession...steep odds.

Now, in Advanced sets, some Routes REQUIRE one or more Locomotives as part of the total number.

In the original rules, the relevant statement is

  Locomotives are Multi-colored and act as a wild card that can be part of any set of cards when claiming a route.

"Any set of cards" means that it may contain more locomotives. Note that it does not mean that it may contain any further combination of colours, as

  To claim a route, a player must play a set of cards equal to the number of spaces in the
  route. A set of cards must be of the same type.

In the rules of Ticket To Ride: Europe this is explained better:

  Locomotives can always act as a stand-in for any given color.

and (as an example):

  To claim a Blue route that is three spaces long, a player may play any of the following card combinations: three Blue cards; two Blue cards and a Locomotive; one Blue card and two Locomotives; or three Locomotives.


Games to learn a foreign language or to enrich your vocabulary in your native language? I like Scrabble for learning a foreign language or enriching my vocabulary in my native language. What other games also help you do that?

Please submit one game per answer only - that works best with voting. If you want to submit multiple games, just leave multiple answers.

In a Pickle (English). For up to six players.

  Can a giraffe fit in a phone booth? Does a sofa fit in a shopping cart? It all depends on how you size it up in this game of creative thinking and outrageous scenarios. Try to win a set of cards by fitting smaller things into bigger things — there's some juice in a pickle, in a supermarket, in a parking lot. Play the fourth word card to claim the set, unless one of your opponents can trump with a larger word. The player with the most sets at the end is the big winner! Includes 300 cards and instructions.

I can tell from personal experience that the game is quite fun, for native and non-native speakers alike. It encourages thinking outside the box, re-interpreting words and defending your interpretation. Someone puts a president in a jam, but then someone else puts that jam in a glass. Or someone plays the card with the word "universe", thinking that no one can beat that, but then the next person plays the card with the word "dictionary" and wins the set (after all, "universe" is a word in a dictionary).


How do Rest in Peace and Progenitus interact? What happens to my Progenitus when it tries to die and there is a Rest in Peace in play?

You (as the controller of Progenitus) get to decide which replacement effect happens. After this first replacement effect happens, the remaining effect doesn't have anything to replace, because the "enters the graveyard" isn't part of the effect.

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


Building settlements in Seafarer Does one have to travel by sea with boats to an island in order to build a settlement? Or can you build a settlement with road or with boat on any turn?

If you are on land, you can build settlements separated by (at least) two roads.

If you want to go to another island, you should build a "road of" boats from a settlement. Until you reach land where you can build a settlement. From the settlement you can build roads again.

You can build boats along the coast as long as they start at a settlement.

You can not alternate between roads and boats without a settlement in between.

There is one exception. If you have two settlements and you build a road from one and a boat-road from the other, they can connect.

To summarize,

you can build a boat on an edge if:

nothing has been built on that edge
you have at least one boat in your stock
you pay a the build cost:

a sheep and a wood
or a card that enables you to build a ship

at least one of the hexes is a water hex
either one of the nodes has a valid connector:

the node contains one of your settlements
the node contains one of your cities.
one of the other edges leading to the node contains one of your boats.
the node does not contain an enemy settlement
the node does not contain an enemy city

you can build a road on an edge if:

nothing has been built on that edge
you have at least one road in your stock
you pay a the build cost:

a wood and a clay
or a card that enables you to build a road

at least one of the hexes is a land hex
either one of the nodes has a valid connector:

the node contains one of your settlements
the node contains one of your cities.
one of the other edges leading to the node contains one of your roads.
the node does not contain an enemy settlement
the node does not contain an enemy city


7 Wonders Resource Clarification I am trying to learn how to play the Game 7 Wonders. How many of what resources do each of the wonders start the game with?

The instruction manual never actually tells you how to know what resources each wonder starts out the game with.

This question indicates a common misunderstanding of the way resources work in 7 Wonders. Resources are not collected and spent; you can build any card (building or Wonder stage) that requires resources as long as you have your own access to those resources, or pay a neighbor for the temporary use of theirs. If you do not have the required resources, and cannot acquire them from your neighbors, you can't build the card or Wonder stage.

Coins work differently as a building cost; when they are required, such as for the brown split-resource cards, they are paid to the bank.


Munchkin Booty: is there a time limit for "Not so fast me bucko" Is there a time limit in which the Not so fast me bucko card must be played.

The card text reads as follows:

  play this card Immediately after a card is drawn or played.

I drew into a low level monster which if i had beaten it would have won me the game, the other two players i was playing with discussed between themselves and worked out if they could play enough bonuses to stop me winning.

After discovering they didn't have enough between them one of them played "Not so fast me bucko" to prevent me from drawing the monster.

My argument was that the card states it must be played immediately where as they spent over a minute working out what they could have done.

Their argument was that immediately just meant before another card is played.

I can't seem to find anything about the definition of immediately in the official FAQ. But my interpretation would be that as long as no other actions were taken between the drawing of monster and the playing of the card, that would still count as immediate.

But as the rules themselves say

  Any disputes should be settled by loud arguments, with the owner of the game having the final word.


Childhood dangers card game made in the 70s/80s Does anyone remember the name of a card game that was made in the 70s or 80s in which you collect cards in a sequence of events that was meant to teach kids to avoid household injuries?

Some of the card collections included: don't reach for a pot of boiling water, don't play with matches, and don't leave a rake in the grass with the tines sticking up. They had circles in the corner with symbols tied to the cards you were collecting (pot of water, match, etc.). The back of the cards might have had red crosses on them, but not sure.

My mom was a teacher, and says she may have bought them at an educational store in the Tacoma, WA area where I grew up. My sister and I joke that this game was a shared fever dream, since they were so weird (and morbid....the final cards all had children with x-out eyes), and no one else on earth seems to remember this game—Help!

Sounds like "Safety Quartett" (One of the thousands of Quartett / Go Fish! thematic decks).

Example card: https://boardgamegeek.com/image/1538979/quartett

And the one  with the rake: https://boardgamegeek.com/image/1538975/quartett


What's the relation between Mansions of Madness, Elder Sign and Arkham Horror? What's the relation between Mansions of Madness, Elder Sign and Arkham Horror?

All of them are published by Fantasy Flight Games and they are based of Cthulhu Mythos. So my question is, is it possible to use them together in someway?

If I get all three games, Can I share something between them?, Can I mixup the card decks? e.g: characters, miniatures, dices, adventures...etc

Mansions of Madness, Elder Sign, and Arkham Horror are all games whose themes pull from the Cthulhu Mythos.

In Elder Sign and Arkham Horror you play as investigators cooperating in an attmpt to prevent/drive away an Ancient One entering this world, but the mechanics of both games are very different. I'll describe the games generally.

Arkham Horror has you play investigators wandering around the town of Arkham, having encounter fighting monsters, traveling through gates to other worlds, and sealing said gates. When you seal enough gates (or some other less often-fufilled victory condition), you win. Game play is driven by skill checks. Each investigator has 6 skills and will use them (along with potential skill boosting items) to make skill checks to succeed at various tasks (Understand lore, escape a house before it collapses, kill a monster, etc.)

Similarly, Elder sign has you playing these very same investigators trying to prevent the ancient horror from entering the world, but there's no board to speak of. Instead, your turn consists of picking one of the encounter cards on the board, gathering a pool of specialized dice, and rolling them, trying to match the necessary results displayed on the cards. Winning gets you various rewards. You win when you get enough 'Elder Sign' tokens, which could be direct rewards from completing a mission or by cashing in some of the trophies you've earned.

Mansions of Madness pits a team of investigators against a 'Keeper', who is trying to fufill some hidden agenda of his. The investigators explore a pseudo-randomly generated building trying to discover, and then prevent, the Keeper's goal. The Keeper meanwhile tries to nudge the investigators in the right direction so he can fufill his secret goal easier. The 'board' in this game consists of modular parts that get rearranged depending on the particular scenario being played.

So mechanically and piece-wise, the games are very different. The only pieces you can use in any of the other games are the markers for the investigators.

In Arkham Horror, the investigators have standing cardboard-y pieces with their images on them. In Elder Sign, the investigators have smaller cardboard-y pieces with their images on them. In Mansions of Madness, the investigators have moulded plastic figures in their likeness. Any of these markers could be used in any of the games equally as effectivelly.

Additionally, the monster figures from Mansions of Madness can be used in Arkham Horror. Arkham Horror's monster tokens are squard cardboard pieces with various monster fighting statistics on them. In Mansions of Madness you have the same sized tokens, but the printed stats are totally different, making them non-interchangable. But Mansions of Madness has you slot these tokens into larger monster figures (the tokens are still readable if you look under the base). So you can use these figures for your Arkham Horror play.

Finally, the figures that come with Mansions of Madness are all unpainted. Fantasy Flight sells painted versions of all of these figures, and more, on their website. So if you like the idea of having investigator minis, but don't want Mansions of Madess, you can still get whichever figures you like.


How does the ability of Bloodthirsty Aerialist resolve with other life link creatures? Scenario:
I have Bloodthirsty Aerialist and a Blood Burglar on the board. I attack with both and both get a blocker assigned to them.

Does Bloodthirsty Aerialist's ability trigger before damage because of Blood Burglar's Lifelink? As in does Bloodthirsty Aerialist get a +1/+1 counter on it before the damage is done against the blocker?

The scenario unfolds as follows:

You declare bloodthirsty Aerialist and Blood Burglar as attackers.
Your opponent declares blockers for these creatures.
All damage is dealt. At the same time, Blood Burglar's lifelink causes you to gain 2 life.
Bloodthirsty Aerialist's ability is triggered and goes on the stack (but doesn't resolve yet).
State based actions are checked. If either of these creatures have enough damage on them to die, they are put into the graveyard.
Bloodthirsty Aerialist's ability resolves (assuming players pass priority). If Bloodthirsty Aerialist is not on the battlefield, the ability does nothing. If the creature is on the battlefield, it gets a single +1/+1 counter.

Bloodthirsty Aerialist will only deal 2 damage to the creature that blocks it, and if it is dealt three damage, the +1/+1 counter won't be placed on it in time to save it from dying.


Can Dragon Broodmother+Elemental Mastery be triggered to provide elemental tokens before upkeep resolves? Fairly new mtg player, lifetime dragon fan looking to build some nifty combos.

Dragon Broodmother has text that reads:

  At the beginning of each upkeep, create a 1/1 red and green Dragon creature token with flying and devour 2.

If I have enchanted her (or another creature I control for that matter) with Elemental Mastery, which has:

  Enchanted creature has "Tap: Create X 1/1 red Elemental creature tokens with haste, where X is this creature's power. Exile them at the beginning of the next end step."

Can I activate the tap to make elementals in such a way that they exist on the battlefield prior to the upkeep generated dragon token so that it can devour them and become bigger immediately?

I tried reading some similar questions but I'm afraid the whole stack business is still a little murky to me.

Yes.

When dealing with keyword abilities, it's best to start by looking up their exact definition.

  702.81a Devour is a static ability. “Devour N” means “As this object enters the battlefield, you may sacrifice any number of creatures. This permanent enters the battlefield with N +1/+1 counters on it for each creature sacrificed this way.”

Dragon Broodmother's ability is a triggered ability, which means you'll get priority before it resolves.

The choice of creatures to sacrifice is made on resolution, so they don't need to exist when the ability is added to the stack.

So, you can activate the ability granted by Elemental Mastery in response to Dragon Broodmother's ability being added to the stack (i.e. after it's been added to the stack, but before it resolves). Having been placed on the stack last, the ability granted by Elemental Mastery will resolve first.


In Catan, how to ensure nobody lies when monopoly card is played? I don't like that the rules assume players are honest. One time, we had a player that lied about not having the requested resource, but was caught in the next turn when he tried to buy a road with that resource. However, a cunning opponent can lie and get away with it.

What's the most practical way to handle this situation? How do you deal with it? I don't really like any of the solutions I can think of. Forcing everyone to show all of their cards, having a judge/game master who checks everyone's cards, relying on everyone's honesty, ... all of them are either impractical or unfair.

Count the cards in the supply

In Settlers of Catan you are always allowed to count the number of resources left in the supply decks.  It is a perfectly legal move to count the deck before using the monopoly on a resource.

This also means that after you got the resources you can just check how many you have in your hand, and how many are left in the deck.  If you are missing one, then someone is cheating.

In the 4th edition of the game there are 19 of each resource card.

Even if you think that counting the deck is out of the spirit of the game, having someone do it after a monopoly reveals no new information, and just controls for cheating.


Does anyone know the name of this game? Does anyone know this game? Need help!

This looks like Gobblet. Check if the pieces fit into one another?


Why isn't resistance a case of halving any damage taken? In the Pokémon TCG, there is something called Resistance and Weakness. Like this:

For example, for some games, you have multipliers like 1x for 'Neutral Attacks' that aren't affected by Resistance or Weakness, 2x - or something like that - for 'Effective Attacks'and 0.5x for 'Ineffective attacks'.

But why in the TCG does Weakness cause 2x damage, and Resistance cause -20 damage?

There is an argument to this:

For a new change:

Low Damage attacks (those <20) will cause no damage, or even help them to heal (if it is possible).
If the damage is an odd number multiplied by 10 (like 10, 30, 150...), it would cause it to do damage like 5, 25, 75, 165 and damage like that. But this can be resolved by introducing a '5' Damage Counter, and that can be counted as 1/2 a damage counter.

Against a new change:

It has already been like this for a while.

Obviously, there are more arguments, but these few will provide enough justification, I believe.

So why was -20  introduced, not ÷2?

I am looking for:

Why they didn't do it like the mainline Pokemon games?

My uninformed, best guess:

The Pokémon card game was designed to be simple and playable by young children. Subtracting 20 is a simple operation, as is multiplication by small numbers, but division is more complicated, can lead to mistakes, and requires instructions on how to round "half" values (or 5s, in this case) up or down.


Ashes : How do you play with 4 player? So i've bought ASHES: Rise of the Phoenix born. I've played it with 3 of my friends which made a 4 player game with 4 pre-made Decks. Sadly the rules (at least in french) doesn't cover how it's supposedly played, half of the decks we had were designed for single play (Noah in particular, he's able to lock an opponnent but if there's a threat on the side he's likely to die first. In a lesser extent Meorin, with only 3 beasts couldn't really handle 3 turn of abuse on her beasts). So how is it done? Is it 2 players against 2 others? Is it that we should draft to even the odds?

Also, I really liked this game, but playing defensively is immensively hard to punish with 3 other players, it forces a stalemate that no one can break without dying, any tips to prevent that ever again?

Sorry for the long post, it might be hard to read, english is somehow not that easy for me..

I've had an answer from Isaac Vegas. This game is competitively based on one versus one, for 4 players play, it's better to make 2 1v1 battle, then a 1v1 battle for losers and one for winners.

Based on further play with friends, we discovered that 2v2 is quite balanced in most cases, and 1v1v1 works quite swiftly.

To prevent stalemates, what is advised is taking risks. Forcing others to attack by fragmenting your forces will incite them to strike you BUT, one will react more strongly than the others so it's supposedly the first to react that'll be maimed.


What happens if a permanent is made to gain and then lose an ability, or vice versa? Rayami, First of the Fallen is on the battlefield, and currently has hexproof due to a creature exiled by her effect.
The opponent then activates Shadowspear to remove hexproof.
My questions are:

Would Rayami lose hexproof?

If so, and a second hexproof creature is exiled with her effect, would she regain hexproof?

If she didn't have hexproof before the Shadowspear activation, then a hexproof creature is exiled with her effect, does she gain hexproof?

Rayami will not regain hexproof from their own ability until end of turn
All effects granting or removing abilities to creatures (and other permanents) are continuous effects, governed by the Layer system described in rule 613.  Specifically, these are ability-adding and ability removing effects, applied in Layer 6.

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

As these are both applied in the same layer, rule 613.7 determines how they are applied.

613.7. Within a layer or sublayer, determining which order effects are applied in is usually done using a timestamp system. An effect with an earlier timestamp is applied before an effect with a later timestamp.

This means, for example, if I had a creature with hexproof, and then Shadowspear removed that hexproof, I could give that creature hexproof again with Ranger's Guile and it would gain hexproof, but my opponent could remove that hexproof with another activation of Shadowspear.
If Rayami applied a continuous effect to grant an ability every time a creature was exiled, then they would regain hexproof the way you described.  But that's not how Rayami works.
Rayami has two abilities - a replacement effect that exiles creatures that die, and a static ability that grants a continuous effect granting abilities.  The timestamp for this continuous effect is Rayami's - the moment when Rayami entered the battlefield.  Changes to which cards are exiled with blood counters doesn't affect this timestamp.  Therefore, additional creatures dying will not grant Rayami hexproof if Shadowspear has already been activated this turn.
Thus, the answers to your questions are:

Yes
No
No


When does Zada, Hedron Grinder determine if a spell was cast only targeting Zada, Hedron Grinder? In trying to figure out where my head is at to day, here's the following.

Player casts Soul's Fire, such that Zada, Hedron Grinder will do damage equal to its power to Zada, Hedron Grinder.

Since a spell was cast that only targets Zada, Hedron Grinder, his triggered ability is placed on the stack on top of Soul's Fire.

In response to the triggered ability, Player sacrifices Goblin Flectomancer, changing the targets of Soul's Fire, such that Zada, Hedron Grinder will do Damage equal to its power to the opposing Player. Goblin Flectomancer resolves.

Triggered ability of Zada, Hedron Grinder tries to resolve. Will it check to see if the spell that was CAST only targeting Zada, Hedron Grinder still only targets Zada, Hedron Grinder?

If it doesn't, or is satisfied that while the spell currently targets Zada, Hedron Grinder and the opposing player it was CAST only targeting Zada, Hedron Grinder, it will then create a copy of Soul's Fire for each other creature Player controls.

Will the ability change only the first target, replacing Zada with another creature for each copy, or will it change both?

Zada's ability will resolve, and each of the copies will only target the corresponding creature.
First, when a triggered ability resolves, two conditions are checked to see whether it will continue to resolve. Rules 608.2a and 608.2b:

If a triggered ability has an intervening “if” clause, it checks whether the clause’s condition is true. If it isn’t, the ability is removed from the stack and does nothing. Otherwise, it continues to resolve. See rule 603.4.

If the spell or ability specifies targets, it checks whether the targets are still legal. [...] The spell or ability is countered if all its targets, for every instance of the word “target,” are now illegal. If the spell or ability is not countered, it will resolve normally. [...]

Zada's ability has no intervening "if" clause, and no targets, so once it starts resolving, it will create the copies.
The part of Zada's ability that changes the copies' targets says "Each copy targets a different one of those creatures." It does not say to set only one target; it simply says that the spell targets the creature. The most reasonable interpretation is that it sets all of the spells target to that creature. This is backed up by a ruling on Zada:

If you cast an instant or sorcery spell that has multiple targets, but it’s targeting only Zada with all of them, Zada’s ability will trigger. The copies will similarly each be targeting only one of your other creatures. You can’t change any of the copy’s targets to other creatures.

This ruling is only conditional on what the spell targets when it is cast, not what it targets when the ability resolves. So, any time a spell with multiple targets is cast targeting Zada, the copies each target only one creature, no matter what happened to the spell in between.


MTG Gatecrash Simic Strategies for a Prerelease event I am going to be playing this weekend at the prerelease of Gatecrash, with the chosen guild of Simic. Now the core strategy of Simic is to grow relentlessly, using the Evolve mechanic (whenever a creature enters the battlefield under your control, if that creature has greater power or toughness than this creature, put a +1/+1 counter on this creature).

There are a couple of problems with this guild type:

Its power level is inconsistent.
Not many creatures in green and blue that have high toughness and power to make it evolve.

To mitigate the issues of running Simic I'm considering splashing red for Gruul might be the most optimum choice.

What other problems, strategy, or card combos should I watch out for when playing Simic?

In regards to GTC Simic in general, here's this humble magic players breakdown of the playables. The only cards included here are commons since you really can't ever rely on seeing even uncommons. There's about 80 uncommon cards a set, and you're going to see a total of 18. So maybe three or four of those will be simic, and maybe one of those will be playable. If they are great, but let's focus on the bread (no pun intended) and butter of your guild first.

If a card doesn't appear in this list, it's because I personally didn't think it would be a good fit for the "grow 'em" strategy, which is undoubtedly what simic will be playing. That doesn't necessarily mean it's bad (although it probably means I think it's bad in general), and I welcome challenges to anything present in or absent from the list. I am comfortable making the list because it's 1) objective based on certain criteria, 2) limited (only 34 cards of the 259 are eligible for the list) and 3) comprehensive (it's not just a list but the reasons why are included so someone could apply the same sorts of logic to other cards).

Green playables:

Creatures:

Crocanura - 3 toughness reach is decent - flying is huge in limited. Evolving will make it hit higher power quickly.
Crowned Ceratok - 4 power trample is great. Giving all your evolve trample is great too. Three toughness makes it weaker to red aggro cards like a 3/1 or 3/2, but it's still a great card.
Disciple of the Old Ways - He's a bear, which is usually playable anyway. His bonus is great if you're splashing red.
Greenside Watcher - If you have 3 or more gates, he's worth playing.
Ivy Lane Denizen - Every green guy gets a +1/+1 counter. Note that this +1/+1 counter happens in parallel with evolve, which is excellent!
Slaughterhorn - A 3/2 for 3 is probably playable anyway, but having bloodrush is simple excellent.
Spire Tracer - He's not a flier, but he acts like one. Green rarely gets fliers, so this is excellent news. Expect him to be targets of +1/+1 counters and bloodrushes.
Wasteland Viper - A 1/2 for 1 is rather lame considering last set gave us Dryad Militant (although that was uncommon). The bloodrush component of this is still excellent.

Spells:

Forced Adaptation - You risk being 2-for-1ed with this, but this will make your creature scale well with your turns. Combos well with Ceratok.
Pit Fight (R/G hybrid) - Cheap instant-speed removal at common. Between evolve, big green creatures, and Wasteland Viper, you've got a lot of viable fighters in your colors.
Verdant Haven - Everyone loves acceleration, but green traditionally has the best.

Blue Playables:

Creatures:

Cloudfin Raptor - will probably swing for 1 on turn 2 as you'd expect with a typical flier.
Keymaster Rogue - This guy is great for triggering those +1/+1 counters all over the place.
Metropolis Sprite - he has the +1/-1 ability that Frostborn Wierd had in RTR, and that proved to be very effective. Putting it on only one color isn't as good, and having only two toughness is also not as good, but if you have ways to get counters on blue creatures, this is a good place for it. Otherwise leave this out of the game.
Leyline Phantom - good for triggering +1/+1 abilites, although it's late in the game, simic should be able to drag the game out to make him worth it. He's kind of like an expensive keymaster rogue.

Spells:

Hands of Binding - probably the best blue spell at common, this is a must play if you have good fliers or other evasion.
Last Thoughts - this is pretty expensive if you don't get a lot of uses out of the cipher component, but if it does work out for you it's excellent. If your opponent has a lot of removal, sideboard this out.
Spell Rupture - If you have the big green fatties of old, this is effectively a Cancel for 1U isntead of 1UU. That's a great thing.
Way of the Thief - Maro promised gates would mean more in this expansion than in RTR. The only real use of gate in RTR before was on a fairly crappy defender in black that really didn't fit the profile. This on the otherhand is a pretty good fit. +2/+2 and unblockable is good, but doing it for 4 is pretty expensive. On the other hand, if the unblockable creature has a couple ciphers on him, well now you're going to win the game. Congrats.

Simic Playables:

Creatures:

Drakewing Krasis - he's a 3/1 flample - since he's still green he combos well with Ivy Lane Denizen.
Shambleshark - 2/1 flash evolve for 2 - requires exactly UG so could be tough to drop on turn 2. But with flash, you can leave the mana open and your opponent may think he's safer for a turn longer than he really is. Great potential here.

Spells:

Bioshift - if someone kills your creature with a bunch of +1/+1 counters (see Forced Adaptation) you can save them quickly.


Is it unethical to "mislead" partner if s/he is the weakest player at the table? Normally (on defense), you try to play in a way to reasonably "signal" and inform partner of your holdings. But suppose partner is the weakest player at the table, and is unlikely to read your signals.
So you shift gears and play to mislead declarer, instead. On the other hand, if declarer were your partner and partner were declarer (with their cards "switched"), you would play a different way.
Essentially, you are playing the "players" and not the cards. This is not considered unethical in other games such as poker or backgammon. Is this considered unethical in bridge?

Playing cards in such a way as to not accurately reflect your hand is perfectly fine - as long as that's actually what you're doing.  There are plenty of hands where you're on defense and you know that partner is pretty much worthless; you're defending 3NT, partner knows your long suit, and you have 14 points anyway and expect partner to be in the lead exactly zero times.  In those cases, play however you wish: you can mislead declarer, or just play at random, any of that is fine. This is called falsecarding, and is a part of bridge.
Where it becomes unethical is when your partner knows to expect it, and can benefit from it.  Again, if your partner can't benefit from it, then it's okay - but your falsecarding shouldn't have an actual meaning ("When I'm the strong hand, defending NT, then I'll play 3rd from length instead of 4th from length").  It has to be something partner can't anticipate, or definitely can't benefit from.
For the most part, it's more relaxed than psychs; psychic bids are nearly always giving partner information when they can be anticipated, since bidding not only is a process partner may be participating in, but it could also inform the lead or other plays later on.  Just be careful that it doesn't become a habit that can convey unauthorized information to your partner, or else you'll have an implicit partnership understanding that needs to be disclosed.
I would add that the specific case you describe - where you think partner is just incompetent and won't understand the signal, and thus you can falsecard without adverse effect - is probably legal, but gets a lot closer to unethical, and is extremely damaging to the partnership.  Even if I were playing with a paid professional, for example, I'd be extremely upset if they decided to start intentionally faking defensive signals on the theory that I wouldn't notice them, not to mention the fact that I would not be able to improve my own play.


What is the art depicted on the Magic 6th Edition paper playmats? In the 6th edition Starter Set, the guided game comes with two color-coded playmats. You can also find (very blurry) screencaps below, and in this instructional video. (I've linked it to the appropriate time, so you should see both playmats within 5 seconds.
I'm trying to find art, source files, or high resolution images of these playmats, so...
What is the name of the art (or card) wherein the gold wizard is depicted on each of these two playmats? If that's unavailable, is it possible to identify the artist?

The video that you linked is contained as part of the Starter 1999 gift box that was released back in 1999 and contains:

2 40 card decks in cardboard deckboxes
A poster of Angel of Light
Two guides that provide step by step instruction similar to those in the video
The video that you linked
two playmats with score keeping beads

It doesn't appear like the featured images are from any cards and are probably just displayed on the box art and playmat as marketing images.

You can see in the image below that they are reflected and colour modified version of each other and featured on the deckboxes as well.

If you want to see what else is contained in the starter kit you can check out this Unboxing video, along with this visual list of each card included in the set.


In Pegs & Jokers must I go past home in order to use a card I'm holding? In Pegs & Jokers, if 4 of my pegs are in Home, and my last peg is 2 spaces away from home (so I need an Ace, nine or two to win) do I have to play one of my other cards and move PAST my home (since I'm told you MUST use a card if you CAN move)?

Yes, you need to move past your home spot.

I've found an explanation and detailing of the rules here. This website states:

  You must always use the full value of the card played. For example when playing a 6 you must move a peg forward 6 holes, no less. If you play a 6 when you have a peg on your in-spot and all your other pegs in the start area, you must move your peg on along the main track, since there is not room in the home track for a move of 6.


Can I use Stormland Mirror on my last turn? After enough Guardian Keys have been found, and the Guardian revealed, each player gets one more turn per the rules on page 14.

Can a player use Stormland Mirror during that last turn to get another turn, including another potentially very lucrative shot at the Guardian?

Co-designer Bryan Reese says yes:

  "Stormland mirror does give you an extra turn, even on the final turn."

Source: Bryan Reese (https://boardgamegeek.com/article/28348033#28348033)


Rummikub Joker After Replacement Tournament rules state that if a joker is in a meld one can not take from that meld. The joker can only be replaced with the tile the joker represented and used to make a meld with 2 tiles from your hand. So the question is after the required tile is placed (originally represented by the joker) can that meld be not be split or taken from for play?

(This question is not laid out in the rules as part of succession.)

If the Joker has been replaced then there is no joker in the meld.  That would remove the condition of "If there is a joker in a meld..."

Maybe the key definition is that it says "is" not "was"

There are multiple different sets of rules for Rummikub, so it would be beneficial to link the rules being used if this answer does not suffice.


Can you play a new player game of Carcassonne w/o farms? I've taught Carcassonne to a number of new players (it's a great "gateway game")! However, the problem that I keep having is with the farmers. Players are able to quickly grasp the idea of putting meeple thieves on roads, soldiers in cities, and monks on monasteries.

But the farmers and their farms confuse the heck out of them during their first game. Generally they are confused about the mechanics of how they work or they don't see their utility. Thus any experienced players surge ahead because the new players just don't understand farms. If I get to play a second game with these new players, they have a better grasp on how farms work and can usually use them effectively, but this is a pain point of the first game.

A friend of mine suggested possibly playing the first game with no farms (giving these new players time to focus on the other mechanics and preventing experienced players from taking advantage of their confusion over farms), then adding in farms for a second game.

What sort of issues might appear if we removed farms in the first game? Would it still be playable? And would this be an effective way of alleviating the trouble we have had with teaching how to use farms?

You could do, the game would work perfectly well without farmers.  I would argue against it because this still leaves the new players in a position where they don't see farms being used and don't see how they can score highly if placed well despite the long-term sacrifice of a piece.

In my experience with teaching Carcassonne, players tend to go very quickly from not understanding how they work, to playing too many farmers too early, then getting a good grasp within a few games.  Just be patient.


Does this 7 Wonders analysis make any sense? In age 1, the only resource you buy are the grey ones, because: in age 1, the brown ones produce only one resource at a time, but in age 2 they produce 2. This means you profit more from buying brown cards in age 2 than 1. So it costs a coin, big deal. No matter what, age 1 or 2, when you buy a grey card, it produces one item. This means when the worse cards are in play, you should buy the ones that will be the same.

Note: It also helps to choose your playing style early right?

The analysis is technically correct, but practically kind of wrong.

Every choice of card in 7 Wonders comes with an opportunity cost, which is to say, "What are you giving up by choosing this card instead?"

It is true that the brown resource cards in Age 2 give you access to twice as many resources as their Age 1 counterparts, for the cost of a single coin which is usually not huge as far as things go. However, if you decide that this means you should ignore the brown cards in Age 1 and just wait until Age 2 to get them, then:

You run the risk of never getting the resources you will need, especially if your opponents are paying attention and carefully deprive you of key cards.
You spend less of Age 2 building more useful cards (e.g. Science and Military cards, especially the ones that enable you to build stuff in Age 3).
You potentially have to spend more coins building things in Age 1, if you're relying on neighbours to provide the resources.
Conversely, your neighbours will not be buying resources from you, denying you a source of income.

It's easy to be flippant and say "It all depends on the cards", but really that's the point - 7 Wonders is a game of making lots of decisions, and there is rarely a singular strategy that you can follow blindly to success.


Lazav, Dimir mastermind, copying Growth-Chamber Guardian, and wearing spy kit Question: So, a Lazav, Dimir Mastermind watches a Growth-Chamber Guardian die and decides to copy it.  Then a Spy Kit is equipped to him.  When a +1/+1 counter is placed on lazav, does it change both names in the text? I know copy effects with self referential names use the new cardname, but does it let me tutor for any creature too?

No, the "Search for a card named Growth-Chamber Guardian" is not self-referential, you are not searching for the card itself, but that ability is naming the legal targets for your search. Just because the targets have the same name as the original card does not make it self-referential, in fact if it were you would only be able to find the copy of Lazav already in play.


Is there a consensus on if blocking king and pawns together so opponent cannot move in Tablut (Hnefatafl) is stalemate, or a win? In Tafl games (I'm specifically playing Tablut if it makes a difference) Black wins if they capture the White king by surrounding it on all four sides.
Suppose the king and one or more adjacent pawns in a block are all completely surrounded and White has no other pawns so they cannot move.  Is there any consensus on whether this is stalemate (like in Chess if the player can't move), or, a win for Black?  Or is it just "house rules"?
Most of the rule sets I've found do not mention it explicitly.  So the implication is it's a stalemate,  but they aren't very official.
(This ruleset suggests you take away one pawn in a blocked group per turn, in my scenario it would amount to the same thing as an immediate win.)

This set of rules for Saami Tablut ("Historical Hnefatafl") includes an explicit handling of that case:

7b. If the attackers surround the king and ALL remaining defenders, then they
win, as they have prevented the king from escaping.

And it's even broader in this set of rules, which captures the king if he cannot move (even if the king's side has other pawns that can move):

The king himself is captured if he is surrounded with enemy pieces or restricted
squares in all four cardinal points, so that he
cannot move in any direction.

(emphasis added)
The case is also present in the rulesets for other variants presented on this page.
In this summary of the history of the game, under the section of "correcting the errors" of Murray's mis-translation of the rules, they say that Helfrid included this additional rule (that agrees with your link to the PDF by Zorya):

If a defending piece is beside the king and the king is trapped, the companion is taken rather than the king.


Can Sorcerers convert two units from the same Tribe in one turn? A Cunning Rules Lawyer pointed out that, while the rules for Sorcerers say:

  Once per turn per opponent, your Sorcerers
  can conquer a Region by substituting one of
  your opponent's Active tokens with one of
  your own taken from the storage tray.

It isn't 100% clear if, when you're playing a four player game, you can convert four regions of the same opponent, or if "once per opponent" means you have to target a different opponent each time.

Does once per turn per opponent mean that you have to target a different opponent each time, or just that you have as many conversions as opponents?

Looks like this is clarified by Antoine from Days of Wonder in this thread.  You may only use it once against a given opponent in a turn.


Can I discard clues from the Cover Up card when at a location with no clues? When you would discover 1 or more clues at your location: Discard that many clues from Cover Up instead

This implies to me that I must be at a location that has at least 1 clue, even though the clue effectively is taken from Cover Up.  Am I able to use this at a location with no clues at all?  It seems at that location I would not discover a clue had I not had Cover Up so I cannot do that.

No, you definitely can't use it at a location that has no clues on it.

The triggering condition for this reaction is

  When you would discover 1 or more clues at your location: ...

And the rules reference (on page 7 under Clues) states

  A card ability that refers to clues “at a location” is referring to
  the undiscovered clues that are currently on that location.

This means that you must first have the possibility of discovering at least one clue at your location, and then be the target of a game effect (investigating the location, an Event card, or some other means) that instructs you to discover at least one clue at your location.

The triggered effect also specifies that this would not be of any use to you on a location with zero clues. It says

  ... Discard that many clues from Cover Up instead

Even if there was no minimum limit of discovering 1 clue at your location, discovering zero clues at your location would result in zero clues removed from Cover Up.

Also note that Cover Up, like all Triggered abilities controlled by the player, is optional to perform. So you can opt to discover the clues if you feel it is of the most benefit to you, or you can opt to discard the same number of clues from Cover Up instead.


What happens if I pocket a C/m but accidentally touch a C/m on the table? While playing Carrom I placed my strike and pocketed my C/m. Mistakenly, my finger touched my opponent's C/m. Do I play on, or is this a Foul?

It will be a Foul. You will lose your turn, the pocketed piece will be returned, and a penalty piece will be returned. Presumably your touch caused the piece to move. According to the ICF rules:

The C/m and/or Queen shall not be moved or disturbed after the Break, except by way of a stroke. If touched, moved or disturbed the same shall be replaced in the original position by the Umpire, as far as possible and a Foul shall be declared against the offending player as per the Laws.

a) If a player pockets his own C/m by an improper stroke, the C/m so pocketed with a Penalty C/m shall be taken out for placing by the opponent and the player shall lose his turn.


What happens when an undying creature takes damage from a creature with deathtouch? Let's say a 2/2 creature with deathtouch attacks another 2/2 creature with undying.

As far as I can see there are two ways this could resolve:

Damage is applied, killing creature B. As the damage was enough to kill it deathtouch will not matter. The creature is then put back into play, alive, with a +1/+1 counter.
Damage is applied, killing creature B. It is then put back into play, but with its previous state, i.e. still having deathtouch applied to it, thus killing it and putting it into the graveyard.

I'd be grateful if someone could clear this up for me.

The undying creature will return and stay.
Your provided answer options indicate a misunderstanding of what Deathtouch is. Deathtouch merely says:

702.2. Deathtouch
702.2a Deathtouch is a static ability.
702.2b Any nonzero amount of combat damage assigned to a creature by a source with deathtouch is considered to be lethal damage, regardless of that creature's toughness. See rules 510.1c - d.

In other words:
For normal damage to kill a creature, two conditions have to be true:

The sum of all damage packets on that creature has to be 1 or greater.
The sum of all damage packets on that creature has to match or exceed its current toughness.
If both conditions are met, all damage packets are removed from the creature and it is destroyed.

If any of the damage packets comes from a source with Deathtouch, it merely removes the second condition.
So Deathtouch is not, for example, a triggered ability that would cause another destruction affect on top of lethal damage - there still is only 1 destruction effect.
Going further, your option 1 is closer to the truth than option 2 - if a creature dies and returns, it returns as a new object and (with few exceptions) all spells, abilities, etc. tracking the creature's previous incarnation will have lost track of its new version. So even if the Deathtouch was an effect using the stack, it would still not destroy the returned creature.
Edit:
Thanks to StuartCook, a little correction:
According to

702.2c A creature with toughness greater than 0 that's been dealt damage by a source with deathtouch since the last time state-based actions were checked is destroyed as a state-based action. See rule 704.

the Deathtouch rule comes into effect only immediately after Deathtouch damage has been dealt - if a creature has been indestructible or anything similiar at the time the Deathtouch destruction effect was checked for, but loses that ability later the same turn, Deathtouch damage no longer ignores the creature's actual toughness. It's a one-time effect and for the purposes of destruction becomes regular damage if the creature did not die from it.
It's actually a clever way of keeping the "touch" feel of that ability intact in the rules - once the touch is over (after combat), it no longer kills the target immediately.


Can I use a flicker effect to stop an opponents blocker from blocking Pretty much what the title says. Supposing I have the ability to flicker an opposing blocker, can I force damage past it?

To give a concrete example:

Suppose my opponent has:

1 untapped vanilla creature on the battlefield
1 life
No lands on the battlefield
No cards in hand.
1 Enchantment saying, "In your upkeep, you win the game".

And I have:

1 haste-y creature on the battlefield
Flicker of Fate in hand (flicker and creature, for 1 white + 1 generic).
Two untapped plains on the battlefield

It's my first main phase.

Can I use flicker to prevent their blocker from blocking and win the game?

If so, exactly what is the timing?

No, you can't prevent a block with a flicker effect, unless your creature has trample.
If you flicker the creature before it is assigned as a blocker, your opponent can just assign it as a blocker during the declare blocker step of the combat phase. If you flicker it after it has been declared as a blocker, it will be removed from combat, but your attacker will still count as being blocked.

506.4. A permanent is removed from combat if it leaves the battlefield [..]
509.1h An attacking creature with one or more creatures declared as blockers for it becomes a blocked creature; one with no creatures declared as blockers for it becomes an unblocked creature. This remains unchanged until the creature is removed from combat, an effect says that it becomes blocked or unblocked, or the combat phase ends, whichever comes first. A creature remains blocked even if all the creatures blocking it are removed from combat.

When it comes to the combat damage step, blocked creatures will deal their damage to creatures blocking it - there is no creature to deal damage to in this case, so your creature deals no damage at all.

510.1c A blocked creature assigns its combat damage to the creatures blocking it. If no creatures are currently blocking it (if, for example, they were destroyed or removed from combat), it assigns no combat damage. [..]

Exception: If your creature had trample, it would deal its combat damage to the defending player.

702.19c If an attacking creature with trample is blocked, but there are no creatures blocking it when damage is assigned, all its damage is assigned to the player or planeswalker it’s attacking.


Gargos, Vicious Watcher Ruling - M20 Gargos, Vicious Watcher (GVW) has the ability, "Whenever a creature you control becomes the target of a spell, Gargos, Vicious Watcher fights up to one target creature you don't control."

Next, an opponent targets GVW with a Pacifism Enchantment.  GVW may fight an opposition creature.  GVW is enchatned.

Next, Natural End is played to destroy the Pacifism Enchantment. Which scenario below is correct?

1) Does the Natural End target GVW, the Enchanted creature, triggering the ability to fight an opponent creature?

2) Does the Natural End target the Pacifism only, and GVW ability is not triggered - no fight?

Thanks!

Natural End reads

  Destroy target artifact or enchantment. You gain 3 life.

Pacifism is the target, as the enchantment. Even though the spell is targeting an enchantment that is attached to Gargos, the enchantment itself is still the target, as per the wording.


What rules explain Xantcha's behavior when its controller leaves the game? Xantcha, Sleeper Agent has the ability:

  As Xantcha, Sleeper Agent enters the battlefield, an opponent of your
  choice gains control of it.

The release notes for Commander 2018 describe what happens when a player who controls a permanent owned by another player leaves the game as:

  If that player controlled any permanents owned by another player, the
  effects that gave control of them to the player who left end. If this
  doesn't give control of them to a different player (perhaps because
  they entered the battlefield under the control of the player who
  left), they're exiled.

In the same document, the release notes for Xantcha state:

  If the player under whose control Xantcha entered the battlefield
  leaves the game, the effect changing control of Xantcha ends.

Answers to a previous question lead me to believe that Xantcha's replacement effect causes it to enter the battlefield under an opponent's control and not under my control at all.

Because Xantcha appears to be entering the battlefield under an opponent's control, I thought Xantcha would be exiled when its controller leaves the game.

However, I know this is not what happens because the official Magic: The Gathering Rules Manager has answered a question about it:

  What happens to Xantcha when the opponent controlling her dies? Does
  she get exiled? Returned to my battlefield? Do I get to give her to
  another opponent? Is all of this in the release notes?

  It's all in the release notes, but I'll tell you! You end up with
  Xantcha. Will you keep her as your poisonous friend, or kill her so
  you can pop a new Xantcha out of the vat? #WotCStaff

So I know what is supposed to happen - Xantcha's owner is supposed to gain control of it when its current controller leaves the game. What I want to know is the full explanation within the rules of what causes this result to happen.

When Throne of Eldraine was released in October 2019, Xantcha, Sleeper Agent received functional errata that makes it now work the same way a card obtained with Bribery works; and Xantcha will now be exiled by 800.4a when her controller leaves the game.

Leaving the original answer below; as the question only existed due to the old wording on Xantcha and the old rules associated with that wording.

Xantcha, Sleeper Agent has an ability that generates a continuous effect. This continuous effect then ends due to the first part of rule 800.4a:

  When a player leaves the game, all objects (see rule 109) owned by that player leave the game and any effects which give that player control of any objects or players end.

We can see that it is a continuous effect:

  Continuous Effects

    611.1. A continuous effect modifies characteristics of objects, modifies control of objects, or affects players or the rules of the game, for a fixed or indefinite period.

    611.2. A continuous effect may be generated by the resolution of a spell or ability.

      611.2a A continuous effect generated by the resolution of a spell or ability lasts as long as stated by the spell or ability creating it (such as “until end of turn”). If no duration is stated, it lasts until the end of the game.

This is confirmed by a Gatherer ruling on Xantcha:

  If the player under whose control Xantcha entered the battlefield leaves the game, the effect changing control of Xantcha ends. Because Xantcha’s replacement effect creates a continuous effect causing another player to control it, Xantcha isn’t exiled.

This is different from the wording on cards such as Bribery, which says "put that card onto the battlefield under your control". In that case, there is no continuous effect, the card simply entered the battlefield under your control. Because of this, the first part of 800.4a would not see a control-changing effect to end, and instead the third part of 800.4a would exile the creature.

Note that the wording that causes the controller to be an opponent is the same on Xantcha as it is on cards like Donate, "[...]player gains control". The only difference is that it is a replacement effect that happens as the creature enters the battlefield, instead of something that happens to a creature already on the battlefield. Bribery on the other hand has no such replacement effect or continuous effect, it simply lets you put something on the battlefield under your control.

It is still correct that you never controlled Xantcha in the first place, but that is not relevant. The rules don't cause Xantcha to "revert" to its original controller, they simply cause a control-changing effect to end. Theoretically, Xantcha could end up going to a different opponent instead, if there were multiple controller-changing effects in play.


Why is Femme Fatale so expensive to install? Femme fatale costs 9 to install and I am struggling to figure out why it costs so much. The card has the ability to render a piece of ice fairly useless by allowing you to break its subroutines by paying one coin. However, I can also do that with other, cheaper, better icebreakers. I am just a little confused on why it costs 9.

Honestly I think that ability is just the answer. It's a decent sentry icebreaker (filling a slot, albeit at a high cost), but a great counter to ice like these. Just imagine Corp plays a Wotan, and suddenly you bust out a Femme Fatale. Anyway, you probably don't want to use FF anyway without some sort of ability to help you install it cheaper. :)


How exactly does Xenograft work, and not work? The Blue Enchantment Xenograft (New Phyrexia) reads like this:

  As Xenograft enters the battlefield, choose a creature type.

  Each creature you control is the chosen type in addition to its other types.

Discussion on The Gatherer about this card is avid, complicated, and at times, contradictory.
What exactly does this card do? I was first under the impression that it affects all creature cards I control from the point it hits the board and continues to do so for the rest of the game. Then I was under the impression it only affected creatures that were in play at the time of its casting, and NOT creatures that come out later. Now I'm just totally confused and unsure about anything other than that I can obviously add creature types to some or all of my creatures, at some point or another.

Too much confusion. Someone set me straight! Specifically:

Does Xenograft apply to creatures that are already on the battlefield when it's cast?
Does Xenograft apply to creatures that enter the battlefield after it's been cast?
The Gatherer's details page says, among other things, this about Xenograft:

  Creature cards not on the battlefield and creature spells are not affected.

What does creature spells are not affected mean exactly? Aren't all creatures creature spells? I'm lost here.

Please go the extra mile if possible and cover anything I haven't mentioned here if it comes to your mind. I'm so lost with this card that I wouldn't be surprised if you end up answering questions I have that I can't even put into words yet.

All creatures already on the battlefield and all creatures that come under your control later are affected by Xenograft. No if's and but's. As pointed out, it's a static ability that generates a continuous effect. If Xenograft would affect only the creatures that are in play at the time of its casting, the wording would be quite different and would probably involve counters to mark the affected creatures.
Creature cards not on the battlefield are simply that: Creature cards on the stack, in your hand, library, graveyard, command zone, exile, ante, or out of game are not affected by Xenograft.
Creature spells are not creatures, but objects on the stack. You control the spell, but a spell is not a creature, so Xenograft does not apply to them either. Only if and when the spell resolves does it become a creature to which Xenograft can apply.
Creature spells are spells, not creatures:

111 Spells
111.1. A spell is a card on the stack. As the first step of being cast (see rule 601, "Casting Spells"), the card becomes a spell and is moved to the top of the stack from the zone it was in, which is usually its owner's hand. (See rule 405, "Stack.") A spell remains on the stack as a spell until it resolves (see rule 608, "Resolving Spells and Abilities"), is countered (see rule 701.5), or otherwise leaves the stack. For more information, see section 6, "Spells, Abilities, and Effects."
302 Creatures
302.1. A player who has priority may cast a creature card from his or her hand during a main phase of his or her turn when the stack is empty. Casting a creature as a spell uses the stack. (See rule 601, "Casting Spells.")
302.2. When a creature spell resolves, its controller puts it onto the battlefield under his or her control.

Xenograft only affects creatures on the battlefield:

603.6b Continuous effects that modify characteristics of a permanent do so the moment the permanent is on the battlefield (and not before then). The permanent is never on the battlefield with its unmodified characteristics. Continuous effects don't apply before the permanent is on the battlefield, however (see rule 603.6e).

user1873's answer also covers this well.


Is there negative marking when destination cards are drawn and not enough trains are left? A problem occurred during a recent game of Ticket to Ride.
After completing the 3 original destination ticket, the player drew 3 new destination cards.
The player didn't have enough trains left to complete ANY of the 3 destination but the player is required to keep at least one of those newly drawn destination cards.

What happens in this case?
Is the player still liable to negative points at the end of the game for the destination that is impossible to complete?
Is this one of the pure bad luck elements of the game?

Players get negative points for any destination tickets that are incomplete when the game ends, period. Either this player got unlucky, or made a foolish decision drawing new tickets so close to the end of the game.


If Progenitus "dies" to the command zone, can I shuffle my deck? This is related to another question about using Progenitus as a Commander, but focuses on a more specific interaction.

In the Commander format, there is a rule that lets a Commander go to the command zone instead of some other zones:

  903.9. If a commander would be exiled from anywhere or put into its owner’s hand, graveyard, or
  library from anywhere, its owner may put it into the command zone instead. This replacement effect
  may apply more than once to the same event.

Progenitus is a possible choice for a Commander, and it has its own overlapping replacement effect:

  If Progenitus would be put into a graveyard from anywhere, reveal Progenitus and shuffle it into its owner's library instead.

By my understanding of multiple replacement effects, the owner of Progenitus will have the chance to determine which of these replacement effects happen in what order any time Progenitus would go to their graveyard. My understanding also indicates that you could make the Commander replacement happen first, and then the Progenitus replacement wouldn't happen because the "put into a graveyard" isn't happening anymore. However, one could also choose to have Progenitus's replacement apply first instead.

Based on Rule 903.9 including "This replacement effect may apply more than once to the same event." I assume that after applying Progenitus's replacement I can replace "Progenitus goes to the library" with "Progenitus goes to the Command Zone"; either the original replacement still applies because the condition had "... graveyard or library", or it applies a second time due to moving to the library instead. Regardless, it should be possible to have Progenitus replace "goes to the graveyard" with "shuffles into the library", and then have "goes to the library" replaced with "goes to the Command Zone".

My question is, if you replace "shuffles into the library" with "goes to the Command Zone", does the library still get shuffled without Progenitus? Or is the entire "shuffle into the library" action replaced?

Yes, if you apply the replacement effects as described, you will still shuffle your library.

In the rules for the Shuffle keyword action, rule 701.19c says

  If an effect would cause a player to shuffle one or more specific objects into a library, that library is shuffled even if none of those objects are in the zone they’re expected to be in or an effect causes all of those objects to be moved to another zone or remain in their current zone.

In fact, one of the examples covers a very similar situation. It says

  Black Sun’s Zenith says, in part, “Shuffle Black Sun’s Zenith into its owner’s library.” Black Sun’s Zenith is in a graveyard, has gained flashback (due to Recoup, perhaps), and is cast from that graveyard. Black Sun’s Zenith will be exiled, and its owner’s library will be shuffled.

In that situation, like in this one, we have an instruction to shuffle the card into the library, and a replacement effect (created by Flashback) to move the card to another zone (exile) instead of the library.


Can there be two winners at the same time in Catan? Imagine the following setup:

Player A has 6 points, including the Longest Road.
Player B has 8 points with an equally long road.
Player C has 9 points with a shorter road.

Now what would happen if Player C places a village, breaking Player A's road chain? At that moment Player A would have 4 points, while both Player B and Player C would have 10.

In this case, who would be declared the victor?

Only the player who is currently taking their turn can win the game, so player C would be the winner.

Official Rule:

  ENDING THE GAME
  If you have—or reach—10 victory
  points on your turn, the game ends
  immediately and you win! You can only
  win during your turn. If somehow you
  find you have 10 victory points during
  another player’s turn, you must wait
  until your next turn to claim victory.

Source: Downloads page on www.catan.com