Identify this grid placement/guessing game Please help me know the name of this game, i can't google it because i don't know what the proper keyword is.

Basically Its a board game played mostly by 2 or more depending on the creator of the board game.

The theme can be a Tank battle , or ship battle or anything.

You play the Game by placing your pieces, example tanks on a Grid of numbers and letters,

The objective of the game is to guess and destroy the pieces of your opponents are in the grid by guessing the Grid like A1, OR C3.

Sounds like Battleship: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battleship_(game) You place your ships on the grid and you have to guess the positions of the opponent's ships.


How to interrupt a loop with multiple players? Assume there are three players, Alice, Bob, and Chris. The turn order is Alice, then Bob, then Chris, with it currently being Alice's turn.

Alice has a loop that can infinitely create creatures, two creatures on the field, and 20 life.

Bob has a Leyline of Anticipation on the field and a Deadly Tempest, and is planning on casting it when Alice has twenty creatures on the field to deal 20 damage to her.

Chris has a Fumigate in hand and plans to use it on his turn to gain a lot of life and clear the board. Chris also has a Soul Warden and an Aethersphere Harvester on the field.

Alice proposes a shortcut to do her loop a hundred times. Bob wants there to be at least 20 creatures on Alice's board (but wants to minimize this number to minimize how much life gain Chris's Soul Warden gains him), so he proposes to stop at only eighteen loops. If Chris weren't in the game, Alice would be required to accept this new loop (despite the fact that she just got information about Bob's plan). However, Chris and Alice both want Alice to stay alive (at least for now), so Chris proposes only seventeen loops (after which he uses Soul Warden to crew Aethersphere Harvester). Crewing the vehicle does nothing to stop Alice from resuming her combo, but both players just got information about Bob's hand, which causes her to not put another creature on the field.

Is this legal, or does Chris have to provide some kind of 'legitimate response' to interact with Alice's loop, other than the fact that Bob gave away information by proposing a stop to the loop?

Edit: Or is my understanding of the order in which players propose shortcuts wrong?

The described situation is perfectly legal. These loops are governed by rule 720, concerning the taking of shortcuts.
CR720.2a, b and c explain how shortcuts are to be taken:

720.2a At any point in the game, the player with priority may suggest a shortcut by describing a sequence of game choices, for all players, that may be legally taken based on the current game state and the predictable results of the sequence of choices. This sequence may be a non-repetitive series of choices, a loop that repeats a specified number of times, multiple loops, or nested loops, and may even cross multiple turns. It can’t include conditional actions, where the outcome of a game event determines the next action a player takes. The ending point of this sequence must be a place where a player has priority, though it need not be the player proposing the shortcut.
720.2b Each other player, in turn order starting after the player who suggested the shortcut, may either accept the proposed sequence, or shorten it by naming a place where they will make a game choice that’s different than what’s been proposed. (The player doesn’t need to specify at this time what the new choice will be.) This place becomes the new ending point of the proposed sequence.
720.2c Once the last player has either accepted or shortened the shortcut proposal, the shortcut is taken. The game advances to the last proposed ending point, with all game choices contained in the shortcut proposal having been taken. If the shortcut was shortened from the original proposal, the player who now has priority must make a different game choice than what was originally proposed for that player.

Notice the emphasized sentence: that player, in your situation, is Chris. Since Chris was the one who suggested the fewest number of iterations for Alice's loop, when he receives priority, he must take an action that is different from the action originally proposed by Alice for the shortcut.
As you can see, as long as it is a different action from the one originally proposed, it doesn't matter what action that is. Once that action (in your case, crewing the Aethersphere Harverster) has been taken, play continues normally in turn order. Alice can then propose a new shortcut to continue her loop if she wishes to do so, but that action is not required.


polymorphist's jest and emrakul Polymorphist's Jest says each creature target player controls loses all abilities and becomes a blue Frog with a base power and toughness 1/1. My question is...  how would this work with Emrakul? Like let's say a player attacks with Emrakul, you cast Polymoprhist's Jest and then lightning bolt Emrakul.

My assumption is that the defending player would still have to sacrifice six permanents because the attack is earlier in the stack.

And when Emrakul hits the graveyard does it go into the graveyard and stay there or does the graveyard still get shuffled into the library?

Defending player will still have to sacrifice 6 permenants, and Emrakul and the rest of the graveyard will still be shuffled into the controller's graveyard.

Anailator still happens, not exactly because the attack is earlier in the stack like you say ("the attack" doesn't go on the stack). But as soon as Emrakul is declared as an attacker, the "when attacks" ability triggers and goes in the stack. After that, it doesn't matter what happens to Emrakul. Best to kill it in the beginning of combat step.

It still gets shuffled back in because that trigger happens "when it is put into the graveyard". And by that time, it's back to normal, sitting in the graveyard with its abilities. Note that if it said "when Emrakul dies..." instead, then it would NOT be shuffled back in, because when it dies triggers care about the state of the object as it was on battlefield, and the ability didn't exist in the battlefield.


If my opponent Confiscates my permanent and I can cast my own Confiscate, should I target my permanent or their Confiscate? There exist a number of auras that allow a player to take control of a permanent on the board. The earliest of these to my knowledge is Confiscate, but my question applies to any of these effects assuming they have legal targets.

The context is that you and your opponent are both playing Confiscate effects and your opponent has taken control of your MVP (most valuable permanent). It's now your turn and you have the mana available to cast your own Confiscate (or equivalent). Because control effects are applied in timestamp order, you can regain control of your permanent by targeting it—but you could also regain control of your MVP by targeting the opponent's aura.

Are these targets necessarily equivalent? If not, is there any compelling reason to consider targeting the opponent's aura instead of your own stolen permanent?

Are these targets necessarily equivalent?

No. There do exist cases where these targets are not equivalent, though you shouldn't necessarily expect to encounter them in an arbitrary match.

  Is there any compelling reason to consider targeting the opponent's aura instead of your own stolen permanent?

Yes, there is! In short, you should default to stealing their aura because it results in your controlling more permanents and their controlling fewer. Generally speaking, unless a permanent includes some kind of explicit drawback, you're usually better off taking it away from your opponent.

There are a few broad categories of effects where this choice becomes relevant:

Sacrifice-based removal

If an effect would require you and/or your opponent to sacrifice a permanent (or specifically an enchantment), you typically will have more options when you control more things to sacrifice. Likewise, taking away your opponent's permanents provides them with fewer options.

Of these, Dromoka's Command is an example of a cheap, flexible, Modern-legal spell that you might reasonably expect to show up in a deck with reasonable access to green and white mana.

In fact, that's probably the single most important interaction in this answer because of how powerful and popular a sideboard card Dromoka's Command can be, relative to all the rest of the weirdness I'm about to get into. If you're not interested in the quirky stuff, but you kept reading anyway after my short summary, here's a second chance to quit while you're ahead!

Costs involving permanents or enchantments

Some cards allow players to sacrifice permanents in order to gain some benefit; e.g., as an activation cost, an additional cost of casting a spell, or a drawback for some under-costed creature (in the tradition of Lord of the Pit). If you're playing any such cards, you should be aware of the opportunity to acquire an extra resource by targeting the opponent's aura instead of the stolen permanent. Perilous Research comes to mind, being both on-color and potentially on-theme for a deck with Confiscate effects.

Another classic and particularly relevant example is Auratog, which can pump itself by "eating" enchantments you control. If your opponent has stolen your Auratog, go ahead and target their aura; if your opponent isn't savvy enough to sacrifice it in response, you'll end up with some free food!

(There are also other types of cost that are relevant but not really worth exploring in detail; Sphere of Safety, for example, which was reprinted in Commander 2016.)

Arbitrary permanents as useful resources

There are certain matchups where you just want to control as many permanents as possible. Smokestack forms the basis for the "Stax" archetype of prison decks, a matchup where every permanent becomes a useful resource. While these decks do exist, they're not likely to play Confiscate effects because they are designed to operate on very few resources and these effects are always relatively expensive. If you did find yourself in such a situation, unlikely as it might be, you would certainly benefit from having the extra permanent to sacrifice. (Other symmetric effects, like Pox and Smallpox, do not affect all permanents.)

One other interesting example is Terastodon. If you control its enters the battlefield (ETB) effect, you can destroy both Confiscates and get yourself two "free" elephant tokens—but only if you attached your aura to theirs, and not to the permanent they stole. (If your opponent is playing the Terastodon then it doesn't matter what your Confiscate was attached to, their best play either way is probably to just destroy your Confiscate and regain control of your MVP.) This is an interaction I probably wouldn't expect to come up outside of a cube draft with support for a blue-green deck that ramps into expensive bombs.

Effects that count permanents you control

The notable mechanic here is Devotion, which counts up colored mana symbols in permanents a player controls. There are five specific cards which, if either you or your opponent are playing them, would incentivize you to take control of their Confiscate. Master of Waves is a reasonable finisher in a mono-blue control list—exactly the sort of deck that might consider running an expensive but very powerful controlling effect like Confiscate.

The "counting permanents" category also includes at least one case where you would definitely want to let your opponent retain control of their Confiscate: Balancing Act. This card heavily incentivizes you to control fewer permanents than your opponent. Traditional Balance effects (including the Modern-legal Restore Balance) don't affect non-creature, non-land permanents, though, so you're not likely to ever be punished by this.

On the other hand, Cataclysm—and, by extension, Cataclysmic Gearhulk in Modern—does affect enchantments. Despite their superficial similarity to Balance effects, you want to control your opponent's Confiscate if a Cataclysm is on the way, for essentially the same reasons given in the "sacrifice-based removal" section.

There are more cards that count permanents for various reasons, like Touch of the Eternal and Myojin of Seeing Winds, where you probably want to control the aura. Unless you've built a deck around the interaction, though, these are extreme corner cases.

Magical Christmasland

Finally, one amusingly esoteric interaction that you'll never see in a game—but if you did, you'd probably never see it coming: If the stolen permanent is a creature with power 7 or greater, your opponent could counter your Confiscate with Not of This World, despite being tapped out, if and only if you choose to target the creature instead of the opponent's Confiscate effect.

P.S. Analysis of scenarios involving Damping Engine is left as an exercise to the reader. ;)

P.P.S. If your opponent has access to bounce or blink/flicker effects, they can always come out ahead no matter what you targeted. There are things for them to consider about tempo and mana efficiency but this post is long enough as it is without adding an analysis of what is essentially an independent decision; the only thing worth mentioning is that certain cards are restricted in what they can bounce, which reinforces (in a very minor way) the general point that you are typically better off taking control of their Confiscate.


If a Devotion God had a tap ability, would it be able to tap on the turn it came in if you didn't have enough devotion? If a Theros God that requires a certain Devotion enters the battlefield where you do not have enough devotion to fulfill the requirement to make it a creature does it still have summoning sickness for the purpose of a tap ability?

You would be able to tap it to activate an ability that had the tap symbol as part of its cost, yes. Summoning sickness only affects creatures, and the Theros Gods are not creatures if they are on the battlefield and your devotion is low enough. This also applies if your devotion is initially high enough to make them creatures, and then later in the turn your devotion goes down making them not creatures any more (which, incidentally, seems like the biggest opportunity to give the God a tap ability in the first place, such as mutating it with Parcelbeast or Porcuparrot).
The rule for the tap symbol only specifies creatures as a special case, so any non-creature permanent would be unaffected by summoning sickness:

107.5. The tap symbol is {T}. The tap symbol in an activation cost means “Tap this permanent.” A
permanent that’s already tapped can’t be tapped again to pay the cost. A creature’s activated ability
with the tap symbol in its activation cost can’t be activated unless the creature has been under its
controller’s control continuously since their most recent turn began. See rule 302.6.

where rule 302.6 basically repeats the final sentence, plus some more that is irrelevant in this situation:

302.6. A creature’s activated ability with the tap symbol or the untap symbol in its activation cost can’t
be activated unless the creature has been under its controller’s control continuously since their most
recent turn began. A creature can’t attack unless it has been under its controller’s control
continuously since their most recent turn began. This rule is informally called the “summoning
sickness” rule.


Can a player sacrifice a creature after declaring that creature as blocker while taking lethal damage? I'm asking specifically about the lovely Magus of the Balance if that'll help.
So for example, If I were to attack with a theoretical 20/20 Savageborn Hydra, and then my opponent declares block with Magus, would my opponent still be able to sacrifice the Magus after declaring block?

Yes, that's possible. Declaring blockers is one of the steps of combat, and after declaring blockers the Hydra becomes blocked:

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. [...] A creature remains blocked even if all the creatures blocking it are removed from combat.

After that, there is time for the players to play spells or abilities:

509.4. Fourth, the active player gets priority. (See rule 116, "Timing and Priority.")

Combat damage is only dealt in the next step:

Combat Damage Step

510.1. First, the active player announces how each attacking creature assigns its combat damage, then the defending player announces how each blocking creature assigns its combat damage. ...

so it's possible to sacrifice the Magus before it's killed by the Hydra, and the Hydra won't deal combat damage to your opponent (unless it somehow gained Trample) since it's still blocked.


Solitaire variant: Piles of 3, top moved by value match. Name=? I'm in the UK.
My sister taught me this as "American Patience" in the 1960's
(it is not a straight Solitaire).

Object: To clear the tableaux and move all the cards to the 4 foundation piles, Ace through King, as normal.
1 deck (no jokers), all laid out to tableau face up, in piles of 3, each fanned to show underlying cards.

Initial layout: 16 piles of 3, with last four laid as 2 piles of two.

Only top card of each pile is movable to other piles with two or one in pile.
Once the last card in a pile is moved to the foundation, the pile position is lost for further use.

Key rule: Top cards are moved to other piles that match the same value (3 on 3, J on J etc, suit/colour irrelevant).
Aces on top of any pile can move to foundation as normal, enabling standard moves to Foundation thereafter.
During play, groups of three of same value in a pile tend to build up, stopping the fourth of that value from moving until the foundation builds to that value.  Common strategy is to aim for two piles with two of same value to prevent this.

Very rarely get through to foundation completion first go, so get a total of three "tries"
 - ie when no moves left, the foundation stays, remaining tableau gathered and reshuffled, and laid out again in threes as before, until only 4,5 or 6 cards remain to set into tableau;

6 remaining=> 3 piles of two
5 remaining=> 2 piles of two, 1 of one
4 remaining=> 2 piles of two

Love to know the most common name and get an electronic version on my android tablet.

It looks like Troika, but that game has no redeal.


Lasting  games in the past century One of the appeals of traditional games such as Chess, Go, Backgammon, or Poker is the depth that they have acquired over the years; long-standing communities and traditions, wide range of players from different backgrounds, depth of strategic analysis that has occurred over the years, and wide range of skill levels with very strong top players that comes about from years of study and training.

Many newer games are mere flashes in the pan; fun for a while, but ultimately replaced after a few years with something newer and shinier. Many of them have the potential to gain such depth, but they are crowded in a field of other games, and do not really develop their own independent communities nor a significant pool of people to put in the time and dedication to create a strong competitive system.

What recent games (defined as having been invented within the past century or so) have managed to achieve this sort of durability; their own cultures and communities, high-level tournament play, strong strategic analysis and a broad range of player skill? What games have not yet had time to (past 10 years or so), but do you feel have the seeds of such depth?

Here are some criteria that can help determine if a game has reached this level. Not all criteria need apply, or may not apply exactly, but the more the better.

Significant tournaments with professional or semi-pro players; or large amateur tournaments at a national or international level.
Official rating or ranking system (or more than one) with hundreds of players and a wide range of abilities represented.
Significant coverage in mainstream media, not just passing references or coverage in game-specific media.
Multiple independent publications discussing the game specifically (not as one of many, but dedicated to the game in question). Books, magazines, professional level blogs or e-zines, etc.
Professional on-line or software implementations dedicated to this game, or many independent computer implementations in systems which cover multiple games with hundreds of active players.
Popularity in groups of people outside of of traditional gamer groups; cultural relevance of the game outside of the gaming community.
Multiple clubs (regional, city, or university) dedicated to this game in particular, not gaming or a particular genre of gaming in general.

Magic - The Gathering

This simple looking card game transformed the industry quickly leading to huge tournaments culminating in a World Championship.  It has been going strong for over 15 years and shows no sign of stopping.

Strategies mutate and change with every release, but the good players are able to adapt and continue to remain strong.

Tournaments: The World Championship is the culmination of many levels of feeder tournaments.  There are a large number of people in many countries that play the game on a semi-pro basis.
Official Rating system - check, The rating system has been active and supported for over a decade.
Mainstream coverage - NY Times, USA Today, GAMES magazine Hall of Fame, broadcasts on ESPN, many others.
Publications

529 book references on Amazon for "Magic the Gathering", a lot of magazine have publishing price guides and articles for Magic over the years.
Scrye was my favorite back in the day.
InQuest was another popular magazine.

Online or Software support

Two videogames released in 1997 (Magic: The Gathering and Magic: The Gathering: Battlemage
Magic: The Gathering Online was released in 2002 and is still played by hundreds of thousands of people


Can multiple spells be activated with the same mana? So first off I am fairly new to MTG and I was playing with my friend today and he corrected me on my move making. The way I thought it worked is that, for example, if I have a creature that requires 1 Mountain to attack it can attack after I tap the Mountain and the creature. However my friend said that the same land can be used multiple times in a turn, so I could use 2 other creatures on the battlefield that only required 1 Mountain to attack. Is this correct?

There are a few basic concepts you need to understand to understand the answer to this question. For more information, I would suggest reading through the Basic Rulebook:

Mana

Mana is a resource that is separate from cards and lands, and you have to represent it separately or remember how much you have. When you tap a basic land for mana, it adds one mana of the corresponding color to your mana pool (for example, tapping a Mountain adds one red mana to your mana pool). Some spells or abilities also explicitly say that you add mana to your mana pool, such as Llanowar Elves' ability. Your mana pool empties at the end of each step or phase.

Tapping

Every permanent (land, creature, etc) on the battlefield is either tapped or untapped. Abilities that make you tap the permanent, like a land's ability that gives you mana, can only be activated if the permanent is untapped. You untap all of your permanents at the beginning of your turn, and you generally don't do so otherwise. This means that, unless you do something special, you can't use a single land to generate mana more than once in a turn.

Spells

All cards that represent spells have a mana cost in the upper right corner (except some Future Sight cards, which were printed with the mana cost in the upper left). This indicates how much mana you need to spend to play the spell. When you spend that mana, it is removed from your mana pool. For example, if you want to cast Cancel, you need to have 2 blue mana and one mana of any color in your mana pool to cast it, and that mana is removed from your mana pool when you do so.

So, to answer part of your question, if you tap a land for mana, you can only use that mana to pay for one spell.

Combat

When you start combat, the player who is taking the turn decides which of their creatures is attacking. In general, this requires that you tap those creatures (and that they are not already tapped), but it does not require any mana payment. For example, if you control an untapped Akroan Crusader, you can declare it as an attacker, and all you have to do is tap it.

Once you are done declaring attackers, your opponent declares blockers. This means that they decide which of their untapped creatures should block which of your attacking creatures.

Once that's done, combat damage is dealt, which generally means that blocked attackers and their blockers deal damage to each other, and unblocked attackers deal damage to the player they are attacking.


Can a player take a card from the researcher on their turn if they have the co-worker relationship but are not in the same city? It is the generalist turn. Can she take a card from the researcher if they have the co worker relation?

Yes.

Co-worker allows players to Share Knowledge at a distance under specific conditions. When the researcher is the one passing the card, it overrides that condition, whether it's the researcher or another character initiating the action.


Can I play Gonti, Lord of Luxury's exiled card after he leaves the battlefield? I'm interested in using Gonti, Lord of Luxury as my commander. If I summon him and exiled a card with him, and then he leaves the battlefield (is destroyed, exiled, etc), can I still cast that exiled card? Can I do it if he then returns to the battlefield again?

As said on Gonti, Lord of Luxury 's gatherer page :

  You may look at and cast that card (and spend mana as though it were mana of any type to do so) even if Gonti leaves the battlefield. If another player gains control of Gonti, that player can’t look at or cast the card, and you still can.

If it comes back to the battlefield later, it'll be a completely different object, and won't affect the first card exiled, you'll still be able to cast it.


How many artifact lands can I play a turn? I bought the 5 artifact lands from Mirrodin to add to my artifact deck; it works with the artifact theme (having all of my cards be artifacts) and goes well with my Darksteel Juggernauts.

The thing is, the other day a friend told me that, because they are artifacts and not basic lands, I could play a basic land and as many artifact lands as I have in my hand in a single turn. Is this true?

I find it hard to believe as that would make then overpowered and everyone would use them.

Can anyone verify this or point me to an article where artifact lands are discussed?

Artifact lands may be artifacts, but they are also lands, and all the usual rules about how often you can play and land (i.e. once a turn, on your turn) still apply to them.  The same goes for creature lands like Dryad Arbor from Future Sight: if you've played a land already that turn, you can't then play your Dryad Arbor.

If you want to dump out a ton of mana production on your first turn, you're going to have to invest many thousands of dollars for a large collection of Moxes, I'm afraid to say.

From the Comprehensive Rules, section 305, Lands:

  305.2. A player may normally play only one land during his or her
  turn; however, continuous effects may increase this number. If any
  such effects exist, the player announces which effect, or this rule,
  applies to each land play as it happens.

  305.9. If an object is both a land and another card type, it can be
  played only as a land. It can't be cast as a spell.

Essentially, the fact of an Artifact Land being an artifact doesn't mean it is no longer bound by the rules for lands; it must follow all the normal rules for lands, and all the normal rules for artifacts too - so it is a valid target for Shatter, and so on.


Does a game recommendation website exist? Is there a website that will collect your evaluations of various board games that you've played and will then recommend a board game that you will like, based on your evaluations and on those of other members?

Board Game Finder ( https://www.boardgamefinder.net/ ) does exactly that.

From the "How It Works" section of that site:

  To provide the boardgame recommendations, we focus on collaborative filtering. In collaborative filtering, we have a set of items (boardgames) that have been rated by users. The main idea of collaborative filtering is to infer the preferences of each user based not only on the ratings provided by that user, but also on the ratings of all other users in the system. These preferences are then used to form the actual predictions. Thus, collaborative filtering makes use of the ratings of all users to make predictions about a given user. In other words, it recommends items that other users with preferences similar to yours rated positively. This is why it is called collaborative.


Where can I find Duel Monster tournaments in the U.S.? I really want to start getting in matches. I'm still a beginner but I want to practice versing people.

Your Local Gaming/Comic Book Shop likely hosts Yu-Gi-Oh tournaments, along with similar games such as Magic the Gathering, Force of Will, Pokemon, etc.

Without knowing your location, I cannot point you to a specific shop, but there is a store locator available Here


Where does the shark send the divers? When the Shark moves and displaces divers, do they go to the beach or back to the player's supply?

As per the "Activating the Shark" rules card:

  any diver in [the spot the shark moves to] and in either spot next to that spot flees off board back to its owner

Meaning the diver is returned to the players supply.


Custom special abilities rules I know ther are some rules for creating custom Investigators, so new character is balanced and does not ruin the game. It's utilized in Strange Eons.

Are there any rules for custom special abilities for Investigators?

I am creating custom Investigator, who is psychologist like Carolyn Fern, but I don't like to copy her ability. Instead, I thought about ability to restore Sanity in exchange for Clue tokens in 1-to-1 basis during upkeep. Player would be able to use as much Clue tokens as he/she likes and restore Sanity to himself/herself or players in the same area.

I would like to know if there are any rules to check if given special is not over/underpowered.

I would think that would really be up to your own experience that you want to have when playing the game.  Also, doing some play testing would be beneficial in getting a good understanding of whether or not it is over/underpowered.  I know it is a long game, but I would think after one game you would know more of what needs to be tweaked to determine the power of that ability.  And you could always offset that ability by providing lower stats, possessions, and etc.


What happens when a Jace, the Mind Sculptor is played in an unspecific format? If I'm playing casual without a specific format but I'm still trying the rules, what happens when a  Jace, the Mind Sculptor is played?  It is banned from Modern but not from Legacy.

Your and your opponent either agree to a format (in which case, you follow the restriction of that format), or you agree to use your own format (in which case you get to decide what cards are allowed in it). The rules have no say in this.


Can I target my own planeswalker with Angrath? Angrath, Minotaur Pirate's oracle text for its +2 ability is different from its card text to differentiate 'opponent' versus 'opponent or planeswalker an opponent controls'.

Can Angrath target a planeswalker its controller controls with its +2?

I assume so, but the ruling on gatherer leaves me confused:

  Angrath’s first and last abilities target only the player. Creatures with hexproof that player controls will be affected.

Yes, Angrath can target a planeswalker.  As you've stated the Oracle text for it's ability reads:

  +2: Angrath, Minotaur Pirate deals 1 damage to target opponent or planeswalker and each creature that player or that planeswalker's
  controller controls.

Since it specifically says you can target a planeswalker, you can do so.  The Oracle text changed with the Dominaria rules changes to remove the planeswalker damage redirect rule.  Basically, you used to be able to target a player and redirect the damage to their planeswalker.  Now Wizard's is explicit about when you can damage planeswalkers.

The ruling you see on the gatherer page is likely a leftover from before the Dominaria rules change (when you would have just targeted the player rather than the planeswalker).  The ruling appears to be trying to clarify that even if your opponent's creatures have hexproof they will still get damaged (since the creature itself is not the target of the ability hexproof doesn't apply).  It should probably be cleaned up to state that the ability targets only the player or planeswalker.

Edit to address the explicit question in the post.

You can target your own planeswalker if you would like.  The Dominaria rules update states:

  Abilities that damage "target opponent" have been changed to "target
  opponent or planeswalker" with the same exception listed above. These
  spells and abilities can target a planeswalker you control.


Euchre played by a group of 3 people I have played Euchre for years.  Often a group of us finds ourselves one player short of the required 4.  We then usually joke that we should play Canadian Euchre, which apparently allows rules for playing the game with three people.

Is this even a real thing?  Has anyone ever played it?  I imagine it would be cut-throat, but I can't think of how it might work outside of that.

Three person Euchre is definitely a real thing and there are ten different ways to play it, according to Wikipedia. They pretty much all rely on:

Setting extra cards aside as a dummy hand (more rarely, removing cards from the deck or adding cards to the kitty)
Having players keep track of points individually, since they don't have a consistent partner (if they have a partner at all)

The one you described, Canadian Euchre, is indeed one of those ways, (it is also called Buck Euchre, especially in the Midwest of the United States, where I have indeed seen it played).

Four hands are dealt out, one to each player and one face down on the table. The dealer turns up the top kitty card, as usual, and this card is automatically trump; there is no bidding for trump. Instead, each player has the option, in clockwise order starting at the dealer's left, of playing the dealt hand or the blind hand on the table. If the player picks up the blind hand, he places his hand face down on the table and that becomes the new blind hand. Interesting play results if two (or more) players pick up the blind hand because the original owner of the hand knows what they have.
When bidding gets to the dealer, the dealer picks up the trump card and play begins. Normal Euchre play now applies, with each player on their own. At the end of the hand, each player gets one point for each trick taken. If a player takes no tricks, he loses five points.

Another one that I find is pretty common (at least in my region) is "Three Hand Dummy" Euchre, in which you set aside cards as if you had a fourth player, but just ignore them:

Another common three-player variation is played by dealing out four hands, but with the fourth hand acting as a dummy hand, known in different places as "the dummy," "the dead hand," "the imaginary friend," or "Johann." The player who calls trump on the current hand picks up the dummy hand and makes the best five-card hand for themselves out of his or her hand and the dummy hand. The player will now play alone against the other two players, who will play as partners for this hand. The two non-calling players will always play as partners which means that partners will switch from hand to hand depending on who calls trump.
The calling player will score one point for winning the hand and 2 points for taking all five tricks. The calling player can still elect to "go alone" by choosing not to pick up the dummy hand. Taking all five tricks here results in four points. Each player keeps their own score.


What are the name and rules of this hand signing spell game? I remember finding the rules to this game on the internet, oh, 15 years ago or so. The players (typically (or necessarily?) two) sit around a table. At every "turn" - for advanced play indicated by some clock or so, but for beginners like me when all players agree that they have worked out what to do next - each player simultaneously reveals two hand signs out of an alphabet of five or so, independently with the left and right hand. Hand signs were things like a wavy line, pointing with your index finger, or a fist. Then there was a dictionary of ten or so sequences of three to five hand signs that form spells; you look for each hand if the last couple of signs match any of the spells exactly, and if they do then that spell takes effect - for example, if "fist - wavy line - fist - point" would be "lightning bolt" according to the dictionary, then if for the last five turns your left hand had done "wavy line - fist - wavy line - fist - point", that would trigger a lightning bolt. I believe players started with a certain number of life points; there were damage spells, healing spells, counter spells, maybe a shield spell as well?

The fun of the game was, of course, that you'd have to figure out what your opponent was building up to with both her hands, and evaluate if you could afford to carry out your own plans or whether you needed to do something to counter it. Also, sometimes you could come up with nice combinations: the last few hand signs of one spell might form the first few of another, so you could make them overlap for higher efficiency.

I'm pretty sure this was never a commercially published game - since there are no physical objects to sell, that would be a tricky proposition anyway.

Ideally of course I'd like to find the game rules as they were available back then, but I'd be happy to just hear from people who remember this as well. I would even be open to trying to recreate it collaboratively, if anyone is up for that sort of thing.

Sounds a lot like Waving Hands, or Spellcaster. Here's an online copy of the rules.

According to BoardGameGeek, you can even play it online, here.


What is this alternate cut after 3-3 against double keima round hoshi? In 38 Basic Joseki, Kosugi & Davies remark in this position:

$$c
$$ --------------------
$$ -. . . . . . . . . .
$$ -. . . . . . . . . .
$$ -. . 1 . . O . . . .
$$ -. . . X . a . . . X
$$ -. . . 3 2 6 . . . .
$$ -. . O 4 5 . . . . .
$$ -. . . . 7 . . . . .
$$ -. . . . . . . . . .
$$ -. . . . . . . . . .
$$ -. . . X . . . . . ,

that if White blocks at 2, Black will push and cut with 3 and 5 or 3 and a.

I cannot see how one is meant to cut with 3 and a in this situation.
I have not found this in Ishida, or on Josekipedia (though someone has asked a question about a) or in Sensei’s Library; though with this severely pruned search pattern (only shaded points sought):

there were some matches (to which the “a” refers), but nothing useful that I could see.

Questions

Is this a misprint, or how is one meant to cut with 3 and a?
When is this preferable?
What continuations are there, and are they joseki?

Follow-up

I am not sure what I can have thought (though I expected a to be an answer to a different White 4, rather than achieving a different objective), but now I think I see, as Daniel T says in his answer that the marked white stones are separated:

$$c
$$ --------------------
$$ -. . . . . . . . . .
$$ -. . . . . . . . . .
$$ -. . X . c W . . . .
$$ -. . . X b B . . . X
$$ -. . . X W d . . . .
$$ -. . O O a . . . . .
$$ -. . . . . . . . . .
$$ -. . . . . . . . . .
$$ -. . . . . . . . . .
$$ -. . . X . . . . . ,

He shows W@a–B@b, but W b and d also seem to fail, with a shaky ladder and too many cuts respectively. I still do not see when this is good; maybe the issue is which 6-3 stone B wants to separate 5-5 from, but he could just push 3 in the other direction.


How does deathtouch work? What if you have a creature 1/5 and it attacks a 2/2 death creature does the 1/5 die or is deathtouch activated upon death

First off, a creature cannot attack another creature. You can only attack players or planeswalkers, at which point your opponent can choose which creatures to block with. For the purpose of answering the question about deathtouch; I will assume that we are talking about a 1/5 attacking creature being blocked by a 2/2 creature with deathtouch.

From the MTG Quick Start Guide:

  deathtouch—A creature dealt damage by a
  creature with deathtouch is destroyed

The 1/5 will die because it was dealt damage by a creature with deathtouch. The 2/2 deathtouch creature will have 1 damage, and will not die unless it is dealt another damage by something else before the end of the turn.

Note that this works whether it is combat damage from attacking/blocking, or other damage such as cards with the Fight keyword or cards that have an ability that deals damage.

This death occurs almost immediately, at the same time death due to a creature taking more damage than it has toughness would occur. This is a state-based action, which happens automatically each time a player would receive priority. From the comprehensive rules:

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


Ironworks and Great Hall combo Just a quick question to be sure we are playing the right way.

Is getting a Great Hall by playing Ironworks let you draw a card and play another action since the Great Hall is both an action card and a victory card?

Reminder:

Ironworks

Action
cost 4
Gain a card costing up to 4 Coins. If it is an Action
card, +1 Action; Treasure card, +1; Victory card, +1 Card.

Great Hall

Action - Victory
cost 3
+1 Card, +1 Action, 1 VP

Yes, that's how they work. If the text on the cards isn't enough for you, it also explicitly says it in the rules:

  You get a bonus depending on what type of card you gained. A card with 2 types
  gives you both bonuses; if you use Ironworks to gain a Great Hall, you will then draw a card (because Great Hall is a Victory card) and may play another Action (because Great Hall is an Action card).

This is really another case of "do exactly what it says on the cards" - it says on Ironworks that if it's an Action you get +1 Action, so you do, and it says on Ironworks that if it's a Victory card, you get +1 Card, so you do.


When you don't have enough food on Christmas, what happens when you choose thumbs up? In our game, we ran into the Christmas crossroads card while there was only 1 food in our supply:

Thumbs up: Spend 5 food. Gain 1 morale. If Forest Plum is in play [snip: the survivors get an extra 4 items].
Thumbs down: Nothing happens.

(We also had Forest Plum in play.)
What would happen if we give thumbs up? We can't pay 5 food, but we can totally follow instructions to take free stuff. Would we get our stuff and lose just our 1 food, or would nothing happen because we can't do the first part? Is there a clear answer sourceable from the rules or the developers?
Other games have a "do as much as you can" rule, but Dead of Winter doesn't seem to employ one. The food thing isn't listed as a prerequisite to the rest of the actions taking place. I've googled around but it seems others aren't sure either.

Step back from the rules and think about it for a second. You don't get to feel good about giving out food if you don't give out the food!

"Do as much as you can" applies to effects (benefits), not costs (requirements). "Spend 5 food" is really a cost here. I would not permit that option to be picked since the result would make no sense.


How do Isochron Scepter and the Fuse mechanic interact? The split cards in the expansion set Dragon's Maze contain a new mechanic "Fuse". This mechanic allows you to cast both sides of the spell, a new option for cards of this type.

Isochron Scepter allows you to imprint any instant card with casting cost 2 or less, and then produce copies of that card once per turn.

The interaction of Isochron Scepter and instant split cards is a highly useful one, in that you can imprint a split card providing one side meets the requirements of Isochron Scepter, and then cast either side of the card using Isochron Scepter's linked ability.

The fuse mechanic allows you to cast both sides of the card. How does this mechanic interact with Isochron Scepter? This is relevant so far to Turn // Burn and Far // Away.

You cannot use Fuse.

The reminder text reads "You may cast one or both halves of this card from your hand." The scepter allows you to cast a copy of the card from Exile. That it's not a card may or may not be relevant, but the addition of "from your hand" will surely be present in the rules, so it's pretty clear that Fuse cannot be used here.

As such, it's as if you were casting a regular split card. You can cast either side (even if the mana cost of that side is more than two), but not both.

UPDATE: The rules have been released, and the "from your hand" is indeed present in them.

  702.101a Fuse is a static ability found on some split cards (see rule 708, "Split Cards") that applies while the card with fuse is in a player’s hand. If a player casts a split card with fuse from his or her hand, the player may choose to cast both halves of that split card. This choice is made before putting the split card with fuse onto the stack. The resulting spell is a fused split spell.

  702.101b A fused split spell has two sets of characteristics and one converted mana cost. The converted mana cost of the spell is a number equal to the total amount of mana in its two mana costs, regardless of color.

  702.101c The total cost of a fused split spell includes the mana cost of each half. (See rule 601.2e.)

  702.101d As a fused split spell resolves, the controller of the spell follows instructions of the left half and then follows the instructions of the right half.


House rules to reduce the game play time of Power Grid Are there any fair rules for shortening the playing time of Power Grid?

It seems obvious to end the game on less powered cities (rather than the 17 default), but this often skews the phase 2 for the non-leading players. I've considered also moving phase 2 sooner as well. Does anyone have any good ways to shorten the game?

This is a good question, and I'm afraid I don't have a great answer. I think the creators addressed this question a bit with the creation of the Benelux board. When you play with that board you always remove the lowest power plant. That speeds things up a lot.


MtG: making makeshift cards for home play A friend and I got into Magic and get together to play a few games once a week. Each of us has ~110 cards, the bulk of them being a Magic 2012 intro pack, the rest boosters.

We thought we'd mix things up a bit with booster draft or sealed deck, but since our budgets are way too limited to make a cube or buy boosters every week, I thought we could improvise. The current entirely theoretical setup is to use a simulation website for those formats every time we play, then using a home-written program assign a number to each card that is chosen for a deck. The tokens representing the cards chosen with the draft simulator could be simple sheets with numbers 1 through 100 written to them (or as many as needed), inserted into card sleeves with a colored back.

Is there a better way to approach this, in particular the token creation?

A sensible method is to get hold of some commons - I know "your budgets are limited", but if there's a game store that does drafting near you, quite often people just leave their commons lying around on the tables for anyone who wants them, they're that desperate to get rid of them; and even if not, there are other ways to buy them in bulk for cheap - put stickers over the text box, and use cards with like casting costs as proxies.  So if you want to represent e.g. a Primeval Titan (casting cost 4GG) you would use a Craw Wurm or Yavimaya Wurm instead.

Otherwise it seems like you'll end up doing WAY too much cross-referencing - what was a #73 again?  The casting cost should be a useful cue for remembering which card you have in your hand, and you can write any extra information you need on the sticker of course...


What Dominion kingdom-card setups tend to lead to the longest games? Most dominion players notice early on that different kingdom sets have GIGANTIC effects on how the game ends up being played. This also means that some games will end fairly quickly, while others will go on longer.

What Dominion kingdom-card setups tend to lead to the longest games when all players are trying to win? What kingdom-cards specifically tend to contribute most to making games longer? Feel free to give specific setups if you like, but I'm also interested in what cards/combos make for longer games and why/how they do this.

I get that a player in the lead should try to end the game and win as soon as possible, making very long games highly unlikely, but there is still a strong variation in game length due to the cards used and I'm curious what cards tend to be in the setups that are toward the longer end of the spectrum.

Related: What Dominion kingdom-card setups tend to lead to the SHORTEST games?

Basically, any card that denies opponents their resources (i.e. cards in hand) or pollutes their decks (e.g. curses) makes for a longer game because it is more difficult to buy victory point cards for lack of money or just forces an interaction that requires a decision in your opponent (i.e. this increases the time, not necessarily number of hands).

Examples:

Militia - reduces all opponents to three cards, also increases time by a bit.

Bureaucrat - forces all opponents to put one of their victory point cards on top of their deck.

Spy - cycles through good cards in opponent decks, leaving until only a victory point cards or useless card is left on top, also just increases time.

Thief - trash or steal opponent treasure cards, also just increased time.

Witch - adds useless cards to opponent decks.


If I own both Utilities but mortgage one, do I get 10x or 4x the die roll in rent from the unmortgaged one? In the last game of Monopoly that I played, I bought both the Utilities and I mortgaged The Electric Company.

If an opponent lands on The Water Works, how much rent would be due? Would I get 10x the dice roll for owning both Utilities, or does having one mortgaged mean that I would only get 4x the dice roll?

It says right on the card (emphasis mine):

if BOTH Utilities are owned, rent is 10x the amount shown on the dice

Also, from the Monopoly rules:

No rent can be collected on mortgaged properties or utilities, but rent can be collected on unmortgaged properties in the same group.
The player who mortgages property retains possession of it ...


Can older cards that refer to a player/opponent ever be used on planeswalkers? Many older cards refer to players or opponents, e.g. "deal 3 damage to target player". Can any of these be used on planeswalkers, beyond the fact that you can simply attack them with creatures?

For example:

Would my opponent discard a card if Hypnotic Specter damaged a planeswalker they control?
Would my opponent, the planeswalker, neither, or both amass poison counters from an unblocked Nafs Asp?
Can Lightning Bolt target a planeswalker?
Does Syphon Soul affect planeswalkers?
Can Oasis prevent damage to a Planeswalker?
Would Veteran Bodyguard be obligated to take damage being dealt to a planeswalker?
Can a planeswalker gain loyalty from Healing Salve?
Can Healing Salve prevent damage to a planeswalker?

Planeswalkers are not players (or opponents), and they're never treated as players (or opponents). Don't think of them as players, and you'll be a lot less likely to get confused.

There's pretty much just a single rule that make them seem a little similar to players: you can choose to attack your opponent and/or planeswalkers they control.

Along with that, many cards will let you target a player or a planeswalker, e.g. Lava Axe says "target player or planeswalker", and Lightning Strike says "any target", which includes planeswalkers. (Note that thanks to some updates to the game, some older printings of cards may not make this clear, e.g. Lava Axe used to just say "target player", and Lightning Strike used to just say "target creature or player"; always check Gatherer for the current oracle text of a card if you need to be sure.)

But that's it. None of that actually treats planeswalkers as players; it just lets something happen to them that's similar to what can happen to your opponents.

There are no similar rules for any of the things you mentioned, so the direct answer to every one of your questions is no. There is definitely not a blanket revision from "target player" to "target player or planeswalker". (A ton of things that say "player" wouldn't even make sense for planeswalkers - sure, they can take damage, but they don't have hands, libraries, graveyards, or even life!)

To address your questions in a little more detail (some things do still work, just not directly):

Hypnotic Specter - no, attacking the planeswalker won't make your opponent discard. If you want your opponent to discard, attack them, not the planeswalker.
Nafs Asp (poison counters) - no, planeswalkers can't have poison counters; if it deals damage to one it'll remove loyalty as usual. If you want to give poison counters to your opponent, attack them, not the planeswalker.
Lightning Bolt - yes, it can target a planeswalker - it now says "any target". Again, note that older printings don't mention planeswalkers, but the current oracle text is updated.
Syphon Soul - no, it doesn't deal damage to planeswalkers, just players.
Veteran Bodyguard - no, it won't protect planeswalkers, since combat damage is dealt directly to the planeswalker and Veteran Bodyguard's effect never applies.
Healing Salve (gaining loyalty) - no. It can't target planeswalkers, and planeswalkers can't gain life (only players have life).
Healing Salve (preventing damage) - no, you can't target planeswalkers with it.

Beyond oracle updates ("target player" to "target player or planeswalker" and similar), the only other way that older cards are likely to literally target a planeswalker is if they say something like "target permanent" or "target nonland permanent"; planeswalkers are permanents too, so for example Desert Twister can target and destroy planeswalkers, despite being printed in 1993!

Note: I've entirely removed sections about the planeswalker redirection rule, which existed in the past but is no more. See the revision history if you're curious.


Biome/nature board game- collecting animal cards from different environments My sisters and I have been trying to remember the name of a board game we used to play in the late 90s but have had no luck. Here are the details we remember:
1. Players had their own board themed for a biome/environment. I am really confident there was a rainforest board, and pretty confident that there was a savannah, grasslands, or prairie board.
2. Players had to collect the cards for their board. I think there were either 6 or 8 animals per board.
3. There was definitely a poison dart frog card (my sisters and I gave special weight to that card... we were weird kids haha).

I tried to Google the game but couldn't find it, probably because we remember so few details about it. I have already ruled out the game Explore.

Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated!

Would it perhaps be a variant of this Biomes Game? No poison dart frog; but it has some of the features you describe.

https://www.teacherspayteachers.com/Product/Biomes-Game-Full-Set-1888612


In chess, what is the name for the tactics when a piece makes an attack by itself but also opens line(s) of attack for a friendly piece(s)? For example, let us look at the following chess diagram. It is white's turn. Until now, black queen and rook were safe, but white plays d6! White pawn makes an active attack on the black rook but also opens a2–g8 diagonal, which allows white bishop to attack the black queen (and the bishop is protected by the knight).

So, is there a separate name for this maneuver? I don't think it is a fork.

The tactic in which one piece moves out of the way of a second so that the second can attack is called a discovered attack (and more specifically a discovered check if it results in check). The piece which moves may or may not move to a position to mount its own attack -- I'm not sure if there's a term for the specific case in which the piece that moves does mount an attack by itself.

You're correct that it's not a fork, which occurs when one piece simultaneously makes two or more attacks. Here you have two attacks but by two different pieces.


moving backwards into a safety zone in the game Sorry can a player move backwards into their safety zone in the game of Sorry?

No, you cannot. From the rules, under the "Safety Zone" section:

  No pawn may enter its SAFETY ZONE by a backward move; however, a pawn may move backward out of its SAFETY ZONE and on subsequent turns move back into the ZONE as cards permit.


In Axis and Allies, Should An Attacker Be Allowed to Relinquish Certain "Prerogatives?" These are situations that seem to be outside the official (second edition) rules. Unless I'm missing something.

Suppose Russia is allowed attack Norway on the first turn, and does so with two fighters, three tanks (five units that hit with 1-3), and three infantry via Karelia, against 1 fighter, 1 tank, and 3 infantry. The five heavy units roll 1,1,2,3,4, an above average roll that scores four hits. Can the attack tell the infantry NOT to fire?

If the fifth unit is eliminated by infantry, Russia has to occupy Norway, possibly fatally weakening Karelia. Russia has now achieved its "strafing" objective (the German fighter should retreat, and the UK can occupy Norway on its turn.) So Russia would like to cap the hits at four, if allowed.

In the Pearl Harbor attack, Japan sends a battle fleet against the Hawaiian sea zone, and scores two hits on the first round. The US elects to take the carrier and fighter as casualties (so that the sub can withdraw).

If the carrier had survived, Japan can retreat its fleet to Wake Island, out of the Hawaiian dead zone. Can it do the same with a withdrawing sub? (The rules say that the battle is over, and the attacker must stand put, when the defender is DESTROYED. But the sub wasn't "destroyed.")

My theory is that the attacker relinquished his prerogative of "hot pursuit" of the sub and chose to withdraw after a short, one-round battle.

In the case of Karelia versus Norway, the infantry must attack; all attacks other than sub sneak-attacks are considered simultaneous, and you've already declared your attackers, so you must go down the line and attack with everything.

If you didn't want to take Norway, you shouldn't have attacked with so many models.  You can always place your reinforcements in Karelia at the end of the turn.


How can I cheaply and easily create stackable tiles? I'm building a prototype with stackable tiles in several different shapes. I 3D-printed some tiles that lock together nicely, but it is too expensive to 3D-print all the tiles I need to make multiple copies.

My solution so far is printing out the tiles on card stock, gluing to a bristol (i.e. presentation board) covering with a plastic sheet usually used to cover books. On the bottom I glue a layer of non slide rubber sheet to encourage pieces to stay in place.

I then cut the board into tiles with a utility knife and a straight edge.

Does anyone have better ways of making tiles that don't slide much?
I am making the game board the same way but I am having trouble getting the bubbles out from under the coating. Any tips?
Can a stack paper cutter be used to cut out the tiles which are 4 layers thick?

Best bet for multiple "3d" sets: 3-D Print off a master of each type, then use resin casting to make as many as you need. Or use a single type, and print circular labels that go inside a recess.

As for bubble removal - an insulin syringe. that microfine needle barely leaves a mark, and can suck half a cc of air out.

It's better, however, to not get bubbles in the first place... so, you set an edge past the edge of the meaningful area, the use a rolling pin or squeegee to press it flat from there over. I've also found it better to expose the lamination and put the paper onto it, than to place the laminate onto the paper.


What happens if Metamorphic Alteration is enchanting a non-Creature? Normally you would not be allowed to cast Metamorphic Alteration targeting a non-Creature, because of its "Enchant creature" ability. But it could end up enchanting a card that is not normally a creature, due to an effect that makes it temporarily a creature, such as a a manland (Inkmoth Nexus). Or because it was enchanting a flip-walker (Jace, Vryn's Prodigy) that has now transformed.

So you turn Inkmoth into a creature, then enchant it with Metamorphic Alteration, making it a copy of Grizzly Bears. At the end of the turn, Inkmoth's ability wears off, so now you have Metamorphic Alteration enchanting just a land.

However, that land isn't a land, it is a creature still, because it is copying Grizzly Bears.

So does 704.5m apply here? Is this an Aura attached to an illegal object, thus causing the Aura to go to the graveyard? Or, is the object actually legal, because it is being made a creature?

  704.5m If an Aura is attached to an illegal object or player, or is not attached to an object or player, that Aura is put into its owner’s graveyard.

The Metamorphic Alteration stays on the permanent. It doesn't matter why the permanent is a creature. The important thing is that it is a creature, so Metamorphic Alteration is legally attached to it.


When do you gain life from lifelink when attacking? When do you gain the life from lifelink when attacking?  Is it right when the attacks happen, or is it at the end of your attack phase?

You will gain the life at the same time that the damage is dealt. Lifelink simply changes what the effects of dealing are, to include gaining life.

From the basic rule book:

  lifelink—If a creature with lifelink deals damage, its controller also gains that much life.

Note that some creatures, such as Horned Cheetah have a similar ability to Lifelink, but it works slightly different. As a triggered ability, Horned Cheetah's ability will go on the stack when damage is dealt, and ou will gain life after that ability resolves.

So with Lifelink... you are at 1 life, and your opponent is attacking you with 2 1/1 creatures. You can block one of them with a Vampire Nighthawk, but can’t block the other. When combat damage is dealt, you lose 1 life and gain 2 life simultaneously, so you do not lose the game.

If instead you had a Horned Cheetah to block with, then you would lose the game before you gain the life fro Horned Cheetah.


Does General Onimaru's Clockwork Soldier prevent retreats? General Onimaru's Clockwork Soldier ability prevents players from moving backwards.  Does it also prevent retreating from a dashing strike?  If a player is forced to retreat past the Clockwork Soldier, does the Clockwork Soldier keep advancing and if so, is the player now prevented from moving past it in the opposite direction?

Yes, movement is treated the same regardless of how the pawn is moved. David Sirlin answered this question here:

Q: Onimaru's Clockwork soldier state that the opponent cannot move behind the token. Does it also prevents any retreat? Because the way I see it, your opponent has a "wall" that moves toward him 2 case per turn, but the wording of the card implies something else.
A: The movement rules are the same across the whole game. By "movement," that means "the rules for changing the position of your pawn for any reason, when it would reach an obstacle" are the same across the whole game. It doesn't matter if the "movement" is a move, push, dashing strike, retreat, etc. It doesn't matter if the obstacle is a player pawn, the edge of the board, or a clockwork soldier. In all cases, you go as far as you can, then stop when you reach the obstacle.


Avoiding Dovescape's Effect I’ve noticed Dovescape uses the specific word “cast” to trigger its ability, and I am curious about what effects circumvent its wording.

Will the following effects skirt through Dovescape?

Dualcaster Mage copying a not yet countered spell on the stack
Ral, Storm Conduit ’s [-2] ability which would copy the next spell you attempt to cast, the Copy being unaffected since it was not “cast”
Also related Spark Double (or Clever Impersonator) cloning an already in play Planewalker (Or any nonland/noncreature)
Feel free to include additional effects which would improve this question.

The copy of the spell from the ETB effect of Dualcaster Mage will not be countered by Dovescape.  You are correct in saying that copies of spells are not cast, and thus do not trigger Dovescape.  This is also correct in the case of using Ral, Storm Conduit's -2 ability.

Spark Double and Clever Impersonator will work as well.  These cards are creature spells on the stack and would not trigger Dovescape.

From the rulings on Clever Impersonator

  You choose which nonland permanent Clever Impersonator will copy, if any, as it enters the battlefield. This doesn’t target that nonland permanent.

Once it enters the battlefield copying a Planeswalker, it's already been cast and resolved.  It's too late to counter it.

To see, step by step, how it would work, here's how the interaction would play out.

Player A casts Clever Impersonator.
Dovescape does not see a non-creature spell cast, and thus doesn't trigger.
Both players pass, and Clever Impersonator resolves.
At this time, Player A choses the Planeswalker to have Clever Impersonator copy, and it enters the battlefield as a Planeswalker.  Dovescape doesn't trigger because a spell wasn't cast.

With regards to other ways to get around Dovescape, there aren't a whole lot of options.

There are ways to make noncreature spells be uncounterable.

These cards would get around Dovescape, as they all say "This spell can't be countered."
Veil of Summer and Determined can prevent spells from being countered for the rest of the turn if you can get them through Dovescape (see below).  Similarly Overmaster prevents the next spell from being countered, if you can get it through Dovescape.
Taigam, Ojutai Master is a creature that prevents instants and sorceries from being countered (and dragons, but that doesn't matter for Dovescape)
Thryx, the Sudden Storm is a creature that prevents spells with converted mana cost 5 or more from being countered
Boseiju, Who Shelters All is a land that makes instants and sorceries uncounterable with it's mana ability
Destiny Spinner is a creature that makes Enchantment spells uncounterable

Dovescape's ability is a triggered ability.  There are cards that exist that allow you to counter triggered abilities, but with the exception of one in particular, are all non-creature spells that would also get countered by Dovescape. Nimble Obstructionist is the one exception, as cycling a card is not casting a spell, and it's triggered ability from cycling can counter Dovescape's effect
The keyword ability Storm creates copies of itself for each time a spell had been previously cast.  The Dovescape ability will counter the original spell, but not any of the copies.


Do cards that supply bonuses trigger on actions modified by other cards? Many cards in Agricola give you bonus resources under certain circumstances. For example, the Stone Carrier occupation says:

  Whenever you take Stone with an
  action, you can also take 1 additional
  Stone. If you also receive other
  building resources, this costs you 1
  Food.

Many cards also modify existing actions. For example, the Quarry reads:

  Whenever you use the "Day Laborer"
  Action, you receive an additional 3
  Stone.

If you have a Quarry and a Stone Carrier, and you take Day Labour, do you receive 2 food and 4 stone?

Is this generally true for all cards that supply bonuses?

I really recommend downloading yourself a copy of the Unofficial Agricola Companion, which has many amazingly useful and comprehensive rulings from the game designers themselves.  From the entry for Stone Carrier, for example:

Is activated when you use an action space on which stone is placed each round. You cannot use such an action space just to use this card if the action space contains no stone (e.g. when you have the Bureaucrat.)
Is activated by the action space "Take 1 Building Resource" in 3-player games if you take stone.
Is also activated by the action space "1 Reed, Stone, and Wood" in 5-player games and the action space "1 Reed, Stone, and Food" in 4-player games, if you pay 1 food.
You also pay 1 food to use this card if you receive other building resources at the same time from occupations and minor improvements.
Is not activated when you receive stone because of a minor improvement or occupation.
Other building resources are wood, clay, and reed.

I've highlighted the part that answers your question: you only get the additional Stone if you take Stone from one of the specified action spaces.  (Yes, this is generally true in Agricola, though be sure to read the card wordings carefully, and check the rulings if you are in any doubt whatsoever, as it is a game with lots of exceptions to any given rule!)


Is Famished Paladin and Resplendent Mentor a legal infinite life combo? I know I couldn't use these in a Standard game but is it legal for a casual game?
If I control both Resplendent Mentor and Famished Paladin can I gain as much life as I want as long as no spells are cast that affect these two cards?

I know that combos that play off each other and have no end are not legal because the game can't continue, but does this combo work and is it valid?

Yes, that works. Congratulations for finding two cards that work so well together. It's not legal in Standard but it is in other formats (e.g. Modern). There are no rules for which cards are allowed in casual games, it's just what you agree on with your opponent(s).

Note that you can't gain infinite life, as stated in the title; you can gain as much life as you want. E.g. you can declare that you want to execute the loop (tapping the Paladin with the ability it gained from the Mentor) one million times, and you end up with one million extra life. If your opponent has an 'infinite' damage loop, they'll be able to execute theirs for a larger amount than one million and still kill you. They'd be advised to kill your creatures first, otherwise you can respond to their loop iteration with another activation of the Paladin's life-gaining ability.


How do you calculate hand probabilities for 10 cards per hand (8 suits); e.g.: Cripple Mr Onion? Cripple Mr Onion is a card game that involves 8 suits (104 cards in toto), with 2-7 players being dealt 10 cards each (without replacement).

I've tried several different websites for hypergeometric distribution, but really don't know what I'm doing with them (I've no idea whether the results are correct or not, since I can't tell if I input the appropriate data).

I've also tried it by hand, but can't wrap my head around the proper method.  When the suit doesn't matter, then it's easy enough; when the suit matters, it becomes rather more complicated.

How does one calculate the probability of hands in a card game, when the deck involved has 8 suits?

Taking two basic examples, I would hope that I could then work out the rest for myself:

I imagine that calculating the probability of my hand containing two aces (of any suits) is the simplest starting point for this game's rules.
For comparison and contrast, I then also calculate the probability of my hand containing {4, 5, 7} in only one or two specific suits (not the other six possible suits).

There is an excellent work-up regarding Yu-Gi-Oh! in another post's answer, but I don't know how to modify it properly for this problem (which would probably be the best solution possible).

I find hypergeometric series nice for computing, but poor for explaining.  For teaching purposes, I much prefer expanding these out using binomial coefficients.  Some books, and Wolfram Alpha call this "choose."

The key here is to realize that order does not matter.  The total number of possible hands is choose(104, 10) = 26 trillion.

Now, to count how many hands have 2 aces, you need to figure out how many ways there are to choose 2 aces, and multiply that by the number of ways to get 8 cards with no aces.  Writing it out in detail we have:

                    # of hands w 2 aces
P(2 aces in hand) = -------------------
                        # of hands

     # ways to choose 2 aces * # ways to choose non aces
  = ----------------------------------------------------
                      choose(104,10)

     choose(8,2) * choose(96,8)
  = ----------------------------  = 0.14
           choose(104,10)

Here's the Wolfram Alpha expression for all the accuracy you could ever want.

Your second question, how to find {4,5,7} in one of two suits is ambiguous.  Do all three have to be in the same suit?  Or different suits?  There's another issue.  Let's call the suits ABCDEFGHIJ, and say you want the 4,5,7 to be in suits A or B.  Do you care if there is a 4 in suit F?

P(4,5,7 in either of 2 suits, don't care about other suits) =

     # ways to choose {4,5,7} * number of ways to choose other cards
  = ----------------------------------------------------
                      choose(104,10)

         2*2*2*choose(98,7)
  = ----------------------------  = 0.004
           choose(104,10)

Or, the related:
    P(4,5,7 in either of 2 suits, no other 4,5,7 in hand) =

     # ways to choose {4,5,7} * number of ways to choose other cards
  = ----------------------------------------------------
                      choose(104,10)

         2*2*2*choose(80,7)
  = ----------------------------  = 0.001
           choose(104,10)

You might reasonably ask, why are these numbers so much lower than for aces?  This is because you are specifying three cards in the hand, and the aces are only specifying two cards in the hand.

Keep in mind, that in most games, this isn't the full story.  For instance, the way I've computed things, I've included a pair of aces and three kings.  In poker, that's a full house, and so needs to be removed from this probability.  If that's what you want, then things get more complicated.


Can a player change perspective after entering the center? In the game ...and then we held hands, after the first player enters the center, is he allowed to change perspective (change which side of the cards can be used)?

Normally when the player ends his turn in the middle of the board, he is allowed to choose if he is going to change perspective. However, the rules says:

  If at the end of a turn the player’s token is located on a node on the middle line (i.e., in neither half of the board), the player may choose whether to change perspective or not, deciding whether to do this without looking at the covered halves of the emotion cards.

Is the center considered a node on the middle? And so, after the first player enters the center, can he change the visible side of the cards in order to help the other player?

Thank you.

I´ve sent an e-mail to Ludicreations and this is what they´ve replied:

"yes, you are allowed to change perspective after entering the center."


Does Sutured Ghoul count cards exiled by other effects, such as suspended creatures? As Sutured Ghoul says

As Sutured Ghoul enters the battlefield, exile any number of creature cards from your graveyard.
Sutured Ghoul's power is equal to the total power of the exiled cards and its toughness is equal to their total toughness.

The text says the exiled cards, so does only count on cards that are exiled by himself, or does every exiled creature counts?
The oracle does not mention any reference to this:

22/09/2011    If any of the creature cards you exile has a characteristic-defining ability that defines its power and/or toughness, that ability will apply. For example, if Dungrove Elder is exiled this way, its power and toughness while it’s in exile are equal to the number of Forests you control, and Sutured Ghoul’s power and toughness will change as the number of Forests you control changes. If the characteristic-defining ability can’t be applied (for instance, it relies on a choice made as the card enters the battlefield), then use 0.
22/09/2011    In zones other than the battlefield, Sutured Ghoul’s power and toughness are each 0.
22/09/2011    You can’t have Sutured Ghoul exile itself, even if it’s entering the battlefield from your graveyard.

It only counts cards exiled by the first ability, because they are Linked Abilities.

  Linked Abilities

    607.1. An object may have two abilities printed on it such that one of them causes actions to be taken or objects or players to be affected and the other one directly refers to those actions, objects, or players. If so, these two abilities are linked: the second refers only to actions that were taken or objects or players that were affected by the first, and not by any other ability.

    607.2a If an object has an activated or triggered ability printed on it that instructs a player to exile one or more cards and an ability printed on it that refers either to “the exiled cards” or to cards “exiled with [this object],” these abilities are linked. The second ability refers only to cards in the exile zone that were put there as a result of an instruction to exile them in the first ability.


What is "Playing For Top or Bottom" In Bridge? Apparently it relates to duplicate bridge. Initially, I thought it meant playing the hand in a risky way to score overtricks, and taking the chance of sacrificing a potential game. But then someone said that you could "play for top or bottom" by making a safety play that others don't make. The term he used was "going against the field." What did he mean by this?

This answer is specific to Matchpoints. In Matchpoints, playing for top or bottom means that if you succeed, you get a top, otherwise you get a bottom. (Note: I haven't heard of people talking about top/bottom in other forms of duplicate).

Any play could potentially be called this way, including safety plays.

To give a specific example of where a safety play might be considered playing for top or bottom, consider the following hand:

♠: AT8xx
♡: AKx
♢: AKx
♣: Kx

♠: K97x
♡: Qxx
♢: Qxx
♣: Axx

You are playing matchpoints and have reached the contract of 6♠. You also think that the rest of players in your direction will do the same. Say you get a club lead.

Now if this were rubber bridge, you could almost ensure 12 tricks by winning the club K and playing a low spade towards the 7. If RHO follows, you play the 7. If RHO shows out, you win the K and play toward the AT. LHO can only get one spade trick (barring really bad breaks in other suits).

Basically, ducking the first round of spades is a safety play to cater to QJxx spades with one of the opponents.

At Matchpoints, however, the normal play is to bang down the AK, making 13 tricks if trumps are 2-2 and still have chances for making 13 if they are 3-1 with a singleton Q or J.

Assuming the field will not take the safety play, by taking the safety play ("going against the field"), you get a top if QJxx is held by one opponent (and rest of the field goes down by guessing to cash the honour in the wrong hand first). You will get a bottom if trumps are 2-2, or there is a singleton Q or J (you make exactly 12 tricks, while the rest make 13).

We ignore QJx, as we expect opponents to split QJ and ensure a trick. You get an average in that case (everyone makes exactly 12 tricks).


House rules to decrease luck factor in Boxcars I just finished playing Boxcars for the first time. The game was enjoyable, but involved too much luck for my group (dice rolls determine start, movement, and destination) given the long play time.

To win, one player must return to their starting location before being caught by another player. Depending on the random locations, this can be either trivial or impossible. The rules [PDF] suggest optionally removing this catch-the-winner mechanic, but I think this might cause more harm than good. It also falls short of addressing the core problem. Some luck is okay, but there's just too much here. I feel like something could be tweaked to make this into a much more strategic and enjoyable game. How can I reduce the luck factor so this 4-hour game doesn't feel like a waste of time determined by the final few dice rolls?

We have looked at this game critically and found that we agree with your assessment that there is too much luck. Furthermore, the penalties and rewards for that luck are too extreme the way the rules were written.

DISCLAIMER: If you love Monopoly please stop reading this, you will love Boxcars. If you like games of strategy and planning, please continue reading.

This game is far too random, and doesn't offer as much as a viable means of strategy. Before I suggest to you possible alterations to the rules, we have to examine what's wrong with the game.

Too Much Luck

Random starting location, random destination, moving a random number of spaces each turn.

Double Jeopardy

If you happen to be traveling on someone else's rail lines, and you roll low, you are getting penalized AT LEAST double. Moving slower means increased number of turns, which means other players are gaining an advantage on movement alone. Since you are not on your lines, you are paying the bank or other players more for your crappy roll. It's not only possible but extremely likely that on a trip covering more than 10 spaces you will spend more than you make for the trip.

Feels like Monopoly

Monopoly is a good board game when you were 8. The same reason why people wouldn't want to play Monopoly is why you don't want to play this game. You will randomly get muscled out and there will be nothing you can do about it. No strategy, no plan, nothing. Just hope you get stuck in jail so you don't have to pay some stupid high rent because you went 3 laps around the board before you ended on a property you could buy.

There are more things we find to be a bit off but here are some rules we've tried that make the game less brutal. Consider using any or all of these, we have yet to find the perfect combination of these rules that allows for maximum strategy in such a random game:

You pay for using someone else's lines once. Once you decide to use a line that's not yours, you pay that person a 1 time fee. As long as you remain on that same line, you do not pay again, whether that's 1 turn or 10 turns. If you junction off onto another line, even another of the same person's lines, you pay again. You pay at each junction (think of it as a connection fee). What this does is it allows you to plan a route, at least initially, taking advantage of longer lines or lines that you may own. It just adds a lot more strategy. Optional: You may wish to keep the $1k per roll on un-owned lines as a tax to the bank.
You get to see your next destination before purchasing a line. Normally you go to your destination, cash in, purchase route, then see where you are going. This way you can see where you are going and decide if you want to purchase any route in between where you are and where you are going.
Roll a random sector of the map, choose the city. Perhaps you are headed to the southeast, but are blocked out of Miami entirely. It might be more cost effective to go to Atlanta cause you have a way in there. You won't get paid as much, but it will cost you less. Maybe you own lines into Miami, and it would be worth your time to go farther. This helps getting totally screwed.
Roll 2 destinations, pick one. Still random but a little more forgiving.
"Contracts". At the start of the game you get your start location, then roll 3 random destinations. Write them down and you get to pick which one you go to. When reaching that destination cross it off and you MAY roll another. The catch is you have to complete all the contracts you take, so eventually you will have to decide to stop adding to your list. At soon as you have the required money, and all destinations complete, you can then return to your home city and attempt to win.

We find these rules to help, why let a $x game sit on the shelf and never get played because of bad rules.


Mentor trigger ordering Let's say my board is Blade Instructor, Boros Challenger, and Goblin Cratermaker. Can I:

Attack with all three;
Two mentor triggers go on stack;
Stack triggers such that Blade Instructor's trigger goes first, have that target Boros Challenger;
Boros Challenger's mentor trigger targets Goblin Cratarmaker;
Both triggers see a valid target, therefore I end up with 3/1, 3/4 and 3/3?

I'm not sure if #2 actually works - it is possible that Boros Challenger's mentor ability won't trigger because it, at the time it goes on the stack, had no legal target (or does it trigger anyway, just not resolve?).

You can only get one Mentor trigger, the one from Blade Instructor.

If a triggered ability that targets something does not have a legal target when it triggers, it will be removed from the stack as part of the triggering process, and you won't get a chance to resolve anything beforehand. This applies to Boros Challenger's ability as there is no legal target when it triggers.

  603.3d The remainder of the process for putting a triggered ability on the stack is identical to the process for casting a spell listed in rules 601.2c–d. If a choice is required when the triggered ability goes on the stack but no legal choices can be made for it, or if a rule or a continuous effect otherwise makes the ability illegal, the ability is simply removed from the stack.


Elder Sign Terror Effect Timing Terror effects are applied after a roll when you cannot complete a task and at least one of the dice shows a terror icon.

Is it possible to avoid the terror effect by 'securing' the terror die on a spell (assuming no other dice show a terror icon), effectively just failing the task and having to discard a die?

Or does the terror effect apply immediately?

EDIT: After reading the following in the errata, I'm leaning more towards my understanding that they are no longer in the pool and hence do not play a part unless I chose to use them.

  Spells that hold dice are cast after a player’s roll, not before. The
  player looks at the roll, then, if he wishes to save a particular die,
  casts the spell and places the die on the spell. The ‘held’ die
  remains on the spell card until used to complete a task or until
  removed (as described below).

Per the rulebook as written, the terror effect directly results from the failed task roll with the terror result showing.  It takes effect before a die is discarded due to the failed roll.

I would presume by that wording that they are trying to prevent exactly what you are describing - avoiding the terror by discarding the die.  I can't find any errata to clarify the situation.  There is clearly a gap in the timing, otherwise adding dice previously saved couldn't work and once a roll succeeds by that method the terror doesn't apply. Still, once a roll is clearly failed, the terror has to be done before you proceed.

The rules on focusing and assistance are clearer.  Although they save a result and remove a die from the pool, they do so only after a failed roll has already been dealt with.  Since spells can be played anytime on your own turn, this introduces a grey area.  Still, there is nothing in the rules that states a failure can be avoided by removing dice from it, and a terror is part of the failure.

Putting it a better way since I ran a few searches - you generated a terror on a failed roll.  Why would you not suffer an effect simply because you're saving the dice for later?  That just confirms you rolled it.

So my answer would be, unless you can by action change a failed roll into a successful roll, you would have to go through with the terror effect.


Villages card game rules In the Villages card game, we did not understand a few rules.

Can you pick up cards from your villages during your turn?
Can multicolor/light units switch which village they are in if possible?
if there is a village made of light units, what color is that village?
Just how much is the game like gin rummy?

Answering the questions in order:

  Can you pick up cards from your villages during your turn?

No. when a card is played to a village, it remains with that village until either it is destroyed, it is kidnapped, or all units of that village are destroyed. The singular exception (that I am aware of) is a guest unit in an Inn - by the Inn's effect, that guest unit may return to your hand at the start of your turn.

[edit: The "Distant Lands" expansion adds a second building card that allows two additional guest units (one of each color adjacent to the village's color) to be in the village, and like the Inn, they may return to your hand at the start of your turn.]

  Can multicolor/light units switch which village they are in if possible?

As noted in the previous question, the only unit that could "switch villages" is a guest unit residing in an Inn.

  if there is a village made of light units, what color is that village?

A village's color does not change, even if the only remaining units are multicolor or light units. The rules do not specify whether or not a red village with only Light units remaining is considered destroyed or not, only that there is no such thing as a "Light village" (that is, when the village is created, there must be at least one non-light unit in it)


How to deal with damaged cards from a MTG booster pack? I bought a Magic the Gathering display box today with cards from the new edition Innistrad. Unfortunately one of the cards in a booster pack was damaged. It is not just a simple scratch - one corner is bent and a small part of the card is missing. According to different trading platforms this card would be worth about 6 Dollars minimum in mint condition. So it is not really expensive but also not totally worthless.

What can I do about this? Can I obtain a replacement card from the producer (WotC) or from the store I bought it from? How can I prove that the card was damaged when I opened the booster pack? I am sure I am not the first person who got a damaged card from a booster pack. How are such issues usually handled?

Wizards of the Coast has a process you can follow for the replacement of defective products purchased, described in detail on their website:

  If you purchase a product and find that only one or several cards are damaged, defective, or missing when you open it, please return any damaged cards (if not missing), and follow the shipping guidelines provided above.  We'll replace the exact cards for you.


Sensei's Divining Top activations A player in a competitive REL tournament pays 1 mana to activate Sensei's Divining Top's ability to look at the top 3 cards of his library, looks at the 3 cards, changes the order and put them back.

Without performing any further actions or saying/implying that the spell is resolved, can that player then return to look at those 3 cards again?

No they can not look at the cards again.

  1 : Look at the top three cards of your library, then put them back in
  any order.

By placing the cards back on the library they have finished taking all the actions the  ability allowed and then it finishes resolving.

If you were playing a very competitive game, this is not a legal thing to do.

I do not think there is any way to interpret the above rule and all its parts to allow a player to re-do the last step of an ability.

Furthermore the rules do not have anything in them about a player stating that anything resolves. A spell resolves when all of the steps listed in its text have been completed.

  608.2c The controller of the spell or ability follows its instructions in the order written...


Cribbage scoring for a run of 4 out of sequence The play was the following set of cards: 4, 3, 6, 4, 5. Should the score be for 4 points for the 3,6, 4, 5 or only 6, 4, 5?

Sequence does not matter.  4 points for 3-6-4-5.


How does Perplexing Chimera work with Strionic Resonator? I have a Perplexing Chimera and a Strionic Resonator on the battlefield. My opponent casts Shock. I choose to use my Strionic Resonator's activated ability to copy my Perplexing Chimera's triggered ability. What would happen?

According to the rulings on the gatherer page you linked for Strionic Resonator,

  The source of the copy is the same as the source of the original ability.

This means that you will have two triggered abilities on the stack, each of which has the effect

  you may exchange control of Perplexing Chimera and that spell. If you do, you may choose new targets for the spell.

This means that, up to twice, you can exchange control of the Shock on the stack and your Perplexing Chimera, and you can choose new targets for the Shock each time. If you do it both times, then you will retain control of your Perplexing Chimera and you will have chosen the target for Shock, though your opponent will still control it.

For reference, the Comprehensive Rules section about copying objects specifically says in rule 706.10b

  A copy of an ability has the same source as the original ability. If the ability refers to its source by name, the copy refers to that same object and not to any other object with the same name. The copy is considered to be the same ability by effects that count how many times that ability has resolved during the turn.


Identify this card game, where you have to beat previous cards put on the table I remember playing this card game using a regular card deck but I don't remember the exact rules and also don't know what it's called. If it helps, I live in the Netherlands so it might not be known anywhere else. If the Dutch name of the game is known that would also be great.

This is what I remember.

I think it must be played with at least 3 people, but the more the better I think.
Everyone is dealt an amount of cards. (I don't remember what amount)
The player whose turn it is lays down a card. Or multiple cards with the same rank.
The next player should then put a higher card on the table and when there are multiple cards he should put the same number of cards that are all of the same rank and of course higher.
At any time before the next player responds to some cards any other player may throw in a card of the same rank to make it harder for the player to beat it.
I can't remember what exactly happens if you can't beat it. But I believe that it just meant that the player that won is able to lay down the next card(s) on the table to start a new chain.
I also don't remember what the exact goal of the game was and when (if even) a player could draw new cards.
I also believe the terms "attack" were used but I'm not 100% sure

Example with 4 players (as I remember it):

player one lays down a 7.
player two lays down a 8.
before player three responds player one throws in another 8
player three lays down two 10s. (to be able to beat two 8s)
and so on

I can also imagine this is a game that has multiple rules variations. If anyone knows what this game is called and what the exact rules are , that would be great.

It is called President and goes by many different other names, most of which are better not mentioned here. A rule you forgot to mention is that the winning player(s) from last round get the best cards of the loosing player(s).

Here you can find all the details with many variants


Two players would gain control of a creature after it dies — who does? I have an Affa Protector enchanted with Unhallowed Pact ... My opponent kills my Affa with Dread Slaver ...

Who will take control of the creature at the end? This is taking into consideration that my aura spell was cast 5 turns ago. Meaning my aura spell is NOT on the stack.

It depends on whose turn it is.

Both abilities trigger at the same time, and so will be put on the stack together. Abilities are put on the stack in APNAP (Active Player, Non-Active Player) order.* This means that the player whose turn it is puts their ability on the stack, then the other player does. That second player's ability will resolve first, returning the creature to the battlefield. When the other ability tries to resolve, it fails to find the creature in the graveyard and thus can't return it.

Thus whoever's the active player won't end up with the creature. For multiplayer games where there are multiple NAPs they are put on the stack in turn order starting from the AP, so the last player in turn order with such an effect would take precedence.

* From the rules on Triggered Abilities:

  603.3b If multiple abilities have triggered since the last time a player received priority, each player, in APNAP order, puts triggered abilities he or she controls on the stack in any order he or she chooses. [...]

This works with any number of players, starting with the active player and passing around in turn order. In this case, the player furthest away from taking their turn (the last player to put their ability on the stack) would get the creature.


When are suspend card counterable When can you counter a suspend card (when it is suspended or when the final time counters get removed) and would I need to play a counterspell (counter a spell) or a stifle (counters an ability) to do so?

When you move a suspend card from your hand to the exile zone, you are performing a special action, much like playing a land. This cannot be stopped by a Counterspell, nor even by a card like Stifle.

Each of your subsequent upkeeps, a triggered ability removes a time counter. This can be stopped by a card like Stifle. (Note: Stifling the "remove a counter" trigger won't permanently stop the spell, you will simply delay the spell by a turn.)

When the final time counter is removed, another triggered ability (which can also be the target of Stifle and friends) will cast the suspended spell upon resolution. At that point, the spell will finally be on the stack, and a legal target for cards such as Counterspell.