Does this still happen in Haunt 16 even if the traitor dies? The traitor's instructions for haunt #16, "The Phantom's Embrace", reads:

  You Must Do This On Your Turn
  At the end of each of your turns, advance the Turn/Damage Track to the next number. Then roll a number of dice equal to that number. The house blows up if you roll the following number or higher: [...]

If the explorers kill the traitor, does the track continue to advance each round?
My playgroup was divided between two interpretations:

Dead players don't get a turn. The traitor is dead, so he/she no longer does anything 'at the end of each of your turns". The house is no longer in danger of blowing up.
Dead players do get a turn, but ordinarily can take no actions because a corpse can't move / use items / etc. But they can carry out special instructions like the one indicated in this haunt. And anyway, it makes more thematic sense that the bomb would continue to tick down even after the demise of the person that set it. The house is still in danger of blowing up.

Which is the correct interpretation?

The house is still in danger of blowing up. The FAQ clarifies that the traitor still gets turns:

  A dead traitor can still move monsters, etc., during his turn.

If this weren't true, the heroes could usually pull off an easy win by killing the traitor and then taking their sweet time to scour the house for helpful items. This would be imbalanced, boring, and, as you mention, thematically inconsistent.


Multi event scoring system This actually pertains to an informal family sporting event, but I think this is probably the best exchange to ask.

Basically we're holding a series of competitions (miniputt, hoop shooting, etc), and the overall winner across all events wins the grand prize.

I need a system for allocating the overall winner.

What I was thinking is that you would give points first, second, third place in each event, and total points across all events wins grand prize.

The question is:

What is this kind of scoring system called?
What should the points allocation be? ie. You how many more points should first be than second?

You could consider a scoring system similar to those used in decathlon events. This would require significant thought prior to the event and a reasonable mathematics knowledge, but would provide a very tuneable system (if similar events are planned or if there's an expectation that some players may not reach some of the games).

A more basic version that works very well if all scores are "higher better" is to allocate a specific number of points to first place in every game, say 100. The remaining players receive points based of their score out of the winner's score, times the winner's points. This ensures an event with very close results will not unbalance the overall leaders, but that extreme performance in an event won't be discounted either.

For inspiration, here are some points-based systems and discussion:

Formula 1, high-performance racecar competition.
Decathlon, multisport Olympic event. This calculator by Decathlon2000.com may help, or if you want to develop your own system, the discussions there and at NRICH will be of great use.
This answer describes a "bottom-up" scoring system. While focused on a long-term repeated game, is also suitable for accumulating multiple games into one event. Combining this with other methods to encourage better performances would be no harder than developing a "top-down" system, and allows for a widely differing number of participants in each game.


In Magic: The Gathering, how does Ugin, the Ineffable's static ability interact with colorless spells that have X in their cost? If I have Ugin, the Ineffable in play and I want to cast Ugin's Conjurant, how does Ugin, the Ineffable's static ability interact with paying the cost?

Can I announce I want to cast Ugin's Conjurant for 5 and then only pay 3 mana because Ugin, the Ineffable's static abilit reads "Colorless spells you cast cost 2 less to cast"?

Yes, you can choose 5 for X then only pay 3 mana with Ugin, the Ineffable out.

This is because the process of casting a spell works like this:

Make choices your spell offers you, including choosing modes and the value you'll pay for X in the casting cost where applicable.
Choose targets.
Determine the total cost of the spell, which is its cost plus any cost increases and minus any cost reductions.
Pay that cost.

(There's some other details I've glossed over, but those are the most commonly encountered parts.)

This means in step 1, you're choosing 5 as the value for {X}. Then in step 3, you determine the cost: that's {5} reduced by {2} to get a total cost of {3}.

This also means if you chose 2 as the value for X, you may cast Ugin's Conjurant for {0}.


Does having 2 Flickerwisps and an Impact Tremors win me the game? I'm just thinking that if I had a Flickerwisp and an Impact Tremors in play, and I cast another Flickerwisp, would I be able to have the Flickerwisps "flick" each other until my opponents are at 0 life and win me the game? I'm thinking I might be on to something here.

I'm not sure how the "end of turn" ruling affects this, but if it's an issue I guess I can use a Fiend Hunter for this combo, right?

No, the first Flickerwisp will come back at the beginning of your end of turn step. The creature it exiles wouldn't come back until the beginning of the next end of turn since after they wont trigger at the begging of the end step.

Ruling on the card:

  If the permanent that returns to the battlefield has any abilities that trigger at the beginning of the end step, those abilities won't trigger that turn.

It is worth noting that the ruling on the card is just a clarification of the usual "beginning of phase" effects.  Since all beginning of phase effects are put on the stack first, and then are resolved in LIFO order any new "beginning of phase" effects that are put into play don't fire.  The "beginning of the phase" has already ended.

Fiend Hunter will work for this combo, but you would need three of them. We'll call them A, B, and C. The pattern would follow:

A enters
B enters, capturing A
C enters, capturing B, which releases A
Repeat


Does the opponent get to draw up to a full hand after being attacked with Pilebunker? One of the abilities of the Jefferson DeGrey character is Pilebunker.
Screencapped from Tabletop Simulator

[Triggered when] You retreat from a dashing strike
If you're 4 spaces from that opponent after retreating, you may immediately attack (with 4s).

Now normally when somebody blocks they don't get to draw those cards back until their next turn, but this action is usually carried out during the opponents turn.  In this case, since the block is performed during their own turn, do players blocking a Pilebunker attack get to draw a full hand on their next turn?

The turn order is:

Do one of these: move, push, attack, or dashing strike.
If you did an attack or dashing strike, your opponent must respond or he loses the round.
Discard any cards played this turn.
Draw until you have 5 cards, then your turn ends.

Your opponent playing Pilebunker is part of step 2. You still get step 4 this turn (if you successfully blocked), so you still get to draw back up to a full hand of 5 cards.

Source: Rulebook


What form of chess was played in seventh-century Arabia? In Islam, there are a number of reports (of variable grades of authenticity) that the prophet Muhammad either forbade or explicitly disliked the playing of chess.  As is known, he was centered in what is now known as Saudi Arabia during the seventh century; while he may have known about chess as it was played in India, or China, that doesn't necessarily reflect how chess was played in Arabia during his rule.  The colored areas in the following map (courtesy Wikipedia), especially those in brown, represent the regions he was most likely familiar with:

Islamic scholars have, as is their wont, attempted to derive rulings from (or in spite of) these reports as to whether playing chess itself halal or haram, and this is an issue on which there is no scholarly consensus.  Even assuming that the reports themselves are deemed authentic, it is difficult to come up with a ruling as it is less clear why such a discouragement was originally made; this is especially important when attempting to derive rulings of analogous situations.  Three major interpretations that I have seen posited are as follows:

Due to the fact that (some of) the pieces are carved in the shapes of living creatures, it is merely an extension of the ruling regarding graven images.
It is a form of entertainment (i.e. distraction) with no discernible benefit, so it is merely discouraged (but not outright forbidden) as a waste of time.
It an extension of the prohibition on gambling, as people would wager on the outcome of such games.

My own personal theory — and I am hardly an Islamic scholar — is based on the fact that similar reports are made discouraging and/or forbidding games of dice (especially backgammon): Such games where the outcome is based on chance would fall under (or at least encroach on) the prohibition against divination by arrows (i.e. a practice similar to "drawing the short straw" for decision-making).

Of course, modern chess has no element of random chance; it is a perfect-knowledge game in which the outcome can be based entirely on skill, in which case my own interpretation doesn't really make much sense.  However, as the intellectual benefits of modern chess have received significant study (which would fly against the second scholarly opinion listed above), and even though gambling on games does exist, it is hardly the predominant goal of playing nowadays (which would fly against the third), it seems clear that what is now known as chess is not necessarily the same as what was known as chess back then.

I do, however, know that modern chess did not arrive from whole cloth; like many games, it evolved over centuries to become the game we see today.  I know I have personally played (what is claimed to be) a dice-based precursor to chess that called itself Chatranga (although a bit of Wikipedia research suggests it was actually Chaturaji).  As such, it is feasible that whatever variant of chess was popular in the Arab world during the seventh (and possibly early eighth) century could involve randomization in some form.

As such, the question lies thus: What flavour of chess was predominant in the early Islamic world during the time of Muhammad himself (570-630CE), as represented by the above map?

Wikipedia has an entry on the History of Chess. It states that the differences between what is now modern chess began in Europe in the 15th century. Besides the name changes for the pieces, the rules differed. The section covering The Indo-Arabic game appears to reference, Murray H.J.R. 1913. The history of chess. Oxford. reprint ISBN 0-936317-01-9

In early chess the moves of the pieces were:
Shāh: as King now.
Firzān: one square diagonally at a time (contrast modern Q).
Fīl: two squares diagonally (no more or less), but could jump over a piece in between (contrast modern B). This move meant that an individual fīl could move to only eight squares on the board, and no fīl could ever attack another fīl.
(Horseman): as Knight now.
Rukh: as Rook now.
Pawn: one square forwards (not two), capturing one square diagonally forward; promoted to firzān only.
The game could be won by 1. Mating the king; 2. By giving stalemate; 3. By capturing all the opponent's pieces. This kept down the number of draws.

The Murray book in its entirety is out of copyright, I found this section regarding Islam in India. He notes that the prophet supposedly denounced the game, and the difference in rules covered above on the Wikipedia page. This other site notes that Murray objects to the belief that Mohammed would have seen chess played in his lifetime, since the game is of Indian/Persian origin, and wouldn't have spread to the Islamic world until the fall of Persia.

"most probably the Prophet had never heard of the existence of chess, since the Muhammadan jurists have been unable to settle the question of the legality of chess-playing by any direct decision of Muhammad as recorded in the Qur'an, or in authentic tradition. (HJR Murray 187.)" It is difficult to state with any great certainty that chess was played in Arabia during the Prophet's lifetime; chess was after all an Indo-Iranian invention, and it is not unreasonable to assume that it entered Arabian culture through the conquest of Egypt and Western Asia after the Prophet's death. However, it is clear that chess had gained tremendous popularity amongst all classes and social spheres by the time of the Abbasid Caliphate, which took power in the year 750, still very early in Islamic history. It was at this time that religious scholars began to question the legality of playing chess.


Does Master of the Veil work on Megamorphs? Assuming I have Master of the Veil face down and Stratus Dancer face up, can I flip Stratus Dancer back over with Master of the Veil? I do not know of Megamorph falls under Morph. Are they completely different, or is Megamorph and instance of Morph?

Master of the Veil is able to turn Stratus Dancer facedown.

Rule 702.36b defines Megamorph as a morph variant, and so Master of the Veil's oracle'd ability can target a face up Stratus Dancer.

Oracle text:

  When Master of the Veil is turned face up, you may turn target creature with a morph ability face down.

702.36. Morph:

  702.36a Morph is a static ability that functions in any zone from which you could play the card it’s on, and the morph effect works any time the card is face down. “Morph [cost]” means “You may cast this card as a 2/2 face-down creature with no text, no name, no subtypes, and no mana cost by paying {3} rather than paying its mana cost.” (See rule 707, “Face-Down Spells and Permanents.”)
  702.36b Megamorph is a variant of the morph ability. “Megamorph [cost]” means “You may cast this card as a 2/2 face-down creature with no text, no name, no subtypes, and no mana cost by paying {3} rather than paying its mana cost” and “As this permanent is turned face up, put a +1/+1 counter on it if its megamorph cost was paid to turn it face up.” A megamorph cost is a morph cost.


When charging an entrance in Zoomaka do I give change? Let's say I have a full set of Monkeys in Zoomaka the total sum of all cards are 3+2+2+2 = 9 So all players should give me 9 Zoomas right? If one of my opponents only has two five Zooma cards in their bank am I required to give change?

No.

I presume from the title you've played the relevant Entrance card to charge the fee.

From the rules, page 10:

  When paying a debt no change is returned.

The player could choose to pay with assets from their zoo instead of using the full 5-cost banked card, though this might make more sense if the total cost were, for example, 7.


How can I play Dominion by myself (like solitaire)? Is there any suggested way to modify the rules to play Dominion on your own, like a Dominion Solitaire? It seems possible given that you're mostly just building your own deck and collecting victory points, but I'm not sure how to replicate the scarcity aspect that makes the game competitive and challenging.

Probably the best way to make a bot to play against is to not make it have a deck at all, just every other turn make it take a duchy and on the other turns make it randomly take an attack card and do it's effect (only bother with the effect that effects you for the bot doesn't have a deck)
You should check out the game Ascension, it is a deck building game like dominion, but with a viable built in solitaire variant.


Does Summary Dismissal Send a Transformed Card to the graveyard? If the transform ability of a card has triggered and then the opponent plays Summary Dismissal, what happens to the card that would have been transformed? Does it un-transform or go the graveyard?

If Summary Dismissal is cast in response to an ability that transforms a card that ability will be countered and thus removed from the stack. Since the ability to would transform the card no longer exists the card will not transform (it will not un-transform since it never transformed in the first place). If it was an activated ability that was countered it can still be activated again assuming the costs for it can be payed a second time. If it was a triggered ability it will trigger again the next time its condition is met.

If Summary Dismissal is cast after a card has transformed it will have no effect of the card at all since it only effects abilities that are currently on the stack, and can't do anything about ones that have already resolved.

  Only activated and triggered abilities on the stack are countered. Static abilities of objects remain unaffected, and activated and triggered abilities of objects may be activated or may trigger again later in the turn. Spells and abilities that have already resolved aren’t affected.

Countering transform abilities should never cause a permanent to go to the graveyard, the closest thing I can find is cards like Accursed Witch that die and return to the battlefield transformed, in this case they would stay in the graveyard.


Can I cast a spell if I might be able to pay its cost but don't know yet? A Wizards forum thread had an interesting question that was left unanswered.  If I have only two black mana available, can I cast Fatal Lore if my opponent has a Spellwild Ouphe on the battlefield?  The issue is it is a legal play only if my opponent chooses the destroy creatures option (since I could target the Ouphe, making it cost two lest to cast).

Since it is a legal play under some outcomes of the process of casting it, it is a legal play.  If your opponent chooses the mode where you draw cards, it will become an illegal spell and the game will be reverted to the state it was in before you began casting it.

The precedent for this comes from a card specific ruling on Selvala, Explorer Returned:

  If you activate Selvala’s ability while casting a spell, and you
  discover you can't produce enough mana to pay that spell’s costs, the
  spell is reversed. The spell returns to whatever zone you were casting
  it from. You may reverse other mana abilities you activated while
  casting the spell, but Selvala’s ability can't be reversed. Whatever
  mana that ability produced will be in your mana pool and each player
  will have drawn a card.

From this, we can tell that you are allowed to cast spells you might be able to pay for.

As Hackworth and various members on the forum point out, the rules do not explicitly prevent you from attempting to cast spells you have no way of paying for in any circumstance, but doing so doesn't ever help you.  At best, it reveals a card in your hand with no other consequence.  At worst, it could get you disqualified in a tournament for repeat offenses of slow play or cheating (if you are attempting to cast an illegal spell to make an opponent reveal information in their reaction).


How to capture unoccupied enemy-controlled territories? How do I capture them? (besides tanks blitzing). That would not work if im trying to capture an island. Just move in with a bunch of infantry and claim it for myself?

On an island, there wouldn't be an opportunity for a tank blitz (unless it started from a land zone two zones away).

But tanks or infantry can assault an island (or any coastal region) from a transport, possibly with air or battleship support. If they "outlast" the enemy defenders, the survivors can move ashore and occupy the island.

Tanks or infantry attacking an unoccupied island have "outlasted" the enemy defenders, by definition.


After the combat phase, can hexes be claimed even if the ships weren't involved in combat? From the Eclipse rulebook, page 21:

  Influencing hexes:  If a hex has no population after all
  battles have been resolved and you have at least one Ship
  there, remove the previous controller’s Influence Disc (returning
  it to his Influence Track). After this, you may place
  your own Influence Disc there. Also, if your Ship is in a hex
  without an Influence Disc after the Combat Phase, you may
  place a disc there.

A literal interpretation of the last sentence means that just having a ship in a hex allows one to stake a claim with an Influence Disc.  Obviously, this would apply for the following two combat-related situations:

Defeating ancients or the GCDS, leaving behind an unclaimed hex.
Two opposing armies fighting over an uncontrolled hex, leaving behind an unclaimed hex.

However, this also opens up a third intriguing possibility:

Moving a ship into an unclaimed and uncontested hex, later claiming it without needing an Influence action.

Is this third interpretation legal, or are hexes claimed in this step limited only to ships which actually did something during the Combat Phase?

You interpreted the rules correctly. The rules state:

  if your Ship is in a hex without an Influence Disc after the Combat
  Phase, you may place a disc there.

Which does not require that you actually participate in combat, just that you have a ship in a hex without any influence disks. So you are allowed to claim an influence disk free hex by ending your turn with a ship in that hex.

This forum post at Board Game Geek discusses the same question.


what’s the names of the card game that uses 8 decks of cards? This card game was played by 3 women at a Sr Center and it took 3 hours. Eight decks of cards used to play this game.

Could it be Hand and Foot, a variant of Canasta? It uses multiple decks and has each player trying to build 7-of-a-kinds while emptying their two hands (the second being called the foot, hence the name). If they aren't playing cut-throat and instead just going for high scores, this game can theoretically go until every single card sans the 3s are melded.


Can a Counterspell basically counter more than one spell? I'm on my main phase.

I cast a 2/2 creature, and want to enchant it in the same phase.

I cast the creature - no counterspell.

I then want to cast a +3/+3 Aura enchantment on that creature, and then a second +2+2 enchantment on it.

My opponent then casts Counterspell on my creature as his spell goes on the stack.  Are the enchantments also gone to the graveyard or were they not able to be cast in the first place?

My way of seeing it was they couldn't have been cast because there was no creature to cast them on.  Otherwise, a counterspell basically counters three spells.  I sense I'm probably wrong but this seems broken.

This situation cannot happen as you have described it. In order to enchant a creature, the creature must already be on the battlefield. If your opponent wants to counter your creature, he must do so before it resolves.

In casual games of Magic, you have to settle the confusion with your opponent and decide whether he meant to allow the creature to resolve. There are two possible outcomes:

Your creature resolved, and your enchantment is on the stack waiting to resolve.
Your creature is countered, and you did not cast your enchantment (yet).

In tournament games, the two outcomes are the same, but this time the rules say that your opponent gets to choose.

Example

  Andy: I cast Grizzly Bears.
  Nathan: ...
  Andy: I cast Oakenform, targeting Grizzly Bears.
  Nathan: When I get priority after you cast Grizzly Bears, I'll cast Counterspell, targeting Grizzly Bears.

When you cast two spells in succession without asking your opponent if the first one resolves, you are actually suggesting a shortcut. Your opponent can choose to take priority after either spell. Silence cannot be used as an indicator that the game has moved forward.

In this example, Andy played sloppily by assuming that Grizzly Bears resolved. Nathan has the option to accept the shortcut, or deviate from it by responding to Grizzly Bears (which he did).

What can I do to prevent this from happening in the future?

Simply ask if your creature resolves.

  Andy: I cast Grizzly Bears. Does it resolve?

You'll learn to recognize when it is important to do this. It may be seen as an annoyance if you are constantly asking "Does my spell resolve?" when your opponent is completely tapped out with no cards in hand.


Should players recount their moves during deliberation in Werewolf? What if no werewolves? I've only played about 10 games of ONUW and during deliberation on who to vote out, a trend emerges: we often discuss what we did and try to deduce who is who.

Say there was a Seer, Troublemaker, Robber, and Village Idiot, each one would tell everyone else which cards they looked at/swapped around, so much so that by the end of the deliberation, we usually have all of the players correct. Is the game meant to be played this way? Is there any benefit to a villager telling a lie?

What if no player has a werewolf (say they're all in the middle). Is there a way villagers can even win the game? A villager must be voted out (unless there's a draw?).

There is a benefit to a villager holding back information, or telling a lie. The benefit is that if all the villagers immediately and automatically tell the truth, then the werewolf can use the information to his advantage. For example, if no villager claims to be the Seer, then the werewolf can safely say that he was the seer. If, however, people are reluctant to claim things, then if the werewolf claims to be the Seer, then the real Seer can speak up and call out his lie.

Another thing I've seen done is the troublemaker telling a lie about which players he switched. For example, I'm the troublemaker, and I switched players A and B with each other. I suspect that player C is the werewolf. I say "I switched players A and C". Player C, who really was the werewolf, believes me, and says "well in that case, I was the werewolf to start, so now player A must be the werewolf!" Then, when I reveal the truth that player C is was NOT actually switched, we all know that player C is the wolf, he just admitted it!

It is also not clear from your description what a werewolf does in your games. If "everyone tells the truth", and everyone is believable, then what does the werewolf do? If someone says that he was a Village Idiot, how do you know if he's telling the truth, or if he is actually a werewolf who is lying?

If there is no werewolf, then the villagers win by not killing anyone. The only way to do this is to not give more than 1 vote to any player (for example, each player votes for the person on his/her right). Often players will agree to vote this way if they are truly convinced that no one is a werewolf; but if they do so, and there actually was a werewolf, then the werewolf wins.

So yes, it is normal to discuss what each person did, and who each person is. But the werewolf will almost always be lying, which means that you can't know for sure if any 1 person is telling the truth or not.


In Arkham Horror, can "Any Phase" actions be performed multiple times immediately? The item in mind is the Enchanted Jewelry which can prevent one stamina damage any phase (and gets discarded once 3 stamina tokens have piled up on the card). Does this mean it can only be used to prevent 1 stamina loss during that phase, or can I prevent 3 damage at once?

The only reason that you would be unable to repeat the "Any Phase" ability on a card is if you must exhaust the card to use the ability (e.g. Dragon's Eye), or if it explicitly says that you can only use the ability once per turn (e.g. Mandy Thompson's ability). Since the Enchanted Jewelry meets neither of these conditions, it can be used multiple times per turn, including repeatedly from the same attack. The same also applies to the Shotgun.


Annotated 9x9 Go Games I've recently started playing Go and I would like to study some annotated 9x9 games, but can't seem to find anything. Does anyone know where I could find such games? If it's free that would be even better.

There is not much written about 9x9 Go games, but you can find a few videos about them on Youtube.  I would recommend the following series of videos 'Crazy Nines', by Go content creator xhu98:

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLGTqST4O93ERWgQkCroFSCg4UiOgmL4Mq

The series features Dan level amateur players discussing 9x9 strategy.  This is the best 9x9 analysis I have been able to find.


How do you identify (and resolve) "critical path" issues in Ticket to Ride? Suppose you have a destination card for Los Angeles to New York. Some portions of the route are likely to be harder to complete than others. How you you identify which ones?

For instance, Los Angeles has only four or five routes, and New York has seven or eight. Does that mean that I should prioritize paths leading out of LA because there are fewer of them? And should I give the highest priority to potential bottlenecks such as Houston-New Orleans and/or Nashville-Atlanta?

And suppose I have two adjacent destination routes, Vancouver to Montreal and New York to Atlanta?  Does that suddenly make New York to Montreal a high priority route so that I can connect them, and possibly get longest route?

LA has fewer routes, yes, but all of them can still be used to get to NY with only a few "extra" wagons needed. So, initially it seems to be a bottleneck, but losing e.g., LA to Phoenix is not a game-ender for you.

You are on the right track, though, in identifying the endpoints which have the fewest number of routes available to them. Vancouver, for instance, only has 3 routes available (2 if playing with 2 or 3 players), so getting any route into Vancouver would be a priority if your destinations went there, even if it is not your preferred route. You can't complete your ticket if you can't get to both endpoints, so getting into those endpoints may be the highest priority. If, however, you have Denver to Chicago, both of which have several routes in, getting into the endpoints early is less important as you can more easily adapt to the cards you are dealt.

As for adjacent tickets, getting from NY to Montreal is a priority, of course, but not necessarily via the 3-blue route. You can go through Boston (which will actually get you a longer train, but take 2 turns), or you may even go through Toronto or SSM - it all depends on your other tickets and at what point in the game you drew the 2 adjacent tickets. That said, if I have a ticket to (or near) Atlanta, I'll almost always grab Nashville-Atlanta as one of my first moves. Same with Houston-NOLA. They're low cost and can easily connect some otherwise-disparate routes.

All of this is dependent on the train cards you draw, of course. Your initial plan may be to go LA-Phoenix-Denver-and on to NY, but if you're getting a lot of black and yellow cards but no white cards, you may instead go LA-El Paso-OKC-and on to NY. If you're drawing a lot of blue cards, then the NY-Montreal route is a priority; if you're drawing a lof of red and yellow cards, then it's less of a priority and NY-Boston is.


Giving a creature hexproof as a response The situation/question:

I have Nahiri, the Harbinger. I use her "-2:  Exile target enchantment, tapped artifact, or tapped creature" on Elusive Tormentor.
My opponent transforms Elusive Tormentor, which gives it hexproof.
Does Insidious Mist get exiled or does my spell no longer work.

Nahiri's ability would be countered due to a lack of legal target (commonly called 'fizzling'). This is because the legality of a target is checked at 2 different times, when the ability is activated and put on the stack and then again when the ability goes to resolve.

608.2b If the spell or ability specifies targets, it checks whether the targets are still legal. [...] Other changes to the game state may cause a target to no longer be legal; for example, its characteristics may have changed or an effect may have changed the text of the spell. [...] The spell or ability is countered if all its targets, for every instance of the word “target,” are now illegal. If the spell or ability is not countered, it will resolve normally. Illegal targets, if any, won’t be affected by parts of a resolving spell’s effect for which they’re illegal. [...]
Example: Sorin’s Thirst is a black instant that reads, “Sorin’s Thirst deals 2 damage to target creature and you gain 2 life.” If the creature isn’t a legal target during the resolution of Sorin’s Thirst (say, if the creature has gained protection from black or left the battlefield), then Sorin’s Thirst is countered. Its controller doesn’t gain any life.


Does a bid of 'Double' make you the declarer? South bids, say 2 spades, then west bids 'double', then all others pass.
Does this mean that south is the declarer with the contract being 2 spades doubled?
Or does west win the contract with 2 spades doubled?

My intuition in reading so far suggests that south would still win the auction, but I have not explicitly read that this is the case.

Also, this is not intended to touch on any bidding conventions either, just simply how this affects who wins the auction. I do believe I understand the consequences in the game play or rather the scoring of a doubled bid, but I am simply uncertain who would have won the auction under these circumstances.

Your understanding is correct: South would be the declarer, playing a contract of two spades doubled. Doubles (and redoubles) never change who is declarer, just the scores for making or failing to make the contract.


When Vesuvan Shapeshifter copies turn face up replacement effects, why do they work? Vesuvan Shapeshifter says:

As Vesuvan Shapeshifter (...) is turned face up, you may choose another creature on the battlefield. If you do, until Vesuvan Shapeshifter is turned face down, it becomes a copy of that creature (...)

My understanding is that due to the word "as", this is a replacement effect. There is a ruling for Vesuvan Shapeshifter on gatherer that says:

(...) any “[when/as] [this creature] is turned face up” abilities of the chosen creature will work if Vesuvan Shapeshifter is turned face up.

For triggered abilities such as "when this creature is turned face up..." this makes sense to me. The Shapeshifter is turned face up as a copy of the creature so the triggered ability sees that, due to 614.6.
I don't understand why replacement effects such as "as this creature is turned face up..." would also work. My understanding is that once an event has been replaced the game moves forward, and replacement effects cannot effect past events per rule 614.4.
So from my understanding, the Shapeshifter is turned face up as a special action, its controller chooses another creature, the "turn Vesuvan Shapeshifter face up" special action is replaced with a "turn Copied Creature face up except it has Vesuvan Shapeshifter's upkeep triggered ability" special action and the special action finishes. Vesuvan Shapeshifter would then have the replacement effect of the copied card, but the effect would never have had a chance to do anything because the game had already moved on.
Could someone explain why that is incorrect?

Compatible replacement effects can chain together.

Vesuvan Shapeshifter's abilities are indeed replacement effects:

  614.1e Effects that read “As [this permanent] is turned face up . . . ,” are replacement effects.

Replaced events do not happen:

  614.6. If an event is replaced, it never happens. A modified event occurs instead, which may in turn trigger abilities. Note that the modified event may contain instructions that can’t be carried out, in which case the impossible instruction is simply ignored.

The event to be replaced is "Vesuvan Shapeshifter is turned face up", and is replaced with "The Vesuvan Shapeshifter is turned face up as the chosen creature". When that happens, the Shapeshifter has not yet turned face up:

  707.11. If a face-down permanent would have an “As [this permanent] is turned face up . . .” ability after it’s turned face up, that ability is applied while that permanent is being turned face up, not afterward.

If the copied creature has its own replacement effect on being turned face up, it is now in effect as it is being turned face up, and it happens as well.

  616.2. A replacement or prevention effect can become applicable to an event as the result of another replacement or prevention effect that modifies the event.

So the sequence of events is:

You decide to turn Vesuvan Shapeshifter face up
As you turn it face up, before it's actually turned face up, you choose another creature with a replacement effect that replaces getting turned face up.
Before the copied creature is turned face up, its own replacement effect happens and does something.
The copied creature is actually turned face up with its replacement effect applied, as if it was that creature all along.


Where can I play Phase 10 online? Is there an online site to play the card game Phase 10 on?
A clone is fine, but I'd really like to avoid a download.

There is a clone of Phase 10 called Wizard Cards you could download and install.  Magmic games has released versions of Phase 10 for Blackberry and iPhone also.  There doesn't seem to be a version you can play in your browser online at this time.


New Bridge Partner and Etiquette I joined a duplicate bridge group and was matched with a partner;  we are doing pretty well when it comes to points.  Question:  My partner sometimes criticizes not only me but also opponents, sometimes offers unsolicited advice, and is sometimes catty about other people playing in the room.  What is correct way to address this?  It is not constant an often subtle.  Am I being overly sensitive or is this something that should be addressed by me or by the director?

It's tough for the Type A personalities so often attracted to competitive games like Bridge, but all criticisms of partner should be reserved until after the match. I suggest noting to your partner "Make a note of that hand, and we'll discuss it after the game." One or two violations per game, that accept such a comment with a positive attitude, can be tolerated in a partner - any more than two you should be looking for a new partner, as the problem will get worse not better.

All criticisms of anybody else in the room are out of bounds - give your partner one warning and then have a word with the director. If you partner persists in this behaviour during the game look for another partner, and report offenses to the director as they happen by calling him/her to the table. Otherwise you are liable to get branded by other club members as a cohort of like mind.


In Munchkin, can a thief steal at level 1? Can a thief steal at level 1 given that failing to steal causes the thief to lose a level?

The Official Munchkin FAQ says Yes.

  Q. What happens to a Level 1 Thief who fails an attempt to steal? Does
  he die?

  A. Nothing happens to him. You can't go below Level 1. (Beware
  the Level 1 Thief – he literally has nothing to lose!)


How do I allocate variable damage to multi-wound models? Let's say my grav cannons (D3 damage) shoot at some crisis suits (3 wounds each) and the suits fail 3 saves. I roll damage and get a one, a two and a three. Should I have rolled the dice in order? Or can I roll them together and allocate? Or do I roll them together and the other player allocates?

To see how different this could be:

If I allocate, I'll apply the three first, then the one and the two, killing two models
If the target player allocates, he'll apply the two, then the three, killing one model. The one then gets applied to a fresh model, leaving it with two wounds.
Or, if applied in order, I might have rolled the one first, then the three, then the two. That would kill one model and leave another with one wound remaining.

With variable damage against multi-wound models (or models with a Feel No Pain equiv.) you need to roll the damage rolls one at a time. The damage is not rolled and then assigned. The only choice you would have is if you had a weapon whose profile changed based on hit/wound roll (for example d6 instead of d3 on a 6 to wound). In this case you would make two groups of wound pools, and the firing player could decide which should be applied first, the defending player would then make the saves against these. If the defending models had differing saves (or some had FNP) the saves and damage rolls would need to be made individually.

The important thing to remember is that technically group rolling is a shortcut. Each weapon is intended to be fired individually. This is of course tedious, so where possible, when it doesn't actually matter, we group rolls together.


Super Polymerization how does it work My question involves the card Super Polymerization. I understand that it can be used to fusion summon using monsters on either side of the field, but it seems unclear on if those monsters have to be the ones listed on the fusion monster.

Super polymerization stats

  Discard 1 card, Fusion Summon 1 Fusion Monster from your Extra Deck, using monsters from either side of the field as Fusion Materials. Cards and effects cannot be activated in response to this card's activation.

Does that translate to the opponent has 3 random monsters that I take to summon Blue Eyes Ultimate without any Blue Eyes? Or does my opponent need to actually have a Blue Eyes for me to use?

Does that translate to the opponent has 3 random monsters that I take to summon Blue Eyes Ultimate without any Blue Eyes?

No, you must use the correct fusion materials for the monster you wish to fusion summon.

If superpoly let you do that it would be too broken.

The advantage of it is that is quick-play, so you can fusion summon during your opponent's turn.

This card was mostly used in Hero decks, where many of the fusion monsters have as requirements "1 hero + some attribute-specific monster"... So you could use your hero and (say) your opponent's dark effect monster to summon Destiny HERO Dangerous.


How to randomly choose a hex tile I’m designing a board game which uses hexagonal tiles (hex[es]) to form the game area the players move about in. There is a single hex which is the players starting point, and one “layer” of hexes around that centre one. This is the starting layout:

After this, players can add new hexes to the structure in any direction. The only rules are they fit in to the hex ‘grid’ and they touch an existing hex. Therefore they do not need to fully complete concentric layers, they can go one direction in a line of hexes for example.

I would like to introduce a mechanic that targets a random hex, and this is where I’m struggling to come up with a good way of determining that random hex.

Ideally, the method should give an equal chance for any hex to be targeted; and it should only use components which are generally found in board games. It would be very easy to do this with the addition of a mobile phone, for example, but I would like to try and keep this classic. Common components are items such as dice, spinners, tokens, cardboard components, etc. Feel free to suggest anything that might help. The other requirement would be that the process is not overly complicated - but as that’s subjective I’m open to anything.

TL;DR Is there a method of choosing a random hex from any number of hexes, in any formation, using common board game components?

The best way to deal with variable count randomization is to use a drawing bag

Create two sets of tiles.  Whenever you add a tile to the board, add its copy to a drawing bag.

Now whenever you need a random tile, draw it from the bag.

This technique requires all your tiles to be unique. If they are not unique, and can't be given a unique identifier, then create a double set of numbered tokens, and assign a number to each tile as it is placed.

Deck vs Draw Bag

StartPlayer mentioned using a deck, which is also an excellent suggestion. The two options have slightly different use cases, so which one you choose should depend on how you need them.

Draw bags are better if you are frequently adding items between draws, because it is easier to shuffle a bag, especially if there are only a few items.

On the other hand, a deck is better if you need to remove specific items in a manner besides randomly drawing them, because it is easier to search a deck than a bag.


In Le Havre, is it a good idea to feed with money? As a general rule, is it better to overpay food by 1, or to use a coin? This situation usually comes up when I have a stack of bread or steaks and some money.  I have the food to pay, but usually feel cheap and use a coin instead, which wastes VP.

I realize there are many specific decisions where the decision is obvious, but I feel like pretty often the decision is moot, and requires falling back on a general rule.

Does this decision change if paying a player?

It's entirely situational.  Sometimes you have more food than you need and are clearly better off spending the extra food.  Other times you don't have enough food and would end up spending more money for food at the end of the round anyways.  Often it is in between these two extremes, and then it can be a tricky decision.

When paying to another player, that player's situation may be relevant, but it's generally secondary to your position vis-a-vis food.

What you need to look at is how much food you have compared to how much you need at the end of this (and future) rounds.  If it will end up costing you more than one VP/money to get back the two food later (and you'll need), you should probably spend the money.  Otherwise not, but even this doesn't cover everything.

Concrete example:  You have 1 franc and 1 bread (and no other food), and want to use a building that costs one food.  Before your next action, the round will end and you'll need 2 food for support.  In this case, you can spend the money, and then the food at the end of the round, leaving you with no food or money for your next action.  Or you could spend the food, leaving you with not enough money for food at the end of the round, which will force you to take a loan.  So on your next action, you'll have 3 money, but also have an additional loan, a net cost of 2-4 VPs, BUT it may be worth it if you need cash to use a building on your next action and would otherwise have to sell a building to get that cash.  Of course, if another player has an action before the end of the round, they might screw up your careful plans by using one of your buildings and giving you a fish, so you no longer need a loan...


Can I cast a spell while another spell or ability is resolving? My opponent has a Sorin, Lord of Innistrad with scads of loyalty. I've got a Gideon Jura and a Nihil Spellbomb on the battlefield.

He activates Sorin's "ultimate" ability, targeting Gideon.

  -6: Destroy up to three target creatures and/or other planeswalkers. Return each card put into a graveyard this way to the battlefield under your control.

Is there any way I can use the Spellbomb to prevent my opponent from stealing Gideon after he is sent to my graveyard?

No. Except for effects that specifically instruct a player to cast a spell, spells/abilities may not normally be played during the resolution of a spell or ability. Since Sorin's ability is both destroying, and returning Gideon, there is no point at which you would have priority to activate the Nihilism Spellbomb to remove the Planeswalker.

You may want to read up on how priority works.

  608.2f If an effect gives a player the option to pay mana, he or she may activate mana abilities before taking that action. If an effect specifically instructs or allows a player to cast a spell during resolution, he or she does so by putting that spell on top of the stack, then continuing to cast it by following the steps in rules 601.2a–h, except no player receives priority after it's cast. The currently resolving spell or ability then continues to resolve, which may include casting other spells this way. No other spells can normally be cast and no other abilities can normally be activated during resolution.


Is either player at a disadvantage when cards "aren't' shuffled well enough"? Perhaps I should be asking this on one of the math sites rather than here, but I reckon cardplayers would know: when my wife and I play Skip-Bo and things aren't going her way, she claims that I "didn't shuffle the cards well (long) enough."

While it may be true that I only shuffled the cards a few times (rather than dozens), my assertion is that it doesn't really matter, as far as who has the advantage - we're both playing with the same "badly shuffled" cards, so it's an "even playing field."

Am I wrong? Is either player at a disadvantage with insufficienlty shuffled cards?

I am even tempted to not shuffle at all between game 1 and game 2 to see how that turns out.

As long as neither player has information about the order of cards in a deck of cards, no player can gain an advantage from a "bad" shuffle.

A "bad" shuffle could be defined as a shuffle that does not, by a reasonable standard, erase all information remaining from the end of the previous game, most notably the order of cards. This does not mean that there is no recognizable order to the cards, only that neither player knows in what order the deck is, including after a player has seen a part of the deck.

If a particular game produces long streaks of ordered cards on the table, and a subsequent shuffle before the next game does not break up that order, then there is the potential that information remains to be gained in the next game, and a possible advantage for one player. The amount of shuffling needed to prevent that depends on the technique used and the amount of order that is present (e.g. how large are the blocks of ordered cards the game typically produces).

As for your problem with the half-serious allegations of negligience or even cheating by your wife: That question is not likely to be resolved with better shuffling alone, it's about venting her frustration after losing - she is not going to complain about a bad shuffle if she wins. Simply offer to let her shuffle the deck whenever she wants, or at least let her cut the deck before the game starts. This involves her in the shuffling process and she has no more reason to take insufficient shuffling as an excuse.


How can I effectively use the Coppersmith? I've been playing Dominion with the base + Intrigue sets for a while now, and one of the cards that I have trouble wrapping my mind around is the Coppersmith.

In theory, it seems like a great card - it allows you to make all of your Coppers into Silvers, and in some cases - even Gold. However, I have yet to build a deck during a game that manages to use it effectively. Usually, in order to pull one or two of those with a nice amount of coppers, I need to create a deck that relies heavily on +cards/+actions chains, and the Coppersmith only begins to affect the game too late for it to be of any use.

So... how can this card be effectively used?

Coppersmith is a terminal action, therefore you have to design your deck to accomodate it.  (By terminal action, I mean it is an action that does not give +Actions).  As others have noted, Coppersmith is a card used to give you an early start.  By managing your deck, you can extend that advantage well into the mid game.

Here is a chart showing how 1 coppersmith can accelerate your early game.  I've compared it to Smithy, and "Big Money"  (A base strategy of buying only silver/gold/provinces which is actually fairly strong)

                    Chance of Having (once during the two turns)
Turn 1-2 purchases   $6      $7     $8       Notes
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coppersmith+Treasure 50.91%   0.00%  21.21% # 1 in 792 that 2 golds can be bought
Smithy+Silver        42.60%  19.39%   2.12% #Not possible with a 5/2 copper split
2 Silver             33.59%   8.84%   0.00% #Not possible with a 5/2 copper split

This shows a few things

you have a vastly higher chance of affording a province.
The coppersmith gives you a 70% higher chance of being able to afford a gold than "Big Money"
The coppersmith works with a 5/2 copper split on the first 2 turns, while the other two do not.
Coppersmith will not give you possibly annoying $5 and $7 hands.

Is buying a province on turn 3 a good move?  Maybe not, but it could be.  My point is that if you buy coppersmith, you stand a higher chance of getting an early gold.  This advantage will carry over to future turns.  Coppersmith will help you hit the financial high points of $6 and $8 more often, while avoiding $5 and especially $7.

Every set of 10 cards in Dominion is different.  Coppersmith won't always be a great card, but it can be used to great effect.  Try playing it with wishing well!


Does first strike damage occur before normal damage? When I attack with a first strike creature, does it deal combat damage before normal combat damage is dealt?

Specifically, if I attack with Drana, Liberator of Malakir (has first strike and "Whenever Drana, Liberator of Malakir deals combat damage to a player, put a +1/+1 counter on each attacking creature you control.") and 5 other creatures with no counters on them, do I deal damage equal to the creatures' total power or damage equal to the creatures' total power + 5?

Yup, that's one of the reasons Drana's powerful - she can pump up your other attackers in time to help them deal more damage. The point of first strike is that it happens first!
Here's how combat plays out, assuming you attack with Drana, your opponent doesn't block her, and nothing weird happens:

First Combat Damage Step

Drana and all other creatures with First Strike or Double Strike deal damage. Drana will deal 2 damage to your opponent, unless you've pumped her up somehow.
Drana's ability triggers, then presumably resolves, placing a +1/+1 counter on each of your attacking creatures, including Drana.

Second ("regular") Combat Damage Step

All of your creatures without First Strike (including those with Double Strike) deal damage equal to their power, including the +1 from the counters they just got.

There are rulings on the Gatherer page for Drana to this effect:

Drana’s last ability triggers after combat damage has been dealt, so only attacking creatures that survive the combat damage step in which Drana deals combat damage will have +1/+1 counters put on them.
The +1/+1 counter won’t change how much damage Drana or any other attacking creature with first strike or double strike deals during that combat damage step. However, the +1/+1 counters that are put on attacking creatures without first strike will affect the damage those creatures deal during the regular combat damage step.


Supporting Routed Units in A Game of Thrones In FFG's A Game of Thrones boardgame, can routed units be supported?

In a recent game, one player (the aggressor) attacked another (the defender) but was defeated. His routed units had to retreat into the area they started from and were turned on their sides - exhausted.

The defender had a March order on the newly-victorious units, and used it to attack the routed units in their original area. But the aggressor had an adjacent supporting unit, and a third party did as well.

It seemed to me (I was neither the aggressor, the defender, nor the interested third party) that units have to be able to give battle in order to be supported.

But we couldn't find a rule that said specifically either way. We found rules that said that battles ensued when one player moved units into an area with another player's units already in it. We found rules that said that routed units have no combat strength and must be lost if they would be forced to retreat again while exhausted. But nothing specifically relating to whether an exhausted force can be supported and therefore have a combat strength.

One of the players in the game in question just sent me this link: http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/98106/supporting-routed-units

  Routed units have no combat strength. They still count towards a player s Supply limit, but if a routed unit is forced to retreat again in the same game turn, it is automatically destroyed. Routed units may never be taken as casualties in battle. Routed units may not participate in a march, even if a March order token is resolved at their new location. After all March orders have been resolved for the turn, return all routed units to their normal upright position.

It seems that the accepted interpretation is that routed units may give battle (with a strength of zero) and may be supported.


How can we determine the winner in Love Letter if the last two players tie and have the same value of cards discarded? At the end of the game, both remaining players have a Baron.

The sum of all cards discarded by both players is equal.

Who wins?

I did not find the rules stated below from the English rulebook (Alderac). Maybe they did not have this situation during the early test games. The Finnish/Swedish/Danish/Norwegian rulebook (Nordic version, Lautapelit.fi), has been published a bit later, and there is a solution for this problem.

Tie-breaker for the winner of a round

The round ends if one player cannot draw a card at his turn. Then you compare the cards in your hands. If you both have the same card you will have to calculate the sum of the cards you have discarded. The rules say:

  whoever has the highest sum will win the round.

This implies that if you both have the same card in your hands and the same sum, you will both win the round (i.e., that round has multiple winners). This rule (that there might be multiple winners) is confirmed in the section concerning the beginning of a new round. It says:

  The player who won the last round will start the next round. If the
  round had multiple winners, the youngest one will start.

But what if this happens and the game ends?

This might also lead into a (very rare) situation, when the entire game ends and two players have to equal amount of points. The rulebook of the Nordic version states:

  When a player collects the required number of points/hearts, he wins
  the game and conquers the heart of the Princess. In the case of
  draw, the youngest player wins.

So, quite thematically, the Princess prefers to fall in love with the younger guy ;) (In a real life situation, it might happen that the fate favours the one who has more digits in his bank account. But the Princess does not lack in riches so...)


Double strike and Regeneration: Can the blocker die from combat after regeneration? I am unsure how the following situation resolves:

Player A attacks Player B with a Two-Headed Cerberus with a Baleful Eidolon bestowed upon it, making it effectively a 2/3 with double strike and deathtouch. Player B blocks with a Nessian Asp.

The first strike damage will kill Player B's asp, so he regenerates it using Boon of Erebos.

What happens in the next damage phase? I can see three possibilities:

Both creatures die (the Asp is killed by the deathtouch, the Cerberus by damage)
Neither creature dies because the regeneration removed the Asp from combat, but the Cerberus was still effectively blocked and does not hit Player B.
Neither creature dies, but the Cerberus is not blocked in the second damage phase (I don't think this makes sense) and so hits Player B for 2 damage

The answer is #2. Regenerate causes the creature to be removed from combat:

  614.8. Regeneration is a destruction-replacement effect. The word “instead” doesn’t appear on the card but is implicit in the definition of regeneration. “Regenerate [permanent]” means “The next time [permanent] would be destroyed this turn, instead remove all damage marked on it and tap it. If it’s an attacking or blocking creature, remove it from combat.” Abilities that trigger from damage being dealt still trigger even if the permanent regenerates. See rule 701.12.

As for the damage that the attacking creature would do, once a creature becomes blocked, it stays blocked no matter what happens to the blocking creature:

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

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


When can I use Cyberfeeder's recurring credit with icebreakers? In Android: Netrunner, Cyberfeeder is a piece of hardware that reads:

1 [Recurring credit]
Use this credit to pay for using icebreakers or for installing virus programs.

I'm interested in the "using icebreakers" clause. I know I can use it for icebreakers' paid abilities, such as 1 [Credit]: +1 strength or 1 [Credit]: break ice subroutine, but I was wondering if it can also be used for other effects like this one of Darwin's:

When your turn begins, you may pay 1 [Credit] to place one virus counter on Darwin.

Does "use" apply to this kind of cost, or just to paid abilities?

This is answered in the Android: Netrunner FAQ (page 10):

  Can the Runner use the recurring credit on Cyberfeeder to pay for using Femme Fatale’s bypass ability or Darwin’s gaining counters ability?

  Yes. Triggering any ability on an icebreaker is considered to be using it.


In Robo Rally, does a powered down robot get to earn option cards and repair? If he is pushed onto repair spaces etc, does he repair and earn option cards at the end of the 5 register phases if he is on an option space?

The rules state:

  The robot doesn’t receive or execute Program cards and doesn’t move while powered down, but board elements still affect it. For example, a robot that powers down on a conveyor belt will still be moved by that belt even though it’s not moving on its own.
  Other robots can push a powered-down robot, and the robot can still be damaged (such as by laser fire), Because of that, a robot that’s powered down may receive new Damage tokens during the turn.

The fact that phase 4, the Complete Registers phase, lists "Board Elements Move" as subpart C and yet files flags and repairs sites under subpart E suggests to me that these are not technically "Board Elements". Coupled with the natural telling of the story of robo-rally, that one would expect a lump of metal to be subject to attacks and conveyor belts but not be able to 'pickup' items or make use of a repair site to repair itself (this, versus the idea that a factory arm is doing the repair 100% for it), I lean toward the reading that the robot cannot earn cards or repair while powered down.

It depends on how you view the rules from the original 1994 edition vs the rules from the newer edition.

In the rules for the original edition, you cannot:

  A powered-down robot is completely shut down--it can't fire weapons, tag checkpoints, or update its
  archive location, nor can it acquire or use option cards. Powered-down robots don't move under their
  own power (they receive no program cards), but they may be moved by pushers, gears, and conveyor
  belts. They may also be pushed by other robots and shot at by lasers.

This is also clarified in the FAQ from that edition:

  Q: What can a robot do when it is powered down?

    A: Nothing. A powered down robot cannot fire weapons, receive option cards, tag checkpoints (if pushed onto them), update archive locations (ditto), or use turn programmed cards (for example, Shield). It cannot use any options unless the options specifically say they can be used while a robot is powered down. The robot basically becomes a lump that can be pushed around and suffer damage.

It is reasonable to assume that rules from the original edition are intended to be carried to the new edition unless it's somethign that the new edition specifies (such as the differences in how robots re-enter the board). Based on this, the answer is no, the intent of the rules is that you cannot receive new option cards or repair while powered down.

However, this rule is missing from the newer edition, so by a literal reading of the newest rulebook, without being concerned about the old edition, the answer would be yes. The rules for earning new options simply say that a robot on the correct space earns an option, no exceptions listed for if that robot is powered down. And the rules under powering down make no mention at all about this preventing you from earning new options or healing. The rules do specify that your robot can still be affected by board elements, and lists taking damage and conveyor belts as examples of this. One could say that option and healing squares fall in this category as well.

There's some good discussion on this question here and here, but no official answer given.


Are there any chess sets with more than 32 pieces? In every single chess set which I have purchased in my city (I'm from Moldova), there are exactly 32 pieces (16 white and 16 black). No more, no less. By pieces I mean kings, queens, rooks, bishops, knights and pawns.

However, it can be troublesome in practice. As you should probably know, there are pawn promotions in chess. And, according to the rules, the choice is not limited to pieces captured by your opponent. So you can have 9 queens, or 10 rooks etc. I know that in casual chess play an extra queen can be represented by upside-down rook. But I consider it pretty ugly, and it does not solve the problem if both rooks of the same color are still on the board.

I know that to satisfy every single possible game, a chess set must have 96 pieces, 48 white and 48 black.

My question is as follows. In practice, are there chess sets with more than 32 pieces, be it 96 pieces or 34? Do they have any practic use, e. g. in tournaments, and does an ordinary chess player have the possibility of buying such chess set? Thanks a lot for help.

The thing I know exists is a set with an extra queen each, so 34 pieces:

https://www.chessbazaar.com/tournament-series-staunton-chess-pieces-with-german-knight-in-sheesham-box-wood-3-7-king.html

This should cover like 99.9% of all games.

If you want more (actually an extra Knight/Rook/Bishop might be needed in very rare situations), you can look for single replacement pieces. Those can be easily found on google for popular chess designs:

https://www.chesshouse.com/collections/wooden-chess-pieces/products/single-standard-wood-chess-pieces


In MTG when can I tap land If I tap a land, end my turn, and then play an instant allowing me to untap it again, can I tap that land for more mana, and when does that mana get used up.
Basically, if I tap mana on my opponents turn, when does it leave the mana pool.

If I tap a land, end my turn, and then play an instant allowing me to untap it again, can I tap that land for more mana

Yes, the only restriction is that the land be untapped when you want to use its ability, it does not matter when you last tapped it for mana. You could even play the instant on your own turn (using the land twice in the turn).

  when does that mana get used up

It doesn't matter whose turn it is, each players mana pool empties at the end of each step and phase.

Note that brown "mana pools empty" throughout.

  Basically, if I tap mana on my opponents turn, when does it leave the mana pool

You don't tap mana, you tap land. Mana is the result of tapping the land. The way I like to think about it is mana is something I have to spend now while lands are something I can tap whenever you need them (giving you mana of course).


Monster encounter tactics My feeling is that, until my characters are boosted quite significantly with bonuses, re-rolls, and preferably a blessing, many of the monsters are at best a coin flip to beat in a single monster encounter and on average can take multiple turns, taxing precious moves/options, and at worst tax the player's health and sanity. Usually I simply avoid monsters and "live and let live" when possible, and I turn to using Tokyo encounter cards which lean toward "defeat monsters" to surgically remove threats. Camping at Tokyo seems the way to go to address monsters unless efficiently save for specific cases such as having a ridiculously boosted character or someone who can execute powerful moves to local monsters.

I'm looking for opinions on this and also other general tactics toward dealing with monsters.

The monster pile is pretty full of things that will easily take a few turns to kill.  That's intended in this game, as Eldritch Horror is much less about monster killing and a lot more about mystery solving.  There are a few Old Ones where you will have to worry about the monsters with, but you generally don't have to keep killing monsters all over the place.  The thing you DO need to do is close those damn portals before the doom track gets too high.

Your low-level monsters (cultists, maniacs, zombies) are easy enough to deal with one-on-one, even if you're not all powered up.  It's the large ones, like Dark Young, you have to worry about.  And if a Star Spawn is sitting in front of a gate you have to close, you can team up on that thing to try and take it down.  Get everyone to the monster that you need to deal with and have them start to throw everything they have at it.  I mean, when you look at what you're trying to deal with, you shouldn't be taking on a Star Spawn by yourself anyways.  That thing's as big as a house.

And it is true that you need to get the right items to start taking some of this stuff on.  That's why I like playing with people that start with weapons or as Charley Cain.  With Cain, you can basically airdrop resources to people that need it the most (and this goes for things other then monster slaying).  Getting people the right cards when they need it helps to clear away unwanted monsters.

Early game, you should be focused on getting at least one mystery solved and ignoring monsters for a while (even if it's the Black Goat).  Once you have something solved, you have more time to deal with picking up resources.  Usually have one or two people on monster stomping duty, buying up whatever items they can, while everyone else tries to manage the doom track.


Possible to play 2x2 with 1 core set and data pack in Netrunner? I have just purchased the Android Netrunner Core Set, played a few games, and am now excited to play more.

The problem is that our usual gaming group consists of 4 people, and to my knowledge the Core Set only allows you to build up to 2 playable decks (1 corp, 1 runner) for play at the same time, because of the number of neutral cards.

I would like to know what would be the most economical way to extend the Core Set with enough cards to build 2 enjoyable Runner and Corp decks for play at the same time without actually shelling out another 40$ for a second core set?

Short answer: Buy the What Lies Ahead data pack.  That with the core set lets you build two legal runner decks and two legal corp decks.

Longer answer

I assume from your question that you've already read the rules on deck building and aren't just trying to build the starter decks.  If you're thinking about buying data packs, you pretty much have to be building custom decks for things to even make sense.

If you're just going to play you're own decks against each other, you can do whatever you want in terms of deck building.  When limited in cards, ignoring influence limits is the best way to be able to follow agenda density requirements and deck minimums.  As long as your decks are fun to play against each other, that's really what matters.

If you want to follow all the deck-building rules, here's the run down:

Runner Decks

The base game comes with enough cards for you to be able to build two legal runner decks by having each run cards from the third faction.  Remember that you can spend up to 15 influence on out of faction cards (at least for the core set identities).  For the runners, all they need to do is get up to 45 cards (at least for the core set identities) while still staying under influence limits.

Let's assume we're making Shaper and Anarch decks.  The core set comes with 31 shaper cards and 32 anarch cards, with 15 neutral cards.  If we split the neutral cards between the two, that means we have two decks of 39 and still haven't used any influence.  That means each deck can run 6 criminal cards and has 15 influence to spend doing so.  Between Forged Activation Orders, Special Order, Easy Mark, Femme Fetale, and Bank Job, (all either 1 or 2 influence per copy) you're good to go.

Corp Decks

The primary limitation in building decks is the corp's agenda requirement.  The core set does not come with enough agendas to legally build multiple corp decks.  This is problematic because agendas cannot be run in decks of other factions (they have no influence value, which is different than having an influence of zero).  Of secondary concern for the corp is ICE.  The rule book suggests 17 - 20 pieces of ice for a 45 - 49 card deck.  This is an area where the corps might be hurting.

The deck building rules require 20 - 21 agenda points for the 45 - 49 deck size required by all the core set identities.  Given the core set only ships with 5 or 6 points of agendas in each faction and 15 points of neutral agendas, we need more to work with here.

The data pack What Lies Ahead is the best of the data packs for enabling more decks because it contains an agenda of each faction.  If you only buy this data pack, one of your corp decks must be NBN, as you need the 3-point Restructured Datapool.  This lets you run the neutral Private Security Forces in your NBN deck and the Priority Requisitions in your other corp deck of choice (along with the core set agendas and the corresponding What Lies Ahead agendas) and have two corp decks that meet agenda density requirements.

Now on to the ICE issue.  NBN (which must be one of your corps because of agendas) starts with 9 pieces of ICE from the core set, and gain another 3 (TMI) from What Lies Ahead.  If we split the core set's 6 pieces of neutral ICE (Wall of Static and Enigma) between our two corp decks, that means the NBN deck is already up to 15 pieces of ICE.  This means you only need 2 - 5 pieces of out-of-faction ICE which is fine on a 15 influence budget (look at Ice Wall, Shadow, Rototurret, Chum, and Wall of Thorns for 1-influence ICE).  You also get the neutral ICE Draco in What Lies Ahead, which probably works well in the NBN deck (goes with the "trace" theme).

All of the other corporations have at least 9 pieces of ICE in the core set, get another three from What Lies Ahead (though if you're running Haas-Bioroid, you'll probably need a Priority Requisition or an Accelerated Beta Test to be able to rez Janus 1.0, so maybe don't run all three copies of him), which leaves you in a similar situation to the NBN deck.  Pretty easy to get to the 17 - 20 range.

The fact that What Lies Ahead includes a piece of ICE and an Agenda for each of the four corporations is what makes it the ideal data pack to buy if you're just going to buy one.  Also, Morning Star is amazing.

2x2 Netrunner:

I'm curious as to how you're playing 2x2 Netrunner, as the standard rulebook does not support this at all.  The only rules I've run into on the topic were designed for the old Netrunner game (that's Netrunner the CCG, not Android: Netrunner the LCG), but could probably be adapted: http://www.darkpact.de/netrunner/variants/theBigSellOut.html.  That said, the simple solution is just pair off and play two games at the same time.  I'd be interested to know which you do.

A Purchasing Alternative

All you need from the core set to build multiple starter decks is a set of each of the neutral cards from the core set.  There are ways of buying these sets, such as buying a special of all the "triplicate cards from the core set" from http://borntoplaygames.com/product-category/customizable/netrunner/.  This would let you use the rulebook's recommended starter decks and have any corporation pair you want.


Value of short side suits in Spades In Spades, what are the methods that count how many tricks a short side-suit is worth?

Steve Fleishman's book Master Spades describe the method called Simple bidding (Appendix A).  According to Simple bidding, a void or singleton side-suit + exactly 3 spades is worth 1 trick.

While this method indeed simple, it is not very accurate.  Do you know about a better method to evaluate short side suits?  In particular: Isn't void + 3 spades worth more than just 1 trick? I think it worth about 2.

Bridge players use a more fine-grained point system, where 3 points is worth roughly a trick. The short-suit evaluation used then is something like the following:

With 3 trumps:
Doubleton = 1 point; Singleton = 2 points; Void = 3 points;

With 4 or more trumps:
Doubleton = 1 point; Singleton = 3 points; Void = 5 points;

Plus a 5th trump is evaluated as 1 point, and each additional trump beyond 5 as 2 points.
Part of the reason why these evaluations may seem a bit lower than expected is that there may be duplication with partner. In Bridge such duplication is assumed, and the hand perforce loses value if it doesn't exist.

From my comment below:

[This evaluation] has it's origins in the Work Point Count popularized first by Milton Work and then Charles Goren. There are variations, as no definitive research exists, but all are similar to what I outline above.
Other evaluation systems exist, including Larry Cohen's Law of Total Tricks and Courtenay's Losing Trick Count, which experts use as a refinement and/or double-check on the Point Count evaluation. Point Count tends to give a best estimate of strength while the other two tend to give a maximum estimate of hand strength.

Culbertson's Honour Tricks, now usually referred to as Quick Tricks, are an older assessment of hand strength now usually used as an adjunct to Point Count. Thus various actions in a Contract Bridge auction will have a minimum (occasionally also a maximum) in both Point Count and Quick Tricks.


Does the Terra Mystica app implement the official rules updates? I've been playing the Terra Mystica app on Android, and I noticed that the rules description on the Cultists' ability didn't include the updated text (if everybody declines taking power when you could have earned a cult point from it, you gain a power). I played a game as them, but the AI never turned down the power, so I couldn't tell if the rule was implemented without the text update. This update was made after the second edition printing.

This also got me wondering if the game setup includes the errata for the scoring tile setup, forbidding the spade points tile on turns 5 and 6. This update was included in the second edition printing.

Does the app include either/both of these updates?

Yes.

The Terra Mystic App (on Android at least) includes the changes to Cultist Power and the variable starting Victory Points.

It does not block the Spade tiles in the last two rounds.

The above is based on my experience playing the app as of August 2017.
Edited to reflect recieving [5 points for founding town/4 earth cult for a Spade] as my final round token in a game in late August.


Maritime Trading both ways? I recently played with a friend who said you can use the maritime harbor to trade 2:1 in both directions. I said this wasn't true, but couldn't disprove him in the rule book. The rules say:

  The exchange rate of 2:1 only applies to the resource shown on the harbor location.

Suppose you're on a 2:1 wood trade.

(1) You can trade 2 wood cards for 1 grain/ore/sheep/brick card.

(2) You can trade 2 cards for 1 wood card. (2 grain for 1 wood. 2 brick for 1 wood etc.)

Can you only do (1), (2), or both. Which is correct?

This is covered in the Catan FAQ:

  Trade - What is the meaning of the resource symbols on some harbor
  hexes?

  Answer The special harbor hexes always show the resource type of which
  you have to discard 2 units in order to receive one different resource
  or one commodity.

In other words, it only works one way - the way you expected.


Magic the Gathering lingering spell effect I have a question about a card sequence.

Let's say I play an instant card that says "all creatures who dealt damage this turn return to owners hand" in my first main phase.

Then if my opponent flash summons a creature card in my second main phase that says "when this creature enters the battlefield do two damage to target creature/player", does that creature return to my opponent's hand because I played the instant spell card in my first main phase and it says this turn and my turn hasn't ended? Or does that effect of the spell resolve and the effects no longer affect subsequent events?

The wording "All creatures who dealt damage this turn return to owners hand" is a little off. You could find the virtually identical

Return all creatures that dealt damage this turn to their owners' hands.

"Return." There's no duration. It's something that happens there and then. When it resolves, all creatures that dealt damage earlier this turn are returned to their owners' hand. Creatures that deal damage latter will not be affected.
"That dealt damage this turn" is just a condition that specifies which creatures are affected.

Return all creatures <matching this condition> to their owners' hands.

While there are no existing card with the initial text, there are existing cards with the different conditions. For example, there's Part the Veil. It's an instant with

Return all creatures you control to their owner's hand.

If at a later time you gain control of a creature, it will not be returned to your hand. Only creatures matching the condition at the very moment the effect resolves are affected.

There is a thing called continuous effect which can last beyond the source of the effect that created it. Some of them affect the objects that matched the condition when the continuous effect was created and some of them continually revise what objects they affect. Here are the examples associated with rule CR 611.2c:

Example: An effect that reads “All white creatures get +1/+1 until end of turn” gives the bonus to all permanents that are white creatures when the spell or ability resolves—even if they change color later—and doesn’t affect those that enter the battlefield or turn white afterward.
Example: An effect that reads “Prevent all damage creatures would deal this turn” doesn’t modify any object’s characteristics, so it’s modifying the rules of the game. That means the effect will apply even to damage from creatures that weren’t on the battlefield when the continuous effect began. It also affects damage from permanents that become creatures later in the turn.

Related Answer


Which characters do Threads of Fate plot rule apply to? The Threads of Fate plot rule states

  [Loop Start] Place 2 Paranoia on all characters who had Goodwill last
  loop

The spreading incident allows for Goodwill to be moved from a character to another character. So my question is, does this plot rule apply to characters who had Goodwill at any time or just characters who ended the loop with Goodwill?

Based on rulings from Simon Lundström (who translated the rules), as stated here:

  The subplot says (or should say) "characters who had at least one goodwill at the end of the previous loop".

So only the characters (including corpses) who had a Goodwill counter on them at the end of the loop get 2 Paranoia on them at the start of the next.


Will double strike trigger cipher twice? Say I am playing with a creature that has double strike (e.g. Two-Headed Cerberus), and I cipher Hidden Strings to it. This allows me to tap/untap up to 2 target permanents whenever the creature deals combat damage to a player.

If my creature then attacked a player and wasn't blocked, and he took the double strike damage, would I then be able to tap/untap 2 target permanents twice? In effect tap/untap 4 target permanents?

I am asking this because my friends and I play with a few different ciphers and have had arguments about this a few times.

Cipher triggers whenever the encoded creature deals combat damage to a player. An unblocked creature with double strike will deal combat damage to the player twice; once in the "first strike" combat damage step, and again in the regular combat damage step. As a result, if an encoded creature with double strike is not blocked, you will be able to cast the encoded card twice.


Does Hallowed Burial search all libraries for creature cards and put them on the bottom too? Looks like most things I've read just assume it's only from the battlefield but the wording says all creatures. Does "all creatures" always only refer to active creatures because they're not creatures until in play, just creature cards?

“Creatures” (and “creature”) specifically means a creature permanent on the battlefield. So it will not affect creature cards anywhere else.

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

And

  609.2. Effects apply only to permanents unless the instruction’s text states otherwise or they clearly can apply only to objects in one or more other zones.

In order to refer to objects in other zones; an effect would specifically use the word “card” and specify the zone. See Birthing Pod for an example.


Why are the pips on dice organized the way they are? Is there any particular reason why the pips (the little dots) on a die are arranged in those patterns (3 is a diagonal line, 6 is two horizontal lines, etc.)? And also why any face plus its opposite equals 7?

This is a really interesting question and just spent last hour googling around for various thoughts.

The first thing is why pips and not numbers. This is because the invention of dice predates the invention of numbers. source

According to the wikipedia article on pips its notes that the pip designs are 'easily countable'  Why the particular patterns for the numbers I don't know the fact is if you roll a 5 you recognize the pattern straight away.  Its worth noting the the pip design on a six sided dice is the same pip pattern on standard playing cards for values Ace-6.  Someone may be able to explain the origin but I imagine its a similar answer to why is are Letters shaped they way they are?  I's assumes the pip pattern is just something that's evolved over time that we then recognise.   if a dice (or a playing card for that matter) just displayed pips in a long row then counting them each time would be very tricky so the fact they evolved into a pattern that we regonise without counting the pips is probably where it came from.

Finally, why do numbers on opposite sides add up to the same number?  According to to this article Dice were not always like that, apparently some Roman dice were arrange with opposite sides adding up to prime numbers.  ie 1 opposite 2, 3 opposite 4 and 5 opposite 6.  This article states that if a dice is random it really doesn't matter what sides the numbers are on,   However the article suggests the rise in opposite sides adding up to 7 appears to be that was because it is perceived to be more fair, even though its still random what number comes up.  From the article:-

  “We think users of dice also adopted new ideas about fairness, and chance or probability in games,” said Eerkens in a statement. The numbering style changed from the prime number configuration (1-2; 3-4; 5-6), one heavily influenced by popular ancient Egyptian numerical arrangements, back to the style “where opposite sides add up to seven (6-1; 5-2; 3-4).” Eerkens suggests that while the direct cause for this shift is unclear, it could possibly be related to an gradual effort to make fair and balanced dice.

Also I should say that someone else with more historical or archaeological knowledge than I might be able to give a different answer.  I'm really intrigued by the idea that opposite numbers on a dice adding to same number is perceived to to be more fair that any other arrangement despite it not making any difference.


Limit on weapons used during combat Is there any sort of limit to the number of weapons or items you can use during combat?

In Arkham Horror, the hand icons restricted the number of weapons/spells/items that you could use.

From the rules reference (page 12):

  Q. Can I use multiple weapons during combat?

  A. Yes, but you can only apply the highest bonus to a test. However,
  you may use any other effects, from your other weapons. For example,
  if you have a Bull Whip Asset and a .45 Automatic Asset, you may
  apply the +3 bonus from the .45 to your {combat check} instead of the +1 bonus from the whip, and you may still reroll one die by using the whip’s
  other effect.


Damage distribution while blocking many creatures at once Related to: Blocking with First Strike + Deathtouch

It is said in the answers that the blocking player can choose how his Hundred Handed One deals damages to attacking creatures.

Example: Defending creature is a 6/8 with deathtouch, first strike who can block up to 100 creatures. Assume 10 3/3 creatures are attacking. To take advantage of first strike and deathtouch, he could deal one damage to 6 different attacking creatures, kill them, and only be dealt damage by the remaining 4 attacking ones.

Background:

To a question I asked on facebook to the official Magic page, I've had a specific answer which felt correct to me.

The question was: "If I have an attacking 9/9 creature with first strike who has to be blocked by every available creature and the defending player has ten 2/2 creatures to block, will the attacking creature deal 9 to each defensive creature, or 9 amongst the defensive creatures ? If so, who chooses how the damages are dealt ?"

The answer was : "Since attacking creature has first strike, attacking player chooses to which defensive creatures the 9 total damages are dealt, but has to deal enough damages to kill one creature before applying remaning damages to another one."

In the related answer, is it really correct that the defending creature can deal only 1 damage per attacking creature, using its deathtouch to kill them? And doing so, won't it take damage from every attacking creature since it doesn't kill them before they can attack, and not only the 4 last ones? (reminder: defending creature has first strike)

510.1c A blocked creature assigns its combat damage to the creatures blocking it. If no creatures are currently blocking it (if, for
   example, they were destroyed or removed from combat), it assigns no
   combat damage. If exactly one creature is blocking it, it assigns all
   its combat damage to that creature. If two or more creatures are
   blocking it, it assigns its combat damage to those creatures according
   to the damage assignment order announced for it. This may allow the
   blocked creature to divide its combat damage. However, it can’t assign
   combat damage to a creature that’s blocking it unless, when combat
   damage assignments are complete, each creature that precedes that
   blocking creature in its order is assigned lethal damage. When
   checking for assigned lethal damage, take into account damage already
   marked on the creature and damage from other creatures that’s being
   assigned during the same combat damage step, but not any abilities or
   effects that might change the amount of damage that’s actually dealt.
   An amount of damage that’s greater than a creature’s lethal damage may
   be assigned to it.

If the defending creature has first strike and deathtouch, you can deal only 1 damage to each creature, as deathtouch make it lethal.

UPDATE: Thanks to tengfred to comment the key rule for this:

  702.2c Any nonzero amount of combat damage assigned to a creature by a source with deathtouch is considered to be lethal damage for the purposes of determining if a proposed combat damage assignment is valid, regardless of that creature’s toughness.


How many of the same artifact can be on the battlefield at once? How many of the same artifact can be on the battlefield at once? For example, could I play more than one Dragon's Claw or Angel's Feather?

There is no limit. If you have more than one out, each one will trigger independently and give you a life.
The only three limits are:

Legendary permanents with the same name,
Planeswalker permanents sharing a subtype and
Enchantments with the World supertype.

704.5j If two or more planeswalkers that share a planeswalker type are on the battlefield, all are put into their owners’ graveyards. This is called the “planeswalker uniqueness rule.”
704.5k If two or more legendary permanents with the same name are on the battlefield, all are put into their owners’ graveyards. This is called the “legend rule.” If only one of those permanents is legendary, this rule doesn’t apply.
704.5m If two or more permanents have the supertype world, all except the one that has been a permanent with the world supertype on the battlefield for the shortest amount of time are put into their owners’ graveyards. In the event of a tie for the shortest amount of time, all are put into their owners’ graveyards. This is called the “world rule.”


Creating small flat bottom holes in plastic models for magnets I want to insert and glue 1/16" diameter rare earth magnets into holes I create in my plastic models. The purpose of the magnets is to make it easy to swap weapons/options on my Warhammer 40K models.

Regular twist drill bits leave a wide concave hole in the plastic, making it difficult to glue a magnet flush to the bottom of the hole.

Forstner drill bits create a flat bottomed hole (with a small concave hole in the center), but only down to 1/4" diameter holes.

Brad point drill bits create a flat bottomed hole (with a small concave hole hole in the center and a depressed ring around the hole) down to 1/16", but it seems brad point bits below 1/8" are not a "true" (?) brad point bit.

I have two cascaded questions:
1) does a 1/16" non-true brad point drill bit provide a good-enough flat bottomed hole for 1/16" diameter rare earth magnets?
2) if not, what is a workable method to create 1/16" diameter flat bottomed holes in plastic?

Update 2 Oct 2012: The root problem I am trying to solve is magnets being pulled out of their holes after gluing. I originally thought I had a tool problem (concave hole causing lack of contact surface area between magnet/glue), but CaulynDarr and Affe's comments point to a likely process problem. Experimentation and tenacity on my part will solve that. Thank you for your comments!

I can't answer the specific question on drill bit types.  I've don plenty of magnatizing, but haven't analyzed the tools I've used in that great of depth.

I've used Dremel's precision drill bit set in my 7.2 Volt rotary tool.  I've never had too big a problem with the convex bottom of the hole they create.  If you match the drill bit size close enough to the magnet diameter, the sides of the hole should provide enough surface area to hold the magnet in place with a little super glue.

A little super glue, epoxy glue, or an epoxy resin like Green Stuff or Milliput could be used to fill in the hole to an even surface.


Descent: Can you get rid of cursed items? In Descent there are various cursed items, which we always played as bind on pickup?

Is this the case?  Can you wield any other weapon while you have a cursed item?  How do you work around this completely making useless a character that gets an item it can't use well (a mage with a two handed sword).

I don't recall there being any rules for auto-equipping cursed items; you can elect to use it if you want to, but you don't have to.

You get a curse token for equipping a cursed item, and while you can remove the cursed item as normal, you do not lose the curse token for un-equipping the item (so if you re-equip it later, you get another curse token).

In your example, if the mage can simply choose not to equip the weapon.

Now, Dark Relics, on the other hand, must be equipped when found, and the only normal way to remove them is to die.  Fun fun...


Can I make decisions while searching my library based on what order it is in? Let's say I have 3 Millikin and 4 Selvala, Explorer Returned on the battlefield (via Mirror Gallery), and a Panglacial Wurm in my library.

I start searching my library, without shuffling. (because of some spell or ability)

I want to cast the Wurm, but I need all 4 Selvalas to generate mana. Can I make decisions based on what order to activate the Millikins and Selvalas in based on the top cards of my library? Can I even see the top cards before I cast the Wurm?

You can decide the order in which to activate mana abilities based on knowledge about the order of your library. You can also decide whether to cast the Wurm based on knowledge about the order of your library.
First, the keyword action "Search" is defined in rule 701.15a:

To search for a card in a zone, look at all cards in that zone (even if it’s a hidden zone) and find a card that matches the given description.

And the following are rulings on Panglacial Wurm in Gatherer:

Panglacial Wurm’s ability works only while you’re searching your own library. [...]

If you want to cast Panglacial Wurm while searching your library, you must do so before you find any cards with the search effect.

Together, these strongly imply that you can choose to cast Panglacial Wurm after you have looked at all of the cards in your library and before you have "found" any of them. So, you can absolutely use the information available at that time when making that choice.
In addition, Panglacial Wurm has another ruling that says

While searching your library, you must keep your library in the same order until you shuffle it. This order could matter if you tap Millikin for mana, for example, to pay for a Panglacial Wurm you cast from your library.

Then, in the process of casting a spell, one of the last steps is 601.2g:

If the total cost includes a mana payment, the player then has a chance to activate mana abilities (see rule 605, “Mana Abilities”). Mana abilities must be activated before costs are paid.

There's nothing in that rule about simultaneous activation, or what order things happen in, so the obvious interpretation is that at this time you can activate and resolve mana abilities sequentially in any order you choose, like any other action in the game.
Once you can do that, you can activate the Millikins and Selvalas in the order you choose to maximize the mana you get, taking into account the information about the library order that you have.