In Arkham Horror, do 'leftover' successes after triggering a doom token removal still count? In a 2-investigator game, if he rolls 3 successes, does the remaining success get accumulated toward the next doom token removal? Along the same vein, if he rolls 4 successes, does he remove 2 tokens?

Yes, left over success rolls do carry over, but the number of success required depend on the GOO that you are facing and the number of players. Also, if the GOO awakens, you always fill up the doom track if it wasn't already full.

The following is quote from the FAQ which you can find on the FFG Arkham Horror website:

  To defeat the Ancient One, the players must do a total number of
  successes equal to the number of players multiplied by the number of
  doom tokens on the Ancient One. So, if 4 players are facing Yig (doom
  track of 10), they need 40 successes to win. For every 4 successes
  they do, they remove 1 doom token to track their progress. If the 12
  investigators get 9 successes in the first round of combat, they would
  remove 2 doom tokens, and 1 success would carry over to the next round
  of combat.


When should I build the Crane card? In San Juan, is the Crane card useless?

I haven't found it useful at all.  My conclusions about it are:

Pros

Allows you to build a high cost building for less cards.

Cons

Lose abilities of over-built building
Lose points of over-built building
Lose pace with others, slower to reach 12

Is the Crane card ever a useful build?

The crane can be very useful when you don't want to finish the game.

Remember: the one who builds his/her 12th building isn't the winner. This action only ends the game. If you have 11 houses and are not in a position of wining, it could be useful to build one more without finishing the game.

EDIT

Also, using a crane can help you building a big house in two steps, no need to have seven cards in the hand at one time.

An interresting effect linked to the use of the crane is that you can use the builder's privilege twice on the same card. Let's say you want to build something that is worth 6. You are the builder. Build some building that's worth 3, pay it 2. Next turn, choose the builder, expand your 3-building to your 6-building, pay 2 instead of 3. The total cost of the building was 4 instead of 6. Add to that some additionnal cards that reduce the price, you can even have a free 6-cards!!!


Why are Elo ratings for go higher than for chess? If we compare Elo(-like) ratings in chess and in go, we see that the highest ratings published for go (3621 for Ke Jie as of 2016-03-13 at goratings.org) are higher than those in chess (2851 for Magnus Carlsen as of 2016-03-01 at FIDE.com).

Is the best explanation one of the following suggestions, or something else?

Go is in some sense better played than chess. While many in the West think of chess as the premier intellectual game, go has, I believe, been studied more intensively, had more support in Eastern culture than chess has where it is played and is financially more rewarding.
Go is better at distinguishing slight differences in strength, e.g. because games are longer or because draws are rare (about 1 game in 50, I believe).
There is some arbitrary difference in the way the Elo approach is applied to go and chess, e.g. an arbitrary baseline or scaling factor.

In any case, an explanation of how the rating system work and, if appropriate, interact with the nature of the games is needed to make an answer complete. If it is illuminating, a comparison with other games would also be welcome — for example, what would happen with ratings for a trivial game like noughts and crosses?

I realise that the systems are not intended for direct comparison, but I hope that they still allow some sort of conclusion to drawn. They are, after all, based on the same principles, though various parameters may be differently set.

There is no ELO rating in go. And even no official international rating at all. A common question in go forums is "how does my rating in [whatever country or online server] compare with [other country or online server]".

The European Go Federation is maintaining an international rating system where Ke Jie is rated 2956.

goratings.org is an individual initiative by Remi Coulom. It has become popular because it gave journalists a way to assign a World ranking to Fan Hui, but this is not an official rating system.

Bottom line is your answer 3, there is some arbitrary difference in the way the approach is applied to go and chess.


In Agricola, why are Minor Improvements not separated by number of players whereas Occupations are? In Agricola, Occupations cards are each marked with 1+, 3+ or 4+, indicating the number of players for which they are valid. For example, you cannot be dealt a 3+ or 4+ card in a two-player game. With a few exceptions (such as those that refer to the "Travelling players" space) the 3+/4+ cards would be playable, and potentially useful, in any game, but presumably they are restricted for purposes of balance.

Why do the Minor Improvements not follow the same system? There are a number of cards where their behaviour changes directly in response to number of players, especially in the I deck (e.g. Slaughter-house, Milking shed, Punner). Others don't directly refer to other players but still change in their utility, for example because of different availability of certain actions (e.g. Bake bread; see also here).

Intuitively, in designing the game I feel it would have made sense to have the same system for both Minor Improvements and Occupations: either decide that both should be available in all games, and accept that some will be more useful than others for a given number of players, or categorise them both in order to fine-tune the balance.

Is there any reason that they follow two different systems?

The purpose of the marking is to help the players to remove the cards from the deck before playing which do not fit the player count.

Specifically, many of the occupations refer to spaces on the board that are not present in lower player counts, such as "Travelling Players", which is only present with 4 or more players, and thus all of its associated occupations are only relevant with 4 or more players.  The Occupation cards are marked based on number of players so that you can remove the ones that are not valid for your player count.

However, Minor Improvements are valid at all player counts, so you do not need to go through and remove any of them.

Uwe Rosenberg could have designed the Minor Improvements such that you removed some of them at lower player counts (in which case those would be marked), but he did not choose to do so.


UNO do I need to call it again? Ok - help me solve a family argument! I called UNO on my last card, but the player immediately before me on the next round played a miss a turn card. Do I need to call uno again or because I missed a turn am I covered?

The official rules state:

  When you play your next-to-last card, you must yell “UNO” (meaning “one”) to indicate that you have only one card left. If you don’t yell “UNO” and you are caught before the next player begins their turn, you must draw two cards.

It says nothing about calling UNO when your turn comes up or if you somehow end up with 1 card in your hand via other means (swapping hands, etc.).


How would this seki be scored at the end of the game? I'm a Go beginner with a VERY little bit of experience (three or four actual games under my belt), and I'm looking through the life and death problems at Sensei's Library trying to get a better understanding of the game. In the solution to problem 9, the following board position was shown as one of the failure modes for Black (who should have played at 1, thus killing White):

$$W White lives in seki.
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . X . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . X X X X X . . . , .
$$ | X O O O O O X X X . .
$$ | X O M B 1 O O O X X .
$$ | . O O B B M O . O . .
$$ +----------------------

I understand why White lives here by playing at W1: this is seki, since neither White nor Black wants to play on the two points marked by an X. (If White played on one of the two X points, Black would do nothing; if White played on both points, he would then have a bent three shape and Black could kill his group. But if Black played at either X point, White would play at the other and live with a bent-four or twisted-four shape).

What I'm not quite clear on is how this position would be scored at the end of the game. My first thought was "Since White is alive, the marked Black stones are dead, so White scores five points of territory plus three prisoners for a total of 8 points." But then I thought, "No, this is seki: White can't actually capture the marked Black stones without dying, so Black is also counted as alive. Therefore, this area provides points for neither White nor Black at the end of the game, because neither one has managed to actually control the territory."

I'm pretty sure that my second thought was the correct one: this area would be scored as zero points, and none of the stones would be removed from the board in the end: White's large group is alive and Black's three marked stones are also alive, so neither group are prisoners and neither player has surrounded these five spaces of territory. But am I right? An answer from a more experienced Go player, confirming that this board situation would score no points for either White or Black (or correcting any mistakes on my part) would be welcome, to reassure me that I'm not misreading this position.

P.S. I wanted to tag this as "seki", but that's apparently a brand-new tag on this site, so it requires 150 rep and with my newbie's 101 reputation I can't do it. If someone with more rep wants to add that tag, that would be welcome.

Both the black and white stones are alive, so no points are scored for either side here.


Are special body slots reserved for equipment with the exact same name? In Zombicide - Black Plague, survivors have a body slot, which can also be used to equip other equipment which should normally be equipped in hands. For example, Samson can equip a shield in his body slot.

And here is the shield card mentioned on Samson's survivor card:

Now: is this body slot strictly reserved for this exact shield or could any shield be equipped in it, like the Shield of Ages? I am looking for "rules-as-written" answers, because I already house rule this as any shield can be equipped.

You can only use the indicated piece of equipment in the body slot, not any similar piece of gear.
From page 17 of the rulebook under Inventory > Body:

Alternatively, it can hold the specific Equipment card that is listed on it.

So rules-as-written it is quite clear that you can only equip that item, and not a similar item instead.


In Uno, can you quickly finish a two player game by skipping your opponent's final turn and without saying Uno? So me and my friend are playing Uno.
It's a 2 player game and we play where you can stack draw 2’s or draw 4’s.

My friend (player 1) has 2 cards left.
I (player 2) have 2 cards left.
It is player 1’s turn.

Player 1 plays a blank wild Card and says “red, draw 2”
Player 1 immediately lays next card down not saying Uno or giving player 2 time to draw two cards or if they wanted to stack another draw 2 card on top. Player 1 laid both cards down back to back.

Player 2 calls out that player 1 did not say Uno or give you time to draw two cards or stack a draw 2 card.

Player 1 says it doesn’t matter because they are out of cards and the game is over and that they are not obligated to give you time to:
A) draw two cards; or
B) call them out for not saying Uno

Did or did not player 1 win?

Player 1 hasn't won yet at all. They broke the rules.

Uno says when it's your turn, you play a card. Then it's the next player's turn. That player might have to do something with their turn (like draw cards) but if they have a draw 2 in their hand, they have an opportunity to respond instead.

  Player 1 says [...] they are not obligated to give you time to A) draw 2 cards or B) call them out for not saying Uno.

Actually, that's exactly what player 2 has time to do now. Player 1 played their card. Now it's player 2's turn, and they can choose whether to respond with a draw 2 in hand or not. Players are obviously obliged to give their opponents time to take their turns, and player 1 is given no allowance to just unilaterally decide to skip player 2's turn.

Let's address that bit I skipped over with the “[...]” though:

  Player 1 says it doesn’t matter because they are out of cards and the game is over

Imagine this: at the start of the game immediately after we're given our hand of cards, I just put all mine down face-up in the discard pile and say I've won. You object and say I can't do that. I say it doesn't matter because I'm already out of cards and the game's over and I won.

That doesn't work, does it? I broke the rules, and I definitely haven't won at all. Winning has to occur within the bounds of the game—if I broke the rules, I'm essentially not playing the game, and at that point me winning or losing is neither here nor there.

At the point you reached, you've got some options:

Back up to player 2 having their turn. Player 1 probably draws, on account of being rightly called out for not saying Uno.
End the game (nobody won), shuffle up and play another properly.


How does Shield Dancer's ability work with a creature that has Trample? I have a Shield Dancer, 1/3, whose activated ability states:

  The next time target attacking creature would deal combat damage to Shield Dancer this turn, that creature deals that damage to itself instead.

He blocks a 6/1 creature with Trample, such as Ball Lightning. Trample states that leftover damage carries over to the 'defending' player. With the Shield Dancer's ability activated and the damage reversed, what happens with the left over trample damage?

The attacking Ball Lightning would deal 3-6 damage to itself and the rest to the defending player.
Assigning combat damage and actually dealing combat damage are two different actions during the combat damage step:

510.1. First, the active player announces how each attacking creature assigns its combat damage [..]
510.2. Second, all combat damage that’s been assigned is dealt simultaneously [..]

Shield dancer's ability modifies how damage is dealt, but the rules for assigning combat damage from an attacking creature with trample remain the same:

702.19b The controller of an attacking creature with trample first assigns damage to the creature(s) blocking it. Once all those blocking creatures are assigned lethal damage, any remaining damage is assigned as its controller chooses among those blocking creatures and the player or planeswalker the creature is attacking. [..]

When determining what constitutes lethal damage, the Shield Dancer's ability is not taken into account. 702.19b continues:

702.19b [..] 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. The attacking creature’s controller need not assign lethal damage to all those blocking creatures but in that case can’t assign any damage to the player or planeswalker it’s attacking.

Therefore, the attacking player has to assign at least 3 and at most all 6 points of damage to the Shield Dancer, so it would receive lethal damage. The rest is assigned to the defending player. Then when the damage is actually dealt, the Shield Dancer's replacement effect happens, the damage assigned to the Shield Dancer is dealt to the Ball Lightning instead, and the damage assigned to the defending player is dealt to that player.


How many rounds of the monopoly table occur per monopoly match? I am trying to produce research regarding monopoly and I want to know  where I could find out how many rounds of the monopoly table occur per monopoly match. Thanks.

According to one source that provides Monopoly statistics, it is about 30 turns per player.

Source:

  Since the average game of Monopoly takes about 30 turns per competitor[...]

Unfortunately they don't provide more detailed analysis showing the numbers used in calculating this average number of turns, but the page does include specific statistics to suggest that this number is more than just a guess.


Are treasure cards spent by Storyteller still in play? I played a game tonight with Storyteller and Alms. Storyteller says:

  +1 Action
  +1 Coin

  Play up to 3 Treasures from your hand. Pay all your coin; +1 Card per coin paid.

Alms is an event that costs 0 coin. It says:

  Once per turn: If you have no Treasures in play, gain a card costing up to 4 coins.

I had a turn where I played the three coppers in my hand to get +4 cards, after which I had no more treasure cards in hand but multiple buys. I was going to buy two silvers with Alms, but the other players said I couldn't because of the treasures I had paid to draw cards with Storyteller. I argued that those cards weren't in play since I used them. Are treasure cards spent by Storyteller still in play?

No, treasure cards stay in play. You may view the process as follows:

During your action phase, you play any action cards (or treasure cards, as well with the help of the Black Market) that generate Coins.
You play the Storyteller; you gain +1 Action and +$1.
You may play now up to 3 treasure cards from your hand.
Any total money that you have generated and have available so far (as you might have spent some with the Black Market), is lost; you draw that many cards.
Any subsequent money you generate is not lost and may be spent in the Buy Phase.

While the Storyteller card explicitly mentions that you have to "pay all your coins", it does not mention anything about any card leaving play. A card only leaves play during the Clean-Up phase (base game rulebook) or when a card effect explicitly says so (e.g., the Mint from the Prosperity expansion, or the Duration cards).

Furthermore, the Adventures rulebook (p.15) makes it crystal clear that "spent" treasure cards stay in play:

  You can track that the Treasures have been "spent" by putting them under the Storyteller.

However, if for some reason you have $5 and two buys, it is perfectly legal to buy a Mint for $5, trash all your treasure cards in play because the Mint says so, and then buy the Alms event, gaining a card costing up to $4. But not with the Storyteller.


How do I get rid of Rules Lawyer and win the game? Rules Lawyer says

  State-based actions don't apply to you or other permanents you control.

https://magiccards.info/rule/704-state-based-actions.html

I've seen a bunch of people asking how to kill this creature and thus win the game.

How would one do it? You can't kill it by it blocking your monsters, you can't lower its toughness enough to kill it, you can't give it negative counters to kill it. And you can't win the game with it on the field. How does one kill this card?

In fact, Rules Lawyer can be removed as easily as any creature normally can be, because its effect only applies to you and other permanents you control. It can be removed by dealing lethal damage to it or by reducing its toughness to 0.

If a player has two copies of Rules Lawyer, however, then each one will protect the other, and some other kind of effect will be needed to remove it. You will have to resort to one of the hundreds or even thousands of cards that can destroy a creature (e.g. Murder) or artifact (e.g. Naturalize), or exile one (e.g. Path to Exile or Fade into Antiquity), or bounce one (e.g. Unsummon or Steel Sabotage), or even send one to a library (e.g. Banishing Stroke). Mass destruction (e.g. Wrath of God or Creeping Corrosion), exile (e.g. Final Judgment or Merciless Eviction), bounce (e.g. Evacuation or Hurkyl's Recall), or sending to library (e.g. Terminus). There are dozens of variants of each of these kinds of effects, and even others that remove creatures or artifacts without relying on state-based actions.

Regarding winning the game, even if you can't do so via state-based actions, you can still win the game with an effect that specifically wins the game, such as Laboratory Maniac, or Biovisionary, or Azor's Elocutors, or any of over a dozen similar effects. You an also make the controller of Rules Lawyer directly lose the game with cards like Door to Nothingness or Phage the Untouchable or even the Unstable card Baron Von Count, and there are also several other cards this kind of effect too.


Gandora The Dragon Of Destruction and Union Monsters If my opponent is using a monster that is equipped with a union, and I use Gandora The Dragon Of Destruction's field clearing effect against that monster equiped with a union,  does the union card get destroyed, or both of the monster cards being affected by Gandora's effect?

Both the of the cards would be destroyed, also including the rest of the field, but the destroyed monsters can still use their effects.


What are some good introductory rules to bridge? I've tried to learn how to play bridge before, but there are so many variations (even on the Wikipedia page) that it's hard to keep track of everything and pin down exactly one way of playing it that I can use as a base to learn all the variations from.

As far as I've learned, the game is similar to (and derives from) whist, which is the most basic trick-taking game, where a team scores points for winning tricks past six. But past that, I looked at the rules for playing bridge, and couldn't make head nor tail of them. There are variations like rubber bridge and contract bridge, and among those variations on how to score points. For example, the first rulebook I ever saw bridge in had the club-trump suits worth 2 points, diamonds worth 4, etc. up to no-trump worth 10, and a team won once they scored 30 points worth of odd tricks. But then I learned from somebody else that a single trick was worth 30 points, and then from somebody else that a contract was for six plus the bid, but I didn't know what the contract was even used for and what purpose it had in scoring.

Between rubber and contract, which one is more popular? What do all the variations have in common besides their origins in whist? Please help this beginner.

Rubber and Contract bridge aren't two different types. Rubber bridge is a form of Contract bridge.

There are essentially two forms of contract bridge these days

Duplicate Bridge
Rubber Bridge

In both forms (i.e. contract), for one deal, there is a 52 card deck dealt, the players do the bidding to determine the level and trump (or no trump), and depending of whether they are declaring or defending, they either try to make or break the contract.

The differences come in the mechanics around a set of deals, and how the deals are scored.

Rubber is mainly geared towards four players playing for money, and most of its quirks might have been derived from whist.

Duplicate is the form of bridge more prevalent these days and tournaments are held using that.

The raw scoring for a particular deal is almost the same in both rubber and duplicate: Declaring side makes 20 points for clubs/diamonds (i.e. if they chose clubs/diamonds as trump), 30 for hearts/spades (if trumps). 40 for the first no trump, and 30 for the rest.
Defending side gets 50 or 100 points for each undertrick. They get a 100 if the declaring side is vulnerable, which is determined differently between rubber and duplicate. The contract could get doubled and redoubled which might affect the score, but I suggest you ignore that for now.

100 points makes a game, and in order to get the game bonus you need to bid to the appropriate level and make it. Similarly you have the small slam and grand slam bonuses.

The difference between the raw scoring for Rubber and Duplicate comes in the bonuses calculation I believe (part score bonus, redoubled overtricks etc). I suggest you don't worry too much about those differences for now, and just remember the 20/30/40 and 100 for game.

In duplicate this raw gets converted to a different score, depending on the kind of duplicate.

In rubber, the raw scores get added up in various ways, in addition to rubber specific bonuses, and if you are playing for money, gets converted to money! :-)

For a beginner, I would suggest you forget about the scoring (apart from what was said above) and concentrate on the play first, and then the bidding, for a single deal.

The 30 making game scoring is probably an ancient form of bridge called auction bridge. I suggest you ignore that (and please check the publication dates of the books you read).

Hope this helped clarify some.


Which famous (board) games are unlicenced and royalty free? Which famous board games such as monopoly are unlicensed? Which games could you recreate and sell without having to pay royalties?

Is there a list somewhere of all board games and their license, or how would you go about finding out which games are unlicensed?

My google skills seem to be failing me.

No singular registry exists. Nor, particularly, is it needed. Copyright expires after some 20-90 years, depending upon country and current laws.

So, anything older than 1920 or so is fair game. (Pun intentional.) But note also, if you simply reprint a work with an expired copyright, you can't copyright it in most jurisdictions.

The name, however, is another matter. Those are trademarks. US and UK Trademarks don't have a duration. Monopoly is, in fact, still a defended trademark, even tho' the rules have been in the public domain for years.  Trademark laws vary widely; consult a lawyer for details of yours.

Trademarks are readily searched using various search engines by country.

There is compelling legal theory (and a little US caselaw) that says you can duplicate the mechanics of a game without license, provided you reword it. You cannot, however, use the trademarks nor original text/wording, original art, nor overly close art. In any case, the line s fuzzy, and varies by country.


What's this 3D game? It was a 16 square playing board.  Each piece was a clear rectangle 1 wide, 2 tall.  Each piece had a red and yellow ball in the center encased in a transparent box.  The object was to get 4 in a row.  Everytime you played a piece, you also laid one down for your opponent.

It sounds like a Cube Fusion variant.

  The game includes a playing board with a 5x5 grid and 12 playing pieces. Each piece consists of two cubes, each with marbles in the center - one red, one green. Players take turns placing pieces on the board, trying to make a specified pattern in his color but not his opponent's -- all the while having to play both his color and his opponent's color each turn. There are several different games explained in the rules: make 3, 4, or 5 in a row (in 3D) before your opponent, form a square in your color, form more three-in-a-row alignments than your opponent, etc.

As far as I know the board is 5x5, although there are rules for 4x4. Picture is of Double Decker, one of the repackagings of this game:


In Jenga, what happens if there are 2 blocks on the top of the tower blocking the way for the 3rd block? I am programming a game of jenga however I have a problem where the player can place down 2 blocks on the top of the tower, and leave no room for a 3rd block? Is there any rule here to prevent this? Can the player push the top blocks to straighten them?

The player cannot take another turn because placing the next block anywhere on the top level will mean it will fall down. The player cannot start a new level either, because a level of the tower must be completed before progress

The rules on Hasbro's site say that you can touch other blocks with a single hand, and you must complete a 3 block story. I don't see why it would be unacceptable to either fix the top story with your hand directly to accept a third block, or nudge the top blocks in place with a block in your hand to complete the story. Clearly, if you are required to make a 3-block story, the blocks must fit across the top.

While stacking, always complete a 3-block story before starting a higher one.
You can touch other blocks to find a loose one - but if you move a block out of place, you must fix it (using only one hand) before touching another block.

This is a mass market game. The rules are written to be as easily understood as possible, not a game like Advance Squad Leader or Magic: the Gathering where the rules are written to close every possible loophole. The rules don't define what 'fix' means or 'out of place', but since you are supposed to create the top story with 3 blocks, those three blocks must fit on the story. The rules also don't prevent you from placing your top block perpendicular, but with nearly half the block extending over the edge of the tower, but I contend that a piece placed like that is "out of place" and is subject to the fixing rule. To fix a block is to move it back to its relative position in my mind. (Example: Top of the tower, center block.)
Several digital versions exist for iOS, Android, Wii, etc. You could always see how the rules were interpreted for those electronic versions and copy their behavior. The Official Jenga version for iPhone allows you to nudge any pieces you want during your turn to 'fix' them (or ruin them actually). The iPhone developers consulted with the original game designer Leslie Scott in the making of the game. In this implementation, a player could place 2 blocks on top to prevent an opponent from placing the third block of a story, but his opponent could just nudge those pieces on top to make room for his piece.

NaturalMotion Games worked closely with Leslie Scott, the inventor of Jenga, to create the most authentic Jenga experience ever.
“I’m delighted by how the team at NaturalMotion Games has so skillfully captured the essence and universal appeal of Jenga,  while adding new and thrilling dimensions to my original game.” – Leslie Scott


Thumbing with both hands Can we use both the hands while thumbing the coins in carrom board or are we limited to single hand only.

Under IV: How to strike in the official rules

  Any hand may be used in play.

Hand in this case is singular. This is somewhat clarified further down...

  The elbow of the playing “hand” shall not come within the playing surface nor shall extend beyond the imaginary lines of the arrows. The “hand” may, however, cross the arrow.

This indicates that there should only be one hand in use.

The rules also indicate what the other hand could be used for

  While making a stroke, taking support of the Stool or Chair, Stand or Table of the C/B or keeping the legs on the rim of the stand or table by the player is not permissible. However, hands may rest on his body and legs or on the rim of the stool or chair on which he sits.

Furthermore, if you wanted to make an analogy with cue-sports, there is almost always a rule against double stroking or push strokes, as the concept of a "stroke" is one single instantaneous point of contact. Carrom's definition gives some more leeway because we're using fingers instead of cue sticks, but the concept is still the same. Using two fingers undoubtedly results in striking the striker twice.


Does the Tribal card type have inherent mechanical implications? Research

(emphasis mine)

  308.: Tribals

  308.1.: Each tribal card has another card type. Casting and resolving a tribal card follows the rules for casting and resolving a card of the other card type.

  308.2.: Tribal subtypes are always a single word and are listed after a long dash: "Tribal Enchantment - Merfolk." The set of tribal subtypes is the same as the set of creature subtypes; these subtypes are called creature types. Tribals may have multiple subtypes. See rule 205.3m for the complete list of creature types.

    Creature Type: A subtype that's correlated to the creature card type and the tribal card type. See rule 302, "Creatures," and rule 308, "Tribals." See rule 205.3m for the list of creature types.

    Tribal: A card type. Whether or not a tribal is a permanent depends on its other card type. See rule 308, "Tribals."

Following these rules, I don't know how to interpret the Tribal card type. So it's not always a permanent (in contrast to creatures). What does the Tribal add to a card as information regarding game mechanics? It comes across as a flavor of cards that doesn't have mechanical connotations, but that strikes me as odd—knowing the wording of MTG (so far in my experience). What am I missing here?

Examples

Let's take Eldrazi Conscription, which is a

  Tribal Enchantment - Eldrazi Aura

and compare it to Archetype of Aggression, which is an

  Enchantment Creature - Human Warrior

So in this case, both cards are a permanent because they're enchantments (in contrast to All Is Dust). The Tribal type confuses me. It does mention Eldrazi, which is a creature, but the card type doesn't say it is a creature. My intuition tells me that an Eldrazi Aura can only enchant Eldrazi creatures, but the card simply states

  Enchant creature

so that means my intuition it wrong.

Does the Tribal card type have inherent mechanical implications, other than not always being a permanent?

Tribal came about because of this rule

  205.3d An object can’t gain a subtype that doesn’t correspond to one of that object’s types.

Which meant that when Wizards wanted to make instants, sorceries, enchantments, etc. with creature subtypes, they couldn't.  At least, not easily.  Tribal was a work around.  By adding the Tribal type, it allowed Wizards to do an end run around their rules without having to rewrite their rules (I can only imagine what weird edge cases would crop up if any card type were allowed to have creature subtypes).

For reference, there are only certain subtypes a card with a certain type is allowed to have.

  205.3. Subtypes

  205.3a A card can have one or more subtypes printed on its type line.

  205.3b Subtypes of each card type except plane are always single words and are listed after a long dash. Each word after the dash is a
  separate subtype; such objects may have multiple types. Subtypes of
  planes are also listed after a long dash, but may be multiple words;
  all words after the dash are, collectively, a single subtype. Example:
  “Basic Land — Mountain” means the card is a land with the subtype
  Mountain. “Creature — Goblin Wizard” means the card is a creature with
  the subtypes Goblin and Wizard. “Artifact — Equipment” means the card
  is an artifact with the subtype Equipment.

  205.3c If a card with multiple card types has one or more subtypes, each subtype is correlated to its appropriate card type. Example:
  Dryad Arbor’s type line says “Land Creature — Forest Dryad.” Forest is
  a land type, and Dryad is a creature type.

  205.3d An object can’t gain a subtype that doesn’t correspond to one of that object’s types.

  205.3e If an effect instructs a player to choose a subtype, that player must choose one, and only one, existing subtype, and the
  subtype must be for the appropriate card type. For example, the player
  can’t choose a land type if an instruction requires choosing a
  creature type. Example: When choosing a creature type, “Merfolk” or
  “Wizard” is acceptable, but “Merfolk Wizard” is not. Words like
  “artifact,” “opponent,” “Swamp,” or “truck” can’t be chosen because
  they aren’t creature types.

  205.3f Many cards were printed with subtypes that are now obsolete. Many cards have retroactively received subtypes. Use the Oracle card
  reference to determine what a card’s subtypes are. (See rule 108.1.)

  205.3g Artifacts have their own unique set of subtypes; these subtypes are called artifact types. The artifact types are Clue, Contraption,
  Equipment (see rule 301.5), Fortification (see rule 301.6), Treasure,
  and Vehicle (see rule 301.7).

  205.3h Enchantments have their own unique set of subtypes; these subtypes are called enchantment types. The enchantment types are Aura
  (see rule 303.4), Cartouche, Curse, Saga (see rule 714), and Shrine.

  205.3i Lands have their own unique set of subtypes; these subtypes are called land types. The land types are Desert, Forest, Gate, Island,
  Lair, Locus, Mine, Mountain, Plains, Power-Plant, Swamp, Tower, and
  Urza’s. Of that list, Forest, Island, Mountain, Plains, and Swamp are
  the basic land types. See rule 305.6.

  205.3j Planeswalkers have their own unique set of subtypes; these subtypes are called planeswalker types. The planeswalker types are
  Ajani, Aminatou, Angrath, Arlinn, Ashiok, Bolas, Chandra, Dack,
  Daretti, Davriel, Domri, Dovin, Elspeth, Estrid, Freyalise, Garruk,
  Gideon, Huatli, Jace, Jaya, Karn, Kasmina, Kaya, Kiora, Koth, Liliana,
  Nahiri, Narset, Nissa, Nixilis, Ral, Rowan, Saheeli, Samut, Sarkhan,
  Serra, Sorin, Tamiyo, Teferi, Teyo, Tezzeret, Tibalt, Ugin, Venser,
  Vivien, Vraska, Will, Windgrace, Wrenn, Xenagos, Yanggu, and Yanling.

  205.3k Instants and sorceries share their lists of subtypes; these subtypes are called spell types. The spell types are Arcane and Trap.

  205.3m Creatures and tribals share their lists of subtypes; these subtypes are called creature types. The creature types are Advisor,
  Aetherborn, Ally, Angel, Antelope, Ape, Archer, Archon, Army,
  Artificer, Assassin, Assembly-Worker, Atog, Aurochs, Avatar, Azra,
  Badger, Barbarian, Basilisk, Bat, Bear, Beast, Beeble, Berserker,
  Bird, Blinkmoth, Boar, Bringer, Brushwagg, Camarid, Camel, Caribou,
  Carrier, Cat, Centaur, Cephalid, Chimera, Citizen, Cleric, Cockatrice,
  Construct, Coward, Crab, Crocodile, Cyclops, Dauthi, Demon, Deserter,
  Devil, Dinosaur, Djinn, Dragon, Drake, Dreadnought, Drone, Druid,
  Dryad, Dwarf, Efreet, Egg, Elder, Eldrazi, Elemental, Elephant, Elf,
  Elk, Eye, Faerie, Ferret, Fish, Flagbearer, Fox, Frog, Fungus,
  Gargoyle, Germ, Giant, Gnome, Goat, Goblin, God, Golem, Gorgon,
  Graveborn, Gremlin, Griffin, Hag, Harpy, Hellion, Hippo, Hippogriff,
  Homarid, Homunculus, Horror, Horse, Hound, Human, Hydra, Hyena,
  Illusion, Imp, Incarnation, Insect, Jackal, Jellyfish, Juggernaut,
  Kavu, Kirin, Kithkin, Knight, Kobold, Kor, Kraken, Lamia, Lammasu,
  Leech, Leviathan, Lhurgoyf, Licid, Lizard, Manticore, Masticore,
  Mercenary, Merfolk, Metathran, Minion, Minotaur, Mole, Monger,
  Mongoose, Monk, Monkey, Moonfolk, Mutant, Myr, Mystic, Naga, Nautilus,
  Nephilim, Nightmare, Nightstalker, Ninja, Noggle, Nomad, Nymph,
  Octopus, Ogre, Ooze, Orb, Orc, Orgg, Ouphe, Ox, Oyster, Pangolin,
  Pegasus, Pentavite, Pest, Phelddagrif, Phoenix, Pilot, Pincher,
  Pirate, Plant, Praetor, Prism, Processor, Rabbit, Rat, Rebel,
  Reflection, Rhino, Rigger, Rogue, Sable, Salamander, Samurai, Sand,
  Saproling, Satyr, Scarecrow, Scion, Scorpion, Scout, Sculpture, Serf,
  Serpent, Servo, Shade, Shaman, Shapeshifter, Sheep, Siren, Skeleton,
  Slith, Sliver, Slug, Snake, Soldier, Soltari, Spawn, Specter,
  Spellshaper, Sphinx, Spider, Spike, Spirit, Splinter, Sponge, Squid,
  Squirrel, Starfish, Surrakar, Survivor, Tetravite, Thalakos, Thopter,
  Thrull, Treefolk, Trilobite, Triskelavite, Troll, Turtle, Unicorn,
  Vampire, Vedalken, Viashino, Volver, Wall, Warrior, Weird, Werewolf,
  Whale, Wizard, Wolf, Wolverine, Wombat, Worm, Wraith, Wurm, Yeti,
  Zombie, and Zubera.

  205.3n Planes have their own unique set of subtypes; these subtypes are called planar types. The planar types are Alara, Arkhos, Azgol,
  Belenon, Bolas’s Meditation Realm, Dominaria, Equilor, Ergamon,
  Fabacin, Innistrad, Iquatana, Ir, Kaldheim, Kamigawa, Karsus,
  Kephalai, Kinshala, Kolbahan, Kyneth, Lorwyn, Luvion, Mercadia,
  Mirrodin, Moag, Mongseng, Muraganda, New Phyrexia, Phyrexia, Pyrulea,
  Rabiah, Rath, Ravnica, Regatha, Segovia, Serra’s Realm, Shadowmoor,
  Shandalar, Ulgrotha, Valla, Vryn, Wildfire, Xerex, and Zendikar.

  205.3p Phenomenon cards, scheme cards, vanguard cards, and conspiracy cards have no subtypes.

As far as actual mechanics Tribal adds, the answer is it doesn't.  It was a work around for a very large set of cards and rules that prevented having to change one of the game's most fundamental rules.

(The only thing that it does affect is the stuff pointed out in @erik's answer.)


What's the strategic advantage of building around alternate win conditions? In MTG, there are several ways to win that don't involve damaging your opponent. The most prominent is milling (running an opponent out of cards to draw), but there are also special cards like Felidar Sovereign, Laboratory Maniac, Battle of Wits, and Barren Glory that introduce unique victory conditions.

I understand why these decks can be fun: it's a novel experience to build and play a deck with an entirely different goal, and figuring out how to achieve some of those goals is a pleasing deckbuilding puzzle. What I'd like to know is something else entirely: when is prioritizing an alternate win condition actually strategically advantageous?

Specifically, it seems like, short of all-in-one-go combo, pursuing these goals involves actively sacrificing tempo and card advantage. Take mill cards like Glimpse the Unthinkable, for example: the card mills a significant chunk of an opponent's deck, but it doesn't actually influence the board state in any way; in the vast majority of cases, making your opponent put ten cards from her library into her graveyard has no affect on her board presence or ability to make subsequent plays (in some instances, it actually helps her, too).

What factors affect the viability of a deck built around an alternate win condition?
Is it ever feasible (like, you-could-take-this-deck-to-a-tournament feasible) to build around an alternate wincon in something that's not just a pure combo deck?
How can one offset or avoid the natural card and tempo disadvantage baked into most of these cards?
When is it practical to include an alternate wincon as "Plan B" (or C, or D, &c.) in a deck with a damage-based Plan A?

I think there's a very simple answer to this question, which perhaps hasn't been concisely stated yet:

Most people's decks are tuned to beat decks trying to win in the "normal" way.  If your deck is trying to win in an unusual way, many decks will not have any good answer to that.

Suppose you're playing a Battle of Wits deck.  A lot of decks won't be packing sufficient enchantment removal to reliably take out Battle of Wits when you cast it - because, in general, enchantment spot removal is not a high priority for winning games of magic.  Which means that, assuming you can survive long enough to find and cast your key card, you win easily.

Or suppose you're playing a deck which has an effective way to gain infinite life.  A lot of decks will be trying to win via the standard route, of dealing 20 damage very fast.  If you can simply gain life faster than they can deal with it, their finely-tuned damage dealing deck is almost certain to have no plan B for dealing with your unusual game plan.

Contrary to other answers to this question, I don't think "the element of surprise" is a key feature to the effectiveness of "alternate win condition" decks... at least not in the sense of your opponent going "huh? What's this deck trying to do, I don't understand...?!".  I think it's a metagame question, pure and simple.  No deck, even after sideboarding, can have effective answers to every other possible deck in the game of Magic.  As such, sensible deckbuilders will build their deck planning to win against the decks they are most expecting to face.  Your opponent may have worked out exactly what your alternate win condition is inside of the first 5 minutes of your match; but that doesn't mean they will have a good way of dealing with it in either their maindeck or their sideboard.  And you may be able to steal quite a few wins against supposedly "better" decks that way.

Never underestimate the power of the metagame.  See for instance the recent World Championships, where Team Channel Fireball brought a Tempered Steel deck that was generally considered to be unplayable because "it rolls over and dies as soon as anyone plays Slagstorm" [or something like that, I'm relying on my memory here].  But as it happened none of the "good" decks at that tournament were packing Slagstorm, and so TCF put 4 players into the top 8 with an identical "B-list" deck.  I don't think you can say the principle of playing to win not just the game but the metagame isn't sound!


How and where can I propose new MTG cards? Where - if anywhere - can I go to put forward a proposal of a new card in magic the gathering?

I figured that the cards must go through a process before being released. I was wondering if I could get my ideas onto the process chain. Can I contact anyone to do this?

Looking on the Magic wizards site, I kinda got lost in the FAQs looking for this and run up a blank.

Wizards of the Coast employees are not allowed to look at unsolicited card designs, from the Wizards of the Coast FAQ on Idea Submissions:

Game Submissions
We do not review unsolicited game or card submissions, return submissions, or make comments on submissions we haven't reviewed.

If you want other people to look at and critique your designs you can go to places like MTG Salvation's Custom Card Creation forum, but the only way to make actual cards is to work for Wizards or submit your design for something like You Make the Card


If an Outpost is played during a Possessed hand, is the Outpost hand played next? As pointed out in a previous question's answer, you may be forced to play an Outpost or Possession while you are possessing someone else's hand, despite the deck's owner getting to play the Outpost/Possession hand and not you.

However, Outpost creates an ambiguity.  Outpost's rules say to play another hand immediately after this one.  However, due to the Possession, the player's normal turn has not yet taken place.

Does the player take their normal turn next or the Outpost turn next?

The turn Outpost is referring to is "this one", the Possession turn.  Outpost doesn't really care what turn it was played on.

So during the clean-up phase of the Possession turn, the possessed player will draw 3 cards instead of 5, and immediately take their Outpost turn.

At the end of the Outpost turn, the originally possessed player will draw 5 cards as normal.  Turn order then returns to where we were before the Possession was played, so it's now the possessed player's turn (finally!) and they take a normal turn.

So your opinion is correct.


How to play a planeswalker such as Sorin, Lord of Innistrad? When playing Sorin, Lord of Innistrad, I know I add 1 loyalty counter at my upkeep. However if I have 6 loyalty my questions are:

Can I play the -2 ability twice or only once per upkeep?
My other question is can I play +1 and then -2 on the same upkeep?

I know I add 1 loyalty counter at my upkeep.

huh? no. Outside of the effect of a spell or ability, you only add loyalty counters onto Sorin when you place it on the battlefield, and when you activate its +1 Loyalty ability.

  Can I play the -2 ability twice or only once per upkeep?

No, for two reasons.

You can't play it during your upkeep at all. Loyalty abilities can only be used "as a sorcery". (On your turn, in a main phase, when the stack is empty.)
You can only activate an ability of a given Planeswalker once per turn.

  My other question is can I play +1 and then -2 on the same upkeep?

No, for the same reasons.

  606.3. A player may activate a loyalty ability of a permanent he or she controls any time he or she has priority and the stack is empty during a main phase of his or her turn, but only if no player has previously activated a loyalty ability of that permanent that turn.


Enchant artifact used to enchant Artifact creature I'm somewhat new to Magic the Gathering and my friend is slightly more experienced than me, so I gave him this one, but am questioning it:

He has a card called Ensoul Artifact which says

  Enchant artifact

  Enchanted artifact is a creature with base power and toughness 5/5 in addition to its other types.

He always puts this card on an Artifact creature with a gazillion power/toughness, to make it a gazillion +5 power and toughness.  Is this possible?  Isn't there a difference between Artifact and Artifact creature?

Also, what does "In addition to its other types" mean?  I always assumed that my friend is wrong, and you can only place it on an Artifact which gives it 5/5 in addition to whatever else the Artifact does.

Isn't there a difference between Artifact and Artifact creature?

An artifact creature card on the battlefield is an artifact. It's also a creature, but that's not relevant here. As long as it's an artifact, Ensoul can enchant and affect it.

  He always puts this card on an Artifact creature with a gazillion power/toughness, to make it a gazillion +5 power and toughness. Is this possible?

It doesn't grant +5/+5. It sets (replaces) the base power and toughness. That could effectively result in an increase of 5 in both stats, but not necessarily.

Say you have an Ornithopter (0/2) with a +1/+1 counter on it, and the Ornithopter is equipped with Bladed Bracers (+1/+1 to the equipped creature). It's 2/4. Ensoul Artifact would change its base P/T from 0/2 to 5/5, making it a 7/7. The toughness only went up by 3.

On the other hand, Arcbound Bruiser has a base P/T of 0/0, and enters the battlefield with three +1/+1 counters, so it's normally a 3/3. If it were Ensouled, it would becomes 8/8.

  Also, what does "In addition to its other types" mean?

When an effect sets a card's type, it loses its other types unless that wording is used[CR 205.1a-b][1].

With that wording, a non-creature artifact becomes an artifact creature when Ensouled. Without that wording, it would become a non-artifact creature.

There's one exception: effects that set the type to "artifact creature" (very specifically) also don't cause other types to be lost. This doesn't apply to Ensoul Artifact, since the type is being set to "creature" not "artifact creature" (though the presence of the "in addition" wording makes the difference rather minor), but it's important to note for similar cards such as Animate Artifact.


How does Vorinclex's second ability work at the time of his death? The Green New Phyrexian Praetor  Vorinclex, Voice of Hunger is quite the beast, his second ability reads:

  If an opponent taps a land for mana, it does not untap during his next untap step.

Say my opponent taps his land for mana, and sometime during his current turn or my next turn, Vorinclex dies somehow. Do his lands remain tapped for the extra turn as originally stated, since they were tapped during the time Vorinclex still lived, or does the effect end immrdiately upon his death, allowing my opponent to untap them as usual?

They will not untap as usual in the next untap step.

The reason is that after the ability triggered (while Vorinclex was alive) it went on the stack as a replacement effect for the next untap step.

When Vorinclex died, it didn't undo that effect.

Any lands tapped after Vorinclex died would untap in the next untap step.

If Vorinclex instead said something like "While Vorinclex is in play lands do not untap as usual" then it's death would change the situation.


Identifying a version of Cards Against Humanity I have an unopened box of Cards Against Humanity that I was gifted a few years ago. I would like to sell it.
As there are different versions, I would need to be able to say which it is. How can I find out without removing the plastic wrapping?

You can verify your version if you look at the back of the box in the lower right corner, it's the little number inside the circle. This also applies to expansions


Does "an attacking creature" count as "a creature that attacked"? Say I have Hypersonic Dragon in play and go to combat phase. Dring the declare attackers step I tap and declare Hypersonic Dragon as attacking. After I have declared Hypersonic Dragon as attacking I get priority (as there are nothing else on the battlefield generating triggers).

Now I play Relentless Assault and it resolves. Since this is during combat, there is no additional Combat or Main Phase added, but is Hypersonic Dragon untapped now?

If not, at what point is Hypersonic Dragon "a creature that attacked"? What is the earliest Relentless Assault can be played to get the untap effect?

The Hypersonic Dragon will be untapped.
It is well established that to attack is to declare as an attacker, so a creature that attacked is one that has been declared as an attacker earlier in the current turn.

508.2. Second, any abilities that triggered on attackers being declared go on the stack. (See rule 603, “Handling Triggered Abilities.”)
508.2a Abilities that trigger on a creature attacking trigger only at the point the creature is declared as an attacker. They will not trigger if a creature attacks and then that creature’s characteristics change to match the ability’s trigger condition

The rule and ruling for "put on the battlefield attacking" further supports this:

508.4. If a creature is put onto the battlefield attacking, [...]. Such creatures are “attacking” but, for the purposes of trigger events and effects, they never “attacked.”
2011-9-22 Although the token is attacking, it was never declared as an attacking creature (for purposes of abilities that trigger whenever a creature attacks, for example).


Is the CMC of a creature that is enchanted the cost of the enchantment and the creature combined? Just started playing MTG and I have a Filigree Familiar of 3 cost enchanted with Marked by Honor with a cost of 4. Does the CMC of the Filigree Familiar equal 3 or the combined cost of 7? My opponent is using the card Fragmentize to destroy the Filigree Familiar, but we aren't sure what the CMC is equal to.

The CMC of Filigree Familiar is always 3. The only time the CMC of a card changes is if it has {X} in its mana cost and it is on the stack (in which case it is the chosen value for X, other wise X counts as 0).

  202.3. The converted mana cost of an object is a number equal to the total amount of mana in its mana cost, regardless of color.


How does the introduction of victory cities in Axis & Allies revised change gameplay and strategy? In the 2nd Edition of Axis and Allies, you win one of two ways:

Capture two of your opponent's capital cities (i.e. Germany and Japan if playing as the Allies or some combination of Eastern US, Russia, and Great Britain if playing the Axis).
Control 84 IPCs of territory at the end of the turn if playing the Axis, or 110 if playing the Allies.

In Axis and Allies Revised, economic victory was eliminated and the concept of victory cities was added. Instead of having to capture two capitals, the game ends when one side controls a certain number of these victory cities (and the number required can be used to scale game length).

How has this change in victory conditions changed gameplay and strategy?

With the introduction of "victory cities," the revised edition tilts the game towards Asia and the Pacific.

Seven new cities have been added to the original roster of five (Tokyo, Washington, London, Berlin and Moscow). The new ones are Paris, Rome, Leningrad, Los Angeles, Calcutta, Manila and Shanghai.

Of these, Paris, Rome, and Leningrad had natural importance in the early editions, en route to Berlin and Moscow, respectively. The Allies actually captured Rome and Paris on their way to Berlin, and arguably, the Germans should have secured Leningrad before attempting Moscow. In a sense, their importance had not changed, only their "scoring."

On the other hand, Los Angeles, Manila, Shanghai and Calcutta have now taken the importance of the other three cities. They are worth fighting for in their own right, rather than just for a few IPCs. Put another way, there are 166 IPCs on the new board and 12 victory cities, meaning that pro rata, each victory city is equivalent to about 14 IPCs. In the old edition, only Los Angeles had anywhere close to that importance. Now it makes sense for both the U.S. and Japan to fight a war in the Pacific instead of heading their forces toward Europe.

The other important change is victory conditions. In the old editions, the Allies were forced to aim for "total victory"  while the Axis were encouraged to go for a major victory (all except the U.S.). (Both of these would be after the implied "mopping up").
There are now minor and moderate victory conditions. The Axis can win a minor victory early by capturing, say, Leningrad and Calcutta, which is more than adequate compensation for the loss of the economic victory option. If the Germans had captured Leningrad and Japan had gone for India instead of Pearl Harbor, the Axis might have gotten a "negotiated" peace.


Does the legacy version do anything to devalue taking Australia early in the game? In the base game if you conquer Australia early, you gain the advantage of 2 extra units a turn with only one territory required to defend it.
Does this change at any point in playing the Legacy game?

Yes, depending on how your group places their stickers.

Initially, the game makes the Australia problem worse, not better. This happens because a player wins when they have 4 Victory Points instead of when they remove all opposition. It is relatively easy to sit back and consolidate your forces in Australia, then attack to get 2-3 Victory Points in a single turn and win before your opponents can counter-attack.

As the game progresses, there are increasing opportunities to "ruin" Australia. Many of these actions can only be taken by the game winner, and many can only be taken once. If you want to de-power Australia in your game, you either need to win a significant number of games or persuade others in your group to help you.

Scars

Starting from the very first game, you can place Ammo Shortage scars in Southeast Asia and Indonesia to make Australia less defensible. More scars become available as the game progresses. Game winners also have the opportunity to remove positive scars from Australia.

Scars and other stickers also restrict starting positions. If you fill all of Australia with stickers, no player may start there.

Cards

In your first game, all territory cards are valued at 1 coin. However, the value of cards will increase with each game you play. Put high coin values on territories distant from Australia to disincentive this strategy.

Other ways

There are more (and more significant) ways to ruin Australia, but these are discovered during play.

Spoiler 1:

   Continent bonus modifiers: One of the options for a winning player is to modify a continent bonus by placing either a +1 or -1 sticker on it. Placing the -1 sticker on Australia and reducing its continent bonus to 1 is a huge disincentive.

Spoiler 2:

   Drafting: After several games, you start to "draft" for placement order, play order, side, and starting troops and coins. A player who picks "first placement" to get Australia is giving other advantageous options, such as "first to play" or "most starting troops". This is particularly dangerous at the beginning of the game. A player with a large army and earlier play order can potentially wipe you out before your first turn!

Spoiler 3:

   Sea Routes: You have two opportunities during the game to add sea routes. One is granted to the player who completes the "Explore the World" mission, and another to the player who opens the "Alien Landing" packet. These can be used to create "back doors" into Australia, making it more difficult to defend.

Spoiler 4:

   Nuke: The first time 3 missiles are used in a single battle, the contested territory becomes fallout. Fallout is very difficult to inhabit and almost single-handedly counteracts to continent bonus of Australia.


Age of Steam Expansion Board Rules I just grabbed VASSAL to play AoS with my brother in Korea.  However the only boards they support at the moment all seem to have non-standard rules.  Paris is multi-colors.  There are these white lines that go over water.  I am generally confused :)

I am looking for a good resource for the Age of Steam expansion board rules.  I have found a few of the rules on BBG but normally people talking about the rules and not a direct link to a rule book.  Maybe they are there and I just can't find them. :-\

(PS if anyone has a source for more AoS maps for VASSAL, that would be great too)

All of the Age of Steam map rules I have seen are only the differences between the base AoS rules and the map's rules and, as I mention below, sometimes they are not complete without knowledge of the features of other expansion maps.

I do not know of a unified Age of Steam map rules resource, although depending on the designer the rules may be on BGG or on the designer's web site.  At one point I created a fairly comprehensive and up to date list of Age of Steam maps which includes designers, that might be a good place to start.
https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArK4vAoucRR2cHpsb09IZG9Na3FzbE1zeFhqaXlyZkE&hl=en_US

It is fairly well documented that anything that John Bohrer retains the copyright to (including the base game rules) will not be made available online.

Paris being multicolored is actually the easiest rule to manage on the France map, it just behaves like all of the colors present.  The other rules, like engineer being required to build over mountains and the non-existence of bankruptcy are less obvious.

White lines over water almost always indicate a sea route or ferry that can be built as a single track tile build at a fixed cost (which can vary by map).  If the line is dotted, it usually means that one or both of the ends of the line are towns that must be urbanized before the link can be purchased.

One of the major challenges of AoS map rules is that they all assume a certain amount of familiarity with the rules of AoS and, in many cases, with the rules of one or more expansions for AoS.  For example, the New Zealand print and play map for AoS has sea links with town terminals but it does not spell out when they are allowed to be built.  I believe this is due to some sloppy thinking on the part of the designers, as they assume an accretion of knowledge about AoS that may or may not exist for a given gamer or group.


What happens if nobody wins? If you create a path to the gold with a blue door in the way, and there are no blue dwarves, no boss, and no profiteer, what happens?

The game designer, Frederic Moyersoen, discusses the answer to that question on BGG (emphasis mine).

If there is a path with a blue door, the blue gold-diggers win (and not the green). If there are no blue gold-diggers, no profiteur and no boss, nobody wins.


Play card before previous player has finished its turn Is it a legal play when:

player 1 , plays a green draw 2 card
player 3, plays a green 4 card before player 2 can play their yellow draw 2 card

If you look at the rules:

  Draw Two – When a person places this card, the next player will have
  to pick up two cards and forfeit his/her turn. It can only be played
  on a card that matches by color, or on another Draw Two. If turned up
  at the beginning of play, the first player draws two cards and gets
  skipped.

You can not play a second draw-2. Although this seems to be a common house rule.

Then again, it is nice to wait until the player has drawn the two cards before playing the next card.


Are multiple Cloak of Confusions redundant? If I put two Cloak of Confusion on a creature card and it is not blocked, can I have my opponent discard two cards at random?

You can use multiple.

Going by the Oracle wording, which is the only wording that counts, the ability on Cloak of Confusion is a triggered ability; so when the creature attacks and isn't blocked, both abilities will go on the stack. You can order them however you want (it makes no difference as they are identical), and when each one resolves, you can choose to make your opponent discard a card at random.

Note that if you were to only choose the "you may have it assign no combat damage this turn" for one of the two abilities; the creature would still assign no combat damage, and your opponent would only discard 1 card. So you would want to make the same choice for both abilities.


What happens to Death Cloud when there aren't enough legal targets Probably a really easy one but if I play Death Cloud where X=5 and my opponent only has 4 creatures does Death Cloud get countered because there aren't enough legal targets or does it just force him to sacrifice them all and ignore the last one?

Death Cloud does not target. The only time a spell targets is when it says target on the spell (or a keyword on it uses target, eg Enchant X or Support N). Thus Death Cloud will do as much as it can and make them sacrifice all 4 of their creatures.

609.3. If an effect attempts to do something impossible, it does only as much as possible.
Example: If a player is holding only one card, an effect that reads “Discard two cards” causes him or her to discard only that card. If an effect moves cards out of the library (as opposed to drawing), it moves as many as possible.


What happens if an action card makes another queued action card impossible? Last game, the situation arose where I scored a hit on a dreadnaught and played Direct Hit!. My brother then quickly grabbed his Emergency Repairs card.

Direct Hit! reads:

  Play: "Immediately after the ship has been damaged in a Space Battle in which you participate."

Emergency Repairs reads:

  Play: "At any time"

So this resulted in an argument: "Direct Hit! means that the hit was a kill shot so you can't do Emergency Repair" vs "I repaired first, so you can't play Direct Hit!".

After consulting the rules we found out that you always have to announce that you are going to play a card. Then other people can announce they also want to play a card. Then the cards are resolved in order of play.

So what would have happened in our situation if both action cards had been announced? If either is played first, the other cannot be played any more.
Is the action card then discarded? Does it go back into the player's hand? Does the player have to reveal what it was? If not, can he just decide not to play it any more even though it would still be possible (i.e. to repair/direct hit another ship)?

My word here is by no means final—there is no clear answer to your question that I can find—but I have a good argument for resolving your case based on the existing rules, FAQ, and card text.

There is no rule that states that Emergency Repairs cannot be played in an action cycle began by a player announcing a card that turns out to be a Direct Hit!.

(The following is worth mentioning: Sabotage—another action with ‘immediately’ in the Play text is explicitly said to not be announced, which would mean there is no cycle of actions played by other players, as that text only takes effect after an action is announced. It would seem ideal that other immediate Action Cards be given a similar non–announced status, but no one asked me.)

The use of ‘immediately’ in the Play text of Direct Hit! implies that it happens before any other actions could possibly be announced— except for others with the same same trigger in its Play block. The closest thing a player being attacked has to Direct Hit! is Recheck, which instead reacts ‘immediately’ to the die roll— before the damage has been inflicted.

I believe there is a reason for the lack of contradictory immediate actions that are triggered by the same state. The only exception is the pre–combat phase, and the FAQ has a solution for resolving those actions. (Rulebook effects are treated here as actions, as well— which demonstrates that immediate effects on Action Cards are treated with the same priority as immediate rulebook effects are.)

So… if we got to the situation where Emergency Repairs is played in an action cycle began with the announcing of an Action Card that turned out to be a Direct Hit!, it would still resolve.

Emergency Repairs does not target a ship or fleet, but rather the system that it resides in (the targeting text is simply “Choose a system”). Other ships (if any) in the system, for example, would still be repaired. You could technically play it on a system you have no ships on, as it does not require you to have any ships in said system. (It has not received an erratum which requires presence like Direct Hit! has.)

It would be possible to play Emergency Repairs in an action cycle started by a Direct Hit!, and then use Sabotage on the Direct Hit!, though…


How to value old MTG cards in foreign languages when none are for sale? I used to play MtG when I was younger, around '95-98(?), and found an old box at my parents with a lot of cards that I'd be more than willing to part with. I know some at least are from edition IV. And for some reason there are some spanish, german and italian cards as well that I think I got in some sort of collector's box with rare packages.

I got the TCGplayer app for the phone that's working great for the most part, but some cards it can't determine the value of because there are none for sale. There are a few cards that it thinks are German that are actually in English, but I'm guessing this is a glitch and not because there's something odd with the card it's scanning.

Question: How would I go about valuing cards like that when I have very little understanding of what a realistic value is, and there are none for sale to show me a good base line?

Option 1: Look the cards up on cardmarket.com or other secondary market sites:

Have you tried any other site except for TCGPlayer? There are numerous other sites which let you gain insight on prices of MTG-cards. I'm guessing you live in the US so you may not know about Cardmarket.

Note that this site is mostly used in europe, so prices may differ significantly from the prices in the US. But on the other hand you will find pretty good comparable figures since people often offer cards in foreign languages. Cardmarket also lets you filter by languages and card gradings.

Other options: CardKingdom.com, magicmadhouse.com, mtgmintcard.com

Option 2: Determine the approximate Value of Cards on your own:

Since the cards you're looking at are pretty old, they are most probably relevant in the formats Vintage or Legacy. Are your cards present in any of the meta decks? If not, they probably won't be worth too much. If they are not in any of the meta decks, how do you evaluate their power level?

Does it have Strong stats? (if it is a creature)
Combo potential?
Good Value for low mana costs?

If you can answer any of these questions with yes, they may have some value. Certainly this approach can only give you a seperation between potentially valuable cards and bulk. You can never exactly tell the value of a card without having access to the market.


Axis and Allies with TWO boards!!! So, I have been developing a way to play A&A with two boards. You have the Axis on one and the Allies on the other.

Now, before you start saying that this is ridiculous and stupid and would prolong the gameplay 10 fold, let me explain...

On your board, you have your troops and you can see territories you don't own. Then, on your turn, you can choose to attack somewhere or you can do reconnaissance and send a bomber over an enemy area to see what is in it. Since bombers are a big part of attacking the enemy, this would be a free move. But, the more bombers you have, the more recon you can do. A bomber cannot do more than one territory per turn.

So, you recon or decide where to attack and write it down. Then, a mediator takes your paper into the other room where the enemy board is and they tell you what you're fighting or what you've spied.

So this is my VERY BASIC plan. I want ideas to help develop this a bit more.

Any ideas??? (<-- there is my question)

My suggestion is very similar to Scott's, but with subtle variations to make it less burdensome to play in person.

This isn't a rule, just a suggestion: Play with someone you trust. There's going to be hidden information, and if you think the other player is going to cheat you're going to be paranoid about looking for malfeasance and not have fun. Two honest players can make this work without a moderator, which I think is important.

Two boards, one for the axis and one for the allies. If multiple players  represent each side then they see their side's board; this models the sharing of intelligence amongst friends and reduces the need for more than two boards. The boards should be set up in full view of both players and then a divider put up between then. After setup, the army trays and money are set to the side in view of both players so that it's clear what's going into and coming out of the trays (doveryai, no proveryai). Having the players in two rooms would be a logistical nightmare; this is simpler.

Each player can see units in enemy-controlled adjacent land territories. The friendly territory only has to be controlled, not occupied. This models the ability to generally know what the enemy has on the front lines and eliminates the need to add a new surveillance mechanic to the game. (The bomber idea sounds cool but would be tedious and error-prone in practice. Imagine the time spend reading off all the locations you wanted to spy on and then adjusting the board--at the start of every turn).

You cannot see adjacent naval territories. This models the largeness of the sea and difficulty of conducting naval reconnaissance with WWII-era ships. The only way you know what is in a sea territory is if you try and move into it. This would require only a minor change to the current rules: all naval movements are combat movements, unless ships were moving into friendly-occupied sea zones.

Fighters and bombers can only conduct "reconnaissance" of sea zones if they attack. If aircraft attack an occupied sea zone then combat commences as normal; if it is empty then their movement is consumed, but nothing else happens. Overflying a sea zone reveals nothing; you must commit to attack it. This models that searching the sea for ships is harder than overflying territory on your way somewhere else.
I like that this is similar to the original idea of using planes for spying but with less overhead. I also like that this enables submarines to become a more effective naval unit because they can "hide" in plain sight. An enemy has to use a fighter's attack to even see if they are there. I get excited thinking if Germany could use this rule to build a North Atlantic navy under the UK's nose.

Purchases are public knowledge; placement is not. Players must show their money and what they're buying. Purchases are placed in view of both players while the rest of the turn is conducted. This models the ability of nation to get a general idea of their enemies industrial capacity and capabilities. This also has the added benefit of reducing the opportunity to cheat because both players are verifying the amount of money being turned in and the units being purchased. (Also, honest math mistakes in purchasing are common.) Units are placed in secret, except for those placed on the front lines.

With these changes I think it would be possible to play with only two boards, in a single room, without a moderator. If anyone can think of any holes let me know.


How does Thought Sponge interact with Yarok, the Desecrated? Situation
I have Yarok, the Desecrated on the battlefield:

If a permanent entering the battlefield causes a triggered ability of a permanent you control to trigger, that ability triggers an additional time.

I play Thought Sponge, after my opponent drew three cards this turn:

Thought Sponge enters the battlefield with a number of +1/+1 counters on it equal to the greatest number of cards an opponent has drawn this turn.

Does this creature's triggered ability trigger an additional time? Is it entering as a 4/4, or as a 7/7?
Confusion
I'm not sure whether this effect counts as replacement effect, as mentioned in the rulings of Yarok:

7/12/2019. Replacement effects are unaffected by Yarok’s ability. For example, a creature that enters the battlefield with one +1/+1 counter on it won’t receive an additional +1/+1 counter.

Unfortunately for you, Thought Sponge won't trigger again. In fact, it doesn't even trigger at all, since it is indeed a replacement effect:

  614.1c Effects that read “[This permanent] enters the battlefield with . . . ,” “As [this permanent] enters the battlefield . . . ,” or “[This permanent] enters the battlefield as . . . “ are replacement effects.

and as you noted, replacement effects are unaffected by Yarok's ability.

A similar card which is affected by Yarok is Propeller Pioneer which has the Fabricate 1 ability:

  When this creature enters the battlefield, put a +1/+1 counter on it or create a 1/1 colorless Servo artifact creature token.

This is a triggered ability:

  603.1. Triggered abilities have a trigger condition and an effect. They are written as “[When/Whenever/At] [trigger condition or event], [effect]. [Instructions (if any).]”


Goldnight Redeemer and Angel's Tomb I was playing a casual game with a friend the other day testing out a new angels deck I built and came accross this situation....

I had an Angel's Tomb, which has this artifact may become a 3/3 flying white artifact angel  until end of turn whenever a creature enters the battlefield under your control, on the field as well as 2 other creatures and I then summoned Goldnight Redeemer, which has WETB gain 2 life for each other creature you control.

The question is does the Angel's Tomb effect trigger before or after Goldnight Redeemer since both are activated by Goldnight Redeemer entering the battle?

To expand on user1873's answer ever so slightly - they're both your abilities, so you can put them on the stack whichever way you want.  You want to put the Goldnight Redeemer's ability on the stack first, and then Angel's Tomb's ability on the stack after that.

The abilities then resolve in a Last In, First Out style: at the top of the stack, the Tomb becomes a creature.  Then we move on to the Redeemer ability and gain 2 life for each other creature - which now includes the Tomb-Angel.

Stacking triggered abilities correctly can be a bit difficult to visualise at first, so I thought it would be useful to provide a little walkthrough...


What is the Power/Toughness of a */* when it is not on the battlefield? If a creature has a P/T of * / *, but is not the battlefield, What is it's P/T with regards to effects that care about P/T such as  Wild Pair and  Varolz, the Scar-Striped.

If I used  Varolz, the Scar-Striped to scavenge a  Boneyard Wurm, and I have X creatures in my graveyard, do I get 0 counters or do I get X counters?

It depends on the card in question. If it can't be determined use 0.

  208.2a The card may have a characteristic-defining ability that sets its power and/or toughness according to some stated condition. (See
  rule 604.3.) Such an ability is worded "[This creature's] [power or
  toughness] is equal to . . ." or "[This creature's] power and
  toughness are each equal to . . ." This ability functions everywhere,
  even outside the game. If the ability needs to use a number that can't
  be determined, including inside a calculation, use 0 instead of that
  number. Example: Lost Order of Jarkeld has power and toughness each
  equal to 1+*. It has the abilities "As Lost Order of Jarkeld enters
  the battlefield, choose an opponent" and "Lost Order of Jarkeld's
  power and toughness are each equal to 1 plus the number of creatures
  the chosen player controls." While Lost Order of Jarkeld isn't on the
  battlefield, there won't be a chosen player. Its power and toughness
  will each be equal to 1 plus 0, so it's 1/1.

When you scavenge Boneyard Wurm you will get a number of +1/+1 counters equal the number of creatures in your graveyard before Boneyard Wurm is exiled. (A ruling on Varolz, the Scar-Striped reads: The number of counters that a card’s scavenge ability puts on a creature is based on the card’s power as it last existed in the graveyard.)


Invoking abilities not needed in order to charge Net Mercur Is the Runner allowed to invoke abilities from cards which they do not need in order to add a credit to Net Mercur?

For example, let's say the Runner uses their last click to run on Archives (which is unprotected say) - during this run, can they spend a credit from a Stealth card which they do not need to do for any other reason than to add a credit to Net Mercur?

I'm assuming the answer is yes, but answers using any reference material to support their statements would be appreciated.

It depends. According to the official FAQ, "a player can only trigger an action or ability if it has the potential to change the game state." But the FAQ also states:

  The Runner can boost the strength of his icebreakers outside of an encounter with a piece of ice.

So, assuming you have a source of stealth credits and an icebreaker that can have its strength boosted, then you can do so even if it's not being used to interact with any ice. That would trigger Net Mercur's ability.

Edit:
For further clarification, it must be noted that Net Mercur's ability can only be triggered during a run.


What can I sacrifice for Champion of Stray Souls' ability? I have a Champion of Stray Souls. It says, in short, that I can trade any number of creatures (sacrifice) for any other creatures in my graveyard.  It does not say creatures in my hand or on the battlefield, so my question  is:  Can I sacrifice creatures in my deck or in my hand (or just my hand but not my deck, etc.) to trade in for creatures in the graveyard, or just creatures on the battlefield?

You can only sacrifice creatures that are on the battlefield and you control.
From the comprehensive rules:

701.14. Sacrifice
701.14a To sacrifice a permanent, its controller moves it from the battlefield directly to its owner’s graveyard. A player can’t sacrifice something that isn’t a permanent, or something that’s a permanent he or she doesn’t control. Sacrificing a permanent doesn’t destroy it, so regeneration or other effects that replace destruction can’t affect this action.

A permanent is a card on the battlefield, such as creatures, lands, artifacts, etc.. A card that is not on the battlefield can never be a creature (land, etc), only a creature card (land card, etc.).


Is it ever a good strategy to discard cards in Race for the Galaxy? Imagine a a tabuleau which contains both Contact Specialist and Drop Ships, and my hand contains Reptilian Uplift Race and at least one other card, or more generally any other setup which contains both a red to black conversion ability and a total positive military strength in the tableau and a military world in hand.

Is there ever a situation (including cards from any official expansion) in which it would be advantageous to use the red to black conversion ability to settle the military world, thus spending one or more cards, as opposed to simply conquering the military world?

The only situation that this happens in practice that you want to discard for the sake of reducing your hand size is with the Brink of War card Retrofit and Salvage, which allows a player to take all cards discarded at end of turn by other players into hand.  If you preemptively throw cards away to avoid discarding, then you won't be forced to give an opponent more cards.

Round end: After discarding, take all other players' discards into your hand and keep them

In terms of incenting players to use peace rather than military, there is also Pan-Galactic Mediator in Brink of War that rewards you for settling worlds with military to peace settle abilities.  If you have that card in play, you might want to use the peaceful approach to get the reward.

You could also imagine a hypothetical situation in which you discard to avoid claiming the "First to Discard at end of Round" goal, so that another player will chase the goal and take a phase that you want in a multiplayer game.  Such a situation might occur if you are coaxing your opponent to call trade when you have Trade League.  But I've played thousands of games and I've never seen that happen.


What effects do exhausted cards have? In the My Little Pony Collectible Card Game official rulebook, it says that

  While a card is exhausted, it can't be involved in faceoffs or help you confront Problems.

This description is a little vague. Does this only mean that the character does not contribute its power to faceoffs and problems? Or do its static abilities also stop working? Do resources on exhausted characters do anything? How about exhausted resources?

In other words, when a card is exhausted, does its text (or the text of attached resources) do anything?

The key term here is involve. To resolve a faceoff or problem, characters must first be involved in it. An exausted card cannot be involved in a faceoff or problem (except if it is Stubborn) and this applies to resources too. A resource played on a exausted character will not take effect in the faceoff/problem if the character cannot be involved in the faceoff. Only the involved cards contribute to the resolution of a faceoff.


Can I play Ticket to Ride on my iPad against people using Ticket to Ride pocket? I want to play against my friends on Ticket to Ride but I wondering if I can if they are on their iPhones and I am on my iPad?

Yes, all iOS versions of TTR may be involved in a multiplayer game, but only with expansions that are available on all devices.


Is there a game similar to Bloodborne the Card Game with a lighter theme? Yesterday I played Bloodborne the Card Game and loved it! The theme, however, is a little dark for my family (getting killed several times, collecting "blood echoes" which are blood colored chips, and an overall lack of bright colors). What games have similar mechanics and game length, but with a "lighter" theme?

"Bloodborne the Card Game" is a cooperative/competitive card game where you fight a series of monsters and collect victory points that can be lost when you die if you haven't cashed them. You start with five cards and gain only a few more cards before it's over that upgrade your character. It lasts 30-45 minutes, and is for 3-6 players.

Cutthroat Caverns might scratch that same itch. Card based combat mixed with some take that.

Basically you fight monsters via cooperation but the player that deals the final blow gets the loot, so that is the competitive part.

Here is the BGG page:
https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/28259/cutthroat-caverns


Can Trait Doctoring be used to change words like "nonblack"? Trait Doctoring reads:

  Change the text of target permanent by replacing all instances of one
  color word with another or one basic land type with another until end
  of turn.

 Doom Blade, for instance, reads:

  Destroy target nonblack creature.

Assuming I have  Quicken or something to time it correctly, can I use Trait Doctoring to change "nonblack" to "nonred"?

Yes, but not in your example.

A ruling on gatherer for Trait Doctoring clearly supports changing 'nonblack' to 'nonred'

  4/15/2013     The type-changing effect can change part of a word such as
  “nonblack” or “swampwalk” if the part of the word is being used to
  refer to a color or basic land type.

However, Trait Doctoring specifically says:

  Change the text of target permanent by...

Doom blade is a not a permanent.

In order to change the color referenced on Doom Blade, you would need to use a card such as Sleight of Mind, that specifically says it can target spells. (See Steven Stadnicki's answer for more information about this combo)


Does a creature block when it is declared as a blocker or when damage is dealt? Suppose the following scenario:
It's Bob's turn. He has five open lands including a Labyrinth of Skophos and a 10/10 creature. In combat phase he declares the 10/10 creature as attacker and passes priority to Alice who now has to declare blockers.
Alice controls Grizzly Bears equipped with Dead-Iron Sledge. She declares the Grizzly bears as a blocker for the 10/10 creature. As far as I know the triggered ability of Dead-Iron Sledge now goes onto the stack.
I have read the rulings of Labyrinth of Skophos in the gatherer but can't seem to make sense of it:

If a blocking creature is removed from combat, the creature it blocked remains blocked. Unless that creature has trample, it won’t deal combat damage.

Once creatures attack or block, they remain attacking or blocking creatures through the end of combat step unless removed from combat (by Labyrinth of Skophos or a similar effect).

Dont these two rulings contradict each other?
Will Bob be able to activate the ability of Labyrinth of Skophos targeting his own creature or the grizzly bears in response in order to prevent it from dying?

Bob can activate Labyrinth of Skophos targeting either creature, but it won't save his creature.
Dead-Iron Sledge doesn't require the creatures to still be attacking or blocking when it resolves. It will destroy the creatures even if they have been removed from combat. It triggers when the equipped creature is declared as a blocker or another creature is declared as blocking it. After that moment, it doesn't matter at all if the equipped creature is still blocking or being blocked; all that matters is that the ability triggered. *
So the question of when a creature stops being considered a blocker or being blocked is irrelevant to Dead-Iron Sledge; it doesn't care. But to answer that question as well:
A creature controlled by the defending player is considered to be "blocking" from the moment it is declared as a blocker, and stops being a blocking creature if it is removed from combat. An attacking creature is considered to be "blocked" from the moment a creature is declared as a blocker for it, and remains "blocked" even if the blocking creature is removed from combat.
In other words, there are different rules for the attackers vs the blockers. "Block" in the context of "is this creature blocked?" doesn't have the same meaning as "blocking" in terms of "is this a blocking creature?"

Declare Blockers Step

509.1g Each chosen creature still controlled by the defending player becomes a blocking creature. Each one is blocking the attacking creatures chosen for it. It remains a blocking creature until it’s removed from combat or the combat phase ends, whichever comes first. See rule 506.4.

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.

The rulings are different because 509.1g is different than 509.1h. 509.1g says that a blocking creature stops being a blocking creature if it is removed from combat. However, 509.1h says that just because a blocking creature is no longer a blocking creature doesn't mean that the creature is was blocking is no longer blocked.
In simplest terms, it is possible for an attacking creature to be considered blocked, but without any blocking creatures around.
Check out Curtain of Light. This actually causes an attacking creature to become blocked without ever having a creature blocking it. This shows that there's a difference between "is blocked" and "has a creature blocking it".
*Putting this at the bottom because it's helpful, but not necessary to the actual answer. If Dead-Iron Sledge instead said "Whenever equipped creature blocks or becomes blocked by a creature, destroy target blocked or blocking creature", then it would be different; it would matter if the creature was removed from combat, because it would be a targeted ability. When a targeted ability resolves, it checks to see if the targets are still valid. If you targeted a blocking or blocked creature that was removed from combat, then it would no longer be a valid target for the ability, so it would fizzle (leave the stack without resolving and have no effect). But instead it says "destroy both creatures", so it doesn't target anything.


Can a berserk unit advance in Advanced Squad Leader? In ASL, may a berserk unit advance in the APh? It seems logical that it can't, but I cannot find the rule.

It can't advance while berserk:

  A15.431: ... nor may it move in the
  APh ...

but, it may lose it's berserk status in the Advancing Fire Phase, and then advance in the Advance Phase:

  A15.46 RETURN TO NORMAL: A berserk unit loses its berserk status and returns
  to Good Order whenever it (or the
  group it attacks with) eliminates all
  (but at least one) Known enemy units
  in its Location with either TPBF
  (halved) during the AFPh or CC, or if
  at the end of a charge there is no
  Known enemy unit in its LOS (15.431).


What makes a game a Microgame? I'm looking for help figuring out what exactly makes a game a microgame. Some considerations I have for what might make a game count as microgame include:

How many 'pieces' (chits, dice, cards) are too many?
If a board is included, what size limitations are acceptable? Is folding allowed?
Is there an agreed on size for Microgames (within an Altoids tin, etc.)
Are there any gameplay or other considerations I should be thinking about in terms of this definition?

The original Microgames from Metagaming had a rule booklet no larger than 32 small pages (A5 size, approximately), and a counter sheet the same dimensions, plus a map that folded to that size to fit in the plastic envelope.  Counters have to be large enough to read, so there's a limit to the number of counters that will fit on that size sheet.

Another design criterion was that they should take no more than an hour to play, ideally half an hour for experienced players.

Worth noting that within this definition fell the original Car Wars, the original Ogre, the original Melee and Wizard (that eventually evolved into GURPS), and a space combat game called Warp War, among others.


What is the French  card game Paquet Voleur called in English? In Quebec, Canada, we have a card game called Paquet Voleur. This roughly translates to pile thief. Basically, each player has cards in his hand and there are cards on the table. The goal is to make pairs of cards with one card from your hand and one card on the table. You then put that pair, face up, in your "pile". The twist is that people can make pairs with the top card on your pile and take your whole pile.

Does this game solely exist in Quebec? I'm trying to find the English name for it if not.


How is game feel and strategy different between the 1st and 3rd edition scoring rules? I've used the RGG 1st edition scoring rules because I was unaware until recently that there are 3 different scoring systems for Carcassonne. Without having tried the (now most common) 3rd edition scoring rules, it is obvious that there is a decreased emphasis on gearing the whole game towards winning a mega farm at the end. But I'm guessing there are other less obvious ramifications I haven't thought of.

I'd like to hear a more detailed answer to this question from those who have used both 1st and 3rd edition, both with respect to the basic set and with respect to any expansions that have been heavily impacted:

How is game feel and strategy different between the 1st and 3rd edition scoring rules?

I prefer the new rules for the simple reason that farmer scoring always used to be a huge headache.  Doing it pasture by pasture, with the ability to simply empty the pasture of farmers once it's been scored, seems like a great timesaver.  It also feels good that pasture rules have fallen pretty much exactly in line with city-scoring rules.

When I found about the rule change, I was a bit miffed about the new city scoring.  It seemed excessively cheap to be able to make a size-2 city and score 4 for it without any meeple investment.  The added consistency is welcome, though.  It's annoying when teaching any game to new players to have to say "the rule is this... except in this situation, when it's this".  So this change is probably a score draw at worst.

How do the changes alter things strategically?  Well, now that small cities are twice as attractive an option, you're going to get a lot more of them.  More cities equals more opportunities for farmers to make big scores.  That being the case, it's probably good that the farmer rules have been simplified; no one wants a game that makes their head hurt.  Well, most people don't.  (A lot of my friends love Ricochet Robots.)

Simplified-rules Carcassonne retains the excellent central dynamic of the game - between scoring points on the board throughout the game, or building up a farmer presence that will allow for a big score at the end.  Novice players generally don't really get farmers, and I've often found them disappointed when they get crushed in the final tallying-up of a game they thought they were holding their own in.  By keeping farmer rules simple enough that they have a chance of understanding them during their first game, everyone is more likely to be happy.  Farmers may still be the weapon of choice for the Carcassonne expert, but explaining how exactly you won with them no longer feels so dirty!


Rummikub Joker Question So let’s say I have a blue 11, joker and blue 13. Can I use that set of 3, tag it to the end of a blue 10, 9 & 8 thats already on the table and use the blue 13 to a different set? So I’m not replacing the joker but I’m using the set of 3 it’s apart of.

Yes, you can combine sets into new sets. As long as you follow the rules. That is the fun part of the game.

From Wikipedia:

  Joker substitution:
  A set containing a joker can have tiles added to it, be split apart or have tiles removed from it. The joker can be moved or replaced in any possible way as long as you maintain a set of at least three tiles.