How do you resolve Polarity Stabilizer when Bifurcation Conduit has triggered? Bifurcation Conduit states:

If you have two or more opponents remaining, choose an additional
opponent.  For the rest of the turn each part of your machine affects
both chosen opponents.  Then remove this card from the game.

Polarity Stabilizer states:

Take the top three cards from the scrap pile.
Put two into your hand and one into your opponent's hand.

Assume I am playing with at least two other players and that Bifurcation Conduit has run before Polarity Stabilizer.  How do I correctly resolve this card interaction?

The game currently has me in a situation to draw three cards, put two into my hand, and one into each opponents hand.

I don't think a definitive answer exists from the designer or publisher, but here is my informed opinion.

The first interpretation treats Polarity Stabilizer as you would any other contraption that affects your opponents. You would take the top 3 cards from the scrap pile, put 2 in your hand, then the remaining card to the first opponent. Then you would repeat this process for each remaining opponent (top 3, keep 2, 1 to opponent). This is obviously how you would play Radiometric Disruptor (Opponent scraps a card from their hand). And is probably the way you would play a card like  Entropic Processor (if you have the cards to put cards from your hand into each opponents hand)

The other possible interpretation is that you take the top 3 cards from the scrap pile, put 2 in your hand, and choose an opponent to receive the remaining card. This interpretation hinges on the giving the card to your opponent part, not being considered a way to affect your opponent and the rules example :

  For example, Entropic Processor states, "Put one card from your hand into your opponents hand and draw two parts from his parts pile." ... On the other hand, if you put one card from your hand into your opponent's hand and he doesn't have two cards in his parts pile, the effect takes place as much as possible. If your opponent has one card in his parts pile you get it.

I am personally leaning toward the latter interpretation.


Dummy knows more than declarer This week I was playing bridge, specifically as dummy in a no-trump contract. With two tricks to go, the lead was in dummy, and my partner said "Play either, they're both losers." Actually she had miscounted, so that one lead would win a trick, and the other would lose both.  Law 43 says 'Dummy may not participate in the play, nor may he communicate anything about the play to declarer', so the obvious course of saying "actually, it makes a difference; which do you want?" is specifically forbidden. The same Law says 'dummy should not initiate a call for the Director', but I might have stretched a point and asked the director to choose one of the two at random, had I not been acting as director myself that afternoon.

Does anyone know which card I should have played? Laws or EBU rulings preferred: rulings by other bodies such as ACBL useful as supporting evidence.

From Law 70.B:

B. Concession Defined

Any statement to the effect that a contestant will
lose a specific number of tricks is a concession
of those tricks; a claim of some number of tricks
is a concession of the remainder, if any. A player
concedes all the remaining tricks when he abandons
his hand.

Declarer's statement states that regardless of the play, he will lose both tricks. This meets the definition of a concession. Your opponents should have accepted the concession and ended the hand without further play.
As far as what the dummy should do, the best option would be to ask "is that a concession?" as it provides no additional information. Regardless of what you do at this point, the hand should be over.


magic: the gathering enchantment problem If I have an enchantment creature with an aura attached to it, and I bestow the enchantment creature on another creature, does the aura go with it or go to the graveyard?
Can an enchantment creature be enchanted by another enchantment creature?

Bestow is a choice that you make while casting a spell. If you choose to cast it with the Bestow cost, it is an Aura spell instead of a Creature spell. This is a choice that you can only make while casting the spell. If the card is already on the battlefield, you can't turn it into an Aura with the Bestow ability.

You can enchant an Enchantment Creature with an Aura that has Enchant Creature, including an Aura that is a bestowed Creature Enchantment card. An Enchantment Creature is just both an Enchantment and a Creature, so it can be affected by things that affect Enchantments, and by things that affect Creatures, including Auras with Enchant Creature. Adding the Enchantment type to a Creature doesn't otherwise do anything special.


Can you get actions in another players turn with Hidden Ninja and Chronomage? The card text of "Hidden Ninja" says:

  Special: Before a base scores, play a minion there.

Chronomage says:

  You may play an extra action this turn.

Do I have the possiblity to play an arbitrary action after that?

In the "Void Where Prohibited" section of the rules it says "If you get to play extra minions or actions while a base is being scored, you must play those extra cards immediately or not at all" which means that you DO get to play the extra card from the Chronomage, but only if you play it immediately.  You can't wait to see if other cards get played first.

While it may seem weird to be able to play actions during other people's turns, this ruling has been confirmed by an AEG rep here.


Why does Dryad of the Ilysian Grove grant all basic land types even if it loses all abilities? I got my Dryad of the Ilysian Grove turned into a fish on an Arena draft. It's supposed to "lose all abilities", but I could see that the Dryad was still allowing me to get mana from any color. Isn't that considered a static ability? Same question for the "ability" that allows me to play an additional land.

Dryad of the Ilysian Grove applies a type changing effect to all of your lands at layer 4, which takes effect before the Ichthyomorphosis removes the abilities of the Dryad at layer 6.  The ability to play an additional land would go away due to Dryad losing it's abilities and the additional land rule only taking effect after the layers are applied.

The Layer System is one of the most convoluted parts of MTG and can seem confusing at times.

Layers are one of the more difficult parts of the Comprehensive Rules to learn (613). They are often a bane to both players and beginning judges, but why do we have them? What do they do?
Magic is a very complex game, with literally thousands of cards that have continuous effects. When these continuous effects start to pile up, we need to know how they interact. The rules for layers give us a structure to make sure that when the same three cards end up in play at a tournament in Japan, the result is the same as when it happens in Italy, the U.S., and Brazil.

The rules for applying continuous effects is described in section 613 of the comprehensive rules.

613.1. The values of an object’s characteristics are determined by starting with the actual object. For a card, that means the values of the characteristics printed on that card. For a token or a copy of a spell or card, that means the values of the characteristics defined by the effect that created it. Then all applicable continuous effects are applied in a series of layers in the following order.

The ability

Lands you control are every basic land type in addition to their other types.

is a type-changing effect.

Any effect which would add, change or remove types, subtypes or supertypes from the object you’re evaluating. These should be easy to spot, but they’re often thrown in as part of a larger ability.

This applies at Layer 4, whereas ability adding or removing effects applies at Layer 6.

Any effect which would add or remove abilities to an object you’re evaluating.

Because of how layers work, the type changing ability of the Dryad applies before the Dryad loses his abilities.

If a continuous effect (i.e. Dryad's land changing effect) has started applying in an earlier layer, it will continue to apply in later layers even if the ability that created that effect has been removed.

This means that your lands are still every basic land type, even though the Dryad doesn't have that ability anymore.

The ability

You may play an additional land on each of your turns.

is a modification of the game rules; specifically 305.2.

305.2. A player can normally play one land during their turn; however, continuous effects may increase this number.

This ability is applied after the regular layers are applied.  Since this is after the ability-removing effect, the ability disappears and doesn't do anything.  From the MTG Comprehensive Rules

613.10. Some continuous effects affect game rules rather than objects. For example, effects may modify a player’s maximum hand size, or say that a creature must attack this turn if able. These effects are applied after all other continuous effects have been applied.  Continuous effects that affect the costs of spells or abilities are applied according to the order specified in rule 601.2f. All other such effects are applied in timestamp order. See also the rules for timestamp order and dependency (rules 613.6 and 613.7)

The Ichthyomorphosis effect from Layer 6 is applied before the effect that modifies game rules to allow you to play an additional land on your turn.  This ability disappears and thus doesn't allow you to play an additional land.
So, ultimately, you have the following application of effects in your game.

613.1d Layer 4: Type-changing effects are applied. These include effects that change an object’s card type, subtype, and/or supertype.

All lands you control gain each of the subtypes: "Plains", "Island", "Forest", "Swamp", "Mountain" (from Dryad of the Ilysian Grove) and by extension of rule 305.6 gain the ability to tap for any color of mana (but not colorless, as "Wastes" is not a basic land type)
Dryad of the Ilysian Grove is a Fish and loses all other subtypes (from Ichthyomorphosis)

613.1e Layer 5: Color-changing effects are applied.

Dryad of the Ilysian Grove is Blue and loses all other colors (from Ichthyomorphosis)

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

Dryad of the Ilysian Grove loses all other abilities (from Ichthyomorphosis), note that this does not effect the sub-type changing effect from Layer 4 but does affect the additional land rule that would be applied after Layer 7

613.3b Layer 7b: Effects that set power and/or toughness to a specific number or value are applied.Effects that refer to the base power and/or toughness of a creature apply in this layer.

Dryad of the Ilysian Grove has it's P/T set to 0/1 (from Ichthyomorphosis)

After Layer 7

Normally, the additional land rule would effect the game here, but as it was removed in Layer 6, it does not have any effect.  You cannot play an additional land each turn.


Phantom Province Houserule The gaming group that introduced me to Dominion plays with a houserule known as Phantom Provinces, explained as such:

  After the normal condition for ending the game is reached (including running out of provinces), the game continues until all players have had an equal number of turns instead of ending immediately.  During this time, there are an effectively infinite number of provinces to buy (even if the pile ran out as said condition).

This is designed to counter a perceived advantage with going first and disadvantage with going last.  Is there statistical evidence for or against the validity of this rule?  Is this rule in popular use?

There is certainty a first-player advantage in Dominion. However, that particular house rule gives a possibly even more significant second-player advantage. The reason for this is that the first player can never safely end the game. He has very little control over how the game ends. The best he can do is to build up a significant lead, then end the game and hope. Meanwhile, the second player (assuming a 2 player game) can end the game exactly when he needs to in order to win.

There is a lot of discussion about this exact rule here: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=9791.0.

And here is a well-written article explaining the reasons behind the first-player advantage:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=1467.0

There are definitely statistics to support this advantage. http://councilroom.com/ contains statistics from thousands of online Dominion games with top players. You can pick almost any good player at random and see that their win percentage as first player is much higher than their win percentage as second player. It appears that the search functionality on councilroom is down at the moment, but here is a link to statistics gathered from there: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=54.msg723#msg723. Finally, there is a lot of discussion on the statistics of first-player advantage here: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=946.0.

This advantage was designed to be countered by playing multiple games, and having the winner go last in the next game, which is actually written in the original instruction book.


Is it possible to have the same planeswalker from different editions in a Commander deck? Is it possible to have the same card but from two different editions in Commander?
For example, the planeswalker Jace Beleren.

No, this is not possible. The rules clearly state

  903.5b Other than basic lands, each card in a Commander deck must have a different English name.

Since there are different Jace planeswalkers, you can include multiple of them, but you can only have one Jace Beleren.


Can Enchantment Creature play its enchanted ability? When I play Nylea's Emissary and decide to not pay its Bestow cost, does that mean that it is a 6/6 Enchantment Creature with Trample? Does the enchanted creature spell only work if I pay the Bestow cost to enchant another creature?

Close, but not quite. Bestow is an alternative way of casting the card, once you choose to cast it not for its Bestow cost it is a regular 3/3 Enchantment Creature with Trample (It isn't enchanting itself so it doesn't get +3/+3 from its ability). There is no way to attach it to a creature once you have cast it as a Creature.

  702.102. Bestow

  702.102a Bestow represents two static abilities, one that functions while the card with bestow is on the stack and another that functions both while it’s on the stack and while it’s on the battlefield. “Bestow [cost]” means “You may cast this card by paying [cost] rather than its mana cost.” and “If you chose to pay this spell’s bestow cost, it becomes an Aura enchantment and gains enchant creature. These effects last until one of two things happens: this spell has an illegal target as it resolves or the permanent this spell becomes, becomes unattached.” Paying a card’s bestow cost follows the rules for paying alternative costs in rules 601.2b and 601.2e–g.

  702.102b If a spell’s controller chooses to pay its bestow cost, that player chooses a legal target for that Aura spell as defined by its enchant creature ability and rule 601.2c. See also rule 303.4.

  702.102c A spell’s controller can’t choose to pay its bestow cost unless that player can choose a legal target for that spell after it becomes an Aura spell.

  702.102d As an Aura spell with bestow begins resolving, if its target is illegal, the effect making it an Aura spell ends. It continues resolving as a creature spell and will be put onto the battlefield under the control of the spell’s controller. This is an exception to rule 608.3a.

  702.102e If an Aura with bestow is attached to an illegal object or player, it becomes unattached. This is an exception to rule 704.5n.


Do you have to have the destination card in hand to claim the destination? Do you have to have the destination card in your hand to claim that specific route? Or can you claim it without having the destination card?

You can claim any unoccupied route between any two locations (that does not require passing through a third location) at any time. You do not require a destination ticket showing either location, and it doesn't have to be connected to any of your other routes. You only need:

Sufficient trains to cover the route.
Sufficient cards to pay for it.
You don't already control the other route between the same locations.
No other player controls the other route between the same locations in [2-3 players only].*

* Note that the number of players that restrict the use of additional routes varies between versions of Ticket to Ride. For example, extra routes are only blocked in 2-player games of Ticket to Ride: New York and Switzerland.


What zone is a spell or ability in when it is resolving? When I cast a spell or activate an ability, or a triggered ability triggers, it goes on the stack, and then some time later, it resolves. Is it still on the stack while it is resolving? If not, is it some other zone or somewhere else entirely? If it's a spell, when does it go to the graveyard?

A spell or ability stays on the stack starting from when you started casting or activating it until it fails to resolve, it has finished resolving, or it instructs you to move it to a different zone.

Rule 601 covers the step for casting a spell, and the very first step (601.2a) says

  The player announces that he or she is casting the spell. That card (or that copy of a card) moves from where it is to the stack. It becomes the topmost object on the stack. It has all the characteristics of the card (or the copy of a card) associated with it, and that player becomes its controller. The spell remains on the stack until it's countered, it resolves, or an effect moves it elsewhere.

There are similar steps for Activating an Activated Ability and Handling a Triggered Ability. The process of dealing with the stack continues with rule 608.1, which says

  Each time all players pass in succession, the spell or ability on top of the stack resolves. (See rule 609, "Effects.")

Note that there is no instruction for the spell or ability to leave the stack when it starts resolving. Then the relevant parts of the instructions for resolving the ability say

  608.2. If the object that's resolving is an instant spell, a sorcery spell, or an ability, its resolution may involve several steps. The steps described in rules 608.2a and 608.2b are followed first. The steps described in rules 608.2c–j are then followed as appropriate, in no specific order. The step described in rule 608.2k is followed last.

  608.2a If a triggered ability has an intervening "if" clause, it checks whether the clause's condition is true. If it isn't, the ability is removed from the stack and does nothing. Otherwise, it continues to resolve. See rule 603.4.
  608.2b If the spell or ability specifies targets, it checks whether the targets are still legal. [...] The spell or ability is countered if all its targets, for every instance of the word "target," are now illegal. If the spell or ability is not countered, it will resolve normally.
  608.2j If an instant spell, sorcery spell, or ability that can legally resolve leaves the stack once it starts to resolve, it will continue to resolve fully.
  608.2k As the final part of an instant or sorcery spell's resolution, the spell is put into its owner's graveyard. As the final part of an ability's resolution, the ability is removed from the stack and ceases to exist.

For reference regarding rule 608.2b quoted above, rule 701.5a describes what "counter" means, and says

  To counter a spell or ability means to cancel it, removing it from the stack. It doesn’t resolve and none of its effects occur. A countered spell is put into its owner’s graveyard.

As you can see, every instance of a rule instructing that a spell or ability be removed from the stack either comes when it is done resolving or is accompanied by an instruction that it does not resolve.

In all cases, abilities that are removed from the stack simply cease to exist, and spells that are removed from the stack go to the graveyard.


What is the most life you can have at the end of your first turn with only three cards? You start this game with 3 cards of your choice in hand.
Your opponent starts with 0 cards in their hand.
Both libraries do not contain any other useful cards.

What is the highest life total you can end your turn at?

Assume you start at 20 life points. Beyond that, the rules can follow any of the official two-player formats by Wizard of the Coast.

Extra Challenge: If you want a personal challenge (although this is not what I am looking for in the answers to this question), try to find the 4-card infinite-life combo that made me restrict the puzzle to 3 cards only.

With just 2 cards, you can be at arbitrarily many life points.
The 2-card combo is Black Lotus and Game of Chaos. As long as both you and your opponent keep playing, the stakes increase indefinitely, and you can end the game whenever you win a flip.
Assuming both you and your opponent keep playing exactly until someone gets to zero life or below during Game of Chaos' resolution, you can go to 103 life with the 2 card combo, or 109 with 3 cards.
If you win (+1), lose (-2), lose (-4), win (+8), lose (-16), win (+32), win (+64), then you (and your opponent) will be at

21 (19),
19 (21),
15 (25),
23 (17),
7 (33),
39 (1),
103 (-63) life.

At the start of the game, reveal Providence for another 6 life - this doesn't change the sequence of coinflips because your opponent would still fall to 1 life at the same point of the sequence.


If I try to kill a face down creature, can my opponent save it by flipping it? I played a Lightning Bolt during my turn (3 damage to target creature or player) to kill a face down creature. Then, my opponent said he was going to morph the creature which was a 0/5 defender with flying (Monastery Flock).

Can my opponent morph a dead creature, or does morphing the creature save it because it is a 0/5 and Lightning Bolt only deals 3 damage?

Yes morphing will save it because your opponent will get a chance to respond after you cast your spell and there is a ruling related to morphing the card that would apply here.

  Any time you have priority, you may turn the face-down creature face up by revealing what its morph cost is and paying that cost. This is a special action. It doesn’t use the stack and can’t be responded to. Only a face-down permanent can be turned face up this way; a face-down spell cannot.

So this would allow him to morph it and turn it into a 0/5 creature which would save it.


Do you get to draw a card if you rotate a tile? In Eruption, one gets to draw new tiles by connecting lava flows to cities. If there is already a tile connected to a city, and it is rotated using a Aftershock card, and the lava is still connected to the city in the same way, can one draw new cards?

No, new draws can only be made if a new location is in contact with the lava.

Check the rules on page 6: (emphasis mine)

  If this tile is rotated as shown, only one
  Action Card is drawn because there is
  only one lava flow in contact with a new
  location in the village

Also, this was answered on BoardgameGeek by the Designer Chris James


Are ships unable to heal between battles when multiple parties are present in the same hex? The rules say ships heal

  at the end of the combat phase

So, since the combat phase entails all battles, does this mean a battle between players 1 and 2 on a given hex that also contains player 3's ships does not end with healing the winner of that battle before having them engage against player 3? (In essence, they are not allowed to heal until all fighting is done for that entire combat phase.) Such a ruling would be consistent with the rule requiring the most recently arrived players to battle first, as this prevents people from exploiting an upcoming battle by simply drifting in to collect the damaged remaining survivor.

You are correct. Ships are not repairing in between battles between players on a single hex.
Repairing ships is done at the end of the entire combat phase along with drawing reputation tiles and placing influence disks. (page 21 of the rules).


Meaning of redouble in Goren system? Here is the situation. Playing best of minors (with four diamonds and 14 points with no five card suit) I opened one diamond. Opponent on my left Doubled. My partner Redoubled. Her partner passed and I passed…not comprehending what she was telling me or asking. As it turned out she just thought it was the right thing to do having four diamonds and a minimal supporting hand. We made two diamonds, and scored it accordingly, but left all of us still wondering what the Redoubled meant.

What could it have meant, or what should it have meant under the Goren system of bidding? Was redoubling the right thing for partner to do with a minimum supporitng hand?

Playing a basic Goren system the Redouble (of a Take-Out Double of an opening 1 of a suit bid) shows a hand of 10+ points. It tends to show a balanced hand as it suggests that Opener Double the escape by 4th hand if it is into a good 5-card  suit (or 4-card suit at the two level) in his hand, otherwise pass. It also tends to deny good support in Opener's suit for the same reason, as with a good fit Opener's side may find more profit in a Game contract than in penalizing the opponents.

The more strength there is in Redoubler's hand the more likely that it is short in Opener's suit, again because the likely profit in a penalty double increases from the potential mis-fit.

With sound support for Opener's suit the modern tendency is to make a pre-emptive raise: to the 2-level with 4-6 HCP and good 3-card support and the three level with 7-9 HCP and either a side-singleton or 4-card support and a doubleton.

For the situation you described Fourth hand should have taken out the redouble: You scored a nice profit considering the opponents can probably make 8 or 9 tricks in a major themselves.


Are you able to take control of another player's Commander? Recently, I was told by someone in my playgroup that you cannot take control of a player's commander at any point. If an effect would cause you to control another player's commander, either the effect fizzles or the commander goes to the command zone, I forget which he said.

The thing is, I searched mtgcommander.net, and another website that pointed to mtgcommander.net as the source of the official rules of EDH, and I can't find that particular rule anywhere.

Can someone please clarify? At any time are you allowed to control another player's commander?

It would seem that this question is answered indirectly here and here, but I wanted a more definitive answer to the question.

Yes, you can take control of someone else's commander. The rule about returning the commander to the Command Zone reads (emphasis mine):

  903.9. If a commander would be exiled from anywhere or put into its owner’s hand, graveyard, or library from anywhere, its owner may put it into the command zone instead. This replacement effect may apply more than once to the same event. This is an exception to rule 614.5.

Since stealing a creature with, say, Threads of Disloyalty or Act of Aggression doesn't put it into any of the zones described in the rule quoted above (in fact, as ikegami pointed out, it doesn't change the object's zone at all), then the rule doesn't apply.

Also, the rule about commander damage reads (emphasis mine):

  704.5u In a Commander game, a player that’s been dealt 21 or more combat damage by the same commander over the course of the game loses the game. See rule 903, “Commander.”

The clearly says that the damage must be dealt by the same commander, not necessarily yours, so yes, you win the game if you deal 21 damage with a stolen commander.

And to clarify something, mtgcommander.net is the source of what is commonly known as "the French list" for EDH, which is mainly a different banlist, specifically for 1 vs 1 play. As far as I'm aware, the actual rules are the same for Wizards and mtgcommander.net, though I'm not 100% sure about that.


Does Hanabi allow empty clues? I've been playing Hanabi for a while now with a few groups of people.

Recently, we realized that there was a considerable discrepancy in how some people understood the rules. Specifically, one person gave a clue saying "None of your cards are red".

We turned to the rule book, but even then couldn't find a definitive answer. The rules specify that if you give a clue, you have to give a color or a number, and you must point to every card that matches this information in the player's hand. For example, you can't say "red" and point to only one of their red cards.

There doesn't seem to be anything allowing or disallowing giving a clue that matches none of the cards.

Some of our players were absolutely fine with that (according to them, if nothing says you can't, it means that you can)

Some of our players were against it (you are not cluing cards, therefore the clue is invalid), and some even thought it was insanely powerful for advanced plays because your available alphabet for communication becomes publicly known and much larger.

Are there any other editions than mine where the rulebook actually specifies if this is allowed or not? If not, are there any other sources that could answer this question? (ex: interview with creators, official community consensus, etc)

This depends on which edition you are playing.

There are different editions published by different people, and the R & R Games rulebook answers this clearly:

  Important: The player must clearly point to the cards which he is giving information about. (Thus saying "You have zero of something" is not allowed as you cannot point to anything.)

However, this rule did not exist in the original publishing, and the designer of the game actually specifically said it was allowed.

  As per the heading really - when giving info can you tell someone they have zero of a colour or value?

    The official answer by Antoine is "yes" and we also included this in our rules.

It seems that one of the reasons to disallow this is that with that clue as an option, it is possible to come up with a fool-proof convention where each different clue you can give has a known meaning... basically you can encode information into the clues.


How do cards like Brainstorm affect the probability of drawing an out? I posted this on a Magic forum and got zero responses.

I'm playing a High Tide combo deck. Let's say I am Brainstorming with 50 cards in my deck, 23 of which are outs that make me win. I think the calculation for this is: (27/50)*(26/49)*(25/48), so my failure rate is just about 15%.

However, drawing Ponder, Brainstorm, or Preordain off of my first Brainstorm might enable me to dig for an out. I only have enough mana to cast one more cantrip and one out, I have 3 Brainstorms, 4 Ponders, and 3 Preordains left in my deck. I came up with this: ((27/50)*(26/49)*(25/48))*((47/50*46/49*45/48)). (I think) This would be my percent chance of not hitting one of my 23 outs and not hitting a brainstorm, around 12.3%.

Of course just drawing Brainstorm isn't good enough, I need the third card from the top of my deck to be one of my 23 outs (the top 2 are cards I replaced from brainstorm). It is here that I'm stuck, I don't know how to figure that out, or how to figure it out for Preordain or Ponder. It's been a while since I've taken stats, I don't even know if that 12.3 is correct.

Thanks!

The final answer will be obtained using

P(winner) = P(winner on brain storm) + ( P(cantrip but no winners on brainstorm) * P(winner on cantrip) )

There 23 wins to be found in 50, so there are 50-23 = 27 non-win to be found in 50.

P(no winners on brain storm) = (27/50)(26/49)(25/48) = 15%

P(winner on brain storm) = 1 - P(no winners on brain storm) = 1 - 15% = 85%

Sometimes, we'll draw both a win and cantrip using brainstorm.

There are 23 wins and 10 cantrips = 33 wins and cantrips to be found in 50, so there are 50-33 = 17 that are neither to be found in 50.

P(neither winners nor cantrips on brainstorm) = (17/50)(16/49)(15/48) = 3.5%

P(winner and/or cantrip on brainstorm) = 1 - P(neither winners nor cantrips on brainstorm) = 1 - 3.5% = 96.5%

P(cantrip but no winners on brainstorm) = P(winner and/or cantrip on brainstorm) - P(winner on brainstorm) = 96.5% - 85% = 11.5%

We cast the cantrip when none of the 23 winners were in the first 3. That means we're looking at the first of 47 cards. There are 23 wins to be found in 47.

[Note: I forgot to factor in the the possibility to shuffle with Ponder.]

P(winner on cantrip) = 23/47 = 49%

P(winner)
= P(winner on brain storm) + ( P(cantrip but no winners on brainstorm) * P(winner on cantrip) )
= 85% + ( 11.5% * 49% )
= 91%
(90.68%, to be more precise)

[Experimentation shows that factoring in the the possibility to shuffle with Ponder raises the odds to around 93%.]

Let's verify by experiment.

#!/usr/bin/perl

use strict;
use warnings;

use List::Util qw( shuffle );

my @deck = ( ('W') x 23, ('C') x 10, ('O') x (50-23-10) );

my $trials = 10_000;
my $wins = 0;

for (1..$trials) {
   @deck = shuffle(@deck);

   ++$wins
      if $deck[0] eq 'W'
      || $deck[1] eq 'W'
      || $deck[2] eq 'W'
      || $deck[3] eq 'W' && ($deck[0] eq 'C' || $deck[1] eq 'C' || $deck[2] eq 'C');
}

printf("%.0f%%\n", $wins/$trials*100);

$ for i in 1 2 3 ; do p ; done
91%
91%
90%


Creature spells vs. ability to convert a permanent into a creature I just wanted some clarification here, but is an ability to convert into a creature (from a land or an artifact) regarded the same as a casting "creature spell" (as an instant I guess) in terms of "color creature spells you cast cost 1 less to cast"?

Does that makes sense?

If I wanted to convert a land into a 3/3 creature would an artifact with this ability allow me cast that conversion (as a creature spell) for less mana?

No, you said it yourself: it's an ability, which is different from a spell. If you get a discount on creature spells, it won't affect abilities.

Spells

111.1. A spell is a card on the stack. As the first step of being cast (see rule 601, "Casting Spells"), the card becomes a spell and is moved to the top of the stack from the zone it was in, which is usually its owner's hand. (See rule 405, "Stack.")

Abilities

112.1a An ability can be a characteristic an object has that lets it affect the game. An object's abilities are defined by its rules text or by the effect that created it. Abilities can also be granted to objects by rules or effects. (Effects that grant abilities usually use the words "has," "have," "gains," or "gain.") Abilities generate effects. (See rule 609, "Effects.")
...
112.1c An ability can be an activated or triggered ability on the stack. This kind of ability is an object. (See section 6, "Spells, Abilities, and Effects.")

Activating Activated Abilities

602.1. Activated abilities have a cost and an effect. They are written as "[Cost]: [Effect.] [Activation instructions (if any).]"


Rivals for Catan card game clarification Some cards (Abbey for example) have a (1x) next to the name.  What does this mean?

The rules on page 7 has this note:

  Please note: Some cards are marked "1x."  This means that you may only have one of these cards in your principality.


In multiplayer, can a player concede abusively? Arnold, Beth, and Chuck are playing a multiplayer game (e.g. Commander or Free-for-All).

Arnold has Maralen of the Mornsong:

  Players can't draw cards. At the beginning of each player's draw step, that player loses 3 life, searches his or her library for a card, puts it into his or her hand, then shuffles his or her library.

Beth has Dictate of Kruphix:

  At the beginning of each player's draw step, that player draws an additional card.

Currently, it's Chuck's turn. He begins his draw step, and chooses that Dictate of Kruphix's ability go on the stack, and Maralen's ability go on top of that. Because Maralen is on the board, Dictate's ability is essentially useless (Maralen prevents players from drawing cards).

Using Maralen's ability, Chuck tutors up a card. Suppose Arnold really hates Beth. After Maralen's ability resolves, Arnold concedes. Because Arnold has conceded, Maralen is no longer on the field.

  800.4a When a player leaves the game, all objects (see rule 109) owned by that player leave the game and any effects which give that player
  control of any objects or players end. Then, if that player controlled
  any objects on the stack not represented by cards, those objects cease
  to exist. Then, if there are any objects still controlled by that
  player, those objects are exiled. This is not a state-based action. It
  happens as soon as the player leaves the game. If the player who left
  the game had priority at the time he or she left, priority passes to
  the next player in turn order who’s still in the game.

Chuck now proceeds to draw 2 cards (1 from the draw phase and 1 from Dictate of Kruphix).

Obviously, this isn't an ethical thing for Arnold to do. But is it within the rules of the game? Or am I mistaken? Would something else happen instead?

A separate question: would this result in Arnold being banned from future tournaments?

The rules say you can concede whenever you want to:

  104.3a A player can concede the game at any time. A player who concedes leaves the game immediately. He or she loses the game.

This is kind of unavoidable, because people have to be able to pick up their cards and leave. And it's certainly possible to use this spitefully, whether via your scenario or another. (It doesn't even have to be something fancy - just dropping out a turn before your inevitable death can swing things.)

Many people adopt house rules in order to curtail that sort of behavior. It's hard to define clearly what is and isn't acceptable, especially since you can be plenty spiteful even without ever conceding, but if you play with people you get along well enough with, you may be able to get away with "don't be a jerk". More broadly, if you do things that make you miserable to play with, you might quickly find yourself not having anyone to play with.

As for tournaments, well, there aren't really serious multiplayer tournaments, and so the Magic Tournament Rules don't have anything explicit about multiplayer. There is potentially commander at Friday Night Magic, and if they're abiding by the rules, they'll have to allow you to concede at any time. But while I don't think the store could actually kick someone out for making a spiteful concession, the same about being pleasant to play with probably applies there: it's a local store, with many of the same people coming repeatedly.


What Happens If The Sorcerers Run Out of Tokens? In a game of Small World we were playing recently, we were facing Seafaring Sorcerers in a 5-player game, and they managed to expand very well, to the point where they were rapidly converting over most of the map. At one point, the player ran out of tokens to play.

What Happens in This Case?

Does their expansion halt completely? And if a sorcerer is killed, can they then re-use that token for conversion?

The rules address that specific case in the section on picking a race (page 3)

  If, on the other hand, a Special Power (or Race power) lets you take
  additional Race tokens from the storage tray during the course of the
  game, you are still limited by the total number of tokens physically
  available. So a player with 18 Sorcerer tokens on the board won't be
  able to use his Sorcerer power again until some of his tokens become
  available.


Can my commander ever not be my commander? Once and for all: Is there anything that can possibly be done to my commander that would cause it to cease being my commander?

All of these questions ask the same thing, but aren't general enough to be marked as a duplicate.

If a commander becomes a colorless forest, is it still a commander?

Is a commander still a commander if it gets turned into a forest?

Is your commander still a "commander" if it gets turned face down?

Is a commander still a commander if it gets turned face down?

No, 'commander-ness' is an intrinsic property of the card that nothing can take away.

903.3. Each deck has a legendary creature card designated as its commander. This designation is not a characteristic of the object represented by the card; rather, it is an attribute of the card itself. The card retains this designation even when it changes zones.
Example: A commander that’s been turned face down (due to Ixidron’s effect, for example) is still a commander. A commander that’s copying another card (due to Cytoshape’s effect, for example) is still a commander. A permanent that’s copying a commander (such as a Body Double, for example, copying a commander in a player’s graveyard) is not a commander.


Is the target for an ability part of the cost? Can I cast a Manic Vandal if there are no artifacts in play?

Manic Vandal says

  When Manic Vandal enters the battlefield, destroy target artifact.

You can't cast a spell unless it has legal targets.

When a spell resolves, it will be countered if all of its legal targets are gone.

However, your Manic Vandal spell (the thing that you cast to create Manic Vandal the creature) doesn't actually target. Instead, it just summons a creature. Then, after he enters the battlefield, Manic Vandal's ability -- "When Manic Vandal enters the battlefield, destroy target artifact" -- triggers, and you put the effect "Destroy target artifact" on the stack. If there are no valid targets, nothing is destroyed. But you still get to keep the Manic Vandal creature.


Can a trauma card meet the requirements for victory There is a winning condition for the keeper that states that a Mi Go monster must kill an investigator.

If the Mi Go monster did damage to an investigator and then I trigger a Trauma card that kills the investigator based on the damage dealt by the Mi Go, is that still considered as meeting the winning condition?

I don't think it's ever explicitly mentioned, but I'd say no. Thematically it probably makes sense, but from a rules point of view, it seems logical that it would need to be damaged received directly from the Mi Go.


Why is being in the dummy in bridge called "on the board"? It is customary when declarer is in the dummy to say "on the board"?  Where did this terminology come from?

The dummy's hand is typically arranged flat on the table (a flat surface, or "board"), and it appears the terminology comes from this

For example, from the ACBL's glossary:

  BOARD. (1) A duplicate board. (2) The table on which the cards are played. (3) The dummy’s hand, so called because it lies on the table.


Guards! Guards! starting volunteer's effects The board game Guards! Guards! has a system of recruiting volunteers which have various effects on the players who recruit them. These effects range from permanent bonuses to stats (e.g. +1 charm to help recruit volunteers, or +1 magic) to bonus dollars, or immunity from the pox, or a number of others.

at the beginning of the game, each player starts with 3 volunteers.

Do your starting volunteers give you the bonuses printed on the card?

The rules do not seem to clarify anything about this, so I was wondering if anyone here had a convention or house rule, or if a clarification had been released.

From the rules posted on the Z-Man Games website (Page 3):

  Each player begins the games with the following items: ...
  • 5 - Ankh-Morpork Dollars
  • 1 - Lords & Ladies Volunteer Card
  • 1- Man & Beast Volunteer Card
  Players should collect any items/scrolls or attribute
  bonuses marked on the above cards.

This is a slightly older version of the rules released with the original version of the game. In the 2012 revision, it does not explicitly state that you get the attributes. Looking at the rulebook differences, my guess is the publisher wanted to optimize space in the 2012 rulebook and they figured people would just assume they gain the attribute increases.

Based on the original version of the rules, you do get the attribute bonuses for any volunteers you start the game with.


If I use a trainer card that removes damage, can I remove less than that amount of damage? If a trainer card states that it removes 60 points of damage, can you use it to remove 50 points or less of damage?  I have one card that says up to 30 points of damage, so I know I can use it to remove 10, 20, or 30, but this card states 60 and does not use the words "up to".

In Pokémon, there are some core rules. Two of them are relevant here:

"Do as much as you can" -> you can heal less than given amount of damage
"Every card played must have some effect" -> you can't heal zero damage


Why are Bridge's bid meanings public? I'm not a Bridge player, but I've been reading about the game. This part of the rules is surprising to me. From Wikipedia's article on Bridge bidding systems,

  By the rules of the game, the agreed meanings of all calls must be public and known to the opponents. In normal club or home play, the opponents are entitled, at their turn to make a call, to ask the partner of the bidder about the meaning of the call. In high-level tournaments, where screens are used, the procedure is to ask the screen-mate about their calls as well as their partner's calls. In serious online tournaments, the procedure is for the player making the call to self-alert it, but the explanation is visible only to the opponents.

Why would the meaning of a bid be public information? It's unusual and seems to take away part of the preparation that would otherwise have gone into the game. For example, if meanings were secret, then they can be pre-arranged by partners and later used to deceive their opponents. Making it all public seems to detract from the strategic depth of the game. Besides, at that point, why even bother with bidding systems? Let's say the current bid is 1 NT, and I want to know whether my partner is holding the Ace of Clubs. I could just say "I bid 2 Clubs, if you are holding the Ace of Clubs bid 2 Diamonds, otherwise bid 2 Hearts".

What is the advantage to having meanings public? The only advantage I can think of is that there isn't enough scope for strategic play otherwise, but even then this rule seems very artificial.

Note, the agreed meanings of bids must be agreed in advance, they may not be changed on the fly. In serious duplicate play, players have a written description of their agreements available to the opponents.

This changes it from an exercise in cryptography to a problem of card play and deduction. The idea is that a players opponents will have as much knowledge about what his bids and plays mean as his partner does. They are not entitled to know what the player holds or intends, merely what his agreements are.  It is also put that one may make a bid or play not according to the agreements, provided that one's partner is as surprised as ones opponents.

You may not instruct partner during the play what response is wanted for what holding -- this must be pre-arranged, and a system in which 2D showed the Ace of clubs in response to a 2C bid would fail on far too many hands.

Secret agreements provide a too-easy means to cheat, by conveying more information than open agreements allow, particularly by combining with hand-signals, body language, tone of voice, and the like. (those are still used by dishonest players, but less easily.)

It is true that ate the very top levels of play, screens prevent some of this kind of illicit information exchange, but there is a good deal of 'serious' play below the level where screens are normally used, and the standards for bridge play were set long before screens were in common use. And if bidding systems were secret, and subject to change on the fly, there could still be information exchange of a kind which many think would harm the game. Besides, a significant part of the game, especially at high levels, is the attempt to determine from the overall auction what each player holds. it can never be totally accurate, but a good player can get surprisingly close. Allowing secret unexplained bidding systems would destroy this aspect of the game. And allowing this only in top-level bridge  would make that a very different game.

The question says:

  For example, if meanings were secret, then they can be pre-arranged by partners and later used to deceive their opponents.

They may not be secret or used to deceive, but they are indeed prearranged. A high-level pair may spend hundreds or thousands of hours deciding on just what the meaning for each possible bidding sequence should be, and how the various possibility interact to give the best results in play. A pair with superior bidding tools may have a very large advantage over a pair with inferior tools. A sound bidding system allows a pair to reach the best contract more often, to make it harder for their opponents to reach their best contract, and to exchange information which can significantly aid in defense if the opponents win the contract.


Where can I search by card for decks in major tournaments? Where I can search by card for decks from major modern tournaments? By major tournaments, I mean Grand Prixs, StarCityGames Open Series, TCGPlayer Max Point Series, and other large (200+) player tournaments.

For example, I need to be able to find modern decks that use a specific card. I have a Tibalt, the Fiend-Blooded that I would like to find a use for (other than as a bookmark).

magic.tcgplayer.com allows you to search deck lists based on a particular card being used.  Here's the search for Tibalt.  You can also use their Deck search tools to limit by format and place finished in addition to specific cards.

Limiting your search to include decks using Tibalt, in the Modern format, that placed at least 1st through 64th returns zero results, indicating that no successful deck in the entire TCGPlayer database has ever used Tibalt.


Identify a numbers game where you strike out numbers In this game you start out by jotting down numbers 1 through 19 on a squared paper into 9 columns (and skip 10, there are no zeroes).

Then you start striking out numbers that are adjacent (diagonally doesn't count) and are the same numbers or have a sum of ten. Also, the struck out numbers don't count either, for example, if you have 4 5 6, then you can strike out 4 and 6 (their sum is 10).

If you have struck out all the pairs you can find, you write the left over numbers again and look for new pairs. You win if you've struck out all the numbers.

My question is - does this game have an actual name or is it "that numbers game that everyone played in high school"?

Only thing I've been able to find refers to the game as TenPair

http://www.logicgamesonline.com/tenpair/


Do creatures come into play tapped if they come into play at the same time as a card which says "Creatures come into play tapped"? An example situation :

Living Death resolves while there is a Urabrask the Hidden in my graveyard and another creature in my opponent's graveyard. Urabrask says "Creatures your opponents control enter the battlefield tapped."

Will my opponent's creature come into play tapped if it enters the battlefield at the same time as Urabrask?

No, your opponent's creatures will not enter tapped.

The ability "Creatures your opponents control enter the battlefield tapped" creates a replacement effect on creatures entering the battlefield. Rule 614.4 says

  Replacement effects must exist before the appropriate event occurs -- they can't "go back in time" and change something that's already happened.

Since your Urabrask wasn't on the battlefield before your opponent's creature entered, it's ability does not effect that creatures.


Is there a definitive list of Button Men rules? There are many, many Button Men dice rules. I'm trying to find a list of them with easy to understand examples.

I'm not new to the game, but I keep coming across dice I've never heard of (like Rage and Mighty). I would like to find an easy way to look up dice.

I'm sure Buttonweavers has a list somewhere, but I can't find it. I've done some digging through the forums, but it's not as easy to navigate as most that I've used.

The verbiage at beatpeopleup.cheapass.com/game-rules seems to imply that the dice lists on that page are complete.


Spawning from special zombie cards inside buildings In Zombicide, when spawning zombies inside buildings when a player opens a door, what do we do when we draw a "special card"?

By "special card" I mean "additional activation of zombies", "sewer spawn", etc.

For example:

During the player's turn, one of them opens a door.
In one room they draw an "additional activation of runners".

Can the runners be activated in the player's turn? Or do we discard this card and draw another? Or does nothing spawn in that room?

Yes, zombies of that type get an immediate activation. Do not discard that card and draw another, do whatever is on the card. Nothing will spawn in room/zone of the corresponding "special" card. This is covered in the first page of the FAQ

Q: When spawning the Zones of a building I just opened, what happens if I draw an extra activation or manhole card?
A: Always do exactly what the card says no matter when you draw it. If you draw an extra activation card, that Zombie type receives an extra activation immediately. If tou draw a manhole card, spawn Zombies in the manholes normally. in these cases, the building Zone for which the card was originally drawn receives no Zombies.

This is also repeated at the bottom of page 10 of the rule book, just above the so many zombies, so few miniatures sidebar.

There are two special cases: the “extra activation” cards and the “manhole” cards. In both cases, no Zombies appear on the designated Zone.


Do I get the continent troops on every turn I have conquered the continent? If I have conquered the entire continent do I get those bonus continent troops on each turn I play or just one turn after I have conquered it?

You receive bonus troops for a continent each time you begin your turn in control of every district/nation on that continent, for as long as that remains true.  That is, if you lose control of any district on the continent, you will not collect the bonus troops at the start of your next turn.
from Rules of Risk

Continents
In addition, at the beginning of your turn, you will receive armies for each continent you control. (To control a continent, you must occupy all its territories at the start of your turn).


Will infinite loops still force a draw if I have a way to end them? The comprehensive rules of MTG state:

  104.4b If a game that’s not using the limited range of influence option (including a two-player game) somehow enters a “loop” of mandatory actions, repeating a sequence of events with no way to stop, the game is a draw. Loops that contain an optional action don’t result in a draw

So, if I have a Sporemound and a Life and Limb, that creates an infinite combo. A land enters the field, which creates a 1/1 Saproling, which is also a land, which creates a 1/1 Saproling, etc. This cannot end, and according to the rules the game now ends in a draw.

However, I have an unsummon, or destroy enchantment, or some other way to remove one of the cards creating this loop. Does this make the game not end in a draw? Can I allow the loop to continue through a million cycles, then destroy my enchantment to break the loop? Or does the game end anyway?

EDIT:

Thanks for all the answers. So, if I have a way to bounce or destroy one of the pieces of an infinite loop, I can allow the loop to resolve as many times as I want, and the game isn't a draw. However, the rules for shortcuts (719) also say:

  719.4. If a loop contains only mandatory actions, the game is a draw. (See rules 104.4b and 104.4f.)

Does this mean I draw anyway?

I hope you guys don't mind, but I have a few more questions about loops:

When is the game considered a draw, as in how many times does a loop have to resolve to trigger the draw state? If I have an infinite loop that damages a player, but no way to remove a piece of the loop, is the game still a draw?

For example, I have a Sanguine Bond and an Exquisite Blood. It will kill all of my opponents, but it is only mandatory actions and I have no way to stop it. The rules also don't say anything about the game state changing.

Thanks again for all the help.

You have 2 options:

(1) Propose a shortcut where you pass priority on the triggers, allowing Saprolings to be made. If your opponent agrees, you can specify the number of iterations, and then use something like naturalize to destroy one of the enchantments, ending the loop.

(2) You can let the loop proceed indefinitely, resulting in a draw. This is allowed by rule 719.5

  719.5. No player can be forced to perform an action that would end a loop other than actions called for by objects involved in the loop.

To answer your new questions:
Rule 719.4 applies in the situation where no one can interact with the loop, and all actions are mandatory (e.g., you can't set up a mandatory loop with 3x Fiend Hunter because the triggered ability is optional)

The interaction between Sanguine Bond and Exquisite Blood will cause a player to lose the game. This is because state-based actions are responsible for making a person lose when his or her life is 0 or less. State-based actions are checked before any player gets priority and before any triggered abilities are put on the stack, which means that they occur before effects like Sanguine Bond and Exquisite Blood can continue to loop.


Can you take an Immortal Phoenix out of the game? I am a fairly new player and the person I have been playing with has a card called Immortal Phoenix and I was wondering if cards that say "destroy" wouldn't activate the Phoenix's resurrection feature.

'Dies' means 'is put into the graveyard from the battlefield', so any effect that destroys it will end up causing this trigger to happen. The four main ways this card could move from the battlefield to the graveyard is:

Being dealt lethal damage
Having toughness reduced to zero
Effects that say destroy
Sacrificing the creature.

A creature going to the graveyard and removing a creature from the game* are very different things, but there are ways of putting Immortal Phoenix into the graveyard (and keeping it there) and exiling it.

A card like Oblivion Ring can exile it, and some cards like Annihilating Fire can change where it goes. (If it goes into exile instead of the graveyard, it never actually 'died')

If Immortal Phoenix is put into the graveyard from anywhere that's not the battlefield (perhaps by being discarded from Mind Rot), that's also not dying, so it does not return to your hand.

One more complicated way of stopping Immortal Phoenix from going back to a hand is by preventing the creature's ability from happening. You could either counter the ability (such as with Disallow) or by causing the ability to not trigger, such as with Hushbringer

*This is called 'exiling', although there are technically ways to get it back from exile


Are the Bay of Ice and the Shivering Sea areas connected? Since Westeros is an island, the seas should continue around the north. Can ships move around the edge of the top of the map, between the Bay of Ice and the Shivering Sea?

No.

There's no movement outside of the board, and no justification in the rules for these areas to be treated differently. The two sea regions you mention aren't adjacent to each other, nor are they the same region, so ships can't move between them.

As for the lore behind this, the Game of Thrones world is big, and not thoroughly explored. It's likely too dangerous or lengthy to sail around the North pole. The wiki says:

  The maesters also understand that theoretically, a ship should be able to circumnavigate the globe, by continuing to sail west from Westeros until they come around to Yi Ti on the other side, then continue going west until they return to Westeros. They also understand that a ship could sail north over the pole and reach Yi Ti on the other side—provided that there is no landmass or arctic ice in the way. However, as of yet no ship has ever successfully circumnavigated the globe. Ships that have sailed west of Westeros and returned report finding only a vast ocean, and other ships simply never returned. Even the far south of Sothoryos and eastern end of Essos are unknown to men in Westeros. There have been some attempts to navigate north over the pole, but all have ended in failure due to dangerous ice and other unknown dangers.


Does a dashed creature return to my hand at the end of the turn after an opponent takes control of it? If I dash a creature (e.g. Goblin Heelcutter) and my opponent activates the ability of Captivating Vampire on my dashed creature, will the creature still go back to my hand at the end of the end step?

Yes, it will return to your hand.

The dashed creature does not change zones at any time, so it's still the same object as it was when it entered the battlefield with dash. It doesn't matter who controls the creature, or if it's even a creature at all - as long as the object is still the same, dash will "find" it and return it to its owner's hand.

  109.1. An object is an ability on the stack, a card, a copy of a card, a token, a spell, a permanent, or an emblem.

This is in contrast to when the creature is in a different zone when dash resolves, e.g. when it has died during that turn. It also doesn't return if it is on the battlefield but has been in another zone for any length of time, for example when someone Flickers a dashed creature, or if it dies from Dread Slaver. In those cases, your dash creature will be on the battlefield at the end of your turn, but it's a new object that will not be returned to your hand.

  400.7. An object that moves from one zone to another becomes a new object with no memory of, or relation to, its previous existence. [..]


Need help with the Peddler card in Dominion Prosperity I love Dominion Prosperity, and understand all of the cards perfectly except for Peddler.  Can anyone explain it to me?  For some reason I just can't get it. Thanks!

Peddler is a market without the +Buy.

It would have been an unremarkable card if not for its unique price. The standard price is $8, which is the priciest action in the game, but you never really want to buy it at that cost. The below-the-line part reads:

  During your Buy phase, this costs $2 less per Action card you have in
  play, but not less than $0.

This means that for every action you play in your turn, the price of Peddler goes down by $2 in the Buy phase, so if you played two Villages, for example, you can buy a Peddler for $4, which is a much more reasonable price for it.

Of course the more Actions you play in your turn the better it gets, and the more Buys you have the more free Peddlers you can get - if you play four or more actions, each additional buy is a free Peddler! Also note the phrasing Action card you have *in play*
, which means that a duration card from the previous turn (Caravan, Fishing Village, etc.) also counts as a cost reducer. The self-synergy of Peddler is also pretty nice, since the more Peddlers you have, the more you can play per turn thus lowering the price of Peddlers to buy more.

The icing on the cake is that fact that unlike Bridge, the price only goes down during the Buy phase, so you can Remodel a Peddler into a Province no matter how many actions you already played during your turn, since its price is always $8 during the Action phase.

As always, you can read more in this great Dominion Strategy guide.


Does Ranar the Ever-Watchful's last ability trigger if he is exiled? I have bought a commander deck for Kaldheim (Ranar the Ever-Watchful). I'm confused about Ranar's ability:

Whenever a spell or ability you control exiles one or more cards from your hand and/or permanents from the battlefield, create a 1/1 white Spirit creature token with flying.

If I exile Ranar which is the one with the ability? Do I still get that spirit token or do I have to exile another creature?

Yes, Ranar's ability will trigger if he is exiled.
Ranar's ability can trigger when objects leave the battlefield, so it is a "leaves-the-battlefield" ability, which are defined in rule 603.6c:

Leaves-the-battlefield abilities trigger when a permanent moves from the battlefield to another zone, or when a phased-in permanent leaves the game because its owner leaves the game. These are written as, but aren’t limited to, “When [this object] leaves the battlefield, . . .” or “Whenever [something] is put into a graveyard from the battlefield, . . . .” (See also rule 603.10.) An ability that attempts to do something to the card that left the battlefield checks for it only in the first zone that it went to. An ability that triggers when a card is put into a certain zone “from anywhere” is never treated as a leaves-the-battlefield ability, even if an object is put into that zone from the battlefield.

As a result, rule 603.10 applies:

Normally, objects that exist immediately after an event are checked to see if the event matched any trigger conditions, and continuous effects that exist at that time are used to determine what the trigger conditions are and what the objects involved in the event look like. However, some triggered abilities are exceptions to this rule; the game “looks back in time” to determine if those abilities trigger, using the existence of those abilities and the appearance of objects immediately prior to the event. The list of exceptions is as follows:

603.10a Some zone-change triggers look back in time. These are leaves-the-battlefield abilities, abilities that trigger when a card leaves a graveyard, and abilities that trigger when an object that all players can see is put into a hand or library.

When you exile Ranar, the game "looks back in time" to before he was exiled to check what abilities trigger. Since his ability existed at that time, it triggers from that event.


How would these Ticket To Ride variants change the game? In a recent question we securely established that the "Longest Route" bonus in Ticket to Ride is earned by the largest number of train cars used to make the route, not the largest number of stops.

This confused at least one smart user here, who had assumed the opposite to be true.  After all, any fool can build a direct train from New York to Los Angeles, but surely a train that makes a few stops along the way to accumulate passengers would be a much more valuable commodity!

I personally feel as if there could be a strong argument for switching the way that Longest Route works.  After all, you already get lots of points for building the efficient 5- and 6-length routes that are the bread and butter of winning the Longest Route bonus.  Wouldn't there be a more interesting tension in the game if building lots of inefficient, low-scoring routes was what lined you up for the bonus?

I'm going to take this opportunity to suggest another variant, that I brainstormed up a little while ago: Contracts.  Under this variant, any player could spend a move to sign a contract on a route: this is represented by taking one of their trains and placing it over the route, at right-angles to normal train placement.  This train can be later used to build the route in question, but cannot otherwise be picked up from the board.  At the end of the game, any uncompleted contracts score negative points equal to the positive points normally gained for completion of a route of that length.  "Contract" trains do not count as being in the player's supply, for the purposes of determining if the game is about to end.

What implications would adopting these variants have on Ticket to Ride strategy and gameplay?  Are they terrible ideas?

I wouldn't say they're terrible ideas. I REALLY like the first one as it would add another layer of depth to the game. The second I personally would leave out, just because racing to get the train cards you need is part of the fun. Being able to cut other players off too easily could change things. The penalty would need to be pretty hefty, because you could easily rob somebody of 20 points as they try to complete a long route.

There's usually a few routes that end up critical to certain people in the game, and I could see a mechanic of "find out what destinations you opponents are trying to get to and do everything you can to stop them," which could make it a competition to see who has the highest negative score since nobody could complete their destinations. When you have to claim routes normally, you are loosing the privilege and resources to do something that would benefit you, and you need to have the right cards at the right time. Unless you happen to have a lot of cards or have been gathering cards of the same color by chance, you can't block. With contracts you'd be able to stop anyone at any time during your turn at the expense of just a few points if you didn't follow through later.

In the original Ticket to Ride there's a powerful connection of short routes down the center of the country that link almost everything together. You could easily contract as many of these as possible in the beginning, work on your own destinations, then 'complete' your contracts at the end of the game since they're all short colorless routes.

I've found hardcore players have shot down almost many variations I've seen posted, such as drawing 3 cards per turn, having the option to build AND draw in a turn, having 7 cards face up the whole game, etc. See a list of those here. The game is very carefully balanced in the sense of East vs. West, long vs. short routes, and attack vs. defense. This doesn't mean variants are bad, and if you have any revisions or others I'd love to see them. It just means that there is a delicate balance you have to be careful not to destroy if you want the game to retain its original feel.

I haven't found many actual variants to the gameplay, but if you are able to print them and the additional cards there's a TON of fan created maps that give the game a new feel.

and there's always the catapult expansion...


A opening bid of 1Club if followed by 1Diamond A opening bid of 1 Club if followed by 1 Diamond in Bridge shows no majors and 6-7 point, is this correct?

For the time being we would assume you are playing a Green system similar to SAYC.

There are mainly 3 ways of responding to a natural / semi-natural (2+) non-forcing 1C opening:

Up-the-line: You bid your 5-card suits if you have one. Otherwise you simply bid your lowest 4-card suit. Under this method, a 1D opening does NOT deny holding a 4-card Major - you may have zero, one or two 4-card Majors. Say you hold: 963 KJ87 QJ53 A8 , you will usually respond 1D. Opener may either raise, bid his own 4-card Major, rebid Clubs or just bid 1NT. This is very natural and practically does not require extra gadgets.
Walsh: You always bypass any length in Diamond in favour of a Major suit response, unless you hold game-forcing value. Therefore hands like 9 KJ87 QJT753 Q8 are still responded with a 1H, despite you holding much longer Diamond. This has the advantage of letting you find any 4-4 Major fits half a round earlier, but at the cost of bidding space: you are making a higher-level response (1M consumes more bidding space than 1D) which does not contain more information (Under this scheme, 1M response happens more often than 1D) than a lower response.
Transfer Walsh: In order to solve the dilemma between MAFIA (MAjor FIrst Always) and bidding space consumption, Transfer Walsh is designed. You bid 1D to show Hearts, 1H to show Spades and 1S to show Diamond or other minor-oriented hands. This keeps your bidding low while at the same time allowing you to prioritize showing Majors. However, this needs extra agreements with your partner about continuations, and your partnership must be able to cope with interference.

Therefore in response to your question:

Q1: ... shows no [4-card] Major...

A1: Not necessarily. Given your question suggesting 1D denying Major, I assume you are playing Method 2. It usually denies 4-card Major, but only usually, not always. A scenario that you can still hold 4-card Major is that you have game-forcing values and your Diamond is worth mentioning, e.g. x AQxx KQJxxx Qx . You can respond 1D first, and upon opener rebidding 1NT you can reverse into 2H, or if he bids 1S you can make a XYZ or 4SF to further investigate into an ideal game or slam.

Q2: ... and 6-7 points...

A2: No, suit responses are unlimited. Your next call will most likely reveal what strength your hand has. A weak hand will pass, make a preference or rebid his own suit, a stronger hand will move on to game or make forcing bids to find out more about opener's hand.


Does Lich's Mastery let me spend down to negative life with Bolas's Citadel? Could I possibly use Lich's Mastery with Bolas's Citadel? Since I have the condition "you cannot lose the game", theoretically couldn't I go negative with my health by using BC to play cards from my library?

You cannot pay life that you don't have, even if you wouldn't lose the game. So, Lich's Mastery doesn't help you cast cards using Bolas's Citadel, and using them together is probably a bad idea because of the "Whenever you lose life..." trigger on Lich's Mastery.

The most important rule here is rule 119.4:

  If a cost or effect allows a player to pay an amount of life greater than 0, the player may do so only if their life total is greater than or equal to the amount of the payment. If a player pays life, the payment is subtracted from their life total; in other words, the player loses that much life. (Players can always pay 0 life.)


What is the name of this patience style 2 deck card game I was playing a card game online but I don't know the name.

The game is played with two decks.
Approx 1 dealt face up in 10 columns with the rest kept for dealing but only 5 at a time despite 10 columns.
Cards can only be moved to the next card in suit (you build packs from K to Ace), but you can move an entire column of non suited cards on top.
Only Kings can go in column spaces.
Full suit doesn't leave the game until it is full and free if additional cards on top of it.

Sounds like the game you are thinking of could be Spider Solitaire or a variant of it.

The game:

is a solo style Patience/Solitaire game
is played with two decks
consists of 10 columns
cards are stacked with like suited cards from K to Ace in order to remove them
Only Kings may be placed on empty spaces

You can find the how-to-play rules here:
Bicycle Cards: How to play Spider Solitaire

A common game may look like this at the start (Source Wikipedia):

Sidenote: If you want to give spider Solitaire a go, try searching for it from your start menu. Some versions of Windows have the game installed by default.


Five-Year plan - defcon suicide? I'm playing as the USSR in the fantastic Twilight Struggle PC implementation by GMT, and I have a hand of two cards, one is Five-Year Plan, which states:

  USSR Player must randomly discard one card. If the card is a US
  associated Event, the Event occurs immediately. If the card is a USSR
  associated Event or an Event applicable to both players, then the card
  must be discarded without triggering the Event.

and the other is Truman Doctrine:

  Remove all USSR Influence markers in one uncontrolled country in
  Europe.

When I go to play Five-Year Plan, it gives me the Defcon Warning. I'm apparently missing something because I don't understand why playing Five-Year Plan in this situation would allow my opponent to lower Defcon.

Why is this a defcon suicide card?

The USSR might have a card in hand which is a US associated event which automatically lowers defcon, e.g., Duck and Cover.

This answer was for the question as originally stated, which did not specify that the poster was playing as the USSR.


Is house Baratheon meant to be able to expand this quickly? We just played a 4 player game of Game of Thrones and wondered a bit about the balance of house Baratheon.  Unlike in the 3 player game where all of the southern zones are excluded from the game and can't be conquered, in the 4 player game all of those zones can now be captured with a relatively small army - there are a number of forts in those zones and house Baratheon is in prime position to take pretty much all of them simply by extending their fleet south a little bit.

In the game we just played I was House Baratheon and I managed to win fairly comfortably on around turn 5, despite not really twigging onto the potential of this strategy for a couple of turns. I also felt kind of cheap and so didn't really use this strategy as much as I could have done - it seemed that a player properly exploiting this strategy would be at a massive advantage.

Should some of these zones be excluded as they are in the 3 player game, or is simply intended that the other 3 players be aware of this and work together to stop house Baratheon from managing to do this?

This is a "well known problem". I'd suggest to check out the variants mentioned in this post and BGG.

We prefer the "Rumble in the South" alternative:

  In this variant, Stark and Greyjoy are unplayable and their lands are impassable. The impassable regions thus include: Bay of Ice, Flint's Finger, Ironman's Bay, Seagard, The Mountains of the Moon and The Narrow Sea. This variant is excellent at creating a true 4-way battle with shifting alliances! However I tend to make the win condition only 6 castles instead of 7 to speed up the game.

Using the above Lannister tends to be overpowered because of these things:

They don't have the Greyjoys at their backs all game long.
Stoney Sept is a strategic position by the capability of giving support to six other territories.
Stoney Sept has six barrels in its neighborhood and Lannisters almost always capture Blackwater because of it and end with a level six supply.
The Tyrells can't contain the Lannister ships at all (all the ships are going against them and Lannisters almost always have a larger army (because of the supply value).
Their strongholds are far from the line of battle.

We have two alternatives to refine this, I prefer the first one:

Stoney Sept and Blackwater is separated (like having a river): no support, no march, no raid
Weaken (or even ommit) Riverrun: changing it to a castle and removing the barrel

We also tried weakening Blackwater (removing barrels), but it was a failed attempt... it lowered the motivation of others to fight for it...

In the other hand, Baratheon gets weak as hell (because of the lack barrels... they weren't able to capture Blackwater in the games we played), if the cards doesn't come in a really good order...
So we decided to keep the area called "The Mountains of the Moon".


What are the steps to becoming a rules advisor and what kind of rulings can be made by one? I play FNMs at a relatively small store. There isn't a judge that runs the FNMs or any that consistently play there (the crowd is casual for the most part). I know the rules fairly well and the people that play at the store trust me enough to ask rules questions. I want to take the rules advisor test so that there's at least a semi-official source for answers to rules questions at these FNMs.

What steps are there to taking the test and becoming a rules advisor (ie: do you need to talk to a judge as if you were trying to become a L1)? What types of rulings are rules advisors allowed to make?

The Rules Advisor program has recently been discontinued. Becoming a level 1 judge is the entry level for officially judging.

The changes in a nutshell:

  The Rules Advisor exam is available until the end of April. Passing the exam no longer grants or renews the Rules Advisor membership, and all existing memberships will expire normally. Once the exam is retired, all content in that exam pool will be either reassigned to another exam or retired from use.
  The online L1 Practice exam is now available to all users. People interested in becoming a judge now have direct access to this resource, and this exam shows up on your Judge Center profile when you pass it. (Keep in mind that passing the L1 Practice exam does not grant any special benefit or membership.) If a particular store truly wants to require something to judge FNM, passing the L1 Practice exam is a far more reasonable requirement and more supportive of organized play in the long term since it helps lead towards Level 1 certification.
  The online L1 Practice exam now has a 28-day cooldown period. This should make for a training resource that is more readily available to all users, balancing the limited content in the pool with the need to make sure people can study and practice towards earning the Level 1 certification. Level 2 and Level 3 judges can still create the online L1 Practice exam for others, and still have the ability to generate written L1 Practice exams to administer in person. Use the resource as necessary to help people to pass and join the judge community.

Source: http://blogs.magicjudges.org/blog/2016/04/15/the-rules-advisor-exam-is-being-discontinued/


Can nonbasic dual lands such as "Azorius Chancery" be destroyed by the card text "destroy target land"? My cousin and I play MtG together sometimes. He has many years of experience, and I just started playing recently and we have had an argument when I tried to destroy his nonbasic dual lands such as Azorius Chancery, and Boros Garrison, with cards like Poison the Well, and Wrecking Ball, that have the card text "Destroy target land," and "Destroy target creature or land." He says that dual lands with the type/subtype "Land" and card text like...

  Azorius Chancery enters the battlefield tapped.
  When Azorius Chancery enters the battlefield, return a land you control to its owner's hand.
  Tap: Add {W}{U} to your mana pool.

are nonbasic lands and can't be destroyed by cards with the text "destroy target land". So contrary to the card type/subtype being "Land" he says I can't destroy it. Is he right or wrong?

The way I see it, if I can destroy, for example, a mountain with a type/subtype "Basic Land" using an instant/sorcery that has the text "destroy target land" (which he allowed me to do) then why can't I destroy a nonbasic land that has the type/subtype "Land".

I would appreciate if you show some hard evidence or state your MtG experience, such as been to tournaments and have seen that it is or isn't legal to make your answers more credible when I show my cousin the responses if I'm right.

You are correct, you can destroy any permanent with the type "Land" using a card that says "Destroy target land."

The ultimate authority in these matters is the Comprehensive Rules (CR). They are updated regularly, and are free to download.

The simplest rule from the CR that clarifies that nonbasic lands are lands:

  305.8. Any land with the supertype “basic” is a basic land. Any land that doesn’t have this supertype is a nonbasic land, even if it has a basic land type

So, all lands that don't have the Basic supertype are lands that are nonbasic, even if they have a basic land type. There are several lands with a basic land type that aren't basic lands, like the original dual land cycle (Badlands et. al., Pain Lands Sulfurous Springs, etc.), while there are only 5 basic land cards. The basic lands have card names Mountain, Swamp, Island, Plains, and Forest.

Then the rule below shows that a card like Boros Garrison is a legal target for Poison the Well, because it is referencing an object with "Land" in the card's Type Line.

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

If the card were specifically referencing only nonbasic lands, the rules text would have specifically said so. (Examples: Ruination, Blood Moon, Dust Bowl). Similarly, if a card is referring only to basic lands or lands with a basic land type, it would say so. (Examples: Fiery Fall, Global Ruin, Null Chamber, Flashfires).


In Backgammon, why is the match length almost always odd? And why are 9-point matches twelve times less popular than 7-point matches? I was wondering what was the ideal match length, and I came across those statistics:

  Matchlength : Total Matches
  1 : 350
  2 : 59
  3 : 634
  4 : 12
  5 : 1184
  6 : 1
  7 : 492
  8 : 1
  9 : 42
  11 : 31
  Total : 2806

The match length is almost always odd. Why is that? What's wrong with an even match length?

Also, 9-point matches are 12 times less popular than 7-point matches (a difference way too big to be explained by the fact that 9-point matches take slightly more time than 7-point matches). So why are 9-point matches relatively rare?

Largely it's by convention, but the historic cause is the way optimal doubling cube strategy varies with the match length. In the most easy case, in a 2-point match it can barely be wrong to double as soon as you are ahead, and far too easy to leave doubling too late - which means the match becomes a single game the vast majority of the time. In which case you might as well play a 1-pointer. The other small even match lengths suffer similar oddities, but less pronounced as the length increases. Odd match lengths tend to have more "normal" doubling strategy in the early stages.

On at least one server I play on, 2-pointers are frowned on because they are perceived as a way of playing a 1-pointer for double the ratings value...


King Of Tokyo taking control of Tokyo The first Monster in the game to obtain at least 1
attack dice deals no damage, but instead takes control of Tokyo, and moves its
figure to Tokyo City.
Does it mean if I have in my 1st roll an attack dice that I must go to Tokyo or I can re-roll that dice?
If I can re-roll it, and in my last round I obtain again an attack dice can I not use it(not go to Tokyo).

The dice are not resolved until after the third and final roll. So obviously you can reroll anything you don't want. Once the final roll is complete, the effects take place. If that includes an attack die, you must go to Tokyo. Likewise in mid-game play, if you have an attack die in your final roll, your opponent will be attacked and can yield Tokyo (their choice) but if this happens, the attacker has no choice and must occupy Tokyo.
At the beginning when no one is in Tokyo,  if you roll and keep multiple attack dice, the first one doesn't count, but the remainder do.


In Star Wars: Imperial Assault can all rebels attack multiple times? I started my first game last night and my group is confused by one of the rules:

On Page 5 of Learn to Play Guide under Perform Actions #2 states: Attack a Hostile Figure. Only Heroes can use more then one action to attack.

The 'Assault' ability allows more then one attack. Does this mean that all of the heroes have assault? Does hero just refer to any rebel player or is it a specific type rebel player? I'm confused because one of the rebel characters has the assault ability so I need to know how it differs from the rule above.

Due to the use of the word 'assault' which is also in the title I have found this difficult to google.

"Hero" is a very special term in this game.  Only the main characters that you start the game with are heroes. You can pick up other, non-hero characters as you play through the game. Example: han solo.  All imperial characters are also non-heroes.

Heroes can attack multiple times. Non-heroes cannot (unless another rule overrides this). That means that imperial characters and non-hero rebel characters cannot (normally) attack twice per turn.  You are right in that it's functionally almost as though they have the assault ability. However, they don't have assault on their cards, so they don't have the ability. Attacking twice is simply a feature of being a hero.

This distinction could potentially be important later. For example, imagine if a mission had a rule that the assault ability doesn't work during that mission. Or that no abilities work during that mission. In such cases, the heroes would still be able to attack twice, but other characters with assault would lose the benefit of assault


Carcassonne: The River II playable/worth it without River I? I recently received a copy of Carcassonne for the holidays, and have enjoyed it so far. My print, however, doesn't include the mini-expansion River I, and it seems like a neat little mechanic insofar as what I've found. However, it's out of print, so I can't obtain it without quite a bit of markup and expense. The River II, though, is readily available through Amazon, but I don't know if it's playable without the original River, and even if it is, if it's worth buying without the original to supplement it. So, this question boils down into two parts:

Does The River II require The River I?
If not, does not having The River I make The River II less enjoyable to a significant extent?

The River II does not require the River I in any way. I don't believe there is any official way to play with both of them together. IMHO The River I is a poor expansion by itself, in my play experience with it whoever goes first plays a farmer and whole shoreline on both sides of the river is one big connected farm giving that player a strong advantage. The River II fixes this issue by having roads and a city that cross the river, as well as one lake abutting a city, giving strong potential for multiple farms. All-in-all, River II is a good replacement for River I.

I've adopted some house rules that someone on here (maybe @Aramis?) suggested in a comment for using both River I and II: make river of random length by starting with a spring and not separating out the lakes and other spring tiles. The river is not allowed to have 2 springs without lakes, but keeps going until someone draws a lake to end it. This would produce very short rivers with just one expansion, but would work equally well with 2 copies of River II as with I and II.


What is the "Timeshifted" rarity? I'm confused about the "Timeshifted" cards. I looked at the Wizards of the Coast rarity scale. How rare are they and are they valid in Modern? (example Undertaker)

Timeshifted were rather special. Every booster pack from the Time Spiral block had one Timeshifted card, and each Timeshifted card was equally likely to be the included card.

Quoting Wikipedia,

  The Timeshifted cards are distributed one per booster pack and three per tournament pack (taking the place of common cards), and also appear in the preconstructed decks. According to DCI-distributed tournament primers, Timeshifted cards are tournament legal where Time Spiral or the set of original printing are.

This also means that since the Modern format includes Time Spiral, it includes Undertaker.


Expulsion Card ruling in Mesopotamia I don't have the English card text ready but the German one translates roughly like this:

  Move an opponents person or hut (with or without sacrifice token) up to 3 hexes from it's current location.

Can I move an opponents person which carries a sacrifice token with this card or can I only move the bare person?

Considering the parentheses I'd say that the part about sacrifice tokens moved along only applies to the huts...

Given that text, I would rule that you could move either a person or a hut, and the ruling about sacrifice tokens applies to both.

If they had only intended the hut to have the sacrifice token clause, they should have written it as:

  Move an opponent's hut (with or without sacrifice token), or move a person, up to 3 hexes from its current location.


How can we play yu-gi-oh online after dueling network's shutdown? Dueling network shut down after a cease and desist letter. Is there any way to play yu-gi-oh casually online now?

I used to like the ability to just make any deck and play casually, I am trying to see if anything took its place.

Building off of DarkCygnus' answer, the "spiritual successor" to Dueling Network is Dueling Book. It is stylized in the way Dueling Network used to be, has both a competitive ladder and casual matchmaking, and is a "manual" simulator (you have to resolve the effects of cards yourself, place them in the zones they should be in, etc.) The other simulators in DarkCygnus' solution are "automatic" simulators, that give you prompts for things like activation windows for cards and proper zones monsters can be summoned into.

If you are looking for something similar to Dueling Network, Dueling Book would be my recommendation.


Can every game of Klondike-Solitaire be solved? I play a lot of Solitaire games on my Android phone and love to keep an eye out for the statistics.

Given that the Solitaire version lets you restart the game endlessly, I usually play until I solve it. But I never managed to solve more than 80% of the games played (1000+).

So now I wonder, is every Solitaire game solvable?

No.
Example: If all of your cards face up on the board are red, and the cards that come up every third card are also red, and none of them are aces. You lose. Do not pass go, do not collect $200.


Inspiring Statuary = Improvise for Planeswalkers? The card Inspiring Statuary states:

  Nonartifact spells you cast have improvise. (Your artifacts
  can help cast those spells. Each artifact you tap after you're done
  activating mana abilities pays for {1}.)

Are Planeswalkers considered Nonartifact spells, and therefore gain the keyword Improvise?

Planeswalkers are nonartifact spells. They do not have artifact on the type line, therefore, they are nonartifacts.


Does a +1/+1 counter remove a -1/-1 counter? My opponent controls a Kulrath Knight. I control a 4/4 creature (with a -1/-1 counter on it, due to an earlier cast Black Sun's Zenith).

If I use an ability to put a +1/+1 counter on my 4/4 creature, will the +1/+1 counter and the -1/-1 counter cancel each other out, or will I just have a creature with both a +1/+1 counter and a -1/-1 counter on it?

In other words: Will my creature be able to block and attack or not?

I don't believe the rules are 100% clear on that?! (rule 704,5)

121.3. If a permanent has both a +1/+1 counter and a -1/-1 counter on it, N +1/+1 and N -1/-1 counters are removed from it as a state-based action, where N is the smaller of the number of +1/+1 and -1/-1 counters on it. See rule 704.

Both counters will be removed as a state-based action (N=1). Your creature will be able to block and attack.


What Is Eriku's Ability? When I bought my copy of the Tokaido expansion "Crossroads", the shop had included a bonus player named "Eriku" in the box.

He's not part of the main game for either the original board or the expansion, and some Googling has shown that Eriku was a bonus character given away at particular conventions and events.

The catch is that Eriku's ability isn't easy to guess from the picture, and from what I can tell the rules for his character were only shown at the events where he was given away.

The most sensible interpretation I've found is this:

  At each inn, including the first, Eriku can look at the first meal card and choose to buy it.

Is this the correct description? There are so many different variations of his ability floating around that I'm not sure which is right - can anyone help?

From Antoine Bauza (the designer of Tokaido):

  Eriku can look at the first Meal card of the deck and choose to buy it
  instead of one of the regular cards. At the first Inn, He can also
  look at the top card and buy it (no regular hand here of course). So
  He can eat one more meal than the others... Official rules and wording
  will come on Funforge Website I guess...

So at the first inn, presumably before setting off, Eriku can look at the top card of the meal deck and choose to buy it. Then, on arriving at each subsequent inn, he may include the top card of the meal deck in his choices of what to eat.

Source:
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/1063646/what-is-erikus-ability


How to spend attribute symbol on Gear card? We have this hacking rig gear card. Do we discard to use the mechanic attribute on the test? Do we just automatically get it if it's in our hand? Can we just keep stacking those cards to keep boosting our stats?

Cards include: Hacking Rig, Fancy Duds, Fake ID

Unless it says to discard, no, you may keep using it.

Yes, you automatically get it if you assign it to the crew on the mission. Each crew can only hold one equipment per mission (with some exceptions for specific crew and equipment). See the main instructions for more on the rules for equipment carrying limits and how mission assignment works.

Assuming you have multiple crew to carry each of the items you're using and they're all involved in the mission at this point, yes, they skill icons stack for skill tests.


Can Welding Jar target itself? We had this issue come up in a game last night, and we weren't sure how to handle it. Player A had Welding Jar and another artifact in play. Player B cast Naturalize targeting the Welding Jar. In response, Player A sacrificed Welding Jar to regenerate itself.

Is this possible to do? I understand that Welding Jar is going into the graveyard either way, as sacrificed creatures can't be regenerated, but can Welding Jar legally target itself with it's own ability?

EDIT: If this seems non-sensical, let's assume that Player A has something in play like Furnace Celebration that gives them a benefit for sacrificing the Welding Jar.

Welding Jar can target itself.

When you cast a spell or activate an ability, you choose targets (601.2c) before paying costs (601.2g). So the Welding Jar is still on the battlefield when it's time to choose targets, and is a valid target for its own ability.

That ability will fizzle, of course, since you've already put Welding Jar in the graveyard by the time it would resolve.


Identify board game played as a child featuring cute monsters When I was a child I had a board game that featured small plastic monsters. If I recall each player chose a type of monster and you got three monsters to play with of that type.

I remember nothing of the game play apart from I that I think you could chose which of your monsters you moved in your turn.

There were Blue, Yellow, Red and Green Monsters I remember the Blue monsters where like lumpy blue clouds on legs with a bulbous nose and one of the other colours was triangle shaped with an eye on two of the three sides of the triangles.

A friend asked me what the game was called recently and though I remember playing it I can't for the life of me remember what it was called.

I found it, the game was called The Gunge Game and was released in 1989 by Waddingtons. It doesn't even have a wikipedia entry.