How can I beat Germany in Axis & Allies: Europe? I've played Axis & Allies: Europe BGG quite a few times now. It seems that Germany always wins by rushing for Moskva in all the games I've played. Usually USA never plays an important role, coming late to Europe.  By the time England is strong enough to invade Germany, the race is more or less over.

What good counter strategies against Germany am I missing?

The dynamics of the game are based on the following:

In "real life," Germany would have beaten Britain and Russia if the latter two did not receive American help.
Overwhelming American power (almost that of Britain, Germany and Russia put together) meant that the Allies would be heavy favorites once America joined the war.
In the game, America has a fraction of its "real life" power, enough to make the Allies favorites, but not enough to make them prohibitively so.

In the game, if Germany conquers Russia, Germany-Russia is stronger than U.S.-Britain, which was not true in real life. Therefore the game imperatives are

for the Russian player to successfully defend Moskva against capture
For the Americans to find a way to make their weight felt.

Russia needs to play strict defense, with the ultimate aim of defending Moskva. That doesn't mean that they should neglect the surrounding territories (that would make it too easy for the Germans to capture the extra "income"), but rather to beat a "fighting retreat" as in real life. That is, they should mostly build infantry, and use them to defend territories in a die-hard fashion, and leaving air and armor units in Moskva for "strafing" counter attacks, extracting the highest possible price in time and firepower for territories lost.

The Americans need to find a way to help the Russians, making effective use of their margin of superiority. One way is "Lend Lease," sending e.g. fighter units to Moskva for its defense, so that the Russians can build "all infantry."  That is a genuine, but inefficient use of American resources. The second way is to launch "bleeding" attacks in Europe

Scandinavia, which threatens to open a direct route to Russia or
France or Italy, which directly threatens Germany, or even
North Africa, which reduces German income from the south.

If these initiatives are successful, the Germans will have too few troops/income left to defeat Russia.

The Allies CAN lose if the die rolls are bad. Barring this, they have a sufficient margin of superiority to win if they play as well as the Germans.


Tyr's Hand - Rule Check I have Tyr's Hand installed in a remote server and Heimdall 2.0 protecting it. The runner declares a run and approaches Heimdall 2.0. I pay to rez the ice, and the runner decides to break all three subroutines with whatever means are at her disposal.

Is it correct that Tyr's Hand can be rezzed and trashed now to prevent the runner from breaking the second subroutine (1 brain damage, end the run)? And is it correct that essentially the runner has no way of avoiding this from happening - once they have elected to break a subroutine, I can prevent them from breaking it and they must suffer the consequences?

Tyr's Hand should be rezzed after the runner encounters a piece of bioroid ice and declares that they are going to break subroutines on that ice (usually via clicks/breakers).  So, in your example, you would rez Heimdall 2.0 first, and if the runner declares that they are going to break the subs, then you would rez Tyr's Hand.  So, you don't have to rez Tyr's Hand when you rez the ICE (which might be useful if they see Heimdall can't break anything anyways).

When the runner declares that they are breaking, you can rez Tyr's hand and trash it to prevent one subroutine from being broken.  This means: whatever the runner spent to break that subroutine is still spent (e.g. 2 clicks from 2.0 ICE, or credits) - however, they can still spend more to rebreak the subroutine.  So, if they used a breaker - perhaps it just costs them an extra credit.  But if they were relying on clicks, then they are out of luck!


scoring straight (or run) in Cribbage In Cribbage, what is the scoring rule in this example?

Player 1 plays a 4.
Player 2 plays a 3.
Player 3 plays a 5. (claims 3 points for 4,3,5 run)
Player 4 plays a 6. (now 4 more points for 4,3,5,6 run)
Player 1 plays a second 4 (here the debate)

He claims that he should get another 4 points (for 3,5,6,4) indicating by pointing at each card in reverse of the sequence of play (counterclockwise) 6,3,5,4 ending with his second 4).

I claim that he can't count the second run of four cards because they were not in the sequence of play (clockwise).

Who is right?

From the American Cribbage Congress Rules of Cribbage:

  straight (or run), single: Sequence of three or more consecutive cards in any order during the play of the cards; for example, 3-5-6-7-4 (counts three when the 7 is played and counts five when the 4 is played)

When the second 4 is played by Player 1 the last 4 cards played are:

3, 5, 6, 4

This set of 4 consecutive cards clearly meets the definition above of:

  ... Sequence of three or more consecutive cards in any order during the play of the cards ....

Player 1 is entitled to score 4 for this run.

In regards to your claim above that:

  ... he can't count the second run of four cards because they were not in the sequence of play (clockwise).

Nowhere in the Rules is there a necessity to identify the qualifying cards for a score in a specified order. Your claim otherwise is entirely bogus.

The sequence counts solely by virtue of the required cards, having been played, meeting the criterion of being "Sequence of three or more consecutive cards in any order".  Any such identification of qualifying cards is purely informative, and instructive, to assist beginners in learning the game.


Dominion: ghost plus pixie Ghost card says to play an action twice. The pixie is an action that allows you to trash it when you play it. What happens if I ghost a pixie? If I trash pixie the first time, do I still play it the second time?

The golden rule in Dominion is follow the card instructions as much as possible. You can play Pixie a second time, even if it has been moved, e.g., moved to the trash. However, you may not be able to execute some conditional effects, e.g., trash the card. So here is how a Throne Room/Pixie or Ghost/Pixie plays:

Play Throne Room; choose an action card.
Play Pixie once.

+1 Card, +1 Action
Discard top boon (Boon1).
Trash Pixie; receive Boon1 twice.

Play Pixie a second time. Note that Pixie is now in the trash.

+1 Card, +1 Action
Discard top boon (Boon2)
Pixie cannot be trashed, so you cannot receive Boon2, neither once nor twice.

Same goes with Ghost and any similar card (e.g., King's Court from Dominion: Prosperity, Royal Carriage from Dominion: Adventures, etc). No matter now many times you play Pixie, you can only trash the card once. But you always get the +1 Card +1 Action.


How to speed up a game of Empire Builder? Are there any rules variants that I can use to speed up a game of Empire Builder?  I love playing Empire Builder, but the fact that it takes so long tends to put off some of my friends.

One dis-recommendation: don't lower the amount of money for the win condition.  The game advances through phases from initial building (limited range) to networking to running those few big deals that are finally possible late in the game.  By reducing the win condition you'd be cutting out that last phase and that can be a lot of fun.

Tested recommendations:

Setup: alphabetize the goods if you haven't already so "banking" is fast.  This is huge, as otherwise looking through a bunch of different goods with tiny pictures is a pain.
Check BoardGameGeek for player aids.  It can be hard to study the map to plan your move without getting in the way of the active player, but a copy of the map can help (not so much with detailed track planning, but with "where the heck is $city on this map?" planning.  Granted that should be less of a problem on a map of one's own country, but it still helps.)  Similarly, make sure everybody has the "where does this good come from?" card for planning.
Increase starting money by 20 and add one more round of initial building.  I've tried this a few times with Iron Dragon with experienced players.  The effect was to increase the value of those first early runs, thus jump-starting track building.  It didn't make a huge difference in elapsed time (maybe 10%), but it did cut down on the early feelings of angst and futility that can come with unfortunate cards.)

Untested ideas:

Allow each player some small number of "I hate this card" redraws, without the cost of a full-round flush.  I would limit this to the early stages of the game -- maybe up to three uses while your money remains under 100.  The idea is to soften those "aw, crap, I guess I could go there for 10" runs that don't really help you except to flush the card.
If time is being lost because inexperienced players can't plan their turns in advance, consider some scheme for parallel turns.  Play is largely non-interactive, after all.  Maybe a player and the one opposite him at the table can go at the same time so long as they aren't competing for the same pip, goods token, etc?  (If so, turn order wins.)

I don't think any of these would damage the spirit of the game, unlike, say, removing some calamities from the deck would.


What happens while casting protection from Banishing Light? What would happen with this stack?:

Player 1 plays Banishing light targeting player 2's creature.

Player 2 plays Gods Willing on that same creature.

What happens with player 1's enchantment?

Does it do nothing because the target chosen is protected? Does it choose new target that doesn't have protection, since it isn't an enchant-aura? Or is it something else all together?

Part of what will help make this clear is that Banishing Light doesn't get targets chosen at casting time. Here's how Banishing Light normally plays out:

You cast Banishing Light. (No special choices are made. No target is chosen.)
It resolves and enters the battlefield.
Its enters-the-battlefield triggered ability goes on the stack, with a creature chosen for the target.
That ability resolves and the creature gets exiled, to return when Banishing Light leaves the battlefield.

If you play Gods Willing to give a creature protection in between steps 1 and 2, no target's been chosen yet, and the player must choose any other target during step 3. If there are absolutely no other legal targets to choose during step 3, the triggered ability can't go on the stack, so nothing happens — we skip step 3 and 4, and Banishing Light now just sits there uselessly.

If you play Gods Willing to in between steps 3 and 4, you know what creature they're targeting with Banishing Light's triggered ability. If you give it protection, the ability can't resolve and will fizzle & be countered by virtue of having no legal targets left at resolution time. The player who controls Banishing Light doesn't get to pick any other creature; Banishing Light (again) just sits useless on the battlefield. Nothing gets exiled by it.


How thick are Dominion cards? I want to design custom laser-cut boxes to hold my Dominion sets, and I need to calculate how big a box is needed for each expansion. I can easily get the card dimensions online for height and width (91mm x 59mm), but if I'm going to put 500 cards in a box, I need to know how thick the stack will be.

I can't seem to find dimensions on the thickness of a stack. Does anyone know?

I just did a measurement of my fairly well played dominion cards.

When allowed to float up, a stack of 50 cards is 23/32 of an inch tall. I tried different combinations to account for imperfections and came to this number multiple times in various trials.

When compressed with a gentle hand to maximum compression, they compress to 21/32 of an inch for 50 cards.

Thus if you were to have a box holding 500 cards I would expect them to be at absolute minimum 210/32 of an inch, or 6 9/16 inches. If we allow for comfortable float compression that would take us to 7 3/16 of an inch. Since you'll want at least some wiggle room, I would suggest making your 500 card box of dominion 7 inches long. Keeping in mind that 500 cards is 50 types, you may want to calculate extra room for things like placeholders, extra cards, separators, etc.


Can poison action card destroy Warbot? In the Smash Up game, Ninjas have a poison action card. Will it have any effect on Warbot, who is a minion which cannot be destroyed?

Poison - Play on a minion. Destroy any number of actions on it. Ongoing: This minion has -4 power. (Minions have minimum power of 0.)
Warbot - power 4 - Ongoing: This minion cannot be destroyed.

No, it can't destroy Warbot, but that's because it can't destroy minions in general. It can only destroy actions attached to a minion, and Warbot doesn't prevent that.

Poison affects Warbot as any other minion because Warbot's ability has no effect on Poison's ability.

Poison doesn't destroy minions.
Warbot's ability doesn't prevent actions from being played.
Warbot's ability doesn't prevent actions attached to the Warbot from being destroyed.
Warbot's ability doesn't prevent the Warbot's power from being reduced.


Can Asmoranomardicadaistinaculdacar be cast by Aluren or by Cascade effects? (Modern Horizons 2 Spoilers) Asmoranomardicadaistinaculdacar is a card recently spoiled for Modern Horizons 2.

Notable on the card is a lack of an actual mana cost.  The card's first line is clearly intended for how to properly cast the card.

As long as you've discarded a card this turn you may pay [B/R] to cast this spell.

Does Aluren or cards with Cascade (Shardless Agent, for example) allow you to cast Asmoranomardicadaistinaculdacar?

Yes, you may pay alternative costs to cast Asmoranomardicadaistinaculdacar, and "without paying its mana cost" is an alternative cost.

118.6. Some objects have no mana cost. This represents an unpayable cost. An ability can also have an unpayable cost if its cost is based on the mana cost of an object with no mana cost. Attempting to cast a spell or activate an ability that has an unpayable cost is a legal action. However, attempting to pay an unpayable cost is an illegal action.

118.6a If an unpayable cost is increased by an effect or an additional cost is imposed, the cost is still unpayable. If an alternative cost is applied to an unpayable cost, including an effect that allows a player to cast a spell without paying its mana cost, the alternative cost may be paid.

Note that "As long as you've discarded a card this turn you may pay [B/R] to cast this spell." also represents an alternative cost, so that's already a hint regarding alternative costs.


Can Desert Island's 'Trap' card be used on multiple targets affected by fate? In the game Desert Island, the Trap Scavenge Card reads:

  Expend when a Bear, Monkey, or Rat Fate event happens. The target
  gains 3 food instead of suffering the Fate consequences.

If multiple targets are affected by the fate, can the card be use to convert the fate to food for all of the targets?

Desert Island's designer, Jeff Siadek replied to a similar question on boardgamegeek.com that only one target is protected by the trap. Cut throat!


Catan and Seafarers 5-6 player expansion I have both standard Catan and Catan Seafarer, thinking about buying the player extension to expand both games to 5-6 players. If I only buy the Seafarer's player extension, can I also use it onto my standard Catan to play with 5-6 players? Or do I have to buy the 5-6 player extension for each game?

You need both player extensions in order to play with 5-6 players on Seafarers.  The Seafarers 5-6 player extension doesn't contain the pieces needed for the extra players.  You'll need the frame pieces, extra titles, houses, roads and cities from the regular Catan 5-6 player extension in order to play Seafarers with 5-6 people.


"Creature does not untap" on Mutavault I have a Mutavault on the battlefield, which has been animated so it is temporarily a 2/2 creature. My opponent has a Shipbreaker Kraken, which has the following monstrous ability:

  When Shipbreaker Kraken becomes monstrous, tap up to four target creatures. Those creatures don't untap during their controllers' untap steps for as long as you control Shipbreaker Kraken.

If my opponent uses the monstrous ability while my Mutavault is a creature and taps it, will my Mutavault untap on my next upkeep (since it is no longer a creature)?

No, it won't untap. "Those creatures" is not a check. It's just a nice way of saying "those objects that were targeted". Any later changes to the object's characteristics are irrelevant.

608.2i If an ability’s effect refers to a specific untargeted object that has been previously referred to by that ability’s cost or trigger condition, it still affects that object even if the object has changed characteristics.
Example: Wall of Tears says “Whenever Wall of Tears blocks a creature, return that creature to its owner’s hand at end of combat.” If Wall of Tears blocks a creature, then that creature ceases to be a creature before the triggered ability resolves, the permanent will still be returned to its owner’s hand.

A note on "untargeted"
It seems to me that "specific untargeted object" refers to phrases like "that something" or "those somethings", even if they are short for "that targeted something" or "those targeted somethings". The word "untargeted" is there to exclude "target something" and "target somethings" from being covered by 608.2i since targets are rechecked on resolution.
There are two cards that cannot shorten "that targeted creature" to "that creature" without becoming ambiguous. "That targeted creature" does not target, so 608.2i does apply.


Would Guttersnipe plus a cyphered card result in an infinite loop of damage? Guttersnipe says:

  Whenever you cast an instant or sorcery spell, Guttersnipe deals 2 damage to each opponent.

Hidden Strings says:

  You may tap or untap target permanent, then you may tap or untap another target permanent.

  Cypher (Then you may exile this spell card encoded on a creature you control. Whenever that creature deals combat damage to a player, its controller may cast a copy of the encoded card without paying its mana cost.)

and Shock deals two damage to a target opponent.

Here's the process:

Have Guttersnipe on the field.
Play Hidden Strings; cipher it on to him.
Play Shock instant.

Because shock causes guttersnipe to deal damage, this activates the cypher ability and you can now cast hidden strings, which will then cause him to deal two more damage, which allows you to cast hidden strings, which deals two damage, which allows you cast to hidden strings, which deals two damage.... and well you know where this is going.

Does this combo work?

No, that doesn't amount to an infinite loop, because of this term in cipher's definition:

  Whenever that creature deals combat damage to a player [...]

(That's an extract from the reminder text, but the actual rules definition is virtually identical.)

Combat damage is just the damage dealt during the combat damage step. In other words, it's the damage Guttersnipe would deal if you tapped it to attack, and it wasn't blocked and ended up attacking the player. The damage dealt by Guttersnipe's triggered ability does not count as combat damage, so it doesn't trigger cipher.

Your combo would work if cipher just triggered off any damage at all, in which case it'd say this:

  Whenever that creature deals damage to a player [...]


Shipwreck Singer: When can the first ability be activated? Shipwreck Singer has the ability:

  1U: Target creature an opponent controls attacks this turn if able.

When can I activate this ability?

e.g. My opponent has a Manaweft Sliver. I say "attack if able" at the beginning of the draw step of my opponent. Can he now use the mana ability or does he have to honor my attack order and can no longer use its mana ability?

"Attacks this turn if able" means: when the Attack phase comes around, if that creature is able to attack, it must. That doesn't come with an obligation to leave it able to attack, though, and your opponent may rightly wish to do something that leaves that creature unable to attack.

Your opponent can use Manaweft's Sliver ability. Then, when the Attack phase comes around, Manaweft Sliver won't be able to attack, and won't do so.


Why is Monstrosity not a keyword ability? As pointed out recently in a comment on another question, Monstrosity is actually a keyword action, not a keyword ability. This seems strange, especially as it is the only keyword action that is not a verb.

Every card that uses monstrosity has it in the same format: An activated ability with a mana cost; where the only effect of the ability is the monstrosity.

Given this, it seems like it would make a lot more sense to have made monstrosity a keyword ability that has both a cost and modifier built into the definition; similar to the way Awaken, Suspend, and Reinforce work... instead of: 5RR: Monstrosity 3,
use Monstrosity 3 - 5RR..

The language just seems more natural, due to the fact that "monstrosity" isn't a verb. Is it known if there had been plans to have monstrosity be used in ways other than an activated ability? Having it as an action makes sense if there were other ways of it occurring, such as through a triggered ability (Whenever [this creature] attacks with at least 3 other creatures, Monstrosity 2), etc.

Looking for either a word from Wizards on why this choice was made; or something about the mechanic that I missed as to why it needs to be an action instead of an ability.

It is a lot easier to print a card like Nemesis of Mortals if Monstrosity is a keyword action rather than a keyword ability. For reference, its Monstrosity ability says this:

  {7}{G}{G}: Monstrosity 5. This ability costs {1} less to activate for each creature card in your graveyard.

Keyword abilities almost never have those kinds of riders that aren't built in to the definition of the ability.

In addition, Monstrosity as an ability would have two different parameters: the number of counters to add and the cost. That is very rare in keyword abilities and the complexity that would introduce probably factors strongly into this design choice.

Among other keyword abilities with two parameters, Awaken and Suspend are not effects that can be expressed as keyword actions, and Reinforce is specifically an action that involves discarding the card, which would be lost if it was a keyword action.


Whose shadow is in the background of Mox Amber? The Dominaria printing of Mox Amber has a person's shadow on the right side of the art.  It looks like the person has either a helmet or horns.  They are the wrong shape for Nicol Bolas.  Is this the shadow a known character from Magic?

I could not find any reference to the in-universe backstory of the art. If the shadows really do represent named characters, it is not clear who they are.

Higher resolution image of Mox Amber. It's not even clear to me that a character really is casting the shadow.

Regardless, the best I could find about the piece's backstory was the blog of Steven Belledin, the card's artist, which has a post on Mox Amber and the process of its creation. Apparently, Steve Belledin had rather large freedom in designing the art of Mox Amber. He only mentions 2 stipulations by the WotC art direction, one of which was later dropped:

  What Wizards asked for initially was a little confounding to me, but it subsequently was simplified a bit. To start, they wanted a silver necklace with the amber being the necklace's charm. The necklace would be cradled in someone's hands. However, there were two specific stipulations: 1) the piece should not feel like it was part of Volkan Baga's cycle of mox paintings that also include the various moxes cradled in hands; 2) there should be no recognizable things floating in the amber (I assume to avoid any reference to Jurassic Park).

Obviously, the "cradling hands" part was later dropped, after some preliminary sketches. Further considering that

  I spent a lot of time trying to hash something out in my sketchbook, but in the end I found it easier to take a piece of my wife's jewelry and arrange it in different ways on the back of her splayed leather jacket

it seems unlikely that the art of Mox Amber is deeply tied to the game's lore.

Just for good measure, I left a comment in the comments section asking about the shadows, but I don't expect an affirmative answer.


When does Myr Superion check the source? Myr Superion is a 2 mana 5/6 that comes with the following casting restriction:

  Spend only mana produced by creatures to cast Myr Superion.

Under most circumstances this wouldn't be ambiguous, but I'm not sure how it interacts with type-changing effects. Specifically, I want to know whether Myr Superion could be cast with mana produced in the following ways:

Blinkmoth Nexus is tapped for mana, then animated using some other mana.
Palladium Myr is tapped for mana, then stops being a creature e.g. due to Song of the Dryads.
Deathrite Shaman is tapped to activate its first ability, which goes on the stack because it is not a mana ability, and then stops being a creature before that ability resolves.

I wasn't able to find any lands which could produce mana using an ability that is not a mana ability, but I suspect I will be able to deduce that hypothetical outcome based on the others listed.

In other words, when casting Myr Superion does a mana source need to be a creature when the ability was activated, when the ability resolved, or when the Superion is cast?

The ability checks what produced the mana. This means that, to be used to cast Myr Superion, the source of the ability that produced the mana must have been a creature at the time the mana was produced (i.e. when the ability resolved).

As @Natedogg2 of #magicjudges-rules said, "Producing the mana, then making the source into a creature does not count."


Are you allowed to play a monster in face up defense position? My understanding is that as far as normal summoning goes, you can either play a monster face up in attack position, or face down in defense position. You cannot mix them, e.g. face up defense position or face down attack position. Is that correct?

Is that correct?

Yes.

When you normal summon or set you can only do it in face up attack position, or face down defense position, respectively.

There is no thing as "face down attack position". There was before, on the Darkness Approaches card, but it had an errata that removed that effect.

You could however special summon a monster on face up defense position if it is possible. One example may be any Synchro, XYZ, or Fusion Summon you carry out, where you can select how to place that card (unless otherwise restricted).


How can I save myself from Arcbond? I run a white and red burn deck with an Arcbond and want to be able to save myself from taking damage but still have it deal the damage to everyone else.

Are there any white or red cards that could do this?

Choose a card from your format, undefined, to give the targeted creature lifelink.


Do the counters that Ring of Thune adds stay with the ring or the creature? The part of Ring of Thune that's important reads "At the beginning of your upkeep, put a +1/+1 counter on equipped creature if it's white".

If I was to move the ring after a couple turns, lose it to a Reclamation Sage or whatever, would the +1/+1 counters stay on the previously enhanced creature, or would that bonus leave with the ring?

The Ring of Thune puts counters on the creature, so the counters stay with the creature, not the equipment. If they wanted the power and toughness bonus to stay with the equipment instead of the creature, they would use a wording like on Sigil of Distinction:

Sigil of Distinction enters the battlefield with X charge counters on it.
Equipped creature gets +1/+1 for each charge counter on Sigil of Distinction.


Can the last two player heal with beer when Ghost Town is in play? There are only two players left in the game, say an Outlaw and the Sheriff. The Sheriff reveals Ghost Town at the beginning of his turn. Can he heal himself with a Beer card?

I don't think he can, but we had a very adamant player among ourselves who said this was possible, so I would like to ask your opinions.

Edit: Ghost Town is a card from the High Noon expansion with the following ability: During their turns, eliminated players return to the game as ghost. They draw 3 cards instead of 2, and cannot die. At the end of their turn, they are eliminated again.

Edit-2: I'm adding some possible interpretations to the rules:

Cannot heal: Since ghosts are not alive during the Sheriff's turn, the Beer card has no effect due to there being only 2 players in the game.
Can heal: Other players do come back during the Ghost Town effect (with zero life?) so the Sheriff is allowed to heal himself with the Beer card. This would also help the remaining 2 players survive the incoming bullets from the revived ghosts.
Can heal, but only to save himself during a ghost's turn: During a ghost's turn there are 3 players in the game so if the Sheriff gets killed, he can still save himself with a beer card.

The question revolved around the following limitation:

  Beer has no effect if there are only 2 players left in the game; in other words, if you play a Beer you do not gain any life point.

(Emphasis in original.)

As such, it comes down to the number of players left in the game. According to Ghost Town, and reinforced by this FAQ, each ghost is in play until the end of their turn, to the point that they can even be considered winners and can cause the Renegade to lose.

As such,

On the Sheriff's turn, there are two players left in the game. The Sheriff can't use a Beer.
On the "live" Outlaw's turn, there are two players left in the game. The Sheriff can't use a Beer.
On a ghost's turn, there are three players left in the game. The Sheriff can use a Beer on the ghost's turn (in reaction to a lethal hit).


Is there a good place to find information about strategies, tricks and caveats for specific cards? Sometimes, I'm surprised when I see that a certain card is considered good. I don't get it!

For example, when I first saw Skullclamp, I just saw a card that increased power by one at the cost of reducing toughness by one - not a very good deal. I didn't see why it was considered so good it was almost broken. I had to be explained that for a small cost (typically a token creature), it would draw you two cards, a very good deal in most decks.

Ok, I admit that I should have spotted that one, but I have experienced the same feeling several times. I look at a card and think "why the heck is this card so expensive" or "why is everybody talking about this card, saying it will ruin Magic". Or, in my playgroup, someone will play a card and the whole gang goes "ooh, I love that card, it's so awesome", and I just nod and smile and pretend I know what they're all so excited about.

Where should I go to find out why a card is considered so good by so many? Is there some database online that will explain why a card is good? I usually end up googling the card's title, and sometimes get lucky and get that aha-feeling, but not always.

I would like to find a source online where I can look up a card and someone will explain the strategies they use that makes that card effective.

Simply searching for the cardname + the word 'combo' already gives some interesting results:

Skullclamp abuse. - Casual & Multiplayer Formats - The Game - MTG ... on MTGSalvation
Why is Skullclamp banned? on this very site
What makes skullclamp such a good, highly regarded card? on Reddit

I'm not aware of any database with this kind of information. A 5/5 rating on Gatherer tells something about the competitiveness of a card, but not whether it's part of a combo. Kird Ape has a 5/5 rating as well but it's 'just' a Zoo staple.


When would I play a Quickling? I have just started playing MTG and am really liking it. In the six games I have played, with a couple of people, the Quickling card keeps coming up.

We just don't understand under what circumstances this card would be a good thing. Why would I ever want to cast a card and then just sacrifice it straightaway? Or why would I want to spend mana to just swap out a card?

I'm sure there is a really good strategic use for this card I just can't work it out.

Quickling can and should be used on your own creatures for the same reason you would use Peel from Reality: to return a creature with a useful enter-the-battlefield ability such as (at least in M15) Frost Lynx, Reclamation Sage or Hornet Queen, more usefully, because it has Flash, you can use it to save a creature that opponent is trying to hit with any removal.

So not only do you get to reuse a useful creature or save it form being destroyed or otherwise rendered useless (i.e. with Encrust or Crippling Blight), but you also get a 2/2 flier out of the deal, which you can cast any time during your opponent's turn and attack with the next turn.


Can an Aura which was not cast be attached to a permanent with shroud? If an Aura is placed on the battlefield using Genesis Wave or an ability like Sun Titan's, can it enchant a creature that has shroud (or an opponent-controlled creature with hexproof)?

I'm looking at these rules specifically:

  303.4a An Aura spell requires a target, which is restricted by its enchant ability.

  303.4f If an Aura is entering the battlefield under a player’s control by any means other than by
     resolving as an Aura spell, and the effect putting it onto the battlefield doesn’t specify the object
     or player the Aura will enchant, that player chooses what it will enchant as the Aura enters the
     battlefield. The player must choose a legal object or player according to the Aura’s enchant
     ability and any other applicable effects.

  702.17a Shroud is a static ability. “Shroud” means “This permanent or player can’t be the target of
     spells or abilities.”

Yes, they may. The cards you mentioned returned those Auras to the battlefield, so only 303.4 applies here. It should also be notes that the aura must enchant a legal object (i.e. Auras with "enchant player" must enchant players, auras with "enchant a creature you control" cannot enchant noncreatures and cannot enchant opponents creatures, etc)

Aura spells (i.e. Cards cast from your hand, and added to the stack), do require a target. It is unfortunate that they are the only spells that target, without "target" within the rules text.


Are counters the same as a creature's power/toughness? I put 4 +1/+1 counters on a 1/1 creature, so now it is a 5/5. My opponent casts a spell that says to remove all +1/+1 counters from target creature. Is my creature now a 1/1? Or are all creatures 0/0 with +1 counters on them?  If they are 0/0s, then since all counters would be removed, is my card dead?

Related, can I use Sage of Hours, again and again, or would it be dead after the first time I use it due to removing all counters?

Counters are a specific object in the game, usually represented by a physical token (glass beads, tiny dice, pennies if you're desperate, &c.) so you can keep track of them.

+1/+1 counters are a specific kind of counter with a baked-in ability: modifying the power and toughness of a creature they are attached to.

Only things specified as "counters" in the game rules or card text are counters.

All of these things are not counters and do not involve counters:

Your creature's base power and toughness, and effects that set them to specific values.
A creature's power and toughness that gets set by the card text while the value in the corner just says "*/*."
A card that modifies a creature's power and toughness, such as "target creature gets +3/+3 until end of turn" or "all white creatures get +1/+1."

The only times you're likely to be interacting with counters in Magic without a card being super explicit are planeswalker loyalty and a handful of specialized set mechanics:

Infect and Wither turn damage into -1/-1 counters.
Suspend and cumulative upkeep both use counters to keep track of their "ticks."


Scenario 47: Replacing Dead Head With Body Token? Just got done playing my first full game with three of my other friends. My buddy who introduced us to the game became the traitor, and we had a blast. However, the fate of the Heroes is in the hands of this very rule!

As stated in the rules for the Ouroboros, their body stays in each room it moves through. However, when one of the heads is defeated, is it replaced with a body token? Otherwise, does the head stay in the room dead and impeding the movement of the Heroes (assuming the head takes up the majority of the room causing a bit of trouble for traveling)?

You do not replace the Ouroboros head with a body token

During a Haunt, special actions are explicitly given in the following books:

Secrets of Survival (read by the Heroes)
Traitor's Tome (read by the Traitor)

According to the Traitor's Tome, the Ouroboros head only leaves behind a body token on movement, and only if there isn't already a body token in the room it just left. Since neither the Traitor's Tome nor the Secrets of Survival state that anything happens when an Ouroboros head is killed (outside of the Survivors winning if both are killed), it is not replaced with a body token on death.


How to mobilize Cardinal Koth? From The Shadow Rune campaign, The Cardinal's Plight quest, Encounter 2:

Special Rules extract:

  Once rescued, at the end of the last hero turn each round, Cardinal Koth performs a single move action. Koth cannot perform other actions.

The Overlord gets a master zombie, and if it dies he can reinforce it at the start of his turn. Assume the master zombie is always next to Cardinal Koth. The master zombie has Grab:

  Choose a hero adjacent to this monster. The hero must test Might. If the hero fails, he is Immobilized.

Cardinal Koth has a Might of 2, so with our assumption it's safe to say the master zombie will almost always immobilize Cardinal Koth.

And, for completeness, Immobilized:

  You cannot perform move actions or suffer Fatigue to gain movement points. Discard this card or token at the end of your turn.

How can this Overlord strategy be countered?

Once mobilized Cardinal Koth can outpace the master zombie, but situations like respawning the master zombie at the entrance or the Overlord playing Dash could immobilize us again.

Ideas:

Stun (don't kill) the master zombie. Then wait (forever?) for an unlucky roll.
Blockade Koth in a corner. Have to move him to a corner first plus minimum three heroes.
Use a search item to remove the condition. Requires lucky searching.
The quest rule that he gets a move action trumps?

  Page 18, "The Golden Rules": The first bullet point should read,
  “Some cards and abilities come in direct conflict with the rules found in
  this rulebook. Cards and abilities take precedence over the rules in this
  rulebook. Furthermore, many quest rules listed in the Quest Guides come
  in direct conflict with cards, abilities, and the rules found in this rulebook.
  The quest rules listed in the Quest Guides take precedence over cards,
  abilities, and the rulebook.”

  -Descent: Journeys in the Dark Second Edition Errata and FAQ Version 1.6

I'm thinking there might be abilities or feats that can take care of this, but I'm not familiar with all the classes.

Summary

Cardinal Koth can still take a move action while immobilized because the quest rule trumps the card effect of Immobilize

Explanation

If the master zombie can prevent the cardinal from moving with grab, this is basically impossible for the heroes unless they have some of the special things I've listed in the "Hard Mode" section below.  The cardinal has a 22% of resisting a grab.  Because the master zombie can spawn next to the cardinal and grab twice on it's turn if needed, the heroes have a 5% chance of being able to move with the cardinal on any turn (assuming the overlord uses grab as much as possible).  Even if the heroes managed to win this way, it would be extremely tedious.  As a result, this can't be the way this scenario was intended to work.  The cardinal must be able to move despite the grab ability.  What follows is the rules lawyering to achieve this.

The rules for Cardinal Koth read differently from the rules for other special hero characters in that Koth never activates:

  Once rescued, at the end of the last hero turn each round, Cardinal Koth performs a single move action.

Compare this to the very similar special character Fredrick in The Monster's Hoard part 1:

  Fredrick activates at the end of the last hero turn each round...  When activated, he performs only 1 move action.

Every other scenario with a special character for the heroes (villagers, guards, etc.), these special characters get an activation... except the cardinal.  As a result, I believe that the cardinal taking a move action is covered as a special rule of the scenario and thus trumps the restriction of Immobilize.  Essentially, because the move action is not done as part of an activation, it is the scenario that is causing Cardinal Koth to move, not the cardinal himself, and Immobilize restricts the cardinal and not the scenario.

Why then does the cardinal have attributes at all?  Because he can still be poisoned, thrown, etc.  He can even gain the Immobilized condition, it just usually doesn't do anything to him.

In particular, the scenario rule allows the cardinal to ignore the You cannot perform move actions portion of Immobilize.  That's it.  The cardinal can still have his movement affected by other things, such as the overlord card Tripwire.  The cardinal can still be blocked by zombies or other monsters standing in doorways.  He can even have his movement interrupted by Web Trap, since, according to the FAQ, becoming immobilized reduces your current movement points to 0.

I have played under this rules interpretation and it works fine.  It is still quite interesting tactically, and I assume is what the scenario designers intended.

Hard mode

You can play this scenario on hard mode, where the cardinal can't move while immobilized.  In this case, the heroes need special techniques or to have found a particular item in order to have any real chance of winning.

Curse Doll

If you find the Curse Doll as a search item, you can get the cardinal to the door of the library (the Curse Doll is a one-time-use condition remover).  Make sure the master zombie is still alive put 2 heroes blocking the library spaces behind the cardinal, thus preventing the master zombie from moving next to the cardinal and also from moving out of the library.  Then, you can just leave two heroes there the doorway of the library to keep the master zombie trapped and move the cardinal out.

Disciple/Apothecary

The Disciple class has Cleansing Touch which can remove immobilize:

  Each time you use Prayer of Healing on a hero, that hero may also discard 1 of his Condition cards.

While the cardinal can't recover health from Prayer of Healing, he can still be targeted by it for the purpose of cleansing touch.

The Apothecary has a similar ability.

Wildlander

You can use the Wildlander's First Strike ability to kill the master zombie at the beginning of it's activation:

  During the overlord's turn, immediately after he chooses a monster to activate, you may exhaust this card to perform an attack targeting that monster with a Bow. After this attack is resolved, if the monster was not defeated, it may continue its activation.

Stun

If you can reliably stun the master zombie (such as with a hero ability), the master zombie can only grab once and can't attack.  Within 5 turns, this will give you an opening to make a break out of the library and outrun the master zombie.

Other alternatives

There are many other house rules you could introduce if you wanted this scenario to be winnable by the heroes but still prevent the cardinal from moving while immobilized.

Have the zombie spawn at the end of the overlord's turn instead of the beginning.  Then, the heroes can kill the master zombie to buy a turn of respite and get the cardinal out of the library.
Zombies only spawn at the entrance.  Then, the heroes can kill the master zombie and block off the entrance to hold off the zombie hoards while they move the cardinal into place for their dash outside.  It's far more cinematic this way too.
If the heroes defeat all of the monsters, consider that an alternate victory condition.  It's kind of silly that the heroes don't win by default if they do this.
Only allow the master zombie to make one grab at the cardinal per turn.  This gives a 22% chance of the cardinal moving.
Give the cardinal 3 strength.  This ups him to a 53% chance of resisting one grab, meaning he now has the quite reasonable 28% chance of resisting a double grab.


Will an object trigger if the source is sacrificed to pay a cost? Will "When/Whenever Foo" trigger if the source is sacrificed to pay a cost for Foo?

Examples

If I activate Birthing Pod's ability and sacrifice Kurkesh, Onakke Ancient, will Kurkesh trigger, allowing me to copy Birthing Pod's ability?

If I cast Life Legacy and sacrifice Basilica Screecher to pay for the cost, will Basilica Screecher trigger, allowing me to extort?

If a creature with a triggered ability leaves the battlefield before the triggered ability's condition occurs, the ability is not triggered. Rule 603.6d says

  Normally, objects that exist immediately after an event are checked to see if the event matched any trigger conditions. 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 must be treated specially. Leaves-the-battlefield abilities, abilities that trigger when a permanent phases out, abilities that trigger when an object that all players can see is put into a hand or library, abilities that trigger specifically when an object becomes unattached, abilities that trigger when a player loses control of an object, and abilities that trigger when a player planeswalks away from a plane will trigger based on their existence, and the appearance of objects, prior to the event rather than afterward. The game has to "look back in time" to determine if these abilities trigger.

In your specific situation, rule 601.2h says

  Once the steps described in 601.2a–g are completed, the spell becomes cast. Any abilities that trigger when a spell is cast or put onto the stack trigger at this time. If the spell's controller had priority before casting it, he or she gets priority.

One of those steps is paying costs. Activated abilities follow the same steps. So in both of your examples, the creature is no longer on the battlefield by the time the spell is cast or the ability is activated.


Why is Agricola named as such? Agricola is a farming game that shares a name with a (mildly) famous Roman general. They have the same pronunciation, i.e. the game is not pronounced as agri-cola.

Given that Agricola the general isn't super famous, especially not as a farmer, then why does the game share his name?

“Agricola” is the Latin word for “farmer” (dictionary).

It is derived from “ager” (“field”) and “-cola” (“-tiller”, “-cultivator”). “Agriculture” shares the same root, and so does “acre” (albeit indirectly).

That a Roman general had it as his last name is unrelated.


Do Go players play to minimize score difference after realizing they cannot win? I would expect that players might opt for a strategy with a higher chance of winning despite having a greater chance of losing by a greater point difference. But after they see that they will lose, do they continue to play their best to score as well as they can?

Go appears to be different from e.g. chess, where by contrast the game is typically not played out to checkmate and often ends in forfeit when a player realizes that he cannot win.

In general, if you realize that you can't win, you should resign. It's considered rude to make plays that will only allow you to catch up if your opponent makes a stupid mistake.

I don't think Go is different from chess in this way. I would say around half of my games end in resignation.


How do ranks work in amateur Go? One of the most commonly asked questions of beginners. How do ranks work in Go for amateurs?

Why do we start backwards? And why do we suddenly count upwards again? What is the difference between 9d and 9p? How is this related to rating? What are the basic differences between ranks used in different countries and different servers?

Let's start with the basics. Beginners start out as "30 kyu". As they get stronger, the number decreases to 29 kyu, 28 kyu ... down to 1 kyu. Kyu means "student" and is commonly abbreviated 'k'. The range from 10k to 30k is called DDK (double digit kyu) while 1k - 9k are SDK (single digit kyu).

The difference between each rank is supposed to be 1 stone of handicap. That is, an 8k should give 3 handicap stones to an 11k. All handicap games are played with komi of half a point. So an 4k playing a 3k plays black, not placing any additional handicap stones, and white receiving 0.5 komi.

Once a player surpasses 1k he becomes 1 dan, "master", abbreviated 'd'. Dan ranks go from 1 dan ('shodan') to 7 dan for amateurs (occasionally to 8 dan).

Professional players are obviously stronger than amateurs, since they studied the game very intensely for years and received training by pros. Only top amateurs have a chance of winning. Pro ranks go from 1 dan pro to 9 dan pro (abbreviated 'p' instead of 'd') with "10 dan" being a title that can be won in a tournament.

Nowadays, the difference in strength between pros is not related to their rank, because new 1 dan pros received the most up-to-date training and already possess vast knowledge (just like someone coming fresh from university is very up to date on the current research). Formerly, it was said the difference between 3 or 4 pro ranks is about 1 stone.

That being said, there are different ranking systems in different parts of the world that are not completely equal for various reasons. Online go serves got their own ranks as well. On Go servers, it is usually possible for amateurs to get assigned a rank of 9 dan.


What is the benefit of being solid with Amnon Duul (Travel Hub)? I was playing the Firefly board game last night and we realized that we couldn't find any particular benefit in Amnon Duul's bonus for being solid, specifically "You may load any number of passengers and fugitives at Space bazaar, no limit."

We couldn't find any use for said passengers or fugitives in the rule book, the only thing we could think of was if - while on a mission- a fugitive/passenger dies (perhaps due to the Reaver Cutter encounter) you can refill without having to do any misbehaving again.

Can you use passengers and fugitives loaded at space bazaar for anything other than re-obtaining those lost during completion of a mission?

As well as being useful in cases where fugitives or passengers die and you have a job which requires a specific amount of them, there is another case where being solid with Amnon Duul can be handy.
If you start a job like Patience' Ranch Hand Recruitment which states

Pick-Up
Load Passengers, no limit.
Drop-Off
Deliver Passengers. Get paid $300 per Passenger.

but you have some of your cargo hold filled with other stuff (requirements for another job, parts, fuel or randomly acquired cargo) which you are able to offload on the way, then you can top up your cargo hold with more passengers so that you can earn more on completion of the job.


Committing units with a warlord In some situations, you may have units at your HQ with your warlord.
I know when you commit your warlord to a planet,  all the units at HQ come across with the warlord exhausted.

What I want to know is what happens to these units once you win a battle at the planet that is not the first planet? Do they go back to HQ with the warlord,  or do they remain committed to that planet?

After rereading the 'Learn to Play rulebook closely, I found the answer on page 11 (emphasis mine):

  When a player wins a battle at any other planet, his warlord (if it
  was committed to that planet) returns to his headquarters, maintaining
  the state (ready or exhausted) it was in at the end of the battle. The
  planet remains in play, and other surviving units remain at that
  planet, also maintaining their state.

In short, any non warlord units at a planet that is not the first, will remain there after the battle is completed.


What are the key strategy differences between Settlers of Catan and Seafarers? Just starting out with Seafarers of Catan—what are the key strategy differences between Settlers of Catan and Seafarers?

For me the big strategy for seafarers is to realize that most of the time the islands are not worth it.  If it is very convenient to go for an island then do it, but usually I find that the resources I expend could have been better used elsewhere.

(Though if everyone is following this strategy, then the islands are great because of the free space.  Basically you want everyone else to go for the islands but you.)


How does Nature Shields Its Own work with "unblockable" and "can't be blocked" Nature Shields Its Own is an archenemy card that allows you to place creature tokens on the battlefield blocking attacking creatures.  The rulings on its Gatherer page call out flying as an ability that this card bypasses, so does it also bypass "unblockable" and "can't be blocked"?

Are there any other cards that do that?

Yes, the plant token blocks the creature even if that creature "can't be blocked". A ruling on Nature Shields Its Own's Gatherer page says

  The Plant token blocks the attacking creature even if the block couldn't legally be declared (for example, if the attacking creature has flying).

We can find other cards that do this by searching for the wording that Nature Shields Its Own uses: "onto the battlefield blocking". According to this magiccards.info search, there are 3 cards that do this: Ætherplasm, Brimaz, King of Oreskos, and Flash Foliage.


What effect does Attack Left vs Attack Right have on MtG multiplayer strategy? Kelly Digges played both, but didn't make any comment on how/if it affected gameplay in any meaningful way. He also doesn't list any difference in his What's in a name Multiplayer Variants article. I seem to remember that either Anthony Alongi, or the Ferret commented on the differences between the two, but cannot seem to find their articles.

What effect (if any) does Attack Left vs Attack Right have on MtG multiplayer strategy/gameplay?

Advantaging beatdown vs. defense

In "attack left" (unless I'm the last player to go), my turn-2 attack will be against an opponent who has yet to take his second turn; in "attack right" (unless I'm the first player to go), it'll be against the player who has already gotten to take his own turn 2 to fortify his position.

Think of each attacking-player/defending-player pairing as a microcosm of beatdown-vs.-control in a larger game. "Attack left" is a lot like the beatdown deck getting to play first in a duel; "attack right" is a lot like the control player getting to take the first turn. Think about how much that affects the flow of the game in a duel. And, also, note how little it matters when both decks are going for a slow-and-steady strategy, as tends to be common in decks tuned for free-for-all casual multiplayer rather than duels or "attack-one" multiplayer specifically.

Compared to "attack left," "attack right" makes it slightly easier to defend yourself in the early game; that Lingering Souls starts to look a lot better when you realize you'll be able to cast it in time to defend against an aggressive opponent's (non-hasty) two-drops!

The hallmark of the variant is that you're always having to think about both offense and defense, so it would be overly reductive to say "attack right" favors the defender -- everyone is a defender. Rather, it's easier to avoid early damage in "attack right," which offers an enticement to go just a little bit "bigger" without risking an auto-loss to fast aggressive decks.

Sweepers play differently

Here's a niche concern that's big enough to point out specifically.

Let's say you just know one of the other players is going to drop a sweeper on this pass around the board -- maybe because it's obvious (like, say, a Scourglass already in play), maybe just you have strong Magic instincts, maybe you know the game will be over anyway if he or she doesn't. In "attack left," it's desirable to go for an "all-in" attack in the hopes of getting some damage through, since your aggressor's guys will all be dead before they get a chance to attack you anyway. In "attack right," it's much more suicidal, since you're setting yourself up to be wide open when it's time to defend yourself.

Non-strategic gameplay differences

As Kelly says in the linked article,

  Instead of ending my turn and waiting all the way around the turn
  order to be attacked, I passed the turn to someone who immediately
  attacked me.

That's true, but it doesn't really matter that much on a pure strategic level. Either way, your turn is spent attacking and preparing for your opponent's next assault -- whether that comes before or after a series of actions that mainly don't affect you directly is strategically inconsequential. Rather, the shift between passing the turn and waiting to be attacked vs. passing and immediately being the defending player is psychological rather than strategic.

That said, there's a reason to pick one variant over the other on the this basis, too -- psychological perception still affects gameplay.

In my experience, multiplayer Magic sometimes has problems with board state comprehension, analysis paralysis, and loss of focus. So, when Kelly says,

  Once I got used to it, though, it felt very natural to pass the turn
  to someone who would then immediately attack me. That meant that I
  could more or less space out during Matt and Laura's turns.

That's non-trivial. It doesn't affect strategy per se, but it does affect gameplay. Making it easier to players to know when they should focus and when they can "space" a bit means less time wasted on "Whose turn is it," "Oh, I had a response for that," and "When did that happen?"

Magic tends towards this cycle:

Decide which resources you're going to commit to attack and defense.
Attack.
Set up for defense (e.g. cast stuff on your second main).
Defend.
Go back to 1.

That's because the main time to make these decisions is at the start of your turn, having just seen your new card. Part of the strategic appeal of MTG is that you need to be adjusting your plans all the time in response to changing circumstances, including on your opponent's turn; but whatever you do then is constrained by the setup decisions you made on your own turn -- which lands and creatures you played, how many dudes you set aside to block, how much untapped mana you have to pay for Instants and abilities, &c.

The attack-defend-wait pattern (in "attack right") fits this decision-making process better. "Attack left" puts more time between making your defensive plans and executing them, which can lead to greater memory and focus issues at the table.

This is all a bit oversimplified, though. The ideal strategic posture is not to "space out" at all, because, even with limited attacks or range of influence, everything that happens on the board is relevant to you. One of the more important "advanced" techniques in "attack-one" multiplayer is using your removal during your aggressor's defense time (thereby forcing him or her to make worse blocks or expend more resources against his/her opponent). Can't really do that if you're only paying attention on your own turn and immediately afterward!

Likewise, if you can avoid cycles of waxing and waning attention, you won't waste everyone's time trying to "catch up" on the board state during your turn.


Do 'destroy' effects count as damage? Does The Wanderer's static ability prevent 'destroy' or 'exile' effects from working? In a recent game, I had it out and my opponent tried to cast Doom Blade on a creature. I argued that it shouldn't work, and he said it should have.

Damage is one of the ways a creature can be destroyed, but it's not the only way. The Wanderer only prevents (non-combat) damage, not other "destroy" effects like Doom Blade.

701.7. Destroy
701.7a To destroy a permanent, move it from the battlefield to its owner’s graveyard.
701.7b The only ways a permanent can be destroyed are as a result of an effect that uses the word “destroy” or as a result of the state-based actions that check for lethal damage (see rule 704.5g) or damage from a source with deathtouch (see rule 704.5h). If a permanent is put into its owner’s graveyard for any other reason, it hasn’t been “destroyed.”


Warhammer 40k - Tau detachment benefit clarification Coordinated Firepower is a Tau detachment benefit:

Whenever a unit from a Hunter Contingent selects a target in the shooting phase, any number of other units from the same detachment who can still shoot can add their firepower to the attack. These units must shoot the same target, resolving their shots as if they were a single unit ... the firing models +1 BS

Independent character Darkstrider has this special rule

When Darkstrider targets a non-vehicle enemy unit with a shooting attack, that unit suffers -1 toughness against hits from that shooting attack - this applies to Darkstrider's entire unit, not just his own

Darkstrider can only join Fire, Breacher, and Pathfinder teams BUT if I'm reading this correctly, if I use Coordinated firepower, fire at a MC with Toughness 6 using 3+ units (let's say a tank, the pathfinder team w/ Darkstrider, and broadside), does the tank and Broadside fire at the MC using his 5 toughness, due to Darkstriders -1 T ability?

Basically the Hammerhead tank has a Str 10 railgun that would insta kill this 6 wound creature. From the bold items in the above descriptions, I'm thinking that they can?

However Darkstrider would have to be within a Fire, Breacher, Pathfinder unit for this to work. If he is on his own, he is not apart of the detachment.

edit: If this tactic works, then it's safe to say the same tactic would work with markerlights? That is, if I hit a unit with 4 markerlights, and 3+ units fire at that unit as a single unit, the markerlights apply to all units firing?

e.g. I use 2 marker lights for BS (so +2) and another 2 for ignores cover, usually I'd have to apply markerlights per unit firing, so if I shot with a unit of riptides and a unit of tanks, only 1 unit would confer the +2 BS & IC benefit. But if I fire with a unit of riptides, a unit of tanks, and a unit of broadsides, each unit gains the +2 BS & IC since they're firing as 1 unit (also the +1 BS for coordinated firepower).

With the errata* released in July of 2016, this is now a much clearer rule.  The rule now reads that the shots are resolved at the same time, but does not indicate that the shooters are all counted as the same unit.  Just like the rule read before, the benefit of the improved BS and shared markerlights still applies, but you no longer get to share unit-wide special rules.  Darkstrider no longer confers the toughness reduction to all the shots in the coordinated firepower attack.  A Commander with the Signature Systems that buff his unit if he does not attack no longer confers ignores cover and twin-linked to an entire coordinated firepower volley.

*GW publishes errata and FAQs on facebook first for comments, then pushes them to their site later.  Bell of lost souls reposted them for those without facebook accounts here


What if I forget to pay rent? Is the rule of not paying rent if you aren't asked for it, in the rules of Monopoly? Or is this something that people have made up? When is this ok?

According to the official rules, property owners must ask for the rent before the player after the next player rolls the dice or they forfeit the rent.

  The owner may not collect the rent if they fail to ask for it before the second player following throws the dice.

So if the players are labelled A to D, and A should pay rent:

A ... B .x. C ... D

The lessor should request rent before C throws the dice, at the position marked X.


What is the  "this effect"  that doesn't remove White Ward? White Ward is a white aura whose Oracle text is:

Enchant creature
Enchanted creature has protection from white. This effect doesn't remove white ward.

Is "this effect" the "protection from white" that the enchanted creature has or the "Enchanted creature has protection from white." that White Ward has?
This should matter if some other ability gives that creature protection from white.

It refers just to the protection granted by White Ward, not protection granted by other effects.

The easiest way to see this is just to look at another similar card, Spectra Ward:

  Enchanted creature gets +2/+2 and has protection from all colors. This effect doesn't remove Auras.

That's the same language as White Ward, and it has a ruling in Gatherer:

  The protection granted by Spectra Ward won’t cause any Aura to be put into its owner’s graveyard, including Spectra Ward itself. However, if the enchanted creature gains protection from white in another way, Spectra Ward will be put into its owner’s graveyard as a state-based action.


Is Chess with more than three players exists or would be playable? Chess board as a function of the number of players:

2 players - 8x8 square board
3 players - a special hexagonal board
4+ players - theoretically a (players * 2) gonal board.

First Question: Does this gonal board exist? Is it playable (talking about practical needs, e.g. size of a field)? How would the desk look like?

Second question: Would a 2+ players 3D-chess room be possible to create?

Yes, chessboards for 3 players exists. I have a similar to the following at home:

https://www.chesshouse.com/products/3-player-medium-wood-chess-set

It is playable and it is fun, however don't expect a really deep chess game. The main tactic is to be not the one who gets ganged upon. The better chess player won't win. The player who can manipulate the best will win (by making the other one vulnerable to attacks or just by talking).

It is almost impossible to defend against two opponents. For example one captures a piece and the second player captures another piece that was defending the first piece. Another situation is as one attacks your king ('check') and the other one attacks your queen. There are also some funny checkmates, like Scholar's mate where one person uses the bishop and the other uses the queen.

Be prepared for these situations, otherwise it feels very unfair. By times very funny, but also very unfair :)


Can you raise the CMC with Geist-Fueled Scarecrow? Say for example, I cast Sylvan Messenger, normally {3}{G}, but there is also a Geist-Fueled Scarecrow in play - thereby bringing up the cost to {4}{G}.

In response, my opponent casts Horribly Awry. Can Horribly Awry counter my Sylvan Messenger?

Yes, Horribly Awry will still counter your Sylvan Messenger.  (And so to answer the title question, no you can't raise the CMC of a spell.)  Geist-Fueled Scarecrow adds an additional cost, but this doesn't affect either the mana cost or the converted mana cost of the spell:

  202.4. Any additional cost listed in an object’s rules text or imposed by an effect isn’t part of the mana cost. (See rule 601, “Casting Spells.”) Such costs are paid at the same time as the spell’s other costs.


What is the probability of obtaining the right, left, Ace, King, and Queen of trump in a 5-card hand in euchre? Take into account that in order for that hand to be the best hand, the dealer must also flip over a card that matches the suit that your best hand is for.

Edit: the original question had two potential methods, one of which was correct and one of which was not.  For posterity, here are the two methods, paraphrased from the original question.

Method one (correct):

5 cards are chosen without replacement and without the order mattering from a deck of 24 (9, 10, J, Q, K, A in four suits). Then a sixth card is chosen. The 5 cards must be JQKA in one suit and J in the other suit of the same color. The sixth card must be 9 or 10 of the JQKA suit.

There are 42,504 possible hands of 5 cards. There are four possible "best hands" corresponding to the four suits. Once one has fixed a best hand, there is a 2/19 chance of the sixth card being one of the two chosen ones.

Therefore the probability is (4/42504) * (2/19), approximately 9.90619 x 10^-6.

Method 2 (incorrect):

Suppose you want the first two cards to be jacks and then the remaining cards to be QKA of a corresponding suit. Perform each draw sequentially.

You have a 4/24 chance of getting a jack with your first draw.
Then you have a 1/23 chance of getting the complementary jack on the second draw.
Then you have a 6/22 chance of getting one of the possible remaining cards (queen, king, or ace of either jack suit).
Once this happens, the suit is determined and there are only two possible remaining cards, so there is a 2/21 chance of getting one of the possible remaining cards at this stage.
Then to get the last necessary card is a 1/20 chance.
Finally, there is 2/19 chance that the sixth draw is as required.

4/24 x 1/23 x 6/22 x 2/21 x 1/20 x 2/19 = 9.90619 x 10^-7

The first method is correct.

The problem with the second method is that it assumes that the first two cards in the deal are jacks and the third, fourth, and fifth cards are the non-jacks. One could fix this by multiplying the probability by 5C2 (you are choosing which two of the 5 dealt cards are the jacks).

There is no problem with ordering within the two jacks because there is no assumption about which jack came first. There is no problem with ordering within the other three cards because there are no assumptions about which one was which.

Multiplying by 5C2 = 10, one obtains exactly the answer as via Method 1.

Further edit:

As pointed out in a comment, the rules (and thus the probability) are different for the dealer. The dealer must add the sixth card to her or his hand and then discard one of her or his six cards.

The sixth (face-up) card must then be a jack, queen, king, or ace of one fixed suit and the dealer's original hand must be the other three of these cards, the complementary jack, and an arbitrary other card. The chances of the sixth card being a jack, queen, king, or ace are 16/24. Then there are precisely 19 cards left to be the arbitrary card in the dealer's original hand (and the other four cards are fixed). Then there are 19*16 deals that result in the dealer having the best possible hand. The total number of deals (including the sixth card as a separate choice) is again 42504 * 19. Then the probability for the dealer is 16/42504, approximately 3.76 * 10^(-4), quite a bit more likely than for the other players.


Why are bridge games seemingly documented only by the hands and bidding? I was looking for an interesting sample hand in Bridge to sort of demonstrate a card game system that could be used for Bridge (a game I know exists, and thought I knew more-or-less the system of it, but which I do not play).  I wanted to have a simulation play through a famous and well known hand...as I understand the game is studied.

Seemingly I was correct, and I found this game that was apparently an old one rehashed in a James Bond movie:

Okay... that's great, but that's just the hands and the bidding.  Where's the list of plays?

Couldn't find them.  So I looked around to try and find another "famous" Bridge game that listed the plays, but they all seem to just skip that.  Just the hands and maybe one small note about "they ruff this" or "they scrobble that" etc.

Is it simply the case that in Bridge you can hand-wave and say that the game is essentially over once you've seen the hands and the bidding?  Because that looks to be what people do.  Can anyone give me the actual play list for this game, merely from that notation of the hands and the bids?

Usually play in double-dummy problems (that is problems with all hands visible) is left as an exercise to the reader. The play in this problem depends on the opening lead.

If the opening lead is not a diamond, it is ruffed in hand. A diamond is ruffed in dummy and a club played toward hand, where it is won as cheaply as possible. Another diamond is ruffed in dummy (note that the AK of diamonds have now both been played), and another club finessed. Declarer may now play his high club from hand, drawing the last trump, then the diamond queen, establishing that suit. Now declarer's hand is good the cards may be played in any order.


In The Resistance is it always a bad idea for the spies to fail the first mission? My first thought was that it was always a bad idea to fail the first mission as a spy. As there are only two people on the mission, the spy has revealed himself to one of the players.

With 5 players though, it seems like the spies give too much away when succeeding. Is failing the first mission (as a spy) a bad idea even in a 5-player game?

Are there any other situations?

No.

You should almost never let the first mission succeed as a spy. So what if your opponents know that one of the participants is a spy? They don't know which one, and they won't be able to win without figuring out which of you it is.

By making the first mission fail, you give your opponents fewer opportunities to make mistakes as the game progresses. This greatly outweighs the fact that failing a later mission reveals less information.

You do need to get your acting skills into high gear immediately after the mission is revealed as a failure, however. You have to pretend it's obvious to you that your mission-mate was a spy, and appear extremely frustrated if the other players side with her. This can be challenging, but you can't afford to sacrifice a victory point to avoid it.


How do I save myself from Khorne? Chaos in the Old World is a game about stomping all over your opponents, either by dominating regions or killing them off! Khorne is particularly good at the latter, requiring to spill much blood to the blood god to win. This was an issue for me, playing as Nurgle as my precious lepers kept being killed and harshing my ability to lay down corruption. I can imagine it'd be an issue for anyone else too.

How can I protect myself from Khorne? What is his weakness, and how can I exploit it?

Everybody needs to team up on Khorne, at least at the start. If he gets powerful early, he's hard to stop.

Khorne's biggest weakness, as I see it, is that he goes first. Early on, you should be able to spend some low-cost cards and force him to make his moves first. Then, put your lepers elsewhere. If he gets on the same space as you, see if you can move off it.

With this practice, my groups generally manage to keep Khorne in check. You'll still lose a few lepers, but as long as he's not double-ticking his dial, you should be able to tick yours or dominate for points. Later on, he'll be a spread-out unstoppable killing machine, but usually the game ends before that will cause you undue worry.


Do I play a hero's ability every time I draw it? When I buy a hero and put it into my discard deck, then shuffle it and draw it in my hand in a later round, do I always have to / get to play the hero's ability?

For example, each time I draw Seer of the Forked Path, do I get to draw an additional card from my deck?

In Ascension you only ever use a hero's ability when you play the card. So in your case when you draw the Seer of the Forked Path nothing happens. However on your turn if you play that card you will draw an additional card and get the choice of banishing a card in the center row. The fact that the ability only happens when you chose to play the card is important because there are times when you do not want to activate a hero's ability because it has a drawback that you don't want to encounter.

If you look at the rules it describes what every area of the card does and for the area where the ability is it says:

  What the hero does when you play it

It should be noted that constructs unlike heroes stay in play and the effect happens every turn (though some of the abilities you have to chose to activate).

As a side note cards with the ability to draw other cards are generally pretty powerful and are good ones to look to acquire.


If I have a net negative number of dice, how many clue tokens do I need to spend to attempt a roll? Say that my investigator currently has their Sneak score at 1. If I am called upon to make a Sneak (–2) check, that's a net result of –1. If I want to be able to roll one die, how many clue tokens do I have to spend? I have heard it two ways:

You have to spend a clue token to counteract each negative. Thus in this case you would spend 2 clue tokens to roll a single die.
Negative dice doesn't make sense, so you consider it having zero dice. Thus in this case you would spend 1 clue token to roll a single die.

Which way is correct?

You always gain bonus dice from clue tokens spent, regardless of how negative your actual ability check is.

So in your example you do not have to spend one to overcome the negative, then another to gain a dice, you would be able to spend one (or more) clue(s) to gain one (or more) dice.

From the rulebook (page 13 under Spending Clue Tokens on Skill Checks):

  Important: Spending a Clue token always gives you the
  bonus dice that you are entitled to, even if the modifier
  has dropped the number of dice you can roll below 0.


Is there a bonus card when playing the Ticket to Ride USA 1910 Expansion in Big Cities mode? Is there a bonus card (either longest route or globetrotter) when playing the Ticket to Ride USA 1910 Expansion in Big Cities mode?  There is no mention of it in the rules.  Is this an oversight?

I believe that you don't use either bonus card in the Big Cities version of the game (as it's not suggested that you should in the rulebook).

This interpretation is backed up by the computer version and the ruleset found in the computer version, which don't use a bonus card.


Do automatic battles end your turn in Neuroshima Hex? Your turn ends if you start a battle by playing a Battle Tile. Does starting a battle by filling the board also end your turn?

Yes, it does. A battle will always end the turn. From the 3.0 rules:

  The player who starts a Battle (by playing Battle tile or filling up the board)
  finishes his turn, regardless of the number of tiles he has left. As soon as the
  Battle commences, no other tiles can be used or even discarded.

It's also the way it is implemented in the mobile app (I've checked, forcing the described situation).


"A player must capture as many pieces as possible." What happens if he doesn't? There's a rule that says "A player must capture as many pieces as possible." What happens in the event a player didn't see the move with the most captures, and makes a move that takes fewer? What happens in this case?

(Is it against the rules to be not too good in checkers and be unable to see the best combination? Hmmm...)

As per the the Official FMJD Rules for International Draughts, if the opponent notices that you have not captured as many pieces as possible, they may decide whether the move stands or if it must be taken back and made again.

  5.4. If a player has committed one of the following irregularities, his opponent has the right to decide whether that irregularity must be rectified, or on the contrary, must be allowed to stand.

…

  5.4.8. Capture by a piece, of less or more than the number of possible pieces to capture;


Differences between Dixit versions? I'm concerned my niece, who's ten and has been raised on the likes of Hannah Montana, has little to no imagination or creativity. I want to find games we can play that will push her thinking out of the Disney drone-mold and I think that Dixit looks perfect for this. However, there's a problem; there are too many versions.

Amazon.co.uk stocks the following versions of Dixit:

Dixit
Dixit 2
Dixit 3
Dixit Odyssey
Dixit Journey

To me Odyssey looks the most random, but may be too far out for someone with little imagination, at least to start with. Common sense suggests starting with Dixit, as it's the first, but that also makes it the oldest; theoretically the newest would be the most stable and well made.

I'm not looking for opinions here, rather I'm after facts about the different games that may help decide which one is right for us.

So my question is: What makes each version of Dixit different, and what can you tell me about each that may help decide which version is best for my situation?

I personally own all of the above apart from Dixit Journey (which I didn't even know existed).

You should know that, Dixit 2 and 3, aren't technically stand-alone games; they're only sets of additional cards.

Dixit Oddysey is nearly the same as original Dixit when it comes to rules. As far as I remember it has all the rules the original had, plus some additions for bigger number of players. It also has a set of pieces for greater number of players (up to 12, I think). The biggest difference are the actual cards - those are entirely new when compared to original.

My recommendation is to buy the Oddysey, as it contains the game pieces helpful* in playing a game and a manual. Then if your niece likes the game you could buy the others for additional cards.

*) As long as you have access to the game rules, you don't really need anything apart from the cards. All the other pieces in the boxes are used to keep track of players score, and to 'vote' for the cards - if you can manage this some other way (easiest and most crude would be pen&paper solution) you could buy only the cards.


Do Ensnaring Bridge and Tortoise Formation work together? I would like to use Tortoise Formation to temporarily disable the effect of Ensnaring Bridge.  My question therefore is: does that combo allow my creatures to attack, even if there are no cards in my hand?

No, Tortoise Formation has no interaction with Ensnaring Bridge.

Shroud only prevents a creature from being the target of a spell or ability. That is the only thing shroud does. Only spells or abilities that specifically use the word "target" have targets (with a few pseudo-exceptions, chiefly Auras and Equip abilities, for which the word "target" occurs in the official rules but is not usually printed on the card). If a spell or ability does not use the word "target", then shroud has no effect.

Ensnaring Bridge's ability does not use the word "target", so playing Tortoise Formation will not allow your creatures to get around the Bridge's restriction.


What are effective strategies for playing control against aggro-control? In Magic, there's a style of deck known as "aggro-control", which plays a mixture of cheap threats and disruption (especially counterspells). Against a pure control deck, aggro-control seeks to set up quickly in the early turns and then protect its board position from sweepers and spot removal using countermagic, long enough to get an opponent to 0 life.

From a control player's perspective, this can be a difficult situation because you're on a pretty fast clock, but your normal tricks against aggro decks (like Day of Judgment on turn 4) just don't work with any degree of consistency.

What are some strategies that you can employ, either during deckbuilding or in play, to improve a control deck's performance against aggro-control?

You could try playing more spot removal (such as Condemn or Path to Exile) instead of mass removal. Typically aggro-control decks have problems if you succesfully remove their first threats. This way the control deck won't die in the early turns and will be in a good position to win the game, because it has a better late game.

The reason behind spot removal being better than mass removal in this kind of match-up is that it demands more answers: they only need a single counterspell to deal with your Day of Judgment, but they will need two if you play two Condemn. However, they'll need two answers if you play a second Day of Judgment, but usually you wont survive to your next turn if they counter the first one.


Should West read a low card as "not" discouraging in the following situation? This is a link to the whole hand from a Frank Stewart column:

E-W vulnerable, S bid 1 spade, raised to 2 spades by N. All pass.

West opened with the king of hearts. Dummy, East and South played low with the 3,5, and 8 respectively. At this point, West knows that the outstanding cards are QJT.

West failed to continue hearts (and let the contract make) because he was discouraged by the 5. But I would have read it as a singleton and continued hearts on the theory that if East had a Q, J, or T, he would have played that card as encouragement.

Should one not be discouraged by the 5 in this situation?

Would East discourage with exactly JT5 and play the 5? And even so, shouldn't West then continue with the A to drop South's Q?

            Dummy
            Q63
            763
            KT3
            Q863
  West
  5
  AK942
  Q72
  J952

East doesn't know West has 5 hearts. If west had only AKxx and east had JTx, then continuing hearts would set up the third round for declarer. So discouraging from JTx, Jxx, or even JTxx (if opening leader could have AKx) is correct.

On this hand West should definitely continue hearts. It is safe, and given West's holdings in the minors, it's very unlikely that it's crucial to start an attack on another suit.

In general, saving your honors when they could be crucial for taking tricks is much more important than giving the right signal. Sometimes you have to trust partner to work it out without a signal. So don't signal with the Q from Qxx.

A couple more advanced notes:

This is indeed easier if you lead A from AK, since if the lead was from KQx or KQxx, you want to be able to encourage holding the jack.

Contrary to the previous answer, the situation when the lead is from AK and small cards are in dummy is actually one when standard carding does better than upside down, since with JTx you want to discourage but may not be able to afford an honor. This is a well-known position.


Citadels: Circus (German edition, 2012): how to interpret "Cash point" ability? To my knowledge the ability of card named "Kassenwagen" (Cash point) in the German edition of Citadels released in 2012 is translated: "Kassenwagen (Cashpoint) – Once per turn, the active player may place one gold on this card to draw two cards and keep one. You may trash this card to gain all gold on it." https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/1344225/circus-expansion-action-cards-english-name

My question is how could the ability be meaningfully interpreted and should any additional house rules be added. One obstacle interpreting it is not specified when can the Cash point be discarded: can the Cash point be discarded during the same turn it was played and if so can it be discarded immediately after using the draw cards ability or does the player need to wait until his next turn.

I believe that the biggest problem with Cash point is that it is overpowered and the ability of the card should be constrained with additional house rules. During the whole game a player could use the Cash point as a safe place from characters like Thief, Emperor, Abbot or Tax Collector.

I would be grateful if anyone could suggest how to balance this action card or provide any valid arguments claiming that the card is not overpowered and should be left as it is.

You've got the gist of it - I would translate the card as follows:

  Each player may place one piece of gold per turn on this card while he/she is the active player. He/she may then draw 2 cards and keep 1 of them. Immediately after that, you may decide to take all the gold from this card and discard the Kassenwagen.

So it looks like to me, that anytime anyone uses the Kassenwagen, the owner may choose to take the gold immediately after their card draw resolves.  There are no rules stating that you must wait X rounds or X uses before doing so - you are limited by how often players wish to use it.  Similarly, barring any specific mention, it can be used as any other district card in the game.  I can't find a specific reference to any activation delay for any other districts with paid abilities (The Smithy coming to mind) - they are simply available for use as soon as they are built.

To me, the balance seems somewhat obvious - it's a risk/reward game.  It is a temporary haven from the Thief, Abbot, Tax Collector, and Emperor, but the longer the owner hangs onto it - the more likely he/she is likely to be targeted by the Assassin, Warlord (or even worse, the Diplomat), or by the Thief on the turn following the discard.  By holding onto the card, the player paints a very large "PAY ATTENTION TO ME" sign on him/herself.  Additionally, the other players may be wary of providing resources to another player, and may choose not to use it - limiting the effectiveness.  All in all, while it can turn into one amazing payoff, there seems to me to be an equally likely chance that the other players see what you did there and stop you from cashing in.


Gomoku, is it possible to not be able to make a legal move? On a 11 across 12 down Gomoku board with the following conditions:

A player must make a move within 3 spaces of an opponent's piece.
If a player can't make a move that player loses.

Is it possible to force the above, given the conditions?

Yes, it is possible for such a condition to happen, though I'm not sure what you mean by "force." It is possible because it is possible to create a board-state in which neither player has won the game, but the entire board is filled. A simple example of such a state is the following: imagine a filled 11x12 which follows the pattern:

WWBBWWBBWWBB

BBWWBBWWBBWW

WWBBWWBBWWBB

BBWWBBWWBBWW

Obviously, neither player has won the game, and since white and black each have an equal number of stones on the board, it is not impossible to reach such a board state. I have therefore shown that it is possible to reach a board-state in which one player cannot make a legal move. You can also show this for non-full boards by applying the rule of three and three and the rule of four and four.


BANG! Can I use the "Lady Rose of Texas" card to lock out the other player when it is down to two players? In the expansion pack Wild West Show, for the game BANG!, there is a card called "Lady Rose of Texas". It states that:

  During his turn, each player can swap places with the player on his right, who will skip his next turn.

I had a situation come up while I was the renegade, and the only other player left was the Sheriff. It was my turn when this card came up from the expansion pack.

Since it was my turn, and the card states that the person you switch with loses their turn, you could effectively put them into a neverending loop of skipped turns, and always have a new turn start over for you. Eventually, you would win the game because you would get the cards you needed over time.

This seems like an instant win card, which seems kind of lame and defeats how the game should be played. Am I understanding this card right?

Here is some clarification posted on this card over at Board Game Geek where someone got answers from the publishers.

Looking at the answers that where posted it looks like in your case the card was intended to be used only twice as at that point in the game it is only a two player game.

  Q: Lady Rose of Texas. Can a player use this ability just once per turn, or more often?
  A: Once per turn.

  Q: Lady Rose of Texas (and Dorothy Rage). Can this card be used at any point in the turn? For example, can Willy the Kid Bang! the player on his left, switch seats to the right, and then Bang! the player on his right?
  A: Yes, Lady Rose of Texas (and Dorothy Rage) can be used at any point in the turn.

  Q: Lady Rose of Texas. Is there a limit to the number of times this can be used in a row? For example, if the game is down to two players, one of them could keep swapping places and the other would never get a turn. Even with the Sheriff and 2 or 3 Outlaws, the Outlaws could keep swapping with the Sheriff and never let him get a turn.
  A: The card was intended to be played a maximum of N times where N is the number of players currently in the game.


Why does Renegade Freighter not just have trample? The artifact vehicle Renegade Freighter has the ability

Whenever Renegade Freighter attacks, it gets +1/+1 and gains trample until end of turn.

Given that trample is only generally relevant when attacking, this should behave basically identically to:

Trample
Whenever Renegade Freighter attacks, it gets +1/+1 until end of turn.

At first, I thought that maybe this was because it would be strange to have a non-creature have trample, so it only gets trample at a time that it is a creature. But then I saw Fleetwheel Cruiser, which is another vehicle that does always have trample. In fact, Untethered Express is even more similar, in that it does have a when-attack ability, yet it also just always has Trample.
Renegade Freighter could be seen as slightly weaker as worded, because something like Stifle could prevent it from getting Trample. However, that seems like a small enough thing that it wouldn't be specifically designed around.
Is it known why this card only gets trample when it attacks? A good answer could either point to any statements about it from the development team, or to information about general templating choices where this is a consistent design choice. Or finally, perhaps there is an important difference between always having trample vs only having trample when attacking that I am missing.

There are some more relevant edge cases where the difference actually matters. Two of the cards that were in standard at the same time as Renegade Freighter were Odric, Lunarch Marshal and Majestic Myriarch. Both of those check for abilities including Trample at the beginning of combat, so in both cases, they can find Trample on Untethered Express, but not on Renegade Freighter.


Does Portal count as a Spell Die? The Assistant is a Basic Card, but it explicitly counts as a Creature Die at the same time. The Portal card belongs to the Basic Cards as well, but its faces are akin to those of spells: there are no faces that show creatures, rather it has one face that provides Quiddity and the portal immediate effect on the other five faces similar to  e.g. the Growth spell cards.
When the Strong Devotee of the Holy Query with burst scores, it permits you to capture one Spell Die that costs up to four Quiddity. Discriminating Incantation allows you to capture a Spell Die from the Wilds for free when you cast it. Does the Portal count as a Spell Die in this vein?

No, Portal dice can yield either Quiddity or an immediate effect, but it has no "spell" sides (spells are kept and used later rather than when rolled; see phase 3 in the rules), so there's nothing to indicate that it's a spell die. Portals are just basic resource dice; neither creature nor spell.


Gifts ungiven vs. hexproof What happens when my opponent cast Gifts Ungiven while I have hexproof (like from Veil of Summer)? Does it fizzle or give them all four of the cards?

If you already have hexproof when your opponent attempts to cast Gifts Ungiven, then Gifts Ungiven cannot be cast because it cannot target an opponent; attempting to do this is an illegal action and results in the game returning to the state before your opponent attempted to cast the spell (CR 601.2c, 601.2e).
If you acquired hexproof between the spell being cast and the spell resolving (e.g. by casting Veil of Summer in response to Gifts Ungiven going on the stack), then it will fizzle as all its targets are now invalid, or more formally not resolve and be placed into its owner's gravecard (CR 608.2b).