No, not quite. The age counter isn't actually placed on Glacial Chasm until the cumulative upkeep trigger resolves. When it resolves, as part of the same triggered ability, you must then pay two life for that counter or sacrifice Chasm. You can't remove the counter before you have to pay two life for it because you don't get priority while an ability is resolving.

You can, however, remove each counter immediately after the cumulative upkeep trigger resolves, meaning you pay only pay two life per turn indefinitely.


During your turn, you can pretty much do whatever you see fit with every tile on the table, including those you've only just placed. As long as the end result has no invalid sets. Except, apparently, joker tiles:

From Rummikub.org:

  With the exception of the joker, any tile on the table may be repositioned provided that all tiles on the board eventually become part of a meld. The joker may be used in place of any tile when forming melds, but once a joker is on the table it cannot be moved to another meld. It must first be replaced by the tile for which it was used.

I cite this source, because it seems to be the most reliable one. But, truthfully, I wasn't aware of the joker exception.


Having started a small avalanche, what does one do with an undefended cutting stone?

9 looks like a severe mistake to me. White may simply capture the single stone and be satisfied, like this:

$$B Simple punishment
$$ ........-
$$ ....Ob..-
$$ ....XO..-
$$ ..1.XO..-
$$ ...XOX2.-
$$ ...cOa..-
$$ ........-
$$ ---------

After this, if black c, white may answer at a, or may tenuki. Tenuki is reasonable, because the black followup does not threaten white, only captures two stones and ends in gote.

(If W2 instead at a, which is sometimes a good move, then black has a cut at b. This cut is worth more than the black descend at c.)

In other words, the cut at b works a lot worse than in the joseki for black. At the same time, black is not strong (e.g. the point you played at in the game remains a weakness). Territory is white's, too. This is not an even result.

As for why B1 was played at all: It is indeed a shape point, because it makes black a work (to capture the two white stones). In some other joseki that look (vaguely) similar, it is actually the correct move.

The underlying reason why the order was wrong becomes visible if we compare with the joseki move. If black plays at W2 instead of B1, then it is significantly harder to capture him in the corner (four liberties instead of two). That is why, in the joseki, white will need to offer a trade, losing two stones but capturing the stone at B1. (There is a ladder involved etc., but those are details.)


What is the name of the game where you bid for a hand in decreasing numbers?

I know that game, it goes by many names but is often called "Oh Hell!"

Here's a link for you: http://www.pagat.com/exact/ohhell.html


Unless one of those creatures has First Strike or Double Strike, they will deal combat damage simultaneously. The following will happen:

Your 6/4 will deal 6 damage to your opponent's 5/5. (Note that 6 ≥ 5.)
At the same time, your opponent's 5/5 will deal 5 damage to your 6/4. (Note that 5 ≥ 4.)
State based actions kick in, see that both creatures have damage greater than or equal to their toughness, and both creatures die.


What is new in the 6th edition of Warhammer 40K?

The rule-book itself is full color with expanded art and fluff sections.  Though you won't find anything here that wasn't present in previous versions outside of some new artwork.  Most of the price increase was because it's GW and that's just what they do.  Any other gaming company would probably charge 10-20% less for the same thing.

GW did just release a rules only version that drops the fluff and color artwork for a price reduction.  The new starter also contains a mini-rulebook just like last edition.

6th was a pretty big overhaul to the game.  For better or worse a lot of mechanics from the current version of Fantasy where ported over.  I'll go over the big changes:

Flyers - Probably the biggest change and also includes Flying Monstrous Creatures.  They move fast and are hard to hit (always requiring a 6+ to hit regardless of BS).  They also neglected to give many of the armies any units with the new Skyfire rule to shoot them down.  This has had a great impact on balance.
Allies - You can take small detachments from other codexes based on an allies matrix.  Some allegiances are good enough that your characters can join up with allied squads.  Game balance has been tossed out the window this edition.
Hull Points - Vehicles essentially have wounds now.  Usually 3 for standard vehicles, 2 for lights like speeders, and 4 for the big guys like Land Raiders.  Pens or Glances take off a hull point.  There is no damage table for glances anymore.  They also made AP 2 weapons add 1 to the damage table, and AP 1 adds 2.  Pretty much everyone's mech has been shelved this edition. It's far to easy to glance vehicles to death.
Snap Fire - Pretty much anything can move and shoot now, but heavies need 6+ to hit if they move.
Assault - Big changes here.  Assault moves are 2d6 now instead of a fixed 6".  They also included challenges between characters.  Defender can also snap fire into assaulting units now.
Wound Allocation - Another big change.  Wound allocation is by closest model.  Characters can jump out of the way to transfer the hit to a mook on a 4+(2+ if it's an IC).  This effectively allows you to take a nasty character with a big squad of guardsman for +20 wounds.


Can you sacrifice a creature that's in the middle of an attack?

Your opponent could have declared that token as an attacker, then sacrificed it before actual combat damage happened. It would have counted as attacking — at least until it was sacrificed — but it wouldn't have actually done any combat damage to its blocker.

The combat phase works like this:

  Beginning of Combat Step

  Nothing has happened yet, but you're considered to be inside the combat phase. Players can cast spells and use abilities.

  Declare Attackers Step

  The active player may declare which of their creatures are attacking.
  Those attacking creatures get tapped. They're now considered to be Attacking for the rest of the combat phase, even if something untaps them somehow.
  Players may now cast spells and use abilities before moving on.

  Declare Blockers Step

  The inactive player may declare which of their creatures are blocking.
  The inactive player assigns the blocking creatures among the attackers. These creatures are now considered Blocking for the remainder of combat, even if something taps them somehow. Any attacker assigned a blocking creature is now considered Blocked for the remainder of combat, even if its blocker disappears, and will not deal combat damage to you personally (unless it has trample, or something else that lets it do that).
  Players may now cast spells and use abilities again before moving on.

  Combat damage happens.

  Any attacking creatures still alive and present at this point attack their blockers and/or the opposing player/planeswalker/etc.
  Nobody can cast spells during this process.

  Combat finishes, the board gets cleaned up (dead creatures removed, etc).

It sounds like the Goblin in question was given a blocker during the Declare Blockers step. At that point, the other player does have the opportunity use an ability to sacrifice the goblin, and if the goblin is doomed to die, that's probably a good choice.

However, once combat damage happens, that sacrificed goblin won't be around anymore. You say this:

  I'm new to the game, but it seems to me that if he sacrificed it prior to its attack, it shouldn't have counted as an attack.

It will have counted as attacking, but since it's dead by the combat damage step, it's gone and won't actually be there to do anything. Your blocker won't take damage from the goblin, for instance - the goblin will be dead and gone.

(There was a time in the past when you could cast spells and use abilities during combat damage, so that the goblin could deal combat damage and get sacrificed too, but that was weird and got removed from the rules a few years ago in M10.)


In bridge, what caused bidding "standards" to decline post Goren?

A complete history of scoring changes, coupled with the whys of those changes would be a complicated story. But those doubled contract penalty changes came about for a simple reason. A few pairs realized that preemptive bidding against slams was simply too much of a potential gain against slams, so the scoring change was implemented to prevent this. Compare how many tricks you can go down against a vulnerable small slam, and still gain under the two scoring systems:

Old: 100 300 500 700 900 1100 1300 1500
New: 100 300 500 800 1100 1400 1700

So if they are vulnerable, a small slam will cost you 1370, 1430, or 1440 points. If you are not vulnerable, you could go down 7 tricks (doubled) and STILL gain under that scoring. Under the new scoring ladder, even a 6 trick deficit will be too much against a minor suit slam, and a 7 trick deficit will always cost you against all slams.

The second part of the question is to identify the cause of declining standards. A big reason is seeing how important it is to open 1NT. When you CAN open a strong 1NT, you gain considerably in the bidding. It allows you to become declarer in most contracts, assuming that you use transfers. I recall reading that this is a potential gain of roughly 1/2 of a trick on average, because they must lead into your hand at trick one. As well, hiding the strong hand is a valuable thing. If your opponents know what cards you have, they can defend vastly more effectively.

So making the strong hand the declarer is a valuable thing. But how often does this happen? How often will you open 1NT with a 16-18 point hand?

Overall, the probability of picking up a 16-18 point hand (ignoring shape) are 7.28%, versus 10.09% for a 15-17 point hand. (I could run a complete simulation to get the odds for balanced hands in those ranges, but things won't change too much.) The point is though, compared to a 6-18 point 1NT, you will be able to open a 15-17 point 1NT almost 40% more often! This difference is a HUGE gain.

So I'd argue that the shift in strong NT ranges is not a declining of standards, but a realization that the slightly weaker range is much more valuable overall.

Other changes in preempt quality are due to the realization of how valuable a preempt can be. Your opponents today will often use highly accurate bidding systems. Compared to the "old" days, when the opponents more frequently got to the wrong contracts, it is simply too dangerous to allow a quality pair to bid to the optimal contract. So instead we preempt more aggressively. This makes them guess how high to bid, or force them to double us.


(1) You are correct - if you Decline your active race, that's all you do in that turn.  There's no window of opportunity for conquering at all.

(2) I believe Declined Ghouls operate as a special case: normally only one token of a Declined race stays in a region, so it's very obvious what happens when that region is conquered (the token is obliterated).  Declined Ghouls however have all the characteristics of an active race, so I'd say that, as long as you still have Ghoul-occupied territories on the map, you can redeploy them in just the same way as you would your active race.

(3) A Spirit race never leaves the map, even when in Decline; Ghouls can still carry out conquests even while in Decline.  I don't any real contradictions going on here: as long as your Spirit Ghouls stay on the map, and it may be a very long time, they can still conquer territories and generally behave much like an active race.  Note however that you can't do some Conquering with your Spirit Ghouls and also put another race into Decline in the same turn.  It's one or the other out of Conquering or Declining on any given turn, that really is the golden rule! (unless the active race you choose to put into decline has the "Stout" power - In this case you could use both the Spirit Ghouls as well as your active race to attack, and after scoring still be able to put the active "Stout" race into decline, therefore reaping the benefits of both special powers)


What happens to a permanent I gained control over using Agent of Treachery, and I leave a multiplayer game?

When a player leaves the game, all objects (see rule 109) owned by that player leave the game, any effects which give that player control of any objects or players end, and all spells and abilities controlled by that player on the stack cease to exist.

(emphasis mine)

So Alice's control of the Leyline ends, and Bob controls it again. The Leyline won't be affected by

  Then, if there are any objects still controlled by that player, those objects are exiled.

This sentence rarely matters, but as @Hackworth notes in the comments, Command the Dreadhorde is one of those situations. The Rulings under that card mention it as well:

  In a multiplayer game, if a player leaves the game, all cards that player owns leave as well. If you leave the game, the creatures and planeswalkers you control from Command the Dreadhorde’s effect are exiled.

Regarding Beguiler of Wills, you can think of the Rulings in Gatherer as a sort of FAQ about the card. All Rulings can be traced back to the Comprehensive Rules; apparently Wizards didn't feel the need to add it. The situation is the same as with Agent of Treachery; the 'stolen' creature won't be exiled but will once again be controlled by its owner.


Yes (in most rules; check your specific rules for exceptions). From Wiki

Pieces may only be moved to the home position with an exact application of the total roll, the value on a single die, or the complete application of a reward.

You cannot voluntarily forfeit a roll, but you can take part of the roll if that is your only option.

All die rolls must be taken and may not be voluntarily forfeited by a player.

If either of two rolls must be forfeited, the player must forfeit the lower number.


What is the actual world ranking of Fan Hui

Just to add a few notes in addition to Pieter's answer, and with a hint to your implied question (can AlphaGo beat Lee Sedol?):

First off, I'm not sure if you thought being 9p automatically means being stronger than 2p. This is not the case.

However, in this particular instance, other matters are of more importance. Fan Hui has not been competing in Asian (i.e. highest level) tournaments for many years, and his competition in Europe is limited - that's why he's the current European champion, after all.

However, this also means that it can be assumed that he's not quite as sharp as an active, competing pro in Asia. His focus simply shifted towards teaching, as teaching was the reason he came to Europe. That is to say, and with no disrespect to Fan Hui's great skill, Lee Sedol, an active top level competitive pro, is quite a bit stronger than Fan Hui - 2 stones, goes the rumor among pros.

Obviously, the closer we get to perfect moves, the more difficult it becomes to improve further: For instance, doubling AlphaGo's calculation power does not at all lead to doubled strength. Think of it more like a logarithmic scale: To improve another stone in strength, you have to put in just as much work as you did for all previous stones together (roughly speaking). It remains to be seen if AlphaGo's improvements since the Fan Hui games are large enough.

About comparing pro Go players

While we cannot compare pros by their rank, we can get a rough idea of their relative strength by using Dr. Taeil Bai's chart, of which I reproduce the beginning of the most recent version I could find (from cyberoro, 2014):

I am not aware if Fan Hui is included in the list, too - if he was, that might be the source for your 600th-700th information.


How do the expansions for Race for the Galaxy alter the game - are they worth buying?

The expansions all have different themes to them, and they change up the game play in significant ways.  The first expansion, The Gathering Storm, is easily the most interesting in terms of changing up the game play.  It adds in the goals, which channels play in different ways in each game.  That, plus the new start worlds, provide enough extra variety that I'd suggest it's worth getting after playing roughly 25 games or so of the base game.  That many games allows you to see the different strategies that are available and become familiar with the approaches.

Rebel vs. Imperium has an excellent new start world mechanic, where each player gets dealt two start worlds with their opening hand and then gets to make a choice.  This, on its own, justifies the expansion I think.  The takeover mechanic isn't especially interesting, it just doesn't come up terribly often, so really here, you're talking about just beefing up the deck and providing more variety.

The Brink of War, honestly, I don't care for.  The prestige mechanics seem to tilt things pretty far back towards military being the most successful strategy.  Perhaps I'm just not very adept at it, but after about 15 games or so, I'm close to taking the cards out of my deck.

Alien Artifacts is actually the start of a new expansion cycle. It's designed to be played with just the base game, and it changes things in a very different way than the first three. It introduces a map that the players build, with the players moving around on the map to find new stuff. Explore becomes a first-class action with the expansion, which isn't really much true in the other ones. I only have four or so games with it, and I think some of the rules for building the map are kind of inelegant (although understandable why they are the way they are), but it's a fun experience. I'd still probably buy it third of the four expansions, though.


Dolphins don't belong to anyone. In my version of the rules (UK), the only thing a Dolphin does is let you pay 3 movement points (I.E your entire turn) to move a swimmer and dolphin to the safety of a coral island, and leave the dolphin in front of the island.

You can move the dolphin with the swirler without having any effect on the swimmer(s) present.

I think different editions have different rules though.


Rule 6.2.3. [...] any over 49 are lost [...]

So the Syndicate loses those resources but they are lost and no one receives them.

Maybe the Government henchmen kept the skim for them.


Combining Ascension expansions: tokens and boards

In my opinion:

I don't think there are any any interactions between sets to-date that would make this impermissible, but this might be inadvisable.  Consider that cards with set-specific interactions will become more ineffective as you combine sets with different mechanics (as the odds of useful interactions decreases, the value of those cards decrease).
Sure, but less tokens-per-player will presumably mean less cards and turns-per-player, so decks that excel in the short-term will win more often than decks that take a while to build out. I'm thinking "kill-the-monsters" type decks will be favored over "invest in the longer term"-type decks.
All of the Ascension games that I'm aware of can be played without boards altogether - they just suggest a physical layout for different types of cards.


1 damage or 3, it's up to you

Both Ambuscade Shaman and Warstorm Surge trigger at the same time, when your 1/1 creature enters the battlefield. Since you control both, you get to decide what order they're put on the stack.

If you put Ambuscade Shaman's trigger on the stack first, then Warstorm Surge's trigger on top, then the damage trigger will resolve first and deal 1 damage to target creature or player. Then, Shaman's trigger will resolve giving the creature +2/+2 until end of turn.

If you put Warstorm Surge's trigger down first, then Shaman's trigger will resolve first, giving the creature +2/+2 until end of turn, and then Surge's trigger will resolve, dealing 3 damage to target creature in player.

Suffice to say, it's likely that you want the second scenario to occur most of the time.


Can you fail to find a card in someone's hand?

You can "fail to find" a card, but only while explicitly searching someone's library or hand. In the case of Inquisition of Kozilek, you are not "searching" the zone, so you must choose a card if a valid choice is available.

Per the comp rules, "fail to find" is specific to searching a hidden zone:

  701.18b If a player is searching a hidden zone for cards with a stated quality, such as a card with a certain card type or color, that player isn’t required to find some or all of those cards even if they’re present in that zone.

While the hand is still considered a hidden zone even when it is revealed (CR 400.2: "Library and hand are hidden zones, even if all the cards in one such zone happen to be revealed"), Inquisition of Kozilek's instructions say to choose a card from it, not search for one. Thus, you must follow the normal rules: which is to carry out as much of the actions as possible.

So, you may still be wondering: why doesn't this rule come with a "fail to find" clause?

The simplest explanation is that it's part of the underlying logic of the Magic comp rules — to minimize actions that players can't "double-check" using public information. (Consider the difference between Vampiric Tutor and Mystical Tutor, for instance. What purpose does the extra "reveal" clause serve?)

Adding "fail to find" to the rules for searching guarantees that your search will result in a valid game state without forcing you to prove there are no valid choices by revealing your entire library.

Inquisition of Kozilek doesn't need a "fail to find" rule because it says "reveal" — all players get to see the targeted players' hand and verify whether there are any suitable cards in it.

If a discard spell said "Look at target layer's hand" instead of "Reveal," the rules manager would probably insist they include a "may" clause, like Vendilion Clique.


Do I earn two energy cubes if I end my 5th register on an energy space?

Short answer: Yes.

If you end any register on a space that has an energy cube you get that cube. If you end the 5th register on an energy space you get a cube from the bank. These statuses are both checked independently.


From my Reddit post, I just had to spend those 300 coins on getting two Shadows Over Innistrad boosters, and the cards from the Starter Box were added to the collection automatically.


Why am I unable to draw cards in Magic 2014?

At the start of your turn, you draw 1 card. In a two player game, the start player does not draw a card at the start of his first turn.

If a computer version of MTG did not let you draw a card at the start of each turn, then either there was some sort of bug, or it was a special mode that changes the normal rules of Magic.


No, there is no rule against playing so that the game as a whole progresses slowly, as long as you take all of your actions in a timely manner. The official tournament rules describe slow play (in section 5.5) as

  Players must take their turns in a timely fashion regardless of the complexity of the play situation and adhere to time limits specified for the tournament. Players must maintain a pace to allow the match to be finished in the announced time limit. Stalling is not acceptable. Players may ask a judge to watch their game for slow play; such a request will be granted if feasible.

Note that this rule is primarily concerned with turn length and the pace of play. Stalling in this case means not taking any action or passing, such as by staring at your hand without actually playing anything on your turn.

If this seems a little ambiguous, the Competitive REL infraction procedure guide describes slow play more simply (in section 3.3) as

  A player takes longer than is reasonably required to complete game actions... It is also slow play if a player continues to execute a loop without being able to provide an exact number of iterations and the expected resulting game state.

As long as you are completing game actions and turns in a timely manner, you won't break this rule.


Is this true : «In a 2-player game of Monopoly, there is a 12% chance that the game will go on indefinitely.»

The short answer is "Yes, but...".

The longer answer is, as per the paper in question, that a team of researchers did some calculations on what would happen in a 2-player game of Monopoly where both players follow very simple strategies (and a couple of things that aren't 100% by the rules), notably:

Always try to keep a small reserve of cash on hand to pay rent or other costs.
Always buy properties you land on where possible.
Never bid on properties that are up for auction.
Build houses according to a simple pattern.
Never pay to get out of jail (even on the third roll).
Always sell your Get out of Jail card to the bank for $50 (which I'm pretty sure isn't a thing).
Never trade properties.

At the very least, #2, #3 and #4 are generally considered poor strategy - careful use of auctions can get you key properties on the cheap, and clever building of houses can deprive your opponent of their opportunity to build. Obviously the key here was removing most of the major decision points to keep their model manageable.

With those simplifications to the game, they then created a big state model of the game - all the possible things you could potentially see if you took a snapshot of the game at different points in terms of who owned what properties, how much money they have, what spaces they're on, etc. And then they modeled all the different paths the game could take between those states, to find the probability of going from one state to the next (e.g. if the current state includes "I have rolled doubles twice in a row", there's a 1 in 6 chance the next state will transition my position to "I am in Jail").

Then, with that bit transition model, they do some fancy maths to show how often the game winds to a close. You're right in saying that the game is not zero-sum, but the "banker" role can both add and remove money so it can be as much to blame for making the game go on forever as it can be the reason it finally ends.

They actually do this modelling in a few different ways, but all of their different methods all agree that if you run the game for an arbitrarily long time then there's about an 88% chance that one player or the other will win, meaning that there's a 12% chance that you'll never actually see the game end because both players wind up having enough money on hand to handle the ups and downs of the dice.

So, in a 2-player game of Monopoly, with a few rule changes, and where neither player makes any real decisions, there is a 12% chance that it will never end.


Quoting from the rules (page 5 bottom right):

  After a hunter moves, if the agent is visible to that hunter, that hunter
  may attack the agent.

So no, a hunter has to see its own target, you can't use another hunter's line of sight for that.


Does stonecoil serpent count as entering battlefield when paying X=0?

Stonecoil Serpent does enter the battlefield as a 0/0 (causing Purphoros's ability to trigger), then dies immediately.
The exact events in order in case you want them:

Stonecoil Serpent enters the battlefield. Purphoros's ability triggers but is not put on the stack yet (603.2).
After Serpent resolves, you would normally get priority. Since a player is about to get priority, state-based actions are checked (704.3).
Serpent dies by state-based actions (704.5f).
State-based actions are checked again; none are relevant so now the ability is actually put on the stack (704.3).
State-based actions are checked one more time and then you get priority and the game proceeds normally.

The relevant parts of the rules cited above:

603.2. Whenever a game event or game state matches a triggered ability’s trigger event, that ability automatically triggers. The ability doesn’t do anything at this point.

603.3. Once an ability has triggered, its controller puts it on the stack as an object that’s not a card the next time a player would receive priority.

704.3. Whenever a player would get priority (see rule 117, “Timing and Priority”), the game checks for any of the listed conditions for state-based actions, then performs all applicable state-based actions simultaneously as a single event. If any state-based actions are performed as a result of a check, the check is repeated; otherwise all triggered abilities that are waiting to be put on the stack are put on the stack, then the check is repeated.

704.5f If a creature has toughness 0 or less, it’s put into its owner’s graveyard.


Are the reckoning effect Lore checks on Glamour cards considered spell effects?

Yes.

From the rules reference, page 11:

  An investigator can resolve a Spell card's effect as described on the
  card. A Spell card’s effect may be triggered by a specific event or
  require an action.

The rules don't explicitly define a "Spell Effect", so we use the above to determine that it means the effect of a Spell card, whether cast or activated otherwise.


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

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

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


Is there a situation or way that a sabotage run is a good idea in TI:3?

Situation:

Hostile force:  1 carrier, 10 fighters, 4 cruisers, 1 war sun, 1 ground force

Defending force:  1 carrier, 6 fighters, 1 cruiser, with 3 ground forces defending the planet.

The planet in question is highly valuable, and this is the final turn (or losing it will cost you the ability to gain VPs this turn).

In this situation, you are unable to destroy the war sun in straight combat, and if it lives to the end of the battle, it will single-handedly destroy all defending ground forces while keeping the lone ground force secure for the invasion.  On the flip side, should the war sun be destroyed, then the invasion will be unsuccessful this turn (1v3 odds) excepting extreme luck bias.  Therefore, the #1 priority for this battle is the destruction of the war sun - the other massive segment of the fleet is irrelevant.

Strafing run, GO!


What game does this black die belong to?

These dice are from the Pokèmon XY Furious Fists Elite Trainer Box.

source: https://www.pokemon.com/us/pokemon-tcg/product-gallery/xy-furious-fists-elite-trainer-box/


Sequence of fast and triggered effects - Enchantment Alteration, Abduction

If you move Abduction off of a creature that is in combat and would die from combat damage, one of two things will happen:

If you control the originally enchanted creature anyway, that creature still dies in combat, and Abduction's last ability does not trigger.

If the creature instead returns to an opponent's control, it leaves combat and does not die.

If the enchantment moves onto a creature you don't control that is in combat, that creature will also be removed from combat.

In this scenario, the last opportunity you have to cast Enchantment Alteration before the creature dies is during the declare blockers step. Once it resolves, if the creature it moved from and/or the creature it moved to change control as a result, they leave combat. This is a result of rule 506.4:

A permanent is removed from combat if it leaves the battlefield, if its controller changes, if it phases out, if an effect specifically removes it from combat, if it’s a planeswalker that’s being attacked and stops being a planeswalker, or if it’s an attacking or blocking creature that regenerates (see rule 701.15) or stops being a creature. A creature that’s removed from combat stops being an attacking, blocking, blocked, and/or unblocked creature. A planeswalker that’s removed from combat stops being attacked.

Then combat damage is evaluated, and state-based actions are checked, which may result in some creatures dying. If the creature now enchanted by Abduction dies this way, it will be returned by Abduction's last ability. The creature previously enchanted by Abduction is completely unaffected by Abduction's abilities. All that matters for Abduction's last ability is whether the enchantment is attached as the creature dies.
Abduction's first ability says

When Abduction enters the battlefield, untap enchanted creature.

Attaching Abduction to a different creature does not cause it to leave or enter the battlefield, so Enchantment Alteration does not trigger that ability.


Damage distribution while blocking many creatures at once

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

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

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

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


Is anyone the "captain" of the partnership after the following bidding sequence?

For the most part, in Bergen, the opener is the "Captain".  Responder does what Opener tells them to, nothing more.  This is particularly true here, in the 1S-3S sequence, which is often described as "preemptive" - it describes a weak hand.
The way you can tell is how the response is very tailored to provide fairly specific information, and then the rebid from opener is either signoff (including pass), or (to lower 3-level responses) includes the help suit game try, which is still fairly limiting in the options it provides.  Opener could have almost any hand (could be 12 HCP, 5-3-3-2, could be 18 HCP, 5-3-4-1, could be 11 HCP, 6-4-2-1, etc.)
Most of the time in this auction, opener passes or raises to 4S (if opener is particularly strong, particularly shapely, or in competition if opener has a 6 card suit or is otherwise willing to tolerate 4S competitively).  Since opener didn't open 2C, you're out of slam territory excepting very limited situations, and so the standard Bergen sequence such as described here doesn't usually mention any other options.
More generally, when you see a conventional sequence, you can tell who is captain because that's the "asking" hand.  The asker is captain, deciding what the ultimate contract is, and the responder just answers questions. Often conventions are structured so that the eventual declarer is captain - because that way defense finds out the least information possible about that hand - but not that's always possible.
There are cases where it's handed off - like in the sequence

S
W
N
E

1S
P
3C
P

3H
P
?

There, South has made a help suit game try, and is giving control to North - asking if North thinks 4S is worth considering.


Are mission tokens considered Figures for sake of hero abilities?

Mission tokens are not considered figures unless explicitly declared to be by the mission rules. Therefore, the Covert ability would not apply to Pulse Cannons.

From page 20 of the Rules Reference Guide:

  Objects

  Objects refer to elements on the map that are not figures. Doors, crates, and terminals are all considered to be objects.

  Most mission tokens are considered to be objects, unless the mission rules use the token to represent a figure.

The Covert ability reads:

  Covert

  Hostile figures 4 or more spaces away from you do not have line of sight to you. You do not block line of sight for those figures.

Since Pulse Cannons are represented by Imperial Mission Tokens, and are not explicitly referred to as figures in the Mission Rules, then they are not figures and Covert does not apply to them.


The Agricola cards are not wrapped in the box strictly by which deck they belong to. You'll need to open and sort through all the cards that came with the game. The terms "E-deck", "I-deck", and "K-deck" just refer to subsets of those cards. The E-deck is all of the cards with the E symbol, and so on.

Should you need a manifest of all the cards, this website contains a complete list of them. Only the E-, I-, and K-decks are part of the base game; the rest are expansions or promos.


Are there quasi "official" rankings of board games?

BoardGameGeek is a very comprehensive list of board games, their relative rankings, and reviews, commentary, and more for all things board games. They also have a convention, the BGG.CON.


Do you score points for claiming a route in Ticket to Ride Pennsylvania?

In Ticket to Ride, the expansions rules feature the differences with the base game ones.

If the routes were not meant to be scored, it would be stated in the rules for that map.

On the Pennsylvania map, you score using the same points scheme as usual:

1 space   --> 1pt
2 spaces --> 2pts
3 spaces --> 4pts
4 spaces --> 7pts
5 spaces --> 10pts
6 spaces --> 15pts
7 spaces --> 18pts

This backed by Alan R. Moon himself on BGG


Why do some people use fetchlands in mono-colored decks?

One reason is that it thins your deck.

It is generally known that smaller decks work better than larger decks, which is why almost everyone uses the smallest legal size of 60 in constructed.

Cards that draw you cards when you play them (cantrips such as Gitaxian Probe) turn your 60 card deck into an effectively 59 card deck. Fetchlands do the same thing. After using a fetchland, you have removed a card from your library.

Note that unlike "draw a card", searching for a land specifically removes a land from your library. This means that you are more likely to draw a non-land card after you have used a Fetchland. So it effectively changes the land to non-land ratio of your deck slightly.

So the deck in the example has 19 lands. If they were all Mountains, then after you play your first mountain (pretending you had 0 cards in hand or anywhere else), you would have a 18 out of 59 chance that the top card of your library is another Mountain. If instead you play a Bloodstained Mire first, and use it, then after that you have a 17 out of 58 chance that the top card of your deck is a Mountain. More chance of drawing non-lands instead.

In that particular deck, the loss of life is not very relevant; that type of deck is hoping to win the game before the opponent can deal 16 or so damage to you. So having 20 life instead of 16 isn't going to save you. In a different type of deck, they might use Evolving Wilds or Terramorphic Expanse instead. They have the same deck-thinning effect, but instead of losing life, you would lose tempo because the fetched lands enter play tapped.


Will an ability on the stack resolve if its source is removed?

Your Hawk will die. Once a triggered ability has triggered, it is independent from its source:

  112.7a Once activated or triggered, an ability exists on the stack independently of its source. Destruction or removal of the source after that time won’t affect the ability. Note that some abilities cause a source to do something (for example, “Prodigal Pyromancer deals 1 damage to target creature or player”) rather than the ability doing anything directly. In these cases, any activated or triggered ability that references information about the source because the effect needs to be divided checks that information when the ability is put onto the stack. Otherwise, it will check that information when it resolves. In both instances, if the source is no longer in the zone it’s expected to be in at that time, its last known information is used. The source can still perform the action even though it no longer exists.


What happens if Humble Defector is sacrificed before its ability resolves?

Yes. Abilities exist on the stack independently of their source.

  112.7a Once activated or triggered, an ability exists on the stack independently of its source. Destruction or removal of the source after that time won’t affect the ability. [...]

That means that even if the object that has the ability changes or ceases to exist, the ability spawned from it will go on to resolve as normal.

In this case, that means you get to draw two cards, then the targeted opponent attempts to gain control of Humble Defector and fails to do so.


Prevent the next x damage and multiple unblocked creatures

You get to decide which damage to prevent.  And you don't have to prevent all damage from one source before preventing damage from a different source.

The first thing to note is that creatures do not attack in order - it just seems that way when you assign damage to blockers.  Attacking creatures are required to assign as much damage as is required to kill each blocker, but all the damage is dealt simultaneously.510.2  Furthermore, there is no assignment step for damage that will be dealt to a player.

The next thing to look at is the way that damage is actually processed.  From the comprehensive rules:

  119.4 Damage is processed in a three-part sequence.

  119.4a First, damage is dealt, as modified by replacement and prevent effects that interact with damage.
  119.4b Next, damage that's been dealt is processed into its results, as modified by replacement effects that interact with those results (such as life loss or counters.)  [ed: These are detailed in 119.3]
  119.4c Finally, the damage event occurs.  [ed: examples follow]

The final piece of the puzzle is in the rules regarding Prevention Effects (emphasis mine):

  615.7 Some prevention effects generated by the resolution of a spell or ability refer to a specific amount of damage—for example, “Prevent the next 3 damage that would be dealt to target creature or player this turn.” These work like shields. Each 1 damage that would be dealt to the “shielded” creature or player is prevented. Preventing 1 damage reduces the remaining shield by 1. If damage would be dealt to the shielded creature or player by two or more applicable sources at the same time, the player or the controller of the creature chooses which damage the shield prevents. Once the shield has been reduced to 0, any remaining damage is dealt normally. Such effects count only the amount of damage; the number of events or sources dealing it doesn’t matter.

Putting it all together, here's what happens.

After all combat damage has been assigned, all combat damage is dealt simultaneously.510.2  The damage event starts out as [7 damage dealt to player].
The prevention effect (from Hallowed Healer) is applied, and the damage event becomes [5 damage dealt to player].  Since all the damage is being applied at once, you get to decide which damage is prevented.615.7
The results of the damage are processed now.  Depending on your choices in step 2, one of several things could happen:

If you blocked 2 damage from the Blighted Agents, the 5 damage all gets converted into loss of life119.3a.  Both Latch Seeker and Tandem Lookout's abilities will trigger, and your opponent will draw 2 cards.
If you blocked 2 damage from Tandem Lookout, 2 damage gets converted into poison counters119.3b and the other 3 is converted into loss of life119.3a. Latch Seeker's ability triggers, and your opponent draws 1 card.  Tandem Lookout's ability does not trigger, since it did no damage.615.6
If you blocked 2 damage from Latch Seeker, 2 damage gets converted into poison counters119.3b and the other 3 is converted into loss of life119.3a.  Both Latch Seeker and Tandem Lookout's abilities will trigger, and your opponent will draw 2 cards.
Many other options are possible - see below.

Finally, the damage event occurs.

Since you get to decide which damage is prevented, you get to decide which creature(s) don't deal any damage.

Furthermore, you can prevent any amount of damage from any sources in any combination - you could prevent 1 damage each from Latch Seeker and Tandem Lookout if you wanted.  (In your particular case, it wouldn't be a good move - but there are conceivably situations where this would be advantageous.)


Why do cards from Alpha have to be in opaque sleeves?

Since the corners of alpha cards are distinctly different from the other editions of magic cards, it would be equivalent to playing with a marked deck, since presumably all your cards won't be alpha.


Backgammon best strategy for clearing my home

The logic of finding the “general rule” in these situations is flawed and will lead to potential mistakes. There are positions where you have to move the highest or the lowest number and need to be able to quickly calculate the numner of dice combinations that are favourable or not for your next roll.

In your example, if you leave the checkers at 6,1 points: you need all sixes (11 combs) plus 55,44,33,22 (4 combs), total of 15.

If you however leave the checkers on 4,3 points, you need 65,64,63,54,53,43 (12 combs) plus 66,55,44,33,22 (5 combs) for a total of 17 rolls. The latter play is superior.

Just in case one wonders why not always move the highest point, consider the example of having two checkers on 5,3 with a need to play a deuce. if your move is 5-3, leaving checkers on 3,3 you will clearly lose more games than if you have moved 3-1, receiving the position of 5,1. I will let you calculate the combs and compare.


Do the prices of cards drop when they leave Standard?

TLDR: Great cards do not significantly drop in price when they rotate out of standard, as great cards are usually playable and viable in other formats.

When a card is great, and used across many formats, there is no reason for someone to reduce the card's price when they sell it. This includes when it rotates out.

Though, there are some things that DO cause card prices to drop. If you are looking to buy a card at a drop, try and look for one of the Three Rs.

Remember however, that predicting when these can happen is very hard to do. It is very similar to the stock market, for predicting both upwards and downwards price spikes.

Reprints, removals, and realizations. This is because a great card in standard can be used across multiple formats, and thus has a cross format value. So unless something impacts it greatly (like one of the Three Rs) it will not drop in price. That being said, if a card is only seeing play in Standard and Standard alone, then the Three Rs are pointless, and the card will probably drop when it leaves (but if that is the case, the card is probably not a great card). This drop however is not sudden, and is usually over the course of the end of the lifespan of the sets.

  Reprints: When a card is reprinted, no matter how good it is, it will go down in value. This is because there are now more of the card.
  Even if it is still a valuable card, there are more of it,  and thus it is
  less valuable.

On the other hand, a card that has been confirmed that it will never be printed again will go up in price, such cards like Black Lotus or Bayou. This applies to very old cards most of the time, but some rare versions of cards have their cost raise in a similar way (such as Kaladesh Masterpieces or Zendikar Expeditions). This may change if the lottery cards get reprinted eventually.

Example: Seedborn Muse is a card that has been worth a lot in recent time. When it was released, it was not worth much, but as time passed, it went from a card worth ~2.5 USD up to a card worth ~30 USD. But, it was reprinted as of recent in the set Battlebond. Since then, it's price has dropped excessively, going down towards ~13 USD (Specifically the Tenth Edition one, the Battlebond one is worth even less).

  Removals: When a card gets removed from a format (through a banning), it instantly loses a lot of value it has. While this could be looked at similarly
  to a card rotating out, the shock of an important card getting banned
  has people rushing to sell it. This causes the price to drop
  as a lot of them are pushed into the market at once.

Example: Emrakul, the Promised End was an extraordinarily powerful card in standard. But, come January 2017, it was hit with the ban hammer, and was removed from standard. It dropped by around 50%, going from ~20 USD to ~10 USD, and stayed rather low for a while. (Recently, it has began to climb back up however, but this is assumed to be because another format has began to use this version of Emrakul).

Another example: Smuggler's Copter was a card that was seeing an absurdly high amount of play in Standard. Along with Emrakul, the Promised End, it got banned in January of 2017 from Standard. Before the ban, it's price had been steadily declining from ~20 USD to around ~10 USD, but when the ban hit, it began to rapidly drop in price. Within a week, it dropped down to ~6 USD. From here, it slowly declined to ~2 USD, where it has stabilized and been for a long time.

The main reason for this type of downwards price spike is people rushing to sell their copies before the price reaches it's lower stabilized price.

  Realizations: Very often, during spoiler season or when new cards are released, cards will get over hyped and over priced. Eventually,
  they will go down once people realize they are not as good as they
  thought.

This can work in the other way as well, where a card that was under the radar gets realized for hidden potential. Examples being cards that fit in a combo or cards that counter a popular deck type nicely.

Example: Karn, Scion of Urza, was very expensive shortly after his release (reaching around ~60 USD at his peak). But, once players began to realize he was not as good as people made him out to be, his price slowly fell back down to his original price (~40 USD), and eventually even lower (~30 USD).

As you can see, those are some major ways prices drop. If a card is good outside of Standard (such as EDH), do not expect it's price to drop until it receives a reprint, a banning (from a format it sees play in), or it is replace/realized to be not as good as it is.

An example of a good card not dropping after it rotated out is Thought-Knot Seer. Once the hype for it died down, it stabilized at ~6 USD, and is even climbing today. This climb has been happening even after it was rotated out of Standard (as it became a staple in a Modern deck).

Conclusion: If a card in standard is truly great, it will not lower significantly in price when it rotates out of a format. This is because a truly great card will see play across multiple formats, and thus keeps some level of value across them. It takes something much more ground shaking to have a card spike downwards in price, such as a reprint, a removal, or a realization.

A note: the opposite is true for upwards price spikes, as it seems those happen a lot more often in comparison. People are faster to sell high than to sell low, as it is logical when running a card selling business/selling cards for profit.


What triggers/resolves first, an effect from a creature dying or an effect from a creature going into the graveyard?

You choose the order in which the abilities resolve, so you will be able to search for the Worldspine Wurm with Verdant Succession.

Rule 700.4 defines "dies":

  The term dies means “is put into a graveyard from the battlefield.”

This means that Worlspine Wurm's ability triggers "when Worldspine Wurm is put into a graveyard from anywhere" and Verdant Succession's ability triggers "whenever a green nontoken creature [is put into a graveyard from the battlefield]". So, of course, if a Worldspine Wurm is put into a graveyard from the battlefield, both of those conditions are met, so both aiblities trigger simultaneously. Then rule 603.3b says

  If multiple abilities have triggered since the last time a player received priority, each player, in APNAP order, puts triggered abilities he or she controls on the stack in any order he or she chooses. (See rule 101.4.) Then the game once again checks for and resolves state-based actions until none are performed, then abilities that triggered during this process go on the stack. This process repeats until no new state-based actions are performed and no abilities trigger. Then the appropriate player gets priority.

So, if you choose to put the Worldspine Wurm's ability on the stack on top of the Verdant Succession's ability, the Wurm's ability will resolve first and it will move to the library, then the Verdant Succession's ability will resolve and you will be able to search for it.

If the Worldspine Wurm's ability was instead worded like the ability on Darksteel Colossus, then it would be a replacement effect (the key word indicating that is "instead"). In that case, it would go to the library instead of the graveyard, so, as the definition above implies, it never "dies" and Verdant Succession's ability never triggers.

I would like to note that if the Verdant Succession and Worldspine Wurm are controlled by different players, the outcome of the Worldspine Wurm dying will depend on whose turn it is instead of any choices a player might make. Rule 603.3b says that triggered abilities controlled by different players are put on the stack in APNAP order, which is defined in rule 101.4:

  If multiple players would make choices and/or take actions at the same time, the active player (the player whose turn it is) makes any choices required, then the next player in turn order (usually the player seated to the active player’s left) makes any choices required, followed by the remaining nonactive players in turn order. Then the actions happen simultaneously. This rule is often referred to as the “Active Player, Nonactive Player (APNAP) order” rule.

This means that the abilities are put on the stack in turn order starting with the active player, so they resolve in reverse turn order. If that resolution order happens to make the Worldspine Wurm's ability resolve first, you can find it when searching.


Does Leonin Arbiter affect Karn, The Great Creator from choosing a card outside of the game?

No, Leonin Arbiter has no effect on Karn's ability. The library is a specific zone in the game; it is where you put the deck to start the game, and it is where you draw cards from. The sideboard is a completely separate thing outside of the game; it is normally used for switching cards into and out of your deck between games in a match, and only specific effects like on Karn can access it during a game.


How can I find what basic and stage 1 Pokémon cards can evolve to?

TL;DR - Simple way
Use official Pokémon TCG Card Database where you can find cards that evolves from a card you have.
Explanation and hard way
Pokémon TCG uses the same evolution system as video games and anime, i.e. every Pokémon has determined number of possible evolutions. However, most of them has only one or zero evolutions. Bulbapedia List of Pokémon by evolution families has all possible evolutions available, if you don't know them at all. Mega evolutions are included here.
TCG also has its own additions to that system, although they are rather simple.
Sun & Moon evolution mechanics:

any Pokémon other than ♢ Pokémon

normal evolution rules: Basic → Stage 1 → Stage 2
some Baby Pokémon are excluded, i.e. Pikachu is Basic Pokémon

Pokémon ♢ (Prism Star)

card is Basic even if the particular Pokémon is normally not Basic

Deprecated evolution mechanics:

Pokémon EX, Pokémon SP, and Pokémon ☆ - always Basic, can have Lv.X or Mega Evolution
Pokémon BREAK and Pokémon Lv.X - power-up that enhances some Pokémon
Mega Evolution Pokémon

evolve like Stage 1 (are put onto Basic Pokémon)
player's turn ends immediately after Mega Evolving a Pokémon

Restored Pokémon - evolve like Basic Pokémon (can evolve into Stage 1 Pokémon)
Baby Pokémon

generation 2 and 3: evolve into Basic Pokémon
generation 4: Baby Pokémon are Basic cards that don't evolve at all

all other mechanics follow normal evolution rules

To get all cards your Pokémon can evolve into, find if it has an evolution and look it up in Pokémon TCG Card Database, which includes released cards, or in Bulbapedia List of Pokémon by evolution families (select a Pokémon, then select In the TCG), which includes also very old cards and cards yet to be released in English.


This appears to be the fast-paced or Super Chinese checkers variant described in Wikipedia.

While the standard rules allow hopping over only a single adjacent occupied position at a time (as in checkers), this version of the game allows pieces to catapult over multiple adjacent occupied positions in a line when hopping.
In the fast-paced or Super Chinese checkers variant popular in France, a piece may hop over a non-adjacent piece. A hop consists of jumping over a distant piece (friendly or enemy) to a symmetrical position on the opposite side, in the same line of direction. (For example, if there are two empty positions between the jumping piece and the piece being jumped, the jumping piece lands leaving exactly two empty positions immediately beyond the jumped piece.) As in the standard rules, a jumping move may consist of any number of a chain of hops. (When making a chain of hops, a piece is usually allowed to enter an empty corner, as long as it hops out again before the move is completed.)
Jumping over two or more pieces in a hop is not allowed. Therefore, in this variant even more than in the standard version, it is sometimes strategically important to keep one's pieces bunched in order to prevent a long opposing hop.
An alternative variant allows hops over any symmetrical arrangement, including pairs of pieces, pieces separated by empty positions, and so on.


life and death: 2 x 4 in the corner with defects


What happens when I sacrifice a creature when my Teysa Karlov is on the battlefield?

Resolute Watchdog's ability is an activated ability not a triggered one, so it isn't affected by Teysa at all.

602.1. Activated abilities have a cost and an effect. They are written as “[Cost]: [Effect.] [Activation instructions (if any).]”
603.1. Triggered abilities have a trigger condition and an effect. They are written as “[When/Whenever/At] [trigger condition or event],
[effect]. [Instructions (if any).]”

As an addendum, sacrificing a creature (typically) counts as it dying, so your friend is wrong.  So sacrificing a creature could potentially cause Teysa's ability do something.

700.4. The term dies means “is put into a graveyard from the battlefield.”


No, the hand is not dead.

Looking at Robert's Rules of poker here the following is included in rules for misdeals.

  In button games, action is considered to occur when two players after the blinds have acted on their hands. Once action occurs, a misdeal can no longer be declared

As action has occurred (players calling pre flop) then this rules that the hand can not be declared dead.

I'm confused as to how the top few cards would get mixed up but as long as they haven't got mixed with the muck (previously folded cards, or discard pile to boardgamers!) then the cards coming off the deck will still be random and continuing is possible.


In Diplomacy, can a fleet in a coastal province be used to convoy?

Fleets in coastal provinces cannot convoy.  To convoy, you have to be in the open water.  From the rules (emphasis mine):

Convoying an Army Across One Water Province
A Fleet in a water province (not a coastal province) can convoy an
Army from any coastal province adjacent to that water province to
any other coastal province adjacent to that water province.

Convoying an Army Across Several Water Provinces
If Fleets occupy adjacent water provinces, an Army can be convoyed
through all these water provinces on one turn, landing in a coastal
province adjacent to the final Fleet in the chain

Thus, in the situation you describe, a fleet in Trieste cannot convoy; it would need to be in the Adriatic Sea.


Which Age of Steam map is best to use for an initiation to the game for 5 or 6 players? Why?

I have had multiple successes introducing the game with the Germany map in large groups and no failures (so far).

Failure, in this case, would be someone that doesn't understand the game enough to be able to identify why they lost or won. (Although, a friend of mine has a block on the game in general - she finds it too difficult and can't fathom ever winning.)

The greatest feature of the map that enables this success is the removal of one rule. Namely, the ability to construct unfinished links. I.e., all players must always connect both ends of the track they lay.

The effect of this rules tweak, in addition to various long-distance destinations (foreign terminals) being abstracted (tiles adjacent to them costing 6 to 12$), is that newbies cannot begin making a whole class of mistakes with far reaching negative consequences.

For example, they know connecting to Lyon will cost them, at least, 14$ - they don't have to start building it this turn, see that they don't have the money they need next turn and abandon the track they already laid to the next lucky player with a few dollars to spare.

This is not to say the map is boring for experienced players, there are still many possibilities to block (probably more, since the longest distance a link may have is three) and the board becomes quite crowded with more than four players so the newbies will still be developing the skills to cope with the game's challenges.

All being said, I don't know any other map that plays so well and simply with as many players. (The base Rust Belt map is still a good map to use, to teach the game, when playing with three or four, though.)


Rescue from the Underworld on an unearthed creature

You will get the card back after it goes to exile because it doesn't say to return the card from the graveyard, rather just return 'that card'. From the Gatherer rulings on Rescue from the Underworld:

  However, if the sacrificed creature is put into another public zone instead of the graveyard, perhaps because it’s your commander or because of another replacement effect, it will return to the battlefield from the zone it went to.

The unearth creature going to exile instead of the graveyard is a replacement effect.

Normally, effects cannot find objects that change zones. There are eight exceptions to this rule, and you found one of them:

  400.7. An object that moves from one zone to another becomes a new object with no memory of, or relation to, its previous existence. There are eight exceptions to this rule:

  [...]
  400.7h If an effect causes an object to move to a public zone, other parts of that effect can find that object. If the cost of a spell or ability causes an object to move to a public zone, that spell or ability’s effects can find that object.

Other ways of getting around the exile part of Unearth involve other cards that are worded like Rescue (specifically ones that do not specify the zone the card needs to be in to move), and ones that 'blink' or 'flicker' a creatures like Cloudshift that exile the creature and return it either immediately or at some time in the future.


This is not from me, but I approve it :)
Skaven pros -

They have access to vast arrays of troops/troop types, and can get them in vast quantities.
The leadership rules they come with over-ride what would be a fatal
weakness and combined with the new re-roll of all leadership tests
allowed by the BSB and the general's leadership in a 24" diameter
bubble they have the same Ld as dwarfs, ie impregnable.
They have excellent magic capacity and at least one game ending
spell, which is now far easier to cast now in 8th irresistibly.
The new initiative strikes first regardless of charge now makes even
their weaker troops likely to inflict a credible ammount of damage on
all but the most heavily armoured foes.
The Storm Banner can, for a tiny cost eradicate their greatest
weakness - being squelched by template weapons and shot to death -
yes it affects their own troops to, but this is generally less
detrimental to them than it is against other armies such as DE, HE,
WE, Dwarfs, Empire, OK of which (generally) most of their opponents
will come from.

Cons -

Such a large quantity of troops on the table means the potential for
being bottlenecked against terrain, the newer terrain rules have
nearly removed this as a problem for skaven now.
The ability to be lose all their Ld bonuses by being flanked was a
great problem, but in 8th the most common flanking units, fast
cavalry have been hit by needing full ranks to break ranks. To give
the fast cav enough ranks to both survive getting to the flanks and
then (as ranks are counted after combat now) last long enough to be
able to break the ranks is an option. This falls under analysis though
as with 2.5k or 3k skaven can build a battle line that stretches from
table edge to table edge and presents no flanks to the enemy.
Overall I believe skaven have really been boosted a vast amount in
8th, but regardless of numbers they will die in droves in HtH against
any and all opponents, it's just a case of will they fail their
stubborn ld 10 re-rollable break tests over the course of the game?


Is the Merchant ability mandatory if you have two identical tiles?

Yes. If you are able to perform the Merchant's action, you must. This does involve a certain amount of trust, since you do not have to reveal your tiles to prove that you cannot perform the action. (On that point I would paraphrase the Love Letter rulebook on a similar point, which says "Don't play with cheaters".)

From the rulebook, page 5:

  Using a special action is mandatory unless otherwise written on the card. If the action is impossible, it is ignored.


LOTR CG: May I keep the resource tokens of a dying hero?

Tokens on a card are discarded when the hero dies, the comprehensive rules cover this under Leaving Play

Leaving Play: When a card (other than a site) leaves play for any reason, any cards played on that card (or borne by or stacked on that
card) are discarded. Any tokens on that card are removed.


What happens if a double-faced card that is copying a different double-faced card transforms?

It is #2, you will end up with an Insectile Abberation.

A few different rules at play here. First off, your Delver of Secrets is only copying The Ravenger side of Nicol Bolas, it doesn't have any relationship to The Arisen:

  706.8. When copying a double-faced permanent, a face-up meld card, or a melded permanent, only the copiable values of the face that’s currently up are copied.

When you exile your creature, the aura will not go with it, simply because the aura is a separate permanent. It will sit on the battlefield for a moment, but go straight to the graveyard next time state-based actions are checked:

  303.4c If an Aura is enchanting an illegal object or player as defined by its enchant ability and other applicable effects, the object it was attached to no longer exists, or the player it was attached to has left the game, the Aura is put into its owner’s graveyard. (This is a state-based action. See rule 704.)

And we know the object no longer exists because:

  400.7. An object that moves from one zone to another becomes a new object with no memory of, or relation to, its previous existence. There are nine exceptions to this rule:

(None of the exceptions apply).

So what you have is an instruction to return your card to the battlefield, transformed. You can do this:

  701.27a To transform a permanent, turn it over so that its other face is up. Only permanents represented by double-faced cards can transform.

So you turn the object formerly known as Nicol Bolas, The Ravenger, over so that its other face is up, and return it to the battlefield.


Can Aphotic Wisps be cast on a black creature that has fear?

You can target any* creature, it doesn't matter if the creature is black and/or has fear. This is because all the card says is "Target creature", not something like "Target non-black creature without fear". Dross Prowler is a creature thus it is a valid target for "Target creature".

  114.1a An instant or sorcery spell is targeted if its spell ability identifies something it will affect by using the phrase “target [something],” where the “something” is a phrase that describes an object, player, or zone.

*barring things like hexproof, shroud and protection


Is there a normalized scoring format for Scrabble?

Duplicate scrabble Is a form of scrabble that is highly normalised and the standard form for competitive play in French. It can involve an arbitrary number of players who are not "competing" on the board, but only to find the highest score.


If I can't "win the game" in multiplayer, do my opponents still lose?

No player will lose the game, and the game continues normally

  104.3h In a multiplayer game, an effect that states that a player wins the game instead causes all of that player’s opponents to lose the game. (...)

This multiplayer rule that modifies how winning and losing works normally makes Laboratory Maniac's ability work different in multiplayer games. While in a two-player game, a player would win with Laboratory Maniac and drawing from an empty library, that rule makes each opponent of that player lose instead.

Now, if one of those players controls a Platinum Angel which has a continuous effect stating that they can't lose the game and opponents can't win the game, it will prevent any opponent of that player from winning the game.

  101.2. When a rule or effect allows or directs something to happen, and another effect states that it can’t happen, the “can’t” effect takes precedence.

Platinum Angel will effectively prevent Laboratory Maniac's ability from going through with the event of winning the game, meaning the rule 104.3h never applies to this situation.

This course of events is backed by Matt Tabak's response to a question asked by Samthere:

  In a multiplayer game, if P1 tries to win via Laboratory Maniac but P2 controls Platinum Angel, what happens? Nothing, or do P3, P4, etc, lose the game?

  Nothing. LM’s replacement effect does apply, and then P1 winning the game just doesn’t happen.

This is actually independent from whether rule 104.3h is actually a replacement effect or not, and whether this has been discussed at large in answers, comments and in chat to the point where everyone seems to be agreing to disagree.
Until further enlightenment in this regard, let's cover both cases, and why they're largely identical...

If the rule was considered to be a replacement effect, since the event of winning the game wouldn't actually happen (with Platinum Angel preventing it), the following rule prevents the entirety of the respective replacement effect (in this case, rule 104.3h) from taking place:

  614.7. If a replacement effect would replace an event, but that event never happens, the replacement effect simply doesn't do anything.

For a concrete example, Leovold, Emissary of Trest can prevent people from drawing cards, and has a ruling which notes that "Replacement effects can’t be used to replace draws that Leovold disallows." Replacement effects replace the event as they happen; if the event is prevented from happening, there's nothing for them to replace. Therefore, similarly, replacement effects can't replace winning the game if you're prevented from winning the game.
If it wasn't considered a replacement effect, the game would just as well never reach the event of that player winning the game, seeing as there's "you win the game" simply clashing with "you can't win the game", which is settled by rule 101.2. Again, rule 104.3h would never be applied, as the event of a player winning the game is never reached.


Are there any cards that permanently take control of opponents creature

Control-changing effects aren't really special cases. What you're seeing here is just that some effects are permanent and some aren't. If you put Goblin War Paint on a creature, it gives that creature +2/+2 and haste - but if the aura goes away, so does that effect. It doesn't give +2/+2 and haste forever, just as long as it's around.

Specifically, continuous effects generated by an object last only as long as that object generating them is around:

  611.3b The effect applies at all times that the permanent generating it is on the battlefield or the object generating it is in the appropriate zone.

and continuous effects generated by spells or abilities last as long as they say they're going to last, and if no duration is specified they last until the end of the game:

  611.2a A continuous effect generated by the resolution of a spell or ability lasts as long as stated by the spell or ability creating it (such as “until end of turn”). If no duration is stated, it lasts until the end of the game.

Also perhaps relevant is:

  611.3a A continuous effect generated by a static ability isn’t “locked in”; it applies at any given moment to whatever its text indicates.

So an Aura that has an effect on the creature it's enchanting always applies just to that creature, even if it gets moved around.

Illusory Gains is an example of an effect generated by an object that's not around forever in the realm of gaining control, but a more obvious one is the classic Control Magic. Its effect lasts only as long as the aura is on the battlefield enchanting a creature. If you Control Magic an opponent's creature, and they destroy the Control Magic, they get their creature back. If you move it to a second with an Aura Finesse, you'll lose control of the first creature and gain control of the second creature.

Illusory Gains is the same idea. It gets moved around, and it only says you control the creature it's enchanting, not any other ones, so when it moves away from a creature, there's no longer an effect giving you control of that creature.

Another way a continuous effect might not last forever is if it's created by a spell or ability which specifies a duration explicitly (like "until end of turn"). This is what's going on with Act of Treason. That case is pretty obvious from the text on the card.

The last case is if the spell or ability which creates it doesn't specify a duration. In that case, it lasts until the end of the game. So Beguiler of Wills and Blatant Thievery give you control of things indefinitely: they just say gain control, and don't say "...until end of turn" or anything like it to specify a duration.Since the rules work this way, there aren't cards that explicitly say "gain control forever"; they don't need to.


Searching a library for something, failing to find it, the later discovering it was there

You are never required to actually find a specific card when you search your deck, so if you don’t find it when you look, you have simply missed your chance.

  701.18b If a player is searching a hidden zone for cards with a stated quality, such as a card with a certain card type or color, that player isn’t required to find some or all of those cards even if they’re present in that zone.

So there is no difference between simply choosing not to find any Forest, or being unable to.

Note that this works differently if a card has you search for cards in general, such as Demonic Tutor. In that case you actually must choose a card.


Is there a way to approximate Hold'em blind increases to time a game?

One way to help this is to think about it backwards, so you have 8 periods of blinds (15 minutes x 4 x 2 hours) and let's assume 8 players, 100 chips each.  So, ideally, you want one player eliminated each period.  What's a high-enough blind to encourage play?  Try 10-1 or 20-1.  With 10-1, the last period will have 2 players, each with 400 chips, so that's a big blind of 40.  The second to last, has 3 players with ~260 chips each, that's a big blind of 26.

10 11 12 16 20 26 40 is therefore the mathematical progression (which we'd tweak to 5, 10, 12, 16, 20, 30, 40 for poker sanity and ease).  This is quite aggressive, so feel free to tweak the ratio.  Still, it should give you a method for determining good numbers.


Is the medallion being used in Haunt N21?

The errata added restrictions on this use of items:

If there are five heroes and a monster in a room, could each of them use, say, the Spear to attack that monster, then pass it on to the next person?
No. Add this rule: "For each item, during a turn an explorer or monster that can carry items may only perform one of the following actions: use the item, give the item to another explorer, drop the item, steal the item, or pick up the item. Using the item means making any attack or roll or other action in which the item is involved in any way."

So the heroes cannot do this, due specifically to the last sentence: "Using the item means making any attack or roll or other action in which the item is involved in any way." Even though you are not attacking with the medallion, as you would with the spear, the medallion is involved in the attack as it is a requirement for the attack to have any effect.


What if the boss or the profiteur connect to the gold?

It's clear that the rules are a little badly worded.  They say:

  The Boss builds tunnels for both the Green and the Blue Team and wins
  every time one of the teams wins.

However, the game's creator has made it clear that in the corner case, where the path is completed but both the Blue and Green teams are blocked by a door, the Boss wins anyway (even though it is not true that "one of the teams wins").

I think that the Profiteer wins in this situation too - the Profiteer ALWAYS wins, after all...

See this old question - in fact now I read that, I'm a bit worried that this question may count as a duplicate...

ETA: I think if one dwarf wins, they get 5 Gold.  If one dwarf wins and he's the Boss, he gets 4 Gold.  If two dwarves win, and they're the Boss and the Profiteer, they would get 4 gold each, minus their respective "job penalties": so 3 Gold for the boss and 2 Gold for the profiteer.  Seems like a reasonable interpretation of the creator's assertion that the Boss winning on his own gets 4 Gold (assuming he didn't just pluck that figure out of thin air...)

In short, I'd say that the "1 or 2 less than the other winners get" (for the boss and profiteer) is another sloppily worded piece of rules.  "1 or 2 less than they would otherwise get" would be a better way of putting it.  If the Profiteer won on his own, for example, he'd get 3 Gold (5-2).


You can choose any previous action. "Previous" just means "something earlier", it doesn't imply "exactly 1 space". The best evidence for this is the fact that it says "a" previous space, not "the" previous spot. So yes, you can choose start player using a guy at the top.


Engineers end of game victory point stronghold

The bonus cards the rule book is referring to are the cards that flip at the beginning of each round (each with one ongoing effect and one end-of-round bonus effect).

It's simply stating that the final end-of-turn bonus effect does not apply on the final round (hence the tiny half-bonus card they provide you with to cover up the second half).


This is subjective, but I think the game is fun with two players.

It is fun when you really get in sync with each other.


When exactly do I get to check the next card when casting a spell from the top of my library with Experimental Frenzy?

You cannot look at the top of your library while casting a spell like Banefire from the top of your library. You can look at the top of your library as soon as you have finished casting the spell. This is specified in rule 401.5:

  Some effects tell a player to play with the top card of their library revealed, or say that a player may look at the top card of their library. If the top card of the player’s library changes while a spell is being cast, the new top card won’t be revealed and can’t be looked at until the spell becomes cast (see rule 601.2i). The same is true with relation to an ability being activated.

Since the first step of casting a spell, listed as rule 601.2a, is

  To propose the casting of a spell, a player first moves that card (or that copy of a card) from where it is to the stack. [...]

Casting a spell from the top of your library counts as the top card of the library changing while the spell is being cast.

The final step of casting a spell, rule 601.2i in the same section, says in part

  Once the steps described in 601.2a-h are completed, effects that modify the characteristics of the spell as it's cast are applied, then the spell becomes cast.

Once you complete the entire process of casting a spell, then the spell becomes cast and you can look at the card on top of your library.


In Ticket to Ride, do cities have to be connected in the same order as on the ticket?

In both Ticket to Ride and Ticket to Ride: Europe, routes can be completed in any order, and there's no concept of direction of travel. All that matters is whether you can reach one of the cities from the other at the end of the game.

  If, by the end of the game, a player has created a continuous path of his color plastic trains between the two cities named on a Destination Ticket he holds, he scores the additional points indicated by the Point Value on the Ticket. If he has failed to complete a continuous path between those cities, he deducts the Point Value on the Ticket from his total score.

A path between cities must be created. Nothing about traveling from one of the cities to the other city.

For example, you could satisfy a Rostov-Erzurum ticket by having built Erzurum-Sevastopol, Rostov-Sochi, and Sevastopol-Sochi in any order.

This is a related question about Train Stations in Ticket to Ride: Europe.


BoardGameGeek Castle RavenLoft has quite a few used-made scenarios and extra characters.

The most are listed in the Variants forum, although you may look around in there a bit and find some others under "rules" maybe.

One of my favorites is "Crypts And Creepers", although it's more of an 'expansion', not just another scenario.

WotC is also having a "Build your own scenario" competition, so you should see more available on-line when that happens also.

Here's a link I just found that has most of the user-created adventures listed and ranked:

BGG Castle RavenLoft Adventure Database


How do you handle drawing more flood cards than there are tiles on the board in Forbidden Island?

Yes. From the rule book page 8.

When the Flood Draw Pile Runs Out
If the Flood draw pile ever runs out, immediately shuffle the Flood discard pile and stack the cards face down to form a new Flood draw pile. If this happens in the middle of a turn, continue drawing Flood cards as necessary from the new pile.


Escape From Colditz (2 player): How do you deal with all your POWs being in Solitary?

That is a known problem for which players usually agree to home rules.
I would suggest two such home rules:

Prisoners in confinement are automatically released after a few turns (this copes with the rolling doubles problem). Just put each prisoner piece on one side of the cell and move it each turn to the other side, when it should go through the wall release it.
When releasing prisoners in this way from Solitary, place them directly in the roll call spaces, where they cannot be taken again.

This way the Security Officer cannot mount a "capturing machine" that effectively blocks the prisoners actions. Also remember that the guards cannot block rooms and alleys entrances.


Creatures always deal damage equal to their power. Creatures with double strike do this twice.

Specifically, a creature with double strike deals damage equal to its power once during the first strike damage step, and once during the regular combat damage step. Creatures with first strike deal damage just once during the first strike damage step, and regular creatures deal damage just once during the regular combat damage step.

When your attacking creature is blocked by multiple creatures, you pick an order to assign damage. Your creature deals lethal damage to the first, then if there's still damage left over, goes on to the second, and so on. It never gets to deal more damage than its power, though - it's just a question of how it's spread across the blocking creatures.

So for example, if your 4/4 with double strike is blocked by two 4/4s (without first strike or double strike), during the first strike damage step your 4/4 would deal 4 damage to of your opponent's 4/4s (killing it before it has a chance to deal damage), then during regular combat damage your 4/4 and your opponent's remaining 4/4 would deal 4 damage to each other (killing each other). End result: you traded your 4/4 double strike for two regular 4/4s.

Similarly, if your 4/4 were blocked by three 3/3s, during first strike damage it'd deal 3 damage to the first (killing it) and deal one damage to the next one, then during regular combat damage it'd deal two damage to that one (finishing it off) and two damage to the last one, taking 6 damage in return (killing it). End result: you traded your 4/4 double strike for two regular 3/3s.


In EDH/Commander, what is the 'color identity' of a double-faced card?

Yes, both sides of DFC count towards its color identity.

903.4c The back face of a double-faced card (see rule 711) is included when determining a card's color identity.
Example: Civilized Scholar is the front face of a double-faced card with mana cost
{2}{U}. Homicidal Brute is the back face of that double-faced card and has a red color
indicator. The card's color identity is blue and red.

So, Elbrus can only be used in a Commander deck where Black is part of your Commander's color identity.


Are the Bay of Ice and the Shivering Sea areas connected?

No.

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

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

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


If my partner sorted my cards for me, what would the official ruling be?

If I was directing I would rule under Law 12-A-2 (Normal Play of the Board Impossible): Average-plus to your opponents, average-minus to you and you partner.

I would further rule under Law 90-B-5 (Improperly Touching Another Player's Cards) a further 10% penalty to both pairs. It is your Partner's duty to obey the Rules of the game, which she flagrantly violated. Likewise, your opponents being at the table, they should have prevented the irregularity from occurring, or called the Director themselves.

This would net your opponents a flat average (average-plus at 60% - 10% = 50%).

This would net you and your partner a 30% (average minus at 40% - 10% = 30%).

Update:
I would not have allowed play of this board to occur (at this table); this is necessary to reinforce the first ruling above in everyone's minds.

If the opponent's were very new to the game I might forgo the second penalty against them; you and your partner always gets both barrels of the penalty however.


How likely is it to get a complete set of commons from a single booster box?

The exact value is difficult to calculate. This is due to the print runs of the cards - the 74 commons have "print runs" of 5 to make the printing easier. There are hundreds of these, but the fact that no pack contains the same cards does complicate the calculation.

I did throw together a pack simulator to test this and it ran in the background. Below is the output after 10 million trials. The highest was 200 packs and the lowest was 45. On a different run (of about 22 million trials) I was able to get a playset in only 44 trials. This run I've let go for 35 million trials and it was only able to get that 45, although eventually I got so unlucky I needed 215 packs on one of them. The last 17 million trials have not changed the min and max, though. I don't expect them to be changing any time soon.

Thus I think it's safe to say you are never going to get a playset from a single booster box.

I modified it to check the number of boxes and found a very consistent: 2 boxes were sufficient 39.2% of the time, three boxes 58.8% of the time, and four boxes sufficient 2.0% of the time. Five boxes were only necessary on 0.03% of runs but that was consistent far far into the tens of millions of trials.

If you want to play it safe, buy 3 boxes - you'll have them all 98% of the time.

new max: 72 on trial: 2
new max: 77 on trial: 3
new max: 81 on trial: 4
new low: 72 on trial: 6
new max: 87 on trial: 9
new max: 88 on trial: 10
new low: 65 on trial: 21
new max: 92 on trial: 25
new low: 64 on trial: 31
new max: 95 on trial: 42
new max: 108 on trial: 64
new low: 61 on trial: 78
new max: 115 on trial: 80
new max: 116 on trial: 110
new max: 119 on trial: 146
new low: 60 on trial: 153
new low: 59 on trial: 162
new low: 58 on trial: 222
new low: 56 on trial: 296
new low: 55 on trial: 607
new low: 53 on trial: 744
new max: 140 on trial: 2928
new low: 51 on trial: 6183
new max: 156 on trial: 9309
new low: 49 on trial: 49366
new max: 162 on trial: 60593
new max: 170 on trial: 112123
new low: 48 on trial: 117347
hit trial: 500000
new low: 47 on trial: 830525
hit trial: 1000000
new max: 186 on trial: 1307797
hit trial: 1500000
hit trial: 2000000
hit trial: 2500000
hit trial: 3000000
hit trial: 3500000
new max: 195 on trial: 3563925
hit trial: 4000000
hit trial: 4500000
hit trial: 5000000
hit trial: 5500000
hit trial: 6000000
new max: 198 on trial: 6005659
hit trial: 6500000
new low: 46 on trial: 6614767
hit trial: 7000000
hit trial: 7500000
hit trial: 8000000
new low: 45 on trial: 8015142
new max: 200 on trial: 8333263
hit trial: 8500000
hit trial: 9000000
hit trial: 9500000
hit trial: 10000000


What is a good board game to use for a programming competition

Robo Rally (rules) could be interesting. Amusingly, the game itself is programming a robot, one of several (up to 8) on a game board.

Each player gets 9 random instruction cards per round and chooses 5 to play.  Then all the robots' moves are evaluated simultaneously (more or less).  Your robot can get pushed around or damaged by other robots as well as by conveyor belts and other board elements.  First robot to hit all the checkpoints in order wins.

You should have a few knobs to tweak here to make the challenge easier or harder:

Do the players know the board in advance, or does their AI have to deal with it dynamically?
The damage rules could be left out for simplicity, or left in for more complexity

It's possible this is too complex, but it's pretty well suited for this kind of contest, I think.

It's also an excellent board game to play in person, especially with other programmers.


Putting opponent’s cards in your hand in canasta

The Official Rules of Canasta describes optional point penalties for certain Irregularities in the play.

  Point Penalties

    Penalties paid in points, rather than by forced plays that rectify the error, are unpopular with many players. Therefore players may choose either to use or to omit the following point penalties, In all cases these penalties are additional to the penalties prescribed in rules 51 to 60.

One of these is for illegally taking the Discard Pile, which seems to clearly apply here:

    For taking the discard pile into the hand illegally, 200.

As play on the hand cannot possibly continue, and neither can it be scored in any meaningful sense, it should be redealt by the same dealer after applying the Point Penalty above. THis seems a natural extension of Rule 52:

  52. There must be a new deal by the same player if it is ascertained, before each player has had a turn to play, that a card is faced in dealing or found faced in the deck; or that the dealer departed in any respect from the rules of correct procedure in dealing; or that a player was dealt an incorrect number of cards. After this time limit, the deal and any incorrect hand stands as regular.

The Official Rules of Rubber Bridge note two points which I believe are pertinent, and should apply to all attempts at remedying irregularities of any card game:

  The Scope of The Laws

  The Laws are designed to define correct procedure
  and to provide an adequate remedy whenever a player
  accidentally, carelessly or inadvertently disturbs the
  proper course of the game, or gains an unintentional
  but nevertheless unfair advantage. An offending player
  should be ready to graciously accept any penalty set
  forth in these Laws or any adjustment or decision of an
  Arbiter.
  These Laws do not deal with dishonorable practices
  where ostracism is the ultimate remedy.

  1. General Principles:

  These Laws cannot cover every situation that might
  arise, nor can they produce equity in every situation covered.
  Occasionally the players themselves must redress
  damage. The guiding principle: the side that commits an
  irregularity bears an obligation not to gain directly from
  the infraction.

I would extend this to say that an egregious offence, even when inadvertent, should always carry a penalty when it is impossible to restore play - in order to prevent even the possibility of temptation to commit such an offence intentionally. Further, to be so careless as to pick up an opponent's hand when picking up the discard pile is exactly such an egregious offence - as it could otherwise be used to force a likely redeal when the current situation is disadvantageous.

Yes, Rubber Bridge is a different game; but carefully note this commentary on the Canasta Rules:

    "The Canasta procedure and Irregularities as described here, and adopted by the Association of American Playing Card Manufacturers, are the same in substance as the rules given in the books of Oswald Jacoby, Ottilie Reilly, Albert H. Morehead, Geoffrey Mott-Smith, Ralph Michaels, Charles Goren, Fly Culbertson, Richard L. Frey, Samuel Fry, Theodore A. Lightner, and others, and endorsed by the Regency Club of New York and other clubs."

    Arranged by Albert H. Morehead.

All of Oswald Jacoby, Ottilie Reilly, Albert H. Morehead, Geoffrey Mott-Smith, Ralph Michaels, Charles Goren, Fly Culbertson, Richard L. Frey, Samuel Fry, and Theodore A. Lightner were world class bridge players as well as Canasta experts. Both Morehead and Mott-SMith were at one time chairman of the ACBL Laws Commission. They applied the same standards of fair play to all the card games which they played and excelled at.


Link Summon Vorticular Drumgon with another Link monster as material?

No, you can't.

Drumgon explicitly states you need to use 3 dark dragon type monsters.

If what you want to do were allowed, the text would read as follows:
2+ Dark Dragon monsters


Adding dice to checks in Pathfinder: Rise of the Runelord

You must play all cards that will modify the check before making the check.

According to the rules (starting on page 11), each check is broken into a number of steps. In order (emphasis mine):

  Determine Which Die You're Using.
  Determine the Difficulty.
  Play Cards and Use Powers That Affect the Check (Optional).
  Assemble Your Dice.
  Attempt the Roll.
  Take Damage, If Necessary.

Step three is where you would discard your Blessing of the Gods in order to add the die. If you make it to step five, where you make the roll, it is now too late to play any cards or powers to modify have the check is made.


Can I set up a chain reaction by placing gas markers on adjacent squares?

Jason C. Hall the designer of Last Night on Earth was on BoardGameGeek.com and said this:

http://boardgamegeek.com/article/1730957#1730957

We have yet to see this happen, but it would be pretty sweet!

I would say that an exploding Gas Marker should have the chance to set off adjacent Gas Markers on the roll of 3+ (or auto if in the same space).  Everybody loves a big explosion.

-Jason


Dominion Seaside Treasure Map: do both copies activate?

You play the first, performing its action of trashing itself and the second Treasure Map and gain 4 golds. You can't continue to play the second Treasure Map since it's no longer in your hand.

You also can't use Throne Room to gain more than 4 golds since the text states "If you do trash", and you can only trash a card once (I also tested on isotropic to make sure)


What does the expansion symbol of From the Vault: Transform mean?

The quote is merely referring to the fact the expansion symbols colours on the front are inverted on the back. The standard is for expansion symbols to be the same regardless of what side they are printed on, so this difference in colour makes the set symbol unique.

I suspect that the symbol is supposed to be the back of a werewolf in front of a moon. Though the expansion only contains one werewolf, werewolves are a core part of the transform mechanic and featured heavily in the mechanics debut during Innistrad.

Front (Orange background, Black lines):

Back (Black background, Orange lines):