What tactical/strategic decisions can you make in D&D: The Legend of Drizzt board game?

After playing the "Wrath of Ashardalon" game (same system, different scenario), the biggest strategy that came to my mind is sticking together/splitting the party. If you split the party, you can explore more rooms (hopefully getting to the boss quicker), but you have more monsters (and encounters and monsters with ecounters) to deal with. If you stay together, encounters that affect a whole room can cause a lot more headache.

Having only played a couple times, I'm certainly no expert on it, but I'd say choosing how to split the party is a main tactic of the game.


How does Humility interact with graft creatures?

Yes it would, because it would become a base 1/1 creature instead of a 0/0 and still have the 2 +1/+1 counters on it. It would then be a 3/3.
Yes, Humility removes the Graft ability that causes the spider to have counters as it enters. This prevents the ability from placing those counters on it as it enters the battlefield. It will enter as a base 1/1 spider mutant with no abilities and no counters.
Yes, if humility left the battlefield, the spider from question 2 would now be a 0/0 creature and die due to having 0 or less toughness. The spider from 1 would be back to being a 2/2 due to the counters.


Priority can matter, but only in rare corner cases.  Here are the main types of situations where priority matters.  Some of these are pretty obscure.

Split second cards
It's your turn.  You have in hand Dark Depths and Vampire Hexmage for the infamous Marit Lage combo.  Your opponent has Sudden Death in hand.  Can you summon Marit Lage?  The answer is yes.  You retain priority through playing Dark Depths and casting Vampire Hexmage, then your opponent gains priority while Hexmage is on the stack (which is still too early to cast Sudden Death on it), but then your opponent cannot respond again between the Hexmage resolving, entering the battlefield, and you activating its sacrifice ability.  As the active player, you can retain control through this entire process.  That said, if you were putting the Hexmage onto the battlefield on your opponent's turn through Aether Vial, they would be able to Sudden Death it before you could use its ability because they have priority.
If instead your plan is to win via Chance Encounter + Frenetic Efreet, you can still do it facing a Sudden Death if it is your turn and you play Chance Encounter first.  After the Efreet enters the battlefield, you have priority and retain it through as many activations of its ability as you want.  You can have a billion activations of its ability on the stack by the time your opponent has the option to Sudden Death it, giving you near statistical certainty that you will have enough counters on Chance Encounter to win.
The reason split second cards matter with priority is that they temporarily change how the stack works.  Instead of a player being able to respond at any time, they can't respond until the split second card has finished resolving, meaning when you can cast them matters since players cannot react with other spells or abilities once they are cast.

Sorcery speed abilities (such as planeswalker abilities)
When a planeswalker spell resolves, assuming it was the bottom spell on the stack and cast by the active player (so not cast using Vedalken Orrery or the like), the active player has the option to activate one of it's abilities before anyone else can do anything.  This is important because if someone else could do something, they could Lightning Bolt your planeswalker before you could use one of its abilities.  This pretty much only matters with planeswalkers because their abilities are sorcery speed.  Almost all other activated abilities of permanents are instant speed.  Those that aren't also benefit from priority.  This is anything with the text "Activate this ability only any time you could cast a sorcery." such as Aggravated Assault.  Basically, if you have a permanent enter the battlefield under your control, you can put one of its sorcery speed abilities on the stack before anyone else can kill or destroy the permanent.
The exception to this is if the card with a sorcery speed ability triggers an enter the battlefield ability, in which case the stack will not be empty when you gain priority and players will be able to use instant speed removal before you can use its abilitiy.
Also in this category are the ability to trigger abilities with sorcery speed cards, such as the situation in this question.  If the active player has just cast Kor Spiritdancer and it resolves and doesn't trigger any enter the battlefield abilities, the active player will be able to cast an Aura and consequently trigger the Spiritdancer's ability before the other player has the chance to play instant speed removal.

A change in casting eligibility as a result of a non-stack action (such as paying a cost, activating a mana ability, or unmorphing a creature)
You are playing a mill deck against a burn deck.  Your opponent has Searing Blaze in hand and you are at 1 life.  Meanwhile, your opponent has three cards left in his/her library, and they are all copies of Lightning Bolt.  You have Altar of Dementia on the battlefield and a beefy creature in hand.  Who wins?
This matters includes, but also goes far beyond, priority.  First, Searing Blaze requires that you have a creature on the battlefield for it to be cast.  The requirement is just for casting; the creature need not be there on resolution since as long as any of a spell's targets are still legal, the spell will resolve.  Additionally, sacrificing a creature to the Altar is part of the cost for the altar, and so the sacrifice doesn't use the stack.  Consequently, there is an action that doesn't use the stack that changes whether or not another action can be put on the stack.  It's a fairly rare situation, but it is one where priority matters.  If it is your turn, your creature can enter battlefield and then be sacrificed to the altar without your opponent getting priority.  By the time he/she has priority, the creature is already in the graveyard, and so Searing Blaze cannot be cast.

Retaining priority after playing a land
This is also going to be a bit contrived.  You have some creature that you need to give double strike in order for you to win.  You have Assault Strobe and a Mountain in hand, and several Mountains on the battlefield.  Your opponent has Mana Short.  Because of priority, they cannot stop you from casting Assault Strobe.  If they cast Mana Short before your main phase, you can just play the Mountain on your main phase and then cast Assault Strobe with it.  Meanwhile, if they wait, you retain priority after playing the land, and so can still cast Assault Strobe before they cast Mana Short.  The first chance they have to cast Mana Short during your main phase is in response to Assault Strobe.  Basically, this just means that Mana Short should be played before your opponent's main phase and that it doesn't deprive them of mana sources they get after that point, but this isn't exactly news.
As is the case for the sorcery speed abilities, if the land entering the battlefield triggers an ability, the stack won't be empty when you receive priority, so your opponent will have a chance to use Mana Short before you can cast Assault Strobe since sorceries can only be cast when the stack is empty.

Breaking the symmetry of hidden information
This is one introduced in comments and is perhaps the hardest to formalize.  Take the example in the question where a player is attacking with a 2/2 and has Giant Growth while the defender has Lightning Bolt.  It is now the declare blockers step, the last time to cast spells before combat damage.  If neither player knows about the other's threatened instant, than each player is eager to cast his/her card but whoever does so first loses the interaction.  Here, that the active player must chose first is a disadvantage because it causes the active player to be the one to make the bad decision rather than the non-active player.
That said, the application of priority rules here is only relevant if players are using a low degree of short-cutting (namely the non-active player waits for explicit verbal confirmation that the active player is not acting during the declare blockers step before announcing "I do this during the declare blockers").  In addition, no player trying to win will invoke priority rules here if he or she is erroneously skipped; the ability to respond is far more valuable.  As a final point to why this situation is particularly rare, both players must have to have basically equal willingness to take an action that is disadvantageous given full information.  For this to actually be the case requires fairly specific setups of both game board and player psyche, and occurs rather rarely in practice.

Multiplayer
If multiple players want to respond to a particular event (such as by countering a mass-removal spell), whoever is earlier in priority will be at the disadvantage of acting first.  Perfect information in this situation doesn't help.  The first player with the option to counter the spell cannot know for certain the true priorities of the next player with the option to counter it.  The first player must chose whether to counter the spell or risk it going uncountered where the second player has the leisure of only needing to counter it if the first does not.


Will Endless One still enter with X +1/+1 counters while Humility's in play?

As of the Ixalan rules update, Endless One will not enter the battlefield with counters if Humility is on the battlefield. As other answers have mentioned, Endless One's ability is a replacement effect that modifies how it enters the battlefield. The new version of rule 614.12 says:

  Some replacement effects modify how a permanent enters the battlefield. (See rules 614.1c–d.) Such effects may come from the permanent itself if they affect only that permanent (as opposed to a general subset of permanents that includes it). They may also come from other sources. To determine which replacement effects apply and how they apply, check the characteristics of the permanent as it would exist on the battlefield, taking into account replacement effects that have already modified how it enters the battlefield (see rule 616.1), continuous effects from the permanent’s own static abilities that would apply to it once it’s on the battlefield, and continuous effects that already exist and would apply to the permanent.

Applying this kind of replacement effect involves checking continuous effects that already exist. Humility's ability is one such continuous effect, and applying it removes the ability that would add the counters.

The Ixalan Comprehensive Rules Update goes into some detail about how this rule changed, and it specifically mentions a similar situation:

  Humility causes creatures with modular to enter without their +1/+1 counters.

For reference, the definition of Modular is

  Modular represents both a static ability and a triggered ability. “Modular N” means “This permanent enters the battlefield with N +1/+1 counters on it” and “When this permanent is put into a graveyard from the battlefield, you may put a +1/+1 counter on target artifact creature for each +1/+1 counter on this permanent.”

The part of the Modular ability that affects how the permanent enters the battlefield has basically the same wording as Endless One's ability, so Endless One's ability is affected the same way by the rules change.


Can a Thorncaster Sliver's ability have deathtouch?

Thorncaster Sliver's ability works with deathtouch. (The ability doesn't have deathtouch; the Sliver has deathtouch.)

You can go have a look directly in the comprehensive rules if you like - though generally (and in that case), wiki.mtgsalvation.com has copied the relevant part of the comp rules into the articles. As it says:

  702.2c A creature with toughness greater than 0 that's been dealt damage by a source with deathtouch since the last time state-based actions were checked is destroyed as a state-based action.

It doesn't say "combat damage" in that rule, just "damage" - so any sort of damage dealt by a creature with deathtouch to another creature causes that creature to be destroyed. This is all you should need to convince someone, especially a judge, who ought to be familiar with the rules in the first place. So yes, the combination of a pinging ability like Thorncaster's with deathtouch works how you want it to.

If you need a reminder, it's right there on the card in the reminder text, at least in core sets: "(Any amount of damage this deals to a creature is enough to destroy it.)" Reminder text isn't actually official rules, but they would certainly have written "combat damage" there if it's what they meant.

(You say "the rules say combat damage" - perhaps referring to 702.2b? But that's talking about the definition of lethal damage in the context of deathtouch, which matters when you're assigning damage to multiple blockers.)

The rulings on those wiki pages aren't official per se, but I would expect they're generally correct, and many are probably copied from rulings on cards on Gatherer. Sometimes you'll find the same set of rulings copied onto many cards with the same keyword/ability, but I don't think that ever got done with deathtouch.


Could Armed/Dangerous target an opponent's creature, to force a block with all creatures in play?

Could all creatures in both sides block one of my opponent creatures

No. Dangerous's effect doesn't allow a creature to block creatures it couldn't otherwise block, and one can't block one's own creatures. It merely affect the choice of whether a creature blocks or not, and the choice of what it blocks when it does.

  Could "Armed & Dangerous" could be targeted at a creature my opponent controls?

Yes, but it wouldn't be useful to do so unless it's something like Illusionary Servant.

The effect would be useless when your target an opponent's creature (except in very obscure situations). For starters, since Dangerous is a sorcery, the opponent wouldn't be able to attack with the creature before the effect ends.


If I draw my Critical Miss card, can I apply its effect so as to mitigate it?

I've possibly already answered this in a roundabout way here.

The short answer is none of your options.  The attack did no damage.

There is no such thing as a "miss" or "critical miss" card in Gloomhaven. The word 'miss' does not appear anywhere in the rules.  It is a 'null' card.

from page 11 of rules

  A “Null” symbol means that no damage is done by the attack.

If you pull rolling modifiers and then draw the null card you did no damage.  If the base value of the attack and any other rolling modifiers do not come into play.

Its important to make the distinction between damage and effects.  if you attack added poison or you pulled a rolling wound these are still applied as these are not damage and the attack didn't miss as there is no such thing.


How is a roleplaying game not a board game?

To give a short, simple attempt at answer to kick things off: I would say that a roleplaying game must be partly comprised of hidden information that has been invented by one or more of the players.

That's the key difference I can see between The Arkham Horror/Mansions of Madness (boardgames) and The Call of Cthulhu (roleplaying game), where both are moderated by a Keeper.  In both setups the Keeper controls the opposition to the players, but in only one is (s)he asked to invent details, descriptions or outcomes, as opposed to just managing them.

In a boardgame, it would be seriously frowned upon for any player (even in a moderatorial role) to come up with new challenges or house rules for the others that are not in the script.  In a roleplaying game, that's practically compulsory.


Do I have to keep a creeper whenever I draw cards in Fluxx, even if I was drawing cards to give to other players for "Everybody Gets 1"?

After reading the rules carefully, I found that this is mentioned in the Creeper section:

  Note that this is true any time you draw a card; for example, with 'Everybody Gets 1' you must keep all Creepers you get while drawing the cards you'll be giving to other players.

If you drew Creepers during Everybody Gets 1, you would keep the Creepers you got, draw new cards to replace them, and give 1 non-creeper to each other player. After some searching I found it on the mailing list for Looney Labs. :)


Are Item Finder and Dowsing Machine the same card?

Since there is no official source saying they are the same card, even though they have the same effect, you should be fine playing with 4 and 1 in Unlimited. There's no reason to assume the rules are different than any other two cards, if this were a special case it would be outlined somewhere.


Commander Damage Stacking & Player Control

They would not track separately; the player will lose.

  903.10a A player that’s been dealt 21 or more combat damage by the same commander over the course of the game loses the game. (This is a state-based action. See rule 704.)

And

  903.3. Each deck has a legendary creature card designated as its commander. This designation is not a characteristic of the object represented by the card; rather, it is an attribute of the card itself. The card retains this designation even when it changes zones.

Basically, no matter who controls a commander, it is still the commander of the deck it started in; it is the same actual commander. While you can take control of a player's commander, there is no way to change it into your commander.

In regards to your question about 1 player controlling 2 separate commanders, this can easily happen with the Partner ability, that allows you to have 2 Commanders. In this case, damage from each commander is tracked separately; you need 21 damage from the same commander to lose the game.

  702.123d Except for determining the color identity of your commander, the two commanders function independently. When casting a commander with partner, ignore how many times your other commander has been cast. When determining whether a player has been dealt 21 or more combat damage by the same commander, consider damage from each of your two commanders separately. See rule 903.11a.


Which Settlers of Catan expansions are recommended?

The two biggest expansions for Catan are Seafarers of Catan and Catan: Cities and Knights.  I previously asked the question, "How is gameplay improved in the Cities & Knights Expansion?" recently before buying it myself.  I would check out the answers there for some other opinions on that expansion.  There is also a third expansion, Catan: Traders & Barbarians, but that isn't as popular.

Seafarers of Catan

This was the first expansion for Catan.  The expansion expands the size of the board and gives you the ability to have islands separate from Catan.  The game comes with a number of different scenarios and the ability to create maps with random landmasses.  (Random maps on Seafarers is a favorite of one of the people I play with, and how we usually play.)  Besides adding boats which are roads going across the water, and a pirate to act as a robber, Seafarers doesn't significantly increase the game.

Catan: Cities & Knights

Cities & Knights was the second expansion for Catan and take the base game and builds up on it.  Three commodities are introduced to the game: Coin, Paper, and Cloth.  Cities, now instead of producing two resources, produce a resource and a commodity for ore, wood, and sheep.  The development cards are not used and progress cards in three colors are now used.  Progress cards are gained by developing your cities, and can't be bought.  You use the commodities to upgrade your cities through different levels to increase the speed of you earning progress cards.

Knights also move from being cards to being tokens on the board.  In addition, every so many turns, the barbarians come and attack Catan.  All active knights defend, and if Catan wins, the person who helped to defend the most gets a victory point.  If Catan looses, the person who helped the least, looses a city.  A third event dice determines when the barbarian moves or when progress cards can be generated.

All of this increases the length of the game and makes Cities & Knights plays slower.  It's a much more strategic game with Cities & Knights.  The progress cards also give you a lot of different options.  A number of cards directly harm other players, while benefiting you.

Catan: Traders & Barbarians

This is the one I haven't played, but I do know it adds a lot of different scenarios and variants to Catan you can play with.  It includes the Catan Event Cards, and Settlers of Catan: The Great River.  (As a side note, I know my local game store carries The Great River as a separate expansion.)  The wikipedia article on this expansion has a lot of information available about it.

5-6 player Extensions

The main game and each expansion, has a 5-6 player extension for it that lets you play 5-6 players.  I have extensions so I can play the main game or Seafarers but have never actually had 5-6 people to play it.  Friends of mine speak very highly of playing Catan with more people though.  Adding more people does slow the game down though and if you play Cities & Knights with 6 people, your looking at a very, very long game.

Recommendation

I love variety when playing games, and I find Seafarers adds a lot of variety that makes each game different.  You get this with playing random maps with the core game, but random landforms really diversifies what's going on.  We've had games with large landmasses or narrow landmasses.  If you want to break out of the standard Catan island, this is the expansion for you.  I can also speak highly of Cities & Knights.  It's a different type of game, but adds a lot of depth and if your looking for that, get it.  No one has recommended Traders & Barbarians to me yet, so I would say the jury is out on that one for me.  I would suggest both the other two expansions first, and get Traders & Barbarians if your still looking for more Catan.

Finally, I would get the  5-6 player extensions on as need basis.  If you at least get the core game extension, you can at least play Catan if you have more people then usual.


What can we do with a player who camps in a table top game?

There are already quite a few ways you could deal with this, some based in the rules, and some beyond the rules:

As long as one of your units can see the hidden unit, it stops being hidden

From the rulebook (page 11):

  If an enemy moves so that he can see the hidden warrior, the model is no longer hidden and the counter is removed.

It may be worth sacrificing a fast-moving but weak unit to remove the hidden counters from the opponent's units, thus allowing the rest of your warband to use ranged weapons against them, or charge them first.

Units within a number of inches equal to your initiative are automatically spotted

From the rulebook (page 11):

  Enemy warriors will always see, hear or otherwise detect hidden foes within their Initiative value in inches. So a warrior whose Initiative value is 3 will automatically spot all hidden enemies within 3"

So even if you can't get into direct line of sight, again sacrificing a unit may reveal some or all of the enemy warband.

If terrain permits, you may also be able to move one of your own units with a high initiative into a position where line of sight cannot be drawn to it, but its initiative reveals some or all of the enemy warband.

The All-Seeing Eye of Numas allows you to see hidden units

From the rulebook (page 100):

  The bearer of the All-Seeing Eye can see all models on the table top, even if they are hidden or out of sight.

If you are lucky enough to have one of these, the enemy can never hide from you!

Arm your troops with spears

This will make his charge much less useful, since the Strike First ability means you will hit him before he can hit you.

Use terrain set up to destroy his chances at the edge of the board

If you are playing the standard rules for terrain placement for most scenarios, you are within your right to place terrain at the edge of the board that is horrible to defend. Then if you manage to win the roll for first set-up, choose the side he has designed with defence in mind and leave him with nothing worth hiding around.

Play a different scenario

If you play scenario 3 (wyrdstone hunt), scenario 4 (breakthrough), scenario 5 (street fight), scenario 7 (hidden treasure) or scenario 8 (occupy), there is a very high chance he will lose by using this tactic.

Meta-game things that may help you

Whenever he initiates this tactic declare a temporary alliance with someone (or everyone) else (if playing with more than two of you), and mob him in his nest. There may be some casualties to your alliance, but you should make quick work of this player's warband and teach him in the process that using this tactic is going to make the game less fun for him.
Teach yourself to measure distances by sight. Your opponent will end up out of cover and ready for shooting/charging if he declares a charge, but falls a half inch too short.
Talk to the player (as a group, and as nicely as possible) and just explain that while, yes, his preferred tactic is technically legal, it makes the game much less enjoyable to play for the rest of you.
Use his tactic right back against him. If you just hide at your starting location and keep passing exactly like him, he will quickly realise just how un-fun it is to be on the receiving end of it.
Create a list of your own scenarios, making sure that many of them either cannot be won by playing defensively (like scenarios 3, 7, & 8), or actively deter defensive or stationary play.
If none of these things work, then I would suggest trying to play some games when he isn't invited.


What happens in the case of multiple land animation effects?

Yes, the land will be 7/7 until end of this turn, and a 3/3 otherwise.

Noyan Dar's and Celestial Colonnade's abilities do the same thing: Turn the Colonnade into a creature that's still a land and set its power and toughness to a specific value. When both effects are active, the latest effect "wins".

Therefore, the order in which you activate them matters. If you first activate and resolve Celestial Colonnade's ability, then trigger Noyan Dar, the Colonnade will be 3/3, because the Colonnade's power/toughness-setting ability will be overwritten by Noyan Dar. If you trigger and resolve Noyan Dar first and then activate the Colonnade, it will be a 7/7.

Noyan Dar's ability has no end condition, and counters always remain on permanents, so the land will be a 0/0 with 3 +1/+1 counters on it when the Colonnade's ability has ended.


The game designer intends that "after this turn" effects do not happen when the game ends. The game ends at the end of your turn, so any other effects set up after that can't happen: nothing happens after the game ends. Likewise if you have five Possession effects stacked up for "after this turn" but the game ends, you of course do not play those turns.
References:

shuffle.it forums
Wiki


How long does it take to play Arkham Horror?

Well I can tell you my personal experience - I bought it because I knew lots of friends and acquaintances in my past were fairly obsessive about it, and organized an 8-player game one evening with a bunch of beginners.  Four or five hours later, we were maybe halfway through the game?  One or two of the group had gotten pretty into their characters and quests, but some of the others had completely given up, it was just too much.  Admittedly this was a very "casual" set of players, not dedicated boardgamers, but it's a cautionary tale.

I'd say you wouldn't want to break this out except amongst people who are pretty serious about boardgames, and preferably people who have done some roleplaying - Call of Cthulhu would be ideal, obviously, but in general terms I really would class this as a roleplayer's boardgame.  It definitely seems advisable to learn the rules with a smaller group than 8!  I expect that games will speed up as everyone becomes familiar with the mechanics and strategies, but I'd still expect to be talking 3+ hours.

I don't see the point of breaking it up into multiple sessions really - part of the fun of the Lovecraftian universe is slogging onwards to the end of your quest despite encroaching exhaustion and madness!  If you're looking for a light, fun game that you can whip out at short notice and then play for a couple of rounds before putting away again, Arkham Horror would seem to me like a really odd choice!


How does one defeat an enemy's True-Name Nemesis?

Protection doesn't provide perfect invulnerability against your stuff. The reminder text on the card lists specifically all of the things that you can't do. Here are some ways to deal with an opponent's True-Name Nemesis:

Decrease your opponent's creatures' toughnesses. For example, if you play Elesh Norn, Grand Cenobite, your oppenent's creatures will get -2/-2, so the True-Name Nemesis will have less than zero toughness and die due to a state based effect.
Destroy or exile all creatures. If you play Wrath of God, all creatures will be destroyed, including the True-Name Nemesis. There's nothing that say's that it can't be destroyed by effects you control.
Force your opponent to sacrifice a creature. If you play Consuming Vapors, they'll have to sacrifice a creature. You can force them to sacrifice the True-Name Nemesis if you get rid of their other creatures.
Prevent it from attacking. You can either make it very expensive to attack you, with Norn's Annex, for example, or just prevent it entirely with Blazing Archon.
Remove its protection. If you play Polymorphist's Jest, Sudden Spoiling, or Humility, all of your opponent's creatures will be 2/2 Frogs with no abilities, including the True-Name Nemesis. Then you can get rid of it like any other creature.
Make damage unpreventable, then deal mass damage. For example, you could play Everlasting Torment, then Anger of the Gods.
Outpace your opponent. If you have enough power on the field, you can either kill kill them faster than they can kill you, or force them to keep the True-Name Nemesis untapped as a blocker.
Prevent it from entering the battlefield in the first place. You can counter it with any of a number of counterspells, name "True-Name Nemesis" with Nevermore, Meddling Mage, or Voidstone Gargoyle, cast Iona, Shield of Emeria and choose "blue", or just cast Llawan, Cephalid Empress.
Force it to block with an effect that destroys blocking creatures. For example, if you enchant an Engulfing Slagwurm with Lure and attack, the True-Name Nemesis will be forced to block if able, and it will be destroyed.
Make it deal damage to itself using Wave of Reckoning.


When can I take additional actions in Grand Austria Hotel?

On of the games designers clarified this on Board Game Geek, but you can take an additional action at any time during your turn, with the caveat that in order to increase the number on a die you must have the needed Krone when you take the die.

Page 8 of the rulebook contains the unorder list of "Additional Actions".


Penalties involved in withholding knowledge of a rule violation

Player 1 would be committing a Tournament Error (Deck/Decklist Problem) under item 1 of section 3.9 of the IPG:

  The deck and/or decklist contain an illegal number
   of cards for the format.

If decklists are registered, it's also a violation of item 4:

  The contents of the presented deck and sideboard do not match the decklist registered.

The penalty for this is a game loss.

Player 2 would be Cheating under section 4.8, which a player commits if he or she "notices an offense committed in his or her (or a teammate's) match and does not call attention to it", if these two conditions are met:

  The player must be attempting to gain advantage from his or her action.
  The player must be aware that he or she is doing something illegal.

The penalty for this is disqualification.

Player 2 might also be committing a Game Play Error under section 2.6, which is defined like this:

  A player allows another player in the game to commit a Game Play Error involving an effect or action that he or she does not control, and has not pointed it out immediately.

Player 1 would have to be committing a Game Play Error for this to apply. Section 2.5, which defines Game Rule Violation, "handles violations of the Comprehensive Rules that are not covered by the other Game Play Errors". A Tournament Error is not a violation of the comprehensive rules, but the comprehensive rules do say this:

  100.2a In constructed play (a way of playing in which each player creates his or her own deck ahead of time), each deck must contain at least sixty cards
  Even if this means sections 2.5 and 2.6 apply, the penalties for both are less than the penalties for violations under sections 3.9 and 4.8. Also, the IPG suggests using the latter two in this case:

  If a judge believes a player is intentionally not pointing out
  other players’ illegal actions, either for his or her own advantage, or in the hope of bringing it up at a more
  strategically advantageous time, they should consider an Unsporting Conduct — Cheating infraction.


Can I switch two pawns that are right next to the safe zone?

Yes, you can switch them (the opponent's pawn is not yet safe; see rules below).

And what the opponent then "can do" doesn't change. The opponent plays from that position as normal. Clockwise, as normal. If they can back up a few spaces (e.g., with a 4, see rules quote below), then they would find that helpful. Or switch back with you with another 11. Or similar. Otherwise, that pawn is faced with going around clockwise again.

Rules:

You may target that pawn with your 11:

  You may only use 11 for pawns in play on the open track — not
  at START, HOME or in a SAFETY ZONE.

and they can move backward from there:

  However, you may pass the entry space on a backward
  move (4 or 10 card) or as the result of a “SORRY!”
  or “switch” (11) card played against you.


Can you announce that you are a character not in play in Mascarade

ErroneousPlanet has the correct answer, and all of their points are right on. I did find a copy of the rulebook online and scanned it. Below is what I saw.

While the rulebook doesn't explicitly say that you must declare you are a character that is in your instance of the game, it does say at the top of page 7 (emphasis mine) "it is possible to use the power of any character in the game without being that character, even without knowing who you are." I would take this phrasing to mean the instance of the game you are presently playing, not the board game as a whole, so you cannot claim to be a character that is not currently in play.


Do I get to keep the 2nd Kalonian Twingrove when I got it via a Mimic Vat?

The rulings on Mimic Vat say:

  Any enters-the-battlefield abilities of the exiled card will trigger when the token is put onto the battlefield. Any "as [this permanent] enters the battlefield" or "[this permanent] enters the battlefield with" abilities of the exiled card will also work.

This means that you will get one token copy of a Kalonian Twingrove, and one Treefolk Warrior token. The Treefolk Warrior token won't be exiled, as it wasn't created by the Mimic Vat.

This is assuming you have any forests in play. If you do not, then both tokens will immediately die for having 0 toughness and vanish!


Is an early escape normal in encounter 1C?

Yes, this is a normal situation.  It isn't very fun, sure, but it is a normal one.  I've had it happen several times and each time I swear off playing this scenario until I find a new group of victi-- friends who have not yet experienced my wra-- version of fun.

In fact, I had a situation where one of my players simply wanted to "try and leave to see what happens".  Everyone else followed.  Game over in the first couple of turns.


Yes, you not only need to show all five cards, you need to show which of those you picked.

No action is taken in secret; all players are to be made aware of all actions taken and what they effect. And since the cards are revealed when you pick them, they get to know not just what card you picked, but it's name as well.

  701.14a To reveal a card, show that card to all players for a brief time. If an effect causes a card to be revealed, it remains revealed for as long as necessary to complete the parts of the effect that card is relevant to. If the cost to cast a spell or activate an ability includes revealing a card, the card remains revealed from the time the spell or ability is announced until the time it leaves the stack.

(Emphasis mine)


Yes, that's basically the point of the card.  Here's a BGG thread confirming it.
CyberBunny is not currently in Tokyo, so he is definitely able to heal.  And since he is not in Tokyo, the damage he deals is applied to monsters in Tokyo.  Since Gigazour does not leave Tokyo, CyberBunny is placed in Tokyo Bay.  So yes, your resolution is correct.


How can I add a taste of adventure games to my game?

This is an interesting scenario. The first idea that sprung to mind would be to have a set of cards that relate to each other specifically. Each card in the set needs a certain criteria to be met to allow you to then search the deck for another card in the set. The harder the "quest" is the more cards there are in the set that you need to complete the adventure.

On reflection, this seems more like a lore issue than a mechanical issue. The wording on the "adventure cards" may be the best place to include your adventuring aspects. Maybe have "Scenario" cards that explain a certain journey and need choices to be made at certain points (Maybe drawing from two separate decks that accompany the scenario cards?). These choices determine the outcome of the adventure.

This is only a brainstorm. I'd like to think I could come up with more ideas. If so I will update the answer.


In 2-3 player Citadels, can the unique district abilities be triggered twice?

Yes you can use the unique ability twice.

The rules here state the following regarding 2-3 player games.

  each player has two turns each
  round (one turn for each character).

So if a card says it can be used 'once per turn' then you will get to activate once during the turn of each character you took.

The rules make a distinction between 'round' (The process from character selection and calling each character in order) and 'turn' (when a character takes and action and/or builds a district and uses special abilities.


Is Parcheesi simply an alternate name for Pachisi? Or are they significantly different games?

In modern, Western usage, they are the same game

Consider these two games:

1981 Pachisi by Whitman Games

1982 Parcheesi by Selchow & Righter (later republished by Milton Bradley)

Both of these have similar boards with only cosmetic differences. They also both use dice, are played individually rather than in teams, and have similar rules.

There are some historical differences

Bruce Whitehill published an article about Pachisi and Parcheesi in the September 2007 edition of Knucklebones games magazine. He defines some clear differences between the two:

Pachisi was designed for team play, Parcheesi for individual play

  Pachisi was designed to be played by four players acting as two teams, unlike Parcheesi, in which each player plays independently; team play significantly raises the level of strategy required for the game.

The boards have a different appearance and sequence of play

  The Parcheesi board still has the appearance of a cross, but the main paths have been moved to form a path around the edge of a square gameboard. Parcheesi pieces begin in individual areas in the corners of the board (one color per area), whereas the “men,” as they are often called, in Pachisi begin and end in the same center square.

Traditional Pachisi uses cowry shells, Parcheesi uses dice

  One more significant difference (there are other minor ones) is that the moves in Parcheesi are governed by dice, whereas Pachisi uses cowrie (or cowry) shells.

However, most modern versions of Pachisi and Parcheesi do not have these differences, as shown above.

I suspect that the differences could be likened to regional variations of the game, or a change of the rules over time. This might be compared to Chess. Over the course of hundreds of years, the pieces on the board and the rules of movement have changed, yet the game was still "Chess". In fact, Whitehill's article lists many alternative names for the game, noting that some contain regional rule variations of Pachisi.

It seems that in this case, the rules of Pachisi have changed over time or had variations, and Parcheesi is just another name for the same game.


Zendo is an Icehouse game which can be ported to different game systems; none of the fundamental rules refer to any sort of specific pieces, you just need pieces that can be combined together into structures such that there can be some rule that distinguishes two classes of structures built out of the pieces; or if you're familiar with Zendo terminology, you need to be able to build koans out of the pieces, and come up with a rule that distinguishes which koans have the Buddha nature.

I've played Zendo with playing cards before (rules can be things like "a koan has the buddha nature if the red cards add up to 10"), and it could just as well be played with Piecepack ("a koan has the buddha nature if it has at least one sun square and one moon coin"), or likely could be adapted to most any game system.

The nice thing about porting Zendo to other game systems is that the rules you make up will adapt to the attributes of the game system in question; the mechanics don't rely on things you could do with any pieces whatsoever, like count them or put them in piles.

For some other game systems than Icehouse, it might help to have more than one copy, as you need to be able to use identical pieces in different koans to test out theories. An Icehouse set is almost ideally suited, as you have 5 copies of every piece, with just enough attributes different between the pieces (4 colors, 3 sizes, a few different orientations you can place them in, a few ways to stack them) that rules are relatively easy to judge and not too hard to guess; but you can use pretty much any game system you want.


There is no way to get rid of starvation tokens but they only cause a loss of morale when there is not enough to food to eat for that round. In that situation, you would lose 1 morale for each starvation token in the food supply.

This is covered in the rules in the section that describes the Pay Food section of the Colony phase. The rules indicate that in the situation where you do not have enough food in the food supply to feed the colony, you do not remove the food, but instead add a starvation token and then decrease morale for each starvation token in the supply.

This was further confirmed in a forum discussion on BoardGameGeek that involved Johnny Gilmour, one of the game designers.


Target permanent you control refers to a card on the battlefield. So yes it has to be on the battlefield and it would stay on the battlefield when it comes under their control.


What changes or improvement will the Puerto Rico expansion offer me?

Short answer:  I don't like the first expansion ("The Buildings" expansion in the Treasure Chest [BGG] set), as there are only a few good buildings; I do, however, enjoy the second expansion ("The Nobles" expansion in the aforementioned Treasure Chest).  If you are a completist and want some variety, go for it, but I don't feel the first expansion adds much to the game.

Long answer: I feel that the Nobles expansion is the better expansion, as the buildings have good synergy, the Nobles colonists put a much larger emphasis on Mayoring (you replace one colonist on the ship each phase with a red Noble piece; each Noble is worth 1 VP at the end of the game and some buildings function differently if it is occupied by a Noble) and the expansion as a whole seems to try and put more emphasis on roles that might not have been taken as much in the core game.  The Nobles expansion does have a few arguably degenerate combos, though.

The Buildings expansion to me just has some random buildings with weird rules for the sake of being "different", like the Forest House and the Black Market.  There are a couple of bright spots in the first expansion, though, such as the Storehouse, Library and Statue.

The drafting rule: very much slows down the start of the game, and while I could be judging harshly, I think the drafting is a major turn-off and slows down the start of the game pretty severely.  I don't want to pick buildings, I just want to play!

I do like the Variant 2 suggestion in the link you provided to speed up the drafting process, but I find it simply easier to say "We're playing with all of Expansion 1", "We're playing with all of Expansion 2"), or "We're playing the core game".

I'm going to cover both expansions, just for the sake of thoroughness, so you can decide if the expansion is right for you.

Cost 1

Small Market vs. Aqueduct (Expansion 1)

The Aqueduct will give you one more barrel of indigo or sugar for a large plant when crafting, but the Small Market is practically the de facto opening move and a fantastic buy; other than trying something new, I can't see why you would want to take the Aqueduct over Small Market.

Verdict:  Small Market, hands down.

Cost 2

Construction Hut and Hacienda vs. Forest House and Black Market (Expansion 1) vs. Land Office (Expansion 2)

Construction Hut is nice for getting a quarry when someone else Settles.
Hacienda is nice for getting a random extra plantation, when you're going for the Residence or want to get plantations as quick as possible and don't particularly care what you pull.
The Forest House allows you to take a plantation from the stack, place it face-down on your plantation area and call it a Forest; for every two Forests you have in the plantation area, you get a 1 doubloon discount (in addition to any Builder privileges and/or quarry discounts).
The Black Market allows you to reduce a building's cost; you may discard one colonist, VP or good back to the supply and get a 1 doubloon discount, but you cannot discard more than one of each type, and you cannot have any doubloons left after using the Black Market.
A colonist-occupied Land Office lets you buy the topmost face-down plantation in any of the plantation stacks for 1 doubloon during the trader phase.  A noble-occupied Land Office lets you discard a plantation tile from the plantation to earn 1 doubloon.

The Forest House does give you a discount above and beyond a quarry at the cost of spending 2 turns doing nothing but getting a forest; I rather just have a Construction Hut for the guaranteed Quarry.  I don't like the Black Market because you can almost always do something with the discarded good (sell it or ship it), and who wants to discard VPs?  The noble-occupied Land Office is amusing if you get stuck pulling a plantation you'll simply never use, but the colonist-occupied Land Office is a Hacienda that you have to spend an extra doubloon for.

Verdict:  The Expansion 1 buildings are the worst of the bunch.  Construction Hut and Hacienda still probably win, although Construction Hut and Land Office isn't bad.

Cost 3

Small Warehouse vs. Storehouse (Expansion 1) vs. Chapel (Expansion 2)

Now we're getting to some actual decisions!  Small Warehouse is great when you and someone else are producing the same good, but he gets the drop on you and captains first and fills a ship up.  In addition to your one barrel kept after captaining, a Storehouse allows you to get 3 more goods (of any type), so you effectively get to keep up to four barrels after captaining.  The Chapel, during the craftsman phase, gives you 1 doubloon if occupied by a colonist, and 1 VP if occupied by a Noble.

Verdict:  All three are great.  If you have diverse plantations, I think Storehouse is actually better.  If you want a free doubloon or VP almost every turn, the Chapel is pretty tempting.

Cost 4

Hospice vs. Guesthouse (Expansion 1) vs. Hunting Lodge (Expansion 2)

Hospice is nice because your plantations are automatically occupied when you Settle.
Guesthouse is extremely interesting.  During the Mayor phase, you may place up to two of your colonists in the Guesthouse.  Then, during any other phase, at any point, you may move people from the Guesthouse onto any other space on your board, where they immediately take effect.  Great for getting a Big Purple building occupied at the end of the game when no one is going to Mayor again, or when you just bought that Coffee Roaster but haven't had a chance to occupy it yet.
Hunting Lodge is such a Johnny combo-riffic building.  During each Settler phase, if the Hunting Lodge is colonist-occupied, you may discard a plantation from your island.  If the Hunting Lodge is noble-occupied, and you have the fewest plantations on the board (not tied for fewest), you earn 2 VP.

Verdict:  All three are great again.  Hospice is very straight-forward and good at what it does, but Guesthouse is a really versatile building, and Hunting Lodge is really hilarious if you can stay behind in plantations, especially early in the game.

Cost 5

Office and Large Market vs. Trading Post and Church (Expansion 1) vs. Zoning Office (Expansion 2)

Wow, still reading?

Trading Post gives you your own Trading House, but you can't use Small Market or Large Market with it.
With the Church, you get 1 VP when you buy anything in the 2nd or 3rd column, 2 VP if you buy anything in the 4th column.
A colonist-occupied Zoning Office lets you pay 1 less doubloon when buying anything in the first 3 columns, and a noble-occupied Zoning Office lets you pay 2 less doubloons when buying anything in the 4th column.

Verdict:  Office and Large Market all the way.  Trading Post suffers because you don't get Small or Large Market bonuses, and Church and Zoning Office really don't give great returns.  Selling Coffee over and over again, and at a possible +2 doubloons is fantastic.

Cost 6

Large Warehouse vs. Small Wharf (Expansion 1) vs. Royal Supplier (Expansion 2)

Small Wharf lets you ship straight to the supply, as many or as few barrels as you want, but you only get 1 VP for each two barrels you ship.
Royal Supplier lets you ship straight to the supply, and you get 1 VP for each barrel, but you can only ship 1 of each good, and you can only ship up to X barrels, where X is the number of nobles on your board.

Verdict:  Large Warehouse or Royal Supplier.  Small Wharf is reasonably costed, and if you miss out on a Wharf, it's not bad, but I think the Royal Supplier does it better, because you're going to want Nobles anyways; it only takes 5 barrels to get 5 VP with the Royal Supplier, whereas it takes 10 barrels with the Small Wharf.  Large Warehouse is great simply for how much it can hold.

Cost 7

Factory vs. Lighthouse (Expansion 1) vs. Villa (Expansion 2)

My wrist is cramping.  The Lighthouse gives 1 doubloon for each shipment (much like the Harbor, but with doubloons instead of VP).  If you have a Lighthouse and you select Captain, you get another doubloon just for being awesome.  During the Mayor phase, an occupied Villa lets you take a Noble from the supply.

Verdict:  They're all fantastic picks.  If your opponents will allow it, the Villa.  The Villa may just be the single most broken building in the game, as an early Villa can fuel Jeweler and Chapel, plus you're getting a free guy worth 1 VP.

Cost 8

University and Harbor vs. Specialty Factory and Library (Expansion 1) vs. Jeweler (Expansion 2)

Specialty Factory gives you X-1 doubloons when crafting, where X is the number of goods of a single kind you produced.  Produced 5 corn?  You just got 4 doubloons.
The Library is awesome.  When you take a role, double the privilege.  It's just that simple.  Think about it.
During the Craftsman phase, the Jewler gives you a doubloon for each Noble on your board.  It also counts as a large production building.

Verdict:  Library and (Jeweler if playing with Nobles, Harbor without Nobles).  I hate the University; it is way too expensive for what it does.  The Specialty Factory is nice, but I think there is more money-making opportunities with the Jeweler.

Cost 9

Wharf vs. Union Hall (Expansion 1)

During the Captain phase, before captaining, you get 1 VP for every two of the same good you have.

Verdict:  The Wharf is just better.  If you have a Large Market and the Union Hall, and you somehow keep being unable to ship anything, I could see some big decent VP bonuses there, but I much rather just be able to ship everything at 1 VP per barrel.

Cost 10

I'm just going to cover the new ones here.

Statue -- it's worth 8 VP, period.  No occupation necessary, just fork over the 10 doubloons and collect 8 VP.  Fantastic.
Cloister -- you get VP depending on how many triplets of plantations you have on your island; 1 VP for 1 set, 3 VP for 2 sets, 6 VP for 3 sets and 10 VP for 4 sets.  Tricky to use.
Royal Garden -- all your nobles are worth 2 VP instead of 1 VP.  Absolutely brutal with the Villa.

Boy, I sure hope this helps!


If I am going to start playing Magic The Gathering, what set should I start with?

Unlesss you're playing in some sort of tournament, It doesn't matter what cards you use.

The most popular tournament format is Standard, and the legal cards for that are all the cards from the past 5 to 7 sets.(4 sets rotate out every October)

Standard legal sets include:  Innistrad, Dark Ascention, Avacyn Restored, M13, Return to Ravnica, and Gatecrash.

Generally your local store will be selling these standard-legal sets.

Other notable tournament formats include

Modern: which is cards printed in a major set since 8th edition.

Legacy: which has no time limit on cards, but there is a list of banned cards

Vintage: which has no time limit, and has a restricted list(you can only use 1 of the card).  the only cards banned in Vintage are cards that deal with Ante and Shaharazad.

You can learn about other sanctioned formats here.

If you're just looking to play around with each-other casually, than it would be fine, to buy whatever starter decks your store happens to be selling and play them against each-other.

If you're looking to play a little more competitively, the Event decks are designed to be fairly powerful, and able to win a few games at low-level tournaments such as FNM(Friday Night Magic) events.  (your local store might have such events.  you should ask)

your store might also have duel decks.  These are 2 decks designed to be played against each-other.  Not all the cards in these decks are Standard Legal


Zombicide Black Plague Intro game board blocked?

As shown in the example diagrams on page 36 of the rulebook, multiple Vault doors of the same colour will both link to the vault of that colour.

Thus you would use the vault door on the left side of the map, enter the vault, then leave by the vault door on the right side of the map, allowing you access to the final area.


Taking advantage of an Insane Investigator

In at least scenario 2 mythos and trauma cards are pretty cheap. For 1 threat you get 1 mythos or 1 trauma card per cultist. Playing the trauma card is in itself free. In my last game the keeper managed to get my insane investigator to run 3 spaces into one of her monsters who at once took a sample and ran through a locked door I couldn't follow. This ended up being probably the most important move in the game. I forced the investigators to go from passive to aggressive to stop the keeper from getting her last sample.

So while the use will depend on the luck of the draw a well placed trauma card can change the course of the game. Many of the low insanity cards are really not nice. In a game where your objective is to kill the investigators you could get lucky and draw "final solution" and simply make the investigator kill themselves or the card that makes the investigator attack one of his friends.

In a couple of the scenarios you get trauma at the same time as you get mythos. This is a way to get some use out of them.


Solitaire all cards dealt face up in 13 columns, then 12, then 11, 10, 9

It is not exactly the same rules but it is very similar to Perseverance

It's a solitaire game starting with 12 columns, not 13 (the 4 aces are moved to the foundations at the beginning)
You have to build the foundation from ace to king
you can only stack cards of the same suit in the columns
when you are stuck you pile the columns without shuffling and re-deal in less columns. Not specifically 13, 12, 11, 10, 9 as you mentioned but in pile of 4 cards.


Can Bunker's Grenade Launcher be used on the same target 3 times?

No, you must select different targets for each set of damage.

In the Sentinels of the Multiverse app developed by Handelabra Studio in cooperation with Greater Than Games, playing Grenade Launcher asks you to select a target for each instance of dealing damage and does not give you the option for selecting the same target(s).

This matches the usual definition of "another". From dictionary.reference.com:

  Another (adj):
  1.
  being one more or more of the same; further; additional:
  another piece of cake.
  2.
  different; distinct; of a different period, place, or kind:
  at another time; another man.
  3.
  very similar to; of the same kind or category as:
  What we need today is another Thomas Jefferson.

In general, Sentinels of the Multiverse cards are very literal in their instructions: if it were intended to have an OR, it would have an OR.


Discarding a card in Phase 10 that allows the next player to go out

Yes, it is permissible ... and there are some occasions where you may find it to be advantageous. For example:

One person may be on the same Phase as you and well ahead of the others, but she may not have made her current Phase yet. If you feel she is close and you are not, it may be worthwhile to "end" the hand so that neither of you can advance.
Similarly, one person may be leading in terms of points, but he may have not laid down any sets or runs yet. It may be to your advantage to discard a card the next person can use to go out so as to (hopefully) stick the leader with a lot of points.

However, as is the case in many games, what is legal according to the rules may not necessarily be acceptable according to your group. Discarding such a card in this case may lead to cries of bias for the person to your left or against the perceived victim of your play. It may be wise to determine which is the primary concern in your group, winning or enjoying the game, before you decide how to play the hand.

Of course, this assumes that you have multiple cards to discard, and that you have not yet made your Phase. If you have made your Phase, then any card in your hand that the next person could play is also playable by you; you should play that one yourself and discard a different card.

It may be the case that no matter what you discard, the next person will pick it up and go out, particularly in the Phases that require you to lay down 8 or 9 cards. For example, you may be on Phase 6, but you only have 8 cards to your run of 9, and the other two cards are playable. You draw a playable card: all three cards are playable, so you have no choice but to discard one. In that case, it may help to explain during scoring that you had no choice.


Dropping the first three blocks on the top

It counts as losing.

From the rules:

  The game ends when the tower falls -- completely or if any block falls from the tower (other than the block a player moves on a turn).


Yes you need two hand weapons to claim an extra attack.  Spear + Hand weapon does not grant a bonus attack.

P89, Two Special Close Combat Weapons: "A model can't .. wield .. (an) additional hand weapon alongside another type of special weapon.."


What would happen if you made Spellskite Hexproof?

You can fizzle a spell, but only once. Here are the two sequences possible:

1. Give Spellskite Hexproof, and then change target to it

Spellskite's ability resolves, and attempts to change the target. It fails because Spellskite is not a valid target. The spell or ability in question continues to target its original choice.

2. Change target to Spellskite, and then give Spellskite Hexproof

First you change the target of a spell (say, Lightning Bolt) to Spellskite, and let Spellskite's ability resolve. Lightning Bolt is now targeting Spellskite, but before it resolves, give Spellskite Hexproof. When Lightning Bolt tries to resolve, it will fail, as its current target is now invalid.

Basically, if you want to do what you're thinking of, you need to change the spell's target to Spellskite, and let the target-changing ability resolve BEFORE giving Spellskite Hexproof to fizzle the spell.

Just to be clear, here's a hard example of the second, more useful case.

Player A controls a Spellskite, and is at 3 life. Player B casts Lightning Bolt targeting Player A. In response, Player A activates Spellskite's ability targeting Lightning Bolt on the stack. Spellskite's ability resolves, so now Lightning Bolt is on the stack targeting Spellskite. Then, Player A casts Blossoming Defense targeting their own Spellskite, which resolves and gives Spellskite Hexproof. Lightning Bolt tries to resolve, and is countered as its target (Spellskite) is no longer valid.


Who wins if player who said 'cabo' has lowest points but another player also has the same?

Having looked around a bit I have not seen any rules for dealing with ties but there are two ways to handle it and personally I think the first is the best since there is some risk involved in calling cabo.

First: The player that called cabo wins as it can be risky to call it since the other players all get one more turn to play as stated in the wiki.

  When a player calls cabo, the other players each get one more turn and then everyone has to turn their hidden cards face-up, and lay down the cards from their hand. The player with the lowest score wins

Second: You declare it a tie and all players with the low score share the win.


Can King Macar the Gold-Cursed be tapped without attacking?

You can't just tap your creatures whenever you want. You can only tap it at one of the following times:

When the game tells you to tap it (like when you attack).
When a card tells you to tap it (like Twiddle).
When you can tap it to pay a cost (like Endless Obedience).

Cards that would allow you to tap King Macar include spells with conspire and convoke, cards that grant tap abilities (that has a couple of false positives), and cards that tap creatures as an effect.


You should be able to build a reasonable deck of any colour for casual play using just standard commons. It won't be particularly exciting, but as long as you have a reasonably large fraction of creatures, go easy on the enchantments, and choose cards to follow the mana curve (i.e. some low cost, some high cost, most in-between), you'll be fine.

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by 'mermaids'. If you're referring to Merfolk, then yes, you should be able to build a reasonable deck based on that theme relatively cheaply. A basic idea would be 4x Lord of Atlantis, 4x Sunken City, and then your choice of Merfolk cards (of which there are lots; many are common).

Here's a list of Merfolk to give you an idea of the possibilities:

http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Search/Default.aspx?name=+%5Bmerfolk%5D


When should a player decide to fold in Texas Hold'em Poker?

It's a hard question to answer, and depends on the player's style and whether the player likes to bluff, as well as the style and skill of the other players.

If I don't have decent hole cards (low cards or nothing matching) I fold. I might risk it if I'm one of the blinds, but if I'm raised I'll fold. If I have a decent starting hand I usually wait for the flop.

In my opinion you should bet based on the strength of your cards. Generally speaking, the games I've won have always been ones where I've consistently been conservative, and I find the same applies to my opponents. By conservative I mean don't bet unless you're sure the odds are in your favor.

For more on odds, read this article.


Game creator David Sirlin confirmed that the move pictured is Cycloid Revolution.

  The art is Cycloid Revolution. It's sort of like Venom's huge ball super in GGXX.

It can be assumed that Time Spiral Hurricane would look similar to the Sonic Hurricane of Guile from Street Fighter, an inspiration for the character.


How to measure the difficulty of a deal in Klondike-Solitaire?

From a human perspective I suppose one's interpretation of difficulty is quite subjective: what one person might find difficult another may find easy. If, for our purposes, we use a rough definition along the lines of, "how much time the average player spends on a layout", then there are a few interesting things we can say about the relationship between a layout's difficulty and its general features.
As your first point suggests, the solvability of the layout (i.e. does a sequence of legal moves exist that results in a win) is obviously key. Let's consider this case first:
Unsolvable Layouts
If a layout is not solvable then in one sense it's infinitely difficult. However, even for unsolvable layouts, the depth of the search tree can reflect a kind of difficulty.
In the extreme case, if to begin with there are no legal moves available in the tableau (main cards) or the stock, then although the layout isn't solvable, in a sense it is easy because you can immediately give up. Alternatively, a layout may have a huge number of promising moves, only to turn out to be unsolvable in the end.
Using a tool like Solvitaire (full disclosure: I am one of the authors of Solvitaire) can identify unsolvable layouts and record the number of unique states that needed to be searched to prove that there's no solution (often a very large number of states!). Another good solver is Klondike-Solver, although I'm not aware of what metrics it reports.
This isn't a perfect measure by any means. Humans aren't computers, and our brains probably aren't using depth-first search in the way a solver might. Without looking at human gameplay data though, this is probably the best heuristic of difficulty for unsolvable layouts.
Solvable Layouts
As was the case for unsolvable layouts, if one has access to human gameplay data then that's almost certainly going to be the best source of understanding how difficult humans will find a layout.
Let's assume though, that we don't have this data available, but we do have a computerised solver. Just looking at the static cards in the starting layout is unlikely to tell us much, but by running the solver we can deduce more about a deal's difficulty (for a human).
Here are some heuristics one could use instead:
Size of Search Tree
For a computer this is important, but in the solvable case it may not tell us much about human play. For instance, the search tree for a layout could be huge, but have one solution that's very obvious to a human. We would not want to classify such a layout as difficult just because it has a large search tree.
Depth of Shallowest / Best Solution
Based on the above logic, the depth of the shallowest (i.e. "best") solution in the search tree is perhaps a better measure. However, this still may not be ideal. We might label a layout as easy because it has a shallow solution, but if this solution is extremely hard for a human to spot then our heuristic will be misleading.
Number of different solutions
This heuristic could be quite accurate, although it's hard to say. Having a lot of different solutions in the search tree would suggest a human player is likely to come across a solution sooner, but there is no guarantee. This would certainly be something worth exploring further.
Number of states searched until first solution
This is probably the most obvious heuristic: how many states did it take before the solver came across the first solution? However, this measure can be deeply flawed. There is no guarantee that computerised solvers search in anything like the kind of order a human would search in (Solvitaire certainly doesn't).
Say move "A" obviously leads to a solution in a few moves, whereas move "B" leads in a very different direction. There is no guarantee the solver picks "A" first; it might instead pick "B" and try thousands or even millions more moves before it backtracks to the point where it thinks to try "A".
To make this kind of method work one needs a policy for which moves to try. For Solvitaire, which just wants to explore all possible moves, this doesn't matter, but for determining difficulty this is very important! If one could come up with a  policy which reflected closely how an average human would play, then the number of states searched until the first solution would be an excellent metric. But coming up with such a metric is hard, complex work.
What Is A Move: Dominances and K+
In all of these discussions we've talked about moves and states. But how we define a move in Klondike is actually not trivial.
Firstly, consider the stock. The standard rules require we turn over 3 cards in one go. A consequence of this is that at different times there are different groups of cards that are effectively "available" to us.
Bjarnason et al. use a solver which can move any of the available stock cards into the tableau in a single move (they call this the K+ representation). For a human, this is like saying "I remember there's a 5H in there, so I'll just loop back over the stock to get it". From the point of considering difficulty, one may wish to consider this sort of thing to be a single move, rather than several separate moves.
Finally, in our paper on Solvitaire we consider something called dominances. These are cases in which we can prove that one of the available moves is guaranteed to be a good move. For instance, sometimes it can clearly be shown that "putting up" say an ace, is always the right thing to do. This is often obvious to a human player and one might not wish to count this as a move (Solvitaire doesn't count this as an extra move).
In summary:

One must first consider solvability
Then if a layout is solvable, one can begin with easier, but probably less accurate methods like the number of possible solutions, or the depth of the best solution
Finally, and only if one can craft a good (human-like) policy for moves to try at each search step, a better approach may be to measure the number of states the solver searches until the fist solution


Can I play a card for its miracle cost in this situation?

No, Terminus could not be played here
As you already suspect, that the Terminus is a new object at the end of the sequence of plays you describe. It's still in playerB's hand where the miracle trigger would expect it, but it's a new object regardless, because it changed zones.

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. [..]

The complete rules for miracle also mention what happens when the Terminus in this case leaves the hand:

702.93a Miracle is a static ability linked to a triggered ability (see rule 603.11). “Miracle [cost]” means “You may reveal this card from your hand as you draw it if it’s the first card you’ve drawn this turn. When you reveal this card this way, you may cast it by paying [cost] rather than its mana cost.”
702.93b If a player chooses to reveal a card using its miracle ability, they play with that card revealed until that card leaves their hand, that ability resolves, or that ability otherwise leaves the stack.


Am I allowed to shuffle my hand when ever I want?

When you are playing a game, you can reorder your hand whenever you want. Your opponent is not supposed to know which card is which in your hand unless your hand is revealed.

If a spell allows you to make your opponent discard a card, it will either say

  [Player] discards a card at random from their hand.

In which case, you should shuffle the hand before allowing them to chose a card from it.

Or, it will say

  Look at [player]'s hand (or "[Player] reveals their hand"). You choose a [quality] card from it. That player discards that card.

In that case, they are looking at your hand, so they will definitely be able to know what card they are choosing.


Probability of being dealt a 7-card flush in Rummy

What are the odds of being dealt all 7 cards in the same suit?

The odds of pulling 7 spades in 7 cards the number of ways to pull 7 spades (from among the 13 spades) divided by the number of ways to pull 7 cards (from among the 52 cards).

13c7 = 1716

52c7 = 133784560

1716 / 133784560 = 0.0000128 = 0.00128 %

For general suit (not just spades), multiply that by four:

= 0.0000513 = 0.00513 %

If you want to continue to the eighth card:

The odds of pulling 8 spades in 8 cards the number of ways to pull 8 spades (from 13) divided by the number of ways to pull 8 cards (from 52).

13c8 = 1287

52c8 = 752538150

1287 / 752538150 = 0.00000171 = 0.000171 %

And again multiply by four for general suit:

= 0.00000684 = 0.000684 %

(subtract the number of ways to get a straight if you want to exclude straights from "all cards in the same suit".)

Notation explanation:

13c8 is read as "13 choose 8" and means "the number of ways to choose 8 things from a set of 13 things". It is computed as 13!/((13-8)! * 8!).

In general, NcM = N! / ( (N-M)! * M! )


Can I go for both Tichu types in one round?

No, you can only call one type of Tichu per hand.

Honestly, I spent an inordinate amount of time looking at different rules (here, here, here, and here). Ultimately, none of these explicitly state whether a player is allowed to call both types of Tichu, but all of them imply it. I finally found one source with this wording after Grand Tichu:

  A single player may not call both a "Grand Tichu" and a standard "Tichu".

This seems to explicitly call out what the other rule sets imply: after calling a Grand Tichu, you cannot call a small Tichu, and vice versa (assuming you're calling a small Tichu before you see nine cards). The website these rules come from also has some strategy documents that appear to support it's claim that two Tichus cannot be called by a single player.

On a separate note, part of the reason this might not be explicitly called out in many rule sets is because they are translations. I don't read German, but someone might be able to verify that the rules as originally written indicate that only one Tichu can be called, and translations failed to pick up on this.


Does the rent for the 'Double the rent' card need to be paid in two steps?

The double the rent card has to be played with a rent card, and doubles the rent to be payed for that rent card.
In your example, they would need to pay just 12m.


Jeskai cards that will let me draw off of either scrying or spell cast or creature entering the battlefield?

There are a several cards that fit your parameters. I found them by searching on Scryfall with the search string ci:uwr is:permanent o:whenever o:draw (o:creature or o:scry). This looks for cards in the Jeskai color identity that are permanents, and have the text "whenever" and "draw" on the card to look for repeated triggered abilties that draw cards, and have the text "cast", "creature" or "scry", to look for triggered abilities with those conditions. This finds a lot of false positives, but it only finds 100 cards total, which is small enough to examine manually.
The specific cards that match your criteria are:

Customs Depot, which has the ability "Whenever you cast a creature spell, you may pay {1}. If you do, draw a card, then discard a card."
Hazoret's Monument, which has the ability "Whenever you cast a creature spell, you may discard a card. If you do, draw a card."
Jeskai Ascendancy, which has the ability "Whenever you cast a noncreature spell, you may draw a card. If you do, discard a card."
Mentor of the Meek, which has the ability "Whenever another creature with power 2 or less enters the battlefield under your control, you may pay {1}. If you do, draw a card."
Whirlwind of Thought, which has the ability "Whenever you cast a noncreature spell, draw a card."
Zephyr Scribe, which has the abilities "{U}, {T}: Draw a card, then discard a card." and "Whenever you cast a noncreature spell, untap Zephyr Scribe."


No they can not look at the cards again.

  1 : Look at the top three cards of your library, then put them back in
  any order.

By placing the cards back on the library they have finished taking all the actions the  ability allowed and then it finishes resolving.

If you were playing a very competitive game, this is not a legal thing to do.

I do not think there is any way to interpret the above rule and all its parts to allow a player to re-do the last step of an ability.

Furthermore the rules do not have anything in them about a player stating that anything resolves. A spell resolves when all of the steps listed in its text have been completed.

  608.2c The controller of the spell or ability follows its instructions in the order written...


Do Time Stories combats during travel between Locations use up Time Units?

As you said the rules don't seem to cover these exact scenarios, but the way I interpreted the rules I assume that any test or action that causes me to roll the dice costs a TU unless the text specifically says it doesn't cost any TU.  My main reason for thinking this is that the base rules do specify that all tests cost a TU, and some expansions do have cards with text specifying that a test can be performed without spending TU.


A basic introduction is available via Games Workshop, and a general overview can be found on the Warhammer_40,000 page on Wikipedia.

Beyond that, there is an enormous amount of information available in the Codexes.  Games workshop produces a Codex for each race which contains a lot of backstory as well as units and rules specific to that race.


Betrayal at House on the Hill, Haunt 42: can Explorers be used if they are killed by an event? (spoiler)

The Traitor's Tome says of the Traitor,

   You must sacrifice (kill) one of the  heroes using a weapon ...

which excludes a death due to an event.


Alternative to Dixit Odyssey voting boards+pegs

There aren't official tokens for more than 7 players. Instead, you can have the rule that people hold their hands over their voting cards on the table to indicate readiness. That makes it easy to tell if someone is still deciding, and if you hold the voting card face down against the table it stops the pegs falling out.


Does Proliferate work with Energy Counters?

Yes, like poison and experience counters before them players get energy counters, and proliferate can add an additional counter of a type a player has.

When Thriving Rhino enters the battlefield, you get {E}{E} (two energy counters).

This means that 2 energy counters are placed on you when you play a Thriving Rhino.

121.1. A counter is a marker placed on an object or player that modifies its characteristics and/or interacts with a rule, ability, or effect. Counters are not objects and have no characteristics. Notably, a counter is not a token, and a token is not a counter. Counters with the same name or description are interchangeable.
701.25a To proliferate means to choose any number of permanents and/or players that have a counter, then give each exactly one additional counter of a kind that permanent or player already has.


Permanent to let a creature tap for two mana?

A few cards do allow creatures to be tapped for 2 mana, each with its own restrictions:

Grand Architect has the ability "Tap an untapped blue creature you control: Add {C}{C}. Spend this mana only to cast artifact spells or activate abilities of artifacts."

Joraga Treespeaker has the ability "Elves you control have '{T}: Add {G}{G}.'" as long as it has at least 5 level counters.

Sachi, Daughter of Seshiro has the ability "Shamans you control have '{T}: Add {G}{G}.'"


It's a cooperative game.  So, the first thing you need to do is decide, as a group, how to distribute the three white face-up cards among the group.  You could decide that all three go to one person, or you could decide any other division.

This decision is often made based on which characters are in play.  For example, if you're playing with Sir Galahad, you all might choose to put all special whites into the middle face-up and give them all to Sir Galahad (remember everyone starts with a Merlin, so everyone will have at least one special white), since Sir Galahad can play them for free on his turn.  Likewise Galahad might play a high fight card to give to Sir Kay, since Sir Kay is more likely to do combats (e.g. for the armor, which is a good first quest to attempt).

You likely wouldn't want to give Sir Gawain any cards, since his special power is to draw an extra one, so he can fill up his hand at Camelot faster (the 'heroic action' at the round table is to draw more white cards, and he gets an extra)

Since this is your first time playing, especially with only 3 players, the rules strongly encourage not playing with the loyalty cards/potential traitor.  I agree with this.

If King Arthur is in the game, he goes first, else the youngest player starts.

First you 'progress evil' by drawing a black card and doing what it says.  Let's say that it's a Picts card, so you place a Picts miniature on the Picts battlefield.  Now the player gets to do one thing.  This can be to move away from the round table to a quest (place the miniature in a/the small circle of that quest), draw two cards (this is the 'quests heric action'), or play a special white.

I'd recommend option two for the very first turn, as it's unlikely you have enough cards to sucessfully complete a quest.

The goal is to be able to 'finish' a quest, and not waste a lot of time moving around.  This means having two pairs of fight cards, a run of 1-5 fight cards, etc. to correspond to the quest (black knight or picts/saxons in those two cases).  Strategy-wise, I suggest the group gets someone with a 'full house' (two of one fight card and three of another) and then go to the Lancelot's Armor quest, as the armor's power makes the game much easier.

Feel free to ask clarifying questions (comments) if you need more help.


When does the next player start their action?

#1 is correct.

I can't find a place in the rulebook that makes this super-obvious/clear, but there's this:

  The game then proceeds clockwise,
  from player to player. Once all players have had a turn, a new
  turn begins.

And:

  During his turn, each player must now either:

  Expand the reach of his race through new conquests
  OR
  Put his race In Decline to select a new one.

Basically, all the parts of a turn that are described are what one player does on his own turn, before the game moves to the next player's turn.


What is the correct grade of Magic cards?

From TrollTraderCards:

  Near Mint / Mint:  Cards in NM-Mint condition show minimal to no wear
  from shuffling or general play

  Light Play:  Minor scuffing, drawing (including signatures or stamps)
  or slight bending.

  Moderate Play:  May show any amount of wear, and any type of wear,
  but usually still legal for tournament play once sleeved

  Heavy Play:  As moderate play, although much more excessive. May not
  be legal for tournament use, even when sleeved.

But for a more in-depth I would use Star City Games's guide as it provides with you example images. You can find that here.

I would grade your card (without personally looking at it) between PL and HP using Star City Games's grading system, as I can't see if the card has much dirt in it but has that white spot near the top on the left. If it is just a blemish and the bottom and the card is also clean, then PL, if the card has some gunk in it overall, then HP.


Bloodlord of Vaasgoth plus Warstorm Surge, then casting a vampire creature spell

This is incorrect; the damage will be dealt too late for Bloodthirst.

You were right up to a point... but Warstorm Surge triggers on a creature entering the battlefield, meaning that it will not trigger until after Vampire Nighthawk is on the battlefield, completely done resolving.

Note that Bloodthirst creates a replacement effect, that changes how a creature enters the battlefield. It does not do anything once the creature is on the battlefield.

The actual order of events, assuming that both players pass priority when they can.

Cast Vampire Nighthawk.
Bloodlord of Vaasgoth's ability triggers.
Bloodlord of Vaasgoth's ability resolves, giving Nighthawk Bloodthirst.
Vampire Nighthawk resolves; entering the battlefield - its bloodthirst doesn't do anything because an opponent was not dealt damage.
Warstorm Surge triggers.
Warstorm Surge resolves, dealing 2 damage to your opponent (or any target).

Bloodthirst rules:

  702.53a Bloodthirst is a static ability. "Bloodthirst N" means "If an opponent was dealt damage this turn, this permanent enters the battlefield with N +1/+1 counters on it."

We know this is a replacement effect because of:

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

To do what you want, Bloodthirst would need to be a triggered ability instead of a replacement effect; and it would also have to be worded in such a way as to avoid having an intervening if clause so that the condition would only be checked when it resolves (rule 603.4).


Can I cast Tactical Advantage multiple times on the same creature?

Yes, you can cast as many spells as you want on the same creature.
The targeting requirements for Tactical Advantage are that it must be a creature you control, and it must be blocking or being blocked. Tactical Advantage changes none of these properties, so the second Tactical Advantage is just as legal to cast as the first.


Ponte Vecchio?  According to BoardGameGeek:

  The "rich gentleman" has money burning a hole in his purse. He also
  likes to spend the day ambling back and forth along the Old Bridge
  (Ponte Vecchio), spending wherever he stops.


What changes to the game will the "On The Brink" Pandemic expansion offer me?

To answer all your questions, but not in order:

Other things you should know:  Also adds some rather nice storage trays for the viruses, and some smaller pawns (including for the original base roles) which fit on the board better.  All of this stuff will just fit in the original box, but only if you're good at packing (the virus trays could actually do to be about 10% smaller).

The new roles add significant variation to the base game even without using any of the other new mechanics in the set.  (There's also a reprinted Operations Expert card with revised wording, which I recommend also using for the base game.)  It becomes tempting to add house rules for how you select powers; there's one new power that's related to (but a major variation on) each of the original roles, and some completely unrelated new roles on top.  This means that purely random draw can, if you're unlucky, produce some very odd or tricky mixes.  (Some groups, of course, prefer it that way.)

The expansion makes the game last longer only if you're using the new disease variants.  The bioterrorist option in particular takes longer, as it adds a hunt-the-hidden-player mechanic (a little bit like Fury of Dracula).  Mutating diseases add a little more complexity and hence a few minutes more playtime.  (They also make it harder, so they can dramatically shorten the playtime...)

Most of the variations on disease - and hence a lot of the set content - make the game more difficult. So if you regularly find Pandemic challenging, consider carefully: you might have trouble using some of the material without making it too challenging.

The question you linked addresses 6-7 players better than I can here. Short form: it works, but not at all well unless you add house rules to cope with the massive difficulty increase.  (Personally, I'd always rather play something else with 6 or 7; Pandemic really wasn't designed for it.)

Summary:

(Personal opinion: I found it to be fun, but expensive for the amount of content.)

Does it add enough that it's worth getting instead of an entirely new game?  Depends how much you play Pandemic.  If you play intermittently or are still finding the base game surprising you, probably not; use the revised Ops Expert wording and get another small game instead.  If you play Pandemic regularly and feel like you've seen all the base game has to offer, it's definitely worth getting.  If you regularly beat the pants off Pandemic and want some more challenging options, grab it.


How many booster each players should crack for a 60 cards booster draft?

Depending on what your goal for your 60 card draft is, you might want to decide between 4 and 5 packs per player.

The MtG tournament rules recommend 3 booster packs per player for the default 40 card draft format. Accordingly, you would need 4.5 booster packs for a 60 card draft format to keep the average deck quality on a similar level.

There are no official Limited formats with deck sizes other than 40. I am not aware of official Limited tournaments which used a different number of packs than what is recommended in the tournament rules.

The draft phase itself and deck building afterwards take considerable amounts of time. Increasing the number of packs increases both, and might take significant drain on your players' mental stamina before the actual games even begin. On the other hand, drafting with a lower than recommended number of packs takes less time, but also lowers the average deck quality, since players will have to include more cards in their main deck that would otherwise go into their sideboard.


Does Touch of Moonglove need another "this turn?"

Given the Oracle wording on Bone Shaman (as pointed out by @ArcanistLupus in the comments), I would say it probably should have another "until end of turn".

Bone Shaman's Oracle text

  {B}: Until end of turn, Bone Shaman gains "Creatures dealt damage by
  Bone Shaman this turn can't be regenerated this turn."

Clearly someone at Wizards decided that Bone Shaman needed similar wording to be more clear as to the purpose of its ability.  I would guess that Touch of Moonglove's wording is just an oversight (or maybe whoever wrote Bone Shaman's Oracle text wasn't involved with Touch of Moonglove).

Ultimately though, as you've pointed out, the intent was obviously not to deal with all creatures damaged throughout the course of the game.  You could try to rules-lawyer it that way, but I doubt any reasonable judge or playgroup would allow it to happen.


Equipment cards and the timing of their activated ability

The following is the definition of the equip keyword ability:

  702.6a Equip is an activated ability of Equipment cards. “Equip [cost]” means “[Cost]: Attach this permanent to target creature you control. Activate this ability only any time you could cast a sorcery.”

(Emphasis mine)

The restriction only applies to the equip ability itself; it doesn't say or imply anything about other abilities on the permanent with equip.

It doesn't even apply to other abilities that attach equipment. For example, Healer's Headdress's second ability ("{W}{W}: Attach Healer’s Headdress to target creature you control.") can be activated anytime you have priority. This is why the second ability is more expensive than the equip ability it also has.

As for the meaning of the "any time you could cast a sorcery" restriction, it's explained by the following rule:

  307.5. If a spell, ability, or effect states that a player can do something only “any time they could cast a sorcery,” it means only that the player must have priority, it must be during the main phase of their turn, and the stack must be empty. The player doesn’t need to have a sorcery they could cast. Effects that would preclude that player from casting a spell or casting a sorcery don’t affect the player’s capability to perform that action (unless the action is actually casting a spell or casting a sorcery).

(Emphasis mine)


Do automatic battles end your turn in Neuroshima Hex?

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

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

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


"Combat" is short-hand for "combat phase"

You are correct that the specific word "combat" without further qualifiers is not explicitely defined in the Comprehensive Rules. However, it is shorthand for "combat phase", as can be inferred from here:

  500.5. When a phase or step ends, any effects scheduled to last “until end of” that phase or step expire. When a phase or step begins, any effects scheduled to last “until” that phase or step expire. Effects that last “until end of combat” expire at the end of the combat phase, not at the beginning of the end of combat step. Effects that last “until end of turn” are subject to special rules; see rule 514.2.

Logically, "until end of combat" is equivalent to "until end of combat phase", therefore "combat" is equivalent to "combat phase".

Also, combat is not initiated in any way other than advancing the turn; it eventually happens every turn, whether or not any creatures are actually going to attack.

  500.1. A turn consists of five phases, in this order: beginning, precombat main, combat, postcombat main, and ending. Each of these phases takes place every turn, even if nothing happens during the phase. The beginning, combat, and ending phases are further broken down into steps, which proceed in order.

That means the Juggernaut has to attack if possible, whether or not other creatures also attack.


Can older cards that refer to a player/opponent ever be used on planeswalkers?

Planeswalkers are not players (or opponents), and they're never treated as players (or opponents). Don't think of them as players, and you'll be a lot less likely to get confused.

There's pretty much just a single rule that make them seem a little similar to players: you can choose to attack your opponent and/or planeswalkers they control.

Along with that, many cards will let you target a player or a planeswalker, e.g. Lava Axe says "target player or planeswalker", and Lightning Strike says "any target", which includes planeswalkers. (Note that thanks to some updates to the game, some older printings of cards may not make this clear, e.g. Lava Axe used to just say "target player", and Lightning Strike used to just say "target creature or player"; always check Gatherer for the current oracle text of a card if you need to be sure.)

But that's it. None of that actually treats planeswalkers as players; it just lets something happen to them that's similar to what can happen to your opponents.

There are no similar rules for any of the things you mentioned, so the direct answer to every one of your questions is no. There is definitely not a blanket revision from "target player" to "target player or planeswalker". (A ton of things that say "player" wouldn't even make sense for planeswalkers - sure, they can take damage, but they don't have hands, libraries, graveyards, or even life!)

To address your questions in a little more detail (some things do still work, just not directly):

Hypnotic Specter - no, attacking the planeswalker won't make your opponent discard. If you want your opponent to discard, attack them, not the planeswalker.
Nafs Asp (poison counters) - no, planeswalkers can't have poison counters; if it deals damage to one it'll remove loyalty as usual. If you want to give poison counters to your opponent, attack them, not the planeswalker.
Lightning Bolt - yes, it can target a planeswalker - it now says "any target". Again, note that older printings don't mention planeswalkers, but the current oracle text is updated.
Syphon Soul - no, it doesn't deal damage to planeswalkers, just players.
Veteran Bodyguard - no, it won't protect planeswalkers, since combat damage is dealt directly to the planeswalker and Veteran Bodyguard's effect never applies.
Healing Salve (gaining loyalty) - no. It can't target planeswalkers, and planeswalkers can't gain life (only players have life).
Healing Salve (preventing damage) - no, you can't target planeswalkers with it.

Beyond oracle updates ("target player" to "target player or planeswalker" and similar), the only other way that older cards are likely to literally target a planeswalker is if they say something like "target permanent" or "target nonland permanent"; planeswalkers are permanents too, so for example Desert Twister can target and destroy planeswalkers, despite being printed in 1993!

Note: I've entirely removed sections about the planeswalker redirection rule, which existed in the past but is no more. See the revision history if you're curious.


You receive 3 crystals at the end of each round while it is in play. The symbol at the bottom left of the card indicates that the effect is continuous, as all end-of-round triggers (that I can remember) are.