Preventing early elimination from ruining someone's first game of Diplomacy?

Like Ry4an said, it is pretty much guaranteed that some people will be eliminated (or nearly so) early on.  You'll want to make people aware of this at the beginning, and set some expectations going in of how people will react (ie Is it OK to just give standing orders for 1 or 2 units and leave? Is it OK to proxy control of units to another player and leave?  Are eliminated players allowed to listen in on negotiations between other players?)  You might want to have other games on hand so that eliminated players can entertain themselves during the negotiation phase and check in on the Diplomacy game occasionally if they're interested in the final outcome.

Another option that I mentioned here is to plan to play several mini-games with pre-determined ending years.  You won't get the full end-game experience, but several shorter games with some time to debrief in between might be a better first Diplomacy experience than one full game with a number of eliminations.


The rules are not exactly clear on the definition of duplicate, so it is truly up to the players as a group to decide.

In my experience, if they refer to the same thing, they are considered duplicates, in your example as the "Jacksonville Jaguars" and "Jaguars" are the same team, they should be considered duplicate answers. This encourages thinking out of the box and looking for less common answers, that's the fun of the game after all.


Will Recoil still have creatures controller discard card?

Regarding resolving spells (or abilities) with targets, the rules say (emphasis mine):

608.2b If the spell or ability specifies targets, it checks whether the targets are still legal. A target
that’s no longer in the zone it was in when it was targeted is illegal. Other changes to the game
state may cause a target to no longer be legal; for example, its characteristics may have changed
or an effect may have changed the text of the spell. If the source of an ability has left the zone it
was in, its last known information is used during this process. If all its targets, for every instance
of the word “target,” are now illegal, the spell or ability doesn’t resolve. It’s removed from the
stack and, if it’s a spell, put into its owner’s graveyard. Otherwise, the spell or ability will
resolve normally.

So the Recoil doesn't resolve at all, and no discard happens. This complete failure of the spell to resolve due to missing targets is what "fizzle" means. "Fizzle completely" is superfluous. Once the time has come to resolve a spell, it either fizzles or it resolves.


Which Experts Seem to Interchange Trumps and Points in Bridge Bidding?

Very few experts advocate, or use, the Rule of 20 as a primary guideline on bidding. Rather, it is used as a secondary measure to assist judgement on close calls, and to aid in discriminating between otherwise similar hands when making a call decision.

The reason for this is that it is rather indiscriminate, and lacks the precision and accuracy of other methods. It fails to consider other very important aspects of hand evaluation such as:

Distribution of the rest of the hand.
The degree of 'fit' in the 3rd and 4th suite.
Point location.
Point fit; how points reinforce each other in regards to the other information available from the bidding.

In this regards it is similar to the Losing-Trick Count. an essential member of the expert's tool-kit, but only one of the techniques regularly used for hand-evaluation.


Which dual lands count as having the name of their respective basic land types for certain effects?

There's an assumption you're making that's a bit off here, that assumption being that you are looking for something by name. Voltaic Key has the ability ", : Untap target artifact." that does not untap a card named artifact, but a card with the type artifact.
In the case of Arbor Elf, untap target forest refers to cards with the subtype forest, Dual lands such as Breeding Pool and Scattered Groves both have forest on their type line, and can be targeted. Even a few single colored non basic lands like Dryad Arbor and Sapseep Forest count, as they have forest in their type line.
We can see this method more clearly in cards like Nissa's Pilgrimage, which specifies basic forests, or Cabal Stronghold which specifies basic swamps. Specifying the supertype basic in addition to the subtype forest/swamp/etc means you can only find this info on the type line, though they could have said lands named forest or lands named swamp and got roughly the same result.
In addition to cards like this, there are effects that change the type of land, or turn things into lands, effects like Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth would make all lands swamps, so they would count for anything that looks at swamps, such as Cabal Coffers, and Life and Limb makes all creatures with the subtype saproling into forests (and vice versa) turning them all into creature land - saproling forest.
Currently there are 25 cards that are printed as forests, 2 of these are the basic lands (regular and snow covered) the other 23 are non-basics. For the other 4 basic land types, there are: 23 Plains, 23 Islands, 23 Swamps, and 23 Mountains. Generally these cards exist in cycles that have the same number of each, Dryad Arbor and Murmuring Bosk are the 2 exceptions, forests without a matching cycle in other colors.


Do Commanders' abilities work from the command zone?

Unless otherwise stated, abilities on permanents are only in effect when the permanent is on the battlefield. It does not have any effect if Phenax is in your command zone. See the comprehensive rules:

  604.2. Static abilities create continuous effects, some of which are prevention effects or replacement effects. These effects are active as long as the permanent with the ability remains on the battlefield and has the ability, or as long as the object with the ability remains in the appropriate zone, as described in rule 112.6.

This ability isn't among the exceptions listed in 112.6, which are too long to be listed here; I agree with @Arthur's comment that the general rule is 'if it makes sense on the battlefield, it only functions on the battlefield'.


When was "pennant" renamed "coat of arms" in Carcassonne?

The original German is Wappen.
English rules have translated that variously as Pennant, Banner, Shield, or Coat of Arms.
The Rio Grande edition called it Pennant.
The Z-Man edition called it Banner.
And when Z-Man printed "Carcassonne II" (art by Pätzke instead of Matthäus), they called it Coat of Arms.
From the German forum:

Das Wappen in dem Stadtgebiet:

Carcassonne (Grafik bei Doris Matthäus)
Bei RioGrandeGames: pennant
Bei ZmanGames: banner

Carcassonne II (Grafik bei Anne Pätzke)
Bei ZmanGames: coat of arms

So the change "from" pennant came in 2012 with ZMG 78000. That changed it to "Banner". The change from "banner" to "coat of arms" came in 2014 with ZMG 78100.


What is an efficient way to organize my magic collection?

There are a lot of ways to organize your cards that are efficient. What it is going to come down to, is what sort of efficiency are you looking for.

Deck building efficiency - This is pretty much a non-issue if you use digital deck builders, but if you don't know exactly what cards you own, it is helpful in finding possible alternatives for cards you want to run but don't own. Because all cards are near other cards of the same color/type, it is easier to find cards to fill out your deck.

Color, Card Type, Mana Cost, Alphabetical

Card finding efficiency - This reduces the size of all your box divisions, making it easier to find a particular card.

Set, Alphabetical (or collector number)

Trade/Deck Idea efficiency - Separating the Rarest cards from the most common cards allows you to easily find more valuable cards, or cards that an entire deck can be built around.

Rarest/Non-rare, any other sorting criteria.

Size efficiency- With many of the other sorting types, you may try to separate the individual Colors/Sets by placing them in their own box and filling up empty space with deckboxes or basic lands. When you organize for space, you need to only separate sections with index cards cut to fit card sleeves.


How are Swindler's effects resolved in a multiplayer game?

Each player reveals, trashes, and gains in turn order. The relevant text of Swindler is:

  Each other player trashes the top card of his deck and gains a card with the same cost that you choose.

In Dominion, you do each instruction in order. The convention is that each instruction is one sentence. For Swindler, the instruction is "trash and gain." Having multiple parts of a single instruction is common in Dominion. For instance, the Bureaucrat uses the same construction. In resolving Bureaucrat, the first player must reveal a Victory card and put it on top of their deck, then the second player does both of those things, then the third.

If Swindler wanted everyone to trash, and then everyone to gain, it would have to be written as two separate sentences, and it would be a really messy wording to make sure that the cost of the gained card matches the cost of the card trashed from that player's deck.


The Resistance card game - "Deep Cover" Spy role question

Reveal script in the rule book is very thorough:

  Reveal Script

  The “reveal” phase at the start of the game will vary depending on
  which roles are added – see below for new scripts to use for the
  different Character cards that are included.

  “Everyone close your eyes and extend your hand into a fist in front
  of you”
  “Spies, not the Blind Spy – open your eyes and look around
  to see your fellow spies”
  “Spies close your eyes”
  “All players should have their eyes closed and hands in a fist in front of them”
  “Spies, not the Deep Cover spy – extend your thumb so the Commander
  will know you”
  “Commander, open your eyes and see the Spies”
  “Spies – put your thumbs down and re-form your hand into a fist”
  “Commander, close your eyes” “All players should have their eyes
  closed and hands in a fist in front of them”
  “Commander & False Commander – extend your thumb so that the Body Guard knows you”
  “Body Guard, open your eyes so you know the Commander & False
  Commander”
  “Commander & False Commander – put your thumbs down and
  form your hand into a fist”
  “Body Guard, close your eyes”
  “All players should have their eyes closed and hands in a fist in front
  of them”
  “Everyone open your eyes”

Just follow it exactly and you'll see that there is nothing specific Deep Cover spy has to do during step 2, and by step 5 spies already closed their eyes, so they shouldn't have this bit of information.

So other spies know that Deep Cover spy is on their team, but they don't know that he/she is Deep Cover spy.

Of course, nothing stops you from making homerules and playing it differently if you feel like it, as discussed on BGG forum for Resistance Avalon (which is the same game really)


If something happens to a vehicle, what happens to the creatures that crewed it?

Crewed creatures are considered wholly separate from the vehicle themselves. They are not "on" the vehicle, and they don't share its fate in any regard or have any ongoing relationship with it. Crewing the vehicle merely means the creature gets tapped and has no further implications.

When a Vehicle is exiled then returned to the battlefield later, only that Vehicle is exiled, and only that Vehicle is later returend. The creatures that crewed it are not affected in any way, and won't be exiled in the first place. Similarly if the vehicle is destroyed or dies, this doesn't mean anything for the crew.

(Your Conqueror's Galleon gets exiled only at the end of combat, by the way, meaning it will do combat damage. It also returns to the battlefield transformed immediately, not at the next untap step.)


What would be the reasons for not having Jokers in a deck?

In my experience, the vast majority of decks do in fact run Jokers.

The main exception is a deck that does not want to get into shootouts at all or make any pulls. This is typically a "Landslide" deck that focuses on playing more dudes & deeds than the opponent can deal with.  It often includes cards like Make the Smart Choice or Pistol Whip, seeking to remove everyone from a posse before it ever gets to comparing Draw Hands. In such a deck a Joker will be a dead card if ever drawn to your Play Hand so there is no point in including them at all.


Is it ever a good strategy to discard cards in Race for the Galaxy?

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

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

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

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


Using the Deserter card in Catan Cities & Knights after realizing you can't place a knight instead

It is technically not legal; but how to handle this situation will depend largely on your playgroup’s style and friendliness.

Playing the Deserter card when you don’t have a space to place your new Knight is completely legal:

  Progress Cards: Deserter - May I play the Deserter if I can’t place a knight of the same strength?

    Yes

Also, the act of placing your own knight is optional; the card says you “may” place a knight.

So technically, as soon as the player revealed the card and chose the opponent, the card should be considered played, and now that the card has been played, it would be too late to construct a road before the card is finished getting played.

  During your turn, after you have rolled the dice, you may play any number of progress cards in any order. You may play them between other actions taken during your turn. When you play a progress card, resolve all of its effects, then place it, face down, under the progress card stack of the matching color.

However, with pretty much any playgroup I know, the players would allow this, assuming that the player did not get any extra knowledge by playing the card that caused them to decide to build a road. There are 2 possibilities here:

If the player needed to build a road in order place his own knight no matter what, then I and anyone I’d be likely to play with would allow the player to build the road first; basically temporarily undoing the move. Little mistakes like that happen often in board games, and we generally allow the player to fix it if he catches it immediately and before anything else has changed.
If the opponent's choice of which knight to remove affected the decision to build a road, then we would not allow it to be undone. For example, if the opponent had 2 knights; one was in a space where the active player could place a knight, and the second was not. The attacked player chose the second knight, which left the active player with no space place a knight. But had the attacked player chosen the first knight, then a new road would not be necessary. In this case, playing the card without building a road first would not be an obvious mistake; but could be seen as a gamble that the opponent would chose the first knight.


Can casinos protect themselves against card counters by limiting bet variations in blackjack?

The answer to this is most likely no since a casino wants players to maximize their bets and placing any kind of limit that would keep a player betting lower would not be in their best interests. Minimum and Maximum bets at a table are established to maximize the amount that a casino can win while limiting a player to take advantage of long term odds to win by placing small and large bets over time. The short of it is a casino wants players to make larger bets when they are feeling lucky but they also know that a lot of players are not going to want to place large bets all of the time so they need to allow them to place both small and large bets depending on how they feeling their luck is running.


How was "komi" re-set in the past 50 years?

Achieving the statistically perfect komi is interesting, but generally the difference between winning by 1/2 a point or winning by 1/3 a point does not change a game result.  We play in units of one stone (i.e., one point in area scoring), not 1/3 stone.
I don't have my copy of Go Players Almanac so I can't readily check dates -- I'll try to update later -- but my memory is that before komi was introduced, jigo (a draw) was possible; but in the Japanese pro tournaments at least, a jigo counted in White's favor (though not as strongly as a win), since it was known that Black had a significant advantage.
The Japanese introduced komi in the early 1900s, at a value of 2.  (Komi wasn't standardized for a time, so there are arguments for "introduced" at earlier dates -- see John Fairbairn's discussion at https://senseis.xmp.net/?HistoryOfKomi for examples -- but I think "early 1900s" is good enough for our purpose here.)  2 was pretty quickly seen as insufficient, and by 1934, komi had been raised to 4.5, where it stayed until the late 1950s / mid 1960s, when it was raised to 5.5.
When I began playing in the late 1980s, players indeed talked about how komi had "recently" been increased to 5.5.  (Well, when the game is 2000 years old, I guess 20 or 25 years seems "recent".)  When I began playing in amateur tournaments in the late 1990s, the komi could vary, depending on the rules in use.  AGA tournaments tended to follow the lead of the Nihon Ki-in, and used komi of 5.5; but there was strong material support from the Ing Foundation for tournaments, with the caveat that the tournament had to be played using Ing's idiosyncratic rules (intended to make the game more accessible to children and beginners) -- one of which was komi set at effectively 7.5.
Sometime in the early 2000s, Chinese rules switched komi from 5.5 to 7.5.  About the same time, the Nihon Ki-in switched from 5.5 to 6.5.  The AGA switched from 5.5 to 7.5 effective 2005.
There was discussion about whether the AGA should make it 6.5 instead, but changing from 5.5 to 6.5 would affect only the margin of victory in the vast majority of AGA games, not the game result.  (It's theoretically possible to have a game with weird seki formations where that may not be true, but it's very rare in actual play.)  So for example, if Black with 5.5 komi wins by 1.5 points, then with 6.5 komi Black still wins, but by 0.5 points.  If the reason for komi is to give both players an even chance, and 5.5 isn't enough, then 6.5 also isn't enough.  So the AGA changed to 7.5 not 6.5.
You may be thinking, "what about the games that Black with 5.5 komi would win by 0.5 points?  Doesn't shifting to 6.5 komi mean that instead White would win by 0.5?"  The answer is that, with 5.5 komi, Black would not win by 0.5 (except in the unusual seki situations that rarely happen).  This AGA article describes why:
https://www.usgo.org/news/2013/09/only-a-passing-matter/
(I read a better explanation, but I'm not finding it now.  Will update if I find it.)
A reasonable question is, why did the Japanese go with 6.5?  I don't have a definite answer, but I believe it's mostly because they have a slightly different ruleset.  In AGA rules, White must play last, which would penalize White under the Japanese rules.  In Chinese rules, you get a point for each intersection you surround, and you get a point for each stone you have alive at the end of the game -- there is no penalty for filling in a point of your own territory, as there is with Japanese "territory" scoring.  (There are also differences in how prisoners are handled -- they matter in Japanese "territory" scoring, but not so much in Chinese "area" scoring.)
The mathematician Elwyn Berlekamp proposed a system of bidding for komi.  For example, on the first move, Black could play and pay 20 points komi, or pass.  Next, White could play and pay 19 points, or pass.  Eventually, one of the players moves, and pays the komi to the other player.  Berlekamp arranged a short series of games between two pros living in America.  IIRC, the komi paid tended be surprisingly high -- 9 or 10 points.  (Thanks for reminding me of this -- I'll have to dig up the details.)


Does D/D/D oracle King d'arc's effect work on all card effects that take life Points?

The answer is no. Paying lifepoints and taking damage are two different things, just like an effect that sends a monster to the graveyard is different from an effect that destroys a monster. The wording is important. Because the word that the card text uses usually matters, paying lifepoints for any reason will not equate to taking damage for cards like D'Arc. You can read more about taking damage vs. paying lifepoints here.

Any cards that specifically inflicts damage to yourself will work, however. Blazing Mirror Force and Ring of Destruction both fit the bill, while also offering useful destruction effects. If you want a full list of cards that do this, you can find it here.


Correct use of Bonus cards in Terra Mystica

One action you can take in Terra Mystica is ending your participation for the round.

To do this, you first select a new bonus card out of the ones remaining (taking any bonus gold that exists on that bonus card).

Then you apply End-of-Turn bonuses from your existing bonus card (as you mention - there are three bonus cards that may award victory points based on how many dwellings, etc. you own).

Now the round is officially over for you, and others may now select the bonus card you just put back.

--

In other words - yes; a player takes a bonus card as soon as they end their participation in the round (and some won't be available, as other players will still have theirs).


Yes, it is perfectly legal for the researcher to share cards on the first turn but it is still somewhat limited, as it is limited to the cards that the player starts with. While it does sound powerful at the start, it should be remembered that it does limit the amount of damage that can be controlled on the first turn if it is spent sharing knowledge. Not to mention that if you are in a 4 player game it would only change someone's hand by 1 or 2 cards, depending on which colors they match in the other players hands, which isn't that large of an advantage when you need 5 cards to do a cure.
2 players: 4 cards to give
3 players: 3 cards to give
4 players: 2 cards to give
Rules

When doing the Share Knowledge action, the Researcher
may give any City card from her hand to another player
in the same city as her, without this card having to match
her city. The transfer must be from her hand to the other
player’s hand, but it can occur on either player’s turn.


There isn't a definitive set of rules. It's a game learned through word of mouth over generations. And house rules are easily added. All this means that not everyone plays by the same rules. Ultimately, the answer comes down to whatever rules the group agreed to use.
What? You didn't agree to a set of rules? ;) Well, the Wikipedia page for Crazy Eights has no variant listed concerning the functioning of eights. It only lists the following rule:

They can also play any 8 at any time, which allows them to declare the suit that the next player is to play; that player must then follow the named suit or play another 8.

And this version of the rules says:

An Eight may be played on any card, and the player of the Eight must nominate a suit.

In both cases, no limit is mentioned concerning the stated suit. Words such as "other" and "change" that would imply a different suit should be picked are conspicuously absent. This means the suit already being played is a valid choice.
This is consistent with how I played.


Does End of Days affect cards underneath another card (e.g. The Dreamer's defeated Projections)?

I tested this in the app version of the game.

The cards under The Dreamer they are destroyed
The cards are put back under The Dreamer, per its effect
If some other card would interact (Like Savage Mana), that takes precedence and would be destroyed afterwards

Also don't forget that it's the players that choose which effect resolve first and which cards are destroyed first.


The official Rio Grand Games  rules cover this eventuality (page 4) the last sentence under Plant Bean Cards

  If the Active Player has no cards in hand, he omits this step.

I have no access to the Amigo Games version, or the German version of the rules. The Game Cabinet site does have a translation:

  Playing Bean Cards - You must play the first card dealt to you on to one of your fields, unless you hold no cards.

You just skip the first step, since you are unable to fulfill the conditions.


Protection, damage and Leyline of Punishment

The Champion will end up getting destroyed by the Anger of the Gods because of this rule.

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

So you have the Champion saying damage can be prevented, and the Leyline saying it can't be prevented so it isn't prevented.


Will it break the alliance, if I take over a worker-occupied area?

Moving into an area occupied by a worker, it counts as an attack.  From the rules:

  If you ever attack a player who has your faction’s Alliance
  token or force their workers off a territory, you must flip over
  the [alliance] token you have.


What cooperative board games are there that I could safely play with my wife?

Arkham Horror is almost completely cooperative.

It is the players against a Great Old One(GOO) of Cthulhu mythos.  Players need to work together to arm themselves and find clues that will enable them to seal gates that open from other realms.  There is a large number of expansions, but the basic game is very enjoyable.

Generally, the expansions make the game harder and should be avoided until you can regularly beat the GOO in the base game.

See Is it possible to play 2-player, 2-character Arkham Horror successfully? for a question about the viability of a popular 2 player variant for Arkham Horror.


Can you have an aura attached to an aura that is itself attached to the first aura?

Yes, and I think you only need two Feedbacks and Aura Graft (and an arbitrary other enchantment). Just use Aura Graft on Feedback 1 and have it enchant Feedback 2.

While the rules mention that

  303.4d An Aura can’t enchant itself. If this occurs somehow, the Aura is put into its owner’s graveyard.

there's no such rule forbidding 'mutual' enchantments.


Is Root really asymmetrical and balanced?

Root is highly asymmetrical

While each faction has technically the same goal (reach 30 victory points), and there are some universal ways of gaining victory points (destroying your opponents' cardboard, and crafting items), each faction has its own unique mechanics for playing and earning other victory points.

The Marquis of Cats earn victory points by building Sawmills, Garrisons, and Workshops (possibly not the actual names?).  No other faction even has these buildings, let alone gets victory points for building them.

The Eyrie have a building of their own (Nests), but they don't get victory points for building them - instead they get victory points based on the number of nests they own every turn.

The Woodland Alliance earns victory points for spreading Sympathy, which superficially resembles the Cat's method of earning points, but the Cats build using wood (which the other factions don't interact with at all) in areas they control, and the Woodland Alliance spreads Sympathy without needing control (or even board presence) by discarding supporters (an extra 'hand' of sorts, which the other factions don't have.

The Vagabond earns points for giving cards to the other players and completing quests.  The other factions can't even do these things, much less get victory points for them.

The asymmetry of Root comes from the highly asymmetric mechanics of the factions, rather than an asymmetry in the factions' goals.

Root isn't perfectly balanced, but it's practically balanced

Perfect balance is nigh impossible to achieve.  Even if every player has identical abilities, any game with sequential player turns will have at least a slightly unbalanced nature, meaning that the only games with the potential to be perfectly balanced are ones that involve simultaneous play, like Set or Bananagrams.

But a game is practically balanced if the advantage difference between the factions (or turn order positions) is smaller than advantages created by randomness, player skill, and play dynamics (i.e. who's being beaten on by all the other factions this time).

Root is practically balanced.  The differences in overall strength of the factions is slight enough that it's not obvious who will have the advantage in any given setup, and vagarities of play have more of an effect on the winner than any inherent advantage that faction has.

Slight caveat
I'm pretty sure that the Lizard Cult from the expansion is weaker than the other factions.  Certainly nobody in my playgroup has managed to win with them, and I've heard that they're getting some power errata with the newest expansion.  But the four base factions are extremely well balanced.


Can you pick up a locomotive if it's revealed as a replacement card?

No, once a card has been revealed as a locomotive, you have to "spend" two draws to pick it up, which means you can't do so since you've already drawn one of your two cards.

From the official rules (PDF), emphasis mine:

  If a Locomotive card is one of the five face-up cards, the player who draws it may only draw one card, instead of two. If, after having drawn one card the replacement card is a locomotive, the player cannot take it.


In "Standard" American, Is It Possible to Bid the Opposing Suit "Naturally" Over a Takeout Double?

In "standard" american (or typical variants of 2/1) it is normal to play 2H in the sequence: (1H) - X - (P) - 2H, as a close to game forcing hand (opposite a minimum takeout double) or better. There might be variants which different partnerships play, but it is almost never a natural bid.

2H should not be to play, as it makes no sense to play in 2H there. You are contracting to make at least 8 tricks with hearts as trump, with partner showing shortness in hearts by his takeout double! If you make those same 8+ tricks, opposing a 1H doubled contract, don't you rate to make at least +200 (or more if opps are vul)? There might be cases where you let 1H doubled make, but in that case, you are probably down 2 in your own 2H anyway and those would be very rare.

Over a minor suit takeout, some people might consider playing it as natural, as opponents could have shortness there and might have the option to try and run to a longer suit, but I believe the usual is still to play 2D in: (1D) - X - (P) - 2D, as close to game forcing hand etc and not natural.


How do I promote a board game to the masses?

Promoting a board game (design, prototype, print&play or kickstarter) should definitely involve BoardGameGeek, and similar communities.

I could expand, but everything's covered in this article: http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/322382/game-design-self-publishing-resource-game-designer

You should provide print&play materials for playtesting groups, to see if most people actually agree on your game's quality. And the feedback can lead to an improved game.
If your game is better than good, the word will spread (forum threads growing longer, enthusiastic playtesters recommending it to their neighbours' moms, etc.)

And: the "masses" (as in: everybody not actively following the boardgaming industry) will only encounter a game once it's physically for sale in shops. That's why every family with two kids has a copy of Monopoly but not Agricola, Diplomacy or Twilight Struggle.


Why is Bazaar of Baghdad supposedly such a good card?

While all of these answers get at some measure of Bazaar's popularity, I should note (as Ian does somewhat in passing) that virtually all of Bazaar's value at this point comes from it being the key card in the Vintage Dredge deck; Madness and Flashback are both effectively moot, but in Vintage Dredge is an immensely powerful strategy.  Note that in the Dredge decks, Bazaar is all upside; drawing 2 cards means you have two opportunities to dredge, and the discard 3 puts cards in your graveyard where you want them - Dredge would rather not have cards in its hand!  See, for instance, the first decklist at http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/vintage/22161_New_Phyrexia_In_Vintage_Dredge.html - this is a pretty good example of Bazaar at its most powerful.


Before the haunt, can players agree to automatically crack the Vault?

You don't have to do anything on your turn, so if all players agree there's no reason you couldn't give the player who discovers the vault all the turns until they open it.

However, I'd suggest this is tactically a bad idea for the players not in the vault. Until the haunt starts you don't know who is on your team. An individual player could increase his or her own chance of winning by grabbing the sweet, sweet loot for themselves. It would make more sense for all the players who stood a chance of opening the vault to rush there as soon as it is discovered, personally I think that would be much more fun.


Can Supply-Line Cranes supply themselves?

Yes. It is a valid target because it is on the battlefield when the trigger happens. What happens, in order:

Supply-Line Cranes enters the battlefield.
The game checks for any triggers that happen as a result of this event.
Supply-Line Cranes' trigger is found, and it triggers.
You put the trigger on the stack, and must choose a target at that time.
Supply-Line Cranes is a creature (and it's on the battlefield) at this time, so it is a valid target for you to choose.
When the trigger resolves, Supply-Line Cranes is still a valid target, so it resolves, putting the counter on Supply-Line Cranes.

The other answers are correct, but fail to mention that you must choose the target when the triggered ability goes on the stack, so it matters that it's a valid target when it triggers, not so much that it's a valid target when it resolves. (If it stopped being a valid target before it resolved, because it were destroyed with an instant or something, then the ability would be countered and go away. But it would still have been a valid/legal target in the first place).


The point is just that. Players don't want their own cards destroyed, so playing a card that has a penalty to whoever destroys it makes it less likely to be destroyed. If card A provides some effect to its owner and card B provides the same effect but does something to whoever destroys it, clearly card B is more beneficial to it's owner as fewer players would want to destroy it.

All these cards have some beneficial effect for the player (for example Gremlin from the Tricksters). Clearly, other players would want to destroy them, but if they do, they have to pay some kind of penalties. Some players may be willing to pay that if the net value (destroying the card - penalty paid) ends up being positive in some way.

Another case may be destroying cards for its effect. For example, Nukebot from the Robots destroys other minions in its base once destroyed. Placing it on the Fields of Honor (1 VP per minion destroyed to whoever destroys it) makes it really tempting for anyone trying to destroy it.


There are of course different definitions of light strategy games, so I will just mention some games, which I have introduced to nongamers in parties, and which have been interesting both for them as well as more experienced gamers (in random order).

Games which can be explained in 5 min

Small pure card games:

Saboteur: 3-10 players, 30 min
6 Nimmt! or Category 5: 2-10 players, 45 min (usually less)
Coloretto: 2-5 players, 30 min (this one I really like despite its simple rules)

Cards and some bits:

Citadels: 2-7(8 with usually included expansion) players, 60 min - this one is a must have
DiXit: 3-6 players, 30 min - almost no strategy but very good and can be easily played with upt to 8 players even using just the expansion and writing points down on a paper

Abstract:

Rumis(+): 2-4(6 with expansion) players, 45 min
Blokus: 1-4 players, 20 min

Other:

Ca$h'n Gun$: 4-6 players, 30 min
Fast food or any other reaction game like Halli Galli, jugle speed are all around 2(3)-6(8) players and 10-15min
Roll through the ages: the bronze age: 1-4 players, 30 min (this is a nice gem, also pure gamers love it, and when you have taught all others some games and don't have anything to do, you can play it by yourself ;))

Games, that require a little longer explanation, but are still manageable

Bohnanza: 2-7 players, 45 min. Even though this is an easy game, explaining it always takes me more time than I like
Bang!: 4-7 players, 30 min. This one is really good for more players, but explanation takes some time. Can be modified so, that healing beer cards make the player drink a tequila shot ;)
Dominion: 2-4 players, 30 min. Everybody loves this one, and it can be played as fast filler. Just don't overdose with expansions in the first session. If you have an expansion, you can run more than one parallel game.
Agricola (Family version): 1-5 players, 120 min. If you are really adventurous explainer and have longer time to kill in a small party, this actually can work really well. My nongaming in-laws understood the family version on ~10 min and really liked it (even though their score wasn't great)
7 wonders: 2-7 players, 30 min. As previously mentioned it might look intimidating, but is easily explained and a fast game.

In my opinion one of the most important things for a game to be successful with non-gamers and casual gamers is the capability of "getting in the game fast" - you must generalize the important rules and guidelines and delve into details as you go. If you do so, and the game is not a total brain burner and doesn't exceed some 2h, you will be able to play almost any game with nongamers.
Basically:

Persuade them, how cool the game is
Don't scare them away before they get into it

Also, a good advice by Tynam - with some exceptions, like bang and saboteur, try to split the group in several smaller gaming sessions with similar expected game time, so they can mix the games during the evening.

Edit: Added hyperlinks as promised


Your friend is right, the new copies aren't affected by Bile Blight.
The set of affected permanents / entities is determined at the resolution of the spell.
Of course it would have been a different story if this had been an enchantment along the lines of Engineered Plague

@tengfred already guided you towards an answer that has the exact ruling in his comment, but I've pasted it here for convenience as well.

  611.2c If a continuous effect generated by the resolution of a spell or ability modifies the characteristics or changes the controller of
  any objects, the set of objects it affects is determined when that
  continuous effect begins. After that point, the set won’t change.
  (Note that this works differently than a continuous effect from a
  static ability.) A continuous effect generated by the resolution of a
  spell or ability that doesn’t modify the characteristics or change the
  controller of any objects modifies the rules of the game, so it can
  affect objects that weren’t affected when that continuous effect
  began.


Who wins when the would-be last wizard standing is killed by a reaction?

Based on the rules, Player A should receive the sole LWS token. (For official ruling, see below the break.)
The relevant rule can be found on page 17 (emphasis mine):

When the dust settles and there is but one Wizard alive, the game ends and that Wizard earns a Last Wizard Standing token. In the unlikely event that a Wizard kills himself, leaving no Wizards alive, that Wizard still earns the token. Going out in a blaze of glory is never frowned upon in Epic Spell War!

As you've already noted, in order for a Reaction to happen, the player needs to have died according to the rules. This is confirmed by Matt Hyra from Cryptozoic on Board Game Geek:

Gregg Prendergast: Doers the "reaction" effect only take place at the time your character is killed, or does it take effect any time you are attacked (even if you don't die as a result of the attack)?
Matt Hyra: Only applies if you are killed. If you are not killed, any Reactions in your spell remain face down.

So the order of events would look something like this:

Player A kills Player B
Player B dies
Player A is the last remaining Wizard
Player B has a Reaction that kills Player A
Player A dies
Steps 4 & 5 don't really matter because Player A receives the LWS token even though they are dead

I asked this out on Board Game Geek to get an official answer. From Matt Hyra, Cryptozoic R&D, in response to my question:

The player had to die to trigger the Reaction, so unless the Reaction tells you you are resurrected, the Wizard who killed you gains the LWS token.


Race for the Galaxy vs. San Juan and Puerto Rico

RftG, in terms of gameplay, falls fairly in the middle of the two other games.  Similar mechanics of role selection, cards as money, 'big building' cards, victory points, shipping strategy (consume) vs. building.  There's slightly more relevance to role selection in RftG than in San Juan, but not as much as in Puerto Rico.  Seating order doesn't matter as much as in Puerto Rico.  In terms of learning, San Juan is easier to teach because it has a more accessible theme and RftG has an intimidating iconography.

Still, it's a game where it's hard to make real mistakes, just sub-optimal choices, so winning is usually determined by luck, game experience, and familiarity with the cards.

RftG has more luck than Puerto Rico, since it's based on card draws (even though this is mitigating by multiple reshuffles per game).  Still, all these games are 'group solitaire games' at their core.

I'd only suggest RftG to someone with some 'real' board game experience (i.e. not Monopoly or Apples to Apples), AND if they enjoy the space theme.  Rules take about 45 minutes to explain fully, but this can be done, in part during a first practice game.  Strategy isn't as important in RftG as it is in Puerto Rico, as the extra randomness tends towards good tactics being more important.  This is because it's a progressive build game where early decisions affect victory point 'velocity'.  Strategy comes in when you know the cards and can selectively optimize for one or more 'big building' cards, and usually is only relevant fairly late game.


What happens in this infinite damage/infect loop?

Depends on how much life your opponent currently has.

If your opponent has non-positive life

Your opponent would lose a life from the damage except for Phyrexian Unlife.
Instead, your opponent would gain a poison counter from the damage expect for Melira, Sylvok Outcast.
Instead, nothing happens to your opponent.
Exquisite Blood doesn't trigger since no life was lost.
Sanguine Bond doesn't trigger since you didn't gain any life.
The game goes on.

If your opponent has positive life

Your opponent loses a life from the damage.
Exquisite Blood triggers and gives you life.
Sanguine Bond triggers and cause your opponent to lose a life. Phyrexian Unlife doesn't prevent or replace loss of life, so it doesn't effect this.
Exquisite Blood triggers and— Oh my, we've entered a loop of mandatory actions. If noone has a way of ending it, the game ends in a draw.

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

Note that neither of the players are forced to end the loop even if they could. For example, if your opponent could sacrifice Phyrexian Unlife (ending the loop by losing), he doesn't have to do it.

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


Is there a tool that will help me construct a list of games with a more specific game mechanic?

How important is this to you? Is this something you are simply curious in? Or is this something you want to put real effort and time into accomplishing for a task or job of some kind?

If it is just a hobby, you could go to your local game stores with a notebook and ask the people there, look at the games there. Repeat at a few other game stores and you should have a nice list. (similar to just browsing games on BGG)

If it is something you want to do more seriously. You could try to contact some of the big board game manufacturers (like Fantasy Flight for instance) And directly ask them which games use non standard N-sided dice.


Can Mr. X move into or through a detective occupied field?

In Scotland Yard, if Mr. X ever occupies the same location as a detective, he loses on the spot, regardless of if it was by the detective's move or his own move (forced as it may be). This is explicitly mentioned in the Scotland Yard rules, and Scotland Yard does not explicitly allow a double-move to bypass this (so implicitly, you still lose if you do a double-move that passes through a detective's location). This game also doesn't seem to permit Mr. X to remain in a location, noting that Mr. X effectively has an unlimited ticket supply (in theory, it is possible that Mr. X could end up unable to move, but such a situation requires deliberate actions on both the detectives' parts as well as Mr. X's that it should never come up in normal play)

From what I can get of the rules for the game you're specifically asking about, N.Y. Chase, it does not appear to specifically indicate this as a game end, only that if a detective moves to the station that Mr. X is at or if all routes away from Mr. X's location are blocked. Unlike in Scotland Yard, N.Y. Chase's rules account for the possibility that Mr. X may lack the ability to move due to not having appropriate tickets. If Mr. X has options that he cannot take due to not having the tickets, he announces that he has to remain where he is, but the detectives must still locate or completely trap him to win.


Magic - The Gathering

This simple looking card game transformed the industry quickly leading to huge tournaments culminating in a World Championship.  It has been going strong for over 15 years and shows no sign of stopping.

Strategies mutate and change with every release, but the good players are able to adapt and continue to remain strong.

Tournaments: The World Championship is the culmination of many levels of feeder tournaments.  There are a large number of people in many countries that play the game on a semi-pro basis.
Official Rating system - check, The rating system has been active and supported for over a decade.
Mainstream coverage - NY Times, USA Today, GAMES magazine Hall of Fame, broadcasts on ESPN, many others.
Publications

529 book references on Amazon for "Magic the Gathering", a lot of magazine have publishing price guides and articles for Magic over the years.
Scrye was my favorite back in the day.
InQuest was another popular magazine.

Online or Software support

Two videogames released in 1997 (Magic: The Gathering and Magic: The Gathering: Battlemage
Magic: The Gathering Online was released in 2002 and is still played by hundreds of thousands of people


Say that we have two players, Alice and Bob. Assume that Bob has a German Foil Storm Crow out and its Alice's turn. Alice wants to cast Pacifism because god, that's a scary Storm Crow. So the enchantment goes on the stack, targeting Storm Crow. Now priority gets passed to Bob and say this German Foil Storm Crow holds sentimental value to Bob. He casts Blossoming Defens targeting the Storm Crow. Now Blossoming Defense is on the stack targeting Storm Crow. Priority gets passed back to Alice and she has no response. The Blossoming Defens resolves first, giving Storm Crow indestructible and hexproof. Now the Pacifism resolves attempting to target Storm Crow.
Because of:

Resolving Spells and Abilities

608.2b If the spell or ability specifies targets, it checks whether the targets are still legal. A target that’s no longer in the zone it was in when it was targeted is illegal. Other changes to the game state may cause a target to no longer be legal; for example, its characteristics may have changed or an effect may have changed the text of the spell. If the source of an ability has left the zone it was in, its last known information is used during this process. The spell or ability is countered if all its targets, for every instance of the word “target,” are now illegal. If the spell or ability is not countered, it will resolve normally. However, if any of its targets are illegal, the part of the spell or ability’s effect for which it is an illegal target can’t perform any actions on that target, make another object or player perform any actions on that target, or make that target perform any actions. If the spell or ability creates a continuous effect that affects game rules (see rule 613.10), that effect doesn’t apply to illegal targets. The effect may still determine information about illegal targets, though, and other parts of the effect for which those targets are not illegal may still affect them.

The Pacifism tries to target the Storm Crow but now that its an illegal target it just fizzles and goes to the graveyard. Bob precedes to then beat Alice's face in with a Storm Crow and win.
TL;DR the creature becomes an illegal target and the enchantment fizzles, just going to the graveyard.


If the longest road is interrupted and therefore reduced, does the player have to surrender the longest road card?

Yes and Yes. In the rules it states that if the longest road is split, then you re-evaluate who has the longest road. If no-one qualifies (or it is now a tie) it is returned to the bank.

Building a settlement to split someone's longest road is a key tactic in Settlers, which can be prevented by the player building extra roads and/or settlements to protect the vulnerable spots, but that obviously slows down their road building.


Yes, you can do this. There are no special rules or restrictions regarding going out concealed, so you are just subject to the rules for melding normally, along with the rules for going out normally.
Melds belong to both your partner and melds by either of you can be placed in front of either of you; there is only one set of melds for your partnership.

All the melds of a partnership are placed in front of either partner.

A player may add additional cards to a meld by their side, provided that the melds remain valid (having no more than three wild cards).

A player goes out when they get rid of the last card in their hand by discarding or melding it, provided that their side has melded at least one canasta or they complete a canasta while going out. Failing this requirement, a player must keep at least one card in their hand.

A player goes out "concealed" when they meld their entire hand in one turn, including at least one canasta, without having made an earlier meld and without previously having added any card to melds that their partner has made

So it only matters if your partnership has a Canasta, not if you personally do. And you can always add cards to your partnership's melds; it makes no difference if the cards were melded previously by you or your partner. Whether you are just melding some cards or going out makes no difference there.
Source: https://bicyclecards.com/how-to-play/canasta/


Are two Indestructible creatures safe from each other, or do they somehow cancel each other out and destroy each other?

No, nothing like your friend's idea happens. Indestructible simply means they can't be destroyed, period. They can be exiled, returned to their owner's hand, sacrificed, have their toughness reduced to zero, shuffled into their owner's library, or even turned into frogs, but if anything tries to destroy them, including lethal damage, it just doesn't happen.

  702.12b A permanent with indestructible can’t be destroyed. Such permanents aren't destroyed by lethal damage, and they ignore the state-based action that checks for lethal damage (see rule 704.5g).

There's no secret "...unless..." clause in the rules like your friend believes. The only way to actually destroy an indestructible creature is to make it stop being indestructible; usually that means causing it to lose all its abilities, like if you turn it into a frog!


Can models give up their Vengeance move to recover from Knocked Down?

According to Privateer Press Infernals:

  No. While knocked down, a model cannot advance. A model cannot
  sacrifice movement/action to stand until the start of its activation,
  which is well after the Maintenance and Control phases.


Board game about setting fairy tales right

I found it in the meantime. The game was called:
Der Geheimbund des Schwarzen Auges   and nicknamed DSA Junior

Seemingly it is only available in german (which could be the reason why it was so hard to find out). Back then it seemingly did not have a long run as only a few boxes and books were released. Its purpose was to introduce kids with roleplaying games and also to some core concepts from dsa (english the dark eye).


How do I determine my monster's hit points?

Monsters (like explorers) don't have hit points. If a scenario says that a monster can be killed instead of just being stunned, then that scenario should also say how it can be killed. It may just say that if it's defeated, then it is killed instead of stunned, or if it's defeated with a specific item, etc. You may have to be more specific in your question about which scenario you are playing, but just double check that scenario's rules; there are no general game rules to cover this.


Did I overstate my values on the following bidding?

Normally your 2H bid would show around 10 points in that situation, so the question is whether you consider your hand to have that value.  You have 8 HCP, plus some bonus for the heart length; so maybe you could stretch that to a 2H overcall. I don't think I totally mind it, but it's aggressive for neutral vulnerability; and you shouldn't mind the game push by partner after it.  Personally, though, I wouldn't bid it.

You do have a legitimate alternative that you're discounting, though, which is the negative double.  Normally that shows 4 hearts and 6+, but it can also be used with a below-game level heart hand with more than 4.  It's not an ideal bid for your hand, of course, but it keeps the auction lower.  Imagine this auction:

1S - 2C - X - P
2D - P - 2H - P
2S - p - P - P

Your partner might bid 3D instead of 2S, and you'd pass that as well with no preference between the two I imagine (or you could bid 3S, clearly not wanting a game then).

Either way you stop well short of game, and you adequately describe your hand, as that's the way you bid 6-9 5+ hearts.  The 2H bid after the X perfectly shows your hand, your partner knows what you have, and you end up in a reasonable contract.


Missions in Risk -- is Australia really an island?

Australia is not an island.

The rules for the 2003 edition define an island as follows:

  A mission may require you to control an island. An island is a territory completely surrounded by water and only connected to other territories by sea-lines, for example Indonesia.

See page 18 of the rules here: http://www.hasbro.com/common/instruct/Risk_2003.pdf


Identify this game - 4X board game between 2000 and 2010

I think you talk about Conquest of the Empire (from 2005)

STRUGGLE OF EMPIRES is a better re-implementation of it.


Where can I find the value of cards from the Dragon Ball Z Trading Card Game?

You have a few options actually.

TCGPlayer: Will give you market price and median
Ebay  : Will give you what people are asking for the cards
AlternativeWorld: Seems a bit outdated, but it may help.

Hope this helps.

Edit: Also I noted that in your question you referred to it as CCG (Collectible Card Game). If you do your searches with TCG (Trading Card Game) it probably turns out more results.


Gatherer is quite a powerful search tool if you know how to use it.

Even a good search will probably pull up lots of useless cards, but a page or two of results is easily searchable (I recommend using Visual Spoiler mode, it makes it a lot easier to quickly scroll through, in my opinion), and some of the cards that don't do quite what you're looking for may be useful anyways.

Here is my search:
Colors: Red, Black, Blue or Colorless (exclude all other colors)
Text contains: "enters the battlefield", "counter", "creature", "+1/+1"
Text does not contain: fabricate, bloodthirst, devour, evolve, modular, sunburst

I chose my search terms to closely match what you were interested in, and filtered to avoid the +1/+1 counter related mechanics that were not interesting but cropped up frequently in the results.

This resulted in 89 results.  Most of them are not particularly useful, but it does pull up the Graft creatures in blue, and Sage of Fables, Oona's Blackguard, and Olivia, Mobilized for War which are all along the lines that you were looking for, albeit more limited in scope.  It also pulls up a bunch of creatures that enter the battlefield with +1/+1 counters which may be interested although not what you were looking for.

The dangers of searching this way is that you get exactly what you ask for.  This search does not, for example, pull up Mikaeus the Unhallowed, because the wording of the Undying reminder text is "When this creature dies, if it had no +1/+1 counters on it, return it to the battlefield under its owner's control with a +1/+1 counter on it." This text misses the "enters the battlefield" search term I was using, and therefore a new search would be needed in order to find it.


How can I tell what has changed in a Comprehensive Rules update?

They put an article in their website written by the current Rules Manager (the main authority in Wizards for Magic rules).

This is the one that corresponds to the February 1, 2012 rules update.

If you search for more articles by the same author, you'll find the articles for older rules updates. Searching for articles of previous Rules Managers is trickier.


response with 4 cards in major and long (6+) minor

The following guidances will apply for any natural non-canapé system of bidding, including but not limited to SAYC, Goren (4-card majors), Five Card Majors, Two Over One, and many Precision and ACOL variants.

The importance of finding any existing 8 card major fit, particularly a 4-4 fit in a major, and of identifying misfits promptly, underlie the requirement that a hand such as you describe must respond 1 Spade. Due to the weakness of your hand (6-9 points) you are only entitled to make one free-bid (ie non-forced and non-invited response) during the auction. The specific reasons for making this bid as 1 Spade instead of 2 Diamonds are the following:

To protect against partner having a hand that is 4-5 in the majors. Even if playing the Flannery Convention partner may have this shape but be outside the range allowed by the convention.
To maximize partner's opportunity to make his prepared 1 NT rebid with a balanced 15-17 HCP (when playing Weak Notrump) or a balanced 12-14 HCP (when playing a Strong Notrump).
To maximize partner's ability to make his prepared 2NT rebid with 18-19 HCP.
To keep the auction low until:
1) adequate combined partnership strength is revealed to enable playing safely at a higher level; and
2) A fit is revealed that makes it desirable to try for a game or slam contract.

With a hand strength of 6-9 points (or 6-11 points if playing Two Over One) it is still incorrect to respond 2D over 1 Heart when holding 6 diamonds and only 3 spades. In such circumstance the correct response is 1 Notrump. It is absolutely imperative for bidding success and partnership harmony that proper discipline be exercised in the making of 2-over-1 responses to a suit opening. Such bids are immediately raising the level of the auction and, even more importantly, removing bidding room; they can only be engaged in successfully when the partnership is known to have adequate strength to do so safely.

Note that having made a 1 Spade response (to a 1 Heart opening) with a 6 to 9 point hand and 4-6 distribution in spades and diamonds, it is still incorrect to rebid 2D if partner rebids 2C. This bid again promises hand strength of 10+ points, by being a second free bid. In many systems this is stronger still by being an Artificial Fourth-Suit Forcing call.

You have been asked for a preference by a partner who has declined to show additional strength; do so. The only acceptable calls at this point are:

Pass, showing a hand that distinctly prefers Clubs over Hearts, and cannot raise to 3 Clubs because it has only 6 or 7 points;
2 Hearts, showing a hand that prefers Hearts to Clubs, or has no preference;
2 Spades, showing a 6 card or longer spade suit and denying three card heart support;

If partner rebids 2 Hearts over your 1 Spade response, this is showing a minimum unbalanced hand with 6+ hearts and denying 4 spades. With your singleton the partnership has announced being in possession of about half the high card points in the deck, and has found a seven card major suit fit. Pass is the only call to even consider.

If partner rebids 1 Notrump over your one Spade response, then you are in territory usually governed by specific partnership agreements. Either or both of 2C and 2D will often be conventional bids inquiring further about Opener's major suit distribution and point range.  You do not have the mandated strength or major suit length to consider any of these. When not conventional they will typically show more strength (10+ points) than you possess, as again they are a second free-bid. As above, just Pass and be thankful of getting out of this mis-fit auction cheaply, Weak opponents might even enter the auction and give you the chance for getting a plus score from setting them.


Which effect triggers first in MTG: Mage Slayer or Mystifying Maze

Mystifying Maze can't prevent the Mage Slayer ability from resolving.

It helps to visualise the stack.  As you declare your attack, the Mage Slayer ability triggers and is put on the stack.  In response, your opponent activates his Mystifying Maze and puts this ability on the stack.  Everyone passes, Mystifying Maze's ability at the top of the stack resolves, the creature is exiled.  Now we get to Mage Slayer's ability, still on the stack.  The creature may currently be exiled, but the ability still resolves (and uses last known information to determine the creature's power and toughness).

There is no window to use the Mystifying Maze's ability before Mage Slayer can trigger; at any point before the trigger the creature is not yet an attacker, and is therefore an invalid target.


Does order matter when drawing player cards? (Efficient to Sequence + Epidemic)

Order does not matter; you draw both cards at the same time. And if either is an Epidemic, you must resolve it first before curing a disease.

From the FAQ

  If we have the 2nd beneficial mutation, exactly when can we discover the cure?

    You can do it out of turn, but you can’t so it halfway through an epidemic. It’s also worth noting when drawing player cards, you’ll have to discard down to hand size before curing.


Do dice finish resolving before yielding Tokyo?

It is my opinion that the dice indicate what happens to you at your current location. A heart dice would indicate that you healed, if your location permits it.

This is partially supported by the fact that one must take all damage rolled even if one cedes Tokyo. You should similarly be able to use all hearts even if you are forced to take Tokyo. There's absolutely no mention or implication of any other possibility.

Everyone I've played with has naturally come to the same understanding. You could view podcasts of people playing KoT, but I'm sure they've come to the same conclusion.

  She must choose if the heart is applied to heal for one, or if it will remove the shrink ray token. In this case, order of resolution for the attack/yield and heart matters

No, it doesn't. According to the FAQ on BoardGameGeek, removing a bad counter counts as healing and is thus equally forbidden in Tokyo, so the order does not affect the choice.


It looks to be from Marvel Battleworld - here's an image of a very similar dice on its BoardGameGeek listing (and certainly one in the same style).


What should be taken into consideration when mixing Fluxx sets?

Mixing Fluxx sets is fun, but it will:

probably make the games take longer since you have half as much chance of getting a relevant keeper.  The more sets you add the lower the chances of getting the card you want will be.   With 3 decks your chances are 1/3.  With 4 decks your chances are 1/4.  And so on.  [Thanks to @SocioMatt for encouraging this generalization.]
get weird.  Some sets, like Star Fluxx, have keepers with superpowers which might overpower the other set you mix with it.  Reports indicate that Monty Python Fluxx doesn't mix well.
Stoner Fluxx and some non-English Fluxx editions have different backs which might let your opponent figure out which cards you don't have more easily.


Will I die if I lose enough life to kill me from an effect that also heals me?

TL;DR: You survive if the damage and the life gain happen during the resolution of a single spell or ability. If the damage happens in one ability, and the life gain happens in a later one, you lose in between.

In all of your situations except for the third (the one with Armadillo Cloak), you will survive. This is because in all of those cases, in every way that matters, the damage and life gain happens at the same time. In the Armadillo Cloak situation, you take the damage, then Armadillo Cloak triggers, then you die before you get the life.

First, a subtle point that is relevant here is that having 0 life does not immediately cause you to lose. The way it works is that there is something called State-based actions, which are checked whenever any player has priority (basically, whenever a player has an opportunity to cast spells or activate abilities). This happens all the time, but the important point for this question is that it does not happen in the middle of resolving a spell or ability. One of those State-based actions is to check each player's life total; if they are at 0 life, they lose.

I'll go through each case in more detail:

Soulfire Grand Master

Soulfire Grand Master's relevant ability says

  Instant and sorcery spells you control have lifelink.

and the rules for lifelink say

  Damage dealt by a source with lifelink causes that source’s controller, or its owner if it has no controller, to gain that much life (in addition to any other results that damage causes).

So, when your Lightning Bolt (with lifelink) resolves, it deals you 3 damage (which causes you to lose 3 life) and it also causes you to gain 3 life. When the spell resolves and state-based actions are checked, you are still at 3 life, so you survive.

Ajani Vengeant

The relevant ability here says

  Ajani Vengeant deals 3 damage to target creature or player and you gain 3 life.

This is the same situation as before. When the ability resolves, it deals you 3 damage (which causes you to lose 3 life), and also causes you to gain 3 life. Again, by the time it resolves and state-based actions are checked, you have 3 life, so you survive.

Armadillo Cloak

This is the interesting situation because it is different from the others. Its relevant ability is

  Whenever enchanted creature deals damage, you gain that much life.

This is different because it is a triggered ability. Rule 603, in part, says

  603.1 Triggered abilities have a trigger condition and an effect. They are written as "[Trigger condition], [effect]," and begin with the word "when," "whenever," or "at." They can also be expressed as "[When/Whenever/At] [trigger event], [effect]."
  603.2 Whenever a game event or game state matches a triggered ability's trigger event, that ability automatically triggers. The ability doesn't do anything at this point.
  603.3 Once an ability has triggered, its controller puts it on the stack as an object that's not a card the next time a player would receive priority. See rule 116, "Timing and Priority." The ability becomes the topmost object on the stack. It has the text of the ability that created it, and no other characteristics. It remains on the stack until it's countered, it resolves, a rule causes it to be removed from the stack, or an effect moves it elsewhere.

The condition on Armadillo Cloak's ability is that the creature deals damage. The effect is that you gain that much life. So, when you get attacked by an opponent's creature enchanted with your Armadillo Cloak, it plays out like this:

The creature deals combat damage to you. Armadillo Cloak's ability triggers (from the second rule).
State-based actions are checked. You die because you have 0 life.
If you were still alive, Armadillo Cloak's ability would be put on the stack.
If you were still alive, Armadillo Cloak's ability would resolve, and you would gain the life.

As you can see, you are dead well before Armadillo Cloak would be able to help you. (Note: the ordering between 2 and 3 is specified in rule 704.3)

Corrupt

Corrupt's text says

  Corrupt deals damage equal to the number of Swamps you control to target creature or player. You gain life equal to the damage dealt this way.

You would survive this for the same reason you survive the first two: both the damage and the life gain happen before state-based actions are checked.


Are There Any Good Tools For Developing CCG Or Other Card Games?

NanDeck will do this: http://www.nand.it/nandeck/

Lets you script out card sets, fairly simple to change card sizes, etc.

The website Oil And Rope has a very slick prototyping tool called Paperize: http://paperize.io/beta which lets you upload graphics, use spreadsheet linking, etc. - super cool. Still in beta, but tons of folks love it.


The reason for this change was to "clarify that a card's ability is used at the time you cast it", according to Aaron Forsythe.

This change was not only limited to "can't be countered", but to all abilities that matter when the card was being cast (when it is a spell). See Talara's Battalion, which went from "Cast Talara's Battalion only if you've cast another green spell this turn." to "Cast this spell only if you've cast another green spell this turn."

You can read about it here.

I can't give a definitive answer about Nezahal, Primal Tide. But we know from past history that sometimes in large Oracle updates, certain cards have been missed, and they get updated in future updates. You can find an example of that in this article, where it explains that Decree of Annihilation should have been updated previously, but was missed and was updated later.


Tales of Arabian Nights -- Story versus Destiny and variants?

Been playing a fair bit of this over the weekend, so here's a few thoughts:

It seems that Story is a bit easier to get than Destiny (and there's a couple effects that convert Destiny to Story, plus some that remove Destiny), so I tend to skew a few points towards Story. I haven't seen a particular reason to skew too far away (the furthest I've gone is D7/S13) because there's no guarantee you'll get lots of story points.
The game is fairly random, but there does seem to be some (at least loose) correlation between your choice of reaction and the skills required. So you can work around bad luck to some extent by being a bit more cunning in your opening skill selection and picking reactions that hopefully you have good skills for. (This is admittedly still pretty darned random)

2a. One good way of beating down the randomness is to aim for master-level skills (which let you shortcut the destiny die, and are generally-but-not-always good results), and remember to use any effects that let you skew the game in your favor. (Blessed, Respected, Determined, to name three.)


Is this Barbarossa token used in a boardgame?

As you indicated in the question, there are existing tokens (i.e. coins, possibly as a souvenir) that bears the exact same inscription in your question.

Two commenters have already indicated that the token does not appear to be part of a board game. Given the similarity to non-board game tokens and the fact that nobody has been able to identify it as part of a board game in over a year, I'm inclined to say that this is not a board game piece.


Can I tap a land creature for mana *and* attack with it?

No, he can't. A creature must be untapped to be declared an attacker, so if it's tapped for any reason—including for mana—before attackers are declared, it can't attack.


Does the legacy version do anything to devalue taking Australia early in the game?

Yes, depending on how your group places their stickers.

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

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

Scars

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

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

Cards

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

Other ways

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

Spoiler 1:

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

Spoiler 2:

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

Spoiler 3:

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

Spoiler 4:

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


Finish your routes, prevent others from completing theirs

Ticket to Ride doesn't strike me as a strategy-heavy game.  It's all about making good tactical decisions - completing your tickets in light of random card draws and other players' actions.  Remember that unfinished tickets count for negative points at the end of the game.  My basic gameplay goes like this:

Choose tickets I think I can finish.  The big routes are much harder to complete in a 4- or 5-player game.
If possible, avoid telegraphing where my routes are going.  Others can block you easily if they know you need a certain leg.  That leads directly into...
Claim the critical legs first.  If I need a one-train leg, get it as soon as I have the card.
If you can block, do it, but make it a good block.  Spending your turn solely to block probably only scores you a few points.  If that player then goes around your block, he scores more points and he still completes his route.  Not worth it.
Once my routes are done, decide if a new route(s) is worth the risk.  There's a chance you could pull all 20's, basically guaranteeing you won't win.  With fewer trains remaining, I think the better play is to go for long links of opportunity.  A six-train link is 15 points, even if it doesn't connect to anything else.


Does it really matter if dice are randomized?

As I noted in a comment, there are techniques I've seen people use with spindown dice - most notably a sort of 'skitter along the table' throw where the die is primarily slid rather than tumbled - that can be used to great effect in rolling high numbers.  There's enough imprecision that shots can't really be called precisely, but for spindown dice where all of the faces around a high-numbered face are also high-numbered, they lead to significantly biased rolls.

You might ask why it matters, since both players are rolling the same die and both have access to the same technique - but the point is that there's an ethical asymmetry; one player is (presumably) trying to roll the die in a 'fair' fashion with an unbiased roll, either out of a sense of internal fairness or because they have no reason to suspect the other player is cheating them.  Meanwhile the shark is (also presumably) well aware of the skew in the game and willing to use that skew to his advantage.

For what it's worth, I don't believe most people rolling spindown dice do it with any intention to cheat; the life counter is just what they have handy, and so it's a natural choice.  But there are people who will use it for that purpose, and so anyone who isn't willing to is at a slight overall disadvantage.  Most of the time, at an FNM or in a casual game like the one you describe, it just doesn't matter; who cares if you're an underdog in a die roll that has a maybe 5% affect on the outcome of a game that's just for fun?  But there are certainly circumstances where it does matter, and some people just get in the habit of caring about every little thing so that they build the mental rigor for when it does matter.

As for myself, I usually don't care, though at something like a PTQ I'll insist on a more effective means of randomization.  My preferred choice is either to flip a coin with a call in the air (which is about as close to 'I cut, you choose' as a randomization method gets) or to toss about 5d6; they're quick enough to count, and hard enough to really skew that I can trust in the results.


Can a Diplomacy player pick and choose which unit to support?

From the rules:

  A unit ordered to move can only be supported by a support order that matches the move the unit is trying to make.

The support order was: A Bur S English F Nrs - Bel
The move order was: A Yor - Bel (Possible because of F Nrs C A Yor - Bel)

There are two conflicts:
- The supported unit is a Fleet, the moved unit is an Army. This alone could have been a typo.
- The supported unit is the unit in Nrs, the moved unit is from Yor. And those are clearly two different units. There is no quesion that these do not match.

So the orders where conflicting, they should have failed.


Interaction between Carcassonne: Bridges, Castles, and Bazaars and other expansions

Some Ideas

Admittedly I haven't tried the expansion yet, but here is my take on the specific issues you mentioned:

Builders in bazaar round: Just as bazaars gotten during bazaar round don't count as bazaars because it's not normal tile placement, the builder shouldn't do anything special, either.
Dragon with castle: I would force the follower to stay on the tile where he was before the city was converted, but I look forward to a more authoritative answer.
Non-oval castles: The rules specify "consisting of only two semi-circular city segments".
Bazaar road: It looks to me like it breaks it just as much as the Cloister from I & C, which must break the road, unlike the other Cloister in the Bazaar pic.

Bazaar near end of game: No idea on this one.


Will Kresh the Bloodbraided survive damage through his ability in a boardwide damage scenario?

If Kresh is a 5/5 when the damage is dealt,  he will die when the damage resolves because he will have 5 damage marked on him the next time state-based actions are checked, causing him to go to the graveyard. The check will occur before the triggered ability resolves, so he'll never have the chance to add the +1/+1 counter.


Can split second be used to block damage prevention effects?

No.

Note the text of split second:

  Split second (As long as this spell is on the stack, players can't cast spells or activate abilities that aren't mana abilities.)

Split second only prevents casting spells and activating abilities while the split-second spell itself is on the stack. This means no player may take an action in between casting the spells and resolution. After that spell resolves, however, you'll still pass priority around normally (meaning your friend now gets to play other spells or abilities) before going on to the next part of the turn.

If you want to prevent your opponent from casting spells, you'll need countermagic or a Silence effect. Try Grand Abolisher if you want to keep your opponent from messing with your attack phase.

Alternatively, you can play cards that cancel out the effects of his spells — e.g. Skull Crack or Leyline of Punishment against damage-prevention effects.


In Eldritch Horror, how do you deal with cases when an event forces you to draw a condition card that you already have?

The very detailed reference guide covers this case. From p.4, "Conditions":

  An investigator cannot have multiple copies of the same  Condition. If
  he would gain a Condition that he already has a  copy of, he does not
  gain another copy of that Condition.


How do I Make this Backgammon-Spinoff more Level and Fair?

The easiest rule change would be to disallow hits made in a home board. Extending a nuance from this rule, would be to disallow hits made in a home board

unless they come from a point on the outer board or
only if the piece is entering the opponent's home board or
unless the roll is a double, then one piece may be entered on the point and make the hit

This rule and nuances create a catch up mechanism whereby the player on their march is not trapped by the opponent's fall, and the fall itself is also slowed by the points on the home board being clogged by singles.

Taking any or all of those extra details will have varying effect on this stage of the game. Given the proportion of games that would arrive at this situation, a significant amount of simulation or playtesting would be needed to determine which nuance(s) most accurately transfer the advantage held before this situation to the equivalent advantage held after it.


That appears to be the Scholar's Mate, the four-move game that ends with 4. Qxf7#.

  In chess, Scholar's Mate is the checkmate achieved by the moves 1. e4 e5 2. Qh5 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6? 4. Qxf7#. The moves might be played in a different order or in slight variation, but the basic idea is the same – the queen and bishop combine in a simple mating attack on f7 (or f2 if Black is performing the mate). Sometimes Scholar's Mate is referred to as the Four-Move Checkmate, though there are other ways to checkmate in four moves.

Obviously this is a fake video. I've never met a cat who would fall for this move.


What should I know before my first MTG draft?

Make sure you know the policy on rares - will rares be re-drafted at the end? Do you keep all rares you draft? Is it a 'winner-chooses' system? Most of the time you'll keep what you draft, but not always.
Talking about the cards you're drafting is generally frowned upon - reading signals and predicting what your opponents are drafting is a big part of the strategy, so discussing your picks is disruptive.
The above applies for discussing what you think your neighbors are drafting, too.
Find out if basic lands will be drafted or removed from the pack before drafting.
Find out what the policy is with regards to looking at your cards during the draft. Some groups won't allow you to look at your picks during drafting; some allow a minute between packs to review
It's really not acceptable to complain about your luck, bad as it may be. Part of drafting is making the best of what you have, and half the skill is mitigating any poor luck with good decisions.
There will almost always be a 'pile-up' where someone isn't 100% sure of all the cards, so needs to read them before choosing - be patient with them! However on the other hand, don't take needlessly excessive time deliberating over a choice.
Make sure you are aware of the drafting order - usually it'll be first pack left, second pack right, third pack left, but some pods do it differently. Passing the wrong way can really confuse matters.
If you find a couple of packs waiting for you, make sure you go through them in the right order. If you're not sure, check with your neighbor.
Take your own lands. Some stores will provide lands but occasionally they'll run out, and having your own can take the pressure off.
Sleeve your cards. All kinds of good reasons to do this; preventing differences between lands and the slippery new cards, protecting cards (especially if rares will be redrafted).
Don't be afraid to ask a judge. It's always best to be safe than sorry.
Don't be too shy to ask spectators to back off if they are distracting you or disturbing your game
It's usually considered polite to offer your deck to your opponent to cut or shuffle to their satisfaction before playing. Not doing so will cause suspicion that you may be deck-stacking or cheating in some other way. In more formal, higher level tournaments it is mandatory to present your deck.
Bring a pen and paper for life tracking and counters to use for all kinds of stuff (+1/-1, etc). Dice are considered too accident-prone in competitive play. If you're just in a casual store draft, dice should be fine. Phone apps are also considered ok for life tracking. In more formal, higher level tournaments it is also standard to track your opponent's life total.
Sometimes you will be unfortunate enough to come across someone who uses cheap tactics to try and put off their opponents. For example, arranging their lands in front of their permanents, or tracking their life in base 6. Do your best not to let these maneuvers distract or fluster you. If you have any concerns at all, call a judge - it's what they are there for. (and if someone's life tracking is obscured in some way, keep track of it yourself, carefully, as they may be using these odd counting methods to disguise cheating.)


You can move to any unoccupied hex. The only restriction is that you cannot move through a closed door. Line-of-sight is not required.
From the FAQ:

What are the line-of-sight rules?
Line-of-sight is necessary for all attacks (including every hex of an area attack) and all other abilities that specify a range (including looting, which technically has a range). Any non-attack ability that does not specify a range does not require line-of-sight.

Concealed Dominance bottom-half wording (spoiler, hover to read):

 Move to any unoccupied hex. You cannot move through a closed door.


Is a fifth card in a suit often a decisive factor in three no trump contracts?

There are nearly as many ways to evaluate hand distribution as there are experts. In some cases, these methods are chosen to justify being passive or aggressive in certain circumstances. However everyone recognizes two distinct components to evaluating distribution: a) the core value of the distribution; and b) the fit with partner.

In the days of Goren, a relatively simple evaluation system, one evaluated short suits only, for both suit and Notrump contracts, as:

3 for void;
2 for singleton; and
1 for doubleton.

However remember that Goren's NT openings were all one point stronger than today, and all experts deduct a full point for 4333 distribution, When we shift to modern NT ranges and properly downgrade 4333, we end up with something like this:

+3 for void;
+2 for singleton;
+1 for doubleton; and
-1 for 4333.

Now 4432 distribution (the most common) with 15-17 HCP exactly matches Goren's 16-18 Total Points; but we have a more accurate and precise evaluation for other distributions.

Every expert I know also counts one point for the fifth card in a suit, even if it is expressed as a shift in the opening NT range: ie "Don't open 1NT with a five card suit and 17 HCP." or "I open 1NT with 15 HCP and a five card suit."

We now have:

+3 for void;
+2 for singleton;
+1 for doubleton;
+1 for a fifth card in a suit; and
-1 for 4333

For additional cards in a suit, these are (at least usually) worth more than the single point for a fifth card - but how much more is unsure. Sheinwold recommended in Five Weeks to Winning Bridge to count every card past the fifth at two points each, but that may be a bit aggressive. it may be better to regard it as having value both intrinsically and due to fit (or lack of it) with partner. With this in mind, we couldsay something like this:

+3 for void;
+2 for singleton;
+1 for doubleton;
-1 for 4333;
+1 for a fifth card in a suit; and
+2 for a sixth card in a suit when partner shows at least two; and
+1 for a sixth card in a suit otherwise; and
+2 for seventh and subsequent card in the suit.

Back to your specific example, this evaluates 5332 distribution as (+1+1) - (-1) = +3 points better than a 4333 hand; but only 1 point better than a 4432 distribution - from 4432 to 5332 one has lost a four card suit to gain the five bagger.

Here are overall evaluations for some frequent hand distributions (where the distributional evaluation is the same value, I have ordered them weaker followed by stronger according to my personal subjective assessment):

-1 4333
+1 4432
+2 5332
+2 4441
+3 5422
+3 5431
+4 6322 w/o 2+ fit from partner
+4 5440
+5 6322 w/ 2+ fit from partner

A reminder - this system is a means of assessing the potential for establishing length tricks due to the intrinsic shape of the hand. This is absolutely not an acceptable or accurate means of assessing ruffing potential in the hand with shorter trumps.

As a final note, Goren recommended not bidding 3NT until the partnership was known to have 26 total points. This is regarded as overly cautious by modern standards. Players are better overall than they were two generations ago, and as we see above modern evaluation is more refined. The modern standard is 25 points for Matchpoints, Rubber, and Not Vulnerable at IMPS; and 24 points Vulnerable at IMPS. As I have discussed in other answers, a partnership should agree that the one point variation for vulnerability at IMPS (and the complementary adjustment for slam bidding) is made only by the hand inviting game, or bidding it without an invitation. This is the only agreement for it I am aware of that is both unambiguous and simple to describe and remember.


God-Pharaoh's Statue and Finale Of Promise

When you cast a spell without paying its mana cost, you are still required to pay any additional costs that other effects might impose.
This is reflected in one of the rulings on Finale of Promise:

If you cast a card “without paying its mana cost,” you can’t choose to cast it for any alternative costs. You can, however, pay additional costs. If the card has any mandatory additional costs, such as that of Spark Harvest, you must pay those to cast the card.

Basically the formula for a spell cost is as follows:

601.2f [...] The total cost is the mana cost or alternative cost (as determined in rule 601.2b), plus all additional costs and cost increases, and minus all cost reductions. If multiple cost reductions apply, the player may apply them in any order.

Choosing to cast a spell without paying its mana cost is an alternative cost, one that treats the cost of the spell as {0}. But God-Pharaoh's Statue still increases that cost by {2}, meaning your spells are not actually completely free: you are not forgoing all mana costs, you are just forgoing the initial mana cost of the spell before cost increases apply.
In order to cast Finale of Promise for X=2 targeting two spells while God-Pharaoh's Statue is out, you will pay 10 mana total ({8}{R}{R}). Finale will cost {2}{R}{R} normally plus another {2} from the Statue, then you must pay {2} for one of the free spells, then {2} for the other free spell.
Both of those spells are still definitely legitimate choices for Finale of Promise. Shock still has a converted mana cost of 1, and Chart a Course still has a converted mana cost of 2, because the converted mana cost formula does not factor in any cost increases or reductions we might face when actually casting the card:

202.3 The converted mana cost of an object is a number equal to the total amount of mana in its mana cost, regardless of color.
Example: A mana cost of {3}{U}{U} translates to a converted mana cost of 5.


According to several forums I checked, strategy rating is an obsolete mechanism used in certain published scenarios that would typically give some kind of advantage (initiative, timing of reinforcements, etc.) to the side with the higher strategy rating:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/282685.page

http://forums.tauonline.org/tau/5898-strategy-rating.html


Card game, off color write-in responses.

I submit Balderdash as a possibility. Since the OP doesn't mention what is on the card the player draws, it's hard to say what the game might be. Also Balderdash players aren't directed specifically to be off color, but who isnt?


Can I use a creature's ability on my opponent's turn?

You may use a tap ability at instant speed, so as long as the cost is payed and the creature does NOT have summoning sickness you may use the ability whenever you have priority.


Can Reveillark bring itself back from the graveyard?

Reveillark cannot target a Reveillark card in the graveyard, including itself. While it is in the graveyard, it has its printed characteristics, including 4 power. There are currently no cards that can change the power or toughness of a creature card in a graveyard. So, once it is in the graveyard, it is not a legal target of its own ability, even if it had power 2 or less while on the battlefield.

However, there is a way to get a very similar effect. If you have a Clone, for example, copying a Reveillark, and the Clone dies, it will have power 0 while in the graveyard, and it will be a legal target for the triggered ability. So it can bring itself back, and copy the Reveillark again, effectively achieving the same outcome that you are looking for.


What is the best strategy to avoid large farms in Carcassonne?

There are a couple of expansions I think could help, as well as some strategery. First, expansions:

The River II tends to at least break the board up into 2 or 3
big farms, if not lots of smaller ones.
Abbey & Mayor adds a Barn piece that can really change the way
fields are played.
I think the dragon from The Princess & the Dragon might play in
here as well, but I haven't ever actually played that expansion, and
it doesn't appeal to me generally.
Inns & Cathedrals can really beef up city and road scoring,
rendering farms less important.

Other expansions could also help simply by adding tiles. Since more players means fewer tiles per player, adding more tiles can hold off the farm rush a bit. Adding other scoring mechanisms also helps de-emphasize farms.

Now for strategy:

Push for big cities. In general, my friends and I tend to fight over big cities, with some scoring over 30 points. Cities score more points this way than as field consumers, so if you exclusively focused on this while your friends exclusively focused on fields, you'd win every time. In reality, putting meeples on fields too early in the game tends to cripple players from playing on cities and cloisters, so take advantage and "share" their cities once they are out of meeples to fight back.

Make little fields pockets. If you spot an area where there are going to be three or four cities, try to isolate it and own it with just one farmer. This happens all the time in games I play, and is really annoying to be left out of.

Toward the end of the game, it's natural for everybody to start going for the big fields, but picking the right moment to really start pushing for this is part of strategy, so just enjoy it. If you are playing with 4 or 5 players, you have many fewer tiles per player than with 2 or 3, so farm rushing happens earlier. One possible way to take advantage is to just try to share in lots of features, rather than winning all of them. If you share every other players big cities or farms, you will do better than if you try to hoard the features to yourself. Obviously this is not true in a 2-player game, and not as true in a 3-player game.