Do we have Go endgame tablebases, just like Chess?

I know much more about Go than chess, so I don't know how accurate my guesses about chess endgames will be, but... I think chess tends to be at its simplest in the endgame (like Go), and there is little information in the endgame about how the rest of the game progressed (unlike Go). And, there are  algorithms for winning (in some cases) that generalize to a large number of positions. E.g., if white has a Queen and a King, and black only has a King, unless the Q is about to be captured white will win, regardless of position.

In Go, the endgame is also the simplest part of the game, in that it is the only part of the game in which the score and the value of each move can be calculated very precisely, however position is everything, and you will never see two games end with the same board position. In chess, you can generalize many positions to what pieces remain, but in Go the only generalization is the score count and the number of points still remaining to be taken.

It would be utterly impractical to rely on whole-board level tables in Go, however many small areas of the board will fit common patterns, which are memorized by Go players and programmed into computers alike. A medium-level example would be bent four in the corner is dead, but you'll see that this relatively common position is not at all obvious to a beginner and comes with several caveats (no un-removable ko-threats, surrounding group must be alive with 2 eyes), and while relatively common, it is somewhat of a special case.

Something like knowing where to play to kill (or save!) bulky five (and many many other shapes) should be automatic for a human or computer.

Programming a computer to play good yose is a very hard problem, but is one of the few aspects of Go at which computers can beat professional Go players, as it is all calculation and, while difficult, the theory is well-understood. To do it effectively the program must be able to estimate the current score, identify the moves left on the board that are worth points, and sort them in order of worth---not trivial. This article might be a good place to start.

Summary: There is a place for systematic lists of positions in Go programs, but they won't be useful for whole-board positions. The program needs to be able to evaluate the life/death status of every group on the board, and it is in these one or two group positions that lists will be most useful---and they'll be valuable throughout the game. In trying to attack opponent's groups, your program's goal won't be just to recognize shapes from the list, but rather to force the opponent into shapes that it knows are dead, while maintaining live shapes itself. See also Common Corner Shapes.

In writing a Go program, I would give you the same advice as I would a person learning Go: start on a small board, even as small as 5x5 until you have the rules down. Move up to 7x7, and then stay with 9x9 for a long time before you even think of trying 13x13.

Good luck!


Does Barren Glory require its trigger condition to be satisfied when the ability resolves?

The win with Barren Glory was in fact a bug. Barren Glory's ability has an "intervening 'if' clause", which is described in rule 603.4:

  A triggered ability may read “When/Whenever/At [trigger event], if [condition], [effect].” When the trigger event occurs, the ability checks whether the stated condition is true. The ability triggers only if it is; otherwise it does nothing. If the ability triggers, it checks the stated condition again as it resolves. If the condition isn’t true at that time, the ability is removed from the stack and does nothing. Note that this mirrors the check for legal targets. This rule is referred to as the “intervening ‘if’ clause” rule. (The word “if” has only its normal English meaning anywhere else in the text of a card; this rule only applies to an “if” that immediately follows a trigger condition.)

This means that you have to have an empty hand and no other permanents both at the time that the ability triggers, and at the time that it starts to resolve. In the game in question, the player with Barren Glory had a card in their hand when the ability started to resolve, so they should not have won the game.


Exchanging nearly all man in draughts (checkers)

He has 14 pieces and his opponent 16. So his strength compared to his opponent is 14/16 = 7/8.

The exchange is the trade. Trade 13 pieces for 13 other pieces. So he has 14-13 = 1 and his opponent 16-13 = 3. So his opponent has three times as much pieces as he. The exchange has nothing to do with the promotion to king.

When you are behind, it is often not advantageous to trade. Unless you get a better position.


How does the Locket and Meenlock interact?

I agree with some of the previous comments here. Not everything is going to have an official ruling and even in the back of the original Betrayal at House on The Hill rules book it says:

  ...if the rules are not specified in the rulebook you and your group can decide what makes the game most fun.

Personally, I would take it at face value. Since they have both cards, they must convert physical damage to mental damage and by proxy minus one to any mental damage taken.

That's my preference but if your group comes to any different agreement go with that instead. The important thing is to have fun.


Seafarers of Catan fog scenario question

You should reveal the hex tile when you first build a ship that reaches it; you don't wait until you are building a settlement.

From the rules:

  When a ship (or a road) is connected to an unexplored
  area, a new tile will be discovered! If you place a ship or road
  that connects to the intersection of an unexplored hex, you
  must immediately draw the top tile from the pile and place it
  face up in the empty space.


How are excavation permits handled if the turn you dig in straddles a year-end?

I think the key phrase in the rulebook is this one:

  At the end of his turn, the player pays any costs in weeks he has
  incurred by moving his time marker.

By this token, you wouldn't be able to dig without permission just because, after the weeks taken up by movement, you would be "into next year".  If you start your turn in one year, then everything counts as taking place in that year; excavation permits can only flip at the end of a player's turn.

If you have a permit, you can of course use it at the very end of one year, and then have it flip back up again at the end of the same turn...


How much time do I get to read a card before I counter it?

Your friend made that up. There is nothing in the comprehensive rules about how long a player may retain priority. Once you've got it, you keep it as long as you like until you play a spell/ability or pass.

If you're in an official tournament setting, your opponent can call a judge if he thinks you're intentionally playing slowly. If you're playing at your friend's kitchen table, then anything goes. Of course, the host can always decide to kick you out of his house, so try to play at a reasonable speed.


Where can I find an opening database of professional games for 9x9 Go?

It's not professional games but they are between very strong players:
http://dcook.org/compgo/9by9_experiments.html

This has tons of games:
http://gobase.org/9x9/


American Five Card majors - using Jacoby to respond to a 2NT opening bid

I agree with Aryabhata as far as general principle. Most beginners and even intermediate players greatly overuse Ace-asking bids -- their primary purpose is to keep you out of a slam when you have the tricks but lack controls in side suits; they shouldn't be used to get into a slam when you're not sure you have the values.

A decent agreement in this situation is to use Texas transfers as well as Jacoby. Now you can use the sequences like so:

2NT-3H-3S-4NT: Usually 5332, quantitative invitate to a small slam
2NT-3H-3S-4C: 5-4 or better in spades and clubs (this is mostly to find the best strain, but you can use the follow-on auction to look for slam)
2NT-3H-3S-4S: at least 6 spades, a faint invitation to slam (opener might look for slam with something like Kxx Ax AKQxx AJx -- rich in controls, a good source of tricks)
2NT-4H-4S-pass: at least 6 spades, no interest in slam
2NT-4H-4S-4NT: Whatever your normal Ace-asking bid is (Blackwood, RKC), with 6 spades at least.
2NT-4H-4S-5C: at least 6 spades, first-round control in clubs
etc


The errata posted last year clarifies the definition of a power turret in rule 5.5.2.

Powered Turrets: Chin (B-17G), Nose (B-24J), Top
Turret and Ball Turret (All models of B17 and B24) and tail guns (B-24). The Tail Guns (B17) are
not powered.


How do I handle a gameplay error when I have an equivalent play available in a tournament?

The attack was illegal. Your opponent can call a judge at any time, and is required to do so as soon as he noticed the error. The consequences of that error depend on the rules enforcement level (REL) and the judge's call. The illegal attack will be reverted, but you will not be allowed to animate and untap a different mountain at any REL.
In the Tournament Rules, it is stated that, among others, that

Players are responsible for:
• Maintaining a clear and legal game state.
• Calling attention to any rules or policy infraction they notice in their matches.

As you noted yourself, the mountain you untapped and turned into a creature has summonig sickness and cannot attack. Therefore you committed a game error.
As for consequences, given the circumstances you describe, a judge would probably not come to the conclusion that you were trying to cheat, because you had an equivalent, legal play at your disposal. Therefore, a game loss or worse seems out of the question here.
At regular REL, such as Friday Night Magic or pre-release tournaments, with relatively minor prizes at stake, the judge would most likely decide to rewind the game state to before your illegal attack.

A player makes an in-game error not mentioned above
This will cover the bulk of player errors, and usually the least disruptive option is to leave the game as it is after fixing anything that is currently illegal (e.g. an Aura enchanting an illegal permanent). If the error involved a player forgetting to draw or discard cards, have them perform the appropriate action now. Otherwise, if the error was caught quickly and rewinding is relatively easy, you may undo all the actions back to the point that the illegal action happened. [..]

Note that, since untapping the recently played mountain was perfectly legal, you would probably not be allowed to rewind that action, also for educational purposes:

Player education is a priority; remind the players to play more carefully, but avoid being heavyhanded in order to keep your events fun and relaxed. If a player continues to repeat a mistake despite multiple reminders, you may warn them that the next occurrence will result in a Game Loss.

Further consequences should not be expected. As you yourself admit to playing sloppily, this seems like a textbook case of an educational ruling.
At competitive or professional REL, the following rule applies:

2.5. Game Play Error — Game Rule Violation — Warning
Additional Remedy
First, consider a simple backup (see section 1.4).

This would already be a remedy to fix the game state, as the backup is trivial in your case.
You would receive a Warning penalty for a Game Rule Violation infraction. Had your opponent not noticed and reported the error within a short time, he would have received a Warning for a Failure to Maintain Game State:

For most Game Play Errors not caught within a time that a player could reasonably be expected to notice, opponents receive a Game Play Error — Failure to Maintain Game State penalty. [..]


Pokemon cards with the same name and different features

According to Rulebook, page 22:

DECK BUILDING
(...)
Also, except for basic Energy, you can only have 4 cards with the same name in your deck. This means you can have only 4 cards called “Pignite” in your deck, even if they all have different attacks. Finally, your deck must have at least one Basic Pokémon in it.
(...)

You can see that deckbuilding rules does not talk about cards, but card names.
There are also some parts of Pokémon's name that do not count toward this rule, that is outlined in Rulebook on page 21:

WHAT DOES AND DOESN’T COUNT FOR A POKÉMON’S NAME?
• Some Pokémon cards have extra information after their name, such as a Level or a symbol like GL. A Pokémon’s name changes how you can evolve or play certain cards. Level is not part of a Pokémon’s name:
    ◆ Gengar, Gengar LV. 43, Gengar LV. 44, and Gengar LV.X all have the same name
• Symbols at the end of a Pokémon’s name are part of a Pokémon’s name:
    ◆ Alakazam, Alakazam 四, and Alakazam ☆ all have different names from each other
    ◆ However, δ (Delta Species) is not part of a Pokémon’s name. Aerodactyl and
Aerodactyl δ (Delta Species) have the same name
• An owner or form name in a Pokémon’s name is part of the Pokémon’s name:
    ◆ Meowth, Alolan Meowth, and Rocket’s Meowth have different names
When you are building a deck, you can have only 4 copies of a card with the same name in it, except for basic Energy cards. If your deck has 1 each of Gengar, Gengar LV. 43, Gengar LV. 44, and Gengar LV.X, you can’t put any more cards named Gengar in your deck! However, you could have 4 Meowth, 4 Alolan Meowth, and 4 Rocket’s Meowth.
When evolving, the “evolves from” Pokémon name must match the Pokémon being evolved. So Graveler can evolve from Geodude, or Geodude LV. 12, but not Brock’s Geodude.

There is no difference in casual or tournament play, if they follow official rules. There might be some formats that change those rules, like Prerelease tournament that diverges from official rules such as:

40 cards in deck
only 4 prizes
no "only 4 Pokémon with the same name deck" rule

I strongly recommend to play using the official rules at all times so you are not surprised when you attend a league or a tournament for the first time.


Can I change the order of cards when they change zones?

Fear not!

  404.3. If an effect or rule puts two or more cards into the same graveyard at the same time, the owner of those cards may arrange them
  in any order.

In addition,

  404.2. Each graveyard is kept in a single face-up pile. A player can examine the cards in any graveyard at any time but normally can't
  change their order. Additional rules applying to sanctioned
  tournaments may allow a player to change the order of cards in his or
  her graveyard.

Basically, in formats where no cards care about graveyard order, players don't have to care about graveyard order either. This rule was created in order to "retire" graveyard-ordering in a graceful way.

DCI-sanctioned tournaments follow section 3.14 of the MTR:

  In formats involving only cards from Urza's Saga and later, players
  may change the order of their graveyard at any time. A player may not
  change the order of an opponent's graveyard.

Thus, you may freely rearrange your own graveyard in Standard, Extended, and Modern, as well as modern-day Limited formats. (Word of caution: doing this too often might come off as weird and cheaty. So feel free to arrange your graveyard with all the flashback cards or reanimation targets on top, but try not to get in the habit of fidgeting with it compulsively the way you might fidget with cards in hand.)

Note also that it's perfectly legitimate to spread out your graveyard, as long as you don't create confusion between it and other zones. For example, I like to tile my cards in columns so I can see all my options at a glance.


Taking Discard Pile with One Natural Card in Hand

The Rules of Canasta clearly state:

TAKING THE DISCARD PILE
When the discard pile is not frozen against his side, a player may take it:

a) with a natural pair matching the top card as above; or
b) by melding the top card with one matching natural card and one wild card from his hand; or
c) by adding the top card to a meld he already has on the table.

Having taken and melded the top discard as described, the player takes the rest of the pile into his hand and may then meld some or all of the additional cards as he pleases.
....

Thus it is not allowed to use a card deeper in the discard pile as part of the meld enabling a take of the discard pile.


Feather and spells turning permanents in to Creatures

No, it will not.

Feather, the Redeemed triggers on casting a spell, which happens well before the spell would resolve and have any effect such as turning its target into a creature.

When you cast Siege of Towers, it is not targeting a creature you control; it is targeting a land you control. By the time the mountain becomes a creature, it is well past the chance for Feather, the Redeemed to trigger. Unless you are targeting a land that is also a creature.


What if someone attacks with Master of Cruelties and another creature?

Attacking with Master of Cruelties and other creatures is an illegal action, so they should just undo it and declare attackers again. Specifically, from rule 508.1c:

  The active player checks each creature he or she controls to see whether it's affected by any restrictions (effects that say a creature can't attack, or that it can't attack unless some condition is met). If any restrictions are being disobeyed, the declaration of attackers is illegal.

Illegal actions don't have consequences in game, they are just reversed. Rule 717.1 says:

  If a player realizes that he or she can’t legally take an action after starting to do so, the entire action is reversed and any payments already made are canceled.


Can an opponent folding make you go from probable winner to probable loser?

Suppose the five community cards wind up being 9♦, 10♥, 10♣, J♠, and 3♠. Then C would win with a better full house than A, but A's full house is better than B's pair of 10's. Before C folds, this would count towards his 25% win chance; after he folds it counts for A's 56%. When C folds, we're essentially taking his 25% chance to win, and splitting it up between the two remaining players. The issue then becomes that the cards that help C out also help A more than they help B, so most of C's 25% goes to A rather than B after C folds.


What's the name of the board game with dinosaur cards?

Could it be Lost Valley of the Dinosaurs? While technically published in 1985, it could easily have been a staple in the '90s.

The description from BoardGameGeek:

  You have discovered an ancient chart to a lost valley. It shows that once the valley was occupied by a fierce tribe of natives who had collected a vast wealth of treasure and used vicious dinosaurs to help protect it.

  No humans inhabit the valley now and the chart shows that the 'treasure' is still hidden in a temple at the top of the valley but the dinosaurs are still there!

  The secret of the valley and its treasure have been stolen and you know that other expeditions are currently journeying to discover the lost secret of the valley.

  As your party enters the valley a volcano which has been dormant for centuries rumbles and threatens to engulf the valley in lava.

  The race is on, who will win the fabulous riches of the temple and who may die?

It appears to use "Adventure Cards", and involves the adventurers being chased around the board by dinosaurs while collecting treasure.


If my creature with deathtouch and 0 power blocks one of my opponent's creatures, does my opponent's creature die?

No. Deathtouch still requires that damage be dealt:

  702.2b Any nonzero amount of combat damage assigned to a creature by a source with deathtouch
  is considered to be lethal damage, regardless of that creature’s toughness.

Here's the more general rule as well:

  119.8. If a source would deal 0 damage, it does not deal damage at all. That means abilities that trigger
  on damage being dealt won’t trigger. It also means that replacement effects that would increase the
  damage dealt by that source, or would have that source deal that damage to a different object or
  player, have no event to replace, so they have no effect.

A corollary to all this is that a creature with deathtouch can only kill as many creature as it has points of damage to assign -- for instance, casting Lure on your 2/2 Acidic Slime doesn't let you wipe out your opponent's whole team, just two blockers.


Why do cards have different rarity levels in Magic: The Gathering?

The main reasons for rarity are:

To allow for complex cards without overwhelming new players. Rich interactions are part of what make Magic great, but the sheer volume of rules can be overwhelming. By limiting complex cards to uncommon, rare and mythic, it reduces the amount that new players need to worry about it.
To allow for interesting limited environments as well as powerful cards for constructed. By putting limited bombs at rare or even mythic rare, it reduces the effect they have on limited format games.
To sell cards.


Depending on the format, you can

a) be faster than the hater (except against Leyline of course, only white control helps against that): The fastest combo is Swamp, Dark Ritual, Putrid Imp/Entomb, discard, Exhume.

b) control your opponent's solutions. Black is notoriously bad at dealing with artifacts and enchantments, so you probably need white (Disenchant) and/or blue (countering) as well. Google "reanimator control" for deck lists.

Unfortunately, control typically conflicts with Reanimator's strategy of bringing a fat guy on the table as soon as possible. You either need to spend a turn removing a hate card, or you need to keep enough mana open to counter one. Trying to be faster loses against Leyline of the Void, and possibly against cheap permanent or instant-speed graveyard removal.

Either way, you should always try to discard your fat guy and reanimate it in one go if possible. Give the opponent as little an opening as possible. But if you go against a dedicated graveyard hate sideboard, you're going to have a tough time either way, because as you already pointed out with your list of hate cards, all those cards are cheap and have either a static or an instant-speed activated hate ability.

On the positive side: when going the counter route, the hoser spells' low costs and specific type can be to your advantage. Cards like Spell Snare, Mental Misstep and Annul protect your graveyard for minimal costs.


When should I use Avacyn's Glory's Restoration Angel?

Many cards have an ability that triggers when coming into play.  With Restoration Angel, you could re-trigger one such ability.

For the deck you mentioned, Goldnight Commander has the following ability:

  Whenever another creature enters the battlefield under your control, creatures you control get +1/+1 until end of turn

So, when you play Restoration Angel and remove any other creature, your creatures get +2/+2 instead of just +1/+1.  If that other creature is Geist-Honored Monk then the boost to all creatures becomes +4/+4.

This is just one example.  Fiend Hunter, Champion of the Parish, Mentor of the Meek, and Soul Warden could also be used with this strategy.

Alternatively, you can dodge spells and abilities this way.  If a non-angel you have is targeted by a spell or ability (say Shock) then removing the target from play temporarily will cause that spell/ability to miss and do nothing instead.  As @skovacs mentioned in the comments, this can also apply to unwanted enchantments on your non-angel creatures.


Can I block enemy's port if my navy is on the sea sector next to a factory zone?

I was able to find the answer after reading the rule book for 17th time after awhile.

Clearly the rules state on page 20 paragraph 2 in section restrictions on Placement

"Place sea units only in sea zones adjacent to territories containing eligible industrial complexes. New sea units can enter play even in a hostile sea zone. No combat occurs because the Conduct Combat phase is over."

So yes build your navy in the hostile navy sea sector adjacent to your factory but no battle is committed.


Is there a limit to the maximum number of each card in a Netrunner deck?

Nope, there are no card limits.  (Except for the Agenda limit in the Corp deck, there are no deck design limits of any kind.)

This was a reaction by Richard Garfield to a design mistake in Magic.  Originally he thought rarity alone would keep powerful cards balanced, not anticipating the way the collector market would grow.  WotC shortly learned that rarity was irrelevant for this; powerful cards also needed to be high-cost.

In the next two games, Jyhad and NetRunner, the design team tried to make sure that every card was costed correctly and not game-breaking even en masse.  So neither game had a card limit.

(They didn't always do a perfect job, so some tournaments impose card limits, but the game rules don't.)


I've played literally hundreds of AI's... the strongest opponent cribbage games are all cheating.
The core Issues
Cribbage is focused upon 3 key priorities:

maximize points in hand
maximize points in play
minimize risk of giving points in the crib.

These boil down to two key skills:

Keeping
Playing

Playing is governed by a fairly easily coded set of rules. It's about 30 or 40 decision points, barring reading of the opponent's body language. Coded, it can be done convincingly hard in about 250 lines of basic code.
Keeping is much harder, because it has to balance all three priorities. My own decision tree starts with looking for certain combinations. This alone is several hundred lines of code. ANd then the exception seeking - which requires a good risk assessment protocol. And this is where it gets hard to code.
The AIs
The best non-cheating AI's I've played against (some 30 different programs, 10 of which I was able to examine the source, the others had a normal distribution of hands) are generally about as good as I am. I'm pretty good, but not great.
Now, I've played some 50+ different cribbage games - and I know for a fact that 3 of them cheat, and suspect about 20 more cheat.
The simplest cheat mechanism is to have the computer's hand use a different randomization than the player's hand. One such program was for PalmOS - In 30+ sets to 8 games, it never once had a hand less than 4 points, and never had a 19 crib, either. And it averaged over 6 points per hand.
Several others use similar, but I'm less certain of them.
One, I got hold of the source, and found the code actually gave the computer 8 cards, not 6, kept 4, put two in the crib, and two back in the deck. It was incredibly hard to beat, but occasionally got a 19 hand. I suspect many of using 1-2 extra cards like this.
The Third Key Skill
There is a 3rd key skill for Cribbage - one that AIs as yet have not implemented: reading one's opponent.
EG: In 2004, my buddy George and I played over 50 sets. We usually played  a set during the week, and almost always a set on the weekend, sometimes 2 sets on the weekend. Our play varied by whether we were watching TV or not - when not, we both knew what the other had by subtle cues of posture and reaction to cards. Cribs while not watching TV were usually 0-4 points, and hands typically in the 4-15 point range, with the occasional 2 or 19. When we weren't paying attention, cribs varied more widely, including a 29... I had 5-6-7-8-8-J, Geo had 5-5-7-7-8-8; turn was, of course, the missing jack, my crib. I knew he was throwing points because, while he threw down almost immediately, he also had an eyebrow twitch (a tell for a pair of pairs or a pair royal plus 15-complement). Had it been his crib, with the twitch I might have thrown the 8-J instead of the 5-J.
One of the reasons for including "Cheating" AI's is because that can simulate to a certain degree the reading of one's opponent and the effect upon scores.
Further Discussion
To date, I've seen little documentation of AI work in Cribbage - I've found one academic paper (Kendall & Shaw, 2002), and it is more interested in the development of their own AI. Further, it compares to an non-heuristic AI - Ultimate Cribbage - which I've played, and found a solid opponent.
Cheating AI's, however, are the hardest ones I've found to play against. Just be warned, however - some of those can train one to suboptimal play, especially those that cheat with the crib, as your own crib-risk calculations can become skewed.


Can you buy a property on your next roll?

No, that player may not buy that property. That property should have immediately gone to auction when the player opted not to buy it on their turn. Thus when they start their next turn, the property is already owned.
From the Monopoly Rules:

BUYING PROPERTY: Whenever you land on an unowned property you
may buy that property from the Bank at its printed price. You receive the
Title Deed card showing ownership; place it faceup in front of you.
If you do not wish to buy the property, the Banker sells it at auction
to the highest bidder. The buyer pays the Bank the amount of the bid
in cash and receives the Title Deed card for that property. Any player,
including the one who declined the option to buy it at the printed
price, may bid. Bidding may start at any price.


Player 3 is not able to counter the "DEAL BREAKER" card.

As per the rules text on the card, you can only play a "JUST SAY NO!" card when an action has been played against you, you can't play it to cancel action cards played against other players.


Can the New Angeles Sol prevent a current from being trashed if an agenda was stolen?

New Angeles Sol: Your News allows you to play a current from HQ or Archives (paying its play cost), it does not prevent anything from happening.

After an agenda is scored or stolen, this ability triggers at which point you can play any current that is in Archives (or HQ). If a current was trashed as a part of scoring or stealing the agenda then the current will be in Archives and available to play.

This isn't quite the same as 'preventing' trashing, or making currents untrashable as they still need to be played and paid for.


When exactly does the commander tax get added?

Commander tax increases for each previous time it has been cast from the command zone.

903.8.: A player may cast a commander they own from the command zone. A commander cast from the command zone costs an additional {2} for each previous time the player casting it has cast it from the command zone that game. This additional cost is informally known as the "commander tax."

Note that it has to be cast from the command zone specifically. Destroying a commander, or putting it into exile, doesn't influence this extra cost. So cards that place it into your hand, such as Command Beacon or Alley Evasion (in response to removal), are effective ways to omit the tax increase.


Magic the Gathering: Chaining Instants during combat phase

No, you Can't.

Aethersqual Ancient's second ability has a limiting condition, specifically:

  Activate this ability only any time you can cast a sorcery.

To the best of my recollection, there is not a card in magic the gathering that will allow you to activate the ability. Refer to Vedalken Orrery on oracle for clarification, explaining why it doesn't work.

  This applies only to casting spells. It does not, for example, change when you may activate abilities that can only be activated “any time you could cast a sorcery”.

Editorial: This is one of the occasions where the plain text on the card isn't sufficient. There are several cards that let you play a sorcery as though it had flash, yet it takes going to their oracle pages to find the above. Intuitively, if there is an effect that allows me to play a sorcery as if it had flash, and this ability is limited to only being activated if I can play a sorcery, than I should be able to activate the ability.

You can cast Harnessed Lightning, and choose not to use any Energy, adding to your energy pool for eight total. However, when you go to activate the ability during the end of the Declare Attacakers step of your opponents turn, you will be trying to take an illegal action. Your opponent should stop you from doing so.


Do you always need to keep track of what cards have been drawn in a turn?

If both players can't verify which cards were drawn that turn any unverified cards cannot be returned to the top of the library with Sylvan Library. If you think you might be playing a Library with Flash be sure to keep track of which cards you have drawn that turn.

From the Magic Judge Rules Blog:

  Here’s the Official ruling that has been handed down for Competitive REL events where Sylvan Library is legal: “Players will not have an option to return a card that can’t be proven to have been drawn this turn.”


Should I shuffle the Zombicide zombie "deck"

I would say that any games that include decks of cards and do not specifically tell you to arrange the cards in a particular order assume that the cards are shuffled prior to playing.  Getting them in order is time consuming and unusual, so it would need to be specifically mentioned if that was the intent.


What happens to Death Cloud when there aren't enough legal targets

Death Cloud does not target. The only time a spell targets is when it says target on the spell (or a keyword on it uses target, eg Enchant X or Support N). Thus Death Cloud will do as much as it can and make them sacrifice all 4 of their creatures.

609.3. If an effect attempts to do something impossible, it does only as much as possible.
Example: If a player is holding only one card, an effect that reads “Discard two cards” causes him or her to discard only that card. If an effect moves cards out of the library (as opposed to drawing), it moves as many as possible.


When do transformed creatures go back to their original forms?

Double-faced cards only transform when they (or another effect like Moonmist) explicitly say they transform.  For example, Ulvenwald Mystics says on its front side:

At the beginning of each upkeep, if no spells were cast last turn, transform Ulvenwald Mystics.

and the back side (Ulvenwald Primordials) says:

{G}: Regenerate Ulvenwald Primordials.
At the beginning of each upkeep, if a player cast two or more spells last turn, transform Ulvenwald Primordials.

Thus, the conditions for transforming in both directions are printed on the card.
Loyal Cathar, on the other hand, has a transformation-causing ability on its front side but no transformation-related abilities on its back, so once it transforms, it stays that way until it leaves the battlefield.


Order of resolution on same player controlled cards

You have the opportunity to choose whether or not that creature gets a +1/+1 counter. It comes down to how you order these two triggered abilities involved.
We'll examine giving it the +1/+1 counter first, then examine what you can do differently to makes sure it doesn't receive a counter.
To be clear for those readers who may not be certain: when you take control of your opponent's creature, it will not count as (re-)entering the battlefield, and so does not trigger Cathar's Crusade itself.
Making sure it receives the counter

You cast Zealous Conscripts.

You and your opponent pass priority (in theory), and then Zealous Conscripts resolves and enters the battlefield.

Because someone now receives priority, we check for any triggered abilities that now have to go onto the stack. Zealous Conscripts entering the battlefield has caused two abilities to trigger: that of Cathar's Crusade, and that of Zealous Conscripts. Because they triggered simultaneously, you may put them in whatever order you like:

603.3b If multiple abilities have triggered since the last time a player received priority, each player, in APNAP order,[note below] puts triggered abilities he or she controls on the stack in any order he or she chooses.

You choose to place Cathar's Crusade's ability beneath, and Zealous Conscripts' ability on top (the top one resolves first).

You resolve Zealous Conscripts' ability. Your opponent's creature comes under your control.

Cathar's Crusade's ability resolves and places a +1/+1 counter on each creature you control, including the one you took from your opponent.

If the creature survives to be returned to its owner, it will return with its +1/+1 counter still on it. How nice of you! (This could be a totally appropriate gift to an ally in a multiplayer free-for-all game.)
Making sure it doesn't receive the counter
At step 4 above, we'll make a different choice.

You choose to place Zealous Conscript's ability on the bottom, and Cathar's Crusade's ability on the top of it.
Cathar's Crusade's ability resolves first. It grants a +1/+1 counter to each creature you control, which at this point is just Zealous Conscripts and whatever else you already had.
Zealous Conscript's ability resolves, and you take control of your opponent's creature. It gets no counter.

Note: "APNAP" stands for "active player, nonactive player(s)". APNAP order means the active player does their thing, then each nonactive player in turn order. (In a 1v1, that just means one opponent is the NAP.) The active player is whoever is currently having their turn.


Different between Capsa, Big two and Daifugō

According to Wikipedia, Cap Sa and Big Two are the same game while Daifugo has slightly different rules. I could scrutinize those pages and try to summarize the differences here, but I think there's no point: based on this list and my experience, there are so many variations of these games that you will likely never find two people who play by the same rules anyway. So while it helps to have a general idea of how this class of "shedding" games works, if you're playing with someone new you'll have to review all your rules or learn all theirs regardless of which game you are nominally playing.


Can I activate an enchantment energy ability during an opponents turn?

You can activate an activated ability at any time that you could cast an instant. This includes on your opponents' turns. Being an energy-related ability has no bearing on this.

There are several different times throughout a turn that each player receives priority, which is when that player can act. In terms of combat, you could activate it either when the combat phase begins, or after your opponent declares his attackers, or after you declare your blockers.


Magic the Gathering lingering spell effect

The wording "All creatures who dealt damage this turn return to owners hand" is a little off. You could find the virtually identical

Return all creatures that dealt damage this turn to their owners' hands.

"Return." There's no duration. It's something that happens there and then. When it resolves, all creatures that dealt damage earlier this turn are returned to their owners' hand. Creatures that deal damage latter will not be affected.
"That dealt damage this turn" is just a condition that specifies which creatures are affected.

Return all creatures <matching this condition> to their owners' hands.

While there are no existing card with the initial text, there are existing cards with the different conditions. For example, there's Part the Veil. It's an instant with

Return all creatures you control to their owner's hand.

If at a later time you gain control of a creature, it will not be returned to your hand. Only creatures matching the condition at the very moment the effect resolves are affected.

There is a thing called continuous effect which can last beyond the source of the effect that created it. Some of them affect the objects that matched the condition when the continuous effect was created and some of them continually revise what objects they affect. Here are the examples associated with rule CR 611.2c:

Example: An effect that reads “All white creatures get +1/+1 until end of turn” gives the bonus to all permanents that are white creatures when the spell or ability resolves—even if they change color later—and doesn’t affect those that enter the battlefield or turn white afterward.
Example: An effect that reads “Prevent all damage creatures would deal this turn” doesn’t modify any object’s characteristics, so it’s modifying the rules of the game. That means the effect will apply even to damage from creatures that weren’t on the battlefield when the continuous effect began. It also affects damage from permanents that become creatures later in the turn.

Related Answer


The card you are missing is

1       (rose)         1
The Officers
The Factory
The Page Woven Wire Fence Co
The Business

After studying the cards, I have come to the conclusion that the order of the titles on each card is irrelevant. I do believe that the purpose of the game is to match the numbers by drawing from a deck. It would be simple, of course. Discard 1 card, draw 1 card or take the top card of the discard pile. When you have 4 of a kind, you place them down face up and replenish your hand. When the deck runs out of cards, the discard pile will be shuffled and play will continue until no more new cards may be drawn.

Now, the miles on top of the cards represent contracts that were made with the Page Woven Wire Fence Co. in 1894 (actual contracts). The purpose of the game would logically be to collect the most mileage of fence.

The item you have is very likely highly valuable, and I doubt no more than 20 copies were produced (6 is my actual estimate).

The game can be played without the 1 set if you intend to actually play.

The game was apparently created to offer insight on the company to potential clients.

I hope this has proven to be helpful to you. I also hope I am accurate, as much of what I said was speculation (albeit speculation based on several hours studying the cards and the company).

Value of the antique? Without the card I mentioned, probably 700 dollars. If you find a copy of that card, you could probably double that. Maybe push to triple.


Placing advancements on non-advanceable cards

Queen's gambit doesn't specify that the card has to be able to be advanced. If you compare it to Matrix Analyzer, you will see the difference:

  When the Runner encounters Matrix Analyzer, you may pay 1 [Credits] to place 1 advancement  token on a card that can be advanced.

Normally the Advance action is used to advance cards. This is where the corp pays 1C and 1click to place an advancement counter on a card which can be advanced. When another card places advancement counters, its not actually "advancing" the card, and so it doesn't need to be an advanceable card. However, most effects which add advancement counters specify the card has to be advanceable. The only exception at the moment is Queen's Gambit, since the runner obviously won't know, and is in fact gambling that the card isn't advanceable, to avoid helping the corp.


The real outcome is that Rebound doesn't do anything: it doesn't get exiled, and nobody gets to cast it again.

The definition of Rebound in rule 702.87a says

  Rebound appears on some instants and sorceries. It represents a static ability that functions while the spell is on the stack and may create a delayed triggered ability. “Rebound” means “If this spell was cast from your hand, instead of putting it into your graveyard as it resolves, exile it and, at the beginning of your next upkeep, you may cast this card from exile without paying its mana cost.”

In your scenario, your opponent cast the spell, but you control it as it resolves. This means that you didn't cast it from your hand, so the condition isn't met and Rebound doesn't do anything.


Does Welcome Decks 2016 contain cards that aren't reprints?

There do not appear to be any cards that were only printed in the Welcome Decks.

The most likely explanation I see is that the rares you mention appear in the Welcome Decks but not in the concurrently released Shadows over Innistrad block. So, the quotation you reference could mean

  Each deck includes 1 special rare that cannot be found in other Magic products [that we are currently publishing/distributing]!


How can I recognize games I should avoid buying if I only play with non-hardcore gamers?

Instead of going on to list one game after another I'll try to find some common points to help you out. I'd say there are three main factors in what might put off less hard-core gamers:

Upfront intimidation (should resolve during first game)
Continuous complexity (remains an issue indefinitely)
"Obscure effects" (should resolve after one or two games)

"Puerto Rico" is a good example of "Upfront intimidation". If you take the time to read the rulebook upfront that's gonna be a huge time investment. For many casual players that might be intimidating having to remember all of it. Having "Lots of bits and pieces" also falls into this category. For some that's a turn on for other's not so much.

"Agricola" is much faster to explain upfront but much more complex during gameplay. Handling all those bits and pieces, making sound decisions and trying to form some semblance of a strategy challenged me big time even after several solo games. There are so many different aspects to keep track of, that it requires a lot of concentration.

"El Grande" would be a good example for what I classified as "obscure effects" (to your choices). The game does not have much of upfront reading nor too many continuous choices. The problem is that it usually takes a few turns before your choices have their effect on your score. Some players don't really mind playing along and waiting to see what they get but others will find it frustrating. Especially in the beginning. This is something you can only find out through reviews or first hand experience.

Boiling it down to a few signs to watch out for: Avoid games that...

have lots of material. (The more abstract the material the worse it is)
take close to or more than 90 minutes. (Anything above that is either complex or boring)


For the sake of completeness:

Now Warhammer Fantasy is rebranded to Warhammer Age of Sigmar, that allows you to play with "whatever the heck you want" in any game. But even if you want to play rules hardcorelly, now they are only 4 factions, Order, Chaos, Destruction and Death.

All the armies you named in your question are part of "Order" so, by the new rules, they are completely allowed to be used together.


Empty does not mean "needs 2 critters to conquer" it means without monster or race tokens.

From the rules, bottom of page 9

  A Region is deemed non-empty if, and only if, it contains at
  least one Monster or Race token (Active or In Decline). A Region
  that contains a Black Mountain marker, a Popular Place or a
  Righteous Relic but no Monster or enemy Race token is
  considered empty.

The Great Brass Pipe considers spaces adjacent for the purposes of the owning race, so Flames should be continuous through it.  This is confirmed in the FAQ.


Can I use Extort in a deck that isn't both white & black?

Yes, because extort is merely a keyword. The color symbol {hybrid white/black} is not part of the card, but only exists in reminder text, which is not officially part of the card.
Here's the official ruling on the matter:

EXTORT
With the release of Gatecrash, we'd like to clarify our stance on extort by confirming that, as always, reminder text has no effect on color identity. Extort adds no colored mana symbols to a card outside of its reminder text, and therefore is legal for play in Commander decks of any color or colors (as long as the card it appears on is otherwise legal, of course). There will be no updates to the rules in the foreseeable future that affect how extort works in Commander.


What happens if a player has 5 cards and forgets to exchange them in Risk?

There are cases where cards can be turned in during a turn; for example, if conquering another player results in the victor having more than four cards. In this case, the rules say the cards should be redeemed immediately, the new armies placed, and the turn continued.

I think if someone has started their turn and failed to redeem cards they were required by rule to redeem they should have to do so immediately upon someone noticing. This could provide an advantage because they’ll have the knowledge of how a couple if rounds went, but often armies are all stacked in a giant group.

If they finish their turn and no one notices,  when they do ultimately redeem I say they should get the number of armies they were originally entitled to and not a larger number—which would be the case if other players have redeemed since then. The reason is that sandbagging turn ins to get higher army counts is why turn-in at five cards is required in the first place.


In bridge, does it make sense to "tighten" or 'loosen" up on bidding depending on vulnerability?

For opening suit bids no, emphatically not. The reason is simple mathematics in that when you open (in 1st or 2nd seat) you have no idea whether your side is looking at part score, game, or slam; and the appropriate aggressiveness towards each of these levels varies differently with vulnerability.

The relative worth of game to part-score goes up with vulnerability so it is appropriate to bid slightly more aggressively towards vulnerable games at IMP (and Rubber, both Four-Deal/Chicago and standard) scoring.  For example, it is appropriate to bid a non-vulnerable game with a 50% chance to make (ie requiring only a finesse) and appropriate to bid a vulnerable game with a 35% chance to make (requiring a finesse and a 3-2 break).

However the relative worth of slam to game goes down when vulnerable, so one should be slightly more cautious bidding vulnerable slams at IMPS. It is now appropriate to bid a non-vulnerable small slam with a 50% chance to make but only appropriate to bid a vulnerable small slam with a 65% chance to make (roughly requiring only a 3-2 break).

Empirically, these percentage differences are often estimated as representing about a 1 or 1.5 point difference in partnership combined strength, when better information is not available.

Third seat openings however can probably discount the possibility of slam when holding minimum values, so here the logic is that one should open slightly more aggressively, not less, when vulnerable, because of the increased relative value of game.

This is all nearly the complete opposite of your suggestion. Only when making a competitive part-score decision or a preemptive opening does the logic of the question hold true.

Therefore, until you know which levels your partnership is aiming for, it is inappropriate to adjust your bidding. This is done by having the inviter, only, make the adjustment and only with the inviting bid. Then the partnership can rely on all other calls being standard, allowing more consistent decisions to be made by the partnership.

As a final note, in regards Grand Slam bidding, Barry Crane (and the Four Aces before him) had a commandment to never bid grand slam in Swiss Teams (my emphasis):

  The caution about not bidding grand slams in Swiss Teams made a lot of sense particularly if
  your opponents are not all that skillful as nothing is more demoralizing than to go down one at
  seven while the other team only reached game. In fact, I remember the original Four Aces of forty
  or more years ago had a rule that if you bid seven once and went down you would be forgiven but
  if you did it the second time you were off the team.

Revisiting, for Matchpoints:

The above discussion is entirely intended to guide bidding in IMPS, Chicago, or Rubber scoring. In Matchpoints, different considerations apply.

In Matchpoints the amount by which you gain or lose compared to the field is irrelevant. Rather the number of times you are plus or minus to the field is paramount. This means that far more decisions should be made purely on a basis of
whether or not they succeed a straight 50% of the time.

Consider a touch-and-go game in a major that can be made only on a favourable lead and finding a subtle endplay. Here is a Matchpoint analysis for a case of likelihood for the four cases:

Contract                 Raw Score
& Result                  NV   V    #   MPs
Bid 4 making 10 tricks:  420  620   2  11.0
Bid 3 making 10 tricks:  170  170   2   9.0
Bid 3 making  9 tricks:  140  140   4   6.0
Bid 4 making  9 tricks:  -50 -100   4   2.0

In both case, simply making the 10th trick without bidding it is both sufficient to generate a good to excellent Matchpoint score, and avoids the risk of a terrible one.

In the nearly 5 decades I have been playing bridge, the quality of my game (at Matchpoints) has almost never been from the number of tops partner and I got - it is almost always a consequence of all the available bottoms that we didn't get.


Can Romanians be placed in Finland in Stalingrad?

After looking around through other AH Stalingrad rules (later editions and addenda), I found that Romanians can indeed be placed in Finland at game’s beginning.
Rules state that a maximum of 8 German and or Romanian Combat factors can be placed in Finland as part of the 8 axis points that may be allocated there.  So you could have 4 German and 4 Romanian Combat factors or 2 German and 6 Romanian and so on.


Pat Ludwig has mentioned some good ideas. In my opinion, the four most important things are:

Decide and work towards your food strategy early. You need a solid plan to get food. This is the foundation that gives you the breathing space to do everything else. The first couple of turns feel relaxed, because it's ages before the first harvest. Don't let that fool you! Time constricts sharply in later turns, and what you do here can make or break your later game. Getting something planted by first harvest is usually a good idea.
Don't obsess over Occupations. Most of them will theoretically help you. However you probably can't easily play more than 3 without impacting other areas. Come up with a straightforward plan (also considering your Minors), and then prioritise ruthlessly.
Have a baby as soon as possible. Extra family members are the key to getting lots done.
Be flexible. The best strategy depends heavily on what the other players decide to do. If everyone else is grabbing animals, prioritise farming. If lots of wood is available, consider a building spree. Sometimes the Occupation square is occupied for long enough to render your plan worthless. Move on. Most people have a preferred play style. But the key to winning is to realise that you often won't be able to play the game according to your desires.


The Fight keyword action is defined in rule 701.10:

  701.10a A spell or ability may instruct a creature to fight another creature or it may instruct two creatures to fight each other. Each of those creatures deals damage equal to its power to the other creature.
  701.10b If a creature instructed to fight is no longer on the battlefield or is no longer a creature, no damage is dealt. If a creature is an illegal target for a resolving spell or ability that instructs it to fight, no damage is dealt.
  701.10c If a creature fights itself, it deals damage equal to its power to itself twice.
  701.10d The damage dealt when a creature fights isn’t combat damage.

The bolded sentence is the part that describes what it actually does.

Power and toughness are calculated like usual, and, like with every other effect in the game, you can't cast spells or activate abilities while it is resolving. There has never been a card that cares about or uses a creature's base power or toughness.

A Fight effect is a one-shot effect, which means that you will only see it on an activated or triggered ability. Both of those go on the stack, which means that you can respond to them with instants and abilities like anything else.


Grand slam bidding with high card points hand

As explanation of why it is completely insufficient to ask "What is my opening bid with a 24 high card point hand ...?" consider these examples of hands with 24 HCP:

QJT9876 AK AK AK     Open 5S, asking partner to pass or raise to 6 or 7
                     with respectively 0, 1, or 2 controls in the Spade
                     suit. This is a useful asking bid because it is
                     pointless as an opening pre-empt - the only player
                     at the table you are pre-empting by opening 5 of a
                     major is partner.

AKQTx x AKQTx AQ     Open 1S in order to preserve room to show your strong
                     two suiter with a second round jump to 3D. Opening 2C
                     with strong two-suiters is a bad practice, because you
                     will either lose the second suit, or be forced to
                     introduce it at the 4 level where partner will mis-
                     read it as a control bid in support of his suit.

AKxx Kx AQJx AQJ     Open 2C planning to rebid 2NT.

K32 AK AK32 AK32     I lean towards opening 2C planning to rebid 2NT, but I
                     could forgive a partner who simply opened this 2NT.
                     Game is very unlikely if partner cannot move over 2NT,
                     because of the major suit shortness and the poor
                     texture in all suits.

AKQJTxx AKQ KQ 2     Open 4NT, Blackwood. The only information you require
                     from partner is how many Aces he has, and you may lose
                     the opportunity to ask if you let opponents into the
                     auction.

Update

Consider the following deal, consistent with OP's description. As the hand given by OP is actually 27 HCP, and an obvious 2S opener in consequence, let's amend to be an interesting question, dropping the SK to become:

S_AQJxx
H-AKx
D_Ax
C-KQJ

opposite something like

S-Kxx
H-JTxx
D-Kxx
C-Axx

Theoretical issues now aside, and with an actual hand to analyze, let's assume a casual partnership playing a Goren style bidding system - so no relevant conventions beyond Stayman; Strong 2C with a 2D waiting response and a second negative; straight Blackwood; and Gerber as an immediate jump over NT.

Opener has 24 HCP plus a strong 5-card Spade suit, counting 5.5 QT and 9 PT (playing tricks); this is well above the minimum for a strong 2C opener and, significantly, too strong for a 22-24 HCP Strong 2NY opener. Opener should open 2C (or 2S if that is a strong opener rather than a weak 2).

Over 2C responder will bid 2D (waiting) because she is too strong to bid a 2NT response.  Opener rebids 2S to show the strong 5 card suit; and responder rebids 3S (game forcing because a fit has been announced and a 3C second negative wasn't bid). Even if Responder errs and jumps to 4S, which should be a minimum distributional raise in Spades, the partnership should easily find the small slam in either Spades or Notrump.

Note that the grand, although possibly making on this hand, is a bad bet to bid because it requires responder to have either 4 clubs or for a beneficial break in hearts, or for a squeeze to come home.  This reflects the flaw in Opener's hand of no small diamond, wasting the DJ unless Responder has precisely Axxx or longer.

To directly answer the question in regards the actual bidding sequence at the table: once Opener underbids with an opening of 2NT and hides the strong Spade suit on the second round, Responder can be forgiven for passing 3NT. There is really nowhere for Responder to go with confidence.


Did the British employ a reasonable strategy in "Bismarck"?

Given the assumptions they were working under, yes.  Those assumptions proved incorrect,  but in real life you don't get to check the rulebook and the numbers on the counters before you decide on a strategy.  The assumptions, roughly speaking, were:

Crippling the Bismarck was as good as sinking it.  This is roughly the equivalent of the victory conditions; losing a battleship was acceptable provided that the German ship was damaged enough to be finished off by reserve forces, aircraft, or submarines, and the British remained in contact so those forces could reach her.  One battleship obviously could not guarantee this, but two or more probably could, assuming that

One battleship is much like another.  That's obviously the heart of the strategy; how many ships are necessary in a group? To be completely safe, you would need all your ships in one group, which would mean you would never actually have a battle.  The assumption that any two battleships would be enough to destroy any one was not unreasonable, given that a series of treaties in the 1930s had ensured that every battleship should be on the same displacement, and so should be of roughly equal ability. Actually, the Germans had built a heavier ship than allowed, and lied about it; but that isn't something you can ask an Admiral to decide, and in any case the final showdown, between a Bismarck with steering damage but unimpaired fighting ability and two normal British battleships, ended in success.  The unexamined, and flawed, assumption here was that

One British capital ship is much like another.  The Prince of Wales was admittedly not the best-trained ship in the fleet, (she went to sea with dockyard workers still working on the turrets), so the Admiralty teamed her with the 'Mighty Hood', heaviest and most prestigious ship in the Navy.  A good plan, except that Hood wasn't a battleship at all. There was a clear distinction when Hood was built between 'Dreadnought battleships' and 'battlecruisers'; the latter, the same size as the former, had better engines but less armour, in order to support friendly cruisers and catch raiders.  'Jane's Fighting Ships' (1908 edition I think) welcomed the idea, but warned of the danger that battlecruisers would be treated as battleships and asked to face enemy battleships, which they would not be able to do.  Sadly, this proved prophetic.

If you're asking purely in game terms, the obvious answer is that each hunting group needs to be strong enough to sink or cripple the Bismarck while losing no more than one capital ship, but no stronger (since you need as many groups as possible).  How many ships is that?; you're the player, you tell me.


No, Turn aside cannot counter Noxious Gearhulk.

There seems to be some confusion here. When a player plays a creature spell such as the Gearhulk, it is indeed a spell while it is on the stack and does fulfill one of the conditions of Turn Aside's possible targets. However, a creature spell (generally, all permanent spells except Auras) never targets anything, and is therefore never a valid target for Turn Aside. A creature spell is simply on the stack, and when it resolves, it puts the creature it represents onto the battlefield.

Only the Gearhulk's enters-the-battlefield ability can target something. It goes on the stack when the Gearhulk has resolved and entered the battlefield. However, an ability is not the same as a spell, Turn Aside can counter only spells, so Turn Aside cannot counter that ability either.


Limits to cities of a given resource in Antike Duellum?

There are 10 Gold cities, 12 Marble and 12 Iron cities in the physical game.  These tiles are all double sided to mark which player owns them.  So 10 Gold cities is the maximum limit.


Platinum Emperion and Tree of Redemption

The Tree of Redemption will not be changed.

  701.8. Exchange
  701.8a A spell or ability may instruct players to exchange something (for example, life totals or control of two permanents) as part of its resolution. When such a spell or ability resolves, if the entire exchange can’t be completed, no part of the exchange occurs.

Also see this ruling on Platinum Emperion:

  If an effect would cause you to exchange life totals with another player, the exchange won't happen. Neither player's life total changes.


What algorithm does Better Settlers use?

The code for Better Settlers is open-source and can be found at github.com/andrewflynn/bettersettlers. Not the easiest format to read on the algorithm, but hopefully that helps a little bit.

Also to answer Markus' concern above about taking away the tension of setup, Better Settlers still has that same tension (and arguably even more so because it's actually even more difficult to figure out what the best spots are).

The thing that Better Settlers tries to avoid is situations where combinations of starting positions are completely unbalanced. You still have the same pros/cons of placing first vs. last; it's just at the end of it, everyone stands a much better chance of still being in the game.


Are there systems or experts that will deduct a point for weak tripletons?

Losing trick count is a form of hand evaluation where you count the number of losers in each suit, to a maximum of 3 per suit. So

A, AK, AKQ, AKQxxx, and -void- are all 0-loser suits.
x, K, Ax AKx, AQx are all 1-loser suits.
Qx, xx, QJx, Kxx are all 2-loser suits
Jxx, xxxx, xxxxx, are all 3-loser suits.

Note that 3 little in a suit is the worst possible holding -- it counts for 3 losers without covering any losers in another suit.

Losing trick count is a bit controversial -- note that Qxx xxxxx Qxx xx evaluates to 9 losers, as does AJT AJxx xx Jxxx, where the second is a far stronger hand. However, losing trick count is probably more accurate than high card points when evaluating a distributional hand that has a fit with partner.

The scale of evaluation is based on the assumption that when you add your losers to partner's and subtract that number from 24, you'll make that many tricks. So a 7-loser hand is a minimum opener / game force. An 8-loser hand is invitational and a 6-loser hand accepts. A 9-loser hand is a typical responding hand.

Most players I know only use losing trick count to make decisions when they know that they have a known 9-card fit  or double fit with partner (or possibly a 4-4).

On the other hand, I wouldn't worry overmuch about 3 small in a suit. Often partner will have an honor or shortness to make the suit less hopeless. Another way you can avoid bad games with 3 small is to be on the lookout for wastage; when you have cramped honors in a suit (e.g. KQ tight, AQJ, etc) and partner shows a stopper in that suit, that's bad news -- it means that you're double-counting the honors in that suit.


It sounds like you're describing Fox and Hounds here:

The four Hounds can only move forward diagonally.
The Fox can move forward or backwards diagonally.

There is no jumping or capturing involved; the Hounds win when the Fox can't make any legal moves, and the Fox wins if it reaches the far rank (where the Hounds started).

This game is inherently unbalanced; with perfect play on both sides, the Fox (aka the Sheep, in your case) cannot win. I find it likely that, as a child, finding the game "sufficiently challenging for both sides" was more due to your inexperience in recognizing the optimal plays than in any house rules that actually balanced the game.


Chandra, Pyromaster's ability and spells with x casting cost

X is always zero in this case according to this rule.

  107.3b If a player is casting a spell that has an {X} in its mana cost, the value of X isn’t defined by the text of that spell, and an effect lets that player cast that spell while paying neither its mana cost nor an alternative cost that includes X, then the only legal choice for X is 0.


Why doesn't Relentless Assault work if it is not cast during a main phase?

Reconsider rule 500.8, specifically

  They do this by adding the phases directly after the specified phase.

Relentless Assault adds an additional combat phase after this main phase.

As the spell resolves, it will untap creatures that have attacked during this turn. Then it will attempt to add an additional combat phase, followed by another main phase, after this main phase. If the game isn't in a main phase, it is impossible to complete the additions.


It very much reminds me of a pentomino puzzle. Square board where you try to build certain shapes. I believe Tangram is a pentomino puzzle variant. Linked is an example of what I'm talking about (pieces are made of wood but you get the idea).

https://www.amazon.com/Square-Root-00012-Pentominoes/dp/B00000IZUL

Good luck finding your game!


What strategies can you use as a Renegade in 4 player games to maintain your cover?

I'm not sure Bang! is really about maintaining cover, anyway. Even for big games, it seems like ideal Bang! strategy is...

1) Outlaws try to spike down the Sheriff roughly ASAP, though they can sometimes wait until most players have long-range guns before exposing themselves.

2) Once the Outlaws are dead, the Renegade immediately tries to kill the weakened Sheriff before he gets time to recover.

The only subtlety I see is that, if the Outlaws are having a tough time, the Renegade should stop shooting them.

You're right, though, that in 4-player, because the range is so short, Outlaws don't even need to wait until long-range guns are out. And there's no moment of wondering who the Renegade is -- in larger games, that moment is brief, but it does exist.


The two player formats I know of are:

Solomon draft
Winston draft
Winchester draft

Wizards has some information about these 'casual' formats.
Common Setup
Each of these draft formats uses a similar setup:
3 packs per player (6 total)
Open all the packs, without looking at them, and remove any basic lands then shuffle all the cards together. You should have between 84 and 90 cards depending on the sets the boosters came from (14+basic or 15 cards in each).
Instead of using new boosters one can build a draft pool by:

Shuffle up an existing sealed deck pool.
Shuffle two sealed pools (12 packs total) together and draw off 90 cards.
Shuffle a Cube and draw off 90 cards.

Decide on a minimum deck size (30 or 40, see below.)
Randomly decide who drafts first.
Solomon Draft
Players alternate drawing 8 cards and separating them into two piles, then the opposing player chooses a pile and the separating player keeps the other.
The piles need not be even.
When there are less than 8 cards left in the draft deck/pool the draft is over, the remaining cards are not used.
Winston draft
Begin by dealing out 3 face down cards, these become the draft piles.
Players alternate looking through each pile in turn, they may either take the pile or look at the next. If no pile is chosen the player drafts the top card of the draft deck. Then deals a face down card to each pile the player passed on, plus one card to replace the pile they took. The draft ends when all the cards are drafted.
The piles have no maximum size.
Winchester draft
Begin by dealing out 4 face up cards, these become the draft piles.
Players alternate picking a pile, then adding a face-up card to each pile, including one to replace the pile they chose. The draft ends when all the cards are drafted.
The piles have no maximum size.
alternate setup:
Each player opens their 3 boosters and shuffles them together (removing any basic lands first.) Each player deals off 2 face up cards to create the piles, 4 total and players still choose from any pile. After each choice, both players add 1 face-up card to each of 'their' piles from their draft deck/pool.
Deck Building
Nominally a normal 40-card limited deck is suggested for these formats; this leads to rather low power/'bad' decks, bad mana bases, etc.
I would suggest 30-card decks for better game play (n.b. some people consider the low power-level of the 40-card decks very skill testing and part of the fun.)
You should decide the minimum deck size before drafting.
Players build a deck of the agreed size, using their draft picks and as many basic lands as they need.
Play
The player who drafted second gets the choice to play or draw in the first game of the match. A match is usually a race to 2 wins (nominally best 2 of 3, but draws can force additional games!)
Re-playability
When the match is over you can shuffle up and draft again, or try another format. Since the cards come off the draft deck in a random order, each draft will be different.
If new packs were used, these can be saved to draft again, or combine 2 or more draft pools to choose a random (90 card) subset for better re-playability.


Why has such a powerful card been placed back on the limited list?

The ways of Konami are not always crystal clear, but consider the following scenario:

Bringing Monster Reborn back will bring balance to the current format. How could that be?

Well, this card would empower those decks that were starting to get outdated (many of them, actually), due to the notable power difference new cards, like Links and Pendulum, are having in the current format.

Monster Reborn was a Staple Card back then in all decks, as it greatly supports basically any card archetype. Monster reborn could be "just" what some older decks needed to lift their game.

With it, those decks can now take an opponent's powerful Link monster like Borreload to even the match up, giving them better competitive level and encouraging players of those decks to become more active players. Also, as older decks had "slower" dynamics (usually taking more time to summon a big monster) this will bring them up to speed so they perform better on today's games.

Now, one may say "but modern decks could also use Monster Reborn, thus giving them further advantage, so how come there is balance?".

It is true that more recent decks could also include Monster Reborn into their build, but realistically speaking it may not be worth it. Many, if not all, modern Archetypes have their own cards that can easily bring back monsters from the GY. Many of them also have "searcher" cards, that can quickly help to build combos and fetch those other cards that bring back monsters.

This means that including a copy of Monster Reborn "just because" may not help those decks, and could even impair them; it could be a dead draw in cases where a card of their own Archetype was needed. In terms of probability this also means that you now have fewer chances of pulling your Ace card (1/41, when before it was 1/40), and even fewer considering dead draws not giving you your "searcher" cards.

In other words, modern decks already have several alternatives for Monster Reborn, whereas older ones have not. This could benefit the game in general, bringing more variety and balance to the format.


Can you interfere and help and win the game as an elf in munchkin?

According to the Munchkin FAQ under Important Note #2: Playing/Using/Switching Items During Combat:

  Playing/using a one-shot Item during a combat that aids the munchkins (and not the monsters) does not constitute "helping" in combat, as described in the rules. This means that in any given combat, any number of players can play cards to aid or hinder either side as often as they want, as long as they have the cards. Only one other player can actually join the combat as a helper, however.

So, no, this would not actually constitute "helping" in the combat to satisfy the Elf racial ability.

However, if through some other means you had actually been the helper in the combat, then yes you could have won or tied, as long as the card that allowed you to help did not specify that the level gained could not be the winning level, because according to the FAQ under Important Note #1: Reaching Level 10:

  Note also that ANY level gained as a result of killing a monster counts as the winning level.

And also from this post on the official Munchkin forum

  The level the Elf gains for helping in combat can be the winning level, because it's a level gained as the result of winning a fight.


Are cards that are both Land and Creature affected by summoning sickness?

Yes they are affected. No they cannot use any ability that requires {T} or {Q} as part of the cost (unless the land creature also has haste).

Dryad Arbor satisfies the criteria for being a creature. (or Charmille dryade in French)

205.2b Some objects have more than one card type (for example, an artifact creature). Such objects satisfy the criteria for any effect that applies to any of their card types.

Creatures cannot activate abilities that require {T} or {Q}.

107.5. The tap symbol is {T}. The tap symbol in an activation cost means “Tap this permanent.” A permanent that’s already tapped can’t be tapped again to pay the cost. A creature’s activated ability with the tap symbol in its activation cost can’t be activated unless the creature has been under its controller’s control continuously since his or her most recent turn began. See rule 302.6.
107.6. The untap symbol is {Q}. The untap symbol in an activation cost means “Untap this permanent.” A permanent that’s already untapped can’t be untapped again to pay the cost. A creature’s activated ability with the untap symbol in its activation cost can’t be activated unless the creature has been under its controller’s control continuously since his or her most recent turn began. See rule 302.6.

Creatures cannot attack if you haven't controlled them since the start of their most recent turn.

302.6. A creature’s activated ability with the tap symbol or the untap symbol in its activation cost can’t be activated unless the creature has been under its controller’s control continuously since his or her most recent turn began. A creature can’t attack unless it has been under its controller’s control continuously since his or her most recent turn began. This rule is informally called the “summoning sickness” rule.

Unless they have Haste, a Creature cannot attack or activate abilities that require {T} or {Q} in their cost.

702.10b If a creature has haste, it can attack even if it hasn’t been controlled by its controller continuously since his or her most recent turn began. (See rule 302.6.)
702.10c If a creature has haste, its controller can activate its activated abilities whose cost includes the tap symbol or the untap symbol even if that creature hasn’t been controlled by that player continuously since his or her most recent turn began. (See rule 302.6.)


What happens when a player controls multiple identical monsters?

Since you didn't specify which specific game in the Dungeons and Dragons Adventure System you're referring to, the following excerpt is from the Wrath of Ashardalon rulebook

  Place a Monster on the new tile. To place a Monster, draw a Monster Card and place the corresponding Monster figure on the scorch mark of the newly placed Dungeon Tile. (The name of each Monster is printed on each figure’s base.) If you draw a Monster Card that matches a Monster Card already in play in front of you, discard that Monster Card and draw again. If another player has a matching Monster Card, however, that’s okay (emph added)

This states that you cannot have this situation, as you should have discarded the matching card in favor of a re-drawn, unique (to you) monster.

What this doesn't answer, however, is when there is an option to pass a monster or being forced to pass a monster.  Looking through the rules of both old (i.e. Wrath of Ashardalon) and new (i.e. Temple of Elemental Evil), I don't see this directly addressed anywhere, even in FAQs.  However, I think that we can refer to the spirit of the rules rather than the letter of them in order to resolve this.

One concept that does occur frequently within the rules/FAQ is that no single player may have more than one copy of a monster.  So, if you attempt to pass a monster to the right, but your right neighbor has a copy, either that pass is forfeited or the attempted pass continues further to the right.  Given that there are monster cards that force passing, I believe that the intent would be to continue the pass further around the table.  If everyone else has a copy, then ultimately it winds up being passed back to the original owner.


A player could, in fact, repeatedly activate Crackeburr if the player had the mana to do so, as long as the player had two other creatures available that were both red and blue, because the tapping and untapping are costs and not effects.

Each time the player would have to pick targets for the effects - and could keep picking the same targets over and over again if desired. The effects with targets would go on the stack, so that you would have a stack consisting of the three-damage effect at the bottom, then the return-to-hand, then three-damage, then return-to-hand, etc. Instances of either effect would fizzle if they targeted creatures that were already returned to hand or destroyed via damage. (Bear in mind that damage doesn't use the stack, so as soon as a Crackleburr invocation is resolved because the stack unwound to that point, then if the creature has lethal damage, it will be destroyed.)

Presumably your opponent used Crackleburr's untap ability specifically to bounce itself. This would work, and yes, your opponent could tap it a third time to do three damage if there were mana and untapped creatures available. At that point these things happen in order as the stack unwinds:

Crackleburr does three damage to the second target
Crackleburr returns itself to its owner's hand
Path to Exile tries to exile Crackleburr but fails because the target is no longer on the battlefield
Crackleburr does three damage to the first target


Far be it for me to answer my own question, but...  I've play tested the partial rules from wikipedia with my children, and have worked out the following fuller set of rules, if it's helpful (also trying to make it more rummy-like):

For 2 players, each player is dealt 10 cards.  For >2 players, each player is dealt 7 cards;
Players immediately put down all cards of the same value (example, two 6's or three Kings) face up in piles in front of them;
Once everyone has put down their starting-hand matches, players take it in turn to put down cards matching other people's matches (this differs from the wikipedia rules: wikipedia said to do this extra laying off all at the same time - that becomes rather frantic with children as they argue who put down a card first if there is more than one match).  If they lay down a match, they take the pile to their part of the table;
Once all above starting play has stopped, the dealer hands out a new card to each player in turn, and the pile building and taking is repeated by each player in turn until either:

all cards have been dealt and no more matches have been played (most of the time, all cards would be matched by now, but sometimes they can't be, e.g. with 4 players each player could end up with one of the same card number);
a player manages to lay off all the cards from their hand (this is again different to wikipedia's rules, but makes the game shorter if you have young children playing - keeps their attention a bit better by allowing more rounds to be played);

Once either of the above conditions is met, the cards in front of each player are counted (count of number of cards, not face values).  The player with the most cards wins.  Optionally, you could subtract any cards left in players hands from their score if using the second of the above ending conditions.

My children picked up these rules pretty well and really enjoy playing it!


What happens when you lose an invention that has a one-shot benefit?

On page 16, of the Portal Edition rulebook it states that when flipping a item card over, that "If the Item had an additional effect, you should cancel it
if possible."

So if you lost, say, the Spear, you should reduce your weapon level by 3, if possible.

Earlier on the same page, it mentions the phrase "if possible", and clarifies that if you cannot pay that cost, nothing happens, and the Rule of Unfilled Demand does not apply.


Do any Small World expansions lengthen play time?

Most of Small World's expansions (Grand Dames, Be Not Afraid, Cursed) just add additional races and powers. Those won't lengthen the game.

Realms adds a modular board and scenarios. Those will presumably add to the setup time a little, and some of the scenarios might also take longer than an ordinary game.
Tales & Legends adds events, which will take a little extra time to resolve and consider the consequences of.
Tunnels allows you to play with six players and combine the base game with the standalone follow-on game Small World Underground. It's difficult to imagine that both factors wouldn't considerably increase the play time.


In Bridge can you ask for an "undo" if you make the wrong bid and do the opposition have to agree it?

It depends.  On online vs. face to face (vs. screens), on whether there is a Director or Arbiter, on your intent, on regulations.  But the Law, as I'm sure is in the Johnson comment, is Law 25 (duplicate Laws quoted here, rubber laws similar):
LAW 25 - LEGAL AND ILLEGAL CHANGES OF CALL
A. Unintended Call

If a call is made by a player that was not intended and if it is discovered before partner makes a call, it may be substituted with the intended call. The second (intended) call stands and is subject to the appropriate Law, but the lead restrictions in Law 26 do not apply.
If the player’s original intent was to make the call selected or voiced, that call stands. A change of call may be allowed because of a mechanical error or a slip of the tongue, but not because of a loss of concentration regarding the intent of the action.
A player is allowed to replace an unintended call if the conditions described in A1 above are met, no matter how the error came to the player’s attention.
No substitution of call may be made when partner has made a subsequent call.
If the auction ends before it reaches the player’s partner no substitution may occur after the end of the auction period (see Law 17D).
If a substitution is allowed the LHO may withdraw a call made over the first call. Information from the withdrawn call is authorized to this side and unauthorized to the opponents.

B. Call Intended

A substituted call not permitted by A may be accepted by the offender’s LHO. (It is accepted if LHO calls intentionally over it.) The first call is then withdrawn, the second call stands and the auction continues (Law 26 may apply).
Except as in B1, a substitution not permitted by A is cancelled. The original call stands and the auction continues (Law 26 may apply).
Law 16C applies to any call withdrawn or cancelled.

I've bolded the most important items for a player.  Law 26 is "call withdrawn, lead restrictions".
If you intended to bid 1S and 2S came out, you can change it.  If you bid 2S and then remember you don't play Strong Jump Shifts with this partner, you're out of luck (and likely making overtricks).
In a controlled game (duplicate with a Director, or rubber with an Arbiter), if you believe you're in a L25A situation, you call and let the Director or Arbiter decide.  If it's a game without control, you ask and see if the opponents will let you (the Rubber Laws still use the term "without pause for thought", and "thought" is the important word there).  Likely they will, unless you show that you try to undo intended bids, and then they will dry up.
Note that this law is considered first in situations where the unintended bid is illegal - for instance 1D-(1S)-1H.  If you intended to bid 2H and 1H came out, Law 25 applies; otherwise it is an insufficient bid (no matter if you didn't intend to bid insufficiently or didn't see 1S or...) and that Law (27) applies instead (currently, the only real difference is that your LHO can accept 1H and bid 1S "raising" partner).


Disembarking meeples in scenarios that begin in the sea

It's not an official answer, but it seems that disembarking all meeples after exploring is the only reasonable thing to do. See http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/921800/first-action-when-starting-on-the-plain-sea-hex.


Why are all changelings Shapeshifter creature type?

You're right in that even without the Shapeshifter subtype, they would have that subtype in any relevant situation, due to Changeling being a characteristic-defining ability.

That said, there are a number of Shapeshifter creatures that don't have the Changeling ability, and many have existed before the ability was introduced in Lorwyn as a carbon copy of Mistform Ultimus's ability (a card that's curiously not a Shapeshifter).

Changeling is not an evergreen mechanic, meaning it is only used in several sets - as of now, Lorwyn and Modern Horizons. The subtype Shapeshifter however has been used frequently throughout sets and indicates that it is more than a mechanic to the designers - it is a part of the lore of the multiverse, and despite one might more easily interpret function into "Shapeshifter" than "Kor", it is nevertheless a race of beings within the world.

This is hinted at in the phrasing of a DailyMtG artcle by Devin Low:

  [...], the designers had given the five-card cycle one more thing to share besides having all creature types. "How would a race of Shapeshifters fight?" the designers asked.


This isn't for the purpose of excluding the player from the game - and typically the player in that seat will physically move the cards requested by the declarer to be played. The idea is that dummy's hand (and only that hand) becomes public information, creating an asymmetry - the declarer knows all 26 cards that will be used to try to make the contract, but the defenders must infer each others' holdings from the play.

Why create this asymmetry? I can think of two reasons:

It creates strategic depth. In particular, consider finesses. The skill set expected of declarers includes understanding the play of a finesse, as well as being able to determine whether to attempt them (based on conditional probabilities as well as the risk and reward involved according to the scoring system). If dummy's hand is closed, this becomes impossible - one player on the declaring side may intend to lead into a finesse, but the other player won't know this is the intent, and is torn between the priorities of ensuring the trick is won and sending lead-directing play signals. If we instead open one of the defender's hands in addition to dummy's, the play again becomes impossible - since everyone can deduce everyone else's hand, there is no longer a question of risk.
It makes bidding more competitive. Because of the trick-winning advantage inherent in declaring the contract, it's often possible, when the honours are evenly split, for either side to be able to make a 2- or 3-level contract even without unusual suit length. This enhances another skill component: deciding whether a sacrifice contract will be preferable to letting opponents make their game or slam (in rubber bridge, one might even sacrifice against a part-score contract if it would complete opponents' game).

Okay, but why not just reveal dummy's hand to declarer privately? I can think of three reasons:

It would violate a sacred design principle. Players are only supposed to communicate with each other via their actions - including publicly-known codes in bidding (I believe you asked a separate question about this).
It would be mechanically difficult to implement. If declarer only gets to look at the hand once, it creates memory issues; if multiple times, then it involves repeatedly passing cards across the table, which is messy and creates potential for cheating (by swapping cards between declarer's and dummy's hands, which defenders wouldn't know about in this hypothetical).
It would unbalance the advantage created by making it too strong. As is, defenders can take dummy's hand into consideration when choosing leads (except the first) and responses (i.e., avoid playing an unnecessarily high card when declarer is trying to exit with an unavoidable loser). Overly competitive bidding would ruin the scoring system. (While it might be feasible to calibrate that to match, the game was after all developed pretty organically. The current balance works; why disrupt it?)


Where does Æmber captured from own side go after creature leaves play?

No, but Yes!

It doesn't matter who played Mars Needs Æmber, all that matters is who controls the Martians when they leave play. There are a variety of effects that can temporarily gain control of a creature. Who the Æmber was captured from doesn't matter, only who controls the creature at the time it leaves play. Since Mars Needs Æmber doesn't deal damage, or remove creatures from play, once it's played, who played it is forgotten as far as the Æmber is concerned. This is a small, but important distinction!


When do trading deals become too unbalancing?

As ICodeForCoffee said in the "bribing off the Robber" question:

  According to the rules of Catan, players can't trade unless they're both exchanging resources.

This would seem to be the same issue with the agreement to give extra resources to other players.  They could form an alliance to trade the resources, but not just give the extras "in the future" for a favor.


What mana fixing should I use in Khans of Tarkir Sealed Format?

Mana fixers can virtually never be counted as full lands because you need mana to cast them.

Let's take the case of the banners specifically. If you swap out a land for a banner, the main difference is the banner:

Costs 3 mana to cast
Can be sacrificed for a card draw

(1) makes them a higher mana screw risk than a land (how happy are you if you mulligan into 2 land+banner instead of 3 land?), while (2) makes them a reduced mana flood risk than a land (sac them if you have nothing better to do with your mana).

They should almost certainly be counted as full spells for purposes of mana ratios, especially if you're also playing lands that come into play tapped.


Carcassonne Bazaars and other expansions after the bid

In the rules for Bridges, Castles and Bazaars you can find the following text:

  Once all tiles have been claimed, the players will each place their tile (and a follower, if they
  wish) in clockwise order from the player to the left of the active player. No follower may be
  placed on the bazaar itself.

Later on it's said that there can be no chain reactions, that there can be only one bazaar round in one turn.

However, in the Dutch rules it says (translated):

  After all land tiles have been claimed, all players execute a normal turn where, instead of drawing a land tile, they place the recently acquired land tile in clockwise order from the player to the left of the active player.

This means something else entirely. By the English rules I would assume everything happens within the same turn. By the Dutch rules, suddenly you have many different turns triggered by the Bazaar.

I checked the German rules as well, they seem to be in line with the English rules. So I'm going with those.

The rules say you can place the tile you acquired, and a follower if you wish. Followers do not include builders, pigs and the like, so strictly I don't think you should be allowed to place those. Also, building onto a road or city that has the builder on it only gives you another turn if you are the active player:

  In a yet later turn, he places a tile that extends or completes the road with his builder on it.
  After completing his turn (placing a follower and scoring), he draws and places a 2nd tile as
  normal, including a follower if he wants.

I'm not sure about the Wheel of Fortune, haven't played it.


Forgetting to place a city on the board, or to move the robber. Which fix is acceptable?

1) The player paid for the city, they should get the city.  Now, if the next die roll would have given them double resources, that's where it'd get a little dicey (see what I did there?).  If they have the choice of where to put the city and want to put it where you get double resources, I'd say it'd be reasonable to say they don't get double that time.  If they only had one city choice, give them double.

If you can divine intent, give them the benefit, otherwise just try to smooth things out.

2) This is a weird miss.  You've had 2 turns of production (and potential non-production).  At that point, backing up would be a bit of a pain.  The easiest fix would be to immediately have the 7 roller move the robber, steal a resource, then proceed.

This does not penalize the double-development-card player, since they might not have been able to even buy them if the robber was moved. This restores the resource parity, since the 7 roller didn't get a resource.


From the text I would assume the following:

Whenever you cast a spell, if you pay {W/B} extra, then Extort ability will trigger.

That is incorrect. The triggering event is you cast a spell. Each time that event occurs, the ability triggers.
On resolution, you may pay {W/B} and cause life loss.

A player has 5 lands and 3 creatures with Extort ability. He then plays an Oblivion Ring for 3 mana ({2}{W}), so he now has 2 mana left. If he taps one, would all 3 Extorts trigger or just one?

All three trigger. Note that no time exists between Oblivion Ring being cast and Extort triggering. You don't have to option to tap anything then or when you place the ability on the stack.
When the third ability stacked resolves, you may pay {W/B}. If you do, each opponent loses 1 life and you gain that much life.
When the second ability stacked resolves, you may pay {W/B}. If you do, each opponent loses 1 life and you gain that much life.
When the first ability stacked resolves, you may pay {W/B}. If you do, each opponent loses 1 life and you gain that much life.
So you can cause each opponent to lose up to three life, but each life lost will cost you a mana.
Michael Snook explained how this isn't useless. This post is mostly about correcting your understanding of triggered abilities.


Information about "Make Twenty One, no more, no less" wooden Tabletop Game

Sounds to me like Plinko. I know it from the Price is Right, but commercial versions are likely out there.


In Shadow Hunters, can only Hunters benefit from the Spear of Longinus?

The way I read it, "If you're a Hunter" applies to the entire rules paragraph.  Therefore, you could re-read it as:

  If you're a Hunter and your attack is successful, you may reveal your identity.  If you're a Hunter and you do, or if you are already revealed, you give 2 points of extra damage."

I could certainly see the argument, though, that two sentences are two completely separate, and so that any revealed non-Hunter could do 2 points of extra damage as well.  I believe the intent is for Hunters only, but it isn't very clear.


The answer to your first question is that you should use it either for all skip bids, or for no skip bid. Using it only for some skip bids but not for others could result in a director call and a procedural penalty against you for intentionally transmitting unauthorized information to your partner.

As to your second question: option 1 is correct under the jurisdiction of the ACBL (ie essentially all games in the US and Canada), while option 2 is correct under the jurisdiction of the WBF (essentially all other games).


What does a combo deck based around Thran Lens look like?

There are at least two good choices:

Invoke Prejudice - Affects all opponents in multiplayer.
Intimidate (or Fear) - Shadowmage Infiltrator is probably the best Fear creature.