text:
Where do you go for the 'nearest railroad' in Monopoly?
In the American edition of Monopoly, there is a Chance card that says:

Advance token to nearest railroad
Pay owner twice the rental to which he/she is entitled. If railroad is unowned, you may buy it from the bank.

However, is this the closest railroad, or the next one? If you are standing on the Chance spot in the light blues, do you go all around the board to Reading, which is the closest to you, or do you go to Pennsylvania, which is the first one you land on?

Look closely at the card and it tells you exactly what to do.

Advance token to nearest railroad
Pay owner twice the rental to which he/she is entitled. If railroad is unowned, you may buy it from the bank.

Advance means you are moving forward on the board, so this will always move you to the railroad that you run into. In your example, it means that you would stop at Pennsylvania.
From what it sounds like, you are reading way too much into a simple card. In the game of Monopoly, there is no way to go backwards, so you never look behind you when you are trying to calculate distance.
To break it down from the Chance spot that is in the light blues, the ranking of railroads in terms of distance is

Pennsylvania (8 spaces away with normal movement)
B. & O. (18 spaces away with normal movement)
Short Line (28 spaces away with normal movement)
Reading (38 spaces away with normal movement)

The only time you can pass go with that card is on the Chance spot right after the Short Line spot on the board.
You always need to remember that when playing a board game (unless specifically stated) you calculate distance based on the direction you move.
As for the comment about the Go to Jail card, it does not instruct you to advance to jail. That card is specifying changes to the movement rules on the card because it wants you to treat it differently than other cards that direct you to move to a location.

Go to jail
Go directly to jail
Do not pass go
Do not collect $200

There are other cards which break the movement rules, and those cards fully describe the changes to the rules.

Go back 3 spaces

This card clearly describes a movement that is outside of the normal rules, and does not use the word advance so it can't be confused with normal movement.
Official Tournament Rules where passing go a second time by this card is not mentioned even though it does mention passing go a second time from this space

GO Each time a player’s token lands on or passes over
GO, whether by throw of the dice or by drawing a card,
the Banker pays the player a $200 salary. The $200 is
paid only once each time around the board. However, if a
player passing GO on the throw of a dice lands 2 spaces
beyond it on Community Chest, or 7 spaces beyond it on
Chance, and draws the “Advance to GO” card, he/she
collects $200 for passing GO the first time and another
$200 for reaching it the second time by instructions on the
card.

Yes, I know - so we like to go all the way around the board and collect another $200 ;). That's advancing to the nearest. We wouldn't go backwards.

@Mithrandir I updated the answer to try and clarify that passing go is not possible in this case.

@ColGraff If you where to advance to the nearest of something would you pass by multiple matching locations? Or would you stop at the first one you got to? For example if you where traveling down a one way street and where asked to stop at the nearest gas station would you pick one that was behind you even if you passed several more on your way to get to it? The real point here is that in a situation where you can only move in one direction the next and nearest are the same thing.

in the game of monopoly there is no way to go backwards What about "Go directly to Jail. Do not pass Go."? I always took that to mean you had to move backwards.

@ColGraff another way to look at it is in the game there is only one legal direction to move and all distances are measured from that direction. To get to Pennsylvania it would take a roll of 8. To get to Reading from that same spot it would take a roll of 38 (yes i mean a series of rolls).

@ColGraff that is an exception to the rule card and doesn't change the fact that under normal movement rules that one railroad is 8 spaces away and the other is 38 spaces away.

@ColGraff It's not a case of "nearest" on its own being a synonym of "next", but of interpreting the full sentence. There is a conflict between "advance" (implying a forward direction; you do not "advance backwards") and "nearest" (which you rightly say does not imply a direction). The interpretation in this answer is that "advance to nearest" means "travel in the normal direction until you reach the next". Ultimately, the card is badly worded, but this interpretation feels consistent with the rest of the game play, so it seems likely it is what was intended.

@ColGraff You have to ignore the literal meaning of "advance" in order to take the literal meaning of "nearest", so it really just comes down to a judgement call. Saying that you "advance backwards", or travel an almost complete circuit of the board to get to the "nearest" something, feels very unintuitive to me. I wonder if any of the many historical, international, and special editions has a version of this card with less ambiguous wording.

@ColGraff If I say "go east to the nearest shop", and there's a shop just west of you, would you assume I meant to travel eastwards around the world until you came back to nearly but not quite where you started. ignoring all the other shops you passed on your travels? It's certainly a valid interpretation, but language is very rarely amenable to such purely logical analysis, and it feels perfectly natural to me (and others here) for "advance to nearest..." to mean "go forwards until you encounter...".

Mathematician dropping in:  If you view the board as a continuous helix (and going backwards isn't allowed), then even if it looks like a railroad is 2 spaces behind you, that's not nearest because if you try to get there going forwards, you can't.  You'll be on the same railroad but one turn up the helix.  (For those versed in complex analysis, basically a branch cut)

The go back 3 spaces card is a chance card so it is not possible to cross GO with it.

The edition of Monopoly (UK, I believe) I had as a kid also had a "Go back to Old Kent Road" card. That's also moving backwards.

The wording is ambiguous, but in the many years that I've played this game, I have never heard it interpreted as "Find the closest railroad in front of or behind you, and advance until you arrive there".
While I know of no official ruling that spells this out (which is, in itself, somewhat telling, since most people seem to assume that "nearest" only applies to spaces in front of you, and this consensus was apparently clear enough that the makers never felt the need to clarify), there have been a number of official Monopoly video games released over the years.  I certainly haven't played them all, but I've played 3 or 4 different versions, and never once has any of them advanced me around the board, past "Go", to reach a railroad station behind me when drawing this card.
As these were officially licensed versions of the game, I believe that is a fairly clear indication that the rules for this card are intended to only apply to railroads in front of you.

Besides, if it meant "nearest in front of you or behind you" then when you were on Go or Just Visiting or Free Parking, there'd be a tie, and then what would you do?

@Kyralessa: How does one draw a Chance card when on one of those three squares you listed?

@ForgetIwaseverhere, well, that's true.

According to Hasbro, publishers of Monopoly, you move forward to the next railroad.
Here is the answer I received from Hasbro's Global Customer Care Representative :

According to the creator in monopoly, when the card says advance to the nearest station, you go to the nearest station, no matter if it is behind you, this and the card that states “go back 3 spaces” are the only times you go backwards.
Many people make this mistake because of advance

Can you provide any references to support this assertion, particularly when compared with the actual communication from Hasbro in Robert Miller's answer which directly contradicts this?


text:
In Takenoko does the player have to choose both their actions before performing either
In the rules it states:

To finalize their choices, the player puts two chips on the appropriate spaces of their individual Board.
The order in which the actions are resolved is chosen by the player.

Does the player have to choose their two actions at the start of the 2nd step and then action them.  Or can they perform one action, see the consequences and then decide what action to take as their second action?
We've been playing the latter, but I'm not sure if the former is intended by a strict reading of the rules.
I.e. are the tokens just to keep track of what you've done so you don't accidentally perform the same action twice, or are they intended to lock your actions in before you perform any of them.

The actions are chosen and resolved sequentially as you have been playing, so you can see the result of your first action before choosing and resolving your second action.
While the original rules do seem to indicate that your two actions must be chosen before you resolve anything, it was clarified in the official FAQ:

The two actions are chosen sequentially. This means that if a player choses to draw a new objective card, he can look at it before deciding what his second action will be.

Note that most of the official links to the FAQ now seem to be dead, so I assume that since the FAQ was released in 2012 these changes may be included in newer editions of the game.

source: Stack Exchange

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

sort: votes


text:
Can I resolve this effect that has been destroyed, banished, or sent to the deck?
Scenario 1:
I activate "XYZ Effect". My opponent activates Mystical Space Typhoon. XYZ Effect is destroyed. Does XYZ Effect resolve?
Scenario 2:
I activate "XYZ Effect". My opponent activates Cosmic Cyclone. XYZ Effect is banished after he pays 1000LP. Is "XYZ Effect" resolved?
Scenario 3:
I activate "XYZ Effect" My opponent activates a card that returns my card to the deck. Is "XYZ Effect"  activated?

Does XYZ Effect resolve?

In all scenarios you mention XYZ Effect resolves
Why? Because neither MST, Cosmic Cyclone, or that card that returns to deck have the ability to negate effects; they "just" destroy the card, but never negated its activation and thus it resolves.
This situation is similar to one answer I gave recently. The only cases where a card like MST or similar (that just destroys) can prevent a spell/trap card effect from activating is if that spell/trap card has a continuous effect.
For example, if your opponent activates Fire Formation - Tenki and you cast MST on it your opponent will not be able to search for a beast-warrior. This is because cards with continuous effects must remain face-up on the field to resolve their effects.

field spells also need to remain to resolve their effects

@Whatsthepoimt yep, as stated on the other answer :)

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/


text:
How to make a game of Yu-Gi-Oh! quicker?
I currently play Yu-Gi-Oh! at school, and sometimes, we want to fit in a game in less than 5 - 10 minutes, before lessons.
Of course, in a normal game with 8k LP each, this is almost impossible for a well thought out fully fun game.
What are house rules that could make the game a lot more quicker, without spoiling the "skeleton" of the game? Just saying this is not exactly necessary, but would be nice.
I would like the ways you state to have comments saying the cons of the rule (if any)
Ways I have thought of already:

Making starting LP 4k. Kind of removes the length of the game significantly, making it less fun (which is why we play)

Giving a Time Limit to 5 minutes / game each. Removes main concepts, hence making us susceptible to mistakes.

Please add to this list, but what I am looking for is a combination of house rules that makes it a lot quicker to play.

Well, usually a YGO match (best of 3) lasts aproximately 40 minutes, or at least that is about the time given in official tournaments. Besides playing a 4k game I think there is no other option to make it faster... actually, some current decks are really powerful, and can even play a game under 5 minutes if an OTK or FTK results. YGO games are actually quite fast compared to other card games... elaborating this into an answer

@DarkCygnus Well, my deck has the potential to OTK or FTK (about 4% ?) chance. However, I am talking about general circumstances.

I see, added an answer. Just a thing, you say that: "Making starting LP 4k // Kind of removes the length of the game significantly, making it less fun" - but aren't you asking for a faster game? It makes it harder to answer if you ask for a faster game but say reducing its length is less "fun"... sometimes it is better to postpone a game and play it when you have more time to actually enjoy it without having to rush

What are house rules that could make the game a lot more quicker, without spoiling the "skeleton" of the game?

To be honest, Yu-Gi-Oh is actually quite fast-paced, even more now with all the changes that have been to the format (and I am not the only one that thinks this is a thing). In some cases, if you or your opponent pull out a OTK or FTK the game could well last less than 5 minutes.
In official tournaments, the rulings indicate that rounds have a 40 minutes duration. Each round is played in a best-of-three Duels, meaning that you have about 13 minutes per game. We can see that Duels are already fast enough, and that the official rules consider time limits according to this average duration.
With this being said, we can see that one Duel should at most last 13 minutes, so it is reasonable that a single duel can well last 10 minutes or less. Perhaps a duel can take longer if there is debate or argument while playing it, as to the correct ruling of a card, or on legal aspect of some move.
In this case, to effectively speed your games it would help to reduce the time spent debating or arguing so you have more time to actually play. This can only be achieved if both parties understand and know the rules on a decent or high degree, so there is no room for misinterpretation. Also, the more you play with someone the better you know each other's decks and possible moves, thus you will be able to play your games more swiftly.

Now, if you and your friend(s) are still taking longer than that to play a single game there could be other options (besides being swifter on the debating of rules) you may consider:

As you already suggested, reducing Life Points to 4000 can effectively speed some duels. You even say that "Kind of removes the length of the game significantly", but isn't this what you are asking for?
A slight variant of this idea is to reduce LP to 2000 points, as it was done in the anime/manga on Duel Monsters. This way you games will be really swift on the current format, while not deviating much from the real game (actually, it would be even more like the anime).

Other option I once tried with some friends was to penalize a player that takes much time deciding their moves. The penalty was represented by a fixed deduction of LP (say 500?) each time that player stalls or takes much time to decide. Of course, this is better when done with a third person that can oversee the game as judge and call the penalties. This encouraged fast-play while actually capping each game if a player stalls too much.

Yet another option you got is to perhaps try playing those swift duels on an app or similar, like the well-known YGO Pro. This way you spare yourself from interpreting the rules and timings, so you "just" play and let the game automatically carry out the legal actions for you. Of course that YGO Pro and similar may have some bugs, bit if they do they are minimal.
Then, when you got more free time, you can play with your physical decks and take all the time you need to debate if a move or strategy is valid or not. As a final suggestion, sometimes it is better to postpone a game and play it when you have time to play it properly, without rushing and being able to enjoy it more.


text:
How to play a quicker game of Monopoly?
Is it possible to play a quicker game of monopoly that lasts under one hour on average with only two players? If so, how? I am not looking for anything that specific, but I need house rules that will speed the game up. By the way, I lost my Speed Die.

Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.

First of all make sure you are following the base rules for Monopoly as there are a lot of different house rules that are used that make the game take much longer then it should. Judging on the accepted answer it seems that you are indeed using some house rules that make the game take longer.
I am including 3 rules that are commonly changed by house rules that make the game take much longer, though there are other house rules that cause problems.
Also I have included some official suggestions on making a game shorter.
Official Rules
Buying Property.
When someone lands on any unowned piece of property it will either get purchased by them or by someone at auction so there should be no reason to need more money to buy property at the start.

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 face up 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.

Free Parking
This space does not give the player that lands there anything.

“FREE PARKING”… A player landing on this place does not receive
  any money, property or reward of any kind. This is just a “free”
  resting place.

Passing Go
You do not get double the amount for landing on go

“GO”… Each time a player’s token lands on or passes over GO,
  whether by throwing the dice or drawing a card, the Banker pays
  him/her a $200 salary.
  The $200 is paid only once each time around the board. However, if
  a player passing GO on the throw of the dice lands 2 spaces beyond it
  on Community Chest, or 7 spaces beyond it on Chance, and draws the
  “Advance to GO” card, he/she collects $200 for passing GO the first
  time and another $200 for reaching it the second time by instructions
  on the card

Suggestions from the rules for a short game
Suggestion 1

There are five changed rules for this first Short Game.
  1. During PREPARATION, the Banker shuffles then deals three Title
  Deed cards to each player. These are free— no payment to the Bank
  is required.
  2. You need only three houses (instead of four) on each lot of a
  complete color-group before you may buy a hotel. Hotel rent remains
  the same. The turn-in value is still one-half the purchase price, which
  in this game is one house less than in the regular game.
  3. If you land in Jail you must exit on your next turn by 1) using a
  “Get Out of Jail Free” card if you have (or can buy) one; or 2) rolling
  doubles; or 3) paying $50. Unlike the standard rules, you may try to
  roll doubles and, failing to do so, pay the $50 on the same turn.
  4. The penalty for landing on “Income Tax” is a flat $200.
  5. END OF GAME: The game ends when one player goes bankrupt.
  The remaining players value their property: (1) cash on hand; (2) lots,
  utilities and railroads owned, at the price printed on the board; (3) any
  mortgaged property owned, at one-half the price printed on the board;
  (4) houses, valued at purchase price; (5) hotels, valued at purchase
  price including the value of the three houses turned in.
  The richest player wins!

Suggestion 2

TIME LIMIT GAME… Before starting, agree upon a definite hour of
  termination, when the richest player will be declared the winner.
  Before starting, the Banker shuffles and cuts the Title Deed cards and
  deals two to each player. Players immediately pay the Bank the price
  of the properties dealt to them

This! Following the darned rules is a great way. Money in the middle makes the game last soooo long. The biggest complaint is "then people go out!" as if that isn't the point of the game .... right?

I thought I knew the rules, and had long felt that all the free money house rules people contrived were to blame for long games, but I never knew about the property auction bit!  Seems like it would speed things up tremendously.

Definitely follow the standard rules!  With the exception of the income tax square.  Just do a flat rate.  You waste so much time trying to figure out the percentage.

Not quite sure how the auction rule's supposed to speed up the game, when pretty clearly the best strategy is to just buy everything you land on, anyway...?

@Jules The auction rules speed up the game by ensuring that a property is always purchased even when the person that landed on it can't afford it or chooses not to purchase it because they are low on cash.

@Kevin It only takes a long time to calculate when it's more than 2k net worth. When we play, we say it's 200 if you can't do it in your head.

@JoeW Why hotels being valued at 3 houses? Why is 4 houses worth more than a hotel?!

@corsiKa You will have to ask the designers of the game that question. I quoted the rule suggestions that was printed in the rule book.

I can agree that playing by the actual rules the game lasts about 45-90 mins. for two players. It's all the "common house rules" that make it take forever. Like "have to go around one time before you can buy anything" and "free parking gets you money".

@corsiKa, no.  If you obviously have more than 2K net worth, it takes two seconds.  When it's a pain is when you have 6 or 7 properties, a few houses and a few hundred in case.  You spend five minutes adding everything up to get 1880.  Yay, you saved 12 bucks and wasted 5 minutes of everyone's time

@Kevin You have literally made my point for me. If you can do it in your head (cash stack, few properties) then sure. Otherwise, you're going to pay the 200 and move on. So I believe you meant "@corsiKa, yes."

I love this answer - though have found that when my family plays (anywhere from 2-4 people), we rarely exceed 1:30 .. even if we use Free Parking getting fines (and, therefore, the occasional lottery bonus): we ignore the "you must ask for rent" rule, and pay upon landing regardless of whether the owner asks or not. We also institute a mandatory property auction after the slowest player makes it around the board three times (if we're worried about time). We also have a house rule that you cannot buy a property for less than list value at auction.

@warren wouldn't the auction rule about not being able to buy it for less than face value make it slower to buy property? From my understanding of the rules the auction rules for buying it cheaper is a penalty for the person who landed there but couldn't afford it (or chose not to buy it) as someone can now possibly buy it for cheaper (or for more if it is a contested property)

@JoeW - basically it forces someone to mortgage an existing property to buy it. It might slow us down a little ... but we're still usually done fairly quickly: so any slow down is pretty minor :)

The problem with lower the number of house require for a hotel it degrades one of the standard plays in the game of keeping a large number of houses on your spaces so no one else can buy them.

@JoeW The person who declined to buy the property directly could get it cheaper during the auction, which he otherwise couldn't afford, because everyone can take part in the auction.

@JoeW Thanks for your comments on my question (which I removed). I'm going to try most of these house rules you proposed (maybe including the one I made up).

Deal all the 28 properties to the two players (shuffle the deeds and then alternate properties) before the game begins. The trades occur at the beginning, and players can start building houses and hotels immediately once they have monopolies.
This eliminates the property acquisition phase of the game and moves it right into the building phase of the game.
Not all of the games I've played this way lasted less than an hour, but many did.

This approach also gives a more 'fair' game from the point where all properties are distributed. I had plays where people lost their motivation playing because they gotten leeched of their money by bad luck before all the properties were sold, having them banrupt in a few turns after all property was sold to the rest.

@Mixxiphoid But the point of Monopoly was to show how unfair capitalism is... I think making it fair is antithetical to the message of the game.

@corsiKa I agree, but not everybody can handle his loss so easily :).

I would suggest the following:
0. Don't use common house rules that slow down the game.
1. Find/Buy/Make a Speed Die.
2a. Deal out all properties as suggested in the rules for a quicker game.
2b. For a more strategic starting variation, require players to purchase properties from those they are dealt OR return them to the bank.
3. Don't bail out opponent by accepting deals when they owe rent.

Your answer talks about a Speed Die, but doesn't say what that is. Could you please add that information?

The biggest obstacle to a fast game, in my experience, is adoption of a House Rule for a Fee Parking Windfall - yet kids adore this. I addressed both this and the desire to handicap adults vis a vis younger children as follows:
Modified Free Parking House Rule
1) Landing on Free Parking earns a windfall as:

Youngest child gets $1,000
All other children get $500
Adults get $0

2) Taxes and other amounts owed to the bank *DO NOT get added to the Free Parking Windfall - they are properly paid to the bank as outlined in the standard rules.
3) The amounts in (1) above can be negotiated as other amounts - but only before the game starts. If the younger children are not winning often enough, double the amounts; it they are winning too often, halve them.
Explain to the children how this maximizes enjoyment by all players - everybody CAN win, but nobody is GUARANTEED a win.

I disagree that this is the biggest obstacle. While any free parking rule that gives out money will make the game take longer. Due to the relative rarity of landing on any single space (2.5%) this wouldn't be any massive obstacle. It's ignoring the auction rule that tends to make things take longer - unbought properties don't shift money around, auctions guarantee properties are bought.

@Andrew: Notice I said, explicitly: "... in my experience, ..."

Round all rents to the nearest $5 and eliminate the $1 bills.  Reduces the time making petty change.  (Borrowed from Beyond Boardwalk and Park Place)
Rents are owed.  Rather than adhering to the rule that says that rent not announced before the next player begins his/her turn need not be paid, instead make rents due and payable always.  There is now no incentive to endure, much less to encourage, long and tedious turns by other players in the hope that a rent you owe will not come due from inattention. With this rule in place, while rent is being paid, change being made etc., the next player may roll the dice, at least in trivial cases, which allows a small amount of effective parallelism.
Place a $5 upside down in front of your playing area to indicate you are passing going forward during an auction, the first time you bid, if you have no interest or ability to buy.  Auctioneer may henceforth skip you without notice.  You can revoke it, of course, at will.  This is lovingly referred to as the Grandma rule (ref. the Adam Sandler sketch where he keeps yelling "pass" during Thanksgiving dinner at Grandma's house).  Typically you announce "Grandma" when you first place the $5 token.

Can I ask, what version are you referring to? This needs to be stated if you are not using the original game

Second point doesn't really make sense.  If anything, people are hurrying up to get the next person to go before you notice that they owe you money.

Second point makes no sense because as long as everyone is paying attention it doesn't take long to see who owes what rent. And if people are not paying attention it will just slow down the game in many other ways.

@Kevin This would be true if monopoly was a game with a turn limit, but it ends when all of the money flows to one person. Rents being skipped actually stops this flow of money. At a certain point if it's one person not paying attention, sure this could combine to make them go out sooner, but in general skipping rent and slowing money flow slows the game down as a whole.

Double your initial capital, but halve your gain for passing Go. It is not a difficult change to make, and requires no extra equipment, except possibly a note by the Go space to remind you.
This leads to much more property being bought and developed early in the game, thereby increasing rents significantly, and reduces the capital injection that keeps the game going.
A similar but more extreme format is to multiply the initial capital by a larger number, and reduce the gain for passing Go to zero. Again, no extra equipment is needed but perhaps a note to remind you of the change to the Go space.
Finally, increase the rate at which capital is removed from the players. For example, instead of mortgages, property is pawned. The player receives the normal amount for mortgages, but to regain the property, they must repay the full value of the property.
You might also say that the property is lost for good after the next (or second, depending on balance) time the player passes Go. While a property is pawned, the bank receives any rent instead of the player.

What does pawned mean?

Could you give me an example?

Wikipedia: how pawning works. For example, I pawn Mayfair and receive $200. At some point in my next few turns, I can reclaim Mayfair by paying the bank $400. If you include a time limit: if I don't reclaim it soon enough, the bank can auction it or sell it as if nobody owned it.

Increased starting money does not change how much property is bought. Property is bought every single time someone lands on an unowned property, whether by purchase or auction. Many people play a house rule that removes the auction. This house rule significantly slows the game down. See Joe W's answer.

Property purchases don't change, but improvements (and therefore rent amounts) can be increased much sooner.

@Nij: We've ran out of money before when buying property. I've see the absurdities of 70% of owned property mortgaged just to buy it all.

@simplest_mathematics When he says "Pawn Mayfair" he means "Mortgage Boardwalk."

I don't get this. It will still take you as many turns it would have taken you without the extra money to get all the properties sold. How is this a solution?

Yes, and once you have all the properties, you also have a huge cash reserve with which to buy improvements. Since you're the second person to question that: what about the phrase ".. and developed .." is not clear enough?

@Mixxiphoid , sorry, I felt pressured to accept

@simplest_mathematics, don't worry it is perfectly normal to wait a few hours, if not a day or two before accepting a solution :).

If you follow the rules for property acquisition (auction if player who lands on it doesn't want to buy it), then increasing the starting capital just means fewer properties go to auction which shifts more emphasis to luck of the dice.

How about adding a rule that would allow any person to call an auction on any unowned property on any turn if the person places a starting bid of 3x face value?  One of the major barriers to development is the time required for people to get matching sets.  Few people would want to pay 3x face value for a property except to finish a set or prevent someone else from doing so, but having the option available might speed development.  Also, with regard to pawning, how about requiring that someone with mortgaged property must either pay interest every turn or forfeit the property in question?

There are easier ways to get all property sold. The point of pawning is that it's a fixed-term, fixed-cost loan with forfeiture at the end of term. However, mortgage repayments every turn with default causing forfeiture is a decent idea; you should write an answer to explain it in full. @supercat

@Nij: Many real pawn shops allow customers to extend loans indefinitely by paying servicing fees; indeed, such fees represent a majority of some (many?) stores' profits.

@Nij - You seem to have misunderstood how pawning works, when you suggest a change that " instead of mortgages, property is pawned". What Monopoly calls "mortgaging" is actually pawning - you don't have possession of the item until you pay the money back (with interest).

In Monopoly, a "mortgage" means you retain possession: the bank cannot sell the property even if you haven't paid back the loan before the game ends. In pawning, you do not have possession, and the pawner can do what they want after a given time period. Big differences. @AndyT

@Nij - Sure. But in real life if you have a mortgage on a property you can still let it out and hence earn rent on it; this is what I meant by "possession", but I grant you it wasn't the perfect word to use. But in your answer you haven't defined pawning as the bank can sell the property to someone else, you've defined it as "to regain the property, they must repay the full value of the property", but paying full price to regain it has absolutely nothing to with the "pawning".

Yes, Monopoly "mortgages" are not really mortgages,  so that immediately makes it difficult to talk about changing them to something else. I think you need to read the entire answer, though, if you believe the pawning is limited to just "full repayment of value".

The part of Monopoly that drags is the very long time between when it's obvious only one player can win until the point that they do win. (House rules often drag this out even more, but it happens in the original rules as well.)
That is, the endgame conditions need to change.
However, if you set a specific stop time that people can see, people tend to play differently when that time approaches --- and in a way that is usually not fun -- for example people who see they cannot win will often try to stop one particular player from winning, acting as kingmaker.
So I advise not doing that -- which means you need an event triggering the end of game that nobody knows is coming. There are several ways to do this, but here's one suggestion:
Choose a particular card in the Chance or Community Chest deck (I suggest the "You have won second prize in a beauty contest" card) to be the "stop" card -- As soon as the stop card comes up, that card's own event applies - and any ensuing consequences - and then the game finishes immediately and you determine the winner at that instant.
I'd suggest dividing the relevant deck into three equal sized parts then shuffling the stop card in with two of those parts (shuffling carefully) and then putting the remaining third of the deck on top -- so that the game doesn't end too quickly either. You can instead split into say 4 parts (to make sure the game doesn't finish too late either).
An alternative method of stopping early would be to stop on the second instance of someone getting doubles three times in a row -- it's not hard to come up with others. With some tweaking you can find a way to make the game finish unexpectedly and still have it more or less a reasonable length.

Random stopping points to a game are not fun especially when it can happen right after you start a game.

I incorporated a specific mechanism above to avoid it happening near the start of the game; perhaps you didn't read that part. [If you have an end that people  know is about to happen, you get behavior in the endgame that is game-breaking -- and a lot less fun]

If you're going to downvote, at least have the courtesy to explain what the problem is; I can't fix the issue if people just downvote with no indication of the problem they perceive.

When my daughter and I used to play (a few years ago, now), our rule was that the game ends when no further monopolies are possible.  Our running assumption was that only a fool would help his/her opponent get a monopoly, so trades were not going to happen. (Yes, this makes the game an exercise in rolling dice, but for children that's not a show-stopper.)
The game was declared a tie if neither of us had a monopoly, or if the only monopoly held was Baltic & Mediterranean.  I don't think we bothered about the utilities, either.
If only one player had a monopoly, that player was the winner.
Otherwise the property groups were ranked, with the owner of the highest-ranking group being the winner.  This was mostly based on our experience of who would most likely win if the game were to continue according to the rules.
Orange,
Dark blue,
Railroads,
Green,
Yellow,
Red,
Magenta,
Light blue.

This is a big rewrite to the rules and you are pretty much playing a different game with those rules so I am not sure that it really answers the question.

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Why are the "Dragon Ruler" series of cards banned in official tournaments?
"Dragon Ruler" is a Yu-Gi-Oh! card series which consists of eight cards:
Redox, Dragon Ruler of Boulders

If this card is in your hand or Graveyard: You can banish a total of 2 EARTH and/or Dragon-Type monsters from your hand and/or Graveyard, except this card; Special Summon this card. During your opponent's End Phase, if this card was Special Summoned: Return it to the hand. You can discard this card and 1 EARTH monster to the Graveyard, then target 1 monster in your Graveyard; Special Summon that target. If this card is banished: You can add 1 EARTH Dragon-Type monster from your Deck to your hand. You can only use 1 "Redox, Dragon Ruler of Boulders" effect per turn, and only once that turn.

Tempest, Dragon Ruler of Storms

If this card is in your hand or Graveyard: You can banish a total of 2 WIND and/or Dragon-Type monsters from your hand and/or Graveyard, except this card; Special Summon this card. During your opponent's End Phase, if this card was Special Summoned: Return it to the hand. You can discard this card and 1 WIND monster to the Graveyard; add 1 Dragon-Type monster from your Deck to your hand. If this card is banished: You can add 1 WIND Dragon-Type monster from your Deck to your hand. You can only use 1 "Tempest, Dragon Ruler of Storms" effect per turn, and only once that turn.

Blaster, Dragon Ruler of Infernos

If this card is in your hand or Graveyard: You can banish a total of 2 FIRE and/or Dragon-Type monsters from your hand and/or Graveyard, except this card; Special Summon this card. During your opponent's End Phase, if this card was Special Summoned: Return it to the hand. You can discard this card and 1 FIRE monster to the Graveyard, then target 1 card on the field; destroy that target. If this card is banished: You can add 1 FIRE Dragon-Type monster from your Deck to your hand. You can only use 1 "Blaster, Dragon Ruler of Infernos" effect per turn, and only once that turn

Tidal, Dragon Ruler of Waterfalls

If this card is in your hand or Graveyard: You can banish a total of 2 WATER and/or Dragon-Type monsters from your hand and/or Graveyard, except this card; Special Summon this card. During your opponent's End Phase, if this card was Special Summoned: Return it to the hand. You can discard this card and 1 WATER monster to the Graveyard; send 1 monster from your Deck to the Graveyard. If this card is banished: You can add 1 WATER Dragon-Type monster from your Deck to your hand. You can only use 1 "Tidal, Dragon Ruler of Waterfalls" effect per turn, and only once that turn.

Reactan, Dragon Ruler of Pebbles

You can discard this card AND 1 Dragon-Type or EARTH monster; Special Summon 1 "Redox, Dragon Ruler of Boulders" from your Deck. It cannot attack this turn. You can only use the effect of "Reactan, Dragon Ruler of Pebbles" once per turn.

Lightning, Dragon Ruler of Drafts

You can discard this card AND 1 Dragon-Type or WIND monster; Special Summon 1 "Tempest, Dragon Ruler of Storms" from your Deck. It cannot attack this turn. You can only use the effect of "Lightning, Dragon Ruler of Drafts" once per turn.

Burner, Dragon Ruler of Sparks

You can discard this card AND 1 Dragon-Type or FIRE monster; Special Summon 1 "Blaster, Dragon Ruler of Infernos" from your Deck. It cannot attack this turn. You can only use the effect of "Burner, Dragon Ruler of Sparks" once per turn.

Stream, Dragon Ruler of Droplets

You can discard this card AND 1 Dragon-Type or WATER monster; Special Summon 1 "Tidal, Dragon Ruler of Waterfalls" from your Deck. It cannot attack this turn. You can only use the effect of "Stream, Dragon Ruler of Droplets" once per turn

My question is: Why are the adult Dragon Rulers (Redox, Tempest, Blaster and Tidal) Forbidden?
My argument:

(From personal experience) : I have all of them, and have never experienced any difficulties, a very powerful move, even when we used all of the effects.

As by this  Yu-Gi-Oh! Wikia,

They never die if there's enough resources, and when all of their keys cards were unaffected, there were ALWAYS more resources as they'd search themselves out when banished as the costs to summon another. They make Rank 7 monsters, which are some of the most powerful in the game, with ease, can be sent to the graveyard with ease, and can search from almost anywhere. There's usually a play you can do with them. If I remember righty, the key build right now is the Hieratic Rulers. Don't quote me on all this though, seeing as I just took a glance at your statement and decided to answer in some manner.

I don't agree with this. At all.
First of all, although they never die, the cost is heavy if used repeatedly. The most they can do is 10 summons in a normal sized deck, and this has to be done over 10 turns. And if they used the "Babys" They can't even attack! Even if they did use their own effect to revive, they'd have to be recalled, drastically draining the deck!
Also, they would require many cards to get banished! This would mean a massive pile of banished cards, with only a few cards to get them out, which only a selected few can do! Additionally, there is not more resources, as eventuaally, as I have said all cards will get eventually banished before any real damage is caused!
Have I missed anything? I am pretty disappointed, because this is the deck I would have used for TCG Tournaments, and they pretty much are the only good cards I have!

This looks pretty close to a "Banning these cards is stupid, am I right?" question, which is just a rant in disguise of a question (and those are off-topic). I think that "Why were these banned" is perfectly on-topic, but it might be helpful to remove some of the personal sidenotes, like how you are upset that they were banned because they were the only goods cards you have.

@Thunderforge , I literally only gave 1 statement about myself! That's a bit harsh isn't it? And what does rant mean?

I think you missed the part where, once Dark Matter Dragon came out, DRulers were one of the most powerful series around again, even with their supporters banned and they themselves limited.  4 cards out of 40-60, with only generic dragon support, and yet they still ended up dominating events.

It's kinda like if harpies were limited to 1 Channeler, 1 Dancer, 1 Lady, and 1 Hunting Ground, with all of their other cards banned, but they could still consistently beat Zoodiacs & True Dracos.

There is a pretty good reddit thread on the subject. It sounds like they were dominating events, and several attempts to limit them without banning were unsuccessful.

TL;DR: Very strong monsters. Come from anywhere. Don't die. Can combine into stronger ones. So strong it took Konami (3-4?) lists to finally kill them.

I would accept this, but I don't use Reddit :-(. It is slow, and I have no more memory on my phone. I have to keep clearing out RAM, memory and all that!

Could you post a copy of the thread? I am anoying aren't I?!

You don't have to have a reddit account to read the content. It is way too long to post it all here, which is why I just posted the summary.

Thanks anyway. Yeah, after a gruelling attempt, I read it all lol

@VortexYT I suggest you watch on youtube or similar the Championship Final of that year (it was in 2013) so you get an idea on how broken Dragon Rulers where.. they searched themselves, destroyed things, summoned multiple copies etc... they were REALLY fast and powerful, as they also could benefit from the "best" XYZ and synchro cards that were in that date.

@DarkCygnus I watched it ages ago, but thanks anyway

Theres some very important cards that you are overlooking that made them deadly. Super Rejuvenation, gold sarcophagus, dragon shrine, burial from a different dimension, card destruction, and red eyes dark metal as a unit kept this deck running like a well oiled machine. Also any monster that couldn't attack due to babys were getting xyz'd out anyways. Even with master rule 4 in place, the existence of dragin link deck makes the return of dragon ruler one that I would be a bit terrified of.

I think dragon rulers should come back in this time because with the extra monster zone on the field it can't be that OP anymore because the cost of a dragon ruler is once a turn and with soul charge ban sure you can use them for a link summon but you can't do anything with them so I think all of them should be unbanned and be at least at 2 each


text:
Four Player Card Game Where Players are Kings
16 years ago I was taught a four player card game and I was never told the official name of it, and I have forgotten most of the rules.  I also might be remembering parts of this incorrectly too...
Rules:

The player with the most points by the end of the last set was the winner
The card game consists of 4 sets of 5 rounds where each player gets a turn at being the king of a set.
Each round the cards are dealt out so each player has 13 cards in their hand (much like Hearts)
After seeing his (or her) hand the king decides between 5 different games that will be used to determine the rules for that round
Each game is played once and only once for a set.
1 of the 5 games players could gain points while the other 4 you lost points.
At the end of each set if all the points were done correctly all the players score could be added together and it would equal zero, which served as a type of checksum.
So no matter what by the end of the set first place would always be in the positive while fourth place would always be in the negative.

The games that lost points:

Each of them had different set of cards that would lose points (similar to Hearts where certain cards gained points).
The King would start the first round and it would go clockwise around the group where each player would play a card similar in rules to that of Hearts.
From there whomever won/lost that round would start the next round much like in Hearts
One might have been called Queens, and you did not want to get the four queens
One might have been called Diamonds, and you did not want to get any diamonds

The game that netted points was different from the other four:

For this one the goal was to empty your hand first.
Whomever emptied their hand first got the most points, and it would continue till the second and third person emptied their hands, and they would get respectively less points.
There was four piles one for each suit and you played counting up much like in Solitaire.
If you could not play a card you passed.
King started and it would go clockwise around with each player playing a card or passing.
Common strategy was to holdout on a suit to force the other players to play the suit you needed in order to empty your hand first.  Also if you were the King and you looked at your hand and saw you had lots of face cards you typically would avoid this one, since they are the last cards to be played.

So what is the name of it and what are the rules?

I believe you are referring to Barbu:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbu_(card_game)

This is close, definitely the same family of card games, it is possible I was taught a variation of Barbu.

I have accepted this answer because looking over the rules a few more times, I am confident that my friend taught me a variation of Barbu, and there is enough information here for me to rebuild the rules of his variation and/or learn the original set of rules.

A pleasant game for an evening with friends.

It sounds like Trex (or Trix).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trex_(card_game)

Could it be Wizards you are thinking of... I see a lot familiar things in your post

The game used a standard deck of cards, so this is not it


text:
Is there a portable / travel / pocket Dixit, without a large / bulky board but same riddling gameplay?
I've read Differences between Dixit versions?, and the BoardGame Geek "Dixit product guide" which help, but I'm interested in something more specific.
Is there a version/expansion of Dixit that has the same "riddling/storytelling" element as the main game, but can be played with just cards? (therefore, can be easily transported in just a pocket or without taking up much room in a bag)
I've seen Dixit Jinx which at first glance looked like exactly what I'm talking about, but apparently as well as dropping the board it also has "abstract" cards resulting in, apparently, much more basic and limited riddles/stories/clues.
Dixit Odyssey is apparently playable standalone and looks like its board is much smaller (I could be mistaken from the photos). If the board folds up small, that'd be fine, I could just ditch the giant box, but it's hard to tell from the photos I can find. Some listings of expansions (example) talk as if they can be played standalone with other basic equipment but others say they need the full original.

I travel a lot and so the smaller space would be a big help. Games like Once Upon A Time are great for this, I can just ditch the box and slip the cards in a pocket or at the bottom of a bag.
Dixit appears to also be mostly about cards and riddling/storytelling (must confess I've not actually played it), but all the versions I can find appear to be either expansions, or come in a big box with a board.
I've seen a few comments various places that seem to say that some of the Dixit card-only expansions can be played as standalone games if you use something else (dice, paper) to keep score but I'm not clear about which this is true of or what would be needed.

I think you may have some misconceptions.

Dixit appears to also be mostly about cards and storytelling (must confess I've not actually played it)

it's not a storytelling game, it's more like riddle/guessing game. A player puts a card down and gives a clue, then everyone else put card down that they think will fit the clue, then cards are shuffled and other players try to guess which was original card. That's it. Gluegiving player is just called "storyteller" in game terminology, there is no actual storytelling.

it also has "abstract" cards and drops the storytelling element.

All Dixit cards have that. They are designed to spur a lot of different associations that could be used as a clues, but it's hard to produce coherent story with those.
So I believe Dixit is not what you think it is. I advise to play it/watch videos of it being played, and then reconsider your question.

Okay, my terminology is not precise (though lots of sources do describe it as a "storytelling game" presumably in the loosest sense of the word) - what I was getting at there is that from what I've seen, the "Jinx" cards have much less to work with than the regular cards and so the resulting riddles or whatever are much more basic. I'll try to rephrase

There are no official portable Dixit version I'm aware of, but to play the game you need only 3 things:

Set of cards with artwork
Way to secretly vote for cards for each player
Way to track score

Expansions are just a sets of cards, so choose one you like most. For secret voting you can make a set of tokens with different colored backs and numbered fronts, just like in base game. Or you can use dice and reveal them simultaneously. And for scoring you can use just pen and paper or any counters that go up to 30. You might need to make a box/container too, as I think expansion box is bigger than necessary.
My friend did exactly this, although not for portability reasons, just because she liked set of cards from expansion the most, and it worked fine.

Would playing cards work as voting tokens (assuming up to four players)? e.g. Everyone has a suit, puts their card face down, and when they're turned over, say, 4 of diamonds means the "diamonds" player voted for card #4?

@user568458 Yes, any method will do. Tokens are just smaller usually. Base game uses numbers 1-6, that's why dice work well, but you can use any count you feel like it. Also, one small advise: DIxit suffers a little from lower player counts, when there are too few cards to choose from,  but you can mix 1-2 random cards from the deck to somewhat offset this. So you would probably need counters/cards numbered up to 5 or 6 anyway.

If you just take the cards you can use a mobile app for voting and keeping score - search Dixit Score on the Apple App Store or Google Play Store. Full disclosure - I'm the maker of one of these apps - Dixit Score for iOS (by sovio): https://itunes.apple.com/app/id1252988123

I would recommend another game with similar feeling. Try Codnames: Pictures.
https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/198773/codenames-pictures
I think it's more portable, but there is a lot in common with Dixit (in fact people are actually playing Codenames using cards from Dixit).

Ha, liking Codenames is actually what got me interested in Dixit in the first place!

While it is a nice recommendation, this does not really answer the actual question.


text:
What resolves first? Creatures abilities or instants?
Can instants be played after I decide not to block?
I've been reading through this forum and google for this answer for a while now, the closest I have come to my answer is the thread linked above. Specifically this answer here. https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/a/12216/18889
Now to the specifics of the question. I'll use Longtusk Cub and Shock.
Opponent attacks with Long Tusk without pumping it up, leaving it at 2/2. I do not declare any blockers. Opponent decided to pay energy to make it a 3/3. In response, I cast shock.
Does shock take effect, since its an instant, before Long Tusk becomes a 3/3?
Thanks for the help in advanced.

This isn't a matter of specifically instants or slecifically abilities resolving first. I'm voting for this as a duplicate of a question that explains the stack, casting, and resolution for newbies, which will explain the actual fundamentals that aren't known or understood here (which is fine, I didn't know them either when I asked the question a couple of years ago).

Yes
In this example, the Longtusk Cub's pump ability is placed on the stack, Shock is placed on the stack and the stack resolves in reverse order. Shock deals 2 damage to a 2/2 creature, killing it; the pump ability fizzles as its 'target' is no longer on the battlefield.
A couple of comments on the way you've worded your question:

Does shock take effect, since its an instant, before Long Tusk becomes a 3/3?

The fact that Shock is an instant is irrelevant on when it will resolve, that's what the stack is for. The stack is what determines in what order effects are applied to the game. Shock being an instant allows you to place it on the stack at a good time - as a reaction to your opponent activating this pump-ability.
Also, in this case, it doesn't matter whether you declare blockers or not, or even if all of this is in the attack phase.


text:
Does Persist, Modular, and Hardened Scales give me an infinite loop?
First off, let me preface with that I do know that +1 and -1 counters cancel out.
Now, the cards for this play are:

1 : Arcbound Worker(or any modular 1 critter)
  1+: Hardened Scales
  1 : Cauldron of Souls.

To set the field, all are in play, and Arcbound worker has 2 +1/+1 counters on it. (Achieved when it was brought into play, triggering Hardened Scales)
The question is, if I give the Worker persist, have it swing, and try to bring it back from the grave, does it come back with a -1/-1 counter and a +1/+1 counter, and an additional +1/+1 counter thus resulting in a possible loop? Or do the counters cancel out before I can say Scales triggers?

It's not a loop in any case, as you'd have to activate Cauldron of Souls every time Arcbound Worker re-enters the battlefield to give it Persist again, and nothing you described allows you to do this.

What is the actual question that, if answered, would help you determine whether the cards involved cause an infinite loop? That's the question that you should be asking.

The Arcbound Worker will return with 2 +1/+1 counters and one -1/-1 counter on it, resulting in one +1/+1 counter after state-based actions. Also, there is no infinite loop.
Hardened Scales' ability is not a triggered ability. It is a static ability with a replacement effect, so while it is in play, the Worker will always enter the battlefield with two +1/+1 counters on it; the game will never see the Worker with a single +1/+1 counter on it before state-based actions or other effects are processed.
Therefore, when the Persisted Worker returns to play with Hardened Scales on the battlefield, the Worker will have two +1/+1 counters (from Modular and Hardened Scales) and one -1/-1 from Persist. State-based actions cause the -1/-1 and one +1/+1 counter to cancel out, resulting in a Worker with one +1/+1 counter on it before a player gets priority.
In any case, there is no infinite loop because when the Worker returns because of Persist, it becomes a new object that no longer has persist. You would have to somehow untap the Cauldron and give the new Worker Persist again.

Hardened Scales creates a replacement effect. The event of Arcbound Worker receiving one +1/+1 counter is replaced with it receiving two +1/+1 counters. Once a replacement effect has replaced an event, it does not apply again to the resulting event:

614.5. A replacement effect doesn’t invoke itself repeatedly; it gets only one opportunity to affect an event or any modified events that may replace it.
  Example: A player controls two permanents, each with an ability that reads “If a creature you control would deal damage to a permanent or player, it deals double that damage to that permanent or player instead.” A creature that normally deals 2 damage will deal 8 damage—not just 4, and not an infinite amount.

Since the second +1/+1 is part of the replacement effect, it is not replaced. You just get two counters, and there is no loop.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
What does Hallowed Moonlight actually exile?
Hallowed Moonlight reads:

Until end of turn, if a creature would enter the battlefield and it wasn't cast, exile it instead.
Draw a card.

This seems confusing, the creature was cast when it entered the battlefield. Unless this references tokens or something? Please clarify, thanks.

This is a good response to, say, flicker effects. If a player wants to make creatures go to exile and come back to get enters-the-battlefield triggers again, you can cast this so that they don't get them at all! Hah! This also applies to tokens, of course, along with Put a...onto the battlefield effects, meld... The list goes on. This is a fantastic card.

This card doesn't affect Westvale Abbey at all, and "reveal-cards-until effects" is both oddly specific and not really relevant to the effect in question.

@murgatroid99 reveal-cards-until-you-get-a-creature-then-put-it-onto-the-battlefield-without-paying-its-mana-cost-even-if-it's-fricking-Emrakul? Yeah, that applies. I was, however, wrong about Westvale. Modifying now...

My point is that it's not the "revealing cards from your library" bit that's relevant to the question, it's the "put the creature onto the battlefield" part. There are several other effects that reveal cards and do other things with them, and there are many other cards that put creature cards directly into play in other ways. That's why I said that your particular category, in which about 8 total cards are relevant, was "oddly specific".


text:
How does exiling cards for Delve work?
Rite of Undoing reads:

Delve (Each card you exile from your graveyard while casting this spell pays for {1}.)
Return target nonland permanent you control and target nonland permanent you don't control to their owners' hands.

Please clarify - to exile means to 'banish' from the game? Why would I do that to my own cards? If otherwise, does the {1} mean each card 'exiled' costs 1 mana each?
Finally, if so, where do the cards go, hand, library, battlefield?

Exile means move into the exile zone which, yes, pretty much means they're gone. There are some exceptions, e.g. the Eldrazi Processors, Pull From Eternity, but the idea is mostly that exile is just gone. It's a completely separate zone, not part of any other zone. (You mention hand, library, and battlefield; those are also zones, as are your graveyard and the stack, and the exile zone is separate from all of them.)
But... that's not the important part of Delve. The important part is that you can cast spells cheaply! Each card you exile reduces the amount you have to pay by one mana. Have a bunch of cards in your graveyard you're not doing anything with? Exile them all, cast that Rite of Undoing for just one blue mana!
The effect is so powerful that cards like Treasure Cruise and Dig Through Time had to be banned. It's quite easy to fill up your graveyard, and with that done, Treasure Cruise lets you draw three cards for just one mana, and Dig Through Time lets you look at seven and keep two for just two mana. Sure, the exiled cards are gone, but it's worth it!

A couple side notes about exile: "exile" was originally written as "remove from the game" - see for example this older edition of Path to Exile. "Exile" is hopefully clearer; putting something into an exile zone with generally no way to interact with it is more specific than the vague "removed from the game". And in the rare cases in which something can come back, moving something from the exile zone sounds a lot nicer than returning something from being removed from the game. (AWOL from Unhinged makes fun of this whole deal.)


text:
How can Glacial Chasm be useful?
Glacial Chasm reads:

Cumulative upkeep—Pay 2 life. (At the beginning of your upkeep, put an age counter on this permanent, then sacrifice it unless you pay its upkeep cost for each age counter on it.)
When Glacial Chasm enters the battlefield, sacrifice a land.
Creatures you control can't attack.
Prevent all damage that would be dealt to you.

Wondering what the strategy to use this card is? In a 2-player game, the game is essentially over regardless who controls the card. Please give me your insight, thanks.

What do you mean by 'the game is essentially over regardless who controls the card'

Even as a very, very casual Magic player, I can see that the game isn't over when this card is played: I can cast spells at my opponent, or they can do stuff to remove Glacial Chasm from the table. I'm sure all other sorts of obscure ways exist as well :-)

I'm voting to reopen, because while I think it may have not been worded clearly, the author appears to be confused why a player would use such a card; it doesn't sound that different from the "what is the point of blinking a creature", or "Why would I want to increase the costs of creatures that I cast?" questions.

Agreed, it doesn't seem to be primarily opinion-based: it's not asking "is this good" or "what is the best possible deck for this", just "I don't understand why you'd play this, what can it do?"

I edited to clarify and also included Glacial Chasm's current oracle text (the text from its gatherer entry), rather than what's printed on the image you'd used. Note that the oracle text often includes updates to make cards easier to understand, so when you're looking at older cards and getting confused, it's a great idea to look in gatherer. (There are also sometimes rulings that can help you out, though not in this case.)

First, if the target opponent cannot attack, and any damage received is zeroed out, yes the game is ESSENTIALLY over. The defender can hope to cycle his deck and get something to counter the Glacial Chasm. In the mean time, the opposing player (2 player game) can also cycle, amass a huge 'army' on the battlefield, and.. sit and wait. Second, I appreciate the interpretation, yes this was not opinion based, exactly as stated - why would one play this. Cards with multiple versions, the older ones tend to look.. sharper! Finally, what is gatherer? Thanks everyone!

I think where you're struggling is damage vs paying 2 life.  paying 2 life isn't damage. thus its not mitigated.  though combining with  Eon Hub  (Skip upkeep phase)... I'm not sure what would happen.  Since upkeep is skipped, does the upkeep need to be paid or does the card have to be sacrificed since it wasn't paid.... or do you just get to have all damage reduced to 0 while both cards are in play? http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=51160

@Octomjbber Glacial Chasm prevents your creatures from attacking, not your opponents. It's the cumulative upkeep that makes this difficult to keep in play for very long. First it's lose 2 life (not damage), then 4, then 6, 8, 10,12, etc. It only takes 4 turns to lose 20 life from this.

@xQbert cumulative upkeep is a triggered ability. If theres no upkeep it never triggers so no pay or sacrifice choice happens, the card just stays in play.

It's a little hard to tell from your question, but it sounds like it might be worth making sure you understand what the card does.
First off, "Cumulative upkeep - Pay 2 life". The definition from the comprehensive rules is:

702.23a ... “At the beginning of your upkeep, if this permanent is on the battlefield, put an age counter on this permanent. Then you may pay [cost] for each age counter on it. If you don’t, sacrifice it.” ...

So the first upkeep after you play this, you'll pay 2 life, the next you'll pay 4 life, then 6 life, and so on, until you decide not to pay and sacrifice it instead. So assuming you start at 20 life, and aren't gaining any, the longest you can keep it is three turns, at which point you'll have paid 2+4+6=12 life, and paying 8 more would kill you. You could also sacrifice it after less than that if you don't want to pay that much life.
In the meantime, it's preventing all damage that'd be dealt to you. So if your opponent is trying to kill you with damage, which is reasonably common, you're pretty much invincible for three turns. If it prevents more damage than the life you've paid to hold onto it, you've come out ahead on life (though you'll be down two lands).
So, is that useful? Could be, in the right sort of deck.
If your deck is one that struggles to survive until it sets up for victory, that could be quite helpful. Maybe a couple turns of preventing damage is all you need, and then you can kill your opponent before you even have to worry about not being able to pay the upkeep. Maybe all you really need is to prevent damage for one turn, and then you'll be able to stop what your opponent is doing some other way, and can sacrifice it before you even need to pay life. If you're in situations like this, you don't care at all about whether your creatures can attack, and you may not even have any creatures.
On the other hand, if you don't manage to get ready to win the game in time, you'll eventually have to sacrifice it and your opponent will be able to hit you again - and you'll have been paying life, so you'll be in worse shape to survive.
In all, this is a pretty niche effect. On top of that, it's an old card that can only be played in formats with all kinds of other powerful old cards, so it faces pretty stiff competition for inclusion in serious decks. There are plenty of other ways to stave off defeat for a couple turns (including dealing more directly with threats), and often it's better to try to win faster than to try to just delay your opponent.
But, nonetheless, it still sometimes sees play in legacy lands decks like this one. That's a deck built around using lands to provide effects, so it's actually a bit of an upside that Glacial Chasm is a land: it can be searched up with Crop Rotation or brought back from your graveyard with Life from the Loam. It'll still only be useful in certain situations, so it's just a one-of in a sixty card deck, and many lands decks don't include it at all. But some do, so there you go: sometimes useful.

I want to emphasize how powerful Glacial Chasm can be in Legacy Lands. Since you can recur it with Life from the Loam, and recur Life from the Loam with Dredge, you can do the following every turn: Sacrifice Chasm instead of paying for the upkeep cost, then Dredge Loam instead of drawing a card, then cast Loam to get back Chasm (plus possibly other lands), then replay Chasm. That way, you can get the benefit every turn without having to pay any life.

Recommend removing your one-of caveat. If the deck is designed around sitting beyond Glacial Chasm, there will likely be more than one in the deck to lock down combat damage and direct damage. Drawing into, or searching for, another copy, is a benefit: resets the Cumulative Upkeep, and you can sacrifice the first to the second.

@DrunkCynic When I said it was a one-of, I meant in the specific deck I linked to. When I wrote that, I searched on MTGGoldfish with the default time period (last few weeks) for legacy decks playing Glacial Chasm. There were only two, and both played it as a one-of. There are now nine, and it's a one-of in all of them too, with no extras in the sideboard. A deck designed entirely around Glacial Chasm would play more as you say, surely, but Legacy Lands doesn't seem to tend to. It has other things to defend against, it needs to be able to cast its spells, and so on.

Glacial Chasm all but nullifies combat and direct damage as long as it's in play.
However, there are more ways to win - for example, you can mill your opponent's deck.
The other consideration is that it only has its effect while it's in play. So if your opponent has one out, you can look for a way to remove it - red has a couple of land destruction spells, blue has a few "return land to hand" ones.
Strategically, presumably you play this because you can suffer a few turns worth of life loss in return for having a break from taking and dealing combat damage, which would suggest that you use it while you're setting up something big. Maybe you have a lot of direct damage cards. Maybe you need a few turns to get your combo together in hand. Maybe you want to spend a lot of life on the cumulative upkeep, because you have a card that lets you swap life totals when you're down to nearly nothing and something that will deal just enough damage to finish your opponent off.

Use Eon Hub. Skip upkeep all together, so it's free to keep.

Memory is a little fuzzy, but this card appeared in one of the Magic: The Gathering magazines, after someone paired it with Soul Echo to get pseudo-invincibility. Either the magazine or possibly another source then clarified or stated a ruling that you cannot pay life that you do not have, nullifying the combination. But it was interesting nonetheless.
Soul Echo reads:

Soul Echo enters the battlefield with X echo counters on it. You don't
  lose the game for having 0 or less life. At the beginning of your
  upkeep, sacrifice Soul Echo if there are no echo counters on it.
  Otherwise, target opponent may choose that for each 1 damage that
  would be dealt to you until your next upkeep, you remove an echo
  counter from Soul Echo instead.

I don't know if the paying of life rule/clarification existed prior to the combination or not.

Glacial Chasm is actually a very useful card for a few reasons, there's many ways to abuse the effect of that card, and removing a land, while possible, is still one of the harder things to do in Magic.
Let's start with the downside to Glacial Chasm, paying increasing amounts of life each turn due to cumulative upkeep. If played at full life this would give a 4 turn clock 2, 4, 6, 8 life before you have paid your 20 life. Cumulative upkeep costs give you the option to not pay and sacrifice the Chasm. There are other ways around this cost, most notably the card Eon Hub if you don't have an upkeep to pay in, you don't have to pay, or using Crucible of Worlds to let you replay the Chasm each turn after not paying the cost, that will get expensive in terms of sacrificing other lands, so you may want a way to play multiple lands each turn, such as Exploration. One thing to be aware of, though the card is rarely played this way, someone putting Paradox Haze on you will cut your clock in half, giving you an extra upkeep, Eon Hub would skip both upkeeps however. You can also temporarily mitigate this effect with cards like Transcendence or Phyrexian Unlife, you still have to have enough life to pay the cost, you cannot pay your way into negatives.
Now the second effect - Sacrificing a land, this is a one time cost to play the card, unless you are in some way replaying the card to get around the upkeep cost. It's pretty minor compared to the other effects on the card.
The third ability - Creatures you control can't attack - This only matters to you if your deck wants to attack, combat is only one of the ways to win in magic, if you're using Chasm, this is not likely the way you are trying to win.
The fourth ability is what makes the card useful - Prevent all damage that would be dealt to you. Reducing opponent life to 0 is the most common win condition, this card removes that as a win condition, if you handle the upkeep cost. And note this effect prevents damage from any source, not just combat like the restriction prevents for you.
You still have a lot of win conditions available, and since you're building the deck knowing combat won't be your win, you're building around this restriction. You still have other win conditions:

Mill
Non-Combat damage (burn)
Door to Nothingness
Poison & Proliferate

You can even win with combat, if you can remove and replay the Chasm each turn, like mentioned with Crucible of worlds, you replay on your post combat main phase, letting you attack when you want to. You just need to be aware as long as its' gone you are vulnerable still to non-combat damage at instant speed.

Transcendence and a cannot lose the game effect would let you pay pretty much indefinitely.

My previous comment is incorrect. Trancendence would trigger and fail to lose the game infinitely, so a player removed one of the cards creating that loop (say naturalizing Trancendence) it would cause a mandatory loop draw.

I actually use Glacial Chasm in a casual deck of mine. It is a Sultai aggressive mill deck that can plough through an opponent's deck by turn four or five and usually by turn seven if I'm playing defensively with the few creatures in the deck (tarmogoyf, nighthowler). Glacial Chasm can often times let me survive the additional turn or two I need to finish off my opponent's library.


text:
Werewolves of Miller's Hollow Tie
In a recent game of Miller's Hollow, the game ended when a werewolf killed a witch, and the witch killed the werewolf with their poison potion. In a situation such as this, which group wins?
The problem is, the rulebook says that

The Townsfolk win if they manage to eliminate all Werewolves.
The Werewolves win if they kill the last Townsperson.

The timing on death is only described as the following:

The Moderator will reveal the results in the morning.

Seeing as the Witch can heal themselves,

The Witch can use either potion on him/herself if he/she wishes.

That means that the answer isn't that the witch dies before they can act. Who wins?

Yes the game can end without any player alive. It happens sometimes. And in that case, the game is a tie.
With the basic rules, there can be as much as four deaths in a single night.

Wolf eats hunter
Hunter shoots witch
Witch poisons wolf
Civilian lover of wolf dies of love sickness

All the actions are simultaniously. And winning is declared in the morning and right after lynch.
By the way, during the day a complete kill can happen too:

Wolf and civilian lover vote for last player who happens to be the hunter.
Hunter shoots wolf
Civilian lover dies of life sickness.


text:
Which expansions should not be used together in Carcassonne?
I have really been into Carcassonne lately and have purchased many expansions, even though I'm still missing some of the rarer ones. I have the following:

Base Game
Expansion 1: Inns and Cathedrals
Expansion 2: Traders and Builders
Expansion 3: Princess and the Dragon
Expansion 4: The Tower
Expansion 5: Abbey & Mayor
Expansion 6: Count, King & Robber
Expansion 8: Bridges, Castles & Bazaars
All 6 mini expansions

I have since realized that many expansions have rulings that contradict and/or cause ambiguous situations together and that some just cannot be played at the same time. Are there expansions that should just not be played or are there known combinations of expansions that are the ideal game? I'm looking to have the most fun possible without having arguments over how the expansions work together.
Edit: Here is an example of problems that can occur with some expansions. This is a question I posted a few days ago: Carcassonne interaction between "The Robbers" and "The Messages"
Thanks
L-P

I made games with this expansions.
Base Game, Inns and Cathedrals, Traders and Builders, Princess and the Dragon, The Tower, Abbey & Mayor, Count, King & Robber; Bridges, Castles & Bazaars and wheel of fortune.
And all worked fine together, the most important are: 1. the game can have 4 or 5 hours long and 2. beware when the fields with barn are unexpectedly joined under some bridge.


text:
Use case for Plough Driver, Groom, & Manservant in Agricola

Plough Driver: Once you have a stone house, you can pay 1 food at the start of each round to plough (at most) 1 field.
Groom: Once you have a stone house, you can build 1 stable at the beginning of each round at a cost of 1 wood. You do not need to place a family member on an action space to do this.
Manservant: When you build a stone house, place 3 food on each remaining round space. At the start of these rounds, you receive the food.

Pros: These cards become powerful once you have renovated to stone
Cons: Renovating to stone too early can limit the creation of additional rooms and thus family size.  This will severly constrain your ability to score points/win.
Typical rennovation to stone typically happens late-game, (round 11-14) meaning you only get the cards' use two or three times.
It seems the only realistic way to use these cards is if you happen to draw at least two of them
and you also have either:

Clay Starter: When you play this card, if you only have 2 rooms in your wooden hut, immediately pay 1 food to renovate it to clay for free.

or

Conservator: You can renovate your wooden hut to a stone house without first needing to renovate it to a clay hut.

Question: Are there any other viable (competitive) use-cases for these cards?

I think you are being a bit harsh on these cards. Let's say you renovate to stone in round 11 - definitely doable. Ignoring any combos, for the cost of one action and 1 or 2 food, you could get:

Plow driver -> 3 fields for 3 food. That is likely to get you at least 6 net points (with extra if you sow at some point). It's also similar payback to one of the plow minor improvements, with the bonus that the action space required (occupation) is one that is much less contested at that stage of the game than the plow field spots.
Groom -> 3 stables for 3 wood. Similar to using the rooms/stables action to build stables (a reasonably common move in the last couple of rounds, in my experience), but a little cheaper.
Manservant -> 9 food (so 7/8 net). Not stellar, but certainly better than you'd get from something like fishing.

I think any of these could form a reasonable move, depending on the state of the game and what other actions are available. They certainly don't look horrible. Then, there are a few situations that would boost them from average to good moves. As well as the two cards you mention, there are others that might help you renovate earlier, and a few that help with playing occupations such as the tutor, bookshelf and writing desk.
I wouldn't plan my whole game around using them, but would definitely give them a go under certain circumstances, and particularly if the stone spaces crop up early, making prompt renovation more practical.

There is some truth to what you say.  I guess I'm just confounded as to why there are so many occupation cards that are only valuable when you have a stone house.

@iAndelin I think the answer to that is the "chaos management" part of the game. It can be much better to pick cards that spread over two to four different situations instead of going all in on one type of theme. This allows for adjusting mid-game based upon what others do.

I agree with User2340246 and want to supplement his answer, placing special importance on the fact that this game is all about "Chaos management", so it depends on the game state. Those cards combined could potentially be fantastic in the right circumstances, but if you go into play dead set on getting all of those out, ignoring what is going on around you, most likely you'll come up short.
It is quite possible to have one game where having a "themed" card combo will work out well, and then doing the exact same thing in another game it will not because you will have to do a few inefficient moves to make it happen.
Long story short, keep it in mind but don't force it.
I had one game where I themed it around the manufacturer and the materials-to-food type of thing, and it worked quite well. I actually destroyed that game with 50 some points. At a later date I tried the same thing and I got absolutely crushed. 30 points or so I believe. I thought about it for some time and I realized that I forced the play style and had to make some really inefficient moves to get all of the cards out, which put me wayyy behind in moves. If I would have just done one or two cards around that theme to supplement something else, it would have worked out much better.
Updated Use Case
I found a 67 point use case for these cards. Could have been even more :).
I have noticed that one of the hardest parts of fast renovation is family growth . To combat this I used Farm Steward and the Reed hut. Reed hut to get an extra person out fast, and then Conservator and farm steward for the family growth without room once Renovate came out in phase 2. Using Manservant and Maid and a couple other +1 food each round cards, and I was getting 12 food per harvest for free :) Didn't have to eat a single sheep or grain. Huge points. Oh, it also helped that I got Layabout for the Phase 2 harvest :)


text:
Can different Aces have different values?
I understand that Aces are worth either 1 Point or 11 Points, depending on the player's will. But how are multiple Aces valued? Here are some examples:

Ace, Nine, Ace
Is this always x+9+x, where:
Case 1:
x = 1 or x = 11;
(This hand would always be 11 or 31)
Or can this be x+10+y, where:
Case 2:
x = 1 or x = 11;
y = 1 or y = 11
(This hand can be 11, 21, 21 or 31)

An ace is either 1 or 11, not 1 or 10.

Ooops, @TimLymington is right, I got distracted and counted Aces as 10 not 11. However the math checks out (for what I meant to reproduce) if I don't use a King, but use an Ace. I edited to reflect that

The hand is always scored to give the best possible value for the player, such that they have the highest score they can get without going bust. The player never chooses the values or the score; it is decided by the rule and the cards on the table.
A+A+X will always be valued as 12+X, unless this would bust, in which case it must be valued as 12 (since the only such X is a ten-value card, and therefore the only non-bust score is for both aces to be one-value).
Source: professional experience dealing in a regulated casino.

Alrighty, that's the idea I had but just to be sure =)
Good explanation of the ruling btw

First off Ace value is either 1 or 11 (this is why face+ace is a blackjack)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackjack
Second you choose what it is worth, but most places will assume you want 11 unless it will bust you
So in your hand you can choose between 12,22,22,32

Each ace has it's value determined separately. If you somehow drew 4 aces, you could have 4, 14, 24, 34, or 44 as the value of your hand.


text:
Where do Delayed Triggered Abilities live?
From the rules I gather that Delayed Triggered Abilities are objects on the stack,

112.1b. An ability can be an activated or triggered ability on the stack. This kind of ability is an object. (See section 6, “Spells, Abilities, and Effects.”)

but because these delayed triggered abilities need not trigger until their trigger condition is met, it stands to reason that they remain on the stack until they can resolve. However, this seems to be in conflict with the continuation of the game after a player receives priority, which happens as soon as all players pass on priority and the stack is empty:

116.4. If all players pass in succession (that is, if all players pass without taking any actions in between passing), the spell or ability on top of the stack resolves or, if the stack is empty, the phase or step ends.
...
500.2. A phase or step in which players receive priority ends when the stack is empty and all players pass in succession.

So then, my question is: where do Delayed Triggered Abilities live, and if the answer is indeed 'on the stack', what is the resolution to the apparent conflict with continuing the game?

I think the interpretation here depends on how you read 112.1b. It says that "an ability can be an activated or triggered ability on the stack", but it doesn't say that an ability has to be that. And when it further says "this kind of ability is an object", you could interpret this as saying that other kinds of abilities may not be objects.

I have spent 2 hours of my life trying to work this question out. It's safe to say they don't exist on the stack before they are triggered, but I have not been able to prove to my own satisfaction how or where DTAs stick around until they trigger.

@Hackworth Thanks for your time. I also spent quite some time reading the rules (also/mostly for other things) but couldn't quite work out by myself the answer to this question.

You said "delayed triggered abilities need not resolve until their trigger is met", but I think you meant "delayed triggered abilities need not trigger until their trigger [condition] is met".

@Rainbolt Yes, that is the proper way to state it. I'll correct it in my question.

Delayed triggered abilities (DTAs) simply exist on their own, they do not depend on the existence of another object.
A spell or ability creates one-shot effects and/or continuous effects. Creation of a DTA is a certain kind of one-shot effect:

610.2. Some one-shot effects create a delayed triggered ability, which instructs a player to do something later in the game (usually at a specific time) rather than as the spell or ability that’s creating the one-shot effect resolves. See rule 603.7.

Their source in the rules sense is always the spell or ability that created them, which in any case already ceased to exist before the DTA can trigger; a DTA's controller is the player who controlled the source of the DTA when it resolved (603.7d-f). If a situation cares about properties of the source of a triggered DTA, the last known information about the source is used. (112.7a)
The confusion stems from the fact that "triggered ability" refers both to abilities as they are printed on cards, and to the objects on the stack that they create. You already quoted the rule for the latter case, but you left out the former:

112.1. An ability can be one of two things:

112.1a An ability is a characteristic an object has that lets it affect the game. An object’s abilities are defined by its rules text or by the effect that created it. Abilities can also be granted to objects by rules or effects. (Effects that do so use the words “has,” “have,” “gains,” or “gain.”) Abilities generate effects. (See rule 609, “Effects.”)

112.1b An ability can be an activated or triggered ability on the stack. This kind of ability is an object. (See section 6, “Spells, Abilities, and Effects.”)

For example, take any permanent with a triggered ability, such as Abattoir Ghoul or Abyssal Horror. The text that is written on them respresents triggered abilities. When their trigger condition is met, they create an object on the stack. These objects are also called "triggered ability", and, as you correctly noted, they have to leave the stack (usually by resolving) before the game can continue.
A delayed triggered ability (DTA) follows the same rules. A DTA is a triggered ability that creates instances of itself on the stack that are also called "triggered abilities". However, matters are complicated a little further because a DTA is never printed on a card, they are always created by a spell or other ability:

603.7a Delayed triggered abilities come from spells or other abilities that create them on resolution, or are created as the result of a replacement effect being applied.

However, at that point a DTA is not an object on the stack, just like the ability printed on Abyssal Horror is not on the stack, and therefore does not block the progression of the game. An instance of a DTA goes on the stack when its trigger condition is met, just like a regular triggered ability.

603.7b A delayed triggered ability will trigger only once—the next time its trigger event occurs—unless it has a stated duration, such as “this turn.”

Example: Death Frenzy, Balduvian Rage
DTAs are also always temporary, they either last until the end of turn, or they do something at the beginning of the next turn. That temporary nature is not a fundamental limitation based on the rules. It's a design decision, because it's simply too difficult for human players to keep track of more and more dynamically created abilities across multiple turns, or even the whole game.

Is it correct to say that DTA's that are not an object (so in the 'wait' state) exist independently of their source and will not be removed when the source is removed (other than when the controller leaves the game)?

Yes, it has to be that way. DTAs cannot trigger before they are created, and as soon as they are created, the spell or ability that created them ceases to exist, unless it's a static ability of course.

I think your last paragraph really hits the nail on the head as to why I was unsure about the answer. All abilities are either part of another object or exist on the stack as an object, that's what 112.1 says. But, that doesn't seem to be correct, as DTAs can exist independently from an object and only become an object themselves as they are triggered and put on the stack. In effect, the rules don't seem to mention the nature of DTAs, but we can reasonably infer that they are abilities that are a characteristic of 'the game' itself (this rule should probably be an extension of 112.1a).

Cont'd: To keep things from getting too confusing, then, the DTAs are practically always supplied with a timer that destroys them within a reasonable amount of game-time.

I think the intended interpretation is that a delayed triggered ability lives the same place as continuous effects like "Your creatures have +1/+1 until end of turn" live: nowhere in particular. They aren't objects on the stack (at least not until the delayed trigger is met) because you're right, that would prevent players from getting on with the game. Looks to me that rule 112.1 was slightly sloppy in its wording.