text:
Can I activate a bloodrush ability at instant speed?
Can I use a card with bloodrush in response to something?
For example:
If an evil opponent wants to kill my attacking Skarrg Guildmage with an
Izzet Charm can I discard Scorchwalker and use it's ability to save my guildmage?

Note that your opponent can easily play around bloodrush by throwing burn at creatures that aren't currently attacking.

Yes, in fact you can't not use bloodrush at instant speed because you can't play sorceries while creatures are attacking.

I didn't get your answer Sam I am. Could you please explain?

@Installero What Sam I am means is the only way bloodrush can work is Instant speed, since it targets an attacking creature. Sorceries can only be played during the Main Phase. Creatures can only be attacking during the Combat Phase.

Yes. All activated abilities are at instant speed unless they specifically indicate otherwise*. Because the ability is written with a colon, it is an activated ability. It does not need to be on the battlefield to be activated, and your opponent does not need to know it exists to activate it (although you must reveal it, obviously). In this particular cast, you're discarding the card as part of the cost. That's the only reason you have to discard the card. If it didn't say discard, you could activate the ability as many times as you wanted.
This is spelled out in 112.3b, emphasis mine.

112.3b Activated abilities have a cost and an effect. They are written as "[Cost]: [Effect.] [Activation instructions (if any).]" A player may activate such an ability whenever he or she has priority.

Compare this to the rules text for instants,

304.1. A player who has priority may cast an instant card from his or her hand.

So the timing for activated abilities is the same as the timing for instants.
As for it being in your hand, this is spelled out here:

602.2a The player announces that he or she is activating the ability. If an activated ability is being activated from a hidden zone, the card that has that ability is revealed. That ability is created on the stack as an object that's not a card.

Note: I said specifically indicate otherwise. This specification does not need to be on the card. For example, the Comprehensive Rules state that planeswalker activate abilities can only be activated on your turn at sorcery speed, but this is not stated on the card.

Note that in general creature activated abilities do need to be on the battlefield to be activated.  Bloodrush is an exception because it has a cost - "discard this card" - which can only be paid when it's in hand.

@Tynam same with artifact or any other activated ability. I'm having trouble nailing down the ruling that clarifies that, though. We may have to wait a week for the new comp rules to be released to clarify that.

It's rule 112.6, with the exception spelled out in 112.6i.  (It's not an obvious rule to find even when you know it's there; took me a while searching.)

Yes.
"Bloodrush" has no rules meaning (as indicated by the use of italics), but it's only used on activated abilities (that can be activated from your hand), and you can activate activated abilities whenever you have priority ("instant speed").

112.3b Activated abilities have a cost and an effect. They are written as "[Cost]: [Effect.] [Activation instructions (if any).]" A player may activate such an ability whenever he or she has priority.

So yes, you can activate Bloodrush abilities in response to instants like Izzet Charm. They will resolve before the instant, so the Scorchwalker in your hand can save your Skarrg Guildmage.

Yes, your Bloodrush would stack on top of Izzit Charm and thus resolve before the damage. Bloodrush was specifically designed to be used in the combat phase, at instant speed and only on target attacking creatures.
Also note that because this is an activated ability, this should go without saying but is still questioned again and again, cannot be countered by counter-spells. It can however be countered by the following only because Activated Abilities are named.


text:
What is the name of this game where you place colored cubes on a tiled grid?
I played a game about 5 years ago; pretty sure it would be classified as a Euro game. You have a player mat made by putting a few tiles together, I think a 2x2 square of square tiles. Each tile has a grid on it, I think it's a 6x6 grid or so.
On your turn, you take small cubes and place them on your board; 1 cube per grid space. You can place up to 2 cubes on a turn as long as the 2 cubes are adjacent to each other. There might be 2 or 3 different color cubes you can choose to place, I can't remember for sure. The object is to end up with the most coverage or to cover specific areas, something like that.
Ring any bells?

It sounds similar to Blockus (i.e. square grid that players take turns placing pieces on), but the blockus pieces are tetris-esque, not single squares

Tracked it down... Mykerinos.
http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/21441/mykerinos

Feel free to accept this answer if you're not hoping for some sort of better answer.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Implementing a map exploration mechanic cheaply
I'm building a game in which players explore and steal from a castle. There needs to be an element of surprise and risk, so I've been considering a tile-based system like that used in Carcassonne. However, I'm not a fan of the (monetary) costs associated with producing such a mechanic.
What would be a good, low-cost way to allow exploration of rooms/halls with the risk of guard/maid encounters?

You may want to refine your question so that it is less broad. Right now this can not be definitavly answered. try adding some more criteria to the ideas you are looking for. Add some criteria that the idea should not have etc.

What do you mean by 'costs associated with producing such a mechanic'?  It's hard to imagine a board game whose board or pieces could be printed for very much less than the cardboard components of Carcassonne (meeples are a different matter, of course) and the production values will strongly influence how your game is ultimately perceived.

a) reason I want to cut costs is that the game has a fair bit of dice and cards already in play, and the addition of a tile based system might start adding up.

If you already have some cards (and those are cheaper to produce than tiles), why not just use cards instead of tiles?

That's a pretty solid idea

You see that a lot in 'fantasy flight games' productions

I have flagged a suggestion that this be migrated to http://gamedev.stackexchange.com/, as it pertains more to game development rather than game playing, rules, and strategy. I believe you will get better, and more comprehensive answers there, and the posting will be more easily found by future readers with a similar problem.

@Pieter Geerkens - Board game development questions are perfectly on-topic here. The site you linked is focused on video game devel: see http://meta.gamedev.stackexchange.com/questions/316/are-we-limited-to-video-game-development-here

When it comes to board game development, I think board gamers know best what they enjoy with game mechanics. It's like a chef asking their customers how they like their steak :D. I see more "foodies" in board game forums then I do in the video game development forums.

I'd suggest you look into existing games of a similar nature and explore what they've done.  You'll see what does and doesn't work, and how well it works.  That should help you decide on a good mechanic for your game.

HeroQuest
Descent
Dungeon!

The New Dungeon is a good example also.

I think I'm going to pick up decent and give that a whirl. I'm trying to design something unbiased by other dungeon crawlers, so I tried my best to avoid them until now, since my game is based more on attribute/item drafting.

There's a big difference between "biased" and "informed".

There are several methods.

instead of tiles, cards. Less cost to produce.Benefit: cheapdrawback: usually not square.
a pile of larger geomorphs with just the rooms, not the contents thereof; cards by room typeBenefit: sturdy board chunks, highly flexible modedrawback: rooms fall into well known patterns
movable chunks of wall on a gridded boardBenefit: extreme flexibilitydrawbacks: component costs, setup time, easily disrupted.
laminated grid board with overhead pen, cards for what to draw.Benefits: the most flexibleDrawbacks: lots of work, lamination required.

I like the idea of hall cards/ room cards. I'm flirting with the idea of having corner/intersection tiles, so that it is possible to have a spiral path to the center(and the hall doesn't run off the play area), if the players are drawing lucky. I'll be taking measurements and do some play testing tonight :D.

Non-square cards aren't really a drawback - they'll still fit into a grid fine (albeit a rectangular rather than square grid).

Square cards are rotatable to 4 positions, while rectagular are 2 positions. So yes, it IS a drawback.

If your game has a DM role, I'd consider looking at the sort of "predetermined map" with slowly revealed information, with games such as HeroQuest and Descent being examples.
If your game has no DM and randomly generated maps, I'd look at a game such as Dungeons & Dragons: Castle Ravenloft for some ideas (this one in particular is similar to your Carcassonne-like tiles idea). The "Zombies!!!" games also work in this manner I believe.

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


text:
Who has the winning hand in this Texas-holdem scenario?

The table cards were A,K,K,8,3.
All four suits were on the board.
Player one had A,8.
Player two had A,3.

Is this a split pot?

Yes, it is a split pot. Both players have AAKK8. You always make your best 5 card hand from the cards available. From Wikipedia:

A hand always consists of five cards. In games where more than five cards are available to each player, the best five-card combination of those cards must be played. Any cards not included in the hand do not affect its ranking. For example, if player A holds 3♠ Q♦ and player B holds 3♣ A♣, and five cards 4♣ 5♦ 6♦ 7♠ 10♥ are available to both players, the players hold equally ranking 3-4-5-6-7 straights despite the fact that the player B's ace ranks higher than the player A's queen.

Wow 20 upvotes. I guess i should start asking and answering poker questions.

The best hand in either case would be two-pair with 8 as a kicker (A-A-K-K-8); it makes no difference if the 8 came from the table or from the hole cards.  Since suit also doesn't matter, the hands would tie.
So yes, it would be a split pot.

If the table were A, K, K, 7, 3, the A-8 hand would win. The same would be true if the table were say, A, K, 8, 7, 3. Then the A-8 holder would have Aces and eights with a K kicker, while the A-3 holder would have A, A, 3,3, K, a weaker second pair.
But the actual table gives the A-3 holder A, A, K,K, 8, same as the A-8 holder.
That leads to a split pot.
The 8 on the table "counterfets" (nullifies) the effect of the superior 8 kicker held by the fist hand. At the same time, the second pair of kings means that the A-8 does NOT beat A-3 with the better second pair.


text:
Is the four move checkmate the fastest way to win a game of chess?
Is the four move check mate (1. e4 e5 2.Qf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5?? 4.Qxf7#) the fastest way to win a game of chess, or is there a quicker way?

FYI: The checkmate you describe is known as the scholar's mate

@ColinD - Yes, although a slightly unusual move order. The OP has Qf3 on move 2, which is easily countered by Black's Nf6. This is the Napoleon Opening.

This question was recently asked on chess.stackexchange: http://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/2509/minimum-moves-to-checkmate

There is a quicker checkmate called the Fool's Mate which only takes 2 moves.
The moves that demonstrate the checkmate are:
1. f3 e5
2. g4 Qh4#

Also, of course, the fastest mate for White is in 2 1/2 moves (rather than the 3 1/2 given in the opening post) by making a 'blank' move and then following this in reverse: 1. a3 f6, 2. e4 g5, 3. Qh5#.

So 'one move' means 'a move for White then a move for Black'. I did not know that.

Can this be edited to show the moves on the board itself like some questions on Chess Stack exchange?

The fastest way for Black to mate is
1. f3 e5
2. g4 Qh4#

1.f4 is also possible so there are two versions of this.
There are more versions for a fast mate by White:
1. e4 g5
2. d4 f5
3. Qh5#

Coupled with this f, g pawn advances there is also another neat version
which takes the same amount of moves for White to mate:
1. e4 e5
2. Qh5 Ke7
3. Qxe5#

Thereby fastest white mate can happen in three moves (precisely 2½
moves) whereas fastest black mate can happen in two moves.


text:
Advance to GO, collect $400?
I've recently come back to playing Monopoly, but one thing that's intrigued me is the following card, in the Chance pile.

The wording says "Advance to go (Collect $200)".  Modern versions, like the one I have in my home, are "Advance to GO, Collect $200".
My question is, what exactly does it mean, when it says "Collect $200"?  Since there's also a message on the GO tile, stating "As you pass GO, collect $200", does this mean if I draw the card above, I can collect $400 in one go? $200 from what the card says, and another $200 from the board?

The parentheses are essential.  They mean "Advance to Go (and collect $200 as you normally would)."  I think they're intended to remove the ambiguity where you advance past Go and land on Chance in one turn, and you draw the above Chance card.  In that case, you would get $400: $200 for advancing past Go before landing on Chance, and $200 for advancing to Go with the Chance card.  But on your next turn, moving past Go, you wouldn't get another $200.

No, you only collect $200 dollars, not $400. From the official rules:

Each time a player's token lands on or passes over GO, whether by
  throwing the dice or drawing a card, the Banker pays that player a
  $200 salary. The $200 is paid only once each time around the board.

You only land on GO once, so you only get one payout. The message on the card is just to remind you that landing on GO also pays out.
However, there's nothing stopping you playing this variant as a house rule, which is not uncommon:

According to the official rules each player receives $200 for passing
  Go. However, due to the Chance and Community Chest cards which
  instruct players to Advance to Go and Collect $200 - A popular house
  rule is that you collect $200 for landing on Go plus $200 for actually
  passing Go. Therefore, it is common to pay someone $400 for landing
  directly on Go: $200 for actually landing on Go plus the $200 as an
  advance for their next move when they literally pass Go.

While nothing prevents you from having a house rule of a double Go payout for landing on Go, or from other house rules that increase the amount of money in the game, these house rules are responsible for Monopoly's reputation as a game that takes hours to play.  The game is designed to siphon off money as it goes.  That's what keeps it short.  Try the game a few times without these house rules and you'll find it can be finished in a reasonable amount of time.

In monopoly there are two kinds of cards that move you around the board.  Ones are that keep moving you clockwise until you hit the set square.  This is one of them.  On those cards it says to collect 200 if you pass go.  In this case you are landing on it directly.
The other types of cards move you directly to a square.  This may be the only one but it makes the point. "Go directly to jail, do not pass go do not collect $200"

So to answer your question, the reason that text is on the card is just to differentiate it from the go to jail card

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


text:
Can a Seafaring race attack the land from a sea or lake region?
As a seafaring race if I conquer the lake in the middle of the map, do the regions adjacent to the lake become vulnerable to my attack?

Yes, you can attack these new adjacent regions after conquering the seas or lake. The Seafaring rules state that the seas and lake are considered empty regions for you:

Seafaring
As long as your Seafaring race is active, you may conquer
  the Seas and the Lake, considering them as 3 empty Regions. You keep
  these Regions even once you go into Decline, and continue scoring for
  them for as long as you have tokens there. Only Seafaring races may
  occupy the Seas and the Lake

Since they are just regions, the rules for subsequent conquests apply:

The active player can repeat this process to conquer as many new
  Regions as he wishes during his turn, provided he has enough Race
  tokens left to accomplish these successive conquests. Each of the
  newly conquered Regions must be adjacent to (i.e. sharing a border
  with) a Region already occupied by his active Race tokens, unless
  permitted otherwise by his Race and Special Power combo.

Go forth and conquer!


text:
Do Attached Cards follow the Swapped Monster when Creature Swap is used?
Suppose you have cards attached to a creature, and then use Creature Swap. Do those attached cards follow the monster to the other side of the field?

So I know my comment started this question, and if you want someone else to answer I understand. But here is why I do not think they go with the creature.
The official rules about equip cards:

These cards give an extra effect to
  1 face-up monster of your choice
  (either your own or your opponent’s,
  depending on the card). They remain
  on the field after they are activated.
  The Equip Spell Card affects only
  1 monster (called the equipped
  monster), but still occupies one of
  your Spell & Trap Card Zones. If
  possible, place it in the zone directly
  behind the equipped monster to
  help you remember. If the equipped
  monster is destroyed, flipped facedown, or removed from the field, its
  Equip Cards are destroyed

Emphasis mine.
So it points out that Equip cards you control can in fact be on monsters your opponent controls. Creature Swap only says it gives your opponent control of the creature. Not anything else. In my mind the objects attached to the creature would still be under your control.

I want to put additional emphasis on "If possible, place it in the zone directly behind the equipped monster to help you remember." which seems to strongly suggest (maybe even explicitly declare) that the card there is ONLY a reminder and nothing more.  Thanks for the clear analysis. I'll link this answer to the other question... in due time. BUT!  I would still like interesting techniques to be put on the other page!  In the mean time, I will give others the opportunity to answer as well, and will choose your answer in a few days if I see nothing more convincing.  Thanks for the input.

Confirming this. Equip Cards don't move unless an effect specifically makes them move. Whatever happens to the Monster they equip, as long as it remains a legal target, they will remain on the Field in exactly the same Spell/Trap Card Zone they started in. The comment about placing them behind the Monster is only about the Zone you initially choose. If they were mere reminders, they would neither block a Zone nor require you to place them in one (but rather attach to the Monster card itself as is seen, among others, in Pokemon).

any equip cards stay attached to the monster, but stays under your control even if the monster moves to your opponent's field. it only leaves if said so by an effect, the monster leaves the field, or gets set (flipped facedown)


text:
If I have no creatures in the graveyard, do I nevertheless have one Type of creature?
I have a card called Solidarity, reading:

If you have only 1 original Type of monster in your Graveyard, face-up monsters you control with the same Type gain 800 ATK.

In the case where the graveyard has two or more creatures of the same type then it's obvious we can use the effect; similarly, if the graveyard has precisely one creature in it, then it has exactly one type of creature in it (and so the effect may be applied).
But if the graveyard has no creatures in it, I would argue that there is exactly one type of creature in it (this is a vacuous truth). I wanted to use the card in this situation but my opponent absolutely refused it.
To me this truth is as valid as saying the Empty Set is Hausdorff.  I'm hoping there are mathematicians out there that also play Yugioh and are qualified to answer this; alternatively, I am hoping there is an official answer to this, not just some opinions.

Your premise is faulty - this is not a vacuous truth. If your graveyard is empty, the set of creature types of creatures in your graveyard is also empty. That empty set has zero elements, not one. Vacuous truth is still truth, but your example is not such a case. If the card said "if all creatures in your graveyard are the same type", then you'd have a real question.

-1 for not linking the specific card in mind, AND for tagging this with both MTG and Yu-gi-oh.   Since this you're talking about a scenario in yugioh, MTG rulings don't apply.

If you improve the question, I'll undownvote

Also, I don't know about Yu-Gi-Oh rules, but with Magic, rules questions are definitely best served by specific examples. The rules are complex, detailed, but generally clear - as long as you actually have a specific situation to apply them to. Given this, you probably should not be asking about both games. You want to look at actual cards and actual rules.

Woah!  All the downvoting I wasn't aware that there are so many rules for how to ask a question on this site.  It is my first time here, I think you two might be taking the point system a little seriously.

@Squirtle No, we're downvoting because (as it says when you hover over it) the question is unclear or not useful. If this bothers you, it's because you are taking the reputation system seriously.

I've edited your question to include the actual card you're asking about, and remove the MTG portion. It's now a specific, answerable question, so I also removed my downvote. If you're trying to ask the general question about vacuous truth and are tempted to roll back the edit, I would encourage you to find a specific example where a statement is actually vacuously true and would matter to the game (neither is the case here).

if the card worked the way you wanted it to, in the situation where no cards are in your graveyard, surely all your creatures would get +800 ATK? how would that not be a ridiculously broken card?

That's an interesting point....  If it works for no creatures... then which field monsters get the 800?

The effect should not apply. You do not have one Type of monster in your Graveyard; you have zero. This would be different if the card said, say "all monsters in your Graveyard are the same Type" - that statement is certainly vacuously true with an empty Graveyard.
Further, it doesn't even matter. The effect only affects monster of the same Type, and obviously none of your monsters have the same type as... the null set. So even if the condition were satisfied, the card would do nothing.
(Disclaimer: I don't play Yu-Gi-Oh; I'm just reading what the card says.)

For completeness' sake: There is a Card that says "all Monsters [some location] are the same type" (can't remember the name or the location it was referring to). That card will not work of you have 0 Monsters in that location although it's technically a vacuous truth. I've had this discussion with Konami officials a while ago and tried my best to support the vacuous truth argument, but in the end Konami makes the rules and they came to the conclusion that however it's worded, the intention was to work only if you have at least one Monster, so that's how it works.

@scenia I guess you can read it as "there are monsters there, and they all have the same type".

Funnily, that's exactly what they told me back then. It's still wrong from a logical/mathematical point of view, but then again, we're talking about a Children's Card Game. (No offense intended, only saying the game's target market is children!)


text:
In two-headed giant, does Nightveil Specter exile cards from both heads?
If Nightveil Specter dealt combat damage in a two-headed giant game, do I choose which player's top card to exile or do I exile both?

You only damage one player, so only one player will exile a card. You get to chose which player you damage in the Combat Damage Step.

810.7a Each team’s creatures attack the other team as a group [...]
810.7f As the combat damage step begins, the active team announces how each attacking creature will assign its combat damage. If an attacking creature would assign combat damage to the defending team, the active team chooses only one of the defending players for that creature to assign its combat damage to. Then the defending team announces how each blocking creature will assign its combat damage. See rule 510.1.

Keep your options open, give it double strike!

With DS, the player would get to choose twice, making one plyer exile twice, or each exile once.


text:
Can House Arryn be used under the rules of the base game?
In the Feast for Crows expansion a new house (House Arryn) was introduced along with a new set of rules for a 4 player game that changed the way you scored victory points. Is it possible to use House Arryn (i.e. the cards and unit setup) with the normal Game of Thrones rules, or perhaps with the Dance of the Dragons expansion cards and setup? This could lead to some new ways to play 5/6 player games. Has anyone tried it or thought about it?

Pypok made objective cards to play 6 player feast of crows style game of thrones:
http://enter-there.com/expansions/dance-with-dragons/


text:
How do fish and road building cards apply to bridges?
How many fish does it take to build a bridge?
If you get a road building development/progress card how does that apply to bridges?

http://www.catan.com/service/combinations/fishermen-catan-rivers-catan says "If you pay 6 fish, you can build a bridge".
Meanwhile, the rules for the Rivers of Catan scenario specifically state that you cannot use the "Road Building" development card to build a bridge, and that would seem to extend to any combination of expansions/scenarios that replaces the normal development cards (including the Traders & Barbarians scenario, or the Cities & Knights progress cards).

Thank you for your answer, we came up with a house rule that allows a person to build one bridge in lieu of two roads for progress/development card.

That sounds like a nifty little variant, and it doesn't sound like it would be game-breaking either.


text:
Keeping track of many independent variables on a physical board?
I have a large number of independent variables which I would like to represent on a physical game board. One idea I had was to implement these using rotating disks, a little like the metal spinning mechanism used to select numbers on some types of lock.
Would it be possible to implement these spinning mechanisms on a physical board game as smaller plastic spinning disks? Have any games made use of this idea? Three or four of them would have to fit on a little square with many of these little squares on the board.
Alternatively, is there some other mechanism that would solve the problem more elegantly?
Here is a picture of what I am considering implementing. However I am not sure of the feasibility of adding about a hundred of them to a board.

What are the numbers for? Perhaps each player could have a sideboard; in the game Wolsung (the resource game not the skirmish game) the players collect resources on a sheet they keep in front of them. Might it be possible for players to collect cards that represent their teritories and then put counters on those cards that represent resources or such like?

Who is your target audience? What is the intended age range?

@Pow-Ian , 13+ Pretty much any mature audience. Although I'm sure I could ultra simplify a children's version.

@CLockeWork , I was considering each player having a sideboard for some other variables but specifically to understand exactly what I am thinking of imagine a tiny version of risk where each country has population, wealth, & one or two other variables. They have to be transparent to all the players & multiple sets of these per sq. The reason they have to be on the board is because the resources and people can be captured. There will already be movable pieces for the armies. If I gave each player a card for each sq. it would be too opaque and destroy the purpose of info that should be public.

@CodeCamper - In light of your other question, and your comments there, I've rewritten this one to be less specific to "spinning disks". This makes the questions distinct enough to stand on their own.

you could try a slide-rule-like device

One solution I've seen to this is a cardboard disk with a hole cut out; the disk can be rotated to reveal any of several items below. Battlestar Galactica does this to track resources; Chaos in the Old World tracks both advancement towards victory and threat.

Using 100 moving-parts dials sounds problematic. It would be a huge effort to set up, expensive to produce, and there's a lot of pieces to break. Assuming that each number to be tracked is small, another solution would be a six-sided die for each number, or using a few counters in a specified location.

That is almost exactly what I am looking for except each territory needs the spinning device. That picture is almost exactly what I was thinking of. The problem is the numbers need to be transparent to the players for each territory. What type of counters could I use? Take your example with the Battlestar Galactica suppose something like that(4 numbers) but in each square maybe about 2-5 inch square.

How about a small cardboard square with a number on each side? When the value changes, you rotate the square so the appropriate number is on top.

There will be at least 4 players and the numbers for simplicity sake I can summarize it from 0-9. Preferably 2 digits 00-99. The problem is I need several of these numbers constantly updated on multiple squares but it is more than just 1 number. At this point my concern probably will be compactness and durability. The square can be as large as 5 inches so I'm debating having some sort of multiple sliders on each territory.

It sounds like your game wants to be a video game. The machine does a great job of handling many more details and components than people reasonably can on a board.

Actually that is the case but I am also trying to make a board game version in order to force myself to implement more simplicity. There is an underlying theme to the game which enables it to be a board game and a video game, my only problem is keeping track of a few numbers on each square which is where the computer has a great advantage. I imagine if I could somehow make or find those little plastic wheels like on a combo lock or possible implementing smaller versions of those cardboard wheels you showed me it would resolve the problem.

@CodeCamper As long as you're trying to force yourself to simplify, you could consider simplifying this part of the game.

@Jefromi I am considering reducing the numbers to where I can use tiny chips on little squares with pictures to indicate what the variable is.

It's not uncommon to use dice to track values, turning them to the appropriate side.
For instance, in Shadows over Camelot, knights use D6s to track their health in this way and for no other reason (i.e. they're never rolled).
If you need to track higher numbers, consider using D20s or even two D10s to get numbers from 00 to 99.
The advantage with this is that they don't take up board real estate and they're easy to understand for new players. A downside might be that they're easy to knock over, but most board games suffer from knocking the table.

Two D10s might work although it is so stationary I wish I could somehow build it physically into the board. But right now my square space to put this is about 2 inches but I can increase it to 5 inches.

I Like this Idea but I would say make cavities in the boar where the dice can rest or elevate the board with feet and make slots for the dice to sit in so they would be almost flush with the board. This way they are not in the way and you can roll them over easily.

Good idea! Where can I purchase 10 sided dice in bulk? I wonder if I should do base 6 just because of the abundance of 6 sided dice and the cube shape.

EXTREMELY clumsy in play. It's the cumbersome in Shadows, with a d6; it's far worse with a D10 or d20, as consecutive numbers are not adjacent, except on specially made spindown d20's.

Depending on how your board is arranged, you could try using stiff rectangular strips of numbers instead of circles, which might be easier to make. You'd need a big enough 'window' that players with large fingers can easily slide the strip up and down (or you could just make people use a pencil eraser to push the strip -- style the pencil and now you have a cheap, nifty component!).
If you're OK with just a two-digit number, a pair of disks or strips could work -- the left one represents the 10's place, and the right one the 1's place.
If you're still prototyping game mechanics, the dice-based suggestions are great, but there's definitely an aesthetic difference between dice sitting on a board and numbers embedded in it, especially if you have other objects on the board. Good luck!

Thanks! I am okay with a 2 digit number but worst case scenario a 1 digit number will due but I'd have to round some of the mechanics, my goal right now is to simplify as much as possible. Currently 2 inch squares of blank space(there is other space but that will be used for the moving pieces) I can potentially make the blank space up to 4 inches. The aesthetic difference you mention with the dice is precisely why I wanted to have something built in the board or more stable and separate from the movable pieces. I was also thinking about maybe some stacking mechanism but it would be too much.

Dials have been used on a number of board games.
They have usually been used on the main board as randomizers; in this role, the archetypical ones are Life and Nuclear War. Life uses a plastic base affixed to the board and a plastic wheel setting on a pin in the base, which is spun. In Nuclear War, its a plastic arrow connected to a hub, and the hub passes through a hole on the cardstock display.
The other common mode is as a choice indicator. The most notable use being Avalon Hill's Dune boardgame, but several other designer games make use of them. Almost all of these use a pair of cardboard wheels with a plastic hub, sometimes 1 piece, sometimes 2 pieces, separate from the main board.
Rarely used, but I've seen it done, is a cardboard disk with a hub which drops into a hole drilled into the board. Chaos in the old world does this with 4 dials.
Another mode is just a marker which sits on a dial printed on the board. Supremacy, Imperial, and a many others use variations on this, either linear as with Supremacy, or circular as with Imperial. Note that this allows "overloading" a given track by having multiple markers on the same track, as with Supremacy using a black disk on the player board for Nukes and L-Stars, and colored disks for Neutron Bombs (on the Nukes track) and K-Sats (on the L-Stars Track). One of the optional rules is to use colored markers for the action type bids, placing them on the turn outline as if it were a track.
So, yes, there are multiple ways to create and use pseudo-lock-dial displays, and spiners. Plastic hub and arrow assemblies are standard parts commercially available in bulk. Plastic hubs are available as well. Bindery Screw Posts can be purchased as well, which can be used with cardboard or plastic wheels to bind them to cardboard boards.

I made some measurements on my current prototype and right now my design has 2.25" x 2.25" space to fit in some mechanism to contain at least 3 numbers preferably 2 digit although if it turns too impractical it can be 1-10 or 0-9. The game is already implementing pieces and chips for other things but I need to fit at least 3 numbers in this space that will be transparent to the players(my mini model has 4 spaces but the final version will be 25 spaces which is scaled down from my computer version which has 100 spaces) so whatever mechanism I choose it will be a lot of them not just one big 1.

I think the only problem with the plastic wheels used typically in games to incorporate randomness is that they are huge and my purpose is merely to keep track of some attributes which need to be visible to all players on the playing field easily. Some links and pictures would be great if you could add them to your post. I can make the squares a maximum of 5"x5" although right now it is about 2" and I need to fit at least 3 numbers. Right now I am trying to sketch some sort of sliding mechanism to see how that would work although I am almost positive I can't fit it on my small squares.

I keep looking at this combo lock and I can't help but think if only I could get little plastic combo locks and make my board to have a little depth I could fit a bunch of numbers in a relatively small space which can be easily incremented and decremented but I can't find a particular name for such a device or if it exists.

Use a 2.25" diameter wheel, a 1.75", and a 1.25" diameter wheel, stacked. A single shared hub runs through the center of all three and down into the board. Put the arrow pointing to the selection in the corner of the 2.25" square...

You could just write the numbers on the board. Wits and Wagers gives each player a small plasticized card and a white board marker, you could have similar built in to the board. If there are different types of numbers, you could use different colors as well as different sections of the whiteboard to keep things clear.
This is probably a more expensive option, but it would be quite space-efficient. A 2"x1" rectangle should provide plenty of space for three 2-digit numbers.

Right now the square is 2"x2" but I can size it up to 4"x4"(don't really want to if I did I would call it the Jumbo version). The numbers have to be incremented every round although the white board is certainly an interesting idea it might become frustrating for these particular variables since they can go up every round by 1 or 2. Although thanks for this whiteboard idea I might use it for another component, do you have a link to where I can get them / pictures?

@CodeCamper Here's a picture of the Wits and Wagers components on BGG, you can see the cards and pens in front of the two players. The pens can be bought at any office supply store, there's probably a lot of options for how to do the white board, none of which I'm informed about.

It soulds like you want to mark several values per each space on the board. One of cheapest solutions that works both in tight space and with arbitrary values is to simply use counters. Depending on what exactly you're trying to accomplish it might get a bit fiddly, but for the most part it should be perfectly manageable. Twilight Struggle is a good example: http://dicehateme.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/ussr.jpg

Gaming Counters
These are some nice counting devices that I use.  They could probably do a custom sticker for whatever variable you are tracking.

Welcome to board and card games. This is a very short answer with a link to a commercial site. The question is 6 years old. Besides is does not completely answer the question.
Are you perhaps in the process of spamming this site? If not, I might suggest to expand the answer,

Regardless of whether this used to answer the question, it doesn't anymore because the link became useless and the answer is basically link-only. > "We don’t have any products to show here right now."

@Mast The link still appears to work for me.

@JoeW The link works, but there's no content behind it. That's no longer available, as per the quote I have in my comment.

@Mast I still see content behind the link, and just because you can't buy the product doesn't mean it isn't still useful as an idea.


text:
Has any mathematical analysis of The Resistance been done?
I played The Resistance for the first time a couple weeks ago and am interested in writing a simulation program to test strategies. I know that mathematical analysis has been done on Mafia proper, but does anyone know of work that has been done to analyze The Resistance?

Do you have a link to the Mafia analysis?

I've read this one : http://arxiv.org/abs/math/0609534 but there are others on arxiv.

Here's a mathematical analysis of a potential winning strategy for the Resistance side: http://amininima.wordpress.com/2013/05/18/the-resistance/
And there's a thread on Boardgamegeek where they're trying to determine a formula for "spy-ness": http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/759016/using-excel-to-find-spies
Hope this answers your question!

Huh. So the tl;dr is: she proposes a strategy (for a game of mutually-acknowledged perfectly-intelligent logicians with no Tells) that gives Resistance a mere 26.6̅% chance of victory in 6-player game — am I reading that right? With the acknowledged lack of optimality proof, I wonder if (and, if so, how far) that could be improved.


text:
Could Armed/Dangerous target an opponent's creature, to force a block with all creatures in play?
Could I target an opponent's creature, then use all creatures from both sides to block that creature, so that Bam! I get rid of something nasty? I think this because the wording on Dangerous says "ALL creatures..."

Keep reading past the first couple words: "All creatures able to block..."

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

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

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

Yes, but it wouldn't be useful to do so unless it's something like Illusionary Servant.
The effect would be useless when your target an opponent's creature (except in very obscure situations). For starters, since Dangerous is a sorcery, the opponent wouldn't be able to attack with the creature before the effect ends.

It actually could be useful to target your opponent for more than illusionary sacrifice. Let's say someone has that effect on a high power deathtouch creature (say revenge of the hunted on deadly recluse?). That's bad because he'll do one damage to each of your creatures since they must block. If you cast Dangerous targeting a weak attacker, you'll be given the choice of which one to block, naturally picking the one that won't kill most of your dudes. He'll still get through with damage, but at least it won't be a board wipe.

@corsiKa, You appear to have stopped reading too soon, as I addressed that already. Dangerous can't target attackers because it's a sorcery. What you are describing is one of the obscure situations I mentioned. (You need Hypersonic Dragon in play and you need to be attacked by two creatures and one of them must have Lure.)


text:
Can a player respond while a spell is resolving?
I cast Wistful Thinking on my opponent, whose hand has two Mountain cards. Wistful Thinking resolves and my opponent draws a Shock and another Mountain.
Can my opponent cast Shock before discarding it?

Do you mean "Can my opponent cast Shock before resolving the discard part of the effect"? Your opponent certainly cast cast Shock before discarding it, because once it's cast, it's not in the hand and therefore can't be discarded.

No, that is wrong.

No, they can not cast the Shock.
Comprehensive rule 608, all parts.
The fact that the card text contains 'then' does not make the two parts separate abilities. The whole effect of drawing, then discarding, happens in that order while the spell resolves. There is time in between drawing and discarding for the new information to be reacted upon. However, there is no break in the resolution.
There is no passing of priority until the spell completely resolves, and thus no opportunity to cast the instant.
Edit June 2018:
In regards to the Madness key word and abilities:
A Madness trigger may cause someone to believe that in response to a card being discarded the 'Madness' ability interrupts the resolution of the thing on the stack that would trigger madness. This is not the case.
Rule 702.34 which defines Madness has this to say:

702.34a Madness is a keyword that represents two abilities. The first is a static ability that functions while the card with madness is in a
  player’s hand. The second is a triggered ability that functions when
  the first ability is applied. “Madness [cost]” means “If a player
  would discard this card, that player discards it, but exiles it
  instead of putting it into their graveyard” and “When this card is
  exiled this way, its owner may cast it by paying [cost] rather than
  paying its mana cost. If that player doesn’t, they put this card into
  their graveyard."

Though it is not explicitly stated here, this does not cause the player who's card is exiled to receive priority at that time. The card is in exile and when the player who exiled the card has priority again, they are able to choose to cast the card(s) in exile or let it(them) go into the graveyard.

The whole effect doesn't happen at once, first two cards are drawn, then a moment later four cards are discarded, even if they are part of the same ability. Still, this rarely matters, because nothing can be played in between both actions.

good point. the use of 'at once' is a bit inaccurate since they would happen in order and there would be time in between the two actions for the player to react.

Depends on what you mean by "react", there is no time in which a player gets priority, so a player can't actually "do" anything in between.

by 'reacted upon' I mean they get to decide which of the cards now in their hand, including the ones they just drew, will be discarded.

Different question but related (and I know this is an old answer), might be worth mentioning the Madness mechanic as that might be a not so uncommon situation where newer players might think something is being "responded" to mid resolution.

@Malco that is very fair. I added the rules text and a brief about it.


text:
When can I scramble?
In Axis and Allies Pacific, What constitutes an adjoined sea space for a scramble? Sea space in square contains the fighters or all sea spaces that touch that square?

Up to three fighters/tactical bombers can be scrambled into each sea zone adjacent to a territory that contains a functional airbase.  Any aircraft that are used in this way cannot be used for any further combat operations for the remainder of the round.  You may select units to be scrambled after the attacking player has finished all of his combat moves and you may do so any time the appropriate sea zone in attacked by either air or sea units and that included defending the territory against amphibious assaults.
An example is sea zone 109 and 110 are adjacent to United Kingdom territory.

What about planes on an aircraft carrier? Can they scramble to defend all of the spaces touching their space, or only the space that the carrier is in?

@PaulMarshall That should be asked as a separate question, not as a comment on an answer.


text:
Can one 40k army fight another of the same?
My friend is starting a Necron army, and I was going to start a Space Marine army, but Necrons are really an interesting army to play, while the Space Marines are very generic. Could I build a Necron army and fight his Necron army? Is this against the rules?

If you don't like Space Marines, why not just pick something else? Orks, Eldar, Tyranids..?

There is nothing in the rules to prevent two armies from the same codex from fighting one another.  I would just be sure that you can tell who each model belongs to; this is not too difficult once they are painted, but it could be easy to lose track of who is on which side if there are all just bare plastic.
With the current fluff, Necrons Overlords have their own Dynasties and it is easy to justify a power struggle between two of them.  Most other codexes can have fluff reasons to fight amongst themselves.

That would normally be allowed. Characters are only unique within an individual army list; two different players can have the same unique character. Unless players agree to do something different, of course.

Any army can fight against any other army, even Space Marines of the same chapter.
It depends on how much you care about the story of your battles as to how odd this may feel.
If you are just playing games, it won't be an issue. If you want to run a coherent story or campaign then you'll need to justify why the two armies are fighting, and that may be difficult.

One commander stole the other commander's favorite play thing? If they were Orks it would be super easy to justify.

An easy one for the entire Imperium: one side has been suspected of being tainted by Chaos. Now you can fight anyone! You still have all of your old enemies, and now even your friends are enemies. (Eldar vs. Eldar might be hard to justify, but add in any Farseer prophecy and it suddenly works just fine. Maybe Tau vs. Tau is harder to justify?)

@PaulMarshall Tau vs Tau is easy - it'd happen if two Ethereals disagree vehemently enough.

Short answer:
If you both want to play with same armies, I don't see what the issue is; AS LONG as you know which models belong to who.
If you want to be a player that respects lore, then 2 players might not be able to play the same race v each other (haven't played for a while, but -> Imperials would not fight each other, whereas Orks totally would.) So Necrons could fight each other and it would make sense.

Imperials would fight each other if they believed the other army to be lead by a HERETIC!

That's true, or if an army had gone corrupt, collaborating with Orks.


text:
Will Counterbalance counter storm copies?
Counterbalance allows you to reveal the top card of your library whenever a spell is played, and counter it if the revealed card has the same mana cost.
If an opponent has cast several spells to ramp up to casting Tendrils of Agony, and I have Helm of Obedience on top of my library, do I get to counter all of the storm copies?

No, Counterbalance only counters the original Storm spell.

706.10. To copy a spell or activated ability means to put a copy of it onto the stack; a copy of a spell isn’t cast and a copy of an activated ability isn’t activated. [...]

Since the copies are not cast, Counterbalance never triggers for them.


text:
Can split second be used to block damage prevention effects?
My friend plays a stupid amount of prevent all damage instants. If I attack, and use something with split second, can he still use his prevent all damage? Or with split second ending the stack, is he unable to do anything except block?

Split second is very handy against somebody who plays a lot of counter spells

No.
Note the text of split second:

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

Split second only prevents casting spells and activating abilities while the split-second spell itself is on the stack. This means no player may take an action in between casting the spells and resolution. After that spell resolves, however, you'll still pass priority around normally (meaning your friend now gets to play other spells or abilities) before going on to the next part of the turn.
If you want to prevent your opponent from casting spells, you'll need countermagic or a Silence effect. Try Grand Abolisher if you want to keep your opponent from messing with your attack phase.
Alternatively, you can play cards that cancel out the effects of his spells — e.g. Skull Crack or Leyline of Punishment against damage-prevention effects.

Re "This means no player may take an action in between casting the spells and resolution", note that Triggered Abilities can still be added to the stack, and Special Actions can still be performed.

Alright figured it would be too good to be true. I guess ill have to sideboard some skull cracks to deal with it. With 12 prevent all damage, (fog, darkness, and holy day) ill only need one strong attack. Thanks for the info!

Split second only prevents casting spells and activating abilities while the split-second spell itself is on the stack.
If you were to cast a split-second spell after blockers are declared, he wouldn't be able to respond to it with his instant. But as soon as your split-second spell resolves, both players are again given the chance to cast a spell. He could cast his then.


text:
What is this brick-based board game?
I'm looking for the name of a board game from the 80's or 90's that was made up of yellow bricks in a small table that you had to tap out with a small red pick or hammer.

This is pretty vague. Any other details you can provide would be very helpful. Size, materials, object of the game, vertical or horizontal stacking..?

When I read brick-based game I immediately thought of Settlers of Catan... :-X

Not yellow, but that sounds like Don't Break the Ice: http://www.amazon.com/Hasbro-4784-Dont-Break-the/dp/B00000IVZJ

These variations have yellow tiles:

Summ Bumm (Spielkiste Bee edition)
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/image/1283724/dont-break-the-ice
Wer andern eine Grube klopft (German First edition, 1976)
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/image/1070084/dont-break-the-ice

This fits my memory as well, and white bricks can easily yellow with age. (My poor Legos...)

I've added pictures of variants with yellow tiles.


text:
What is a solid basic strategy for surviving Eldritch Horror?
Is there a solid strategy that you can apply to increase the chances of a win?
Of course the Eldritch Horror statistics do help in working out what can go wrong/right. But they do not offer a specific strategy -- if there is one.

Based of the similar question for Arkham Horror.

I'll enumerate some general tips below (followed by keener insight after having played over 150 hours):
1) Do not obsess about keeping the world tidy, clear of gates, of monsters, of clues. Accept that it is messy and will just get messier. Think more about taking from it what's useful to you at any point in time.  You have so few turns before that mythos deck runs out, before that doom counter reaches zero. Think of it like you're standing at the doorway of the shack in the middle of the pen filled with walking dead zombies. Bee-line it.
2) Make your optimal clue-gathering plan. Some characters are particularly effective in obtaining, dispersing clues, which are generally good as dice saving graces and often essential for mysteries. Assess if you have a better plan than simply "let's see where the clues fall and get there fast". Example: Use the spy's special action to generate clues every turn; keep a partner close by to hand them off.  Move the Psychic one space over and park her in Arkham to try to get spells and score the Clairvoyance spell likely to make her a clue factory (and pair with her ability to send clues to players around the world).
3) Think about what your character does best and specialize. This might be obvious to seasoned co-op gamers, but became more obvious to me when realizing how fruitless it was to try to clean the board systematically and how much more useful it was just to tune out what a creepy bug in south america is doing at the moment. Take the politician; just sit in San Francisco with him for the first 2 or 3 rounds acquiring assets for your fellow team members and make the best of boosting their stats and equipment as early as possible where it will give you the best return.
These are only a handful of observations from 5 play throughs (1st loss, then 4 wins with very few players and an even number at that since I suspect the odd numbered teams have a tougher time after looking at the gate/clue spawn rate on the reference cards).  The takeaway is to make an initial specialized plan and then reassess 2 or 3 rounds in because, at that point, you probably have acquired assets, conditions (hopefully blessed), and spells that require you to shift your strategy to fully optimize your best chances of winning.  Stay nimble in that regard.
Edit: After having now played over 40 campaigns across all the expansions, I thought it would be nice to write down my thoughts on things to consider for optimizing success in Eldritch Horror.  In reviewing my old answer, I feel the advice I gave was more high level and hand-wavy, while the tips I'll list below will aim to be more focused and specific
1) Take Debt and Acquire Assets
The penalties for a collected debt are often well worth the extra bonus 2 successes. If you have a spare action to waste removing a debt, go ahead, but I usually reserve this strictly for investigators who have such high influence that they spend their turn removing debt and then acquiring assets again (i.e. Politician).  Having a large number of assets on hand is so valuable and can be handed down even after your investigator dies.
2) Take one (dark pact) for the team
When given the option to take a Dark Pact or advance doom, strongly consider taking the Dark Pact.  If the pact results in you or another being devoured, doom advances anyway, and thinking of the investigators as expendable allows you to get fresh characters and not hang onto someone who is flailing.  The Sanctuary asset card can sometimes come into play to remove the Pact before you suffer that 1 of 6 roll anyway.
3) Stand together
Look for ways to strengthen each other by moving together.  Many items and abilities work with others on the same space (Urban Guide Asset, Actress additional roll passive ability, Secretary's amazing abilities(!)). The certainty that comes with strengthening each others' rolls often outweighs the disadvantage of covering less space.  Often, key items such as the Mi-Go Brain Case and Plumb the Void altogether alleviate travel issues largely.
4) Tokyo
Look to Tokyo as a potential base of operations for sniping monsters across the board. The ability to damage and discard will minimize both the damage and uncertainty of combat encounters, and the wasted turns traveling (spend those turns acquiring assets, etc)
5) Specialize skills first
Take your best skills and lean toward improving those, not creating a 'renaissance' investigator.  This is just basic common strategy to try to assign roles quickly, such as the 'gate closer' (Shaman is great for that) or the 'spell accumulator' (Astronomer is great, and acquiring flesh ward and install bravery are very useful to soften damage to health and sanity).

Hi, Joey. There's no need to signal edits, as the revision history is easily visible. (Just click on the "edited X ago" link.) In fact, it's preferable that posts read as a seamless presentation of your final ideas.

First and foremost, the goal is to solve mysteries.  Thus, you first thought should be "How can I further that?"  Otherwise, here is an ordered list of potential good moves:

Solve the current mystery.
Resolve any active rumour -- This might be number 0 (zero) depending on how awful the rumour consequences are...
Get clues.
Close gates -- thus fight monsters.
Get an expedition encounter.
Do whatever benefits your character right now: resources, rest, prepare for travel, whatever...  This depends on your current set up.

This is based on a limited set of games (probably a few dozen or more) but helped by the statistics found in the question.
Note that none of the expansions (I have them all) have so far altered this ranking.

I've found that certain characters do provide benefits in certain scenarios. Some of their abilties really can be game winners such as the shaman's ability to manipulate the gate stack. It's also becoming clear that different tactics are required for different Great Old Ones. We have mastered Azathoth with an all round mix of characters and tactics but we are currently battling Yog Sothoth and it seems a more Lore and magic heavy approach is required. Likewise Shub Niggurath seems to be monster heavy so some real brawlers with serious weaponry will be required for that particular black goat of the woods.
Happy Hunting and be careful out there.


text:
Which bidding system is assumed by default at BBO?
Which bidding system is assumed by default at Bridge Base Online (for humans)?
I asked in chat several times in different games (ten times I think) and nobody answered.
Is it Bridge base basic? Or maybe YACL?

Gittelman was keen to propagate his bidding theories, so I would assume Bridge Base Basic.

Gittelman is the founder of Bridge Base Online.

That you need to ask this question simply cements my resolve that bidding systems are table talk.

Playing with random partners on BBO is pretty frustrating. You will find a lot of "advanced" players playing "SAYC" who:

make minimal offshape takeout doubles
make minimal (off or on)-shape takeout doubles, then freebid
interpret your jumps in competitive auctions as strong
"weak 2 bid" = "I have a six card suit and a bad hand"
"penalty double" = "I am sad that the other side won the auction"
"five hearts" = "I am in denial that the other side won the auction"
2C = "I have 17 high card points and a singleton"
4NT = universal language of love.

These bad habits aside, there's still the problem of unfamiliarity with each other's conventions, etc. My advice is: use minimal gadgetry, pass a lot, when you know that someone at the table is lying, don't automatically assume it isn't your partner, and, eventually, when you find a partner who, if not necessarily good, doesn't violate (1)-(8) above, add them as "friend" and then you can play with them the next time you are both on BBO instead of going fishing in the void.

How true. Sounds like bad players abound on the internet as well as in physical clubs everywhere.

Simple answer- No system- its an open community. If high level players like JEC don't need to specify a system why would anyone else.
Partial answer- Most English speaking bridge players are American so can assume they play some sort of Standard American- they assume you are psychic so you know what they play.


text:
What is the point in disclosure of the bidding system to opponents?
I fully understand and agree with the rule "do not communicate in illegal ways" (pose, tone of voice, etc), but I don't quite understand the point in requiring the disclosure of one's bidding system to one's opponents. What does this aim to achieve?
True disclosure sounds hard to achieve in practice. Partners know each other's habits, and as a result bidding communication still has "hidden" parts - it is just not possible to describe every habit to opponents.
This raises a related question. Suppose the bidding system should be disclosed. Why not then require only a single bidding system for all players?

re "Why not a single bidding system for all players?" It exists; it's called SAYC, or Standard American Yellow Card, and it is unplayable by any competent player of even Auction Bridge because of its simplicity and irrationality. I say the latter since if combines too agreements that exist nowhere except SAYC because they are mutually incompatible: 5-card major openings and a natural 1NT response to an opening bid of 1 of a major suit. Consequently only extreme novices play SAYC..

Bridge players hate guessing.
Allowing non-disclosure will basically turn the game into a pointless guessing game, with luck (and to some extent, the bidding system) becoming the predominant factor, rather than skill. This will surely drive away the good players, and all that will be left will be self proclaimed bidding theorists...
Just because you cannot achieve 100% full disclosure does not mean you get rid of it completely.
The current rules [of full disclosure, different systems] allows for (somewhat reasonable) innovation in bidding while trying to pit opponents on an even ground, making skill the predominant factor. Making skill the main factor, with the right amounts of luck, is what keeps people coming back.

I don't think eliminating mandatory disclosure would take out skill at all. Deciphering the opponent's bidding system would be a really interesting skill to include in the game. Plus, even if you haven't fully diciphered theirs, there is still plenty of skill in playing without that knowledge.

@evanrmurphy: So you play a total of 2 hands against a pair in a Matchpoint tournament. What do you think you will manage to decipher?

It's a good point. The dynamics would change quite a bit. One interesting feature of the change is that players who dominate tournaments for some time would have their bidding systems studied and deciphered more than other players.

So new players would have some advantage from their bidding system being still undiscovered, while established players would be defending a known bidding system.

@evanmurphy: Players who dominate tournaments would be well advised to keep changing their system. Not having full disclosure is completely impractical IMO and seems like you are ultimately trying to achieve full disclosure anyway!

Imagine the opportunities for abuse.  Without a disclosure rule, partners can make up any system they want and thereby communicate in illegal ways.  There's really no difference to the other players between "qble and Monica's private bidding system that we won't disclose" and conducting the conversation in Swahili; either way it's obfuscating information that should be available to all players.
(I am neither a bridge player (my husband is) nor a speaker of Swahili, just in case that matters.)

A counterargument would be as long as the communication is done in the language of legal bidding and nothing else, why should meaning be disclosed?  If you can obfuscate the communication that way, and still end up in the right contracts, congrats to you.

I agree with Aaron's conterargument. Bidding is literarly too thin channel for info passing, especially taking into account interfering with ops and penalties for wrong contracts. Moreover some tournaments rules asks not only to disclose convention itself but also to develop and disclose defending strategy against it - that is too artifical.

@qble: re "Bidding is literarly too thin channel for info passing"; Clearly you have never watched or played the game at a high level. The channel is remarkably high-bandwidth as played by expert players. The key to widening the bandwidth is understanding the meaning of all the calls and bids not made.

+1, Very astute for a non-player; I assume your husband is more than merely competent.

@PieterGeerkens, I'm not in a position to know. :-)  (He hasn't been playing a lot lately, but I've heard some anecdotes.)

@user3264's point is interesting. However, I'm skeptical that this massive layer on the game of mandatory disclosure is the best way to address the possibility of illegal communication.

It is a "sporting" rule as much as anything else.
The opponents need to be given an opportunity to learn your bidding system. Some will take it, and some won't. But you can't have a situation where the opponents had "no chance" at understanding.

Opponents always can understand, at least something - from game mechanics. Placing wrong bid at high level would lead to penalties, if such penalties are not enough then maybe mechanics should be adjusted? Or just imagine chess, where after each move you would had to explain all your intent to op, otherwise "he would not have chance at understanding" + you would have to provide all openings you use and know before game, so he would have "opportunity to learn your openings".

@qble: In chess, you can SEE everything. Whether you "understand" it or not is up to you. In bridge, opponents are supposed to be able to "hear" everything, and not in Swahili either, as Monica pointed out. But of course, you hope that they don't fully understand.

Unknown bid system is not Swahili - partners who use it are acting within game mechanics, with possible fines for "wrong" actions, etc.    Ok, another example - football forward before match should send his habbits description during penalty beating to goalkeeper. Otherwise goalkeeper would jump in wrong direction...

@qble It sounds like there's an additional excellent question there: what exactly does it mean to disclose a bidding system, and what determines whether it's a legal one?

@Jefromi I guess this is addressed by special formalistic forms like "ACBL Convention Card". By the way, at some tournament rules some types of bidding systems are banned (like non-natural, too artifical), which beats following @Pieter's evolution argument

@Jefromi: Your question has been more or less asked and answered here: http://boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/522/in-bridge-which-bids-need-alerting. Basically, any system is legal as long as you disclose it. So to answer the question, disclosing "legitimizes" a system.

To address the second question - where would new bidding systems come from if all players were required to play the same system? How would one enforce that?

I don't know - maybe if everyone is supposed to know exact meaning of every possible bid in any case then just use some kind of explicit protocol, without artifical rules? Current status looks a bit akward - "system must be fully disclosed including defense against it". I don't like such artificiality - such rules are "hard" to describe within concise game mechanics.

@qble: Why are you presenting this XY problem? What issue is really at hand?

@qble: There may be a misunderstanding here. You are required to disclose how you defend against specified conventions (since that involves you making artificial bids) but not how other people can/should defend against yours.

@TimLymington: Actually, in many event classes a suggested defence must also be provided, for any particularly unusual agreements. See the ACBL SuperChart on page 3 here: http://www.acbl.org/assets/documents/play/Convention-Chart.pdf

@PieterGeerkens: Thanks, I really did not know that. It doesn't, however, apply in Britain: http://www.ebu.co.uk/laws-and-ethics/blue-book. Perhaps 'suggested defenses' may be required but 'suggested defences' are not? :)

@TimLymington: They may be suggested defences, but they are often expletive-deleted ineffective. ;-)


text:
Does a Sengir Vampire survive when blocked by four 1/1s?

I attack with Sengir Vampire which is a 4/4
My opponent declares four 1/1 blockers

Would Sengir Vampire die or would it gain counters from the three 1/1 creatures that died before attacking the last 1/1 blocker? Thus allowing it to survive while killing the four 1/1 blockers.

All of the creatures will deal their respective damage at the same time. Since Sengir Vampire's +1/+1 ability is a triggered ability, it uses the stack, and before any of the +1/+1 counters go onto the Vampire, it will die.
State-based actions (like death from damage) will happen before the triggered ability on the stack can resolve.
If any of the creatures involved have first strike, however, this changes things:

If the Sengir Vamire has first strike, it will deal it's damage before the blockers, killing them before they have a chance to deal damage, giving it the +1/+1 counters
If the blockers have first strike, they deal damage to the vampire before it deals damage to them, killing the vampire while they remain alive
If all parties have first strike, the outcome is the same as if none of them did.


text:
How can we remember to score points for claimed routes?
When we play Ticket to Ride we sometimes forget to score the points and move the score markers. You know; you're playing not only to get points, but to enjoy the game. And when someone realises they forgot to score a route, we need to recalculate all the routes from the beginning, and that's not very fun.
What are the best ways to not forget that you need to score? Maybe there's a specific way to mark what you're going to do, like scoring first and only then paying for the route? But when playing games with tunnels I fear we could forget to "unscore" such points if we couldn't complete the route.
I hope we're not the only forgetful players out there, and someone already came up with a solution to this. We've played ten games so far and are still having this issue.

Great question! I have the same problem.

We usually just don't bother to score any points at all until the end of the game.  Then, you go over all the claimed routes and score them, as well as scores for tickets to determine the winner.

we inevitably need to do this anyway because there is always one drunk guy who swears we forgot to include a route. Only 50% of the time that drunk guy is me.

I hate this system. It's really hard to keep track of which tracks you've already scored. I guess you could score tickets first, then longest track, then finally remove the tracks as your score then.

We keep score during the game but almost always are off by a few points at the end. It's not always from forgetfulness - it's also possible to bump the score markers. Even when counting at the end it's easy to miss a route or count one twice. So at the end of game, here's what we do:

We count one player at a time. For each player:
One player will examine each route and call out the score for the route. To minimize chance of error, the longest continuous string of routes is traced first and fingers are sometimes used to mark a section that was skipped because it was not part of the longest string of routes.
A separate person moves the score marker, keeping their eyes only on the score track.
If the score is very far off from the accumulated game score or if there is any doubt whatsoever, we count again.
If the second count is different from 1st count, we count a 3rd time.

This may seem laborious but it usually takes about a minute per player. We find that most errors occur when there are many different side branches. A player with a string of 30 or more cars with no branches is easier to count accurately the first time.

I keep track on a piece of paper.  Doing this lets you go back anytime during the game to see if a claim was not scored.  At the end of the game, if the game scores are close, I'll go back through and double check or re-score the claims.
Something like this:
Plr1        Plr2      Plr3
2    2      4    4      4    4
4    6                  1    5
1    7                  2    7
4    11

I have written an app for that: Ticket To Ride Score Calculator app for Android.
The app allows you to scan your Ticket To Ride game board using your phone's camera to calculate the game scores automatically.
With this app you can simply take a picture of the game board using your phone's camera and it will automatically recognize player trains and calculate the scores for you.
You can find additional information about the app here and a video overview here.
Support for iOS devices is coming soon.

Welcome to [boardgames.se]! Please note the rules we have for promoting your own apps. Failing to comply can lead to downvotes.

that looks amazing, but you may need to rename it at some point to something like 'score calculator for ticket to ride' or 'score calculator for ttr' since google tends to take down apps that include the name of the product you don't own first in the name.

In at least 2 of the maps, scoring after the end of the game will not work.
On the Great Britain map, you get bonus points during play :
From the moment you have purchased the «Boiler Lagging» card,
you score 1 extra point for each route that you claim.
Also, from the moment you have purchased the «Steam Turbines» card,
you score 2 extra points for each Ferry route that you claim.
When combined with «Boiler Lagging», you score 3 points for each Ferry route that you claim.
From the rules:
«Some players like to add up the points for the routes they claim
at game end, rather than each time a route is claimed. Because the
score for some routes may be affected by technologies such as
the Boiler Lagging or the Steam Turbines, waiting until the end
to compute Routes points doesn’t work in this expansion.»
Reference : Rules for Ticket To Ride United Kingdom : https://ncdn0.daysofwonder.com/tickettoride/en/img/tt-mc5_uk_rules_2015.pdf
Something similar occurs in TTR - Africa.
From the rules :
«When Claiming a Route, in addition to playing Train car cards, a player may also simultaneously play some of the Terrain cards in front of him to double the points value of the Route he’s claiming.»
At the end of the game you will have no way of knowing which Terrain Card doubled the point value of any route.
Reference : Rules for Ticket To Ride The Heart Of Africa : https://ncdn0.daysofwonder.com/tickettoride/en/img/tt_africa_rules_2015.pdf
A solution
The only way that I have found to not forget to score as you play is to use the «Talking Feather» (or some other unique objet) used by many native American Indian tribes. One can use, for example, the letter-holder from Scrabble, which reminds me of a rail. Whoever has the object plays. In order to start your turn, you must receive the object from the previous player. That action reminds everyone to score the route that has been claimed before the player starts.

I have played the game for many years now and find that it is most enjoyable if you totally forget to count during the game and do the scoring at the end.
It is critical also to not make mistakes when you do all the scoring. I have always looked for a mobile app to count my scores with.
Unfortunately there was no app out there that considered the bonus scores for all the different Ticket to Ride variants.
So I went ahead and created my own app. I share with you all the link, it is an android app, Time to Count.
Please feel free to comment it, since I am always looking for ideas to improve it.
And hopefully this app is what you were looking for to avoid mistakes at the time to count.
You can check out the webpage at https://timetocount.com
If you are on an android phone you can download the app from the Google Play Store.


text:
How can we make Don Bell more balanced?
With Don Bell having 4 bullets and the ability to get an extra turn after the first (on a draw of a heart or diamond), he can become an overpowered character very quickly. He is likely to get 1 more card and shoot one more bang then Lucky Duke, who can draw a third card on a heart or diamond, and always has a shot at a second turn, unlike Vendetta which is one round only and only for hearts.
Because of this my normal group doesn't play with him because he is deemed unbalanced and overpowered. Some house rules that have been suggested have been lowering him to a 3 bullet character and making the extra turn only work on hearts, or leaving him at 4 bullets but needing to sacrifice a life in order to draw for an extra turn.
I was wondering anyone had any ideas on house rules that can make him a more balanced character.

One suggestion I've seen is to not let him draw 2 cards at the beginning of his extra turn.
So this power might for instance let you use a green card immediately after playing it, instead of having to wait for everyone else on the table to take a turn; but it's much less likely to allow the Don Bell player to just run away with the game.

This looks like it will work to keep him in better balance

We independently came up with @thesunneversets' idea, and found it a bit unsatisfying - it ends up being "Don Bell sometimes gets to use an extra Bang! card during his turn or can use a green bordered card immediately".
It's a fairly weak ability: since it's random, Don Bell can't plan for it and neither can any other player; even if he does get the chance, there's only a few "active" green cards for which this is useful in the first place (most of them are Missed! or Dodge equivalents); and players end up forgetting to use the power half the time anyway since he's the only character who regularly draws after the end of his turn.
The chance at an extra Bang is pretty good, but Doc Holiday already does that more reliably (and he pays any two cards instead of one Bang).
We decided that the interesting and unique part of his power was the interaction with green bordered cards, so we flat out changed his power to:

Don Bell may play green bordered cards from his hand as if they were brown bordered cards.

This lets him use the various green misses when he's being shot at, along with doing things like using a Buffalo Rifle as a lower-cost Springfield or a Pony Express as a Wells Fargo. He still can't use the Canteen as a holdout beer, though.
It gives Don Bell interesting decisions to make (do I discard some cards and keep this green in my hand where people don't know I have it, or do I play it so I can keep more cards in hand?), and it gives other players interesting decisions to make related to him (do I play this Pony Express, or do I keep it in my hand since he would want to Panic it from me and use it immediately? Do I take the Conestoga from the general store even though I don't really want it to deny him?)
Finally, from a design standpoint (because this matters to us for some reason) it also provides a certain symmetry with Delgado's ability to interact with blue cards.

That sounds interesting but to me it seems more like a completely new character then a rebalanced Don Bell. Sounds like a good use for the blank character card.

@JoeW Yeah, I know - that's just what we ended up doing with him, because his normal power was just too good. I mean, the closest comparison is to Black Jack, who only gets one extra card on red, and he has to show the table somewhere between 1/2 and 1/3 of the cards he draws...

You should also consider Vendetta from the a fistful of cards expansion because it also can give players another turn (and seems to be part of what Don Bell was designed from) but that only works on hearts and  only lasts for 1 round.


text:
How do Rum and Lucky Duke/Horse Shoes interact?
With the introduction of the Gold Rush expansion, there is no FAQ on how to handle Lucky Duke/Horse Shoes with Rum.
Lucky Duke says each time he "draws!" flip the top two cards and chose one. Horse Shoes says whenever you "draw!", you reveal 1 additional card and choose the result. Rum says "Draw!" 4 cards: you regain 1 life point for each different Suit revealed.
So how do these interact? It's not clear if Rum means to draw 4 cards, or draw 4 times. My play group has ruled that it is intended to draw 1 card 4 times, which would mean Lucky Duke and Horse Shoes would take full advantage of it. But that may not be the case; it's hard to say since Lucky Duke was created before there were any cards that had a draw of multiple cards.
Here are the different ways I can see this working.
1) Based on the wording of Lucky Duke he only draws two cards for Rum and would draw a 3rd card if he had Horse Shoes, putting his use of Rum at a disadvantage compared to all other characters. This would also mean all other characters would draw 5 cards from Rum and they would chose the 4 that they would want.
2) Based on the assumption that Rum is intended to draw 1 card 4 times, Lucky Duke would get 4 draws of 2 cards, and chose one after each two card draw to determine how much life he gets back. If he has Horse Shoes he would draw 3 each time and any other character would draw 2 each time.
From my searches I have seen people arguing for both sides. Personally I'm thinking the second choice is right since it seems that Lucky Duke should have an advantage when it comes to draws.

Another possibility:
This doesn't follow the letter of the rules, but since it's a translation, I think it might be more appropriate to attempt to follow the spirit of the rules.
There's several characters (most, even) whose special abilities essentially are like having a "built-in" item. Willy the Kid has a built-in Volcanic, Paul Regret has a built-in Mustang. I think the intention for Lucky Duke is to have built-in Horse Shoes. Although the wording is different on Lucky Duke and Horse Shoes, for any standard single-card "Draw", the effect of either one is the same.
Continuing with this logic, the correct way for Lucky Duke to use Rum, would be to draw an extra card, for 5 total. And if he has Horse Shoes, then he gets one more for 6. This is much like Jourdonnais, who has a built-in barrel. (Okay, Jourdonnais' ability isn't exactly a barrel since it only applies to Bang! cards, but it's darn close.)
This isn't official, but in addition to the reasons above, I think it makes sense from a balance perspective. Lucky Duke definitely shouldn't have a disadvantage for a luck-based card like Rum, but drawing 8 cards is perhaps too good. See the probability discussion below, and you can decide for yourself how good Lucky Duke's ability should be.
Probability simulations:
From our comments, I got curious about how much of an advantaged each of these methods would allow. I coded it up and a million simulations of each. As I suspected, the drawing two-at-time method is nicest (but it's not as much of an improvement over drawing 5 and choosing 4 as I would have thought). The means (and standard deviations) are in the table below, and the graph below that shows the distribution of unique suits obtained under each rule. If anyone wants to see the code, leave a comment and I'll edit it into my answer.
Draw 4   Draw5   Draw 8
   2.7     3.1      3.3
  (0.63)  (0.64)   (0.56)

Under the draw 5 rule and the draw 8 rule you're the odds of gaining 3 life are about the same (58.8% and 59.9%, respectively), but you see an increased chance of only gaining 2 life in the Draw5 rule.
  Gain    Draw 4   Draw5   Draw 8
2 life    30%      15%      6%
3 life    58%      59%     60%
4 life    11%      26%     34%

I abbreviated the draw-2-at-a-time rule to "draw 8", but I modeled it appropriately as two-at-a-time, picking one of the first 2 randomly, then for each subsequent two cards picking randomly unless one suit was already selected and the other wasn't. Each set of draws was from a 52-card deck with 13 of each suit. I'm not sure exactly how many cards Bang uses, but it's probably close enough.

Drawing 2(3) cards at a time is really not that much more powerful then drawing an extra 1(2) cards. In fact it can actually be a disadvantage. For example if the first draw you get a heart and a diamond and chose hearts and with your second draw you draw 2 hearts it would potentially cause you to gain less life then if you could chose from all 5(6) cards at once.

You are right, it can help but it can also hurt depending on the draw.

Very interesting but I think there is one thing to take into consideration that Lucy Duke only has 4 bullets so he could only get back 4 life if he was the sheriff. Also if you where to account for the horseshoe then you are still limited to players who are the sheriff or a couple of ones that have 5+ bullets such as Big Spence to take advantage of getting 4 health from rum. For most cases I am not sure if there is a real difference between getting back 3 or 4 life (heck even between getting back 2,3 or 4 life for the 3 bullet characters).

Thinking about it I think the bigger concern for rum and how many cards you flip is how many cards get burned in the flip.

This is not directly the answer but may help you solve your issue.  From the FAQ of www.Mayfairgames.com
http://www.mayfairgames.com/gamesupport/FAQ_bang.htm

Q: Can you explain how Lucky Duke’s ability works? Does he use it
  every time he draws cards?    A: Lucky Duke can be a little confusing
  because of an unfortunate limitation in English that does not,
  apparently, exist in Italian. The problem comes from the definitions
  of "draw!"
At the beginning of your turn, you draw cards and add them to your
  hand. Lucky Duke's ability has NO EFFECT on this type of draw.
  Similarly, his ability does not impact Wells Fargo, the Stage Coach,
  or Panic! In fact, his ability ONLY affects the second meaning of
  "draw!"
Sometimes, like when you have the dynamite, you are called to "draw!"
  as in "draw, pardner" in a gunfight. It's supposed to be a pun, but it
  didn't translate so well. In game terms, this means that you flip the
  top card and look at the suit in the corner to see if you get the
  result you are hoping for.
Lucky Duke's ability allows him two chances to get a favorable result
  during this kind of "draw!" So, if you have dynamite, and you flip
  over a 3 of spades, Lucky Duke can use his ability to flip the second
  card to see if it saves him from the dynamite. Then, both "draw!"
  cards are discarded, just like normal.

This doesn't help at all since the draw that it is talking about is a single card where in the case of rum it is 4 cards and the question is does that mean draw 4 cards at once or draw 4 times.

The point I'm trying to bring is that the Lucky Duke's have no effect in the situation since it's effect happen only when we flip card to determine effect.

That is what the Gold Rush card Rum does. DRAW!  4 and for each different suit you gain 1 life. It really isn't different then any other DRAW! Card since you are flipping for an effect.


text:
How do Lasso, The Judge and Belle Star interact with equipment cards?
I am wondering how Lasso/The Judge/Belle Star should interact with equipment cards, since the rule book doesn't seem to be very clear about interactions with other expansions.

Lasso: cards in play in front of all players have no effect.
The Judge: players cannot play cards in front of themselves.
Belle Star: during her turn, cards in play in front of other players have no effect.

The rules say that the only way to remove one from a player is by paying the purchase cost + 1 gold, and they can't be the target of panic/cat balou cards/effects. But how does that apply to  effects that say "cards in play"?
Also, since it's not mentioned at all in the rules: if a sheriff kills the deputy, does that mean he would lose all his equipment in addition to the normal losses?

Lasso and Belle Star would keep permanent (which I think are black-bordered?) equipment cards from having any effect. You can, however, still play one, since those cards don't specifically prevent playing cards. Since removing one by paying cost + 1 gold is an action (according to the Gold Rush rulebook), you should also still be able to do that even in Lasso or Belle Star are active. The cards don't have any effect, but they're still equipment.
I'm less sure about The Judge. It says you can't play cards in front of you or any player, but I think "play" refers to playing from your hand. Getting equipment cards is called "buying", so I'm inclined to say it's a different action and isn't affected by The Judge. I'm not completely sure about that, though, and I haven't found any errata about it.
The rules seem to indicate that equipment cards are identical to other cards in play when it comes to elimination. It does say that all equipment cards are discarded when eliminated, and the rules for Shadow-Gunslinger says "All the rules for the elimination of a player still apply: You discard all your cards in hand and in play (including all equipment)...." That tells me that a Sheriff who eliminates a Deputy would lose his equipment just as though they were regular cards in play.

The group I play with has been using this as a guideline for dealing with the situation since there hasn't been any errata about it that I have seen yet.


text:
What's the best strategy for winning while using all 3 stations in Ticket to Ride Europe?
Ticket to Ride Europe pocket edition has an achievement that I just can't get! It's winning using all 3 stations during the game. Can anyone suggest any strategies on any of the following:

Should I play with 3 or 4 bot players? (You can't use double tracks with just 3)
Should I select the 20+ pt "long route" and try to complete it?
Should I place the stations at the very end? The bot players keep ending the game before I get a chance to establish the stations. If I place the stations earlier, it's hard to keep adding new destination tickets.

Play with 2 or 4 bots. You'll be needing stations more with more competition for routes. Why 2? because you don't get the second half of the doubles without 4 players total. This means that to win, you'll more likely need to make more connections through occupied chunks.
If winning cleanly, grab some tickets, and take one or two that you can connect by dropping a station.


text:
Does "Drive Him Back!" also prevent advancement of the monster on this turn?
Castle Panic's "Drive Him Back" states:

Play this card and move 1 Monster all the way back into the Forest, keeping it in the same numbered arc.

Does that monster then stay there during the next immediate Phase 5: Move Monsters?  Or does that monster go ahead and move to the archers ring?

Since the rules state that all Monsters move ahead in Phase 5 (and there is nothing specifically stating that this one should not move), I see no reason why it wouldn't move along with all the other monsters. That's how my group has always played.

Unless a card specifically states otherwise you do exactly what is said on it. So in the case of Drive Him Back you would move the affected monster forward from the forest to the archer ring on Phase 5.


text:
Confused About Stunned Investigators
When an investigator is stunned I understand that it limits the moves from 2 to 1.  Optionally, the investigator can spend their action to remove the stun.  If I spend the action first, is the move limit still in effect until the next turn?  Or can I then move two times?

From the rulebook:

Investigators: A stunned investigator only receives one  Movement Step
  during his turn. If he becomes stunned  during his turn, he may not
  take a second Movement Step....
....An investigator or monster may have multiple stun tokens on him,  and
  may only discard one per turn (either during the Investigator  Trading
  Step or the Monster Attack Step – see pages 10–11).
Keeper Turn in Detail
Step 1 Investigator Trading Step
....After trading items, each stunned investigator may discard one of
  his stun tokens (see “Status Effects” on page 15)
Step 4 Monster Attack Step
....If a monster has a stun token on it, then the monster does not attack
  during this step. Instead, the keeper removes one stun token from the
  monster

And from the FAQ on the Fantasy Flight website:

Q: Can stunned Investigators perform actions?
A: Yes. A stunned investigator receives 1 movement step and 1
  action step on his turn.

So if the investigator is stunned at the beginning of their turn they can perform one movement step and 1 action step (which can be used as a Run Action that would allow them to move another time). There's nothing I see (in the base rulebook at least) that allows investigators to remove stun tokens with an action. Stun tokens on investigators are only removed at the end of the 'Investigator Trading Step' during the Keeper's Turn.

I don't remember that rule but since nothing would stop you from using your action as an extra move the effect would be the same. So I say yes that is allowed.


text:
Can an investigator carry more than one weapon?
The rule book doesn't say anything specifically about this (or I'm just missing it).  Does anyone know if an investigator can carry more than one weapon and if so, do you choose which weapon you're attacking with during your turn?

From the Attack Action section on page 9:

Attacking a monster is a common action investigators perform. The
  player selects one of his weapon or attack Spell cards and chooses
  a monster as dictated on the card. Alternatively, an investigator
  may attack a monster in his space using his bare hands.

So an investigator is allowed to possess multiple weapon cards.

There are as far as I  know no rules regarding how many weapons you can carry and you can choose which one you want to use.  There are though cards that will limit how much you can carry.
This had never really been a  problem in my games though since the investigators  usually are happy to even have one weapon let alone two.