text:
What happens if Kokusho, the Evening Star dies under someone else's control?
I cast Kokusho, the Evening Star. My opponent plays Hijack and gains control over Kokusho untill end of turn. In that turn Kokusho dies in combat. Question: who gains life and who loses life?

The player who controlled Kokusho as it died gains the life, and each of their opponents loses life.
Whenever a permanent refers to "you", it means its current controller, and whenever a card refers to "opponents", it means its current controller's opponents. In other words, card text should be interpreted from the point of view of the controller. The specific rule that covers this is rule 109.5:

The words “you” and “your” on an object refer to the object’s controller, its would-be controller (if a player is attempting to play, cast, or activate it), or its owner (if it has no controller). [...]

Kokusho's triggered ability is controlled by the player who controlled Kokusho before it died because of some of the triggered ability rules:

603.6c Leaves-the-battlefield abilities trigger when a permanent moves from the battlefield to another zone, or when a phased-in permanent leaves the game because its owner leaves the game. These are written as, but aren’t limited to, “When [this object] leaves the battlefield, . . .” or “Whenever [something] is put into a graveyard from the battlefield, . . . .” (See also rule 603.10.) [...]

603.10. Normally, objects that exist immediately after an event are checked to see if the event matched any trigger conditions, and continuous effects that exist at that time are used to determine what the trigger conditions are and what the objects involved in the event look like. However, some triggered abilities are exceptions to this rule; the game “looks back in time” to determine if those abilities trigger, using the existence of those abilities and the appearance of objects immediately prior to the event. The list of exceptions is as follows:

603.10a Some zone-change triggers look back in time. These are leaves-the-battlefield abilities, abilities that trigger when a card leaves a graveyard, and abilities that trigger when an object that all players can see is put into a hand or library.

So, in summary Kokusho's ability is a "leaves-the-battlefield ability", because it triggers when Kokusho leaves the battlefield. So, it "looks back in time" when it triggers, which means that it triggers based on its appearance before it died. This includes its controller.

In addition to the other (correct) answer, you also may be wondering how it is determined who the controller is considered to be, given that the triggered ability only happens after the creature has died and is now in the graveyard.
This is covered by the following rule:

603.10. Normally, objects that exist immediately after an event are checked to see if the event matched any trigger conditions, and continuous effects that exist at that time are used to determine what the trigger conditions are and what the objects involved in the event look like. However, some triggered abilities are exceptions to this rule; the game “looks back in time” to determine if those abilities trigger, using the existence of those abilities and the appearance of objects immediately prior to the event. The list of exceptions is as follows:

603.10a Some zone-change triggers look back in time. These are leaves-the-battlefield abilities, abilities that trigger when a card leaves a graveyard, and abilities that trigger when an object that all players can see is put into a hand or library.

So for the ability to determine who the controller is, it "looks back in time to when it was on the battlefield, at which point it was controlled by your opponent.


text:
Are mission tokens considered Figures for sake of hero abilities?
One Hero has ability Covert that says "Hostile figures 4 or more spaces away from you do not have line of sight to you. You do not block line of sight for those figures." Side mission Indebted has Pulse Cannons marked by Imperial Mission Tokens. At the end of activation phase they shoot a Rebel in their lane of sight. It's not an attack, as they damage without giving any opportunity to defend and there's no range requirement. At one moment there was dispute if it can damage given hero, as it had unobstructed line of sight.

Rules Reference Guide defines Hostale Figure as follows: "All figures belonging to a player’s opponent are considered hostile." Unfortunately, the guide doesn't define figure per se.

My (Imperial player) opinion was it would damage it, as this ability was talking about figures, and the Cannon was not figure. It doesn't obstruct movement or LoS, you can end your move on tile with it's token.

Unfortunately given situation was critical for Rebels, it was win or lose. As I had four players yelling at me it's not allowed, including game owner, I could only accept their interpretation or leave table. I'm looking for citations or other examples of abilities that would work the way I am expecting it to do. (Or citations confirming they're right)

Based on the use of the term for figures, I would agree with you on this interpretation. I can't find the official rules regarding invisibility though, so I can't confirm technically just yet. Which hero has this ability—first I've heard of it.

Mission tokens are not considered figures unless explicitly declared to be by the mission rules. Therefore, the Covert ability would not apply to Pulse Cannons.
From page 20 of the Rules Reference Guide:

Objects
Objects refer to elements on the map that are not figures. Doors, crates, and terminals are all considered to be objects.

Most mission tokens are considered to be objects, unless the mission rules use the token to represent a figure.

The Covert ability reads:

Covert
Hostile figures 4 or more spaces away from you do not have line of sight to you. You do not block line of sight for those figures.

Since Pulse Cannons are represented by Imperial Mission Tokens, and are not explicitly referred to as figures in the Mission Rules, then they are not figures and Covert does not apply to them.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Do the counters that Ring of Thune adds stay with the ring or the creature?
The part of Ring of Thune that's important reads "At the beginning of your upkeep, put a +1/+1 counter on equipped creature if it's white".
If I was to move the ring after a couple turns, lose it to a Reclamation Sage or whatever, would the +1/+1 counters stay on the previously enhanced creature, or would that bonus leave with the ring?

While you probably meant "lose the ring" - if you were to lose the game, Ring of Thune and all your creatures leave the game with you. The +1/+1 counters would stay on the creature only if it was an opponent's creature that somehow got equipped with your equipment.

"...put a +1/+1 counter on equipped creature."

The Ring of Thune puts counters on the creature, so the counters stay with the creature, not the equipment. If they wanted the power and toughness bonus to stay with the equipment instead of the creature, they would use a wording like on Sigil of Distinction:

Sigil of Distinction enters the battlefield with X charge counters on it.
Equipped creature gets +1/+1 for each charge counter on Sigil of Distinction.

"At the beginning of your upkeep, put a +1/+1 counter on equipped creature if it's white" is a triggered ability of the artifact "Ring of Thune".
It triggers at the beginning of your upkeep, if Ring of Thune is on the battlefield, and it references "equipped creature". If there is no creature currently equipped with Ring of Thune, the ability does nothing. If there is, that and only that creature get a +1/+1 counter.
The +1/+1 counters stay on the creature, they don't belong to the equipment.

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


text:
Collected company + Eternal witness
I cast Collected Company and one of the creature cards I choose to put into the battlefield is Eternal Witness.
By the time Eternal witness enters the battlefield, will Collected company be already in the graveyard so I can put it back to my hand?

Yes, you can add Collected Company to your hand.
It works like this:

Collected Company resolves choosing Eternal Witness
Eternal Witness is put onto the battlefield and triggers (but is not put on the stack yet)
Collected Company finishes resolving and is put into the graveyard as the last action of casting a spell
State based actions are checked and see that Eternal Witness has triggered and it's ability is put onto the stack and targets are chosen

By the time Eternal Witness' ability is on the stack and it's time to choose targets, Collected Company is in the graveyard and can be chosen to be returned to hand

Yes you would be able to return Collected Company.  When you place Eternal Witness on the battlefield, the ETB trigger is waiting to go on the stack since the spell is still resolving.  When it's finished and in the graveyard, then you put the trigger on the stack and can legally target the spell.


text:
Does casting a Partner commander add a the +2 mana cost to your other commander as well?
Since some commanders have the ability Partner, letting you have more than one commander at a time, and to recast a commander, you need to pay 2 mana for each time you recast them, does the +2 mana cost count towards both commanders if one leaves or does it just count towards the one that left the field?

Each Commander will keep track of its own extra 2 mana separately.

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


text:
Can I enchant tokens too?
Is it legal to cast an enchantment on a token creature in MTG?

"Creature" means "creature permanent", which means "creature card or token on the battlefield".
As such, an Aura with "enchant creature" can enchant a creature token.

Thanks for the tip, I couldn't find the answer in the online rules at the MTG website, or anywhere else for that matter.


text:
Can I deal combat damage with a 1/1 Walking Ballista and deal damage with its ability?
Rules Question:

Player A attack with 1/2 creature
Player B block with Walking Ballista with 1 +1/+1 counter
And now can player B use Walking Ballista activation ability, after combat damage but before it go to graveyard, to kill 1/2 creature?

You could have done this prior to 2010 when they change the rules: http://boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/3265/can-someone-explain-the-damage-on-the-stack-rule-change

No, you cannot.  Going to the graveyard (due to damage) is a State-Based action that happens before either player gets priority.  Without priority, you can't activate Ballista's ability.

704.3. Whenever a player would get priority (see rule 116, “Timing and Priority”), the game checks for any of the listed conditions for state-based actions, then performs all applicable state-based actions simultaneously as a single event. If any state-based actions are performed as a result of a check, the check is repeated; otherwise all triggered abilities that are waiting to be put on the stack are put on the stack, then the check is repeated. Once no more state-based actions have been performed as the result of a check and no triggered abilities are waiting to be put on the stack, the appropriate player gets priority.


text:
Splitting the pot without showing hands
Can the last 2  players in Texas Holdem agree to split  the pot equally after the river without showing their hands. is this legal or ethical?

This is a form of collusion, and would not be permitted in many casinos or tournaments according to their rules.
A home-game or less-reputable operation may make its own rules that allow this, but it would be considered very dodgy.
Legality does not typically factor, though anywhere in which it matters, either the entire game is illegal anyway or the operation already has rules to ensure they comply with law and regulation.

I assumed he meant legal within the rules of the game.

Any time the law might or does say a lot about a subject, I assume "legal" means "to do with the law".

This answer says that splitting the pot without showing hands is considered collusion according to the rules casinos and tournaments. How did you reach this conclusion? Did you actually research the rules for many different casinos and tournaments?

@Rainbolt anyone who has played any decent amount of love poker can confirm that this would not be allowed in any reputable poker room. Personally I've played in cash games and tournaments in dozens of rooms in several countries and have never seen this allowed.

@3N1GM4 Not here to challenge you on correctness. I trust that you and Nij know what you're talking about. A source would improve the answer.

Problem is that defining collusion isn't usually done in rules per se, but by common practise and experience and on-the-spot judgement. It would be impossible to list every single action that counts as collusion (or marking, or slowplay, or..) otherwise. Collusion is invariably explicitly disallowed to ensure game security, but saying that a no-show chop would be collusion isn't.

@Nij You are a good source, if you have experience. Why not mention yourself as the source in the answer?

Personal experience is presumed the source unless cited otherwise, isn't it?

I have never seen a poker room or tournament venue in Europe or the US where this would be legal according to the house rules or any version of the TDA rules or similar which may be in effect - the potential for collusion and other angle shooting is very high if it were allowed and for this reason amongst others, I would suggest it is also unethical.
The only way I can imagine a pot would be split between two players without a showdown would be if they both mucked their cards simultaneously, ensuring they were unrecoverable from the muck. In this situation, there would be little choice but to split the pot, but I would expect the players involved to be warned not to do this again, for the sake of the integrity of the game.
In a casual game amongst friends, I'm sure this might be something which happens, but it should still be agreed upon by all players up front to keep the playing field level. I would not play a game for money which allowed this to happen.

The second paragraph is incorrect. In order for two players to fold simultaneously, one of those players must take action out of turn. When a player takes action out of turn, the action is only binding as long as the action is still valid when it becomes that player's turn. In this case the action is no longer valid, because the hand ended before it became their turn. So when two players fold simultaneously, the active player loses and the other player gets the pot. Source: https://www.pokerschoolonline.com/blogs/TheLangolier/know-the-rules-out-of-turn-action

Mucking is different to folding. I'm not describing anyone acting out of turn, but two players who have reached showdown both mucking. While there is still an enforceable order of action at showdown, it is legal (and common) for players who believe they have no chance to win the pot to muck immediately and not follow this order of action. If both players did this at the same time (or at least in quick enough succession as to be unable to determine who mucked first), there are two ways I have seen the outcome ruled in love play, one of which is to split the pot.

As always, house rules will be in effect and different rooms can treat this (extremely rare) situation differently depending on their particular rule set.

Each hand in Texas Holdem has players compete to win the pot, or the collection of chips being wagered in that game. Sometimes the pot will end up being split if the betting is extremely high and one player does not have as many chips as their opponents are betting. In this case multiple people can win a part of the pot, but there is still at least one loser in this situation.
There is no rule I am aware of that allows players in a hand to mutually agree to bow out of a hand, but depending on where you're playing this may be a house rule that has been agreed upon and in that case would be legal at the table it's being played at.
Ethics would involve whether or not all players are aware of this rule prior to the start of the game, and agreed to enforce it. If this rule was not brought up, or if not everyone agreed to play by this rule, then it would not be ethical for two players to support it.
In the general sense as each showdown between players is meant to have a loser, one (or more) of the players who are splitting the pot had a weaker hand than the other. In this case the winning player is voluntarily sharing his chips with the losing player, which is against the rules.

Your first paragraph seems to be confusing split pots for side pots. These are two very different things and applying the terminology of one to the other has historically done more harm than help.


text:
Can I sacrifice the same permanent for two different sacrifice costs?
Hi im new the mtg and have a question about the deck im playing.
so I use "Ravenous Intruders" ability (sacrifice an artifact gain +2/+2 until the end of the turn)
the artifact I sacrifice is "Implement of Combustion"
"Implement of Combustion" has an ability where I can pay 1 red mana and sacrifice it to deal 1 damage
would I be able to activate "Implement of Combustion" ability on top of Ravenous Intruder's ability so I can buff him and deal the 1 damage or would sacrificing implement leave no target for ravenous intruder so he does not buff?

While your question is a duplicate, it's interesting that you mention the Implement. Implements are designed so that the second ability (draw a card) happens when the implement goes to the graveyard. This means the card draw portion happens whether you use the first ability or use something else (like Ravenous Intruders) to sacrifice it.


text:
If Dragonlord Silumgar dies during combat, when does the creature he stole change control?
I play Dragonlord Silumgar and take control of the only creature my opponent has.
On my next turn I swing with Silumgar and the other player's creature I took control of. That player casts Divine Verdict targeting Dragonlord Silumgar and destroys him.
Now, does the creature I took control of return to the other player before combat damage has been dealt, or at the end step?

gee, i love it when someone can freely edit MY question. i'm surprised that it wasn't changed altogether.

@AnubiGrey I love it as well. It lets people who know the site and subject adjust questions to help make them clearer or more informative, which helps people answer well and helps other users finding the question when they have similar problems. It's one of the defining features of Stack Exchange, separating submission and ownership.

i was being sarcastic.

@Anubis_Grey I'm aware, hence my explanation of why it's a really strong part of this site's identity as a place for high-quality, useful, and relatable questions and answers.

The control over the creature changes immediately.
As the ability text on Dragonlord Silumgar states, the change of control effect ends as soon as you lose control of Silumgar, which also happens when Silumgar gets destroyed. A creature that changes control is removed from combat, which means, among others, that it will deal no more combat damage during that combat phase.

506.4. A permanent is removed from combat if it leaves the battlefield, if its controller changes, [..] A creature that’s removed from combat stops being an attacking, blocking, blocked, and/or unblocked creature. [..]

You don't get combat damage from the creature you took, since it gets removed from combat when the control ends.

506.4. A permanent is removed from combat if it leaves the battlefield, if its controller changes, if it phases out, if an effect specifically removes it from combat, if it’s a planeswalker that’s being attacked and stops being a planeswalker, or if it’s an attacking or blocking creature that regenerates (see rule 701.13) or stops being a creature. A creature that’s removed from combat stops being an attacking, blocking, blocked, and/or unblocked creature. A planeswalker that’s removed from combat stops being attacked.

That wasn't the question, though. You need to answer the whole picture.


text:
Can a creature have negative toughness?
I know a creature can technically have negative power, but since a creature would normally die if it reaches 0 toughness, I can't find an official ruling.
The reason I ask is based on +1/+1 counters. Let's say I have a Relic Seeker that has renowned; a base 2/2 with a +1/+1 counter. Now, if my opponent were to cast Cruel Finality, Relic Seeker would be reduced to a 0/0, but he's getting that +1/+1 from the counter, keeping him alive... so do +1/+1 counters bypass the toughness=0 death? Or can toughness go negative?
Another example: My opponent casts Languish. Is Relic Seeker now a -2/-2, and the +1/+1 counter isn't enough to keep it alive? Or does its toughness get reduced to 0 and become unable to go lower since Relic Seeker should die, and the +1/+1 keeps it above 0?

There are two things going on here.
Toughness and base toughness
First, the question you didn't ask, but which I think really underlies your confusion, is on the definition of toughness. When you calculate a creature's toughness, you take into account all toughness-changing effects, including counters. So the toughness of your renowned Relic Seeker is 3. Not 2. Not 0 either. The number marked on the card, 2, is called the "base toughness", and it only gives you a starting point for the toughness calculation. It doesn't have any further significance in the game.
So in your first example, this is (technically) the wrong way to describe it:

Now, if my opponent were to cast Cruel Finality, Relic Seeker would be reduced to a 0/0, but he's getting that +1/+1 from the counter, keeping him alive...

What you should say instead is that, if your opponent were to cast Cruel Finality, Relic Seeker is reduced to a 1/1. Working from a base power and base toughness of 2/2, it gets -2/-2 from Cruel Finality and +1/+1 from the counter, all of which adds up to 1/1.
All this is controlled by rule 613.3, if you're curious.

613.3. Within layer 7, apply effects in a series of sublayers in the order described below. Within each sublayer, apply effects in timestamp order. (See rule 613.6.) Note that dependency may alter the order in which effects are applied within a sublayer. (See rule 613.7.)
613.3a. Layer 7a: Effects from characteristic-defining abilities that define power and/or toughness are applied. See rule 604.3.
613.3b. Layer 7b: Effects that set power and/or toughness to a specific number or value are applied. Effects that refer to the base power and/or toughness of a creature apply in this layer.
613.3c. Layer 7c: Effects that modify power and/or toughness (but don't set power and/or toughness to a specific number or value) are applied.
613.3d. Layer 7d: Power and/or toughness changes from counters are applied. See rule 121, "Counters."
613.3e. Layer 7e: Effects that switch a creature's power and toughness are applied. Such effects take the value of power and apply it to the creature's toughness, and take the value of toughness and apply it to the creature's power.

Negative toughness
Now the question you did ask, whether toughness can be negative: yes, it can. This is controlled by rule 107.1b, where you will see that toughness is one of the exceptions to the rule that Magic mostly uses nonnegative numbers.

107.1b. Most of the time, the Magic game uses only positive numbers and zero. You can't choose a negative number, deal negative damage, gain negative life, and so on. However, it's possible for a game value, such as a creature's power, to be less than zero. If a calculation or comparison needs to use a negative value, it does so. If a calculation that would determine the result of an effect yields a negative number, zero is used instead, unless that effect sets a player's life total to a specific value, doubles a player's life total, sets a creature's power or toughness to a specific value, or otherwise modifies a creature's power or toughness.

So in your second example, you have a renowned Relic Seeker and your opponent casts Languish. It starts with a base power and base toughness of 2/2, gets -4/-4 from Languish, and gets +1/+1 from the counter, all of which adds up to a power and toughness of -1/-1. Since its toughness is 0 or less, it dies (when state-based effects are checked).
It sounds like you may have thought there was a rule like this:

If an effect would reduce a creature's toughness to less than 0, it reduces it to 0 instead.

But there is no such rule.

Does it ever matter that a creature's toughness is negative rather than 0?

I can't think of a specific case offhand, but it's possible.

I couldn't find a specific case involving toughness either, but maybe a similar situation involving power will help illustrate. Whenever Wild Beastmaster attacks, other creatures get +X/+X, where X is Beastmaster's power. If Beastmaster happens to have -4 power when the ability resolves, other creatures will get -4/-4. This is true even if Wild Beastmaster left the battlefield. In that case, the game will use last known information about the Beastmaster's power as it it existed on the battlefield.

Yes, a creature can have negative toughness, even with +1/+1 counters.  The +1/+1 counters modify the "net" toughness of the creature, so things that reduce the toughness reduce that "net" toughness. In your second scenario, between the Languish and +1/+1 counter, Relic Seeker would be at -1/-1.
However, while a creature can have negative toughness, that's only temporary.  As soon as someone gets priority or a trigger would go on the stack, State-based-actions are performed, and the creature is put in the graveyard.


text:
What constitutes a month?
What is a month in Pandemic Legacy? We are not sure.
We were new to Legacy version so we first played the game simply like Pandemic and are now ready to play first round as a Legacy version.

Hi Shelly, welcome to Board & Card Games Stack Exchange! Check out our [tour] to see how we work around here.

A breakdown of how long a month takes depends on the outcome of each game you play. If you win the game it goes faster and if you lose the game it goes slower and it is described in the rules.
If you look at the game calendar (page 16) at the end of the rules you will notice that it has 12 months each broken down into early and late. This shows that is possible to get 24 plays out of this legacy game.
This is further broken down by the game end rules (Page 14) of which I am only including the part about game month
Game Win:

You start your next game at the beginning of the next month

Game Loss:

If this is the first time the month has been played, you must try the month again. If not, move on to the next month for your next game.

What this means is the better you play the faster the game will progress. This will get you between 12 games (If you win every time) and 24 games (if you lose the first attempt every month).
To sum it up just think that months are an indicator of how many more play sessions there might be left in the game.

A month is every one or two games you play.
You'll notice you have a Game Calendar — it's referenced in this PDF rulebook in the lower left of page 4. When you complete a game, you mark outcomes in there. It's broken into:

January — Early
January — Late
February — Early
and so on.

Your very first game will take place in Early January. Entire games take place inside one half of the month; months do not elapse mid-game (as far as I'm aware).
You advance months, or halves of a month, by completing games. If you win, you skip straight to early the next month, as the Calendar advises.
Either way, by your third game, you will be in February, or perhaps even March if you've had an excellent win rate against the infections so far!


text:
Can I target a Shrouded creature's ability?
A friend of mine tells me that an activated ability of a creature (for example, Goblin Fireslinger) can't be targeted (for example, by Reroute) if it's given shroud (for example, by Lightning Greaves).
Since a card like Reroute says "Change the target of target activated ability with a single target" and doesn't target the permanent itself, shouldn't this ability be a legal target?
If there is some ruling source about this, I'm willing to look on it.

Has your friend provided any explanation of why they think "This creature can't be the target of spells or abilities" means "This creature and its activated abilities can't be the targets of spells or abilities"?

No, it was pretty much a misconception: he assumed it was implicit, or maybe he assumed this effects target the creature (which in this case, they clearly don't).

Your friend is wrong. You can target Goblin Fireslinger's ability with Reroute even if Goblin Fireslinger has Shroud.
Activating an activated ability creates an activated ability object on the stack that is independent of the object whose ability you activated (the Goblin Fireslinger, in this case) [CR 112.7a]. The activated ability holds a reference to the Fireslinger, but it does not have any of the Fireslinger's abilities or characteristics, including Shroud.
All that aside, Shroud is an ability that specifically applies to permanents and players [CR 702.18a]. Even if an object on the stack has Shroud (such as an Algae Gharial spell), that object can still be the target of spells and abilities.

Please take any further discussion into chat folks!  Thanks

To give this an actual home so folks can do what Pat said... this conversation has been moved to chat.

Yes, the ability is a legal target.
Shroud applies to the creature. It says you can't choose the creature for a target.
Reroute doesn't choose the creature for the target. It chooses an ability. Those abilities are not connected to the creature (once they go on the stack, they're wholly separate objects) and they do not inherit any of the creature's abilities.


text:
Does Athreos with Deathrender let me keep the same creature?
I control Athreos, God of Passage, and Deathrender equipped to a nontoken creature.
I sacrifice the creature equipped with Deathrender to Victimize, and the opponent does not pay 3 life for Athreos's effect, so the creature will go back to my hand.
Can I choose that same creature card to return to the battlefield with Deathrender's ability?

Yes, you can do that (if you place the abilities on the stack in the correct order[CR 603.3b]) because Deathrender chooses a card on resolution[CR 608.2d].

You cast Victimize.
Victimize resolves:

Choose two target creature cards in your graveyard.
Sacrifice the creature equipped by Deathrender.

Athreos's triggered ability triggers.
Deathrender's triggered ability triggers.

Return the chosen cards to the battlefield tapped.

You place Deathrender's triggered ability on the stack.
You place Athreos's triggered ability on the stack.
Athreos's triggered ability resolves:

Return the sacrified creature to your hand.

Deathrender's triggered ability resolves:

Put the sacrified creature card onto the battlefield.
Attach Deathrender to it.

Nice.

603.3b If multiple abilities have triggered since the last time a player received priority, each player, in APNAP order, puts triggered abilities he or she controls on the stack in any order he or she chooses.
608.2d If an effect of a spell or ability offers any choices other than choices already made as part of casting the spell, activating the ability, or otherwise putting the spell or ability on the stack, the player announces these while applying the effect.

A reference to the rules for the ordering of simultaneously-triggered events would be useful here.

@KRyan, Done. Thanks to diego for digging them out.

As long as you stack your triggers correctly this will work. Two important things to remember here are that when you have multiple triggers that would be put on the stack at the same time you get to choose what order the ones you control go on the stack, and Deathrender's ability doesn't require you to choose a creature until the ability is resolving.
When the creatures Deathrender is equipped to dies two triggers will go on the stack, Athreos's and Deathrender's. Since you control both permanents you get to decide which order they go on the stack. To get the desired result, since the stack works in a Last In First Out method we need to put the Deathrender's ability on the stack first so it will resolve last, and Aethreos's ability above it.
What happens will be this:
The Stack:
(top)
 1. Aethreos's trigger
 2. Deathrender's trigger
(bottom)
When Aethreos's trigger resolves you opponent chooses to have the creature return to your hand. Then when Deathrender's trigger resolves since the creature is in your hand it is a valid option to choose with the ability.

603.3b If multiple abilities have triggered since the last time a player received priority, each player, in APNAP order, puts triggered abilities he or she controls on the stack in any order he or she chooses.
608.2d If an effect of a spell or ability offers any choices other than choices already made as part of casting the spell, activating the ability, or otherwise putting the spell or ability on the stack, the player announces these while applying the effect.

I would recommend not choosing numbered lists to indicate the stack, as it's unclear if you mean the order they entered the stack, or in which you intend them so resolve.

Both abilities trigger when a creature dies, and since you control both abilities, you may stack those triggers in the order you choose.
If you stack them so that Athreos's trigger will resolve first, if your opponent does not pay 3 life, your creature will be in your hand when Deathrender's trigger resolves, allowing you to put the creature on the battlefield as part of the resolution. This is because Deathrender's ability doesn't require you to choose a card when it's put on the stack (such as choosing a target would), so you're free to choose cards that entered your hand after Deathrender's ability was put on the stack.
Keep in mind that you don't know what your opponent will choose to do until Athreos's ability resolves - if they recognize what you're doing with your triggers, they are probably more likely to choose to pay the 3 life if they can.


text:
Do +1/+1 counters count for Fighting?
I have a 3/2 with six +1/+1 counters on it, making it a 9/8. My friend used Prey Upon targeting it with his own 5/5. He said the +1/+1 counters didn't count while fighting, and that it was just considered a 3/2. Is that true?

@ikegami Check your math.

It's a 9/8, period. It's not "considered" anything else.

No, your friend is wrong. The creatures simply deal damage equal to their power:

701.11a A spell or ability may instruct a creature to fight another creature or it may instruct two creatures to fight each other. Each of those creatures deals damage equal to its power to the other creature.

A 9/8 has a power of 9, and it doesn't matter what its base power was. The whole point of power/toughness-changing effects (like +1/+1 counters) is that they change the power/toughness of the creature.
So your friend's 5/5 will die, and your 9/8 will survive.

Terminology: we say your creature has base power/toughness of 3/2, but its power/toughness is 9/8. Pretty much nothing in the game cares what base power/toughness is; the only time it's mentioned is when it's being set, like on Turn to Frog. Everything normal in the game just looks at the actual power/toughness.

It might be helpful to point out that the 3/2 is the 'base power and toughness' and things only care about that when they specifically say so (the only times I can think of is when it is getting set)

Your friend may have been confused because certain abilities that modify or care about combat damage do not apply to two creatures "fighting" because it is not considered combat damage as defined by the rules. For example, first strike and double strike don't "count" when creatures fight because those abilities modify the combat step. They deal damage at a different time during the combat step. If they fight via Prey Upon, they do not go through all the Combat steps, and there isn't a separate first strike combat damage step for those abilities to apply.

This is more of an assumption than an answer to the OP. It would be nice if the downvoters could give you constructive criticism on how this answer does not fit the question. From what I can read you mention the combat phase but the OP doesn't. This does not provide a definitive answer. Just thought I'd give you a heads up on why I think you have been downvoted here.


text:
Why does Archfiend of Ifnir mention cycling, if it already mentions discarding?
On a recent promo called Archfiend of Ifnir, there is an ability that states:

Whenever you cycle or discard another card ...

Why does it say “cycle or discard”? Since cycling involves discarding, wouldn't it be sufficient if it said “whenever you discard another card”?

Note that when you cycle a card, you both cycle and discard a card, but since there's only one event, the ability only triggers once.

In addition to diego's answer, it future-proofs against replacement effects ("if you would discard a card, exile that card instead" would still work with cycling cards) or against future forms of cycling that don't rely on discard (e.g. "gravecycling " means "<cost, exile this card from your graveyard: draw a card; this counts as cycling").

I'm wrong about the first one; "cycling" triggers trigger on the discard part of the cost.

With the current card pool, and under current rules the 'cycle or' part is unnecessary. It is most likely there as a reminder so that players don't need to remember that cycling involves discarding (for the cards that don't have reminder text for it). (It is possible for it to matter, if for example something replaces the discard, but there are no cards that do that currently)
I am unable to find a quote at the moment but I know people at Wizards have stated that they don't always try to make the shortest rules text they can. They are willing to make it longer if it improves clarity.
And now we have the Amonkhet Release Notes which state (emphasis added):

An ability that triggers whenever you "cycle or discard" a card triggers only once if you cycle a card. The ability "Whenever you discard a card" is functionally identical to this ability; cycling is mentioned for clarity.

Another example is on the very same card; why does it say "another card"? Archfiend's ability will never be active while he's eligible to be cycled. It's for simplicity.

A recent example of Wizards valuing clear rules text (even when it might be functionally redundant) is the Fate Reforged Oracle text update to Ashcloud Phoenix, where they added a phrase that the rules already enforce. It's the first change on the list.

The CompRules themselves are full of redundancies, much for the same reason, readability.

Let's say a card exists that says "If a player would discard a card, exile that card instead" I guess then it would matter because cycling would still trigger it. So I wouldn't say "Under the current rules the 'cycle or' part is unnecessary". The current pool of all cards also matters

@IvoBeckers I highly doubt they would print a card that does that, instead they would use a Madness like template with "If a player would discard this card, that player discards it, but exiles it instead of putting it into his or her graveyard" rather than replacing the discard itself. However you are technically correct so I updated my answer.

"for the cards that don't have reminder text for it" - Except for Blast from the Past, from Unhinged, I think every single card with cycling has the reminder text. Personally, I don't think "cycle or discard" improves clarity at all. Just the opposite. It makes people wonder about cards that just say "Whenever you discard a card", and if those abilities trigger on cycling. Would have been clearer to instead put reminder text on the cards that say "cycle or discard" to remind that cycling involves discarding.


text:
How many turns does an average game of Checkers/Draughts go for?
How many turns does a checkers/draughts tend to last for, in the the American/English variation, on an 8x8 board?
I've been trying to google it but I can only find answers related to chess.

This is actually quite broad, but i believe that it can take on average about  15 - 45 min depending on skill level and thinking time.

Maybe it would be less broad if the OP clarified whether they were asking about how many turns are taken by players or wall clock time.  It would seem like the number of turns per game could be determined from analyzing historic games.

@chicks Hi! I am talking about actual turns, now that you mention it I see how ambiguous the question is.

The American Checker Federation
The ACF has the transcripts for a lot of games. By my count, they have 9,374 games recorded from 1952 to 2009. These are available for download. In these 10k games, there has been 460,381 moves made. Thus an average* game of checkers takes 49.11 moves or 24.56 moves per color.
Here is a summary:
White Wins:  1596
Draw:        5406
Black Wins:  2372
-----------------
Total Games: 9374

Total Moves:      460381
Moves/Game:       49.11
Moves/Game/Color: 24.56

* average game between two ACF players


text:
Can I bounce the creatures I've chosen for sacrificing to Annihilator?
I have Hibernation Sliver in play, which allows me to pay 2 life to return a Sliver to my hand.  My opponent controls an Eldrazi with annihilator 2 and attacks, making me sacrifice 2 permanents.
Can I sacrifice 2 Slivers and then, before the sacrifice resolves, return them to my hand with Hibernation Sliver, so I don't have to sacrifice anything and only have to pay 4 life?

Short answer: no.
Longer answer: The permanents you sacrifice to the annihilator ability are only chosen upon the ability's resolution. Since no player gets priority during its resolution, you can't do anything before the permanents are sacrificed.

Sounds similar to paying a cost of an activated ability by sacrificing a creature.  You don't get to respond to the casting cost being chosen and bounce the sac'd creature.


text:
Does Celestial Crusader also boost my opponent's creatures?
I have a Celestial Crusader card that says other white creatures get +1/+1. Does that apply only to my white creatures or will it apply to my opponents white creatures as well?

There are no hidden limitations.
The effect of Celestial Crusader's ability applies to white creatures other than that Celestial Crusader, no matter who controls them.
If it only affected creatures your control, the ability would have been phrased like Paragon of New Dawns's:

Other white creatures you control get +1/+1.

If an effect states "other ~ you control," then it only affects those ~s you control. but if it only states "other ~" then it applies to all that are on the battlefield. a good example is slivers. while Battering Sliver affects all slivers on the battlefield, giving them all trample, Groundshaker Sliver only gives slivers on your side of the battlefield trample.

Re "then it applies to all that are on the battlefield", No, it's not limited to the battlefield. It also includes itself.

Re "then it only affects those ~s you control", Except itself.


text:
Question about Sparring Mummy card
Sparring Mummy says: "When Sparring Mummy enters the battlefield, untap target creature." Am I forced to untap a target creature?

Can I cast this card if on the battlefield there are no creatures ?
Can I cast this card and choose not to untap any creatures if there are any ?

You can cast the creature just fine, since nothing prevents you from casting the creature here (rule 601.3 specifies when you can cast spells and when you can't, however its triggered abilities aren't part of what govern its "castability").
Its ETB ability isn't optional, but it's still highly unlikely for that to be negative for you. Note that the ability only mentions target creature, not target tapped creature, meaning  that you may target Sparring Mummy itself, or any other untapped creature, with the ability, even though on resolution, if the creature is still untapped, it won't do anything.
In general, keep in mind that you only have to follow instructions in a very procedural manner in MtG, and never have to "look into the future" to determine what would probably happen - the worst that can happen is that an ability will be countered by the game rules (for example because the creature you targeted with Sparring Mummy's ability was returned to its owners hand), but that never keeps you from choosing that creature as a target in the first place, or even casting it.


text:
What is this game with two boards and pieces numbered 1-15?
My in-laws found this in their garage but w have no idea what it is. Seems to be made by MB but it has no other markings on it. Any ideas appreciated.

it looks like the backs are designed to attach to something. each other, maybe? or perhaps they're just pieces of a larger game? are there any features on the backs that might help?

Turns out they attach to each other. Possibly some sort of travel game.

MB is Milton Bradley

This is Top 15 (also known as Numbers Up!).


text:
How does my life total work out with Angel's Grace and Ad Nauseum?
If I have a positive life total and cast Angel's Grace then Ad Nauseam and draw my whole deck I know I can't lose the game, but is my life total one or negative a bunch?

Rulings
9/25/2006 The last sentence applies only if your life total is being reduced by damage. Other effects or costs (such as “lose 1 life” or “pay 1 life”) can reduce your life total below 1 as normal.

found it. easy enough


text:
Gideon Jura vs an opponent with multiple combat phases
Say I've played Gideon Jura's +2 ability:

During target opponent’s next turn, creatures that player controls attack Gideon Jura if able.

My opponent has attacked with Combat Celebrant and exerted them for another combat phase:

If Combat Celebrant hasn’t been exerted this turn, you may exert it as it attacks. When you do, untap all other creatures you control and after this phase, there is an additional combat phase.

On their first attack step, they attack Gideon Jura and he dies. Then on my second end step, what can they do?

Consider this same question except instead of multiple attack phases, they decided to destroy Gideon at the end of the turn on which you activated the ability.

Gideon Jura creates a requirement that they attack him if able.
In the second combat step, Gideon Jura is no longer around and able to be attacked, so they have no need to attack him. The player may attack freely, including you directly or any other planeswalker you control. They may also not attack at all since they have no  more requirement to do so.


text:
What's the difference between "exile" and "destroy"?
There is different terminology on MTG cards: "exile" and "destroy"? I do not quite understand the difference. When a card (like Angelic Purge) states:

Exile target artifact, creature or enchantment

Does this mean that that card is going to the graveyard, or it goes to the "exile zone", i.e. can not be played this round anymore and any circumstances?

Exile and the Graveyard are two different zones in magic. "Destroy" puts a card into the graveyard, and "Exile" puts it in the exile zone.
Why does the distinction matter? Well...

Some cards can retrieve things from your graveyard, like Eternal Witness. The cards that can get them from exile are far fewer, but Pull from Eternity comes to mind.
Cards in your graveyard are used as a resource by certain spells or abilities, most commonly spells with "Delve", like Treasure Cruise.
Many cards have abilities that only work when they are in the graveyard. These are primarily used to recur themselves from the graveyard, like Scrapheap Scrounger.
Eldrazi "Processors" from Battle for Zendikar block have bonus effects if you move an opponent's card from exile to their graveyard, so getting their cards to exile in the first place is valuable. For example, see Wasteland Strangler.
"Regenerate" creates a shield that protects a permanent from destruction, but not from being exiled.
"Destroy" will not be able to destroy a permanent with "indestructible" (e.g. Athreos, God of Passage), but "exile" will work.
Abilities that trigger off a creature/permanent "dying" (like on Blood Artist) only trigger if it goes to the graveyard from the battlefield. Permanents being exiled from the battlefield won't trigger the ability.

(It is of course worth noting that there are far more cards in magic that let you interact with the graveyard than those that let you interact with the exile zone. This is why effects that exile are generally considered more powerful than effects that merely destroy)

Not sure if it's good or confusing to mention how exile used to be called "removed from the game".

@GendoIkari, Well, you did just mention it, so you almost force mentioning that they're not actually removed from the game (thus the nomenclature change).


text:
Sacrifice a dead creature?
I have Plagued Rusalka and Grave Pact on the battlefield.
I use Plagued Rusalka's ability and sacrifice it for its cost in order to kill a 1/1 creature an opponent controls by giving it -1/-1. He controls two creatures altogether.
Can the opponent use the very creature I killed with the -1/-1 effect to sacrifice a creature as Grave Pact demands, or can he only sacrifice his second creature to fulfil the demand?
Will one or two creatures on the opponent's side end up leaving the battlefield?

Worth mentioning, the creature does not get a -1/-1 counter from Plagued Rusalka its only reduced until end of turn.

Your opponent can sacrifice the targetted creature before the ability resolves
The exact chain of events is this:

You activate Plagued Rusalka's ability, choosing your opponents' 1/1 creature as a target
While paying its costs, you sacrifice Plagued Rusalka itself, which triggers Grave Pact
Plagued Rusalka's ability is put on the stack, and Grave Pact's ability is put on the stack on top of it - you do not get to choose the order because of the way triggered abilities work

603.3. Once an ability has triggered, its controller puts it on the stack as an object that’s not a card the next time a player would receive priority. See rule 116, “Timing and Priority.” The ability becomes the topmost object on the stack. [...]

At this point, everything's been put on the stack, but nothing has resolved yet. Assuming no player takes any other actions, all objects on the stack will attempt to resolve one after another:

Grave Pact's ability resolves, giving your opponent the choice to sacrifice any of their creatures
If they chose the creature targetted by Plagued Rusalka's ability, that ability will be countered by the game rules when it would resolve for not having any legal targets, and no creature will get -1/-1 until end of turn. This is usually referred to as a spell or ability fizzling.

608.2b If the spell or ability specifies targets, it checks whether the targets are still legal. A target that’s no longer in the zone it was in when it was targeted is illegal. [...] The spell or ability is countered if all its targets, for every instance of the word “target,” are now illegal.

If they chose the other creature, the creature originally targetted will get -1/-1 until end of turn as expected, and put in the graveyard because of that.

Assuming your opponent knows about the rules of the game, there's not a lot of incentive to not sacrifice the creature targetted by Plagued Rusalka here.


text:
Does Baral, Chief of Compliance reduce alternative costs?
Does the first ability of Baral, Chief of Compliance also reduce alternative casting cost?
For example: What about the Overload cost of Cyclonic Rift - is that reduced by one colorless mana?
Or what about flashback costs - are they reduced?

Yes
As long as the cost involves mana, Baral will get the job done.

117.9d. If an alternative cost is being paid to cast a spell, any additional costs, cost increases, and cost reductions that affect that spell are applied to that alternative cost.

Yes.
Total cost
= mana cost or alternative cost
+ additional costs and cost increases
- cost reductions
That means that cost reductions are applied towards the total of the mana or alternative cost, additional costs and cost increases.

601.2f The player determines the total cost of the spell. Usually this is just the mana cost. Some spells have additional or alternative costs. Some effects may increase or reduce the cost to pay, or may provide other alternative costs. Costs may include paying mana, tapping permanents, sacrificing permanents, discarding cards, and so on. The total cost is the mana cost or alternative cost (as determined in rule 601.2b), plus all additional costs and cost increases, and minus all cost reductions. If multiple cost reductions apply, the player may apply them in any order. If the mana component of the total cost is reduced to nothing by cost reduction effects, it is considered to be {0}. It can’t be reduced to less than {0}. Once the total cost is determined, any effects that directly affect the total cost are applied. Then the resulting total cost becomes “locked in.” If effects would change the total cost after this time, they have no effect.


text:
Does Supernatural Stamina return a creature token to the board?
Supernatural Stamina reads:

Until end of turn, target creature gets +2/+0 and gains "When this
  creature dies, return it to the battlefield tapped under its owner's
  control."

If I cast this on a creature token, and it dies (say through combat damage), will it return to the battlefield? Or will it disappear as soon as it dies?

If you think an answer is correct and fully matches your question, don't forget to mark it as an answer.

I'm sorry to disappoint you but a token won't return with Supernatural Stamina.
This is because of the following rules:

110.5f A token that's phased out, or that's in a zone other than the battlefield, ceases to exist. This is a state-based action; see rule 704. (Note that if a token changes zones, applicable triggered abilities will trigger before the token ceases to exist.)

So it will go in the graveyard, the trigger from Supernatural Stamina triggers and then once state based actions are checked the token ceases to exist. The trigger won't find the token and can't resolve.
Note that a token can never leave any other zone than the battlefield due to the following rule, there is no way to bring it back.

110.5g A token that has left the battlefield can’t move to another zone or come back onto the battlefield. If such a token would change zones, it remains in its current zone instead. It ceases to exist the next time state-based actions are checked; see rule 704.


text:
How does the new Sangan errata affect Exodia?
Just reading up on the new sangan errata which is;

If this card is sent from the field to the Graveyard: Add 1 monster with 1500 or less ATK from your Deck to your hand, but you cannot activate cards, or the effects of cards, with that name for the rest of this turn. You can only use this effect of "Sangan" once per turn.

So this new Errata states that you cant use the effect of the monster you added until the turn after you use this effect.
To my understanding this means that if you have sangan in an exodia deck and you have both legs and both arms in your hand then if you use the sangan effect to add the head then you wont win until your next turn. Or would the effect of exodia overrule this effect?
And also if you have the head already and three of the other pieces in your hand when you use sangan to add the last one it doesnt have an effect because only the head has the effect and because you havent added the head to your hand then the win condition can still be activated. Or would you still have to wait a turn because the pieces are listed in the effect of the head?

Having all five pieces of Exodia triggers a win condition, not a monster effect. No card may directly prevent this win condition from triggering.
No card may negate or override the win condition printed on Exodia the Forbidden One. There are multiple rulings to this effect in OCG, including that Prohibition cannot block the effect of Exodia the Forbidden One (this ruling in particular is among those that UDE also issued independently for TCG, before Konami took that over).
There are only three situations in which a player with all five pieces of Exodia will not win:

The player drew the remaining piece(s) of Exodia as a result of an effect that requires them to draw X cards and then discard X cards from their hand (e.g. Graceful Charity - Draw 3, then Discard 2). Exodia's win condition will not be checked until after the cards are discarded from the player's hand.
Both players were required to draw cards (e.g. Morphing Jar), and as a result of that, both players now have all five pieces of Exodia in their hand. The official ruling in OCG (and unofficial from UDE) is a draw.
The player had only the remaining piece of Exodia in their deck and was required to draw two cards from a single card effect (e.g. Pot of Greed). The first draw will add Exodia to their hand, completing Exodia. The second draw causes them to lose the game via Deck-out, before Exodia's win condition is checked for.

Exodia's win condition also occurs before any cards can react to the event that caused its satisfaction (e.g. Magical Thorn) and prevents the remainder of any chain in progress from resolving (e.g. if "Backup Soldier" is played against "Delinquent Duo" and "Backup Soldier" results in Exodia being completed, Delinquent Duo no longer resolves as the game has already ended)

as far as i was aware the win condition was due to the effect of exodia implying that it could be negated due to sangan's new effect

Exodia has no effect, but a condition

@WhatsThePoint Exoida effect: {If you have "Right Leg of the Forbidden One", "Left Leg of the Forbidden One", "Right Arm of the Forbidden One" and "Left Arm of the Forbidden One" in addition to this card in your hand, you win the Duel.} this statement means it's not an effect, it's a condition as user20357 mentioned

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


text:
Sacrificing in response to a triggered ability that would place -1/-1 counters
With the new Amonkhet series, if an ETB trigger says to put -1/-1 counters on target creature you control (e.g. Baleful Ammit, Exemplar of Strength), can you in response sacrifice that creature (supposing you have a sacrifice outlet) and not put the -1/-1 counters from the triggered ability on anything? I can't seem to find any info on this anywhere in the rules.

I don't think the question should be closed as unclear. It doesn't matter what "EOB" means. Having the exact ability text would be nice, but the OP provided enough details for the question to be answerable.

Editors, don't you think it changes the question to change "to have the counters fizzle" to "to not put the -1/-1 counters from the triggered ability"?

@Ikegami Agreed. Changing a question to use proper terminology doesn't help someone who is confused about that terminology.

Yes, you can sacrifice the creature in response to targeting it with the enter the battlefield triggered ability and that will result in the ability being countered (fizzle) because it has no legal targets when it resolves and no -1/-1 counters will get placed on anything.

608.2b If the spell or ability specifies targets, it checks whether the targets are still legal. A target that’s no longer in the zone it was in when it was targeted is illegal. [...] The spell or ability is countered if all its targets, for every instance of the word “target,” are now illegal.

You should know that you must indicate that you wish to maintain priority as you identify the creature that you are targeting with the ability (e.g. "I will target my Oashra Cultivator with this ability and maintain priority. In response to the ability on the stack I will sacrifice my Oashra Cultivator"). This is more important when playing online or in formal play settings but it's a good habit to be in.

Re "You should know that you must indicate that you wish to maintain priority", ...when using tournament shortcuts.

I believe you are asking about an ability such as Exemplar of Strength's ability. Because it targets, the creatures to affect are chosen when the ability is placed on the stack, and it will indeed fizzle if none of its targets exist when it resolves.

608.2b If the spell or ability specifies targets, it checks whether the targets are still legal. [...] The spell or ability is countered if all its targets, for every instance of the word “target,” are now illegal.

Note that it's neither EoS or the counters that target and fizzle, but the ability on the stack.

... Though that has nothing to do with the -1/-1 counters, but with the way 'targeting' works. Saccing a creature once it has the -1/-1 counters (assuming that didn't kill it in the first place) will also take away the counters.

Bad example of "fizzling" - Exemplar of Strength is a creature, so it will resolve regardless of what happens to the creature it targets with the -1/-1 counters. If the creature is removed before the spell resolves, no -1/-1 counters will be placed, but the spell as a whole doesn't fizzle.

@NuclearWang, it is the triggered ability that fizzles, not the creature spell. Ikegami, you might want to clarify that.

@steenbergh, Re "Though that has nothing to do with the -1/-1 counters, but with the way 'targeting' works.", Indeed. I didn't mention counters at all.

I know, and I personally didn't have trouble parsing it. But I can see how NuclearWang's misunderstanding could have happened, as it doesn't clearly talk about the distinction between the creature fizzling and the ETB trigger fizzling.

From the perspective of someone who doesn't know the rules as well as you or I, it would be easy to think of "an ability such as Exemplar of Strength's" as meaning the creature spell itself. (If you didn't know that spells and abilities are different, etc). But I think your recent edit is good and helpful.

Part of it could have simply been that it's easy to overlook an apostrophe and s in a word; especially due to the formatting of the card name being a hyperlink. "The ETB triggered ability on Exemplar of Strength" may help.

@GendoIkari, That changes the meaning to talk about EoS's ability specifically, and the OP didn't even mention EoS. I could add a redundant "ablity' after the "EoS's". This should finalize this.

@ikegami I know, but the question implied 'fizzling' had to do something with the effect rather than the mechanism.

@steenbergh, I still agree.

The effect try to put -1/-1 effects on a target you chose when the effect is put on the stack. If the target is not present when the effect try to resolves, it fizzles and no counters is put on any creature. It's like any other effect that have a single target.


text:
Do Attacking Creatures Deal Damage Simultaneously or Sequentially?
When I declare multiple attackers, do they deal damage at the same time, or do they attack sequentially?
For an example, I attack with Aethergeode Miner and Ninth Bridge Patrol. If they attack simultaneously, I've got a 3/1 and a 1/1. If they attack sequentially, I could use the Miner first, flicker it, and then I'd have a 3/1 and a 2/2, since the Patrol gains +1/+1 for each creature that flickers.
Do attacking creatures work simultaneously?

From the Comprehensive Rules:

510.1. First, the active player announces how each attacking creature assigns its combat damage, then
  the defending player announces how each blocking creature assigns its combat damage.
510.2. Second, all combat damage that’s been assigned is dealt simultaneously.

Note that it is possible to get the sequential effect you want if you have a way of giving your Miner the ability First Strike (or Double Strike). All creatures with First Strike deal damage first, and then there is time to flicker your Miner before other creatures deal damage.

I'm not sure if it's worth talking about first strike / double strike here, or if it would just complicate things.

Okay. So if I read that right, the Patrol won't deal 2 damage that turn, but would the next time?

Are you flickering Miner after combat? If so then yes.

Yeah, I'd be flickering the miner after combat.

@GendoIkari It is probably worth mentioning as what the OP wants to do is technically possible if he can give the Miner first/double strike. Could lead to a better understanding of the game.

Ok, I added it.


text:
How does countering spells work in stack?
I have stumbled upon a situation where my opponent chooses to counter a spell when it is not the most recent spell placed on the stack. It goes like this:

Fog is cast
Opponent casts Counterspell targeting Fog
I cast my own Counterspell targeting their Counterspell
Opponent casts another Counterspell targeting Fog

Is it possible for the opponent to target any spell on the stack? Shouldn't it be targeting the last spell placed on the stack?

When you say a counterspell was 'cast in response to X' do you mean it was 'cast targeting X'? Because in step 4 it generally wouldn't be called responding to Fog while there are still other things on the stack.

Yes, that's what I meant. 4th step the counter-like would target the Fog.

I've made some edits to your question to clean up the wording a little. Can you take a look at them and make sure it still reflects the question you are trying to ask?

Even if you could only target the top-most spell on the stack (which isn't the case), you could still do what you describe by letting some of the stack resolve between steps 3 and 4.

It used to be the case that you could target only the top spell, but that was many, many years ago until they changed interrupts to instants. The basic rules have become a little easier since then.

You can target any spell on the stack, there is no rule limiting it to only the top item on the stack. As you can see below the term counter doesn't have anything that effects how targets have to be chosen, and the spells don't say they have to target the top most object on the stack, so they are able to target any spell that is on the stack.

114.1. Some spells and abilities require their controller to choose one or more targets for them. The targets are object(s), player(s), and/or zone(s) the spell or ability will affect. These targets are declared as part of the process of putting the spell or ability on the stack. The targets can’t be changed except by another spell or ability that explicitly says it can do so.
701.5. Counter
701.5a To counter a spell or ability means to cancel it, removing it from the stack. It doesn’t resolve and none of its effects occur. A countered spell is put into its owner’s graveyard.
701.5b The player who cast a countered spell or activated a countered ability doesn’t get a “refund” of any costs that were paid.

As the answer says, you don't necessarily have to target the top most spell on the stack. But, if you fail to announce your target at a competitive tournament, then you are assumed to be targeting the legal spell closest to the top of the stack. This is an official shortcut described by the Tournament Rules.


text:
What happens while casting protection from Banishing Light?
What would happen with this stack?:
Player 1 plays Banishing light targeting player 2's creature.
Player 2 plays Gods Willing on that same creature.
What happens with player 1's enchantment?
Does it do nothing because the target chosen is protected? Does it choose new target that doesn't have protection, since it isn't an enchant-aura? Or is it something else all together?

Part of what will help make this clear is that Banishing Light doesn't get targets chosen at casting time. Here's how Banishing Light normally plays out:

You cast Banishing Light. (No special choices are made. No target is chosen.)
It resolves and enters the battlefield.
Its enters-the-battlefield triggered ability goes on the stack, with a creature chosen for the target.
That ability resolves and the creature gets exiled, to return when Banishing Light leaves the battlefield.

If you play Gods Willing to give a creature protection in between steps 1 and 2, no target's been chosen yet, and the player must choose any other target during step 3. If there are absolutely no other legal targets to choose during step 3, the triggered ability can't go on the stack, so nothing happens — we skip step 3 and 4, and Banishing Light now just sits there uselessly.
If you play Gods Willing to in between steps 3 and 4, you know what creature they're targeting with Banishing Light's triggered ability. If you give it protection, the ability can't resolve and will fizzle & be countered by virtue of having no legal targets left at resolution time. The player who controls Banishing Light doesn't get to pick any other creature; Banishing Light (again) just sits useless on the battlefield. Nothing gets exiled by it.

Assuming that Player 2 casts Gods Willing in response to Banishing Light's triggered ability, then the creature will be an invalid target for Banishing Light's triggered abilty, the triggered ability will be countered by the rules, and nothing will be exiled.

Here is what's going on in this interaction in detail:
Banishing Light's "When Banishing Light enters the battlefield..." ability is a triggered ability, as described in rule 603.1:

Triggered abilities have a trigger condition and an effect. They are written as “[When/Whenever/At] [trigger condition or event], [effect].”

This ability is put on the stack immediately after the Banishing Light spell resolves. It is at this time that the ability's controller chooses its targets. This is described in rules 603.3, 603.3d, and 601.2c:

603.3. Once an ability has triggered, its controller puts it on the stack as an object that’s not a card the next time a player would receive priority. See rule 116, “Timing and Priority.” The ability becomes the topmost object on the stack. [...]

603.3d The remainder of the process for putting a triggered ability on the stack is identical to the process for casting a spell listed in rules 601.2c–d. [...]

601.2c The player announces his or her choice of an appropriate player, object, or zone for each target the spell requires. [...]

After the ability is on the stack and the targets are chosen, player 2 casts Gods Willing targeting the same creature and choosing White. This grants Protection from White, which is defined in rule 702.16. In particular, rule 702.16b says

A permanent or player with protection can’t be targeted by spells with the stated quality and can’t be targeted by abilities from a source with the stated quality.

Then we can look at rule 112.7, which says

The source of an ability is the object that generated it. The source of an activated ability on the stack is the object whose ability was activated. The source of a triggered ability (other than a delayed triggered ability) on the stack, or one that has triggered and is waiting to be put on the stack, is the object whose ability triggered. To determine the source of a delayed triggered ability, see rules 603.7d–f.

Banishing Light is the source of the ability, and it is White, so the creature cannot be the target of the ability. Then, when the ability tries to resolve, rule 608.2b takes effect:

If the spell or ability specifies targets, it checks whether the targets are still legal. A target that’s no longer in the zone it was in when it was targeted is illegal. Other changes to the game state may cause a target to no longer be legal; for example, its characteristics may have changed or an effect may have changed the text of the spell. If the source of an ability has left the zone it was in, its last known information is used during this process. The spell or ability is countered if all its targets, for every instance of the word “target,” are now illegal. [...]

The creature that player 1 chose is no longer a legal target of the ability, and it is the only target that the ability has, so the ability is countered by this rule. Once that happens, Banishing Light simply does nothing. The ability doesn't trigger again, and player 1 has no opportunity to choose a new target.


text:
What exactly does it mean to "cast" a spell?
For example, Door of Destinies reads "Whenever you cast a spell of the chosen type-" what triggers this effect?
If I have Door of Destinies out and play Akroan Crusader, I know that would count, as would playing a equip card on it, also activating Akroan's ability.
But say that equipment card has " {R}: equipped creature gains +1/+1 until end of turn" does that activate Akroan's ability? Also, does the activation of his spell (and equip spell) trigger door of Destinies?

Seems the rules say it has to go on the stack to be a cast spell, hmmm. Doesnt everything go on the stack? Even attacking creatures?

No, declaring attacking creatures does NOT go on the stack. Neither does the damage that those creatures do. Only spells and abilities use the stack.

Casting a spell put is on the stack, but not everything that puts something on the stack is casting a spell (activating or triggering abilities also puts things on the stack). And not everything goes on the stack, turn based actions like declaring attackers/blockers or drawing your card for the turn, and other things like playing lands or turning a face down creature face up.

It may helpful to mention the name of the "equipment card [that] has " {R}: equipped creature gains +1/+1 until end of turn."

Casting a spell means taking it from where it is, which is usually the hand (but abilities like Flashback or cards like Isochron Scepter can change that), and put it on the stack so that it can resolve and have some effect. This process also involves (among other things) choosing modes for a modal spell, choosing targets for spells that target, and paying the cost of the spell (after taking into account and alternative or additional costs).
For you example, as Door of Destinies enters the battlefield you choose a creature type (I will assume that Human was picked, though it would also work if Soldier were chosen). Then when you cast the Akroan Crusader since it is a Human it will trigger the Door's ability.
In order to equip a card onto a creature you must activate its equip ability, this is not a spell — it is an ability and will not trigger the Crusader's ability. Similarly the "{R}: equipped create gets +/1+1 until end of turn" is also an ability and also will not trigger the Crusaders ability.

601.2. To cast a spell is to take it from where it is (usually the hand), put it on the stack, and pay its costs, so that it will eventually resolve and have its effect. Casting a spell includes proposal of the spell (rules 601.2a–d) and determination and payment of costs (rules 601.2f–h). To cast a spell, a player follows the steps listed below, in order. A player must be legally allowed to cast the spell to begin this process (see rule 601.3), ignoring any effect that would prohibit that spell from being cast based on information determined during that spell’s proposal. (Such effects are considered during the check detailed in rule 601.2e.) If, at any point during the casting of a spell, a player is unable to comply with any of the steps listed below, the casting of the spell is illegal; the game returns to the moment before the casting of that spell was proposed (see rule 720, “Handling Illegal Actions”).

Casting a spell is essentially playing it, such as from exile, your hand, or the graveyard, by either spending the mana required for it, or using a spell/effect (such as Wrexial, the Risen Deep) that lets you play it without its mana cost. If the spell is countered, it still has been cast. (So, for example, if you cast Ulamog, the Ceaseless Hunger, then it is countered, you still exile 2 target permanents.) If any artifact is played on a creature with heroic, it does not trigger heroic.

Abilities do not trigger heroic, so artifact abilities (and equipping) cannot trigger heroic.

okay. i was wrong, but thanks for letting me know that


text:
Can I use Word of Seizing on a planeswalker?
Word of Seizing says:

Untap target permanent and gain control
     of it until end of turn. It gains haste until
     end of turn.

Can I take control of any permanent? Specifically a planeswalker?
I remember somewhere the rules said that if a portion of an effect is not legal or possible, it gets skipped and the rest of the ability resolves (barring any specific portions of effects that say explicitly otherwise)

Yes, you can target any permanent including a planeswalker. You're right that impossible parts of an effect are ignored - in the case of this spell an example is that you can still target a permanent that's already untapped. Untapping something that's already untapped is impossible, so you just don't and move on with the rest of the effect.
However, the part about gaining haste isn't actually an example of an illegal or impossible effect: the planeswalker, or whatever else you steal, will get haste. Most of the time this will be irrelevant (haste doesn't do anything on a non-creature), but if the permanent later becomes a creature it will matter. So if you steal my Gideon, Ally of Zendikar and then use its +1 to turn it into a creature, you'll be glad this spell gave it haste, because otherwise you couldn't attack with it.

Ovalchase Dragster is a self-contained example of a card that has haste but is not a creature. Also, if you cast Gods Willing when you have zero cards in your library, you ignore the instruction to Scry 1. This is an example of ignoring an instruction that is illegal or impossible,


text:
Can an Aetherborn Marauder take +1/+1 counters off a creature that didn't have them (but has P/T to spare)?
So my brother play Aetherborn Marauder. He wants to move three +1/+1 counters from a 4/4 with no previous interaction with any +1/+1 counters. I insist that a +1/+1 counter must have been put on it first, and that its base P/T are not applicable due to the use of the word "counter".
Anyone able to quote the rulebook for this one?

Yes, you can't MOVE counters from a permanent without counters obviously. Finding this in the comp rules might be harder.

From the rules :

121.5. If an effect says to “move” a counter, it means to take that counter from the object it’s currently on and put it onto a second
  object. If the first and second objects are the same object, nothing
  happens. If the first object has no counters, nothing happens; the
  second object doesn’t get a counter put on it. If the second object
  (or any possible second objects) is no longer in the correct zone when
  the effect would move the counter, nothing happens; a counter isn’t
  removed from the first object.

Your Aetherborn Marauder doesn't get any counter if the target of its ETB ability doesn't have counters when the ability resolve.

I didn't see "target" in the phrasing of its ETB.

A creature's power and toughness aren;t counters in and of themselves, they are characteristics of the 'Creature' card type. From the Comprehensive rules, ad 302:

302.4. Power and toughness are characteristics only creatures have.
302.4a A creature’s power is the amount of damage it deals in combat.
302.4b A creature’s toughness is the amount of damage needed to destroy it.
302.4c To determine a creature’s power and toughness, start with the numbers printed in its lower right corner, [...]

These can then be altered using enchantments, instants, sorceries, abilities of sources such as other creatures or planeswalkers, and artifacts/equipment. Most of these effects are temporary in that they only last until end of turn (Giant Growth, or while the source is in play (Glorious Anthem). And sometimes this boost is done using counters which stay with the permanent when its source leaves play (Bond Beetle).
Counters are governed by their own set of rules:

Counters

121.1. A counter is a marker placed on an object or player that modifies its characteristics and/or interacts with a rule, ability, or effect. Counters are not objects and have no characteristics.[...]

And onwards...
In conclusion, you can only move a counter from a permanent when that counter is there in the first place, and base P/T are not counters.


text:
Are Awoken lands actually instantly-dead 0/0's?
I have some friends that play mtg, and one had an extremely good awaken/landfall deck. Then his dreams of succeeding with that deck were destroyed when a friend stated that technically, it's a 0/0 AFTER the +1/+1 counters are applied, rendering the deck useless. That deck was a fun challenge, and it hurts to have that deck taken apart after that comment. I would like to know whether or not awoken lands are a 0/0 after the +1/+1 counters.

If Awaken worked the way your friend stated, then the mechanic would make no sense at all; as casting a spell for the Awaken cost would only have the effect of killing off your own lands. You would simply never use it.

The Awoken land is 0/0 but the +1/+1 counters will give it a toughness greater than 0 so it won't die.

704.4. Unlike triggered abilities, state-based actions pay no attention to what happens during the resolution of a spell or ability.
704.5f If a creature has toughness 0 or less, it’s put into its owner’s graveyard. Regeneration can’t replace this event.

However these cards are worded in such a way that even if 704.4 wasn't true the land creature would still survive because the counters are added to the card before it becomes a creature.

The land has a base P/T of 0/0.  The +1/+1 counters apply on top of that, so it is X/X where x = number of counters.
Rules:

613.3. Within layer 7, apply effects in a series of sublayers in the order described below. Within each sublayer, apply effects in timestamp order. (See rule 613.6.) Note that dependency may alter the order in which effects are applied within a sublayer. (See rule 613.7.)
613.3a Layer 7a: Effects from characteristic-defining abilities that define power and/or toughness are applied. See rule 604.3.
613.3b Layer 7b: Effects that set power and/or toughness to a specific number or value are applied. Effects that refer to the base power and/or toughness of a creature apply in this layer.
613.3c Layer 7c: Effects that modify power and/or toughness (but don’t set power and/or toughness to a specific number or value) are applied.
613.3d Layer 7d: Power and/or toughness changes from counters are applied. See rule 121, “Counters.”
613.3e Layer 7e: Effects that switch a creature’s power and toughness are applied. Such effects take the value of power and apply it to the creature’s toughness, and take the value of toughness and apply it to the creature’s power.

So here we have an effect at 7b that sets it to 0/0, then at 7d the counters apply on top of that.

To make 704.4 easier:
One thing to keep in mind that occasionally trips people up: the game doesn't check state-based effects until a spell or effect completes everything it is doing. This can be counterintuitive sometimes, but it's important to understand.*
In the case of the Awoken mechanic, the effect is typically: "add some +1/+1 counters to a land, and then make it into a creature with 0/0 base p/t".  Once this effect is completed, then the game goes into state-based actions. So by the time the game checks whether the Awoken land has 0 toughness, the +1/+1 counters have already been applied, so the game sees a land that is also a creature with p/t equal to the number of +1/+1 counters on it.

The most common example involves the difference between burn spells and destruction effects: if I Doomblade a Hill Giant, the Hill Giant is destroyed as part of Doom Blade's effect, so it hits the opponent's graveyard before Doom Blade finishes resolving. If I use Lightning Bolt on a Hill Giant, the Lightnight Bolt does 3 damage to it, finishes resolving, and is put in the graveyard. With that done, state-based effects are checked. The game realizes Hill Giant has lethal damage on it, and then Hill Giant is put in the graveyard.

This leads to some cool interactions. For example, say you have a creature that reads: "Whenever a card is put in your opponent's graveyard, they lose 2 life". Your opponent is at 2 life, and casts Hero's Downfall on the creature. That creature dies during spell resolution, and isn't on the battlefield to see HD hit the graveyard. However, if your opponent uses Fireball to kill it, the creature is still on the battlefield when Fireball hits the 'yard, so it triggers. Then state-based effects happen, and it dies. But it's triggered effect is still on the stack, so your opponent loses two life, and dies.

This is a good explanation, but I don't think it actually addresses the primary misunderstanding in the question. Awaken actually puts the +1/+1 counters on the land, then makes it a creature, and this is explicitly mentioned in the question. So I don't think there was a question of whether the land would die in between becoming a 0/0 and getting the counters, but rather whether becoming a 0/0 would override the +1/+1 counters.

I've edited it to reflect the original order of operations. That being said, my answer points to a rule that says the order doesn't matter as long as the both things occur within the same effect.
It is useful to note, as well, that if we put +1/+1 counters on a land as part of one effect, and a second effect then makes that land a 0/0 creature, the land doesn't die.


text:
Can two Enduring Scalelords create an infinite loop?
With two Enduring Scalelords, is it possible to create an infinite loop by putting a +1/+1 counter on a creature, then because of that, place a +1/+1 counter on both Enduring Scalelords, and because of those gaining +1/+1 counters, they get a +1/+1 counter for the other Enduring Scalelord?

To quote directly from the rulings on Gatherer:

If you control two Enduring Scalelords, putting a +1/+1 counter on one of them will cause the ability of the other one to trigger. When this ability resolves, you’ll put a +1/+1 counter on the other Scalelord. This will cause the ability of the first one to trigger. This loop will repeat until you choose not to put a +1/+1 counter on one of the Enduring Scalelords.

Yes, that would create an indefinite loop. You have to choose a number for how many times the loop is to be performed.
In the Comprehensive Rules, this situation is covered by section 719, Taking Shortcuts:

719.1b Occasionally the game gets into a state in which a set of actions could be repeated indefinitely (thus creating a “loop”). In that case, the shortcut rules can be used to determine how many times those actions are repeated without having to actually perform them, and how the loop is broken.

You tell your opponent how often the loop should happen, and if your opponent does not propose a different series of events, your Scalelords will get that many counters.
You have to choose such a number, because there is no such thing as "infinite" in the game. Every number is a definite one. The game is also not a draw, because not all steps in the loop are mandatory:

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

Re "Yes, that would create an infinite loop. You have to choose a number for how many times the loop is to be performed.", Those statements are contradictory. In reality, it's not an infinite loop. Those are only allowed if the loop only contains mandatory options, and those result in a draw (as per the passages you quoted). That is not the case here.

is that better?

Yes, that is a cake batter. (I too can answer completely different questions!)

Yes, you get a non-mandatory infinite loop and can put as many counters on both scalelords as you want.  Luckily for you, it's a "may" trigger, so you can stop it whenever you want, instead of the game being a draw.

In fact, you must stop the loop.

Re "Yes, you get an infinite loop and can put as many counters on both scalelords as you want", Those statements are contradictory. In reality, it's not an infinite loop. Those are only allowed if the loop only contains mandatory options, and those result in a draw. That is not the case here.

@ikegami 716.1b [Occasionally the game gets into a state in which a set of actions could be repeated indefinitely (thus creating a “loop”). In that case, the shortcut rules can be used to determine how many times those actions are repeated without having to actually perform them, and how the loop is broken.]   How is an "indefinite loop" significantly different than an "infinite loop"?

Ikegami is interpreting "infinite" to mean "without end"... which is perfectly reasonable. However, I don't know if the rulebook ever uses the word "infinite"; and it seems just as reasonable to use "infinite" to mean "indefinite" in this context.

@JonTheMon, There's a difference between loops that could be repeated indefinitely (in which case you must take an action to break the loop) and one that actually is. If you have an infinite loop (because it only contains mandatory actions), the game ends in a draw.

Strictly speaking, if you have a loop that involves making choices, and some options result in the loop ending, you must choose one of those options. But you are not obligated to end a loop by taking actions that are not called for by objects already involved in the loop.


text:
How does Ixalan drafting work with its double faced cards?
Will Ixalan pack drafting change due to the double-faced cards? If the draft is sealed and not cube, people can see whether you have a double-faced card in your hand, if you are not careful.

This FAQ has all the answers. Tl;dr: For the majority of tournaments, you reveal all double-faced cards as they are opened. And, since picks are put in a pile in front of you, any opponent can see when you pick a double-faced card. For further details (including e.g. what happens if you don't want to pick a card until you know if your opponent is choosing a double-faced card or not), see the FAQ.
There is also a way to draft completely normally using double-faced cards: tournament officials can open the packs beforehand and sleeve everything in opaque sleeves. However, while Wizards of the Coast does do this at some high-level tournaments, they suggest that your friendly local game store does not use this method so that the store and the judges can't get accused of stealing valuable cards from the packs they'd pre-open.


text:
Where do I find the Magic: the Gathering article about varying card backs?
I remember reading an MTG design article back during the Time Spiral on a what-if scenario where every MTG set would have a different card back.
I've tried looking through the MTG archives, but all I can find is this one;
https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/arcana/almost-different-back-2002-08-05
Which talks about how that almost happened, but isn't the expanded article that I remember. Did I imagine this?
(I hope this is on topic, but I'm afraid it might not be as it's a question about an article about a game, rather than a question about a game.)

Game-adjacent questions are on topic here, so asking about finding this article is OK.

I also distinctly remember seeing an article about that a while ago. I also know there was a video from The Misprint Guy where he talked about alternate card frames, but I don't remember if he also said anything about the backs. I'll try to find some of those.

I haven't been able to find anything, but try looking for articles related to a sixth color, since that's what would have prompted the Time Spiral back change

I've found a couple of articles on MtG's card backs, aside from that one in your original post.
One of them is fairly old, from 2002, and it talks about how Arabian Nights was conceived.
The second one is from October 2017, where Wizards of the Coast unveiled their new MtG logo. This one specifically talks about how they have no intention about changing the card backs at any point for the foreseeable future.
I'm still on the hunt for the specific article you mentioned, but I've not yet managed to find it.

I think I linked the 2002 one in the question. I am reasonably certain it should have been early 2007 near the "Space:The convergence" article. I am starting to think I imagined it.


text:
Control and summoning sickness
If I cast Expropriate and my opponent chose money, if I were to target their Primordial Hydra, can I attack with it immediately?

No you can't attack with it immediately.
To be able to attack with a creature or pay {T} (tap) costs on its abilities, one of these two things must be true:

You must have controlled the creature since the start of your turn, or
It must have haste.

Since neither are true you can't attack with it straight away; you'll have to wait until your next turn.
Gaining control and haste is generally the domain of red theft cards such as Act of Treason: they take control of a permanent and give it haste so you can use it straight away. In exchange, those same effects usually aren't permanent, and the red player has to give it back at the end of their turn. Blue trades that "use immediately" upside for a "use forever" upside.


text:
If I block a creature with afflict and my blocker kills that creature, will I still take afflict damage?
My opponent controls Neheb, the Eternal (a 6/5 creature with afflict 3), and attacks me with it. If I block Neheb with a creature that will kill it, will I still take damage from afflict?

Yes. In fact, you will lose 3 life before creatures deal damage to each to each other.

Yes, you still lose life from Afflict
You even do so long before your opponent's creature dies - Afflict is a triggered ability that triggers when a player declares a blocker for that creature. What happens to that creature afterwards is irrelevant to this ability. Also note that it's not damage, but loss of life.

702.129a Afflict is a triggered ability. “Afflict N” means “Whenever this creature becomes blocked, defending player loses N life.”

So, in your Declare Blockers step, Afflict triggers, eventually resolves, and causes you to lose 3 life. Following that step is the Combat Damage Step, in which your creature will deal lethal damage to your opponent's creature.


text:
How do multiple power increases and reductions affect this creature?
So, I have on my board Chief of the Edge and Herald of Dromoka. My opponent plays Dovin Baan and uses his first ability on Herald of Dromoka.
What is the attack of the Herald now? Does it first go to 0 and then have +1 from the Chief or does it first gain the buff and then go to 0 from Dovin Baan?

Herald of Dromoka winds up with a power of 0 because it is affected by -3 and +1 power simultaneously, which is a -2 modifier no matter which way it occurs.
The first thing to help clarify this is that power can be in negative numbers. See Char-Rumbler for one of the only examples of cards with negative power. (It's got a ruling saying: "Yes, Char-Rumbler’s printed power is -1. While its power is -1 or 0, it simply deals no combat damage.")
Since power doesn't bottom out at 0 and can just keep going down into negative numbers, there's no actual difference either way you order it:

If Dovin Baan applies first, the Herald's power is reduced to -1 then increased to 0.
If Chief of the Edge applies first, the power is increased to 3 then reduced to 0.

107.1b Most of the time, the Magic game uses only positive numbers and zero. You can’t choose a negative number, deal negative damage, gain negative life, and so on. However, it’s possible for a game value, such as a creature’s power, to be less than zero. If a calculation or comparison needs to use a negative value, it does so. If a calculation that would determine the result of an effect yields a negative number, zero is used instead, unless that effect sets a player’s life total to a specific value, doubles a player’s life total, or sets a creature’s power or toughness to a specific value.

Magic the gathering effects are like onions. They have layers.


text:
What game is this d6 with a blank two for?

All the other sides have numbers on them, except the side that would have a two, which is instead blank, as shown in the picture.
What game would this die be for?

Do you know this is intentional, and not just a manufacturing mishap?

What are the other faces of the dice?

Considering that that looks like a very generic die it might actually not be from a game but instead from a magic trick / illusionist kit.
I'd post a link to the various online stores that offer them, but none of them had a whole lot of information about how the trick would work.
It boils down to switching it out with a regular die though.

Of course it very well might be from a board game, but custom dice tend to have some flairs or branding or even a colour.

That's an interesting possibility. Although, from what I can gather from online sources, the gimmick dice used for forcing tricks like this typically have one of the numbers appearing twice (typically on opposite sides of the die, so you won't notice it so easily), rather than one side being completely blank. I'm not sure what a blank-faced die would be good for in a magic trick, since a gimmick like that would seem kind of obvious.


text:
Rules on lone hands
In euchre what, if any, is the penalty if a loners partner plays a card ? I went alone, the opponent to my left lead a card and my partner played the same suite as led.

In a friendly game, where the extra card didn't give any important information (such as playing an ace that the bidder would otherwise not have known where it was), I'd just pick it up and continue play.
Tournament rules should have something to cover this scenario, but a reasonable penalty in this case seems to be forcing the bidder to play with their partner rather than alone.

This solution was the solution we used when we had high school tournaments years ago.  The partnership loses the opportunity for four points.