text:
Can enchantments (briefly) go on protected creatures?
Protection is an ability that grants an object or player several benefits, including:

702.16c A permanent or player with protection can’t be enchanted by Auras that have the stated quality. Such Auras attached to the permanent or player with protection will be put into their owners’ graveyards as a state-based action. (See rule 704, “State-Based Actions.”)

This ability is usually less relevant because when enchantment auras are cast they target, and protection prevents targeting as well. However, if an enchantment aura enters the battlefield without being cast (such as from a flicker effect or Zur the Enchanter), the comprehensive rules say:

303.4f If an Aura is entering the battlefield under a player’s control by any means other than by resolving as an Aura spell ... that player chooses what it will enchant as the Aura enters the battlefield. The player must choose a legal object or player according to the Aura’s enchant ability and any other applicable effects.

Does the "any other applicable effects" clause prevent me from putting an aura onto a protected permanent? At first I thought yes because protection specifically says 'can't be enchanted'. But then I re-considered, as I'm more leaning towards the interpretation that protection prevents ongoing enchantment, not the act of putting an enchantment onto something.
For a specific example, if my opponent has a creature with protection from blue, and I use Brago, King Eternal to flicker a Reality Acid that is currently on the battlefield, can I choose my opponents pro blue creature to enchant with Reality Acid? Knowing that it would immediately slide off as a state based action, but me being ok with that due to Reality Acid's triggered ability.
This question seems close: If a protection effect "doesn't remove Auras", can auras that are not cast be placed on the permanent?, but I think is subtly different as the card in question specifically removes the 'can't be enchanted' clause which is crucial to my question here I think.

I would have pulled the exact same two rules to explain why you can not do what you describe. I'm not sure where the confusion comes from, but "putting an enchantment onto something" sounds synymous to "enchanting" to me.

@SwimmerF the "any other applicable effects" clause is just really vague to me. I know sometimes MTG rules can be confusing about when certain effects are considered or not, such as when needing to assign lethal combat damage effects like deathtouch are considered but damage reduction is not considered. Sometimes this is because of other rules and sometimes it's just a phrasing issue. I was hoping someone could show why "other applicable effects" definitely does or definitely does not include protection.

The player must choose a legal object or player according to the Aura’s enchant ability and any other applicable effects.

Now, what is a legal object? That isn't explicitly defined, and neither is illegal object:

303.4c If an Aura is enchanting an illegal object or player as defined by its enchant ability and other applicable effects, the object it was attached to no longer exists, or the player it was attached to has left the game, the Aura is put into its owner’s graveyard. (This is a state-based action. See rule 704.)

However, the same word legally is used in

702.16n Some Auras both give the enchanted creature protection and say “this effect doesn’t remove” either that specific Aura or all Auras. This means that the specified Auras can legally enchant that creature and aren’t put into their owners’ graveyards as a state-based action. If the creature has other instances of protection from the same quality, those instances affect Auras as normal.

which would lead me to conclude that a creature with protection from blue is an illegal target destination for a flickered Reality Acid.


text:
Rabid Bite mechanics
When a creature is summoned I understand this card has “Summoning Sickness”, where the card is not “tapped” but just cannot attack or use any abilities until the next turn.
How does this work with Rabid Bite? If I play a creature, can I then immediately use Rabid Bite with that creature to have it use that damage as the damage it assigns to the target creature?

"Summoning sickness" does exactly two things: it prevents the creature from attacking, and it prevents the creature from using abilities with the tap symbol.
Nothing else.
If a creature has other abilities, those are all usable.  If the creature is targeted by a spell the spell takes its normal effect (unless it was trying to force the creature to attack).
The creature can even be tapped to pay for costs that read "tap an untapped creature you control", since the cost isn't using the tap symbol instead.
Rabid Bite will behave as normal.

Three. It also prevents the activation of the abilities of creatures with the untap symbol in its cost. /// You have a superfluous "instead" near the end.

Yes, you can. You're not attacking with your creature or using it's abilities. Summoning sickness doesn't affect the function of Rabid Bite.
Rules quote for "summoning sickness":

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

Rabid bite doesn't give the creature an ability with a tap symbol or cause it to attack, therefore summoning sickness doesn't stop Rabid Bite.

This is correct but would be a stronger answer if you could quote the bits of the Comprehensive Rules you're relying on.

Yes, I know. I just wrote up a quick answer. I'll include rules quote once I have more time. Thanks for pointing it out!

Rabid bite doesn't cause a fight, it's "deal damage equal to its power".

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Can I select zero colors for Prismatic Lace?
I noticed that Prismatic Lace explicitly states "color or colors" in it's rules text:

Target permanent becomes the color or colors of your choice.

I realise "colorless" is not one of the five colors of Magic, but can I choose no colors as an option? I'm thinking of scenarios where I may want to protect a permanent from an effect such as those from Ugin and Ugin.

What do you suppose would be the distinction between a "colorless permanent" and a "permanent with no color"?

The distinction here is between trying to choose "colorless" as a color (which it isn't), and trying to choose zero colors as the set of colors that the target permanent becomes. The "color or colors" in the rules text reasonably implies that you could choose 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5 colors, so it's reasonable to ask whether you could also choose zero colors.

I have to admit, I was not considering a difference between the two phrases, since from the perspective of the permanent, it would end up colorless either way.
I was thinking more along the lines of the phrase "color or colors". If it stated just "color", then obviously, the caster has to choose exactly one color, but the second option (under rule 607.2e) seems to allow either zero or more or one or more colors to be chosen. Is zero valid here?

A little tangential, but section 607 isn't relevant here because there are no linked abilities. More broadly, these probably don't qualify as different choices from a rules perspective. It's just one way of writing the various options available within a single action.

Thanks! I have to admit, I just had a quick search for anything that referenced choices where the word "or" appears!

You have to choose at least 1 color.

105.4. If a player is asked to choose a color, they must choose one of the five colors. “Multicolored” is not a color. Neither is “colorless.”

Prismatic Lace instructs you to choose a color or combination of colors. If you were allowed to choose zero colors, the instruction would be worded such that the zero choice would be obviously allowed, for example by containing the phrase "any number of...". There is also the wording that a player may make a choice, in which case you could avoid choosing at all, rather than choosing zero colors. However, there is no mechanical difference between these approaches, the result would be the same.
Also, just in case, don't get hung up on the potential difference between "a color" and "the color" - unless a term or phrase is defined in the Comprehensive Rules, apply the normal rules of English to it.

Even more generally, when instructed to make a choice, you can't choose "no choice" as a choice. If a card tells you to choose a creature/opponent/card/color, you can't choose no creature/no opponent/no card/no color as your choice.

@NuclearHoagie True, though I would word it the other way around - you have to do whatever the instruction says and the instruction is to make a choice, You have 5 legal choices in this case (plus the various combinations), so you have to choose one of those even if you don't want to.

I think it's important to distinguish between "not making a choice" and "choosing an empty list". It turns out that an empty list is not an available option in this situation, but it may be with other wordings. In particular, if a card instructs you to choose "any number" of members of some group, you are allowed to choose none of those things.

@murgatroid99, Re "I think it's important to distinguish between "not making a choice" and "choosing an empty list".", Bingo! If someone asked me what colour or colours I'd like to paint a room, I could very well answer none. But that is avoidance/refusal, not a choice that meets the constraint.

@murgatroid99 I'm not sure I follow. I did discuss the "any number" wording. Why would that distinction would be important? I see no mechanical difference between e.g. "choose any number of colors. Do X with them." and "you may choose a combination of colors. If you do, do X with them.", Any distinction between these wordings would be semantics, a templating issue. Unless you can show a card or rule that produces a different outcome depending on whether you make an empty choice or no choice at all?

I do see a mechanical difference between those two things. If the card said "Choose any number of colors. Target permanent becomes those colors." then you could choose 0 colors and have the permanent become colorless. Alternatively, if the card said "You may have target permanent become the color or colors of your choice.", then you could not choose 0 colors, but you could choose not to take the action, which would leave the permanent with whatever colors it already had.

I don't think the first wording could exist, because the empty choice (effectively "colorless") would not be a valid color that the target could become. The second wording differs from the one in my example, because the choice (the one indicated by "may") is not about choosing the color per se, but about whether or not to apply the color change effect.

The point here is that "red/green" is a valid choice in all of these scenarios, and it is also not a color, so it is not consistent to say that a choice is not a color and is therefore invalid. Colorless is just the property of not having any colors, so the difference between "becoming colorless" and "becoming 'no colors'" is just semantics. As for the "may" wording, there is no real mechanical difference between my wording and yours. In both cases, whether you choose to not choose a color, or to not take the action, the result is that no action is taken.

No, you must choose at least one color.
I asked in the official Magic Judge rules question IRC

Can Prismatic Lace make a permanent colorless? The phrase "color or colors" seems to allow the player to choose any number of colors; would that "any number" include zero?

and got a response from a judge that says

It does not say "any number", it say "color or colors of your choice", so it will be at least one color.

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


text:
Cloning a Molten Primordial at instant speed - who will end up controlling the target creatures?
This came up in a multiplayer game:

I play a Molten Primordial. It resolves and I target 4 creatures controlled by 4 different opponents.
Before the triggered ability resolves one of the opponents casts a Stunt Double.
The double resolves as a copy of my Primordial, its trigger goes on the stack. My opponent targets the same creatures I did (except his own) and 1 of mine. The ability resolves. He now has control of these creatures.
The ability from my Primordial tries to resolve, but as the targets are now under his control it no longer fulfills the "up to one creature" clause.

Do I still gain control of all targeted creatures, or do I only get one?

My opponent targets the same creatures I did and 1 of mine I assume you mean the same creatures except the one that the opponent controls and 1 of mine? The opponent can't target their own creature with his copied Primordial.

You get to control one creature, the one controlled by the opponent who played their own Molten Primordial.
The wording of Molten Primordial's ability is shorthand for:

Gain control of up to one target creature controlled by opponent A until end of turn. Gain control of up to one creature controlled by player B until end of turn.

and so on for each opponent in the game.
Legality of targets is checked twice; once when the ability triggers, and again when it tries to resolve.
When the ability triggers after MP enters the battlefield, all targets you choose are legal. Opponents A, B, C, and D each control a creature, you target one of each.
Before your ability resolves, opponent A casts his own MP. He targets one of your creatures, and one each of B, C, and D. The creatures of B, C, and D are the same you targeted earlier. The ability resolves and he controls them now.
Now your ability gets to resolve. It checks all its targets' legality again. According to the text of MP's ability, for each opponent (A, B, C, D), that opponent has to control the targeted creature. That is false for the creatures of B, C, and D, because A controls them. Only the creature previously controlled by A is still controlled by A.
Therefore, the ability does as much as possible with the remaining legal target, and you gain control of creature A.

Handling Triggered Abilities

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.

Casting Spells

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

Resolving Spells and Abilities

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

In case anyone is wondering - this is covered by rule 608.2b

Let's call the Stunt Double caster "opponent A" and the others B, C, and D.

608. Resolving Spells and Abilities
608.2b If the spell or ability specifies targets, it checks whether the targets are still legal. A target that’s no longer in the zone it was in when it was targeted is illegal. Other changes to the game state may cause a target to no longer be legal; for example, its characteristics may have changed or an effect may have changed the text of the spell.

Since Molten Primordial says "target creature that player controls", the creatures originally controlled by B, C and D are no longer valid targets, but the one originally controlled by A is.

If all its targets, for every instance of the word “target,” are now illegal, the spell or ability doesn’t resolve. It’s removed from the stack and, if it’s a spell, put into its owner’s graveyard. Otherwise, the spell or ability will resolve normally. Illegal targets, if any, won’t be affected by parts of a resolving spell’s effect for which they’re illegal.

That means you still get to control the creature you chose for opponent A.

Thanks for the answer; we thought so.
Just to be clear though: does change of controller actually qualify as a "zone change"?
cheers,
laurens

Nope, the zone is the battlefield and the creatures don't leave it in this case.


text:
Can I tap all my opponent's lands while they're casting a spell to negate it?
If my opponent attempts to play Molten Disaster (along with the kicker cost which gives it split second), can I play Mind Games to tap my opponent's lands to negate Molten Disaster?

No, you can't do that.
Casting a spell follows this basic process:

The player puts the card on the stack.
They make all choices for that spell, including targets, additional costs, etc.
They pay for the spell.

During this process nobody is allowed to cast spells, activate abilities, or do anything at all really — the exception is that the player can activate mana abilities while casting their spell to pay for it.
Only after this process does any player gain priority, meaning they are allowed to cast spells and activate abilities. The player who cast the spell gets priority first, then they can pass priority to the next player in turn order, and so on. (For more details on casting spells and priority see In plain English, how does casting spells and using creature abilities work with the stack and priority?.)
This means that by the time you are able to cast spells in response to your opponent casting Molten Disaster, it has already been fully paid for. It is too late to tap down their lands. Plus their Molten Disaster is now on the stack with split second so you can't cast spells at all until it resolves!
If you did want to tap down their lands, they can just activate them for their mana in response anyway while your spell is still on the stack, and use that mana right afterwards.

Note that neither (A) there not being a moment between your opponent showing the spell and them paying the mana for it during which you can cast your Mind Games and (B) the opponent being able to respond to your Mind Games by tapping the lands if he wants to use them later in that phase relies on the Split Second ability. This means that this doesn't work even if the Kicker cost was not paid. Additionally, if the Kicker cost is paid and the spell does have Split Second, rather than the Mind Games being ineffective, you can't even play it before the Molten Disaster resolves.

No, you can't. When your opponent announces that they're casting Molten Disaster, you can't do anything until the moment it's already on the stack and it's paid for with mana obtained by tapping lands. It doesn't really matter if it has split second or not.
Since Molten Disaster is a sorcery, one thing you could do is casting Mind Games during their upkeep (or draw step). They would have to wait until the main phase before they can cast sorceries, and mana pools empty at the end of each step and phase. Of course, this would assume you know they have Molten Disaster (e.g. via Telepathy) and not enough lands to cast it otherwise.

Other answers have mentioned that mana abilities can be activated during the casting of the spell, and there's no time for the opponent to react in between.
But even if mana abilities weren't special, but worked at instant speed like almost every other ability, you still couldn't prevent an opponent from casting a spell by tapping their lands in response.
Consider some non-mana ability that has a cost of tapping the permanent in question, e.g. Soulmender, which has "Tap: You gain 1 life."
Tapping Soulmender is part of the cost of that ability, and it happens immediately when the player announces the ability they are activating. The cost is paid, the ability goes on the stack, and priority goes back to the same player. Rule 602.2:

602.2. To activate an ability is to put it onto the stack and pay its costs, so that it will eventually resolve and have its effect.

If the opponent casts a spell or activates an ability that taps Soulmender in response (when they get priority), it wouldn't have any effect: the cost would already have been paid when that spell/ability resolved.
Similarly, even if you could cast Mind Games between the opponent tapping their lands and casting the spell, the cost of tapping the lands would already have been paid once it resolved.
(If all mana production worked at instant speed, it would allow some other tricks, though.)

I'm guessing you asked specifically about a spell that has split-second because you understood split-second as:

You can't cast spells unless they're mana abilities. You can use abilities unless they're mana abilities.

Where you consider Mind Games to be a "mana ability" because it taps lands.
But split-second actually means:

You can't cast spells. You can't use abilities unless they're mana abilities.

A spell, whether it taps lands or produces mana, is not a mana ability. "Mana ability" refers specifically to activated abilities and not spells. A mana ability is an activated ability that produces mana in addition to its other effects.
See the other answers for why you can't counter a spell by tapping the lands that would be used to cast said spell.


text:
Whispersilk cloak - does it protect from Sudden Spoiling and Condemn?
If my creature is equipped with Whispersilk Cloak, can my opponent play Sudden Spoiling and then they play Condemn to put my creature on the bottom of my library?

Both Whispersilk Cloak and Sudden Spoiling generate continuous effects (even though Sudden Spoiling says 'until end of turn'), so this situation is covered by rule 613. Interaction of Continuous Effects:

613.1. The values of an object’s characteristics are determined by starting with the actual object. For a card, that means the values of the characteristics printed on that card. For a token or a copy of a spell or card, that means the values of the characteristics defined by the effect that created it. Then all applicable continuous effects are applied in a series of layers in the following order:
...
613.1f Layer 6: Ability-adding effects, ability-removing effects, and effects that say an object can’t have an ability are applied.
...
613.2. Within layers 1–6, apply effects from characteristic-defining abilities first (see rule 604.3), then all other effects in timestamp order (see rule 613.6). Note that dependency may alter the order in which effects are applied within a layer. (See rule 613.7.)
...
613.6. Within a layer or sublayer, determining which order effects are applied in is usually done using a timestamp system. An effect with an earlier timestamp is applied before an effect with a later timestamp.
613.6a A continuous effect generated by a static ability has the same timestamp as the object the static ability is on, or the timestamp of the effect that created the ability, whichever is later.
613.6b A continuous effect generated by the resolution of a spell or ability receives a timestamp at the time it’s created.

Since Sudden Spoiling is cast after equipping Whispersilk Cloak, it has a later timestamp and it 'wins'; the creature doesn't have shroud. Therefore, it's a valid target for Condemn.

Sudden spoiling targets a player, not a creature. I think the heart of the question is if the creature 'regains' shroud after losing it from Sudden Spoiling

Thanks for catching that. Then it's a layer/timestamp question :)

So this means that if you have enough mana, you can unequip and re-equip whispersilk to get shroud back. If it is your main phase.

Sudden Spoiling targets a player, and therefore Whispersilk Cloak has no effect on it. In addition, since Sudden Spoiling causes all creatures the target player controls to lose all abilities, and Whispersilk Cloak grants abilities to the equipped creature, then Shroud would be lost and the creature can be targeted by Condemn (or any other targeted spell).


text:
Why do so many people play out of turn on the last lead?
Is this a common play say in bridge or some other euchre where players just randomly throw their last card in? I notice it's commonly done during a lone hand but also on regular play and I have to always defend that it was my lead.

If the tricks stand at 3-1, then the outcome of the fifth trick does not matter -- 3-2 or 4-1 both score the same.  So this is probably a common reason for everyone throwing in their last card.

It's common in all trick-based card games; since your 'move' is forced (you have to play the only card you're still holding), you're not giving away information to your opponents (or your teammate). By just playing your card the very moment the second-to-last trick is taken, you speed up the game.
Players who do this know who is in the lead; the player who took the second-to-last trick, not the one who throws his/her card first. They assume the other players know it, too. Even more: most of the times they probably already know who is taking the last trick, which can often be deduced by remembering cards played during previous tricks. E.g. it might be clear that there is one trump card left and only one person can have it.
If it's confusing you or one of the other players, e.g. because you/they are relatively new to the card game, just ask the out-of-order-throwing players politely not to do so. Card games are a social activity and if you ask nicely, they're likely to comply.

So your saying its ok to lead out of turn, these players dont confuse me but may confuse others who either arent playing because im alone or are new to the game I find this rude since you cant play out of turn any other time I cant see why they do it at the last.

It's OK if everybody knows what's going on; then it speeds up the game.

How can it speed up the game when we both have 2 tricks and the last trick has to be played and people trying to make their ace good and you have to explain to people it was my lead, I dont care what you say its not right to play like  that its inconsiderate and more proper to play what lead instead of people guessing whos trick it is. Just because its not cheating does not make it right.

@Glorfindel addressed this concern already.  If everyone is aware of what is going on, then it speeds up the game.  You're absolutely right that it slows it down if players are confused.  In my games we rarely play hands past the third trick.  If the side that has the highest trump left is the team that has two tricks in a two to one split then the hand is over.

It's right to play like that if everyone's okay with it and it's not right to play like that if somebody's not okay with it. If you're not okay with it, ask them to stop.

@BillEMontgomery If someone is trying to "make their ace good", then they're trying to cheat.  That's an entirely different problem than everyone throwing their last cards in on the last trick, and definitely behavior worth calling out.

It's common since their move is forced, and so is everybody else's. If there was a player who did have more than one choice, then playing out-of-turn might show hidden information, even if the move showing it was forced in itself.

It's not so much that they are playing out of order as they are revealing their play ahead of time because they know that a) their play will not be changed based on what the people ahead of them play and b) the people ahead of them will not change their plays based on their play.  By revealing the plays ahead of time, it allows the table to process all the plays more rapidly.

Could you explain "trying to make their ace good"? In trick taking games, the order the cards are laid down in doesn't affect who wins the trick...

Maybe claiming that their ace was the same suit as the leading card?

Just because the not-leader puts their A of Diamonds on the table before anyone else does not mean diamonds is led. The suit played by you (if it's your lead) is the suit that is led. Nobody can "make their ace good" by putting their card down first. All that can happen when anyone plays out of turn is that others can change their mind about what to play -- and on the last play, that's not possible since they have no choice what to play.

I can think of at least one trick based game where this would not work: Rage. It has Joker cards that can take any suit/ color and therefore order is important (and there are cards as well which disable trumps for a round)

@Zibelas There are always exceptions to a rule.

It is not that everyone throws the last card it is usually one person doing this and with people trying to learn and older people who can't see or hear that good as well as other issues like concentration etc.
We all can't be experts or play super fast. Older folks don't like to play like that and people who are just learning don't get that way of playing until they understand better. It's ok to play like that at home but at a tournament or even regular play there are rules to follow. It may sound odd to an experienced player, but you have to remember there are new players or older players that are not on the fast track.
Most people don't play like that so when one person throws it in. I can see if some throws in the right bower or gets last trick but this is not a euchre where once you are euchred, they throw the hand in.

The user is clearly asking about the situation where everyone does throw in their last card each. They are not claiming that every single player that ever exists does play like this, or that all players who have ever done it will do it in every hand. This doesn't appear to answer the question at all, and is instead merely commentary on people with that style of play.

@Nij - the user is the author of both the question and answer...

Yet the question has a pretty clear intended meaning, as written, which the answer seems to go sideways from. At best that suggests they don't fully understand the situation they're asking about; at worst that the entire post was disingenuous. @TheChaz2.0

This is a rant, not an answer. Stack exchange is a place for Q&A - questions and answers. If you want to argue that someone is doing something wrong, and convince them of that, go talk to them, not to us!

ok lets drop this since you all think its ok and im just ranting because I dont agree with you............i just dont see anything wrong with leading in turn so its the normal way of playing but thats ok lets drop it since you will never see my side of it.

@BillEMontgomery - This is nothing to do with agreeing with you or not, it is to do with what this site is for: Q&A, not discussion forum.

OK I was wrong I was always taught to play whats lead and play in turn but you say its ok to fling out your last card randomly out of turn ok I did not think thats how to play but I learn something new thanks for telling the aspects of playing euchre.

I really need to disagree here - older folks are most likely to play like this, my grandfather is usually the first card on the table in the last trick in euchre, older people who play these games tend to be more experienced in them (having played them longer) and understand play order doesn't matter on the last trick, since it's pure forced.

Where I play euchre the main ones who play like that are bridge players very few regular euchre players play like that, if you are a card shark count the cards etc, thats different. Its similar to saying throw the cards in once you are euchred theres no sense playing if you are euchred however for player who are slower and dont play like that I dont see why it must be played that way not every one pays that much attention they figure who ever led the card must have taken the last trick, when playing with older folks some are deaf or poor eyesight and sometimes in  confused  for various reasons


text:
Ral Zareks first Ability: Magic The Gathering
Can I activate Ral Zarek's first ability (Tap target permanent, then untap another permanent) if my opponent has no "untapped" permanents? If so, will I get a loyalty counter, and be able to untap another permanent?

Yes, you can. You must choose a 'target permanent' for the first part of the ability; the ability doesn't specify you must choose an untapped permanent. The ability won't be able to tap that permanent:

701.20a To tap a permanent, turn it sideways from an upright position. Only untapped permanents can be tapped.

but that's not a problem; to activate an ability you must choose valid targets, it doesn't matter if the ability resolves fully. Part of activating an ability is paying its cost, which in this case is adding a loyalty counter:

606.4. The cost to activate a loyalty ability of a permanent is to put on or remove from that permanent a certain number of loyalty counters, as shown by the loyalty symbol in the ability’s cost.

During resolution, even if the first part of the ability doesn't do anything, the second part is still carried out:

608.2c The controller of the spell or ability follows its instructions in the order written.

"you must choose valid targets" It's worth pointing out that the ability does not say "tap target untapped permanent", so tapped permanents are legal targets. And also that abilities that are unable to do everything during resolution still do as much as they can (I forget the exact rule reference for this).

Though I think there's the corner case when the opponent controls no permanents whatsoever. In that case, you'd need to pick one of your own to tap. I suppose you could tap Ral himself...

Worth adding 101.3 Any part of an instruction that’s impossible to perform is ignored. (In many cases the card will specify consequences for this; if it doesn’t, there’s no effect.)

It's worth mentioning that if Ral Zarek was the only permanent on the field somehow, you could not activate his first ability, and thus not add a loyalty counter to him. This is because the ability requires two different permanents as targets. ("Target permanent" and "another target permanent". Note that Ral Zarek could be one, but not both, of those targets).
This is because (emphasis mine)

602.2. To activate an ability is to put it onto the stack and pay its costs, so that it will eventually resolve and have its effect. ... Activating an ability follows the steps listed below, in order. If, at any point during the activation of an ability, a player is unable to comply with any of those steps, the activation is illegal; the game returns to the moment before that ability started to be activated (see rule 717, “Handling Illegal Actions”). Announcements and payments can’t be altered after they’ve been made.
602.2b The remainder of the process for activating an ability is identical to the process for casting a spell listed in rules 601.2b–h.

And

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


text:
Can I get a go and last card when opponent is out of cards in cribbage?
My opponent runs out of cards during pegging, I have 3 left, can I get a go and then last card?

Absolutely!
The American Cribbage Congress - Rule 7. The Play clearly states.

Rule 7.2 Scoring
8 b.
When a player's opponent has no more cards or calls "go," the other player may play all playable cards in succession and announce the points scored before pegging the total at one time.

So yes, after your opponent runs out of cards you shall play our all your remaining cards, in any order you desire, scoring all points thereby accrued.


text:
Is it possible to have the same planeswalker from different editions in a Commander deck?
Is it possible to have the same card but from two different editions in Commander?
For example, the planeswalker Jace Beleren.

No, this is not possible. The rules clearly state

903.5b Other than basic lands, each card in a Commander deck must have a different English name.

Since there are different Jace planeswalkers, you can include multiple of them, but you can only have one Jace Beleren.

The printing, set, art, and as of Unstable even the stats and contents of the text box all are not relevant for determining if there are too many of that card in that deck. The only thing that matters is the English name. As of a recent rules change you can have different Jace's in play at the same time, and of course you can have them in your deck due to having different names.
The only cards exempt from the card limit are cards with the supertype basic (the 11 basic lands by name, 5 snow covered, 5 normal and Wastes), Relentless Rats, Rat Colony, and Shadowborn Apostle. All other cards can have 4 copies in a constructed deck and 1 copy in an EDH/Commander deck based on English name. (As long as the card is legal in that format and has not been restricted to 1 copy in that format)


text:
Can a player sacrifice a creature after declaring that creature as blocker while taking lethal damage?
I'm asking specifically about the lovely Magus of the Balance if that'll help.
So for example, If I were to attack with a theoretical 20/20 Savageborn Hydra, and then my opponent declares block with Magus, would my opponent still be able to sacrifice the Magus after declaring block?

Its worth noting that this is a good fraction of why Arcbound Ravager was so destructive in the Mirrodin block.

@Draco And standard. And to extended and later to some extent modern.

As I no longer had a regular group to play with after Kamigawa, as well as not following "the meta" generally, I couldn't make such a statement. ;) I just know that "ravager" and "counter-ravager" were the only decks showing up at national-level tournaments during that block.

Yes, that's possible. Declaring blockers is one of the steps of combat, and after declaring blockers the Hydra becomes blocked:

509.1h An attacking creature with one or more creatures declared as blockers for it becomes a blocked creature; one with no creatures declared as blockers for it becomes an unblocked creature. [...] A creature remains blocked even if all the creatures blocking it are removed from combat.

After that, there is time for the players to play spells or abilities:

509.4. Fourth, the active player gets priority. (See rule 116, "Timing and Priority.")

Combat damage is only dealt in the next step:

Combat Damage Step

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. ...

so it's possible to sacrifice the Magus before it's killed by the Hydra, and the Hydra won't deal combat damage to your opponent (unless it somehow gained Trample) since it's still blocked.

The Magus won't deal any combat damage either.

Important side note: If you respond to the sacrifice by somehow giving your creature trample, all the damage would go through - as if it were blocked by a 0/0 creature.


text:
Karn, the Great Creator - what defines a 'card from outside the game' in sealed?
In the upcoming set 'War of the Spark' there is the Planeswalker Karn, the Great Creator. His -2 ability reads as:

-2: You may choose an artifact card you own from outside the game or in exile, reveal that card and add it to your hand

Now my question is, in a sealed tournament, like the Prerelease, is a player allowed to also choose cards from outside his sealed cardpool, or only out of the cards therein. Does anyone know any rulings on stuff like that?

It's the same wording as used on e.g. the Wish cycle from Judgment. An example is Golden Wish. Its rulings at the bottom say

10/1/2009     In a sanctioned event, a card that’s “outside the game” is one that’s in your sideboard. In an unsanctioned event, you may choose any card from your collection.

So in a Sealed event, you're limited to your sideboard, which according to the Tournament Rules are the 'rest' of the opened cards you're not using in your deck. (Of course, exiled cards can be chosen as well.)

7.1 Deck Construction Restrictions
Limited decks must contain a minimum of forty cards. There is no maximum deck size. Any drafted or opened cards not used in a player’s Limited deck function as their sideboard.

I would suggest closing the loop with this quote from the Magic Tournament Rules section 7.1: "Any drafted or opened cards not used in a player’s Limited deck function as their sideboard."

Also for a direct rule quote in addition to/instead of the card ruling, the end of section 3.15 of the tournament rules says "Certain cards refer to 'a (card or cards) from outside the game.' In tournament play, these are cards in that player’s sideboard."


text:
Energy Chamber and Armageddon Clock
Can Energy Chamber be used with Armageddon Clock? I.e. are the counters on Armageddon Clock "charge counters"?

No, putting counters on Armageddon Clock with Energy Chamber will not allow you to deal damage with Armageddon Clock.
Energy Chamber's ability places "Charge Counters" onto Artifacts, whereas Armageddon Clock's ability instructs you to deal damage equal to the number of "Doom Counters" on it. While you can combine counters with the same name, counters of different names are not interchangeable.

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. Notably, a counter is not a token, and a token is not a counter. Counters with the same name or description are interchangeable.

As mentioned in the other answers, Armageddon Clock's abilities refer to doom counters, not charge counters, so Energy Chamber won't help with it.  However, here are some cards that will:

Doubling Season
Clockspinning (provided the clock has at least one doom counter)
Gilder Bairn (provided the clock has at least one doom counter)
Vorel of the Hull Clade (provided the clock has at least one doom counter)
Anything with Proliferate (provided the clock has at least one doom counter)
Eye Of Doom (can add a doom counter every time it enters the battlefield; just don't activate it's ability unless the clock has no counters)
Imminent Doom + Opalescence + March of the Machines + Fate Transfer (okay, this one is a bit impractical)
Giant Fan and Everythingamajig (not legal in most formats)

And, of course, Doubling Season.

@Zags anything with proliferate like Atraxa...

No. Energy Chamber refers to "charge counters"; Armageddon Clock works with "doom counters". On some forms of the card, like the autolinked one, you can't see that since it just referred to "counters". Later printings, such as the Fourth Edition one, do indicate the difference. As always, the Gatherer will tell you the current Oracle ("official") text:

At the beginning of your upkeep, put a doom counter on Armageddon Clock.
At the beginning of your draw step, Armageddon Clock deals damage equal to the number of doom counters on it to each player.
{4}: Remove a doom counter from Armageddon Clock. Any player may activate this ability but only during any upkeep step.

Of course, you can put a charge counter on Armageddon Clock with Energy Chamber; it just won't have the effect you probably want it to have.


text:
Can I have more than four non-basic lands with the same name in my deck?
Am I allowed to have 5 Bottomless Vaults in my deck?

No, the maximum allowed number of copies for each card is four. The only exceptions are basic lands (Forest, Snow-covered Forest) and cards which specifically mention they're exceptions (like Relentless Rats).

100.2a In constructed play (a way of playing in which each player creates their own deck ahead of time), each deck must contain at least sixty cards. A constructed deck may contain any number of basic land cards and no more than four of any card with a particular English name other than basic land cards.

(from the Comprehensive Rules)
So in the rare case that you're playing a Fifth Edition draft (that's a Limited format) and manage to draft five Bottomless Vaults, then it would be allowed.


text:
Evolutionary Leap Stack Ordering
Using Evolutionary Leap to sacrifice a creature such as Pulmonic Sliver (or another sliver w/ Pulmonic on board), in which order does the stack happen?
You would place the sacrificed sliver on top, or do the triggers miss the sliver in question sending it to the graveyard?
Evolutionary Leap

G, Sac a creature: Reveal cards from the top of your library until you reveal a creature, put that in your hand.

Pulmonic Sliver

If this permanent would be put into the graveyard you may place it on top of your library instead.

Pulmonic Sliver's ability is a replacement effect and doesn't use the stack. That means that when you pay the activation cost for Evolutionary Leap, you may choose to put Pulmonic Sliver on top of your library, and as soon as Evolutionary Leap's ability resolves, it will find that Sliver. Most of the times, that is not what you want, but fortunately Pulmonic Sliver's ability is optional.

Note that if the Pulmonic ability were a triggered ability, the result would be essentially the same.

Do you have a quote or link, at least to what replacement effect is?  I think this is the first time I've read that term (I'm admittedly casual, tho I do lightly skim posts here regularly).

@joedragons The official mtg comprehensive rulebook may be found here. It is not meant to be read from start to finish, but rather as a reference work to answer specific questions when they arise. In your case, replacement effects are explained in section 614 (at least that's the section number in my version of the rules, which admittedly is a few months old now). Many answers given in this site (regarding the game mtg, at least) reference this document.

(cont.) Together with Gatherer, it makes up the lion's share of what official rules and rulings are at all available for the game.


text:
Absorbing damage with Planeswalker
If my opponent attacks my planeswalker (who has 1 loyalty counter) with two creatures (power 1 and 3 respectively), can I absorb the attack of the creature with power 3 with my planeswalker and only take one damage to my health? Or do I treat it like the creature has trample and take three damage to my health?

Neither. Treat your planeswalker as if they are a separate player, one that you can use your creatures to block for. If there is trample damage when your block, that damage goes to your planeswalker, not you. If you don't block (or do block and there's trample) and that damage is more than enough to kill your planeswalker, then your planeswalker dies, and no damage is dealt to you. Damage never tramples over onto you from an attack at your planeswalker. From the comprehensive rules (emphasis mine):

510.1b An unblocked creature assigns its combat damage to the player or planeswalker it's attacking. If it isn't currently attacking anything (if, for example, it was attacking a planeswalker that has left the battlefield), it assigns no combat damage.

Update:
With the printing of Thrasta, Tempest's Roar, "Trample over Planeswalkers" is now a variant of trample - creatures with this would do any extra damage beyond enough to kill the planeswalker to the defending player. As of right now this only exists on Thrasta, creatures with regular trample are not changed.

Creatures attacking your planeswalker, not you as a player, will only damage said planeswalker (or any blocking creatures). It doesn't matter whether they deal lethal damage to the planeswalker and/or have trample or not. In this particular scenario, the creatures will deal 4 damage to the planeswalker, but 0 to you.

510.1b An unblocked creature assigns its combat damage to the player or planeswalker it's attacking.
702.19b The controller of an attacking creature with trample first assigns damage to the creature(s) blocking it. Once all those blocking creatures are assigned lethal damage, any remaining damage is assigned as its controller chooses among those blocking creatures and the player or planeswalker the creature is attacking.

At the point the attackers are declared your opponent must declare whether the creatures are attacking you or the planeswalker. If they decide to attack the planeswalker with 1/1 creature and you with the 3/3 creature then you will take damage. If they are both attacking the planeswalker, then the planeswalker will take 4 damage, remove 4 loyalty counters from it. As it reaches 0 loyalty counters the SBE will check for this and move it to the graveyard.
Just imagine your opponent attacked a player on the other table. Even if they had trample that damage wouldn't go to you. Planeswalkers had been treated in rules as separate players for years (even though recent changes have changed this slightly) the overall rule still applies.

You take no damage. a planeswalker is a separate player, so you take no damage, the planeswalker is just super dead.


text:
What happens when a creature with flying blocks my non-flying attacker?
I’ve declared a non-flying attacker, and my opponent declared a flying blocker. When combat damage is dealt, I deal damage as normal, but can the damage dealt by the flying creature be absorbed by my non-flying creature, or do I have to absorb it with my life?

Think of this as happening in real life.  You are at one end of a field with a dog.  Your opponent is at the other end of the field and has a large eagle.  You "sic" your dog on the other guy and your dog takes off down the field.  The other guy commands his eagle to stop your dog. Eagle swoops down and dog and eagle fight. Eagle may win and stop dog, or dog may win and continue to hurt other guy, but you aren't going to be hurt either way.
Now it's the other guys turn.  Other guy sends his eagle to fly down and attack you.  You can't command your dog to fly up and block the eagle.

@Kevin Mark Rosewater has said on several occasions that "flying" is a wonderful name for that ability, exactly because our real world intuition works so well with that word.

It's your turn and you are attacking your opponent; that means you won't lose life from combat damage. The flying creature will deal combat damage to your non-flying creature. The fact that it has flying has nothing to do with it; that just determines whether it can block or be blocked.
Everything you need to know about this is covered in the basic rules; look for the section 'ATTACKING AND BLOCKING'.

An attacking creature that is blocked deals damage to the creature or creatures that are blocking it, and vice versa.

I think you may be a bit confused between magic and Yu-Gi-Oh rules.
Using your example, you declared attackers and your opponent declared blockers.
Your creature does not have flying so it can be blocked by any creature (unless stated on the creature itself, either attacking or blocking for example Skywinder Drake).
In this case, the ability the blocking creature has is irrelevant.
Abilities that will usually matter when defending (keyworded abilities) are for example: First strike, double strike, last strike, deathtouch, lifelink, infect, whither and indestructible.
In the case of the attacking creature the above abilities are also relevant, but one of the most relevant regarding damage will be trample as mentioned on other answers.
If your attacking creature's power is higher than the blocking creature's toughness then your attacking creature would deal enough damage to the blocking creature for it to be lethal, and you could then assign the rest of the damage to the defending player. Attacking player "always" chooses how the damage is assigned to defending creatures/players according to the rules. The only instance where a defending player gets to assign damage and "blocking order" is if he controls a creature that allows him to block more than one creature at a time. The defending player can never "trample" damage to its opponent as such ability does not exist and they are not the attacking player, therefore all damage must be assigned to the blocked creatures.

If there is no trample (or any other abilities involved) combat between creatures will never cause damage to players.

Not directly relevant to the question, but to avoid any confusion it could be good to mention that even in the case of Trample, the attacking player will never get hit by combat damage.


text:
Are blue/red cards blue and red, for preventing damage by protection circles?
If my opponent attacks with a Niv-Mizzet, can I prevent the damage with a Circle of Protection: Blue?

Remember that warning you got when you tried to post a question without enough text in it?  Adding a bunch of garbage to circumvent it does not go over well.  Please look through the [help] and review [ask] before posting here again.


text:
Mairsil, the Pretender Out of Battlefield abilities
Does Mairsil, the Pretender ability work on activated abilities that are not reliant on being on the battlefield?
Or is his second ability only in effect while he-himself is on the field?
For instance Yuriko, the Tiger's Shadow activated keyword Commander ninjutsu? Or Reassembling Skeleton?
(If either is a bad example please use a better example of an activated ability usable from another zone, hand, graveyard, etc.)

Unless otherwise specified, static abilities like the second ability of Mairsil, the Pretender function only while the card is on the battlefield.

604.2. Static abilities create continuous effects, some of which are prevention effects or replacement
  effects. These effects are active as long as the permanent with the ability remains on the battlefield
  and has the ability, or as long as the object with the ability remains in the appropriate zone, as
  described in rule 112.6.
112.6. Abilities of an instant or sorcery spell usually function only while that object is on the stack.
  Abilities of all other objects usually function only while that object is on the battlefield. The exceptions are as follows: [...]

To clear up some confusion: All abilities that aren't spell abilities, activated abilities or triggered abilities are static abilities and are subject to the rules I mentioned above. But there are some exceptions to rule 112.6 that define which abilities might be effective even outside the battlefield. Some examples are:

Characteristic-defining abilities (like "This card is all colors.")
Abilities that say that say that they function in a specific zone.
Abilities that modify the deck-building rules (like "A deck can have any number of cards named Relentless Rats.")


text:
Do you get treasure if you don't kill the Dungeon! Monster?
I've been reading the Dungeon! WOTC rules, and have a peculiar question: the rules state

If you encountered the Monster in a room, you draw 1 Treasure card from the face-down pile of cards corresponding to the Level the Monster was on. You also collect any other Treasures that were dropped there by Heroes.
If you encountered the Monster in a chamber, you do not draw a random Treasure card, but you do collect any Treasures that were dropped there by Heroes.

However, the definition of "encounter" seems to simply be "there is a monster":

After your Hero has finished moving, he or she encounters that space. If your Hero is in a corridor space, a cleared room (with 1 Cleared token) or a cleared chamber (with 3 Cleared tokens), no Monsters are there. Your turn is over. Otherwise, follow the steps below.

Finally, not killing Monsters has the following outcomes:

Killed! Drop all your Treasure cards. Choose a new Hero (or the same one if no other Hero is available) and place it on the Great Hall.
Seriously Wounded: Randomly drop half your 11 Treasure cards (round up) and place your Hero on
the Great Hall.
Wounded: Drop 1 random Treasure card and move your Hero back 1 space in the direction he or she came. Take 1 Lose a Turn token.
Stunned: Drop 1 random Treasure card.
Miss! No effect.

From my reading, despite the potential negative effects, it seems like each of these is still an encounter, meaning that a Hero gains treasure as long as the Monster was in a room, full-stop.
Is my logical conclusion correct? Does a Hero draw a Treasure card if there is a Monster in a room, no matter what happens in combat?

As a GM for D&D, and a board-game enthusiast, this seems... wrong? The game would move far too quickly if you got treasure just from seeing monsters, and makes no fictional sense either.
I did find this answer which suggests that you only get treasure if you defeat the Monster.
Are the rules just missing a statement at the end of each result of not killing a Monster to the effect of "Your turn is now over. Skip the Looting phase." ? Alternatively, could it mean "If you defeated the Monster in a room, you draw 1 Treasure card [...]" ?

The rules booklet that comes with the box-game is clearer (and, clearly, updated from the PDF linked by WOTC): it states quite clearly the results of not killing a Monster, and clarifies that you only win treasure by defeating Monsters.


text:
Does Evolution Sage proliferate Blast Zone when played?
When Evolution Sage is in play, it proliferates my board every time a land is dropped. When I drop Blast Zone, it enters with 1 counter on it and then triggers the Sage. So after that the Blast Zone should have 2 counters, right?

With proliferate you get to choose whether counters are duplicated on each player/permanent.  Therefore, Blast Zone should have either 1 or 2 counters after it drops with Evolution Sage in play.

@James Yeah alright, I guess that was a little confusing. I'm aware that I can choose whether to proliferate or not. I just wanted to know if it was possible on the Blast Zone right when I play it.

Yes, I was betting that you knew.  I wrote my comment for any newbies that might get confused.

Yes, it does. Blast Zone's ability modifies how it comes into play, so it's a replacement effect, and not a trigger ability like Evolution Sage's. It doesn't use the stack, and when Evolution Sage's ability resolves, it will have a counter you can proliferate.
If Blast Zone's ability would have read

When Blast Zone enters the battlefield, put a charge counter on it.

you would have to choose which ability triggered first, because you control both abilities; if you'd then choose Blast Zone's ability, Evolution Sage's ability would resolve before Blast Zone's and it would not receive an extra charge counter. But again, that is not the case.


text:
Is it allowed to activate the ability of multiple planeswalkers in a single turn?
Suppose I have more than one planeswalker (different planeswalkers) in play.
During my turn, am I allowed to use both of their '+' abilities? Or can I only use one planeswalker ability from one planeswalker during my turn?

You can use all of them; one from each planeswalker.
Here is the rule that prevents you from using the same ability repeatedly on your turn:

606.3. A player may activate a loyalty ability of a permanent they control any time they have priority and the stack is empty during a main phase of their turn, but only if no player has previously activated a loyalty ability of that permanent that turn.

Emphasis mine. It only cares that you haven't used an ability of the specific permanent that turn; you can use one from each planeswalker each turn.

Small note: "of that permanent" means that you can do things like exile and return the planeswalker or play a planeswalker with the same name (and sacrifice the one that you already activated the loyalty ability for) to allow you to use a loyalty ability multiple times in a turn.

Yes, you can activate both. The rules specify you can't activate a loyalty ability of the same planeswalker twice during a turn, but does not specify any restrictions about multiple planeswalkers:

606.3. A player may activate a loyalty ability of a permanent they control any time they have priority and the stack is empty during a main phase of their turn, but only if no player has previously activated a loyalty ability of that permanent that turn.


text:
Can creatures abilities target that creature itself?
Can Spikeshot Goblin have itself as a target with its ability: "Tap: Spikeshot Goblin deals damage equal to its power to target creature or player"?
Yes or No?
I'm unsure as I read some things like "Rule 114.5. A spell or ability on the stack is an illegal target for itself." But I don't know if that Goblin's ability is on the stack or if it is an ability meant by that rule. Also for me an ability is another thing as a creature - so "itself" would mean the ability is targeting the ability, not "the ability is targeting the Goblin which has that ability".
That's why I ask for a simple answer as Yes or No to the Spikeshot Goblin example above.

Can Spikeshot Goblin have itself as a target with its ability: "Tap: Spikeshot Goblin deals damage equal to its power to target creature or player"?

Yes. Spikeshot Goblin is a creature, and unless it somehow gains protection from red, shroud, etc. it's a valid target for its own ability.

114.5. A spell or ability on the stack is an illegal target for itself.

This only means the ability can't target itself, i.e. the ability itself. This is only relevant in rare cases; one example (for spells) would be that you can't change the target of a Counterspell on the stack to itself. (If you want to counter a Counterspell with e.g. Misdirection, you have to retarget Counterspell to Misdirection; when Counterspell tries to resolve, it will then fizzle because the Misdirection is no longer a valid target, and the original target of Counterspell will not be countered.)

It might be worth noting that some creatures explicitly exclude themselves as targets for their own abilities, though this is usually only the case with triggered or state-based abilities.


text:
Has Counterspell always been able to target any spell on the stack?
I read this question What spells can be countered? on HNQ and was quite surprised.
It is a long time I played MtG, but some 10+ years ago I was a somewhat enthusiastic player in our local town, participated in a number of official prereleases.
It is possible I am mixing something up, but has it always been that Counterspell could target (technically) any card on stack?
As far as I remember, the players down here used Counterspell as if it only could target sorcery and instant spells on stack. So you couldn't target e.g. a creature or artifact while it was being played. It's been a long time though.

Under the original rules, technically it wasn't possible to counter anything on the stack, since the stack didn't exist.

Dark Ritual was printed as a 'Mana Source' rather than an instant from Mirage to Urza's Saga. Back then, Counterspell was an interrupt, which was something of an 'instant-but-faster'. You could not counter mana sources like Dark Ritual because they were 'too fast', just like you can't counter a mana ability under today's rules. However, creatures (back then, 'Summon [creature type]' cards) have always been vulnerable to Counterspell and its ilk.
Some more information about how the rules worked back then can be found in the 2002 article 'Rules, Interrupted' by Ben Bleiweiss on wizards.com.

This is fascinating. Unless I am mixing something up, I think we might have been playing MtG wrong for years on town/country level, back in 199x-ies. The idea was that spells were only "sorcery" and "instant" (and yes, "interrupt"). Permanents were, well, whatever it says on them, they were. Note also that at some point back then creature types dropped "Summon" keyword, as in "Summon Zombie" became "Creature Zombie".

This mistake seems like a natural one to make, so I would believe it if your local play group made it too. Non-technically speaking, instants and sorceries are the ones that do something and then go away, which is generally how we think of spells in harry potter, D&D, etc. Blizzard's card game Hearthstone, and Riot's new card game Legends of Runeterra both separate 'creatures' and 'spells'. In those games, using a card that depicts a creature is never 'casting a spell'

The top answer is wrong on one point. Dark ritual was originally an interrupt. But it is correct that you couldn't target it at that point. Also I don't think the concept of a stack (with that name) existed until 6th edition rules

@Gnudiff that's not really too surprising. This was before rules information was easily accessible on the internet, the game was taught primarily through casual word of mouth, and the rules themselves were a lot less orderly.

@Andrew: Indeed — Dark Ritual was first an interrupt, from Alpha up to 4th Edition/Ice Age; then a Mana Source in 5th Ed, Mirage, and Urza’s Saga; and finally an Instant from Mercadian Masques onwards, under 6th Ed rules (sanity at last).  Mana Source was created almost entirely for Dark Ritual, and with only one other card is as far as I know is the rarest card type outside the Un-sets.

Creatures, artifacts, and enchantments have always been spells that could be countered (and now planeswalkers as well).  If you want some examples from 10+ years ago, look at Remove Soul, Artifact Blast, Arenson's Aura, or Insist.  These cards make it pretty clear that creatures, artifacts, and enchantments are spells when on the stack, and this has been true from the early days of Magic.
In my opinion, this is really unintuitive.  It really frustrated me back when I first learned Magic (I assumed "spell" just meant instants and sorceries), and it isn't very clear from Counterspell that it can affect a creature or an artifact on the stack.  Creatures at least have a flavor-justification for why they are spells; the spell you are casting is summoning the creature from another plane, which is why creature's used to have type "Summon" (look at an Alpha printing of Serra Angel for example).  Enchantments also can make sense from a flavor perspective; the spell you cast is creating an enchantment.  What the flavor justification for artifacts being "spells" is anyone's guess.

I mixed up my timeline. It was 20+ years ago. Which means that it was between 5E and 6E (my first precon deck was Urza's Saga Somnophore). As per your frustration, as we discussed in comments to another answer, it appears back then before 6E creatures had "Summon X Creature" instead of "Creature X" as their type. Which was more intuitive for them to be as spells. Not artifacts though.

Any spell can be targeted using counterspell other than itself.

That's true, but while you're casting Counterspell it isn't on the stack yet. And as my answer shows, things were different in the (distant) past.


text:
If the only attacker is removed from combat, is a creature still counted as having attacked this turn?
I'm querying an effect which specifically removes creatures from combat altogether such as Reconnaissance or Spires of Orazca.
If the only attacking creature is removed from combat by an effect like this, how does this attack or lack thereof interact with things like the Raid mechanic and Curious Obsession?
Does it check "Was an attack initiated at all?" this turn or "Was an attack "successfully" made"? Does an effect like the above "prevent" an attack?
I wondered this since burning the creature at any point after it has already been declared as an attacker still makes it count for "a creature attacked this turn".

Declaring a creature as an attacker is a singular event that is not undone by later removing that creature from combat. For example, you will get the benefits of Raid and you will not have to sacrifice Curious Obsession in a turn during which all of your at least 1 attackers have been removed from combat.
Note that effects like that of Spires of Orazca are not the only ways to remove a creature from combat. Simply destroying or exiling a creature also remove it from combat.

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 701.14) 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.

Effects like Raid or the 2nd ability of Curious Obsession do not care whether or not the attacking creature(s) were in combat the whole time, or that they dealt combat damage, or anything else. All that matters is that you have successfully declared at least one creature as an attacker this turn.

Declare Attackers Step

[..]

508.1m Any abilities that trigger on attackers being declared trigger.

Note that there are effects that put a creature onto the battlefield "tapped and attacking". Creatures that have been put onto the battlefield this way do count as attacking creatures, but do not count as having been declared as attackers. In practice this doesn't matter for Raid or Curious Obsession because all those effects have a prerequisite of an already attacking creature, which would already satisfy Raid and CO. But it would matter for abilities that require a certain number of creatures to have been declared as attackers, such as Windbrisk Heights

Perfect thanks. That was the distinction i was looking for. Will wait appropriate time before accepting.

I couldn't find a definitive answer in the Comprehensive Rules, but the post explaining the mechanics from the Ixalan set says:

Raid abilities also don't care about what happened to the attacking creature. Maybe it survived combat, maybe it didn't. Maybe it got bounced. Maybe it changed controllers (that traitor!). As long as you attacked with it, that's good enough for a raid ability.

I would think that bouncing (returning the creature to its owner's hand) would be comparable to the ability on Reconnaissance or Spires of Orazca, so this situation would count as "a creature attacked this turn".

As elaborated in Hackworth's post you are indeed correct!

Abilities like Raid check if an attack was declared. This means that if a creature is removed from combat in any way after being declared as attacking, it will still meet the conditions for raid. Creatures can be removed from combat in many ways, cards like Maze of Ith and Reconnaissance will untap and remove it, the creature can change controllers because of cards like Word of Seizing or Act of Aggression and no longer be attacking, or the creature could leave the battlefield, by being dealt lethal damage (Lightning Bolt), sacrificed (Celestial Flare), destroyed (Doom Blade), bounced to the hand (Unsummon) or exiled temporarily (Ghostly Flicker) or permanently (Unmake).
Note that it's declaring a creature as attacking that meets these conditions. If a creature attacks without being declared as attacking, say when Meandering Towershell returns tapped and attacking a turn after his attack was declared, it will not meet Raid's conditions, this is also why it doesn't meet it's own conditions and exile itself every turn. This is however the only thing I can think of that will be attacking when no attacks were declared, all other abilities that put creatures into play tapped and attacking require something to be declared as attacking already like Hero of Bladehold.

Very nice edge case on Meandering Towershell for tapped and attacking entry

@NikolaRadevic It's literally the only one, I checked gatherer, everything else puts in tokens that attack when a creature attacks or is ninjitsu, so it replaces a declared attacker.


text:
What is this 4x4 board with black and white sided, numbered pegs?

I found this little boardgame but cannot figure out what it is. Hopefully you can help me?

Can you describe how the pegs are numbered? Does each peg have the same number on both ends, and how many of each number are there?

It's a "My First Sudoku / Child Sudoku" puzzle (a 4-number version of the usual 9-number pencil puzzle).
See for example this Etsy listing.

Is there a reason for the different coloration of pegs?  Or is it just aesthetic?

You use one color to fill in the given/starting numbers of a puzzle. Then you fill in your solution with the other color. That way you know which pegs you can't change if you make a mistake and need to backtrack / change numbers.


text:
Can you sell your properties for cheap to another player in Monopoly?
Is it possible for example to sell a property you own to another player for 1$? I was playing with some friends and one of them had to pay me 1200$ and since he didnt have enough he sold all his houses reached 1200 gave me the money and then sold all his stuff for 1$ to another player.

Dupe but slight variation, in this question the person has already settled their debts and is now just selling off property before choosing to quit. (ie the player isn't about to lose, but about to choose to leave)

Yes, you can sell your properties cheap.
No, you can't do this when you are resolving payment for the space you landed on.
From Can you force property onto players in Monopoly

The only time a sale cannot take place is if a player will be cheated.
  For example, Player A lands on Boardwalk with hotels and owes $2,000
  to Player B. Player A cannot raise enough cash or make a trade with
  Player B, so he is effectively bankrupt and should turn over all
  assets. Player A would not be able to make a deal with Player C to
  sell some properties for less than their value (say the red properties
  for $1) since that would cheat Player B. He could sell them for more
  than their purchase value, however.


text:
Monopoly Deal - property wild card queries
A completed set using one or two property wild card with a house and hotel.
Can we move property wild card to another set in such scenario?
Can we move house or hotel to another completed set?

In answer to the first part of your question: we have always played that you can't move a card from a stack with a house/hotel expect to pay another player. However, I can't seem to find a rule written down that says this.
For the second part of the question: my initial assumption was that you can't do this. However, the rules say you can rearrange your cards in any way you choose during your turn. It is worth reading the section below from monopolydealrules.com who are usually very good and as close to an official rules site as the game has:

Can a House or Hotel card be on the table without being apart of a full/completed set?
Yes, but you cannot lay down a House or Hotel card unless you can play
  it on a completed set. However, if a player charges you money and you
  decide to pay with some of the property from your completed set that
  includes a House and/or Hotel, the House or Hotel must be placed on
  the table next to your property section until you complete another set
  and it can be placed on top. You can also pay with your house or hotel
  card if you choose.

I hope this answer helps and if anyone has a better answer I'd be very happy to be corrected!


text:
What happens to spells cast from Nightveil Specter's ability?
If I managed to exile a Cyclonic Rift from a library with Nightveil Specter and I play the rift, does it go to the owner's graveyard or does it stay in exile?

It moves to the stack as part of being cast, then to the graveyard as part of resolving (or as part of being countered). Even if the card becomes exiled again after being cast, it's no longer the object exiled by NS, and thus could not be cast again that way.

Casting a spell exiled with Nightveil Specter follows almost all steps mentioned in section '6. Spells, Abilities, and Effects' of the comprehensive rules, including

608.2k As the final part of an instant or sorcery spell's resolution, the spell is put into its owner's graveyard. As the final part of an ability's resolution, the ability is removed from the stack and ceases to exist.

So, yes, it's put into its owner's graveyard, unless the card itself specifies otherwise (e.g. Time Reversal or Beacon of Immortality).

I don't think one would be able to keep playing it, even if it went back to exile. The rift would have moved from exile to the stack and back to exile, so regardless it is no longer a "card exiled with Nightveil Specter".

Yeah, it's a hypothetical situation if the last part would read 'You may play cards exiled with Nightveil Specter; exile them after casting.'

While @Arthur is correct, it's no longer a card exiled by Nightveil Specter once it leaves exile and goes onto the stack, the point is moot because it doesn't return to exile, unless the spell itself says to exile it, like if it were say Time Reversal

@Glorfindel a hypothetical based on an invalid premise, like Arthur said, once it leaves exile, to go on stack, that link between nightveil and the card is broken, you couldn't keep casting it "forever and ever" as your hypothetical claims


text:
Can I make a word going through another word?
For instance the word PLAY is on the board, and I put BOARD using the A from PLAY. Is that acceptable?

Yes, you can play words just like in a crossword puzzle. As long as the words are left to right or top to bottom.
There are three ways to connect words (except for the first word.
First, connect it like a crossword:
  B
  O
PLAY
  R
  D

Second, extend a word:
LIVE

add an S
LIVES

Third, put a word next to another word so the neighbors form new words:
PROP

Add Idiot forming also PI
PROP
   IDIOT

And yes you can combine the last two to add a word to the end:
TREE

Add SEVEN
TREES
    E
    V
    E
    N

This is, in fact, the primary method of adding words to a scrabble board.

@ArcanistLupus Other than the first play of a game, isn't it not only the primary way, but a completely required way?

@Gendolkari well, you can also extend words, which I was counting as different.

I see how it could be viewed either way. It's fair that there is a difference; but I was seeing the similarity of "must use existing letters on the board".

Not only can you do this, you must do this!
Other than the first play of the game, when the board is empty, all plays must connect to existing words by forming new words out of the already-placed letters.
From scrabble.hasbro.com:

The second player, and then each in turn, adds one or more letters to those already played to form new words.
New words may be formed by:

Adding one or more letters to a word or letters already on the board.
Placing a word at right angles to a word already on the board. The new word must use one of the letters already on the board or must add a letter to it. (See Turns 2, 3 and 4 below.)
Placing a complete word parallel to a word already played so that adjacent letters also form complete words. (See Turn 5 in the Scoring Examples section below.)

Notice that in all 3 methods of forming a new word, the new word connects to an existing word, and uses at least one letter from that existing word to form a new word.

You can cross words over one another like this
        E
        P
   S  O O N
        X
        Y


text:
Finesse or Drop at trick 5?
This is a problem from the "Card Play 101" column from the Feb 2021 ACBL Bridge Bulletin (page 44)
South holds: (S) 6 3; (H) A K 9 8 5 2; (D) A K 4; (C) 7 6. (West deals, E-W vulnerable, matchpoints)
The bidding goes

West
North
East
South

1 S
Pass
Pass
3H

Pass
4 H
All Pass

West leads a low spade, and the dummy (North) comes down with:
(S) 7 5 4; (H) J 10; (D) Q J 10 9; (C) K Q 10 9
East wins trick 1 with the spade A, and returns the spade 2. West wins with the K. West leads the club A which wins. West leads a low club, won by dummy's K. The question is, how should the declarer (south) continue.
South cannot afford to lose a heart trick to the Q, so should south finesse against East, or play for the drop against west?
The column author argues that since west opened with 1S, and east has already shown the  spade Ace, if East had the QH as well, east would have had six HCP and would not have passed. Further, that the defenders only have 17 HCP between them, and if East had the spade A and the H Q, West would not have opened at the one level with only 11 HCP. Therefore the proper play, says the column author, is to cash the AK of H in an effort to drop the Q, as the finesse is hopeless.
However I disagree with this reasoning. If I were west and held the QH singleton or doubleton, I would discount it and pass.  If as West I held KQJxxx; xxx; x; AJx; I would open 1S, even without the HQ. Therefore, it is not exactly assured that W will hold the H Q in my view. Given this, should south finesse or play for the drop? why?

On further consideration, while E might hold the H Q, East cannot hold the H Qxx or better, because then East would have responded to 1S, probably with 1NT. Therefore the finesse is either hopeless or pointless, because if East has the QH singleton or doubleton it will drop. Playing for the drop is still the better play, although it will fail if west has the QH in a 3 or 4 card suit. So the author was right, although the reasoning was incomplete.

I'm a bit confused by this answer, because you say in the OP that the article author leads with this, and then adds in addition, that W probably is not opening those 11 count hands anyway.

@Joe The article author makes two points, saying that both lead to the same conclusion: 1) if E held the HQ east would respond to 1S; 2) If W did not hold the HQ, west would not bid 1S. Therefore, the author says, W must hold the HQ, and playing for the drop is the only chance. I think that E might hold the HQ bare or Qx, but in those cases the HQ drops under the AK anyway, so playing for the drop is still right. Is that clear?

Okay, I understand the point you're making - the original post doesn't totally make clear that they're considered entirely independent (I read it to mean that E doesn't have Ax(x) Qxx, and even if E somehow did, W wouldn't hold the rest).

Agreed here.  But, you should not discount Qx very much, and you should upgrade aces more than you would discount Qx.  (computer simulations have shown that 4321 points significantly undervalue aces)  All advanced and expert players will respond with a fitting A and a Qx.  See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hand_evaluation for some competing theories on hand evaluation.

@DrewHoskins: I would also raise to 2 Spades with Axx support and any hand not 4333. Only the fact that the doubleton is in Spades would keep me from showing the valuable A with a response.

The outstanding Spades are QJT9 in West's hand, West having already played the 8 and K to East's (original) doubleton A2.
Assuming OP hasn't misled on describing the Spade spots, the Heart Q is absolutely marked in the West hand - doubleton or singleton - by the failure of West to lead a (setting) third round of Spades at trick 4.
After winning Trick 2 with the Spade K, West was looking at the Heart Q and knows that there is no chance for a heart over-ruff of Dummy, and that Declarer is looking at 11 tricks if the potential heart loser is avoided. That is the reason for the passive cash of Club A followed by a low Club. West is trying to deceive by playing innocent.
Also, holding heart Qxx a strong West would claim down 1 after seeing the second Club won by Declarer. Lead to the Heart AK in hand and watch that doubleton Q fall.

There is one other possibility: West holds Q 4-times in hearts.
If you trust your opponents to be capable, ruff the third Spade from hand on the board and lead the remaining Heart back to hand. This will hold you to just Down 1 when West was originally 6403 or 6412.
If West really did lead the Spade 8 from an original holding of KQJT98 then I will really expect West to come down with:
KQJT98
Qxxx
-
AJx

East has disappointed West by not finding the Diamond switch at Trick 2; but West could have made the read easier with an opening lead of the Spade Q (playing standard leads) or J (playing Rusinow leads) instead of the Spade 8 at trick 1. East is looking at 6 small Diamonds in hand and 4 in Dummy; and surely can find the correct switch once returning Spades is obviously wrong.

I don't see why E should switch to, Diamonds at trick 2. N/S hold the top 5 diamonds. A switch allows a C loser to be dropped on the 4th round of D. -- Oh I see, this is if W has a D void.

@DavidSiegel: Exactly. Lead a Spade that DENIES Spade K, will force a switch from East.

I agree with the assessment made in the article, if you assume this is aimed at beginners.  Advanced players would consider E's lack of bid as more significant, and not W's choice of bid.
West has the following hand:

Suit
Cards

S
KQJTx(x)

H
(Q?)x(x)

D
xx(x)

C
A(J?)x

Or something close to that (could have Q stiff hearts and 4 diamonds, etc.)
So the question is, without the Q, can West open 1S?  For beginner-level players, playing solid 1S bids, they probably would not be taught to open that 1S - they'd open that 2S with six, and not open with 5.  For even intermediate players, this definitely could be opened 1S - but given this is a beginner-focused column, it makes sense it wouldn't be.

Suit
Cards

S
KQJTx

H
x

D
xxxx

C
AJx

That's a really aggressive hand to open, first seat, vulnerable.  A bare eleven count, with pretty mediocre shape?   Add the Qh to it, and you get something at least considerable.

Suit
Cards

S
KQJTx

H
Qx

D
xxx

C
AJx

Yes, you discount that Qh slightly, but not a full 2 points worth; and I don't necessarily add much for the singleton there, when the spades are so solid (and that x is a 9 or an 8, or maybe both).
Either way, the idea is that the balance of probabilities is with West having the Q - sure, maybe some outlier cases W doesn't, but it seems unlikely.  That combined with E's lack of ability to respond after 1S despite holding Ax(x)?
I'd add to this the fact that W almost certainly has six spades, given E's lack of response.  If W only has five spades, then E's even less likely to have that Q.
But if W has six, S KQJT98, and only 10-11 points, a beginner is opening that 2S.

Suit
Cards

S
KQJT98

H
xx

D
xxx

C
AJx

That's almost the textbook 2S for beginners.  Yes, for more advanced players it's 1S, but at the beginner level it'll be taught to be opened 2S.

Suppose W has KQJTx; xx;   x; AJxxx? Wouldn't that  be opened 1S under the rule of 20? Granted it is an outlier hand.

@DavidSiegel I think we can be very confident W has 6 spades in any case where E has Qxx hearts - see that second part of my answer.  How does E not answer 2S with Axx Qxx (any minor suit holding)?

KQJxxx; xx; xxx; AJx is an automatic one level opening for all but the most sound opening pairs these days.  Yesterday I opened 1S in first seat on AKQxx; xxxx; x; xxx (but we were playing a light opening Precision).

Interestingly, the article would be wrong against my Precision partnership; we routinely open KQJxxx; xx; xx; Axx and routinely pass partner's 1S opening (limited to 15) with Ax; Qxx; xxxx; Jxxx.

@AlexanderWoo Of course against precision this wouldn't hold ;)  I do think that I at least have a strong preference for 2S with that hand, whenever 1S and 2S both describe it, I think 2S is better - you're right that 1S is not invalid per se there, but 2S is just so descriptive, especially with Ogust et al, that you get to the right contract way more frequently with 2S openings than 1S with 11 count 6 card suits.  And it eats up so much space when you're not declaring, as well!

Ok, considering/discussing this more I think I will retract the idea that 2S is the right bid with some W hands.  Will revise shortly.


text:
Which player is responsible for completing a pawn promotion in tournament-level chess?
Given that players want to conserve their clock time, which player is responsible for placing a pawn-promoted piece on the board, is it the pawn-promoter or the opponent? Related: is there a rule about where captured pieces must be placed during the game?

From the official laws of chess:

3.7.5.1 When a player, having the move, plays a pawn to the rank furthest from its starting position, he must exchange that pawn as part of the same move for a new queen, rook, bishop or knight of the same colour on the intended square of arrival. This is called the square of ‘promotion’.

(emphasis mine)
Of captures, nothing is said apart from

3.1.1 If a piece moves to a square occupied by an opponent’s piece the latter is captured and removed from the chessboard as part of the same move.

In practice, any place on the table where it does not hinder either player is fine, e.g. you shouldn't put them in front of or even on the clock.

That makes sense. I could just see complaints arising if the opponent were to hoard captured pieces and took his or her time about putting the new piece on the board! Thank you for your answer.

@Jeff If the opponent didn't give the piece immediately, you should stop the clock and call the arbiter.


text:
Where does the shark send the divers?
When the Shark moves and displaces divers, do they go to the beach or back to the player's supply?

As per the "Activating the Shark" rules card:

any diver in [the spot the shark moves to] and in either spot next to that spot flees off board back to its owner

Meaning the diver is returned to the players supply.


text:
What, if any, is the significance of using cube-shaped tokens for the Institute in Red Rising?
A few weeks ago I was introduced to the game Red Rising and also found out that it was a novel series. The game pieces make plenty of sense to me--the helium looks like little crystals, consistent with mining; the sovereign token looks like an insignia from the series (I haven't personally read the books yet--on my to-do list); and the fleet track pieces look like little space ships. However, the space for the Institute uses a hexagonal pattern. With such attention to detail, I wondered: Why are these pieces cubes, as opposed to hexagons?
Is there a lore-related purpose for using cubes? And, if so, why are they cubes?
I read through some of the information on the Red Rising Fandom pages and looked at Board Game Geek, but didn't find any answers to my question.

This is a guess from me, but it's really common for 3d cubes to be represented as a hexagon in 2d images - perhaps the hexagonal pattern used for the institute is meant to be a flat representation of a cube?

Here's a good examples of what I mean. looking at a cube straight on to one of the corners the outline is hexagonal. that first image, a transparent cube showing all the lines dividing the sides, looks a lot like a rotated version of the institute icon.


text:
Ral, Storm Conduit and 2x Expansion // Explosion
Imagine I have Ral, Storm Conduit on the field.
Then I cast a Shock, followed by Expansion copying the Shock. In response I cast another Expansion targeting the first Expansion. Will this create an endless loop of spells/copies causing Ral's first ability to trigger infinitely?

Yes, you can use this combo an arbitrary number of times, as long as you choose the first Expansion on the stack as the target of your copied Expansions.
Just to clarify: after casting (but not resolving) the first Expansion (card A), the stack looks like this:
Expansion (A), targeting Shock
Shock
-----

(the target for Shock or for Shock's copy isn't really relevant for the combo)
You cast your second Expansion (card B), targeting the Expansion:
Expansion (B1), targeting Expansion (A) and choosing Expansion (A) as the new target for the copy
Expansion (A), targeting Shock
Shock
-----

Now Expansion B1 resolves and creates a copy (let's call it B2); note that the card itself is moved to the graveyard:
Expansion (B2), targeting Expansion (A) and choosing Expansion (A) as the new target for the copy
Expansion (A), targeting Shock
Shock
-----

You can repeat this process: when Expansion Bn resolves, it will create a copy Bn+1
Expansion (B(n+1)), targeting Expansion (A) and choosing Expansion (A) as the new target for the copy
Expansion (A), targeting Shock
Shock
-----

To exit the loop after n iterations, you only need not to choose new targets for Bn+1 copying A (which is targeting the Shock):

706.10c Some effects copy a spell or ability and state that its controller may choose new targets for the copy. The player may leave any number of the targets unchanged, even if those targets would be illegal. If the player chooses to change some or all of the targets, the new targets must be legal. Once the player has decided what the copy’s targets will be, the copy is put onto the stack with those targets.

So even if the opponent managed to counter the Shock somewhere during the loop, which removes it from the stack, Bn+1 can still end up targeting it, and by rule 608.2b it won't resolve. If the Shock is still there, Expansion Bn+1 will 'become' a copy of Shock and resolve. Then, it's Expansion A's turn to resolve (or not to resolve, if the original Shock isn't there anymore), and finally the original Shock.
You see, copying spells this way is dangerous for your opponent the sanity of Stack Exchange users. Thanks @murgatroid99 and @Taemyr for helping out.

It's not endless. Expansion says that you "may" choose new targets for the copy. You are not required to do so, even if the original target is illegal  (CR 706.10c). The Expansion you are copying is the one targeting the original now countered Shock, so you would eventually have to choose to leave that target unchanged to break the loop.

Why would I even have to break the loop? I thought that the game state is checked after each spell resolves and the game ends once a player has <=0 life.

You would need to break it if your opponent has hexproof/shroud and you still want to use this combo to kill off your opponent's planeswalkers.

@Glorfindel Even taking murgatroids observation into account?  Ie. when selecting a new target for your expansion you target the original expansion, but you choose not to select new targets - leaving you with a Bn expansion targeting the now invalid target Shock?

Eh .... I think so, yes. Let me update my answer ...


text:
Footlight Fiend vs. Rising Populace Trigger order
While drafting WAR we encountered a situation we didn't know how to resolve. Imagine the following situation:

The opponent attacks with Rising Populace and a 1/1 creature.
I block the Rising Populace with Footlight Fiend and the 1/1 creature of the opponent with a 1/1 creature myself.

After the combat damage is dealt, the Populace gets a +1/+1 counter while I want to deal 1 damage to the Populace to kill it beforehand. Basically the triggers occur at the same time, so which ability resolves first? The Fiend's since I have priority? Will the Populace die or become a 3/3?

You have played mixed RNA/WAR draft?

Yes we often do some kind of Standard Draft.

603.3b If multiple abilities have triggered since the last time a player received priority, each player, in APNAP order, puts triggered abilities they control on the stack in any order they choose. (See rule 101.4.) Then the game once again checks for and resolves state-based actions until none are performed, then abilities that triggered during this process go on the stack. This process repeats until no new state-based actions are performed and no abilities trigger. Then the appropriate player gets priority.

The attacking player is the active player, so Rising Populace's trigger is put on the stack first, followed by Footlight Fiend's trigger, which will resolve first. After the ability resolves, state-based actions will see a 2/2 with 2 damage, and kill the Rising Populace before its own ability can come to the rescue.


text:
Will casting a card from the graveyard with Flashback add a quest counter on Pyromancer Ascension?
Assume the following situation:
I have Pyromancer Ascension in play with, let's say 0 counters on it. Faithless Looting is in my graveyard and I cast it for its flashback costs. Will the Ascension get a quest counter?

You only get a quest counter if you have two Faithless Lootings in your graveyard when you use flashback.  See the card specific ruling:

If you cast an instant or sorcery spell from your graveyard (due to an ability such as flashback, for example), Pyromancer Ascension’s first ability won’t trigger unless another card with the same name is in your graveyard.

The reason for this is that when you cast one of them, it stops being in your graveyard and moves to the stack:

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.
601.2i Once the steps described in 601.2a–h are completed, effects that modify the characteristics of the spell as it’s cast are applied, then the spell becomes cast. Any abilities that trigger when a spell is cast or put onto the stack trigger at this time. If the spell’s controller had priority before casting it, they get priority.

Thus, when Pyromancer's first triggered ability checks its trigger, the copy you cast with flashback will be on the stack, not in the graveyard.

No, usually it won't get a counter, since when the check happens, the spell isn't in the graveyard anymore (it's on the stack, see @Zags' answer). See the rulings below the card in Gatherer, which discuss this situation as well:

If you cast an instant or sorcery spell from your graveyard (due to an ability such as flashback, for example), Pyromancer Ascension’s first ability won’t trigger unless another card with the same name is in your graveyard.

Casting a spell via Flashback will always trigger Ascension's second ability.

ok so it will work if I already have two lootings in the graveyard? Sometimes i really wonder if i'll ever fully understand this game ^^

Yes, with two of them it will work.