text:
Weird Problems with Starving Venom Fusion Dragon
My friend and I were dueling, and he summoned Starving Venom Fusion Dragon, and Starving Venom Fusion Dragon can copy an opponent's card's effect. So he copied my Cyber Dragon Infinity's effect. Cyber Dragon Infinity's effect allows you to target one face-up monster on the field and attach it to Cyber Dragon Infinity as material.
However, my friend used Starving Venom Fusion Dragon's newly gained effect to add my Cyber Dragon Infinity as material to his Starving Venom Fusion Dragon. My first question is can a Fusion monster ever have Xyz materials?
The next turn, my friend used Starving Venom Fusion Dragon to copy my Cyber Shadow Gardna's effect. Cyber Shadow Gardna is a Trap Monster and part of it's effect says that during the End Phase, set this card back. So my second question is, can a monster be set like a trap?
Starving Venom Fusion Dragon's Effect:

2 DARK monsters on the field, except Tokens
If this card is Fusion Summoned: You can make this card gain ATK equal to 1 opponent's Special Summoned monster, until the end of this turn. Once per turn: You can target 1 Level 5 or higher monster your opponent controls; until the End Phase, this card's name becomes that monster's original name, and replace this effect with that monster's original effects. If this Fusion Summoned card is destroyed: You can destroy all your opponent's Special Summoned monsters.

Cyber Dragon Infinity's Effect:

3 Level 6 LIGHT Machine monsters
Once per turn, you can also Xyz Summon "Cyber Dragon Infinity" by using "Cyber Dragon Nova" you control as material. (Transfer its materials to this card.) Gains 200 ATK for each material attached to it. Once per turn: You can target 1 face-up Attack Position monster on the field; attach it to this card as a face-up material. Once per turn, when a card or effect is activated (Quick Effect): You can detach 1 material from this card; negate the activation, and if you do, destroy it.

Cyber Shadow Gardna's Effect (Trap):

Activate only during your opponent''s Main Phase. After activation, Special Summon this card, it is treated as an Effect Monster Card (Machine-Type/EARTH/Level 4/ATK ?/DEF ?). (This card is still treated as a Trap Card.) If this card is selected as an attack target, the ATK and DEF of this card become the ATK and DEF of the attacking monster. This card is Set in its Spell & Trap Card Zone during your opponent''s End Phase.

Interesting. The first one I am sure that fusions cant have materials, but the other im not sure... working on an answer

You asked two questions, but the real answer why your friend couldn't do that is:

Starving Venom Fusion Dragon explicitly says that it can only target Lvl 5 or higher monsters.

Nor Gardna not your XYZ apply to that, as Gardna is lvl 4 and Cyber Dragon does not have a level (as it is an XYZ monster, it has Rank instead). Although the XYZ is Rank 6, Rank is not the same as Level.

To answer your other questions, only XYZ monsters can have XYZ materials. That means that such effect couldn't have been activated even in this erroneous play scenario.
Now, in YuGiOh some monsters can be set as Spell/Trap cards, such as the Artifact Archetype. However, they specifically indicate that you can set them in such way. Finally, even supposing you copied Gardna's effect and supposing you Starving Venom as Spell/Trap, the effect copied explicitly reads at the end (emphasis mine):

[...] This card is Set in its Spell & Trap Card Zone during your opponent''s End Phase.

So it is specifying it has to be set in its corresponding Spell/Trap zone. As Starving Venom does not have one it is logical that the effect can't be activated by failing to meet the requirement.
Finally, as mentioned in comments, Starving Venom copy effect ends at the end phase. Thus, it will never reach the opponent's end phase for the setting effect to take place.

And just to really drive that nail into the coffin, even if the Konami gods somehow bequeathed unto Starving Venom an associated Spell/Trap zone, it'd be impossible for the effect to apply; Starving Venom loses the copied effect before it even reaches the opponent's turn!

@ReinstateMonica quite true Monica, will add those relevant details to the answer, thanks for the feedback


text:
Which D&D die looks like this asteroid imaged by NASA?
I realize that this may not be 100% on-topic, but I'm hoping that it's close enough.
The Cnet article This asteroid looks like rolling Dungeons & Dragons dice links to the NASA News article Asteroid Resembles Dungeons and Dragons Dice which says:

Radar images of asteroid 2017 BQ6 were obtained on Feb. 6 and 7 with NASA’s 70-meter (230-foot) antenna at the Goldstone Deep Space Communications Complex in California. They reveal an irregular, angular-appearing asteroid about 660 feet (200 meters) in size that rotates about once every three hours. The images have resolutions as fine as 12 feet (3.75 meters) per pixel.
“The radar images show relatively sharp corners, flat regions, concavities, and small bright spots that may be boulders,” said Lance Benner of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California, who leads the agency’s asteroid radar research program. “Asteroid 2017 BQ6 reminds me of the dice used when playing Dungeons and Dragons. It is certainly more angular than most near-Earth asteroids imaged by radar.”

Question: Which Dungeons and Dragons die looks like this asteroid as imaged by NASA?

above: "This composite of 25 images of asteroid 2017 BQ6 was generated with radar data collected using NASA’s Goldstone Solar System Radar in California's Mojave Desert. The images were gathered on Feb. 7, 2017, between 8:39 and 9:50 p.m. PST (11:39 p.m. EST and 12:50 a.m., Feb. 7), revealing an irregular, angular-appearing asteroid about 660 feet (200 meters) in size that rotates about once every three hours. The images have resolutions as fine as 12 feet (3.75 meters) per pixel." Credits: NASA/JPL-Caltech/GSSR
below: "This composite of 11 images of asteroid 2017 BQ6 was generated with radar data collected using NASA’s Goldstone Solar System Radar in California's Mojave Desert on Feb. 5, 2017, between 5:24 and 5:52 p.m. PST (8:24 to 8:52 p.m. EST / 1:24 to 1:52 UTC). The images have resolutions as fine as 12 feet (3.75 meters) per pixel." Credits: NASA/JPL-Caltech/GSSR

there isn't an identify-this-object tag, so I've used the closest thing I could find. Help with tagging welcomed!

I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it is not about board and card games within the scope defined in our help center.

The asteroid itself is too irregular to map well to any particular D&D die.  I don't believe the author had any particular die in mind, which is why they use the term "the dice" instead of calling out a particular type die.
That said... it looks a lot like some D7's:

The D7 is not one of the standard D&D dice, but I think is a much better match.  This variation of a D7 is not even a fair die, though neither is that asteroid by the looks of it.  All of the D&D dice are fair dice; in fact, all but the D10 are Platonic Solids, hence none of them being a good match for the irregularities of the asteroid.

I'm having a hard time understanding that die, but the shape itself does indeed look like a good match.

@uhoh it's something along the lines of 7 pentagons stuck together with some irregular filler to make all the main sides connect.

Thank you for your discussion of the standard D&D dice as well as the D7, you've given me some things to think about. fyi I found "This design is based on spacing points as equally as possible on a sphere and then cutting planar slices perpendicular to those directions." here as one way to make a D7.

It looks not much like any of them, being non-regular.
The author of that article probably just means: it looks like a convex polyhedron / polyhedron with fewer than a dozen sides. The author then chose a reference that was more accessible to non-mathematicians than that terminology.

Right, it just looks like dice in general—as opposed to looking like a weird potato.

Based on the angular point with triangular-looking faces radiating out from it from one angle (your bottom image), and the way that the faces are meeting in a "zigzag" pattern rather than a straight line when viewed from another angle (your first image), I'd say that it most strongly resembles a ten-sided die, also known as a d10.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Who picks a card name first for Null Chamber?
The card Null Chamber states

As Null Chamber enters the battlefield, you and an opponent each choose a card name other than a basic land card name.
Spells with the chosen names can’t be cast and lands with the chosen names can’t be played.

For political reasons, it's relevant to me who picks the card name first (betrayals and such).
When casting Null Chamber, in what order do me and the chosen opponent name cards?

The active player chooses first, followed by each other player in turn order
This is covered by the general rule of APNAP - active player, non-active player. The active player (the player whose turn it is) is the one to make choices first, followed by the other players in turn order. Another example of this rule coming into play would be any card that says "each player sacrifices a creature" - players choose sequentially in turn order, starting with whoever's turn it is, and then  after everyone has made their choice, all the chosen creatures get sacrificed simultaneously.

101.4. If multiple players would make choices and/or take actions at the same time, the active player (the player whose turn it is) makes
  any choices required, then the next player in turn order (usually the
  player seated to the active player’s left) makes any choices required,
  followed by the remaining nonactive players in turn order. Then the
  actions happen simultaneously. This rule is often referred to as the
  “Active Player, Nonactive Player (APNAP) order” rule.

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


text:
How do premium squares work across multiple turns and words in Scrabble?
The official Scrabble rules contain the following:

Premium squares only count on the first turn they are used on. If a subsequent turn uses a letter that was previously placed on a premium square, the tile on that square is only worth its face value.
The only time a premium square is active for more than one word is if more than one word is created with a letter on a premium square on a single turn. Only use premium squares that are under tiles used in a given word when calculating point totals for each word created in a turn.
For example, if you create ‘jobs’ and ‘cakes’ by adding the ‘S’ tile to the end of the existing word ‘job’, and the ‘K’ tile is on a red square, you would count ‘jobs’ for its face value (13) but you would triple the value of ‘cakes’ (30) and your total for the turn would be 43 points.

I find this a bit confusing. Can it be explained further?

Can you add a bit about which part of the explanation isn't clear to you? That way we can take away your doubts instead of just paraphrasing the exact same rule.

The premium square's bonus only counts on the turn in which a tile is placed on that square.
It doesn't count on subsequent turns, even if a new word using the tile on that square is made -- only the base points for that tile are used in scoring the new word.
So each premium tile's bonus can only be used once per game. (EDIT: once as in "one turn", not "one word". If you place a tile in that space that is part of two new words in one turn, you get the effect on both words that turn.)
The easy way to remember this is that: once you can't see it (when considering your play), you can't use it.


text:
Kasmina's Transmutation vs. Gideon Blackblade
If I were to attach Kasmina's Transmutation to an opponent's Gideon Blackblade (using Teferi's Time Twist to have it ETB on their turn, for example), what would happen?
Kasmina's Transmutation:

Enchant creature
Enchanted creature loses all abilities and has base power and toughness 1/1.

Relevant bit of Gideon's text:

As long as it's your turn, Gideon Blackblade is a 4/4 Human Soldier creature with indestructible that's still a planeswalker.

What happens?

Gideon stays a vanilla 1/1 creature since he was a creature at the time

Gideon loses the ability that makes him a creature, immediately stops being a creature and drops the aura

Gideon stays a 1/1 until opponent's turn ends, then stops being a creature and drops the aura

3.
From the card ruling on gatherer:

If an effect causes Gideon to lose all abilities during your turn,
  he’s still a Human Soldier creature and a Gideon planeswalker.

and

If an Equipment becomes attached to Gideon while he’s a creature,
  it’ll become unattached during the next upkeep that isn’t yours. The
  same is true of any Auras that become attached to Gideon that can’t
  enchant a noncreature planeswalker.

And if you want to know why, the answer is layers.  Briefly, effects that change types are applied before effects that remove abilities, and removing an ability doesn't remove a change it made lower in the layers.


text:
Interaction between Ethereal Absolution versus Edgar Markov with Captivating Vampire
Situation
An opponent has the commander Edgar Markov:

Eminence — Whenever you cast another Vampire spell, if Edgar Markov is in the command zone or on the battlefield, create a 1/1 black Vampire creature token.

I play Ethereal Absolution:

Creatures you control get +1/+1.
Creatures your opponents control get -1/-1.

So whenever he plays a vampire, he creates a 1/1 token that immediately dies to my enchantment.
Next turn, he plays Captivating Vampire:

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

Interpretations
According to my opponent, whenever he plays a vampire the 1/1 vampire tokens now do survive as they enter the battlefield with a +1/+1 on them (from the Captivating Vampire).
According to me, his vampire tokens still die after entering the battlefield. As soon as they hit the battlefield they become 0/0 creatures due Ethereal Absolution: creatures with 0 toughness go to the graveyard. I say this happens before the tokens get their +1/+1 bonus, since the Captivating Vampire doesn't state that other vampires enter the battlefield with that bonus.
Clearly we were both biased to a ruling that's beneficial to ourselves. We went for his ruling, because he's the more experienced player. But what do the rules actually say about this situation? Is anyone correct?
In other words: when exactly does the "get +1/+1" from Captivating Vampire and "get -1/-1" from Ethereal Absolution happen once a 1/1 vampire gets summoned? And in which order to they happen?

The vampire tokens will enter as 1/1 creatures and remain on the battlefield.
Both the -1/-1 effect from Ethereal Absolution and the +1/+1 effect from Captivating Vampire are continuous effects, generated by their respective static ability. These effects do not grant counters, and the abilities are not triggered. They are simply true, and immediately affect any object they do affect; there is no delay. Objects that are affected enter the battlefield with the modifications already active.
Continuous effects are handled in layers. Power/Toughness-changing effects happen in layer 7:

Interaction of Continuous Effects

613.1g Layer 7: Power- and/or toughness-changing effects are applied.

Within layer 7, there are sublayers for the different kinds of P/T-changing effects:

613.3. Within layer 7, apply effects in a series of sublayers in the order described below. Within each sublayer, apply effects in timestamp order. (See rule 613.6.) Note that dependency may alter the order in which effects are applied within a sublayer. (See rule 613.7.)
613.3c Layer 7c: Effects that modify power and/or toughness (but don’t set power and/or toughness to a specific number or value) are applied.

Both the +1/+1 and the -1/-1 are in that layer.
Within a layer or sublayer, the effects are applied in timestamp order, i.e. generally the order in which the abilities that generated the effects started working. However, in this case it doesn't matter, the +1/+1 and -1/-1 just cancel each other out, no matter which is applied first.

Might be worth adding: we don't care if the creature hits 0 toughness sometime during layer calculations, we care about the total result of applying all those factors and then act on that result.

For a practical example, consider Force of Savagery.
If state based actions were checked before all static buffs, they couldn't keep Force of Savagery alive. Yet the Gatherer rulings specifically calls out Glorious Anthem as having the ability to keep FoS on the battlefield.
(https://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=130713)

Care to add what happens to the token generated by playing Captivating Vampire? Unless I'm misreading something, that one still dies because it is played before the Captivating Vampire is on the field, as the ability triggers upon casting the vampire spell.

@Mephy The token does die.  The token is triggered on the casting of the vampire spell.  The token will trigger, go on the stack, and be in play before the spell resolves and actually put the Captivating Vampire in play.  Captivating Vampire's effect will only start when it is in play.


text:
How to calculate the power level of a Commander deck?
I've been playing Magic casually for almost half a year now, mostly in the multiplayer Commander format. Regularly, I hear people talk about the power levels of decks. Especially when I'm playing with someone new, they ask me "what power level are we playing?" My response usually is something like "I don't know".
After asking around and looking online, I've learned the following details—please correct me if I'm wrong.
Power Level
I've heard a couple parameters so far that influence the power level of a deck:

the amount of win conditions (e.g. bomb cards, infinite combos)
the ease of manipulating chances to play those win conditions (e.g. tutor cards)
flexibility in removing threats from opponents (e.g. single target removal, and the ease of having them in hand when needed)
having certain staple land and mana cards

So far this has been helpful, but whenever I ask how exactly they come to the conclusion of their deck's power level, I usually receive a shrug and/or blank stare (or find articles that beat around the bush). I've asked multiple people at different gamestores, but found no clear reasoning so far, so I get the sense it's more of a gut feeling than a clear calculation.
Question
Is there a tier system of some sort? If possible, I would like to see clear and concrete pointers for how to calculate the power level of any deck. If this is ultimately a gut feeling based on certain parameters, a guide for rating my decks with this gut feeling is much appreciated.
Example
For clarity, an example might work. Let's say I have Samut, Voice of Dissent as my commander. The primary win condition is smashing face for commander damage, making her stronger with equipments and auras, with the help of some big trampling creatures. There's quite some ramping options, but there's hardly any card draw in the deck. There's one potential infinite combo in there with Godo, Bandit Warlord and Helm of the Host, and about four removal cards for dealing with threats from creatures, enchantments or artifacts. The deck contains a couple of land fetchers (such as Renegade Map, Traveler's Amulet, but no tutor cards.

In case it matters for answering this question, I'm mostly interested in:

Commander
casual play (winning is not my main goal)
multiplayer

I must confess I've never heard about a 1-10 range being used for power level. Could you offer a source that does?

What I've seen a lot of is the broader tier 1, tier 1.5, tier 2, jank tier classification. But there's no way to objectively calculate that. It's all results-based analysis.

@Hackworth Oh, maybe this is a local thing then? The players in the gamestores in the Netherlands that I've played with mention this. The only source I have is what comes from their mouths.

@Hackworth The tier list is new to me, especially I'd that's more common practice. So that sounds like a good base for an answer.

@Hackworth I'll remove the 1-10 scaling from my Q, as that could be confusing.

The 1-10 scale and tier system are both systems I've seen popularly, it's not a local thing, but it's quite possible that some game stores and play communities just don't use it.

I would format this in an answer, but it doesn't answer your question, so:
You are correct on your analysis on what makes a deck grow in power, typically win conditions, consistency, removal, ramp and manabase, and powerful utility. However, if you are looking for a system such as, "3 tutors and 4 wincons with 6 removal and original duals makes a deck an 8 (or tier 1.5) there is no such concrete system. Typically it is a comparative system, so if your LGS doesn't typically use it, it may be hard to determine the power level of your deck.

If you would like to start a conversation about the comparative and opinion based system of ranking decks, and maybe attempt to create a system, I would move this conversation to the chat

Let us continue this discussion in chat.

Power level is very subjective, and its main purpose is to communicate gameplay expectations.
I personally think that trying to create a very refined algorithm for grading power levels misses the point of what the power level is trying to achieve.  Power level is based mostly on comparing decks to each other.
Because Commander is mostly a casual, multiplayer format, power level is simply a discussion to help maintain player parity to ensure interactive and enjoyable gameplay.  It's to prevent someone's janky Pirates win with treasure deck from being completely obliterated by a well-tuned Prossh Food Chain combo deck.  While both those decks are playing Commander, they're arguably playing different games.  The power level is a discussion tool to manage expectations and make sure no one feels left out of this long, multiplayer game.
To that end, the parameters I've heard for determining power level are much less specific than the ones you've posited in the question. The concepts I use to estimate power level are as follows:

Raw power of win conditions
Consistency
Speed

Some of your criteria in the question fall into these broad categories.  For example, the presence of Commander staple ramp cards help improve both the consistency and speed of the deck.  Immediate win-conditions like Expropriate or Craterhoof Behemoth have good raw-power.  Having a single combo that is easily disrupted by your opponents' removal lowers the consistency of your deck.
Comparing decks is just making sure that games are fun and reasonably competitive instead of being one player playing solitaire and everyone one else just watching.  So I wouldn't worry about getting the exact numbers in your rating system as long as the decks are close.  That being said, my 0-10 rating system, that I based on advice from The Command Zone (a podcast about Commander), is as follows:

0-1: It's hard to consciously bring yourself to make a deck this actively bad unless you're going for an off-beat theme like "griffon tribal."
2-3: These decks might be a jumble of rares (and not necessarily good ones) that someone had in their collection.  The commander exists to provide the color identity needed to play all of these favorite cards, even though many do not synergize with each other.  Consistency is typically low because there is no coherent idea for the deck.
4-5: Most of the Commander pre-constructed deck are at this power level.  There are some themes in the deck, but maybe the deck just plays slowly due a lack of ramp.  Possibly there are too many ideas going on at once, or maybe the win-conditions are just not very powerful.
6-8: These decks have a very clear game plan.  They are pretty efficient and/or flexible.  Research and refinement of deckbuilding is likely.  Upgraded pre-cons and decks that have gone through experimentation and updating typically are around here.  The financial costs of these decks can be higher due to the expense of consistent, faster mana bases or sought-after singles that are high impact.
9-10: These decks are built to win.  They are competitive-tier (CEDH) decks that are very fast and very consistent.  Often, these decks use expensive cards (like Mox) to help speed up the deck even more.

Based on your brief description of your Samut beatdown deck, I'd estimate it at about 5 depending on how consistent it is.  The strategy sounds a bit fragile because it appears all-in on combat and lacks card draw, but it sounds like it has plenty of threats and ways to deal damage.

As far as I have ever seen, there's no official Power Level. There are, however, a number of factors that influence win rates. Keep in mind none of these are absolute, they are just guidelines, and your own experience will depend on the skill of the player 'piloting' the deck.

There is an informal list of Commanders by Tier. Lower Tier commanders have stronger win conditions/better abilities, and higher tier commanders tend not to.
Cost of Deck. Cards that are quite strong in commander formats tend to keep or increase their value, so naturally a deck with many old expensive cards is probably doing so because they are the best card choices. This note is especially true for lands: Izzet Guildgate, Steam Vents, and Volcanic Island all do basically the same thing (tap for Red or Blue) but have wildly varying (dollar) costs because some are slightly more efficient than others. Bare in mind, though, that high quality, expensive cards, can be used inefficiently or badly.
Tapped Out has a 'competitiveness vs casual' meter at the bottom right-hand corner of decks that are entered into the website. I'm not sure how exactly that is determined, but computers are getting quite good at determining synergies and efficiency of card game decks.

The last thing to remember is that, since there is no formal Power Level, every answer is relative to what a person thinks is low and high power. Most likely, they're comparing their deck to the strength of their other decks, and to decks they've seen. If your deck tends to win a lot, and against a variety of other deck types, it is probably a 'high' power deck. If it struggles to win, or winning isn't its end goal (some people in casual commander just want to watch the world burn), it is probably a 'low' power deck.

There is absolutely no way that a computer is doing a good job at determining card synergies on Tapped Out. A quick Google search suggests that the competitiveness meter is universally considered inaccurate.

This chart/method from edhmultiverse.com might help, it ranks decks on two axes: winning power (how easy it is for the deck to win) and stopping power (how easy it is for the deck to prevent other decks from winning)

(a more detailed version is available on the site).

One metric that hasn't been touched on so far is speed, i.e. How many turns should it take, on average, for this deck to win the game?.
Many of the most competitive Commander decks aim to win very quickly, within the first 3 turns, or develop such a strong position that it's hard for them to lose.

Speed + consistency + flexibility is the effective formula


text:
Can doublestrike kill a creature with totem armor?
The Battlefield
My opponent has a 3/3 creature in play, enchanted with a Mask token from Estrid, the Masked's -1, which grants the creature totem armor:

If enchanted permanent would be destroyed, instead remove all damage from it and destroy this Aura.

I have Samut, Voice of Dissent in play, who is a 3/4 with doublestrike.
It's my turn and we move to combat. I attack his planeswalker, and my opponent blocks with the enchanted 3/3 creature.
My opponent told me that Samut first would kill the 3/3 creature with her first strike, removing the Aura token instead, and then swing again killing the 3/3 creature. Is that correct?
Research
The rulings of 7/13/2018 from Estrid mention:

If a permanent enchanted with an Aura that has totem armor would be destroyed by multiple state-based actions at the same time (most likely because a creature with deathtouch has dealt damage to that creature greater than or equal to its toughness) totem armor’s effect will replace all of them and save the creature.

Does doublestrike count as multiple state-based actions at the same time? If so, the ruling of my opponent would've been wrong, and the totem armor would've saved his creature altogether. Right? Or am I missing something here? Any clarification would be greatly appreciated.

Yes, a creature with doublestrike can kill a creature with totem armor in combat.
In a combat phase that involves first/double strike creatures, there is an additional combat damage step. In the first, only creatures with first/double strike deal damage, so the 3/4 deals 3 damage to the 3/3. Players then get a round of priority, which means state-based actions are checked and the 3/3 that received lethal damage dies. Totem armor replaces that death and, unlike with regeneration, the 3/3 remains in combat. In the next damage step, the 3/3 and the 3/4 deal damage to each other and the 3/3 creature dies for good.

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.
510.2. Second, all combat damage that’s been assigned is dealt simultaneously.
510.3. Third, the active player gets priority.
510.4. If at least one attacking or blocking creature has first strike (see rule 702.7) or double strike (see rule 702.4) as the combat damage step begins, the only creatures that assign combat damage in that step are those with first strike or double strike. After that step, instead of proceeding to the end of combat step, the phase gets a second combat damage step.
704.3. Whenever a player would get priority (see rule 116, “Timing and Priority”), the game checks for any of the listed conditions for state-based actions, then performs all applicable state-based actions simultaneously as a single event.


text:
Can a deck with a mono-colored commander have cards with other colors than its commander in it?
The basic rules for building a Commander deck state:

All cards must be in the color identity of the commander

Then the rules summary continues with:

COLOR IDENTITY
A card's color identity can come from any part of that card, including its casting cost and any mana symbols in its text. Every card in your Commander deck must only use mana symbols that also appear on your commander. Colorless cards are allowed as well.

(emphasis mine)
So reading these rules makes it pretty clear to me, giving a "no" to my question. However, a couple of weeks ago I played a multiplayer game with more experienced players, but nobody made any remarks on the (winning) deck featuring a mono-white commander* leading a red-white deck. So now I'm confused. Am I missing something, or was that deck technically illegal?

* I can't remember the exact card. It had doublestrike and was pretty cheap to cast, around 2-4 mana. It was not a flip-card, such as Archangel Avachyn in the example on the linked website.

Here is a list of all 13 double striking legendary white creatures (of any color identity).  Can you pick the commander out of the crowd?

@ArcanistLupus Thanks a lot! Yeah, that list helped for sure. Now I just feel silly for remembering wrongly... it was Kalemne, who is clearly Red-White!

As the rules you quoted say, the color identity of every card in a commander deck must be a subset of the color identity of the commander, where a card's color identity is the set of the colors of all mana symbols and color indicators in that card's rules text.
There are currently only three mono-white legendary creatures whose color identity contains both red and white:

Archangel Avacyn - color ID WR
General Tazri - color ID WUBRG
Sisay, Weatherlight Captain - color ID WUBRG

The only other candidate that's close to your description and could have been valid is Sylvia Brightspear.  She partners with Khorvath Brightflame, which is red.  In the case of partner, a deck actually has two commanders, and they both contribute to color identity.  It's possible Khorvath never got cast, or you simply didn't notice it was from the command zone when it was cast.
If none of the cases above are true, then your opponent's deck was not valid.

Seems that the rule quoted in the question is inexact, since it only mentions mana symbols (ignoring e.g. color indicators). Avacyn doesn't appear to have red mana symbols anywhere but still has white/red identity...

The rules quoted are described as the "basic rules". As always, the basic rules do not capture all of the nuances of the full rules set.

I have a mono white commander deck that plays all 5 colors, my commander is General Tazri. The reason why this works is because she has an ability:

: Ally creatures you control get +X/+X until end of turn, where X is the number of colors among those creatures.

That ability costs one mana of each color to cast, making her color identity contain all 5 colors, though her card's color does not.
Though the wording of the rule is poor, saying the mana symbols need to appear on your commander, the truth is that the commander must have the color identity of those symbols, which includes the color identity of the back of a flip commander, color setting text on the card (which is obsolete) and the color identity marker in cards that need it. There aren't many examples of these currently in legendary creatures, the only real ones to worry about currently are mana symbols in abilities and less common, color changing flip cards like Archangel Avacyn.
It's also worth noting that the color identity of the BACK of flip cards in the deck matters too, so a card like Elbrus, the Binding Blade which could be used in any deck based on the colorless equipment front side, still cannot be used in anything that's not black, because Withengar Unbound is black. This does not apply the same to mana symbols in reminder text, which is why cards with Extort can be in decks that are either black and white, as long as the card otherwise is only black or white, since the hybrid symbol is in the rules, not a part of the card.


text:
How much mana does tapping a Forest make, with Nikya of the Old Ways & Nyxbloom Ancient?
I have Nikya of the Old Ways out on the battlefield:

Whenever you tap a land for mana, add one mana of any type that land produced.

I play Nyxbloom Ancient:

If you tap a permanent for mana, it produces three times as much of that mana instead.

I tap a Forest. How much green mana do I make?
Which of the following answers is correct?

(1+1)x3=6
1×3+1=4

I'm confused about the order of the calculation. An explanation is much appreciated.

Nikya's ability doesn't cause the Forest to produce {G}{G}; it still produces {G} and Nikya's triggered ability produces another one. You don't tap Nikya for mana, so Nyxbloom Ancient only applies to the original {G} from the forest and you make 4 green mana.
Now, two Nyxbloom Ancients would stack, cf. the following ruling on Mana Reflection:

The effects of multiple Mana Reflections are cumulative. For example, if you have three Mana Reflections on the battlefield, you’ll get eight times the original amount and type of mana.


text:
How does Thought Sponge interact with Yarok, the Desecrated?
Situation
I have Yarok, the Desecrated on the battlefield:

If a permanent entering the battlefield causes a triggered ability of a permanent you control to trigger, that ability triggers an additional time.

I play Thought Sponge, after my opponent drew three cards this turn:

Thought Sponge enters the battlefield with a number of +1/+1 counters on it equal to the greatest number of cards an opponent has drawn this turn.

Does this creature's triggered ability trigger an additional time? Is it entering as a 4/4, or as a 7/7?
Confusion
I'm not sure whether this effect counts as replacement effect, as mentioned in the rulings of Yarok:

7/12/2019. Replacement effects are unaffected by Yarok’s ability. For example, a creature that enters the battlefield with one +1/+1 counter on it won’t receive an additional +1/+1 counter.

That is not a triggered ability. 113.3c Triggered abilities have a trigger condition and an effect. They are written as “[Trigger condition], [effect],” and include (and usually begin with) the word “when,” “whenever,” or “at.” [...]

Unfortunately for you, Thought Sponge won't trigger again. In fact, it doesn't even trigger at all, since it is indeed a replacement effect:

614.1c Effects that read “[This permanent] enters the battlefield with . . . ,” “As [this permanent] enters the battlefield . . . ,” or “[This permanent] enters the battlefield as . . . “ are replacement effects.

and as you noted, replacement effects are unaffected by Yarok's ability.
A similar card which is affected by Yarok is Propeller Pioneer which has the Fabricate 1 ability:

When this creature enters the battlefield, put a +1/+1 counter on it or create a 1/1 colorless Servo artifact creature token.

This is a triggered ability:

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

Might be worth stating that if Thought Sponge's wording was "When Thought Sponge Enters the Battlefield, put a number of +1/+1 counters on it...", that would be a triggered ability and would be doubled.
Additionally, if there was a card like Doubling Season or Corpsejack Menace on your board, the number of counters would be doubled.

@Soulus101 any examples of those cards? (When ... enters the battlefield, put X +1/+1 counters on it...") My gut feeling says Wizards wouldn't print them, because they would be so similar yet different.

It's more to a point of "this is what a triggered ability would look like", rather than "and this exists". However, as it happens, the "Fabricate" mechanic from Aether Revolt does this (sort of), and similar effects exist.

@Glorfindel cards like that are rare for another reason, most of the cards that enter with +1/+1 counters based on something in the game state are base 0/0, and would die before the counters were added as SBA if it was a triggered ability rather than a replacement effect.

While Glorfindel has already answered this question, the rulings on Gatherer reinforce that Thought Sponge's effect is a replacement effect:

Thought Sponge gets its +1/+1 counters at the moment it enters the
  battlefield. There’s not a time that it’s on the battlefield before
  its replacement effect has applied.


text:
Do Bolas's Citadel and Experimental Frenzy take reduced mana cost into account?
I am wondering how reduction in converted mana cost affects Bolas's Citadel or Experimental Frenzy, which have the following abilities:
Bolas's Citadel:

You may look at the top card of your library any time.
You may play the top card of your library. If you cast a spell this way, pay life equal to its converted mana cost rather than pay its mana cost.
{T}, Sacrifice ten nonland permanents: Each opponent loses 10 life.

Experimental Frenzy:

You may look at the top card of your library any time.
You may play the top card of your library.
You can't play cards from your hand.
{3}{R}: Destroy Experimental Frenzy.

Let's say I have some of these cards in play:

Ugin, the Ineffable: “Colorless spells you cast cost {2} less to cast.”
Tezzeret, Master of the Bridge: “Creature and planeswalker spells you cast have  affinity for artifacts. (They cost {1} less to cast for each artifact you control.)”
Jhoira's Familiar: “Historic spells you cast cost {1} less to cast. (Artifacts, legendaries, and Sagas are historic.)”
The Immortal Sun: “Spells you cast cost {1} less to cast.”

Would they reduce the converted mana cost of cards played off the top of the library this way?

"Would they reduce the converted mana cost of cards played off the top of the library this way?" Which way? Bolas and Frenzy each provide a different way to cast a card off the top of your library. To cast a card on the top of your library, you have to choose one of them as how you're casting it.

No, mana cost reductions have no effect on Bolas's Citadel alternative cost. Furthermore, Bolas's Citadel and Experimental Frenzy have no interaction.
All the cards you listed reduce the mana cost of spells. Since you pay an alternative life cost for Bolas's Citadel, those effects are irrelevant here. The CMC of a card has a clear definition:

202.1. A card’s mana cost is indicated by mana symbols near the top of the card. (See rule 107.4.) On most cards, these symbols are printed in the upper right corner. [..]
202.3. The converted mana cost of an object is a number equal to the total amount of mana in its mana cost, regardless of color.
Example: A mana cost of {3}{U}{U} translates to a converted mana cost of 5.

The rules for casting spells, especially calculating the total cost of a spell, are:

601.2f The player determines the total cost of the spell. Usually this is just the mana cost. Some spells have additional or alternative costs. Some effects may increase or reduce the cost to pay, or may provide other alternative costs. Costs may include paying mana, tapping permanents, sacrificing permanents, discarding cards, and so on. The total cost is the mana cost or alternative cost (as determined in rule 601.2b), plus all additional costs and cost increases, and minus all cost reductions. If multiple cost reductions apply, the player may apply them in any order. If the mana component of the total cost is reduced to nothing by cost reduction effects, it is considered to be {0}. [..]
601.2h The player pays the total cost in any order.

So for example, when you want to play a card with CMC 5 with Bolas's Citadel, you determine the alternative cost of 5 life and zero mana cost. Then the mana cost reductions try to reduce that mana cost, but it's already at zero and the reductions have no effect.
As a hypothetical, if Bolas's Citadel could take mana cost reductions into account, it would have to be worded something like "Instead of paying that spell's mana cost, you may pay that much life instead." In that case, mana cost reductions would apply in 601.2f, and Bolas's Citadel would take effect in 601.2h.
As for Experimental Frenzy, EF does not offer or mandate an alternative cost like Bolas's Citadel does. With EF, you simply play the spell as you would from your hand, and all mana cost reductions apply. You have to choose whether or not you use BC to play the top card of your library.

Excellent explanation - and thank you for linking to the rules. I had trouble combining these mana cost rules with the wording of Bola's Citadel.
I especially appreciate how you laid out that this could have worked if the wording was different.

Yes, but the reduction has no effect for Bolas's Citadel. 5 life minus {2} is still 5 life.

Bolas's Citadel and Experimental Frenzy simply alter from where you can cast a spell. In Bolas's Citadel's case, it also imposes an alternative cost when you do cast a card from your deck as a result of its ability.
Since they don't instruct you to cast a spell, you must wait until you have priority or another effect instructs you to cast a spell as normal. You must also follow the normal procedure for casting a spell, including using the standard formula for calculating the cost of a spell applies. This means that the cost reductions do apply.
Total cost to cast a spell
= mana cost or alternative cost
+ additional costs and cost increases
- cost reductions
When using Bolas's Citadel's ability, you end up with a cost of 5 life minus {2}. The cost reductions reduce the cost by an amount of mana, but one normally doesn't pay any mana to cast a spell from the deck using Bolas's Citadel, so they have no effect. 5 life minus {2} is still 5 life. (Excess reductions are simply wasted.)
The cost reductions would still apply to colorless mana in additional costs and cost increases.

Thank you! Both of these answers were very useful. I marked the other answer as the accepted answer as it also takes into consideration how reduced mana costs would work for Experimental Frenzy.
EDIT:
Never mind, this does fully answer the question as well.

uh, so does this one. "Yes". "You must also follow the normal procedure for casting a spell". "This means that the cost reductions do apply."

Fair - is it possible for me to mark both answers as correct?

No, and it's ok to accept the other. I just had a problem with that claim


text:
Look at card under Masterplan?
Masterplan is a shadows artifact that reads:

Play: Put a card from your hand facedown beneath Masterplan.
Omni: Play the card beneath Masterplan. Sacrifice Masterplan.

Am I allowed to look at the card under Masterplan (assuming it is under my control) at any point later in the game?

I don't know the game and doing a search seems lots of forums have lots of debates about that card!   However if you can't get an answer here then you can ask Fantasy Flight directly about any rules questions you have.
https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/contact/rules/

If you do, please come back and post the answer you receive!

I've asked FFG and will post if I get an answer. Have done that before and never heard from them though, so not getting my hopes up.

always worth a try.  Answer below from aslum seems to think it will need to in FAQ.  my view in games with that type of mechanic is you can always looks at things you've put face down unless the rules prohibit it specifically or there are are other face down cards in same area of board you shouldn't see.

I expect they'll need to FAQ it, possibly either making a new Game Area or have the card be in a special Masterplan area.
Technically, since the card under Masterplan did not change Game Area, it is still in your hand. This means you can look at it, play it (if you choose the correct house), discard or Archive it.

Since the Masterplan ability is Omni, I dont think you actually need to choose the correct house to be able to play that card, a la Wild Wormhole

No I mean, say the card you put under Masterplan is a Dis card. If you chose house Dis you could theoretically play the card under Masterplan (without activating Masterplan) since it technically in your hand.
Again technically it's still in your hand for hand size concerns. I'm pretty sure that's not RAI but it is RAW.

I dont have a source to quote, but in all TCG I judged, there is a common sense applied to what is known and unknown to a given player.
In that case, as the card was choosen from your hand, and was never seen by your opponent, you know what the card is, so you are allowed to look at it again. But your opponent cant.
For the same reason, both player can lool at both discard piles, as all cards put to the discard pile have usually been played before and the fact they were sent to the discard, is public.
Same thing if you want to know how many cards a player has in hand at a given moment, how many cards are left in either deck.
Same if I ask my opponent something that was public, like if he crafted a key on the previous turn or not, how many cards are currently in his archives.


text:
In what situation is Last Word really relevant?
Last Word reads

This spell can’t be countered.
Counter target spell.

But if I were to be using another counterspell in any situation, couldn't I just choose to target the original spell again? There's no reason for me to be forced to target Last Word with, say, another Cancel. So in what situations is Last Word's first line really important?

Player A casts a spell that essentially reads "You win the game". Player B casts Last word to counter it. Player A has 20 counterspells ready, but they won't save his game-winning spell.
Last Word's uncounterability is less useful if it counters another counterspell because, as you say, the opponent can just target the original spell. But if the opponent is the one starting with the valuable spell, Last Word all but guarantees that the valuable spell gets countered.
Also, there can be many different variations of counterspells with various restrictions and benefits. If Player A casts any creature spell, and player B has Counterspell and Negate, player B has to use Counterspell. If player A protects their creature spell with Last Word, player B's Negate is useless because it can't target the creature spell.

For some reason I was only thinking of it as a protective spell. Not really sure why.

Sounds like Player A needs to get more Determined.

@CollinB: Probably because the spell's flavor feels like the end of an escalating back-and-forth exchange, not the start.

It's relevant because players can counter each others' counterspells back and forth. Consider this scenario:

We're both blue players.
You cast your big combo piece, maybe Nexus of Fate.
I cast Cancel to counter it.
You cast Cancel on my own Cancel.

Then we let the stack resolve. Your Cancel (from step 4) counters my own Cancel (from step 3), and your spell from step 2 resolves without a hitch.
If instead I was playing Last Word, the situation would look like this:

You cast your big combo piece, maybe Nexus of Fate.
I cast Last Word to counter it.

At this point, you can't do squat to my Last Word. Your spell is going to get countered unless you have something like Brutal Expulsion available.

For some reason I was only thinking about the scenario the other way around, E.G: I cast my Nexus of Fate, you cast your Cancel. I cast Last Word on Cancel. You cast another Cancel targeting Nexus again. Too late to edit the question to specify protective uses?

@CollinB I think the question's fine as-is. This is the situation you use Last Word; you don't use it when you're protecting your own spell. If you updated the question we'd just have to say “You don't use it then, you use it like this” which is a lot messier.

Unless it's the only option available to you? My question is basically whether there is any fringe scenario in which it might be relevant to have that on a protective counterspell.

Meant to add an @doppelgreener to that, not sure what happened

@CollinB the analogous ability for a protective counterspell would be split second. i cannot think of a scenario where last words wording helps it as a protective counterspell

@doppelgreener All I can think of off the top of my head is that it's ability would allow it to get past triggered abilities like Dovescape, Cephalid Shrine, Lunar Force, etc.

@CollinB Rather than change the question (which usually results in a mess, requires us to delete or rewrite our answers, etc) I suggest if there's more you want to learn that isn't covered here it would be best to ask a new question. Also, yeah, good point on getting past Dovescape et al.


text:
What exactly is "each combat"?
The text for Juggernaut reads, in part:

Juggernaut attacks each combat if able.

I'm not sure what this means. The word "combat" isn't defined as a countable noun in the Comprehensive Rules. It usually occurs in expressions as an uncountable noun, e.g. "in combat", "during combat", "removed from combat", "result of combat", "beginning of combat", "end of combat", "rules for combat", and as a modifier, e.g. "combat phase", "combat damage". Here are the only occurrences of "combat" as a countable noun that I found in the Comprehensive Rules:

509.5a An ability that reads “Whenever [a creature] blocks, ...” generally triggers only once each combat for that creature, even if it blocks multiple creatures.
509.5c An ability that reads “Whenever [a creature] becomes blocked, ...” generally triggers only once each combat for that creature, even if it’s blocked by multiple creatures.
701.37a Certain spells and abilities can goad a creature. Until the next turn of the controller of that spell or ability, that creature attacks each combat if able and attacks a player other than that player if able.
702.22b The rampage bonus is calculated only once per combat, when the triggered ability resolves.
702.38a Provoke is a triggered ability. “Provoke” means “Whenever this creature attacks, you may choose to have target creature defending player controls block this creature this combat if able. If you do, untap that creature.”
702.120a Melee is a triggered ability. “Melee” means “Whenever this creature attacks, it gets +1/+1 until end of turn for each opponent you attacked with a creature this combat.”
802.1. Some multiplayer games allow the active player to attack multiple other players. If this option is used, a player can also choose to attack only one player during a particular combat.

Unfortunately, none of them explains what exactly "a combat" is. I see (at least) two possible interpretations. I suspect that the intended interpretation is for "a/each/per/this combat" to be short for "a/each/per/this combat phase". But another interpretation (which my nephew believes is the intended one) is for "a combat" to refer to a combat that actually occurs, as opposed to a combat phase, which is merely an opportunity for a combat to occur. In this latter interpretation, the Juggernaut would only have to attack if a combat is initiated by other creatures attacking.
Do you see any grounds for arriving at a definitive interpretation?

"Combat" is short-hand for "combat phase"
You are correct that the specific word "combat" without further qualifiers is not explicitely defined in the Comprehensive Rules. However, it is shorthand for "combat phase", as can be inferred from here:

500.5. When a phase or step ends, any effects scheduled to last “until end of” that phase or step expire. When a phase or step begins, any effects scheduled to last “until” that phase or step expire. Effects that last “until end of combat” expire at the end of the combat phase, not at the beginning of the end of combat step. Effects that last “until end of turn” are subject to special rules; see rule 514.2.

Logically, "until end of combat" is equivalent to "until end of combat phase", therefore "combat" is equivalent to "combat phase".
Also, combat is not initiated in any way other than advancing the turn; it eventually happens every turn, whether or not any creatures are actually going to attack.

500.1. A turn consists of five phases, in this order: beginning, precombat main, combat, postcombat main, and ending. Each of these phases takes place every turn, even if nothing happens during the phase. The beginning, combat, and ending phases are further broken down into steps, which proceed in order.

That means the Juggernaut has to attack if possible, whether or not other creatures also attack.

Thanks a lot! I also got this answer confirmed in the Magic Judges Q&A chat

Also of note, while normally there is only one combat per turn there are effects that can create multiple combat phases in a single turn (eg: Resurgence)


text:
Can you add the same hit as someone else?
Can you add the same hit card as someone else did?
Suppose I'm playing with 4 people, it's my turn and I laid down my phase and then hit on a run of 4,5,6,7, ... I added an 8 and 9. The next player has her phase and wants to play the same hit that I just did. She wants to add an 8,9 and 10. I told her she can't add the 8 and 9, only the 10, because I already added the 8 and 9.
The rules say this:

HITTING: Hitting is the way to get rid of leftover cards after making a Phase. You make a hit by putting a card directly on a Phase already laid down. The card must properly fit with the cards already down.
EXAMPLES: You may add one or more “4s” to a player’s existing set of “4s.” You may add a “2” to a player’s existing run of “3”, “4”, “5”, “6”. You may also add a “7” and an “8” to this run, if you have them. You may add one or more green cards to a player’s seven green cards in Phase 8. You may also add a “Wild” card of any color to any of these card situations. Before you can make a hit, your own Phase must already be laid down. You may hit only during your turn. You may hit your own cards, another player’s cards, or both.

You were correct
There's two key phrases in the Hit rule to support this,

You make a hit by putting a card directly on a Phase already laid down. The card must properly fit with the cards already down.

The first phrase deals with your cards being added to the played Phase and not a separate "also could legally go here" pile. In effect, your card becomes part of the phase. This leads to the second part: since your card is now part of the Phase, a duplicate would not properly fit (at least in this example of a straight Phase).
Your opponent can still play the 10 because that will properly fit the run, and either of you could subsequently add a 3, or 11, etc.


text:
What happens after a draw
In love letter there are some situations, when players have to compare their hands (after using the Baron card or at the end of the round).
What happens if there is a draw?
Situation 1:

A: House maiden (4), Baron(3), B: House maiden(4) , C: Priest(2)
A plays baron on B, both have House maiden.

What happens? Also what happens, if there is no player C?
Situation 2:

End of the round
A: House maiden (4), B: House maiden(4) , C: Priest(2)

Who wins this round? Both A and B? C? No one?
Edit
the answer in How can we determine the winner in Love Letter if the last two players tie and have the same value of cards discarded? answered only for the second situation. the first one is answered by Ken.

Related https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/23924/how-can-we-determine-the-winner-in-love-letter-if-the-last-two-players-tie-and-h

In situation 1 nothing will happen. This is explicitly covered in the rules under the expanded text for the Baron card (page 10 in the Premium edition rulebook).
Situation 2 is also covered in the rules. On page 6 of the Premium edition rules linked above:

In case of a tie, players add the numbers on the cards in their discard pile. The highest total wins. If there is still a tie, then all tied
  players are considered to have won the round.


text:
Lord of the Ring LCG: Lindon Navigator
While using Lindon Navigator to quest, does the forced effects trigger if and only if the quest card is discarded, or after every quest phase?
Lindon Navigator (Ally)

Lindon Navigator does not exhaust to commit to a quest, and can commit to quests while exhausted.
Forced: After resolving a quest to which Lindon Navigator was committed, either discard it from play or discard 1 card from your hand.

The key word being "resolving", I'm not sure which interpretation is the right one.

As per my understanding of the phrasing, it will trigger each time you resolve a quest

A quest is 'resolved' during the quest resolution step of the Quest Phase. This happens every quest phase. So Lindon Navigator's forced effect triggers after the quest resolution step of each Quest Phase regardless of the outcome. Note that this does not technically happen at the end of the Quest Phase as there is still an action window and the quest phase end step.
The quest card is discarded when the quest 'advances' (usually when the quest has progress tokens equal the current quest's quest points; this may happen outside of the quest resolution step by the way). This is different from 'resolution' which happens every Quest Phase during the quest resolution step (unless of course that step is skipped by a card effect).
Source: The Lord of the Rings: The Card Game Online Rules Reference available on the FFG website https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/products/the-lord-of-the-rings-the-card-game/.

Thanks for your answer, I was using this card wrong then :D


text:
Kess, Dissident Mage and adventure cards
I have a question about Kess, Dissident Mage and interaction with adventures cards like Brazen Borrower.
Example:
When I have my Brazen Borrower in Graveyard and Kess on the battlefield, can I cast Brazen Borrower for its alternate cost?
Instant - Adventure
Return target nonland permanent an opponent controls to its owner's hand.

If yes where does my Brazen Borrower go? To exile as an adventure (and I can recast it for its creature cost) or to exile by Kess rule?
I tried to search that on internet but there is nothing that explain why it is possible.
Thank you in advance.

Yes, you can cast an Adventure as an instant with Kess. For those details, see this question. Because that's a duplicate, I'll just focus on the second part.
You will get to choose the order to reply the replacement effects, so as long as you choose to apply the effect from the Adventure first, the card will end up exiled as an Adventure, and you can cast it later as a creature.
We can see that both effects are replacement effects:

614.1a Effects that use the word “instead” are replacement effects. Most replacement effects use the word “instead” to indicate what events will be replaced with other events.

And the rules for choosing which one comes first:

616.1. If two or more replacement and/or prevention effects are attempting to modify the way an event affects an object or player, the affected object’s controller (or its owner if it has no controller) or the affected player chooses one to apply, following the steps listed below. If two or more players have to make these choices at the same time, choices are made in APNAP order (see rule 101.4).

Once the first one of the replacement effects is considered; the other one will not do anything:

616.1e Once the chosen effect has been applied, this process is repeated (taking into account only replacement or prevention effects that would now be applicable) until there are no more left to apply.

You are correct that if Kess, Dissident Mage's replacement effect causes the card to go to Exile, then you will not be able to cast it as a creature later; because the ability to do that is part of the replacement effect on the Adventure itself:

715.3d Instead of putting a spell that was cast as an Adventure into its owner’s graveyard as it resolves, its controller exiles it. For as long as that card remains exiled, that player may cast it. It can’t be cast as an Adventure this way, although other effects that allow a player to cast it may allow a player to cast it as an Adventure.

I beg to differ because an adventurer card is a creature card in every zone except the stack, as well as while on the stack if not cast as an Adventure. You have to ignore its alternative characteristics in those cases. For example, while it's in your graveyard, Giant Killer is a white creature card whose converted mana cost is 1. It can't be the target of the triggered ability of Mystic Sanctuary.

@Narmer You might be right; trying to find the related questions that were asked about that recently.

My previous comment is not related to OP case. Since Kess allows you to cast the spell, rule 601.3e applies, allowing to consider Giant Killer as its alternative characteristics, i.e. Chop Down. Rule 715.4 still applies for Mystic Sanctuary, since you're not casting but changing the Instant zone.

@Narmer 715.4 isn't useless - it just doesn't apply in this situation - Kess/Malek changes where instants can be cast from, 715.4 prevents you from finding an adventure with something like Mystic Tutor. You'd also not be able to Snapcaster Mage an adventure card because of how 715.4 works. A way to think of it is you can't target the card as an instant/sorcery in deck or grave, but you can cast it as one if a non-targeting effect allows instants to be cast from those zones.


text:
In Magic: The Gathering, can I include a card in my deck that I can't play based on my land setup?
I have a plan to build a deck that can get Progenitus on to the battlefield on turn 3 (it's an ongoing joke between my friends and I on who could get Progenitus out quickest with the cards we currently have), but I'm unsure about whether or not I would be allowed Progenitus in my deck at all.
My plan is based on a red/green deck, but obviously Progenitus needs all 5 colours to cast. Within the rules, can I include him anyway? I assume I can, as there are ways of getting him out without casting him, and including cards you don't have the colours for seems more like a stupid move rather than a rule breaking one, but I'm unable to find anything specific about whether or not you have the right colours to include a card in your deck or not.

This is actually a quite normal strategy. Turn one Llanowar Elves, then later using, for example, Natural Order to put Progenitus into play. Many other ways to do it. Such strategies are commonly used even in monogreen decks that have no way of producing non-green mana. (And no, it's not stupid. It's usually more stupid to try and actually cast Progenitus, to be honest.)

It's also common in reanimator decks to have creatures you couldn't hard cast. Some cards have alternative casting costs or uses without being cast, like Squee, goblin Nabob  combined with Bazaar of Baghdad and it's perfectly fine.

@JollyJoker Yes, reanimation (e.g. Entomb+Reanimate) decks are another popular way to "cheat" big creatures into play. You can even do it at instant speed. Other strong ways include Sneak Attack and Show and Tell.

@Eff Sneak Attack reminded me Elvish and Simian  Spirit Guides have been used off color

There is a deck called "manaless dredge" that actually runs zero lands! https://www.channelfireball.com/articles/deck-of-the-day-legacy-manaless-dredge/

The answers essentially say it, but I just want to point out to OP that you could technically make a deck that is nothing but 30 swamps and 30 white creatures, having no way at all to play any of them at all. Nothing stops it. Further, OP suggests it would be "a stupid move rather than rule breaking," but it is not at all stupid either. There are a lot of decks that include cards for which they cannot pay a certain mana color in its cost, and there are multiple reasons to do so. Lots of decks "cheat" (used very loosely) cards into play in many ways, and that's not the only reason to do this.

Folks, if you want to answer the question please just post an answer, and if you want to suggest things that might be missing from existing answers, please do so in comments on those answers.

This reminds me of a funny piece of trivia about the 1996 world championship. Basically, Tom Champheng forgot to register the adarkar wastes in his deck, and the judges decided to have him complete his deck with basic plains instead. Thing is, those were his only sources of blue, and he had a sleight of mind maindecked (and one in his sideboard) so he effectively played with a dead card... but won the championship anyway.

If you are playing a typical constructed game, there is nothing that stops you from putting Progenitus in your deck even if you don't have anything that will give you the mana required to cast it. The Magic Tournament Rules for constructed tournaments don't have such restrictions: Deck Construction Restrictions.
On the other hand, there are formats which won't allow you to put Progenitus in your deck, unless specific conditions are met. One example is Commander, where you would need a Commander of all colors (or make Progenitus your Commander).

You might want to note that just because your general is all 5 colours, you don't necessarily need to be able to produce all 5 colours of mana.  This will result in you being unable to cast your general, but it's still legal.

Yes, you can include 4 copies of Progenitus into any deck.
Generally, you can include up to 4 copies of any card into any deck. There are restrictions to deck building, but the color of a card or what mana is required to cast it, compared to what colors of mana your lands can produce, is not one of those restrictions. The only commonly played format where card color matters for deck construction is Commander, where you can't include cards outside of your commander's color identity.
Restrictions to deck building include:

You can include any number of basic lands (basic Plains, Islands, Swamps, Mountains, Forests, Wastes) in your deck in any constructed format.
You can include any number of other cards in your deck if they say so on the card (e.g. Relentless Rats)
Set formats that are composed of sets in which a card has not been printed, for example Standard.
Formats in which a card is banned (zero copies allowed) or restricted (1 copy allowed), or that have a general restriction (e.g. Highlander, Commander)
Commander format, where you can only cards that match your commander's color identity. Unless your commander is Progenitus or also has all 5 colors as its identity, you couldn't include Progenitus in commander.

Moved a discussion on whether this directly answers the question to chat. tl;dr, yeah, it's of course an answer, everyone gets what it means, some folks think it could be tweaked to be clearer.

In addition to the other answers here, Reanimator decks specifically make use of cards that they can't cast. The way these decks work is to get big creatures with useful abilities into the graveyard, using cards like Buried Alive, Entomb or Putrid Imp then bring them back onto the field faster than you could have cast them normally with cards like Reanimate, Animate Dead, Exhume and Living Death. Many of these decks run only black mana source, since all the spells that make it run are black, but they make use of creatures in all 5 colors.
There are other effects that are less common but can make use of off color creatures, things like Elvish Piper, Quicksilver Amulet, Sneak Attack or Show and Tell all put creatures from the hand into play without needing to cast them, Master Transmuter can do the same for artifacts that have colored costs outside the colors you are playing.
This is not the case for Commander/EDH or rare formats like Star, where your colors in your deck are specifically restricted. In Commander/EDH mana symbols on the cards in your deck must appear on your commander, meaning for a 5 color card to be in your deck your commander must also have a 5 color identity. Star decks are restricted to being all a single color, and each differnt from the colored played by the other players (forming the mtg enemy colored star), though this format is very rarely played.

Actually, the answer to the question is yes, even for Commander.  You may include the card in your deck regardless of whether or not, as posed in your question your land setup has the ability to cast the card, so long as your Commander has all the necessary colors.  For example, you could use Sliver Overlord or Horde of Notions as your Commander to make all five colors legal, and then build the deck as you described, putting only red and green mana sources in the deck.  Commander in no way requires you to put mana support for all the colors of your Commander in the deck, it just forbids putting any cards in that aren't in the Commander's color identity.


text:
What sources of damage are not caused by players?
In the character list, it's states in El Gringo description that

Note that Dynamite damages are not caused by any player.

So my question is: there are other cards which damage is not caused by any player?
Gatling and Indians!
In BANG! FAQ it's stated that Gatling and Indians! are caused by the player who played them.

Q05. Who is considered to be responsible of the elimination of a player with cards like Indians! and Gatling?
A. Unlike the Dynamite, the player who played the Gatling or the Indians! is  considered to  be responsible of the elimination of a player. All special actions due to this elimination apply to him (for example, if he just killed an Outlaw this way, he draws the 3 cards reward).

not sure your question is exactly a repeat of this but This previous question covered the syntax of 'damaged are not caused by any other player' https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/2616/character-specials-triggering-on-non-bang-cards/2625#2625

As a general rule that would be any card that does not cause damage when it is played by the cards but based on some other action such as revealing the top card of the deck.

@StartPlayer So the answer is that there is no card beside Dinamite that do damage not caused by any player?

I think that there are a few cards in expansions that can also cause damage but I am not sure which is why I didn't answer.

Whenever a player plays a card  that instantly deals damage to one of more players, that damage is considered caused by a player. This includes all possible brown cards with a 'bang' symbol.
If the damage is delayed (as it is with dynamite), it is not caused by any player. This is probably partially because it is impractical to keep track of who played it (especially when there are multiple dynamites going around).
That being said, dynamite is the only card in the base game that has this property. Off the top of my head, the card 'Rattlesnake' in the Valley of Shadows expansion is the only other card I know of that has similar behavior.


text:
Small worlds under ground and mummies
Reading the rules for mummies:

Mummies
Mummies are everywhere but they tend to trip over themselves, what with all those bandages! All your conquests require 1
more Mummy token than usual

I know you get 10 to start with, but is there a good side?  Or is the idea to wait until it has a rather large pile of coins?
How are you supposed to play mummies to maximum effect?

The fact that there are 10 is the good side.
This is similar to other races from the base Small World and its expansions. For example, ratmen get a larger number of tokens with no downside. Kobolds (never leave a kobold token alone), barbarians (no redeployment) and pixies (only 1 stays on the board in each region) all have even larger token numbers but have some kind of downside that let them play differently. Kobolds are good at spreading fast but only hold a normal amount of territory. Barbarians spread fast over lots of territory but can't defend it strategically. Pixies are like barbarians on steroids; even more tokens but even less ability to defend.
Mummies are similar; they get more tokens, allowing them to hold lots of territory, but they have a downside that makes them spread out more slowly. This can go well with powers that reward them for holding particular regions (the territory powers), or that want them to stick together (frightened). It also does well with certain powers, such as Tomb, by making the race much more resilient in decline. If you get a power or other ability that makes attacking easier (such as the rabbit sword), they can spread more quickly and hold more total territory.
Mummies are good when your goal is to build up a strong board presence, where consistency is more important than speed. As such, you generally don't want them as your first race unless they have a strong power combo. They'll do well when your previous declined race is still going strong, taking time to spread wide into their own large decline. Reborn is a great combo for your previous race, helping mummies spread quickly and then minimising the loss of previous pieces when they're ready to decline.
Additionally, as you mention, if the mummies aren't a great pick for the current game situation, they'll accumulate money as people skip them, making them more valuable later on.

To clarify, the ratmen get a larger number of tokens than the average race, not more than the mummies get (8).  Any race with more than 8 tokens is going to have a special ability that is primarily negative.


text:
Cast spells as if they have flash - does it affect equipping?
I was reading Equipment cards and the timing of their activated ability and wondered about the Equip keyword timing.
Let's say I'm playing Vedalken Orrery (which has, You may cast spells as though they had flash) and have an artifact with Equip. I can now cast sorceries (because they are spells) at any time (because it's "as though they had flash"). Does that mean I can equip at any time?

702.6a: Equip is an activated ability of Equipment cards. “Equip [cost]” means “[Cost]: Attach this permanent to target creature you control. Activate this ability only any time you could cast a sorcery.”
702.8a: Flash is a static ability that functions in any zone from which you could play the card it’s on. “Flash” means “You may play this card any time you could cast an instant.”

Not sure if this is a duplicate or not... a question asking about Scavenge rather than Equip, but it's the same underlying question: https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/8491/hypersonic-dragon-instant-scavenge/8493

No.

307.5. If a spell, ability, or effect states that a player can do something only “any time they could cast a sorcery,” it means only that the player must have priority, it must be during the main phase of their turn, and the stack must be empty. The player doesn’t need to have a sorcery they could cast. Effects that would preclude that player from casting a spell or casting a sorcery don’t affect the player’s capability to perform that action (unless the action is actually casting a spell or casting a sorcery).

So in other words, "any time you could cast a sorcery" is just short-hand; it doesn't actually mean "casting a sorcery is a thing you can do right now". It means that the timing rules for that ability follow the normal timing rules for casting a sorcery.

No; see the Rulings below the card:

6/15/2010 This applies only to casting spells. It does not, for example, change when you may activate abilities that can only be activated “any time you could cast a sorcery”.

Simply put, abilities are not spells. Anything that affects only how spells are cast (timing, cost, etc.) does not change anything about how abilities are activated.

@NuclearWang I think that would actually make a decent independent answer.

@DavidZ I disagree for this particular question. The confusion here wasn't whether activating an ability was affected by things that affect spells, but rather about if "any time you can a sorcery" is affected by things that change when you can cast a sorcery.

Thanks to both for your comments, but, yeah - it's like @gendolkari says. It's about timing, not about mixing spells with abilities.


text:
How often can we use Tyr's Challenge?
If all villages are pillaged, can we use the Tyr's Challenge card as our action?

Tyr's Challenge
You may pay 2 rage to repillage an already pillaged village

If we can afford the rage for the action, how often can we use it?

If you have the rage and you have the card, you can do it as often as you like.
The cards are not limited in their use except when specifically stated.
Note that if all provinces are pillaged, the round ends, and you can't use Tyr's Challenge even if you could afford it.

are you sure ?
because its so important .
If all villages are pillaged . Can all player move?
even march or put the upgrade cards or quest ?

@omidamir Players can't move or do anything in a round if everything's already pillaged. If you wanted to use the ability over and over you'd have to lock down a region so that it wouldn't get pillaged, then use the ability in other areas.

To disambiguate: yes, I'm absolutely sure that the game works this way. The rules are very clear and very simple. You use a card unless told otherwise. You stop all action after all regions are pillaged unless told otherwise.


text:
Ninjutsu ability and the stack
There are some cards that have a ninjutsu ability, which means that you can target an unblocked creature and replace it with your creature (this can be done only after the declare blockers step).
Lets say that my opponents has an unblocked creature, and after I decide not to block it, he places a ninjutsu creature on the stack after paying its cost. Then, in response to that, I cast a lightning bolt to that creature (the one that is about to be replaced). When the lightning bolt resolves, the creature that dies and the ninjutsu creature has an illegal target.
My question is, should the ninjutsu creature go to the graveyard, or should it return to its owner hands?
Ninjutsu is defined as follows (as noted in this Wiki article):

702.48. Ninjutsu
702.48a Ninjutsu is an activated ability that functions only while the card with ninjutsu is in a player’s hand. “Ninjutsu [cost]” means “[Cost], Reveal this card from your hand, Return an unblocked attacking creature you control to its owner’s hand: Put this card onto the battlefield from your hand tapped and attacking.”
702.48b The card with ninjutsu remains revealed from the time the ability is announced until the ability leaves the stack.
702.48c A ninjutsu ability may be activated only while a creature on the battlefield is unblocked (see rule 509.1h). The creature with ninjutsu is put onto the battlefield unblocked. It will be attacking the same player or planeswalker as the creature that was returned to its owner’s hand.

An example of a ninjutsu creature: Ninja of the Deep Hours

The scenario you describe cannot happen. Once you have finished activating the Ninjutsu ability, the chosen creature has already returned to your hand without other players being able to interfere with that.
The reason for that is that returning the attacking creature is a cost of the ability. By the time anyone can react to the Ninjutsu going on the stack , the creature is already in your hand.
Furthermore, Ninjutsu does not target the creature you return to your hand, so it can't become illegal. Targets are reserved for effects, not for costs.
For clarity: the wording for activated abilities is always "cost : effect"

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. [..]
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–i. Those rules apply to activating an ability just as they apply to casting a spell. An activated ability’s analog to a spell’s mana cost (as referenced in rule 601.2f) is its activation cost.
601.2c The player announces his or her choice of an appropriate player, object, or zone for each target the spell requires.[..]
601.2f The player determines the total cost of the spell.
601.2h The player pays the total cost in any order. [..]
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, he or she gets priority.

Note especially the last sentence of 601.2i. Only after a spell or ability is finished casting/activating (in particular after all costs have been paid) does any player get priority, i.e. the ability to cast other spells/abilites.

You cannot respond to a Ninjutsu ability by killing the creature that is being returned to hand. Returning the unblocked creature to hand is part of the cost of the ability, so by the time it's on the stack and you have an opportunity to respond, the creature isn't there anymore.

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


text:
Will a spell like Fiery Cannonade kill Wayfaring Temple if Temple had more toughness than the damage before casting?
Wayfaring Temple says:

Wayfaring Temple’s power and toughness are each equal to the number of creatures you control.
Whenever Wayfaring Temple deals combat damage to a player, populate. (Create a token that’s a copy of a creature token you control.)

My opponent had Wayfaring Temple out and it was a 4/4. I played Fiery Cannonade which deals 2 damage to each non-pirate creature, and it killed off 2 of the creatures making Wayfaring Temple lose two power and toughness making it back to a 2/2. Would Wayfaring Temple die from the two damage is was already dealt or does it revert back to a 2/2?  Help please.

Let us continue this discussion in chat.

I have cleared out the comments because the issue under discussion appears to have been resolved, and the relevant edits were made to the question. If any more discussion is necessary it can continue in the linked chat room.

Just to help any further confusion: It's important to remember that damage lasts until the end of turn. If a creature takes 2 damage early in the turn, and only later is its toughness reduced to 2 (or less), then it will die because it still has those 2 damage on it.

The Wayfaring Temple will die.
When Fiery Cannonade resolves, it deals 2 damage to each non-pirate creature, which in this case is 2 damage to Wayfaring Temple, 2 damage to creature A, 2 damage to creature B, and 2 damage to creature C. When state-based actions are checked, creatures A and B die because they have as much damage as toughness. Because state-based actions caused something to happen, they are checked again. This time, Wayfaring Temple is a 2/2 with 2 damage, so it dies as well.

State-Based Actions

704.3. Whenever a player would get priority (see rule 116, "Timing and Priority"), the game checks for any of the listed conditions for state-based actions, then performs all applicable state-based actions simultaneously as a single event. If any state-based actions are performed as a result of a check, the check is repeated

704.5g If a creature has toughness greater than 0, and the total damage marked on it is greater than or equal to its toughness, that creature has been dealt lethal damage and is destroyed. Regeneration can replace this event.

Damage only wears off at the end of the turn; so if it survived, it would have 0 damage at the start of the next turn. But it still has that 2 damage for the rest of the current turn.

Yes. the Wayfaring Temple would die.
What happens is this, their temple is a 4/4 with no damage when the spell is cast because your opponent had 3 other creatures in play at the time. Since the temple is not a pirate, it takes two damage like everything else. Creatures with more damage on them than their toughness are sent to the graveyard as a state based action(SBA). Here's the relevant rule:

704.5g If a creature has toughness greater than 0, and the total damage marked on it is greater than or equal to its toughness, that creature has been dealt lethal damage and is destroyed. Regeneration can replace this event.

When SBAs are checked after Cannonade resolves, the two creatures with 2 or less toughness die due to this rule, but Wayfaring Temple does not. This is because at that point he is still a 4/4, since the other two are still alive. Because something happened as a result of SBAs, the SBA check is done again:

704.3. Whenever a player would get priority (see rule 116, "Timing and Priority"), the game checks for any of the listed conditions for state-based actions, then performs all applicable state-based actions simultaneously as a single event. If any state-based actions are performed as a result of a check, the check is repeated

During this second round of SBA checks, Wayfairing temple is now a 2/2 due to the deaths of the other creatures with 2 damage on it, following 704.5g it dies during this round of checks. The fact that they die in different SBA rounds may matter, if one of the creatures that died in the first round of checks was something like Deathgreeter, it would not see the temple die. There would be a third round of SBA checks which, based on the information given, would do nothing and priority would pass back to the active player.
Note there are no "counters" involved in wayfaring temple, it's power is set by a characteristic defining ability.

Thank you I thought it died but it was unclear because damage is dealt simultaneously so I wasn't sure but thank you guys.


text:
Betrayal at the house on the hill arsenal room and puzzlebox
If you open the puzzle box while standing in the arsenal room how many cards do you then draw?
The Arsenal Room text says:

When you draw an item card in this room, draw 2 cards and choose 1 to keep. Discard the other.

The Puzzle box says:

Once during your turn, you can attempt a knowledge roll to open the box:
6+: You open the box. Draw 2 item cards and discard the Puzzle Box.
0-5: You just can't get it open.

The arguments that was presented during my game was as follows:

"The text on the room tile applies only to the item you have to draw when you discover the room"

"When you open to puzzle box you get 3 cards and gets to keep 2 of them"

"When you open the puzzle box you get 4 cards and gets to keep 2 of them"

I think that none of the three interpretations you present are likely to be the intended one.

"The text on the room tile applies only to the item you have to draw when you discover the room": This seems contradicted by the general "an" in "When you draw an item card on this room..."; if it referred to only the item from discovery it would probably say something more specific like "...the item card...".
"When you open the puzzle box you get 4 cards and gets to keep N of them": This is stretching the "choose 1 to keep. Discard the other" rather far - that language really only makes sense if the choice is between two cards.

Instead, the interpretation I'd favor is:

"Draw 2 cards" from the puzzle box means draw a card and then draw a second card, so each of those draws would get replaced by the arsenal effect and you'd end up drawing 2 and keeping 1, then drawing 2 again and keeping 1 again.

There are also two other interpretations I think are somewhat supported by the text:

"Draw 2 cards" means draw a card and at the same time draw a second card, so with the Arsenal effect that becomes drawing two pairs of cards at the same time and keeping one card from each. (This is almost like your draw 4 keep 2 option, except you have slightly less freedom in which cards to keep.)
Just draw two (with no bonus from Arsenal Room) because Arsenal Room only helps when you draw "an" item card and instead you drew two item cards. (This is the same result as your first interpretation, but for a different reason.)

The way I chose my top interpretation of these 3: Whenever rules are ambiguous, as they are all too often in Betrayal, I try to fall back on the most similar rule from MtG since they've thought of pretty much everything. In this case, rule 120.2 says

Cards may only be drawn one at a time. If a player is instructed to draw multiple cards, that player performs that many individual card draws.

Drawing two pairs and decide which ones to keep at the same time gives one the advantage of information, which will occasionally be huge, yet most of the time irrelevant, the way I'd guesstimate it.

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


text:
Can you attack twice in one turn?
I'm talking about Dungeons & Dragons: The Fantasy Adventure Board Game published in 2002 by Parker Brothers, a division of Hasbro.
In the "Actions" part of the rulebook it says:

Each Hero may take 2 Actions on each turn. You can choose to take 1 or no Actions if you wish.
The following Actions are all possible within the game and use 1 Action each:
[...]

It doesn't specify whether you can choose the same action twice in the same turn or not but in a later example (only in the Dungeon Master's Guide (pg. 8)) it says (explicitly for Monsters):

[...]
You can decide not to move or attack with a Monster or not to attack and take a double move. [...]

I am pretty sure, that they want to say that Monsters can't attack twice, but I am not so sure about player characters.

I would say that player characters are capable of attacking twice. The rules state you have 2 Actions to spend each turn, spent on a list of actions that cost 1 Action each, with no further limitations beyond the cost.
This is reinforced when they explicitly state that this option is not available to Monsters, a case of "the exception proves the rule".
I.e., "no free parking on Sundays" implies parking is free every other day. Monsters can't attack twice (without stating otherwise for players) implies Player Characters can.

Yeah, this is the clear interpretation. The game says "you can take two actions" and "each time you take an action it can be one of these". Unless it explicitly says otherwise, this clearly allows taking the same action twice.


text:
What is the art depicted on the Magic 6th Edition paper playmats?
In the 6th edition Starter Set, the guided game comes with two color-coded playmats. You can also find (very blurry) screencaps below, and in this instructional video. (I've linked it to the appropriate time, so you should see both playmats within 5 seconds.
I'm trying to find art, source files, or high resolution images of these playmats, so...
What is the name of the art (or card) wherein the gold wizard is depicted on each of these two playmats? If that's unavailable, is it possible to identify the artist?

Maybe just screenshot the video to save people the trouble?

The video that you linked is contained as part of the Starter 1999 gift box that was released back in 1999 and contains:

2 40 card decks in cardboard deckboxes
A poster of Angel of Light
Two guides that provide step by step instruction similar to those in the video
The video that you linked
two playmats with score keeping beads

It doesn't appear like the featured images are from any cards and are probably just displayed on the box art and playmat as marketing images.
You can see in the image below that they are reflected and colour modified version of each other and featured on the deckboxes as well.

If you want to see what else is contained in the starter kit you can check out this Unboxing video, along with this visual list of each card included in the set.

This is pretty helpful so far. Do you know if there are any artist credits in any of the materials you've found? I think knowing the artist might help me narrow it down if possible. I've updated my question to account for this if you happen to know anything.

@Robert Without having a physical copy of the kit it is kind of tough. Artist names would be small legal type text around the copyright if included at all. Anything like that would just be a guess from me but I will see if anything comes up. BTW if you click that image the source image is pretty high res (1468x1072).

@Robert after a quick look around at the artists that were active during that time my best guess is Ron Spencer but only as the Shiny, Muscly, Man with lighting effects seems to be common in his work and he looks to have done a decent amount of work for Wizards..

Frankly I don't believe for a second that it's Ron Spencer, but I can't thank you enough for the effort. I'm honestly getting a Terese Nielsen vibe, but I could be wrong. I may continue searching and see if I can find a more thorough answer.

@Robert No problem, and as I said just best guess from the few artists I scanned through. Best of luck with the search, one thing that may be worth a shot is firing off the question to Mark Rosewater at either his Blogatog or his twitter @ maro254

So I've looked through the cards from 6th edition and it doesn't match any of those. I'm fairly certain these gold wizards are meant to depict you the player. I can't find any concrete evidence on this, or any additional high res prints of the images, but from my experience with starter sets in the past this was usually the case.
I think sadly these images are lost to time a little. If you could get your hand on a good condition copy of the starter set you could rip the images from there, but otherwise you're a little out of luck sadly.