text:
Can an opponent bolt a mana-generating creature to stop me from generating mana?
What happens if I tap a Llanowar Elves for its ability and the creature is destroyed in response with an Ultimate Price? And why? (a brief explanation will suffice)
This may sound as a silly question but the opinion between my friends is divided. Some think that the green mana is generated and the others say that the mana is not generated.

@doppelgreener This question deals with mana abilities, which is a special case of activated abilities.

I think this is actually a duplicate (and really a subcase) of http://boardgames.stackexchange.com/q/7893/1500.

I don't think the question is a duplicate because as corsiKa said, the oponent never has the chance to destroy the creature in response(I actually can use the green mana to protect the LLanowar Elves if I want). Anyway thanks for the answer corsiKa.

I vote not duplicate. While the final end result is the same (the ability can't be stopped), the mechanics behind what happens are completely different with mana abilities.

Honestly, Does killing a creature mana source that's being tapped for mana to pay for a spell counter that spell? would have been a better duplicate target. I didn't see it until after I voted.

Heh, I agree with @Rainbolt. So now do we reopen and mark as duplicate again, pointing to the better duplicate question? Or does this require moderator attention?

Your opponent would be better off waiting until later in your turn to kill your dork.
Llanowar Elves has a mana ability. This doesn't go on the stack, and thus cannot be responded to.

605.3b An activated mana ability doesn't go on the stack, so it can't be targeted, countered, or otherwise responded to. Rather, it resolves immediately after it is activated. (See rule 405.6c.)

So your opponent doesn't even get the chance to bolt your creature before you get your mana. He can only bolt once he has priority, which presumably you won't pass until you perform whatever action it was you were tapping for mana for.
But even if it were a card like Nettle Drone, the ability would go on the stack, and when it resolved the damage would still be dealt. The ability itself will never be countered solely on the actions of your opponent, short of a Stifle effect that specifically counters the ability. It would only get countered if it would have got countered anyway (lack of targets, illegal targets).
So your opponent would be best off waiting to bolt your dude. You might play a creature that he'd rather bolt instead, or you might do something else that he might want to use the mana for. Once it's tapped, it would have to be untapped (something that -can- be responded to) and then he could bolt. If nothing else, he can bolt on end step.

Deathrite Shaman would let your non-mana-ability example actually have mana (potentially) produced; in some sense a more direct analogy to the OP's situation.

This answer is correct, but the starting sentence is misleading. Destroying the source of an ability never stops an ability from resolving (unless it's also the only target). Destroying all targets does counter an ability, but that is tangential to the actual question asked.

Yeah my first reaction was also that "It depends on the ability." is not correct at all. Whether it's a mana ability or not doesn't change the outcome

@murgatroid99 You're absolutely right. I've clarified this because ambiguous opening sentences piss me off too. :-)

"The ability itself will never be countered solely on the actions of your opponent."  This is false for a non-mana ability like Nettle Drone, eg if your opponent has a card like Azorius Guildmage.

@DanStaley A bit pedantic, but sure, I've updated to reflect that.


text:
Tamiyo's Journal and the Legend Rule
The Legend Rule states:

If a player controls two or more legendary permanents with the same
  name, that player chooses one of them, and the rest are put into their
  owners' graveyards.

This is just a rule clarification so my brother believes me, but is everything listed below legal?

tap Tamiyo's Journal and sacrifice three clues to find another Tamiyo's
play it for 5 mana and put the tapped Tamiyo's into the graveyard
tap the untapped Tamiyos and sacrifice three more clues

That seems like a very inefficient way to tutor for a card.

"Is this legal?" leaves me wondering what parts of the scenario you need help with. I recommend asking a more specific question. For starters, ask yourself the question "Why would this not be legal?"'

@murgatroid99 I can tutor Emrakul on turn 5 with Tamiyos, but this above combo is for Tireless Tracker / Fleeting Memories.

I guess it does save 1 mana as compared to sacrificing each of the 3 clues to its own ability,

Yes, that's perfectly legal, assuming that you started with 6 clue tokens. Hard to point to a specific rule saying so, but there's 2 things to keep in mind:
1 - The legend rule, which you quoted, doesn't say anything about restrictions on which of the duplicates you have to choose, so there's no reason you can't choose the tapped one to get rid of and the untapped one to keep.
2 - Tamiyo's Journal doesn't care where the clue tokens came from; it doesn't have to be the same tokens that it created.
Of course, as described, you will get no benefit from this: you'll have just wasted 3 clue tokens and 5 mana. But it could be good with various combinations.

It's very inefficient unless you have 5 mana and need all 6 clues to be sacrificed. Tireless Tracker or Mazirek come to mind.

Of course, I'd only do this if I have cards like Tireless Tracker / Fleeting Memories

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Can I defeat an opponent with their own commander?
I know that if I gain control of my opponent's commander, it won't lose the status of commander. How is the commander damage calculated in this case? Can I do the 21 commander damage with the stolen commander to win the game? Does the damage add to the damage of my own commander?

Yes, you can make a player lose by dealing 21 total damage to them with their own commander. (If it keeps getting stolen by yourself or others, a cumulative total 21 damage from their own commander will make them lose.)
The rule, from mtgcommander.net's Rules — Play section, is:

If a player has been dealt 21 points of combat damage by a particular Commander during the game, that player loses a game.

That is any one specific commander card, including their own. Commander damage from different commander cards doesn't count together: if you've successfully stolen every commander on the board and dealt 20 damage with each of them to one opponent, they still haven't lost to commander damage.
Also, commander damage never makes anyone win directly, it only makes players lose. You'll only win if them losing made you win, e.g. they were your only opponent.

If you've dealt 20 damage with 4 or 5 different commanders, most decks will have lost by then, not due to commander damage, but due to being dealt 80-100 damage.

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


text:
What is a good basic/non-basic lands ratio for Back to Basics in Commander?
I recently obtained a Back to Basics and I wonder what is a good ratio of Basic/non-basic lands so it doesn't hurt me more than my opponents.
I suppose that near to 0 non-basics is a trivial answer for a mono-color deck, but I want to add it to my blue/white Commander deck. I tried to cut the less essential utility lands, but I am hesitant to take out the "dual lands" because it would increase the inconsistency of my deck.

Inconsistancy is generally less of a worry for Commander than for other formats, because the slower format means that you have more turns to draw into your lands.
I think that I'd be perfectly comfortable running a two color Commander deck with only basics, although I typically don't because I don't have a strong reason not to include duals. Three color would be more cause for concern, but two color should be fine.
Also, consider that fetch lands can help you balance your colors, but replace themselves with basic lands, so they won't be affected by Back to Basics.

Really it depends a lot on the meta you expect to be playing in more than the number of colors in your deck. There are cards that create a problem for you playing non-basic lands, like:

Ruination
From the Ashes
Back to Basics
Blood Moon
Detritivore
Dwarven Blastminer
Dwarven Miner
Helldozer
Trench Wurm
Shivan Harvest
Trailblazer's Boots

In that case your non-basic lands are going to be a problem, and this doesn't include non-repeatable effects that work on individual lands like Fulminator Mage and Wasteland. You could also have an issue when given the chance to look for basic lands if you have none, through effects like Path to Exile, Veteran Explorer or Collective Voyage.
However this doesn't mean you should go with only basic lands either, even if your deck is monocolored. There are also cards that can cause you issues with using basic lands, like:

Reality Twist - except for blue, Boros and Golgari
Infernal Darkness - except for black
Contamination - except for black
Naked Singularity
Sundering Titan

And for specific colors:

White - Stench of Evil, Flashfires
Blue - Boil, Boiling Seas, Tsunami, Omen of Fire, Choke, Curse of Marit Lage
Black - Karma
Red - Glaciers, Volcanic Eruption
Green - Acid Rain
One basic land name - Wake of Destruction

All of which create problems for basic typed lands, and these are just the biggest ones, there are others that just do damage for tapping land with a specific basic typed, like Scald or ones that gain the controller life when their opponents tap that land like Lifetap. Players using the upkeep spells here will also likely play Eon Hub to bypass that cost. There is no perfect answer here, there are cards that are a problem for both sides of the basic/nonbasic equation. Based on this going all one way or the other leaves you open to more problems

One aspect to also consider is having enough basics to take advantage of effects that specifically tutor them up. E.g. failing to find a basic after having your creature Path to Exile'd feels bad.

@Veskah True, though the overall idea here is that all either way is a bad thing, I added mention to that, and more nonbasic hate cards that I thought of after the original writing.

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


text:
Canasta Red-3 Up-Card
In the rules of Canasta, it says that if the up-card at the beginning of a round is a Red 3, then the discard pile is frozen.
But doesn't that go without saying? The discard pile is always frozen to everybody at the start of a round until someone goes down with the initial meld requirement.
What am I missing here?

It matters in the case that someone Melds without picking up the discard pile. In this case; that rule means that the discard pile is still frozen, even though it wouldn’t be if the up-card had not been a red 3.

Thanks Gendolkari. That makes sense. So are you saying that once a card gets placed on top of the Red-3, it's no longer frozen? I thought it acted like a Wild card and stays frozen. One other quick question while I've got you... If my partner has a Canasta, but I haven't played a card yet, can I "go out concealed" without a Canasta of my own?

@MylesMarkson No, the red 3 goes sideways just like a wild card would; so it stays frozen until someone picks up the discard pile. If it were only frozen for the very first turn, then you would be right that the rule would make no sense.

@MylesMarkson Please create a new/separate question for your other question.

You're a good man Gendo! It's good to have a friend who will help me with all of my Canasta questions. I'm a newbie!

@MylesMarkson As a friendly reminder if this answer solved your problem you can mark it as accepted to show users that it helped and to show thanks to Gendolkari for providing the answer.

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


text:
Gala Greeters and Replacement Effect
Let's say I have both Gala Greeters and Jinnie Fay, Jetmir's Second on the battlefield.
A creature comes into play that triggers Gala Greeters's Alliance ability, which should create a tapped Treasure token BUT a replacement effect from Jinnie Fay comes into play and I decided to create a 2/2 Cat creature token with haste. Will the token enter the battlefield tapped or untapped?

FYI: We have functioning [mtg:card name] syntax you can use for card references instead of fetching a gatherer link. It won't show up in the post preview, but it'll work.

The token will enter the battlefield tapped.
The Streets of New Capenna release notes contain the following ruling for Jinnie Fay (emphasis mine):

The tokens' characteristics are entirely replaced by either 2/2 green Cat creature token with haste or 3/1 green Dog creature token with vigilance. They don't have any other abilities the tokens would have been created with. Anything else specified in the effect creating the tokens (such as tapped, attacking, "That token gains haste," or "Exile that token at end of combat") still applies.


text:
MTG Is the commander-ness of a card always known to all players?
Haven't been able to find any definitive information about this.

903.3. Each deck has a legendary creature card designated as its commander. This designation is not a characteristic of the object represented by the card; rather, it is an attribute of the card itself. The card retains this designation even when it changes zones.

This states clearly that commander-ness is a meta form of information, immutable to any form of play. However, it doesn't say this information is absolutely public.
I think this question falls into a black hole of oversight.
Commander-ness being an attribute is unique in the rulebook. It's a property of the card, but stops there. I think it's assumed to be public at all times, but it's not stated implicitly or explicitly anywhere. This feels wrong in a game where such clearances are very important.

If you cast your commander face down, is it identifiable as a commander spell on the stack?
If your commander is shuffled into your library, is it's position always known?

This might fall under Free Information / Derived Information under the tournament rules.

Free information is information to which all players are entitled access without contamination or omissions made by their opponents. If a player is ever unable or unwilling to provide free information to an opponent that has requested it, they should call a judge and explain the situation.

Derived information is information to which all players are entitled access, but opponents are not obliged to assist in determining and may require some skill or calculation to determine.

A simple amendment that commander-ness is defined also as free information / derived information might solve this issue.
I'm aware there is another question about this on the site. However I'm not satisfied with it's answer as it relies on information that is no longer available (EDH Rules Committee no longer has a forum that I know of), and the comments below that answer make some good counter-points.
So to reiterate, is a commander card always marked across all zones? Are there exceptions, and how are they defined in the CR?

I updated my answer to that other question you mentioned. I also emailed the team at https://mtgcommander.net/index.php/contact-us/ to hopefully get an answer to your question. Will post an answer if I get a response.

@Rainbolt Thank you for the coordination! Much appreciated.

If you - for whichever reason - decide to shuffle your commander in your bib, it is in a hidden zone and therefore not known to all players. Actually, it is know to nobody, which card your commander is.

It's been a couple of weeks, so I wouldn't hold out on MTGCommander responding to my question. The closest thing I can find is this ruling from the EDH committee on their now deleted forums which says "Your opponents are also allowed to know which morph creature is your commander." (cont.)

This could interpreted as, "You are allowed to know, but I don't have to tell you.", but then the ruling has no impact. Therefore the only sensible interpretation is that you must make it clear which morph is your commander at all times. The page that this ruling came from is gone so you could argue it no longer applies. That's why I'm posting this as a comment and not an answer.

Your other question about the specific position in your library of a tucked commander was also answered in that same deleted forum post: "The location of each commander is open information (everyone should always know what zone each commander is in), but you don't get to know where in your library your commander is."

@Rainbolt That last ruling was written poorly - you know when it moves from a public to a hidden zone, but the way that's written it sounds like when it moves from a hidden zone to another one (drawing or (demonic) tutoring it after it had been shuffled into a library) everyone gets to know the commander is now in hand.

@Andrew I think the the ruling is clear on that topic. The ruling says, "everyone should always know what zone each commander is in". Your hand is a zone. Therefore, everyone should know when a commander is in your hand.

this raises another question to me, which is what about when a commander card changes zones while its identity is hidden from all players, e.g. exiled face-down from the library (406.3)

No, a commander is not marked at all zones. If the commander is in your hand, or if it is in your deck, then opponents cannot see it. Another example would be if the commander gets exiled face down from either your hand or your deck, then the opponents would still not be able to see it.
If you choose to have a different sleeve for your commander then it would be obvious to opponents but otherwise opponents would not be able to see what card it is.
Keep in mind that every time the commander would change zones, you have the option to return the commander to the command zone instead, which is face up and all can see.

"Keep in mind that every time the commander would change zones, you have the option to return the commander to the command zone instead" Not any change of zones. It doesn't apply when moving it to the stack or battlefield.

Could you cite evidence for this answer being correct?

And pedantically, with the recent rules changes it's not "instead" when the commander moves to the graveyard or exile but "after".

The only time your opponent is allowed to see your Commander is when it's in the Command zone, so if you were to shuffle your Commander in with your deck, which would be seen as unusual unless you had a way to search it out quickly, then your opponent would not see who your Commander is until you brought them to the field and revealed that to them or if it's in your starting hand, etc., I personally would just put the Commander in the Command zone but each person has their own style. Also the only people that would 100% know your Commander would be the judges and the people you hand your deck list to. If you don't think this is legit then I'll leave a link at the bottom of this answer so you can check it out for yourself.
Link: https://magic.wizards.com/en/content/commander-format

At the very least, the first sentence here seems to be wrong - the Commander can be seen in any public zones.


text:
Rummikub - Replacing Jokers
3 of us were playing with older Rummikub rules where if you want to use a Joker that is on the board, you must replace it with a tile from your rack of the same color and value. One player made this move, replaced the joker and used it elsewhere, and then, during the same turn, removed and reused the tile they had replaced the joker with. We contended that if the Joker has to be replaced, then the replacement tile must be in the Joker's spot at the end of the turn. Which is correct?
For demonstration:
 beginning of turn: Rack = [O1] [O2] [R1] [Blu1] Board = [[J] [R2] [R3] [R4]] [[Blk1] [Blk2] [Blk3] [Blk4]]
 halfway through turn: Rack = [Blu1] Board = [[O1] [O2] [J]] [**[R1]** [R2] [R3] [R4]] [[Blk1] [Blk2] [Blk3] [Blk4]]

 where the **[R1]** replaced the Joker.

 end of turn: Board = [[O1] [O2] [J]] [[R2] [R3] [R4]] [[Blk2] [Blk3] [Blk4]] [**[R1]** [Blu1] [Blk1]]

Certainly in the new rules, the Joker would already be cleared and there would be no issue, but in the Joker replacement rules, it seems that a tile would have to be in the Joker's place at the end of the turn.
Thanks!

I am not clear on the distinction you are making.  In Rummikub, you can completely revamp the entire board on every turn.  Every tile can be "moved" and put into different runs/configurations.  All that matters is that the Joker is replaced with a correct tile from your rack, which is what was done.  The "correct" tile can end up anywhere after that.  At least via my understanding of the rules.

So I think the distinction is whether you have to replace a Joker in its previous location, or whether you can replace just the presence of the Joker with the same colored and numbered tile, but put it in any valid location on the board, as long as the original set is still valid. I assumed that the Joker has to be replaced in its previous location before that tile can be moved, but maybe it comes down to your definition of "replace."


text:
Teferi, Time Raveler vs Creaturelands
Let's say I have a Teferi, Time Raveler in play.

My opponent animates an Inkmoth Nexus and attacks me.
I cast Suspend on the Inkmoth Nexus, exiling it with 2 time counters.
2 turns later I still have Teferi, Time Raveler in play when the last time counter is removed from Inkmoth Nexus.

My opponent cannot cast Inkmoth Nexus, but can it be played through the Teferi and if yes does it have haste?

Lands are not spells, so Teferi has no effect on them. This is spelled out (no pun intended) in rule 305.1:

Playing a land is a special action; it doesn’t use the stack (see rule 116). Rather, the player simply puts the land onto the battlefield. Since the land doesn’t go on the stack, it is never a spell,

Per rule 702.61a (Suspend), you can suspend lands and play them (emphasis mine):

When the last time counter is removed from this card, if it’s exiled, play it without paying its mana cost if able. If you can’t, it remains exiled.

Note that if suspend instructed you to cast the card, it wouldn't work on lands, because you can't cast lands. But it instructs you to play the card, which you can do. This is subject to the usual 1/turn limit for lands, and can only be done on your turn.
Because Inkmoth Nexus is played as a land, not cast as a creature, it does not gain haste from suspend. Continuing rule 702.61a (emphasis mine):

If you cast a creature spell this way [using suspend], it gains haste


text:
Can I activate loyalty abilities of a planeswalker once per turn or once per upkeep?
For example if I have Sphinx of the Second Sun out, giving me two untap upkeep and draw steps. Could I use a Planeswalker's ability on my first main phase, then again on my second main phase due to the second upkeep?

You can activate planeswalker abilities once per turn; the extra beginning phase granted by Sphinx of the Second Sun is part of your current turn and does not allow you to activate your planeswalkers again.
First of all, Sphinx of the Second Sun does not grant you extra main phases. After the extra beginning phase, the game will proceed to the ending phase.
Second, that extra beginning phase is part of your current turn. A player's turn begins with their first phase, and ends when all their phases have completed, no matter how many. Planeswalkers can be activated only once per turn:

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

No, you cannot get a second loyalty activation. By default, a planeswalker loyalty ability can be used only once per turn, during a main phase (emphasis mine):

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

And the sphinx's ability just extends the same turn. It doesn't start a new one:

The additional beginning phase all happens during the current turn. Any effects that last “until your next turn” or similar won’t expire just because you’ll go through an additional beginning phase.

As an aside, even if loyalty ability refreshed per upkeep, you still wouldn't be able to use Sphinx of the Second Sun to re-activate a loyalty ability because the sphinx's extra upkeep is granted after your second main phase. And it doesn't actually give you another main phase afterwards where you could use a loyalty ability. This is clarified in the oracle rulings for the card

After the additional beginning phase, the game proceeds to the ending phase (unless something has added even more phases; see below.)

So I agree due to the rule you can only activate loyalty abilities ones per turn. But if it were ones per upkeep, theoretically you could activate it one on your pre combat main phase, and a gain on your post combat main phase.

The wording is weird, but the extra beginning phase actually happens after your post-combat main phase

Are you sure it says at the BEGINNING of your post combat main phase, so you will have the main phase after.

It's a trigger that happens then, but grants the phase afterwards

At the beginning of your postcombat main phase, there is an additional beginning phase after this phase

Aw wow that is some wired wording. But yea your right. Thank you :)

If your question is answered, don't forget to accept whichever post best helped you.


text:
Can I activate Firewall Dragon multiple times to bounce a card?
If I activate Firewall Dragon to bounce a card and the activation is negated, would I be able to activate Firewall Dragon's effect to bounce again or would it not be able to activate?

"You can only use each effect of "Firewall Dragon" once per turn."  So, no.
from https://yugioh.fandom.com/wiki/Once_per_turn :

Only once per turn
Use
The more common type, found on Monster cards, and multiple use/off-field effects of Spell and Trap Cards. If a card states this type of restriction, and either its activation or effect is negated, you cannot activate it once again.

... with the difference between "once per turn" and "only once per turn" being "even if another copy of Firewall Dragon were or were to become on the field, the other copy could not activate this effect either".
Note: very new player, reading the rules and listening to people who talk about Hard Once Per Turn restrictions.  IC Very Easily BW.


text:
Do I have any chance to use a 0 toughness animated land before it dies?
In the event that Living Plane is in play along with Elesh Norn, Grand Cenobite (or similar effects) in play, can an opponent of Elesh Norn play a land and tap it for mana before the state based board events send it to the graveyard for having 0 or less toughness?
Living Plane 2GG World Enchantment: "All lands are 1/1 creatures that are still lands."
Elesh Norn, Grand Cenobite 5WW Legendary Creature: "Creatures your opponents control get -2/-2."
This is also under the assumption that there is something providing haste to creatures since summoning sickness would prevent tapping the creature land for mana.

There is the obvious solution of the opponent an effect that grants all of their creature +2 toughness...  I suspect that was not an intended loophole.

@Yakk I chose Elesh Norn because it's a common enough card that people knew what it does. I'm actually looking at something like an Opening hand that looks like "Living Plane, Forest, Forest, Lotus Petal, Dark Ritual, Kaervek the Spiteful, Birds of Paradise" -- This was in response to the meta Faceless Deeds.

The lands will die before you can tap them for mana.
A combination of these rules will mean the creatures die.

115.2a Playing a land is a special action. To play a land, a player puts that land onto the battlefield from the zone it was in (usually that player's hand). A player can take this action any time he or she has priority and the stack is empty during a main phase of his or her turn, but only if he or she hasn't yet played a land that turn. See rule 305, "Lands."

115.3. If a player takes a special action, that player receives priority afterward.

704.3. Whenever a player would get priority (see rule 116, "Timing and Priority"), the game checks for any of the listed conditions for state-based actions, then performs all applicable state-based actions simultaneously as a single event. If any state-based actions are performed as a result of a check, the check is repeated; otherwise all triggered abilities that are waiting to be put on the stack are put on the stack, then the check is repeated. Once no more state-based actions have been performed as the result of a check and no triggered abilities are waiting to be put on the stack, the appropriate player gets priority. This process also occurs during the cleanup step (see rule 514), except that if no state-based actions are performed as the result of the step's first check and no triggered abilities are waiting to be put on the stack, then no player gets priority and the step ends.

605.3. Activating an activated mana ability follows the rules for activating any other activated ability (see rule 602.2), with the following exceptions:

605.3a A player may activate an activated mana ability whenever they have priority, whenever they are casting a spell or activating an ability that requires a mana payment, or whenever a rule or effect asks for a mana payment, even if it’s in the middle of casting or resolving a spell or activating or resolving an ability.

You would play your land that immediately becomes a 0/0 creature due to Living Plane and Elesh Norn.  Then you would receive priority due to taking a special action (i.e. playing a land) but before you would get priority, State Based Actions are checked, which sees you have a 0/0 creature on the battlefield and would immediately put it into your graveyard.
You cannot activate the mana ability because

You do not have priority - you're about to receive priority back but you don't have it until after SBAs are checked
You are not casting a spell - you can't be in the process of casting a spell because you just played a land
Nothing is asking for a mana payment - again, there is nothing on the stack because you are getting priority as a result of playing a land

You have actually glossed over one important bit to complete the argument: Activated mana abilities follow the same rules as regular activated abilities, i.e. you still need priority to activate them (or to be asked to pay a mana cost, which is not relevant here).

@Hackworth better?

There's also a ruling included at the bottom of the page for Living Plane, which makes the other points in your answer kinda moot - you may want to include that in your answer: "A noncreature permanent that turns into a creature is subject to the “summoning sickness” rule: It can only attack, and its Tap abilities can only be activated, if its controller has continuously controlled that permanent since the beginning of their most recent turn."

@eirikdaude, thought the Q does state the assumption of the lands having Haste to counter that.

A way around this (in silver bordered joke formats) is to make sure you have a Rules Lawyer in play... Though that's certainly quite an edge case


text:
Discard pile and melding
My opponent picks up the discard pile but then cannot meld. What to do?

This is not at all a duplicate of the linked question…

@GendoIkari I've reopened it, I agree it wasn't a dupe of the linked ones.

@CesarM I found the second link after seeing the other close votes; I do believe it’s a duplicate of that one and thus should be close… just not closed as the original duplicate.

@GendoIkari I understand it as a different - that one deals with if you show an invalid meld. This is asking what to do if you pick a card but then figure out that you can't meld (before showing). Might make a difference, might not, but I see them as different scenarios. Happy to re-close if you think so even after this

Ah good point, this question doesn’t clarify that the player has exposed their hand; which the other question deals with.


text:
When returning a card from your graveyard, if it doesn't specify who gets control of it, can I put that card under the opponent's control?
I am building a commander deck all about giving creatures to my opponent—creatures that downsize your abilities. For example, cards that make you unable to cast permanents, spells, lose life every turn, discard cards, etc. and then tapping those creatures down with enchantment auras and spells of my own.
There are many spells and creatures with "return target creature from the graveyard to the battlefield". There are fewer spells that specify that you "return target creature from the graveyard to the battlefield under your opponent's control" and "return target creature from the graveyard to the battlefield under your control."
If I return a card from the graveyard to the battlefield, can I put it under my opponent's control, if it doesn't specify whose control I put it under?

A quick search shows no cards that return a creature "from the graveyard"; it's almost always "from your graveyard".

There are no such card because "the graveyard" makes no sense. There isn't one graveyard; each player has a graveyard.

@user2357112supportsMonica Each player has a separate graveyard, 'the' implies there is only one, that's why many abilities specify "your" graveyard, and those that let you access any graveyard say "from a graveyard" like Rise from the Grave

No, you can't do that.
Rule 110.2a says

If an effect instructs a player to put an object onto the battlefield, that object enters the battlefield under that player’s control unless the effect states otherwise.

The main point of the question seems to be about control of permanents, which is adequately answered by murgatroid99's reference to Rule 110.2a. The framing of the question however seems to be based on a misconception.
When the card text refers to "graveyard" it is generally either "your graveyard" or "a graveyard" - except for a few outliers like Sorry. In the two cards (plus one test card) that specifically state "the graveyard" the meaning is spelled out: "the graveyard of the player who..." for example. There are cards that allow you to affect cards in your graveyard, target player's graveyard, opponents graveyards, etc.
Likewise, in most cases when a card is returned to the battlefield the card text explicitly specifies who gets control of the card once it arrives. As mergatroid99 points out, in those cases where the card doesn't explicitly name the controller, it defaults to the player the effect targets. After a quick browse of cards with graveyard effects that return the card to the battlefield it looks like most of the time when control is not specified the card specifically mentions "your graveyard" which makes it reasonably clear what is meant without the ruling.
A couple of examples:
Debtor's Knell states (in part, emphasis mine):

"...put target creature from a graveyard onto the battlefield under your control."

Corpse Dance opens with (again, emphasis mine):

"Return the top creature card of your graveyard to the battlefield."

There are, as you mentioned, numerous examples. All of them are either covered by explicit targeting ("under your control", etc.) or at a pinch by Rule 110.2a. If the effect allows you to take a card from the graveyard and grant control to any player then it'll tell you so. Until then... no.

I might be mistaken, but my impression is that the question is using "the graveyard" in a looser sense, not necessarily referring to exact card wording. That's mainly because that exact wording doesn't materially affect the question or answer. If they said "your graveyard" or "a graveyard", it's plausible that someone could still have the same question, and the answer would still be the same.

Side note: Sorry is from Unglued, which features a lot of cards with unique effects, isn't legal in any format and shouldn't be considered indicative of valid wording on cards.

Your implication that "a graveyard" and "your graveyard" are the only common wordings is simply incorrect. Many other cards have a variety of other wordings, including "each graveyard", "all graveyards", "that players' graveyard", "target player's graveyard", "their graveyard", etc. And there are cards that don't specify the controller and don't say "your graveyard", such as Goblin Welder and Bloodbond March. You also say "it defaults to the player the effect targets", but that is incorrect. Many of these effects do not target players. It defaults to the player instructed to take the action.


text:
What happens if multiple players win the game simultaneously from Laboratory Maniac?
My opponent and I both control a Laboratory Maniac and have no cards in our library. I control an Alms Collector. An effect causes my opponent to draw two cards. Alms Collector changes that to each of us drawing a card. Laboratory Maniac replaces that with each of us winning the game. What happens?
The comprehensive rules cover all remaining players losing simultaneously:

104.4a If all the players remaining in a game lose simultaneously, the game is a draw.

But not all remaining players winning.

Laboratory Maniac has a ruling for this; the active player wins the game:

If two or more players each control a Laboratory Maniac and each player is instructed to draw a number of cards, first the player whose turn it is draws that many cards. If this causes that player to win the game instead, the game is immediately over. If the game isn't over yet, repeat this process for each other player in turn order.

This is because of this rule:

121.2c If more than one player is instructed to draw cards, the active player performs all of their draws first, then each other player in turn order does the same.

That answers the situation in question. As for the question as worded in the title, my best guess is that there is no way possible for multiple players to win simultaneously. A card would need to be printed with text such as “each player wins the game”, or perhaps “if you would lose the game, you win the game instead”. And if that happened, the rules appear to not cover that situation as written.
Note that the difference between winning and losing, in terms of how the rules work, is that most of the ways that you lose the game are caused by state-based actions, which apply to all players simultaneously. However, there is no state-based action that causes players to win.

I think I can confirm your guess. The only way to win the game other than having everyone else lose is for a card to say that you win. And every card that says that you win the game other than Laboratory Maniac does it in the resolution of a spell or ability, and there's no way for another player to win while that is happening.

@murgatroid99 Biovisionary can cause two or more players to win the game simultaneously, if they all control four or more copies of one during the End Step.

@nick012000 That's a triggered ability so resolves in APNAP order.

The proposal explicitly states in the text that it causes both players to win simultaneously.  Mind you, it's not tournament legal.

With Biovisionary, won't the non-active player win, because the triggers will be put on the stack in APNAP order?

Does anyone know if 121.2c was added to the rules when they released Laboratory Maniac? I would think that before that, there wouldn't have ever been a reason to care about simultaneous drawing. It also matters for Miracle, which was added shortly after Laboratory Maniac.

No, the rule existed at least already in Magic 2010 rules (as 120.2a).

As another historical note, 6th edition rules included "A game ends in a draw if both players lose or win simultaneously."

@murgatroid99: Play "Wrath of God" while both players are kept alive by Platinum Angel.

@Joshua That will cause both players to lose at the same time, which is different from both players winning at the same time. This is addressed in the answer itself, with the point about state-based actions causing game loss but not game wins.

@murgatroid99 Actually, there is exactly one card other than Laboratory Maniac that says you win the game and does not do so as a resolution of a spell or ability: Jace, Wielder of Mysteries. However, it has exactly the same effect as Laboratory Maniac, so it’s not particularly interesting.

@murgatroid99 Jace has 2 separate abilities that let you win the game. The first is a replacement ability exactly like Laboratory Maniac. The other is a regular "you win" on its activated loyalty ability.

Yeah, I missed that. @AustinHemmelgarn I am sorry for the tone of my now deleted previous comment. I felt frustrated with the previous responses to my first comment, and I both did not read the card you referenced carefully enough and I responded too harshly.

Besides Unhinged, there are several cards that have win conditions that don't explicitly depend on something resolving, such as Coalition Victory or Maze's End. If there's a way for multiple players to gain control of permanents at the same time, they could win simultaneously.

@Acccumulation Except for Maze’s End (which is an activated ability, and thus must resolve), Coalition Victory and Approach of the Second Sun (which are sorceries, and thus must resolve), Laboratory Maniac (which is a replacement effect) and Jace, Wielder of Mysteries (which has both a replacement effect and an activated ability that must resolve), all ‘you win the game‘ effects on cards are triggered abilities (which also must resolve to work).

@Acccumulation Coalition Victory is a sorcery that can cause a player to win while a spell (itself) is resolving. Maze's End has an activated ability that can cause a player to win while that ability is resolving. Neither of those is an example of something that does not match what I said.

Wait a second. How is this answer, and indeed that ruling, consistent with rule 614.6? If the card draws never happen, they shouldn't happen in APNAP order.

@TheWreckersCompanion 121.2c refers to when each player is "instructed to draw cards", which does happen here. They never follow that instruction, but their doing something else instead of following that instruction still happens in APNAP order. Their replacement effects can't do anything until the moment when they would go to draw a card, and the player who isn't next in turn order doesn't even get that chance before the game is over.


text:
To whom does Spellshock apply?
Spellshock is an enchantment that says:

Whenever a player casts a spell, Spellshock deals 2 damage to that player.

If I play this, do I then have to pay two life for every spell I cast? Does it not apply only to other players?

The Gatherer ruling seems pretty clear... "04/10/2004 It affects all players, including you."

As a future reference it is best to avoid accepting an answer right away as there is a chance a better answer could come along and at times having an accepted answer will stop some from providing a better one.

Worth nothing that "paying life" is a specific thing and different from "taking damage" in magic - there are cards that interact with both differently (for example if this was paying life, then you couldn't cast spells if Angel of Jubilation was on the field, but since it's damage triggered by casting a spell, you still can cast spells.

There are a few ways that could be written which would change where it applies. It could have been written, in order from most narrow to widest:

Whenever you cast a spell, Spellshock deals 2 damage to you.

This applies to you, and only you. There aren't many cards that work this way anymore, downsides to cards have gotten more rare over time, currently the most recent example I can think of is Treacherous Blessing.

Whenever an opponent casts a spell, Spellshock deals 2 damage to that player.

This way of wording would mean it applies to each player who is your opponent - usually this is every other player, but some formats like two headed giant or archenemy can have players who are allies, it wouldn't apply to them. This kind of wording is on cards like Silverquill Silencer.

Whenever another player casts a spell, Spellshock deals 2 damage to that player.

This way of wording would mean it applies to everyone except you (as the controller of Spellshock). Unlike the previous wording this one does apply to allies in formats where those exist. No card has really been worded quite like this, but similar effects are on cards like Syphon Soul and Zur's Weirding.

Whenever a player casts a spell, Spellshock deals 2 damage to that player.

This is the wording that the spell has, and it applies to everyone in the game, your opponents, your allies (if any) and yourself.
Cards like Spellshock tend to be played in decks that don't intend to cast many spells - decks that use ways to play cards other than casting them, like Sneak Attack, Quicksilver Amulet and Elvish Piper do with creatures, or in decks where you can prevent the life loss with cards like Platinum Emperion or the Nine Lives and Solemnity combo, offset the loss with enough life gain, or prevent yourself from losing for having 0 life with cards like Platinum Angel.

@Allure No it's not a commonly played card, though it does serve a different purpose than Sulfuric Vortex - that one punishes evenly per turn, Spellshock could check storm decks - but otherwise yes it is of little practical use.

@Allure For instance, a spellshock would shut down the sorcery speed storm deck That's taken a big share of the MTGA meta (Grinning Ignus/Grapeshot)

@Allure Red can't deal with enchantments, it can deal with artifacts like Damping Sphere - I'm not arguing that Spellshock is a great card or a best option in any cases, just that it could have uses, and where those uses would be.

Yes, everyone suffers the damage as it specifies all players as a target. However there are other cards that would protect you from that damage such as Circle of Protection: Red or other cards like that

FYI: I updated the question to quote the card text. Up to you if you want to keep the quote in your answer.

@doppelgreener Thanks and I guess I should have done that as part of my edit.

Nitpick - Spellshock is not targeting.

Will Circle of Protection: Red protect my creature or planeswalker from damage dealt by Lightning Helix?

@MapleOwl Circle of protection only protects yourself and not your creatures.

While Andrew has already answered this question, the rulings on gatherer reinforce this:

It affects all players, including you.


text:
Can we play Conquerers if we don't have Cities and Knights?
We have the base Catan and the Cities and Knights: Legend of the Conquerers scenario extension set. But we don't have the Cities and Knights set. We also have the Seafearers extension. Is there a way to play The Conquerors without the Cities and Knights extension?

No. There is not

THIS IS A SCENARIO FOR THE CATAN CITIES AND KNIGHTS BOARD GAME EXPANSION: In order to play with this Scenario, you will need the following 2 Games: CATAN Base Game and CATAN Cities and Knights Board Game Expansion.`

Quote from this location: https://www.amazon.com/Catan-Cities-Knights-Conquerors-Scenario/dp/B084HNCLRV


text:
Does Sproutback Trudge's cost reduction get applied when we cast it from the graveyard?
Sproutback Trudge is a 9-mana costing card that costs 1 less for each life you gained that turn. It can also be cast (at the beginning of the end step) from the graveyard when the owner gained life that turn. So, when [Sproutback Trudge] is in the graveyard and the owner gains life on their turn, can they cast it from the graveyard in addition to it being discounted for each life gained that turn?  For instance, can one cast this card from the graveyard for just the two green mana if the owner gained 7 life that turn?

Yes, you can get both benefits in the same turn and from whatever zone you cast it.
Sproutback Trudge's first ability applies the mana cost reduction whenever you cast it. Since it makes no limitation otherwise, it does not matter when or from which zone you cast the creature.


text:
How do Paradise Plume and Defiant Bloodlord interact if the first spell mentioned is used to cast the second
Paradise Plume allows the caster to choose a color, spend a mana of chosen color, and whenever a spell of that color is played the controller may gain 1 life.
Defiant Bloodlord is a creature that states whenever the controller gains life, target opponent loses that much life.
My question: If I use Paradise Plume to cast Defiant Bloodlord (results in gaining 1 life), does the 1 life gained from using Paradise Plume to play Defiant Bloodlord trigger Defiant Bloodlord to make an opponent lose 1 life? Or is the life gained prior to Defiant Bloodlord entering the battlefield, resulting in no trigger?


text:
Can you replace a Joker with a bonus joker?

If I have 3,4,J, can I replace the Joker with a Double Joker?
If I have 3red, 3blue, Double Joker, can I replace it with a regular joker?

I understand the rules to say:

you cannot replace a Joker with a Joker.

You must replace it with the tile it represents to clear it.  Is that true?  My friend says you can take a group of three tiles, one of them being a Joker and simply add another Joker to the other end to clear the other Joker... Who is correct?

I don't think this is possible.
In the rules is the line "Special jokers cannot replace a Regular Joker or any other type of special joker.". This implies you can not replace the joker directly.
But I think you should be able to rearange sets.

Special Jokers
Special jokers cannot replace a Regular Joker or any other type of special joker.
Reminder: Any set that is laid on the table must consist of at least 3 tiles. In any case (even when you have a Double Joker), you are not allowed to leave sets with two tiles on the table.
In scoring the initial meld, the special joker represents the number, or numbers, it replaces. Note: The Mirror Joker’s value is zero.
Special jokers can be cleared in the same way that the Regular Jokers are cleared, including that they must be played on the same turn and that the player must play at least one tile from his/her rack on that turn.
Double Joker
This special joker fills in two numbers. In a group it represents two of the same number; in a run it represents two consecutive numbers. The Double Joker can only be used inone of these two ways.
For Example:
Run: 2 - Double Joker - 5. The Double Joker represents the numbers 3 and 4.In the initial meld, this tile is worth the value of both numbers it represents(in this example, the value is 7).
Group: Blue 3 –> Red 3 – Double Joker. The Double Joker represents Yellow 3 and Black 3. In the initial meld, this tile is worth the value of both numbers(in this example, the value is 6).
A Double Joker can be replaced with both tiles that it represents in a set or bymanipulating a set to clear it.
The Double Joker tile can be used in any place in a series; as the first, last or middle tile.
The Double Joker cannot be used before the number 2 or after the number 12(only 1 can come before 2 and only 13 can come after 12).


text:
Can anyone identify this Yukon solitaire variant?
So since I was a kid my grandma has always been playing the same kind of solitaire. But no one knows the name. After some digging I found out it must be some form of Yukon.
Deck:
Standard 52 card deck with no jokers.
Deal:
7 rows, first card face up, then 6 cards face down, repeat til the base is filled face up.
Then deal the rest of the cards on the six rows (face up) and let the first row stand alone with one card. (face up)
Play:
Same way as standard yukon, except you can only put the same type on each other in decending order: five of spades on six of spades etc.
Goal:
Build 4 foundations with ace at the foundation and building upwards from there in the same suit and type.
I play this all the time and would love to know the name!


text:
Does Death Tyrant still create its zombie token if it dies in combat?
Death Tyrant card has the following ability:

Negative Energy Cone — Whenever an attacking creature you control or a blocking creature an opponent controls dies, create a 2/2 black Zombie creature token.

We had a situation where the Death Tyrant was goaded into an attack, and it was blocked, and dealt enough damage to die. What we're not certain about - is whether it's ability above would still generate a zombie token for itself and any other attackers the player had that died in that combat round.
Reading the rules, we wouldn't be surprised if it was either yes or no. We're just trying to figure it out for the next time.

Yes, it would. Die / leaves the battlefield triggers go off of what the game state was like just before the triggering events, rather than what it is like just after.

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

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

All creatures that took too much combat damage in combat will die at the exact same time (not counting first strike, etc). So because Death Tyrant was on the battlefield at the moment all of those creatures died, its trigger still happens and resolves normally.


text:
Tapestry Futurist claiming landmarks
The futurists make you start from space 4 on each track, and you do not gain any benefits, bonuses, or landmarks.
Let's say you advance on the Science track and reach Academic Research. This allows you to gain the benefit (and pay for the bonus), on any advancement track. Do you also gain the landmark? Given that you are already on space 4 and no one else has reached that and took the landmark.

This has been covered on BGG forum and clarified the designer on this page.  the answer was no.
Quoting the designers response.

My apologies for any confusion my comment on the other thread caused.
I thought that person was just asking about gaining the Futurists at
the beginning of the game. I've revised that comment to read, "The
initial advancement from gaining the Futurist civilization (at the
beginning or during the game) doesn't let you gain landmarks."
Joe's answer is thus correct:
Academic Research allows you to "gain the benefit & pay to gain the
bonus (if any) of your current position on any advancement track."
Gaining a landmark is neither a benefit nor a bonus, so the Futurists
could not gain the landmark in the fourth space with Academic
Research.


text:
What's this foil dot near the foil stamp of a Magic card?
I saw this photo of a Magic card with a shiny orb next to the oval one in the center. What's that mean?

That is an Ultra Pro brand mark on the card sleeve.
You can see an example of them here:

That's really interesting.  Do they have them in the same place on both sides of the sleeve?

@LeppyR64 it would be rather odd to have sticker on both sides since this would immediatly make card "marked".

@Alex But if they're only on one side then you have to make sure they're always with the sticker on the face, otherwise they're marked.  On both sides at least all the cards are the same regardless of which way its loaded.

@LeppyR64 many sleeves are transparent on one face and opaque on the other, so that damage to any of the cards aren't marking them

In the the case of MTG the tournament rules also state the marking must be on the front face; ... cards must be inserted into the sleeves so these markings appear only on the faces of the cards ...

The dot isn't on the card itself, but on the sleeve that card is in.
Ultrapro is a brand that makes a lot of gaming supplies, including sleeves. Each of their sleeves is stamped with that little foil circle on the transparent front side, 2cm from the right edge and 0.5cm from the bottom edge.

probably worth noting that not all Ultra pro sleeves carry the dot, and that it is not always located in the same place. the most recent dot move on the standard size sleeves was in 2018


text:
What is this Solitaire games name
There are 7 rows:
Row 1  7 Face up
Row 2  1 down 6 up
Row 3  2 down 5 up
Row 4  3 down 4 up
Row 5  4 down 3 up
Row 6  5 down 2 up
Row 7  6 down 1 up
Any of the 3 remaining cards can be played to bottom of a row IE 9 spades on 10 spades, if there are no moves possible.
Aces are played to discard piles when only at bottom of row
cards are played from any row position to the bottom of corresponding row
IE 8 of spades is played below 9 of spades which must be last card in the row.
Game is won when all 4 suites are played ace to king.
Game is lost if no moves can be made.

This sounds like the common Klondike solitaire with three variations, but nothing I've heard of before. Do you have any more information about it (even where you learned it could help to identify local variations)?

Heard of the game from a cousin, who didn't know the name either. I have a picture of the game layout but could not figure out how to add it.

The most similar game seems to be "Applegate". It has the same rules as you describe but a different layout with fewer cards face-down. It also doesn't have separate piles for the aces. Rules here: https://www.goodsol.com/pgshelp/index.html?applegate.htm

Appreciate the suggestion, but it's not it

Possible duplicate? https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/48062/identify-this-standard-deck-solitaire-with-a-7x7-tableau


text:
How long does Gnarled Sage's +0/+2 stick around for?
Gnarled Sage gets +0/+2 when you've drawn 2 or more cards this turn. It doesn't say “until end of turn” though, so will the +0/+2 stay or not after the end of the turn?

The buff to Gnarled Sage only lasts from when you've drawn your second card until the end of the current turn, even though it is worded differently. For most practical purposes, it's the same as an "until end of turn" triggered ability.
Most abilities on permanents that do something "until end of turn" are triggered abilities, meaning the ability waits for a trigger event and then does something, such as Steelgaze Griffin. By contrast, Gnarled Sage's ability is a static ability that is functional as soon as and as long as its enabling condition ("As long as you've drawn two or more cards this turn") is true.
However, the condition makes sure that it only activates the buff for the current turn, which comes out to the same in most situations as a hypothetical triggered ability that gives the same buff "until end of turn".
There are a few mechanical differences between the ability being worded as a static ability rather than a triggered ability, but as far as your question about duration is concerned, there is no practical difference. Whenever a turn ends and a new one starts, you will not have drawn 2 cards during the current turn, and the buff won't be active.

It lasts until the end of the turn and doesn't stay longer.
Gnarled Sage's ability is a static ability:

As long as you've drawn two or more cards this turn, Gnarled Sage gets +0/+2 and has vigilance.

It's simply checking if this condition is true. If it is true, the other thing is also true. We calculate this moment to moment whenever we need to know it.
As long as this is a turn you've drawn two or more cards on, it gets +0/+2 and vigilance. As long as this condition is not true—such as at the beginning of a new turn—it does not get these features.
This is not a triggered ability (“when you draw a second card each turn, CARDNAME gets +0/+2 ...”). That would apply a continuous effect, and the continuous effect would need to have an expiration.
But we're not doing that: we're just evaluating a condition in a static ability to see what's currently true (+0/+2 or not).

You're thinking about Gnarled Sage's ability as if it were a triggered ability that applies a continous effect.  It's not. It's a static, conditional, ability.
The ability is always functional - it's just that it has no effect unless you've drawn two or more cards that turn. When the turn ends, the ability doesn't go away, but it's no longer true that you've drawn two or more cards, so Gnarled Sage stops getting +0/+2.


text:
Where can I find a printable checklist for cards and books for Magic's recent sets?
I want a complete printable checklist for Magic the Gathering sets.
I want checklists for the Kamigawa, Amonket, game night, Ixalan complete sets. That is all the cards in these series so I can mark them off and see what I need to get to complete. I would like to use tally marks or write how many of each 1 and whether or not they are a foil card or not.
I also want to know if these sets have a novel or not, since I want to collect those as well. I've collected Kamigawa Saviors already.
Also if there are any extra things that are in these sets like how many dice and their colors or pamphlets or whatever.

https://magic.wizards.com/en/products/card-set-archive

It's not a full duplicate, but this question should help with the card checklist part of the question.

Printable black and white - https://www.etsy.com/listing/1153470615/printable-full-black-and-white-magic-the
Printable colored - https://www.etsy.com/listing/1297270714/printable-full-colored-magic-the
Physical copies - https://www.etsy.com/listing/1258143555/physical-magic-the-gathering-unofficial
I made these printable MTG checklists, it's probably close to what you're looking for. It's roughly 50 pages at the moment and is updated roughly twice a year, time permitting. Hope it works out for you
As for the novels I'm not sure. You might be able to get more info on http://www.magiclibrarities.net/ (unaffiliated)


text:
What do we do when we accidentally block an "unblockable" creature?
While playing a game of Commander, I attacked with Ainok Bond-Kin and activated the ability of Rogue's Passage

{4}, {T}: Target creature can't be blocked this turn

targeting Ainok before the Declare Blockers step. Everyone at the table forgot that Ainok could not be blocked and the player it was attacking blocked it with two creatures.
After proceeding to the Combat Damage step, we realised our mistake. Should we:

Continue as if the Ainok had not be blocked and assign the damage to the player?
Continue as if the Ainok had been blocked and assign the damage to the blocking creatures?
Something else?

I've attempted to put all this into the question. Please further edit the question (not further comments) if the description differs from what actually occurred.

How errors are handled depends on the Rule Enforcement Level (REL).  This needs to be specified in your question.

@ikegami REL "make it up as you go along", this is Commander.

Considering how quickly you spotted the mistake, rewinding the game to the start of the Declare Blockers step seems like the best way to proceed.
Rewinding the game and remaking the blocks in a legal manner would solve all issues and costs little time.
If so many spells and abilities have been played between declaring blockers and dealing combat damage that the gamestate can't be restored easily, the next best (because least impactful) fix would be to continue with the current blocks. In that case, the only rule being violated would be the unblockable ability.
Simply treating the creature as unblocked would be the most disruptive. It would essentially take the two blocking creatures out of combat, give the illegally blocked creature trample, and the defending player would take unexpected damage. Also, all the spells and abilities that made the last legal gamestate irrecoverable were also made under the reasoning that the block was legal. Nullifying that block would also nullify at least part of that reasoning, without being able to take back the actual spells and abilities.

I'm not clear on what you mean by saying it gives the creature trample. The creature would be damaging the player regardless.  And if the blocking creatures didn't have anything else they could have blocked, it doesn't matter that they were taken out of combat.

@Acccumulation, blocked creatures whose blockers disappear still remain blocked and do not damage the player. Unless they have trample that is.

@hkBst but the creature should never have become blocked. It didn't gain trample, it was unblockable

@Acccumulation I laid out which legal steps would hypothetically be necessary to have the (illegally) blocked creature deal damage with common effects, i.e. how many extra steps would be necessary to get the desired end result of the unblockable creature dealing damage to the defending player, without any of the assigned blockers taking, dealing, or soaking up combat damage.

@Caleth That's the point of the question: we did, as a matter of fact, get into an illegal gamestate. If the game is so easily reversed that we can just say that the creature is in fact unblocked, great, we're done, and that was my first answer. However, if the players played a lot of spells and abilities after the illegal blocks were declared so that a reversal of those actions would be impractical, then you would best proceed with the "least bad" illegal gamestate. I argue that the least bad fix would be the one that violates the fewest rules, i.e. to keep the blocks as they are.

@Caleth That creature could have been dealt with in another manner had the issue been realized at the start and the damage could have been prevented or increased. It isn't really reasonable to correct some errors but let others stand.

If you decide the creature stays blocked, you could also refund the unblockable cost. But really, rewinding game state is generally the best choice.

It was the defending player who made the first illegal move (attempting to declare blockers of an unblockable creature). Punishing the attacking player (by erasing the legally-played ability, failing to damage the defending player, and likely losing the attacking creature to illegal blockers) makes no sense at all.
In other words, the first option (treat the creature as unblocked, deal damage to defending player) intuitively makes the most sense. However, it turns out that Magic's  rules do (at least somewhat) cover this scenario. First, an excerpt from the Declare Blockers step rules:

509.1. First, the defending player declares blockers. This turn-based action doesn’t use the stack. To declare blockers, the defending player follows the steps below, in order. If at any point during the declaration of blockers, the defending player is unable to comply with any of the steps listed below, the declaration is illegal; the game returns to the moment before the declaration (see rule 726, “Handling Illegal Actions”).

509.1b The defending player checks each creature they control to see whether it’s affected by any restrictions (effects that say a creature can’t block, or that it can’t block unless some condition is met). If any restrictions are being disobeyed, the declaration of blockers is illegal.
A restriction may be created by an evasion ability (a static ability an attacking creature has that restricts what can block it). If an attacking creature gains or loses an evasion ability after a legal block has been declared, it doesn’t affect that block. Different evasion abilities are cumulative.

So, the declaration of blockers was an illegal action. There's even a section of the rules to handle those! Cool. Unfortunately, it's very short and might not exactly handle the scenario as described:

726.1. If a player takes an illegal action or starts to take an action but can’t legally complete it, the entire action is reversed and any payments already made are canceled. No abilities trigger and no effects apply as a result of an undone action. If the action was casting a spell, the spell returns to the zone it came from. Each player may also reverse any legal mana abilities that player activated while making the illegal play, unless mana from those abilities or from any triggered mana abilities they caused to trigger was spent on another mana ability that wasn’t reversed. Players may not reverse actions that moved cards to a library, moved cards from a library to any zone other than the stack, caused a library to be shuffled, or caused cards from a library to be revealed.

726.2. When reversing illegal spells and abilities, the player who had priority retains it and may take another action or pass. The player may redo the reversed action in a legal way or take any other action allowed by the rules.

As such, the official required action seems clear: the game rewinds to the Declare Blockers step, with the defending player able to assign the would-be blockers to other attacking creatures, or decline to block with them (if there are no legally blockable attacking creatures, the defending player obviously must decline to block).
Of course, some secret information may have been revealed (e.g. if somebody played an instant-speed spell in response to the illegally declared block). Provided that it doesn't violate the limitations on rewound actions in 726.1, that action just doesn't happen (unless you chose to take it again at the appropriate time). The fact that the opponent now has more information than they "should" is, essentially, the price you pay for carelessness and failing to note the illegal action in time.
In any case, since the attack was already declared, and the ability already used, legally, those actions don't reverse. As such, it's a pretty good bet that the defender will take damage. However, they will actually have an opportunity to, for example, kill the creature with an instant, or play a damage-prevention ability, even if they didn't do so "the first time" (after the illegal block), so there's no guarantee that the attack will get through until you reach that point in legal actions.

What if some illegal action happened that can't legally be reversed either? For example, suppose an effect forced you to draw a card, or shuffle your library? The general rules do not cover this scenario. Tournament rules might; I'm not a DCI judge. It's possible that the judge's decision would be "player forfeits for cheating" or "game ends in a draw because an action is both required and impossible". However, a few considerations for casual play:

If the irreversible action was not dependent upon the illegal action, and didn't reveal any new information, one reasonable conclusion is to force the player to play it out anyhow. For example, if a spell or ability, played or triggered at the end of the Declare Blockers step, caused a player to shuffle a card from their graveyard into their library (without this specifically being caused by the illegal block), then you might decide that the spell or ability must happen again, after the rewind.
If the irreversible action depended upon the illegal action (e.g. an effect caused you to draw a card whenever one of your creatures becomes blocked), but no new information was revealed (e.g. because you had previously placed that card face down on top of your library, legally, so you knew where and what it was), then it's reasonable to decide that the action just doesn't happen at that time (you don't get to draw; put the card back where it was) even though that constitutes reversing an action illegally.
If the irreversible action revealed new information (e.g. drawing a card you hadn't previously placed there), there are various options. A simple one might be to undo the action in an information-minimizing way (e.g. the illegally-drawn card is placed back in the library, after which it is shuffled). However, there are situations where this is to the benefit of the player who took the irreversible illegal action (e.g. if they're mana-flooded and drew a land, they probably welcome shuffling that land back into their deck), rather than simply having it still on top to ruin their next draw). In that case, one solution that I've seen is to let the opponent decide what to do (e.g. reveal the drawn card; opponent decides whether to return it to the top of your library or shuffle it into your library or perhaps place it on the bottom of your library). This is obviously unfortunate for the person whose opponent gets to make that choice, but again, it can be viewed as the price of failing to notice an illegal play.
In any case - but especially the third one - there's always the option to call the game as a draw or in favor of whichever player did not accidentally cheat.

Your suggestion (4) doesn't really work for Commander, nobody wants a draw and there are two uninvolved players.

The attacking player made the second illegal move by allowing the unblockable creature to get blocked. Following the rules and spotting/correcting mistakes isn't just on the person taking the action but others as well. If the attacker had pointed out that the block was illegal as soon as it was declared this problem would have been prevented. In this case it would be best to rewind gameplay if possible and treat it as a legal block if it isn't

It should be noted that the player that doesn't point out the rule violation and later says the creature should be unblocked they can be considered in violation of other rules. https://blogs.magicjudges.org/rules/ipg2-6/

@JoeW while absolutely agreed there are a bunch of infractions here, nobody's going to be applying the formal competitive sanctions procedure to a Commander game.

@PhilipKendall Correct but that also doesn't mean that the creature should be considered unblocked and do damage because a mistake was made. The point of that comment was a reminder that all players are responsible for the state of the game and correcting illegal moves. It isn't just the fault of the defender but the attacker who allowed it to happen as well.


text:
Can I attach equipment to equipment that's a creature?
If I turn Ninja's Kunai into a creature, can I then equip it with another Ninja's Kunai? And would it allow me to sacrifice the creature,for the ability, 1, tap, Sacrifice Ninja's Kunai: Ninja's Kunai deals 3 damage to any target?

If I turn Ninja's Kunai into a creature, can I then equip it with another Ninja's Kunai?

Yes, you can. In the definition of the equip ability, there is no limitation on what kinds of creatures an equipment can be attached to:

702.6a Equip is an activated ability of Equipment cards. "Equip [cost]" means "[Cost]: Attach this permanent to target creature you control. Activate only as a sorcery."

Any permanent that is a creature (like your "animated" Ninja's Kunai) can be the target of an equip ability.
There are such things as equip abilities that can only target certain kinds of creatures, but those will say so on the card.

702.6c Equip abilities may further restrict what creatures may be chosen as legal targets. Such restrictions usually appear in the form "Equip [quality]" or "Equip [quality] creature." These equip abilities may legally target only a creature that’s controlled by the player activating the ability and that has the chosen quality. Additional restrictions for an equip ability don’t restrict what the Equipment may be attached to.

For the other part of your question:

And would it allow me to sacrifice the creature,for the ability, 1, tap, Sacrifice Ninja's Kunai: Ninja's Kunai deals 3 damage to any target?

No, it would not let you sacrifice the creature. You have to sacrifice the equipment that is attached to the creature. That's because the card name "Ninja's Kunai", when used in the ability of Ninja's Kunai itself, actually means "this permanent", not just any permanent that happens to be named Ninja's Kunai. It's as if the Kunai's ability was worded "Equipped creature has '1, T, Sacrifice [this permanent]: [this permanent] deals 3 damage to any target.'"

201.4. Text that refers to the object it's on by name means just that particular object and not any other objects with that name, regardless of any name changes caused by game effects.


text:
Can I use apothecaries to reroll lasting injuries?
In Blood Bowl 2020, when you roll on the casualty table and get a lasting injury, and use an apothecary, can you reroll the the lasting injury?
Under patching up casualties, the rules state:

The coach on the opposing team rolls again on the casualty table, giving two possible outcomes.

Supposing that both d16 are rolled, and both come up lasting injury - would a d6 be rolled for both, or would lasting injury be selected and then a single d6 be rolled?

Yes. You use the apothecary immediately after the casualty roll, but the d6 for a characteristic reduction seems to be part of that roll.

The coach of the opposing team rolls again on the Casualty table, giving two possible outcomes. You may choose which result is applied to your player.

It says "outcomes" which means what will happen to the player; a reduction in strength is a different outcome to a reduction in agility, so you get to choose.
There's no official FAQ specifically mentioning this, but we can see that this is how it's been implemented digitally for other versions. For example, this Reddit thread discusses the videogame Blood Bowl 2 offering the players the choice between a stat loss and death. While the tables are different, it seems like the lasting injury result was mainly to condense the table, so I would assume it works the same way unless it mentioned otherwise.


text:
Going out in Rummikub using a joker from my rack
Other posts on the rules for using the a joker don't cover the following scenario:
It's near the end of a game. I have only one tile left in my rack. It's my turn & I cannot go out, so I draw a tile from the bag. This tile is a joker. My tile is, say, a red 5. When it comes to my turn again, there is a meld on the table that is a run of red 1,2,3. Can I use the joker on my rack as a red 4 and add my existing red 5 to the run & declare Rummikub?
The rules seem to imply that you can only use a joker from your rack with two other tiles, also in your rack to make a meld, but at the end of game you do not have sufficient tiles to do this.

Lucky you! From this version of the rules, it's clear that you can use a joker from your rack that you've drawn as any single tile without other restrictions. The restriction that requires you to use it with two other tiles only applies when you use a joker that you've retrieved from the table.

A joker can be retrieved from a set on the table by a player who can replace it during his turn with a tile of the same numerical value and color it represents. ...  A joker that has been replaced must be used in the player's same turn with 2 or more tiles from his rack to make a new set.


text:
Can Jodah, Archmage Eternal and Morophon, the Boundless make a card cost 0?
Jodah, Archmage Eternal's ability says that I may pay one of each color rather than pay a spell's original mana cost
Morophon, the Boundless lets me choose a creature type and spells of that chosen type cost one of each color less to cast.
Simply, if I choose Wizards with Morophon, and I choose to pay one of each color to cast a Wizard spell with Jodah, will that creature cost 0??

Fist of Suns also does this

Yes, that's correct. If the spell has the creature type you chose for Morophon, you can cast it for {0}—it will be free.
To determine the total cost of a spell we follow rule 601.2f:

601.2f. The player determines the total cost of the spell. [...] 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 the mana component of the total cost is reduced to nothing by cost reduction effects, it is considered to be {0}.

Jodah, Archmage Eternal provides an alternative cost for the spell of {W}{U}{B}{R}{G}.
Morophon, the Boundless provides a cost reduction of (again) {W}{U}{B}{R}{G}.
We choose to use Jodah's alternative cost, and we subtract Morophon's cost reduction from it. The total cost is reduced to nothing, making the spell cost {0}.
So you get a free spell! Congratulations!

And Blades of Velis Vel will be free no matter what creature type is chosen.

The total cost to cast a spell
= mana cost or alternative cost
+ additional costs and cost increases
- cost reductions
For creature spells of the chosen type,

Jodah, Archmage Eternal's ability provides an alternative cost of {W}{U}{B}{R}{G}.
Morophon, the Boundless's ability provides a cost reduction of {W}{U}{B}{R}{G}.

So,
The total cost to cast the spell
= mana cost or alternative cost ({W}{U}{B}{R}{G})
+ additional costs (none) and cost increases (none)
- cost reductions ({W}{U}{B}{R}{G})
= Free


text:
Can I activate a creature's ability before that creature triggers and enter the battlefield effects (ETBs)?
The two cards I am concerned with:
Flayer of the Hatebound:

Undying (When this creature dies, if it had no +1/+1 counters on it, return it to the battlefield under its owner's control with a +1/+1 counter on it.)
Whenever Flayer of the Hatebound or another creature enters the battlefield from your graveyard, that creature deals damage equal to its power to any target.

Evernight Shade:

{B}: Evernight Shade gets +1/+1 until end of turn.

If I control a Flayer of the Hatebound, and I cast an Evernight Shade from the graveyard (most likely with Chainer or Dread Return) can I dump mana into the Evernight Shade to beef it up before Flayer of the Hatebound causes it to deal damage?
I don't know how creature abilities stack on top of their own ETB.

Chainer, Nightmare Adept won't actually cause Flayer of the Hatebound's ability to trigger, because if you cast a creature from your graveyard, it enters the battlefield from the stack, not from the graveyard. Dread Return works, though. See rulings on Flayer of the Hatebound.

Suggested reading: In plain English, how does casting spells and using creature abilities work with the stack and priority?, which I asked when I was new to the game and which introduced me to the concepts that relate to this scenario.

Yes, you can pump your creature by responding to the triggered ability while it is on the stack.
You cannot activate a creature's ability before its ETB ability triggers, but you can activate a creature's ability before its ETB ability resolves. If you do so, your activated ability will go on the stack on top of the triggered ability, and it will resolve first.
The power of the creature at the time the triggered ability resolves is all that matters; not the power it had when the ability triggered.

Resolving Spells and Abilities

608.2h If an effect requires information from the game (such as the number of creatures on the battlefield), the answer is determined only once, when the effect is applied. If the effect requires information from a specific object, including the source of the ability itself, the effect uses the current information of that object if it’s in the public zone it was expected to be in[...]

And you have time to pump up the creature before the triggered ability resolves because of the usual way that the stack works; the top thing on the stack only resolves once all players pass priority; so everyone gets a chance to respond to anything on the stack by activating an ability or casting an instant spell before it resolves.

603.3. Once an ability has triggered, its controller puts it on the stack as an object that’s not a card the next time a player would receive priority.

405.2. The stack keeps track of the order that spells and/or abilities were added to it. Each time an object is put on the stack, it’s put on top of all objects already there.

405.5. When all players pass in succession, the top (last-added) spell or ability on the stack resolves. If the stack is empty when all players pass, the current step or phase ends and the next begins.

Note that while the effect itself looks at the information at the time of resolution, the decision to trigger at all looks at the information at the time of the trigger. So if Flayer of the Hatebound had "When a creature with power greater than 2 enters the battlefield ...", it wouldn't trigger on a pumped Evernight Shade.


text:
Does Imoti, Celebrant of Bountry give creatures with cascade and additional cascade trigger?
If I have Imoti, Celebrant of Bounty on the battlefield which has the static ability

Spells you cast with mana value 6 or greater have cascade.

and I cast Maelstrom Wanderer which has cost {5}{G}{U}{R} and the triggered abilities

Cascade, cascade

do I get three cascade triggers from Maelstrom Wanderer?

Yes, it will have the cascade ability three times and thus give you three Cascade triggers.
When an effect says something “has” an ability, or some things “have” an ability, it is granting those things that ability:

113.1a. [...] Abilities can also be granted to objects by rules or effects. (Effects that grant abilities usually use the words "has," "have," "gains," or "gain.")

Effects can only add abilities or remove abilities, and effects like this add them. This is in addition to whatever it already has, which is possibly other instances of that same ability.
We also know Cascade stacks, of course, since that's how Maelstrom Wanderer can have it twice to begin with.

702.85c. If a spell has multiple instances of cascade, each triggers separately.

It has Cascade twice, and is granted Cascade a third time by Imoti.


text:
What does Greater Polymerization require?
So it's been years since I've played. I know the rulings for regular Polymerization, but for Greater Poly, does it mean you can use any 3 monsters, or does it have to be the exact materials listed on the fusion monster card?

Compare the two effect texts. From Polymerization (emphasis added):

Fusion Summon 1 Fusion Monster from your Extra Deck, using monsters from your hand or field as Fusion Material.

And from Greater Polymerization:

Fusion Summon 1 Fusion Monster from your Extra Deck, using 3 or more monsters from your hand or field as Fusion Material, and if you do, it gains these effects.

Then it lists its effects. In other words, they must be Fusion Material as required by the fusion monster. The benefit is that it provides its two effects: invincible to card effects and piercing damage.


text:
TacTix vs. ConTacTix?
I recently learned of the simple game TacTix, essentially a two-dimensional Nim (and thus similar to many other games).
When googling up some examples, I found many pages referring to ConTacTix. Most descriptions of the later describe that seems to be Hex, while some being sold appear to be Hi-Q.
Was ConTacTix a real thing and is there a canonical description of it? Is this an alternative name for some other game perhaps? or just mass confusion?

I see that there is an application named ConTacTix which is the game HEX: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.oliversride.contactix&hl=en&gl=US

Con-tac-tix is a real thing—it is the same game as Hex released under a different name by a different publisher. This game has no relation to TacTix, except for that they were both created by Piet Hein.

This photo is by Felis Concolor at Board Game Geek, uploaded for the board game Hex, who had this to say about it in the description:

CON-TAC-TIX game board, pouch, instructions and wooden balls. Photo courtesy of eBay seller antique41, who says this edition was made in Denmark in 1968, with rules and history in English and a letter of thanks in Danish.

Hasbro also provides on their website a scanned PDF of a nearly identical manual for Con-tac-tix, with a copyright date of 1968.
The game was also initially known as Polygon, and in 1952 Parker Brothers released it as Hex, as described by UC Berkeley's GamesCrafters and the Wikipedia article for Hex. The instruction manual provided by Hasbro acknowledges these two names at the bottom of the third page:


text:
In Rummikub, does a joker count towards the 30 points contract?
If you have a joker in your initial hand of 14 tiles, can it be played in a meld adding its value in order to pass the 30 points contract?
I.e. does a joker have the value of the number it replaces?

Yes. This is almost literally in the rules:

The Joker:
There are two jokers in the game. They can be used for any
tile in a set. A joker used in the opening set scores the value of the
tiles it represents. A joker can be retrieved from a set on the table
by a player who can replace it during his turn with a tile of the same
numerical value and color it represents. The tile used to replace the
Joker must come from a player's rack and not from the table. In the
case of a group of 3, the joker can be replaced by the tile of either
of the missing colors. A joker that has been replaced must be used in
the player's same turn with 2 or more tiles from his rack to make a
new set. Players cannot retrieve a joker before they have laid their
initial set(s). A set containing a joker can have tiles added to it
and can be split apart or  have tiles removed from it. The joker has a
penalty value of 30 points if it remains on a player's rack at the end
of a game.

TIL that we've severely house-ruled Rummikub.


text:
Clergy of the Holy Nimbus VS Weakness
In the old days of Magic the Gathering, if Clergy of the Holy Nimbus was reduced to non-positive toughness by an effect such as Weakness, it would continuously Regenerate while the rest of the game progressed.
With game mechanics and rules text as they were at that time, what sorts of additional complications were created by this ruling? I imagine any abilities that were triggered within each iteration of the Regenerate loop would cause ruling complications of varying degrees.  I realize the degree of standardization in early MTG mechanics was far from what it is today, but were there any consistent rulings that emerged from that time period for how to deal with more complicated interactions built atop Clergy of the Holy Nimbus VS Weakness, or was it just every judge for him/herself with little systemic clarity?

I don't know the exact rule but I don't think a creature with 0 toughness can regenerate. A bit surprised there isn't a ruling on this already.

@JoeW This is true today, but was not the case during the relevant time period.

There's nothing that inherently stops regeneration from applying to a creature with 0 toughness. In most cases, the regeneration shield would just be used up and then the creature would die immediately when state-based actions are checked again. The difference here is that the ability statically replaces destruction with regeneration. I believe that with today's rules, this would actually create an infinite loop and end the game in a draw.

@murgatroid99 Today, state-based action Rule 704.5f would apply, which states, "If a creature has toughness 0 or less, it’s put into its owner’s graveyard. Regeneration can’t replace this event."  This is because Regenerate requires the creature to be destroyed, and while a creature with non-positive toughness used to be destroyed, today it is merely put into the graveyard.

You're right. I checked the regeneration rules, but not the state-based action rules. And I forgot that death from 0 toughness didn't count as destruction.

@murgatroid99 Under modern rules, a single state-based action can't cause an infinite loop just by failing to happen. Rule 704.3 covers this: state-based actions are checked and then, if no actions are performed and no triggered abilities trigger, it moves on. (You can't do this with regeneration, as noted, but I believe it's possible with certain "can't lose the game" effects.)

I think it depends on how you define "failing to happen". "Can't lose the game" effects simply prevent an outcome, but a replacement effect replaces the action with a different action. However, it almost certainly does not matter. I don't think there are any existing replacement effects that can create a game state where this distinction makes a difference.

A creature with 0 or less toughness is put into the graveyard the first time state based actions see it.
This is not destruction. A creature being indestructible will not stop this.
A creature regenerating puts up a shield that says next time a creature is done lethal damage or is destroyed prevent that destruction, tap it, remove all damage from it and remove it from combat.
Weakness as the rules currently stand will always "kill" the knight, unless there are other things affecting toughness.
The rules of how regeneration works was standarised in the great 6th edition rules revamp. You can find an exact breakdown on how the rules changed here

This doesn't really answer the question. You describe how this interaction works now, but the question is about how it was handled previously, when the ruling was different.

This question was asked specifying the rules "at the time" that is as of Legends (June 1994) the 6th edition rules revamp mentioned in your answer would not come for a further 5 years and is irrelevant to the question.


text:
Can a wild card be used as a skip card?
Is it possible to play a wild card as a skip card? It makes a big difference when playing this game with two people. The rules state that you can play the wild card as any other card if I am correct.

Following the rules as written a Wild Card may only be used in place of any number card, or as any color.  So without any rules variations you cannot use a Wild card as a Skip.
There is however a relatively common unofficial variant sometimes referred to as "Truly Wild" that does allow Wilds to be used as Skips.


text:
What are the rules concerning Taken Over?
When the player controlling zombies played the card, it said to fill the room with Zombies from the pool.
This reminded me of another card which said to move zombies from one part of the board to another if the pool was empty.
My question is, what happens when it says to "bring zombies from the pool," but there aren't enough to fill the room…?

You add as many as you can and don't taken them from else where.
This BSE question here gives reference to the wiki.   Searching there will link you back to BGG question here, Where the publisher clarifies it with

If all zombies are already on the board, then you don't place any new
ones, but the building is still taken over.


text:
Could I use Illusion of Choice to force a opponent to pay tribute?
Could I use Illusion of Choice to force an opponent to pay tribute?
Does tribute count as voting?
Like first casting Illusion of Choice and then a creature with tribute forcing an opponent to pick the option you want?

Voting doesn't mean choices generally. Voting is just a specific mechanic involving player choice found in some multiplayer sets: here are the cards that use or reference voting. They all use the word “vote”, and when cards like Illusion of Choice reference voting, they are referring only to cards that use that word.
An example is Capital Punishment, which says:

Council’s dilemma — Starting with you, each player votes for death or taxes. Each opponent sacrifices a creature for each death vote and discards a card for each taxes vote.

Note the actual use of the word “vote” that I've bolded here. The rules for the Vote mechanic make it clear that cards talking about “voting” mean this word, not choices generally:

701.32c. If the text of a spell or ability refers to "voting," it refers only to an actual vote, not to any spell or ability that involves the players making choices or decisions without using the word "vote."

Tribute (Fanatic of Xenagos) has nothing to do with voting. You can't use Illusion of Choice to control your opponent's decision to tribute or not. Cards that simply talk about players “choosing” have no relation to the voting system.

Thanks , also thanks for the Rules link. I hoped I could use the illusion of choice for sirene of the fanged coast and my orchard elemental next to simply being one of the 99 (Tatyova, Benthic Druid) I will see and wait how much voting is important, or else I am probably going to Replace Illusion.