text:
What is the average lifetime of a pack of casino cards?
I've heard that casinos never reuse a pack of cards for some anti-cheating reasons I was never quite able to figure out. Then they do various modifications to mark them as "used" cards (e.g. punch a hole through them, burn the corners, or mark them with permanent ink) and sell them for about a buck apiece. They had about the same look and feel as a pack of air-cushioned Bicycle cards, but lasted only about half as long when I played with them.
So here's my question - does this lack of reuse factor into the build quality of the cards? Does anybody know how long those cards were built to last? Or does it vary from casino to casino?

They do not reuse cards because even a small bend on a cards corner is enough for someone to know what the card is. Also I've heard stories about cheaters marking cards with 'invisible' ink.

And what I'm asking is whether this non-reuse factors into the quality of the cards being made.

I understand your question. I just do not have an answer. I was addressing only the 'anti-cheating reason I  was never able to figure out'. Hence why I left a comment, not an answer.

Perhaps it's the other way around: since they plan on discarding the cards on a regular basis, they only need cards that'll last that long. More durable cards would cost more, but wouldn't have any advantage.

Ultimately, it's going to vary on many more factors than the casino, but I think I can sort of answer the question

does this lack of reuse factor into the build quality of the cards?

First I should note that as I started Googling around for an answer to this, it is abundantly clear that there is not a definitive answer on this. This answer will assume you're talking about plastic playing cards since paper playing cards have such a short life span that they probably couldn't be resold.
There also is a lot of discrepancy on the length of time a casino even uses a pack of cards before retiring them. I have seen references that the Bellagio uses a deck of plastic playing cards for poker for 2 months, but this isn't official or even supported. That same page has a user saying they saw on a TV show that cards are used between 2 and 24 hours depending on what game it is and how they are shuffled, a claim that is impossible to check. This probably refers more to games like blackjack, where the house's money is on the line and they'd want to ensure that no money would be lost because players could identify cards.
The best information I could even find relating to casino cards was on the COPAG Cards website. In talking about use of their cards in casinos, they say

The primary use for 100% plastic playing cards in the casino is in the poker room. Since poker is a game where the players handle the cards extensively, plastic cards are preferred due to the durability and additional security that they provide over their paper counterparts. COPAG cards are used in casinos throughout the world and are dealt in many of the finest poker rooms across the United States.

Later in that same FAQ, there is this question and answer:

How long will COPAG cards last?
The longevity of your COPAG cards differs depending on how they are handled during play. Therefore, we can not give an accurate length of time that they will last. However, 100% plastic playing cards will last significantly longer than paper playing cards.

This is where I'm going to do some fuzzy logic. Given that on the same website they a.) talk about their cards being used for poker in casinos, and b.) they talk about the length their cards will last as if answering anyone that could buy their cards (and you can buy COPAG cards from their website), I would think that the used cards you buy from a casino are not qualitatively different than the cards you could buy new from a store, except that they've already been used.
I'm unsure how long a pack of plastic cards normally lasts since this also varies on how much it's used and how rough it's shuffled and myriad other factors. If you knew that, you could guess that any used pack you buy from a casino will have either 1.) months of almost constant play reduced from their life if they were used for poker, or 2.) a much smaller amount of time, potentially only a few hours of play, reduced from their life if they were used in games where the house's money was at stake.
Edit:
Figures that just after I post this, I noticed that there are separate tabs for purchasing on the COPAG website for retail and casinos, so some clarification is needed. On the retail purchasing tab, the plastic poker cards are measured at 63mm by 88mm. On the casino tab, the size of plastic poker cards is 63mm by 88mm. They are the same size.
Additionally, I would think there is no qualitative difference between the two for economic reasons. It wouldn't be cost efficient to have separate machines for different qualities of plastic for different cards, but changing the pattern on the back would be pretty simple.

"First I should note that as I started Googling around for an answer to this, it is abundantly clear that there is not a definitive answer on this." I didn't google as extensively as you did, but I noticed this too.

I can't believe how many ways there are to Google "How long does a casino use playing cards." And how horrible the results every permutation of that returns.

Isn't "63 mm by 88 mm" the same both ways?

Ya - that was my point. They're the same size.

Well, now it's clear. :P


text:
Creature with equipment attached is returned to owner's hand
If a creature has equipment attached, what happens to the equipment if this creature is returned to the owner's hand?
Does it:

Return to the owner's hand as well?
Go to the graveyard?
Remain on the battlefield?

It will remain on the battlefield.

301.5c ... An Equipment that equips an illegal or nonexistent permanent becomes unattached from that permanent but remains on the battlefield. ...

How can you attach it to another creature?

@rahmu You can use Brass Squire's tap ability to re-attach the equipment to another creature.

@rahmu That is a new question, you can ask it by clicking the Ask question button on the top of the page.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Kill a blocker with an instant - is it still blocking?
We are in the combat phase:

I declared my attackers
My opponent declared his blockers, stating which
attackers he was blocking
I cast an instant, which automatically kills his blocker. There is nothing blocking my attacker now

Now we're in the damage phase. I said that my attacker now does damage and  reduces my opponent's hit points. My opponent said that because my attacker was blocked no damage could be done. I pointed out that the blocker was destroyed before the damage phase, so therefore he wasn't blocking, but he wasn't having it. (My attacker does not have trample)
Is this covered by a specific section in the rules?

Related (not a dupe): http://boardgames.stackexchange.com/q/5344/5048 and http://boardgames.stackexchange.com/q/9663/5048

Just a pedantic note about the wording: the title of your question (is the blocker still blocking) and then the actual question itself (does the attack still deal damage) are asking two different things. The thing is these subtle differences can make a big difference in the MtG rules (much to the dismay of MtG newcomers).

Your opponent was right. From the magic comprehensive rules (http://magic.wizards.com/en/gameinfo/gameplay/formats/comprehensiverules):

509.1h An attacking creature with one or more creatures declared as blockers for it becomes a blocked creature; one with no creatures declared as blockers for it becomes an unblocked creature. This remains unchanged until the creature is removed from combat, an effect says that it becomes blocked or unblocked, or the combat phase ends, whichever comes first. A creature remains blocked even if all the creatures blocking it are removed from combat.

I bolded the relevant part.

Just to add to this, you'd have to destroy your opponent's creature before the "Declare Blockers" step of combat if you want to prevent it from blocking any of your creatures. If you wait until after blockers are declared, it's too late.

Also, even though your creature is still blocked, it isn't dealt combat damage since the blocking creature is no longer on the field.

@Matt: so — just to clarify — the declaration of blockers takes effect instantaneously, rather than going on the stack and giving a chance to respond with an instant?

THOUGH if your creature has trample, ALL damage would go through since it is effectively being blocked by a 0/0!

@PLL, that is correct, declaring blockers (and attackers, too) doesn't use the stack and can't be responded to. After attackers are declared, each player gets priority, which is the last chance to get rid of potential blockers.  Once the Declare Attackers step has ended, no one gets priority again until after the blockers have been declared (which is instantaneous, as you say, and is over and done with by the time priority is regained).

Giving creatures trample and removing them from combat is somewhat of an exception.

@PLL Note, though, that there is time between declaration of attackers and declaration of blockers for instants and sorceries to be cast - for instance, the defending player can attempt to kill an attacker with some Instant spell before deciding whether or not she wishes to block it.

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


text:
Too many Tech-Victories seen in 2-player rules for Civilization
I have been playing Civilization The Board Game some times with my girlfriend, but each time, the game quickly becomes a race for the tech-victory. Since it is a large advantage to research tech in general, this victory is easy, and we do never even attack each other, since the tech victory is easier.
Can you propose some alternative rules which would change this behavior? We thought about just removing the possibility to win by tech, but my prediction is, that this will just make culture-victory the new tech-victory.

Thanks for claifying what "Civilization the BoardGame" you were mentioning. I removed my previous answer because I was referring to "another" Civilization the BoardGame, i.e. this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilization_(board_game) - that came before, by the way...

You can also look at this thread for an explanation how tech victories should be hard: https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/828921

For simplicity, I will focus on the base game (Sid Meier's Civilization the Board Game, as published in 2010) without any expansions because this is what I assume you are currently playing.
Tech victories are common while learning the game rules.  This is because the Research phase acts as a sort of timer; if everyone acquires approximately 1 technology per turn, then someone's tech victory is likely to happen close to the 15th turn regardless of other game events.  Tech victory is what eventually happens if the empires are grown without focussed strategies, or if opportunities to advance are often missed (fewer strategically useful actions per player per turn).
However, after the learning phase is over, you will see that tech victories are not at all that common.  In fact a tech victory is quite a feat for anyone except Russians, whose espionage is the easiest way to speed up research.
And some speed up is very much necessary.  Games played between seasoned players are won around the 11th turn in one way or another.

I've been thinking about this problem. On top of that I've also noticed that  the wonders barely get used in our games.
So we thought it might work to restrict level 3+ tech until after the 4 ancient wonders are placed, then restrict level 5 until all medieval wonders are placed.
Haven't tested this yet but I think it might work to balance the huge benefits of learning tech.

We recently played the Civilization Board Game with 3 players and had a similar experience. In our case one of the players was the Soviets (who have the ability to "steal" tech by marching units into other players cities), and also managed to get a wonder allowing them to steal a technology once per turn.  This speeded up the tech victory win, however in fairness all 3 of us were within 4-5 turns of a tech victory by the end of the game anyway.
We came to the conclusion that the tech victory was a bit of a cheap win (much like the tech victory condition in the computer game) because researching tech is something you need to do anyway in order to remain competitive at all.
In future games we may simply disallow the tech victory (I don't think that the culture victory will take its place as a unlike tech, getting culture points is something that you need to explicitly work on - often at the detriment of city development / research / military), however my suspicion is that this will lengthen the game considerably.  Our game was fairly lengthy (about 3 hours) and so with hindsight it might be that we just weren't being agressive enough with the alternative victory conditions.
Update: Having played a couple more games (included 1v1 games) I've concluded that a tech victory is just a side-effect of being too nice to each other! Charging at each other with traditional armies generally seems to bring games to a close long before anyone is close to a tech victory.

The easiest solution in general if you want to make a 'feature' less likely chosen is to make it more expensive or add (additional) preconditions.
In this case you can make it more expensive.
However, you also have to watch out for not unbalancing the game.

Have you tried this?  How did it work out?

No I haven't tried it myself.

well, in the computer game, you can control which victories to implement. you can check the box by the domination victory, so that no one can we by domination for example. the simple fix for this is to decide at the beginning of the match that victory by technology is not an option. hope this helps.

In our games, the game is usually won by someone conquering a capital city.This is even with the Fame and Fortune expansion.

Once you master the game, wonders are used a lot more, and the Rationalism and Pacifism social policies are necessary for a tech victory (sans Russia).


text:
APNAP rulings applied to world effects
Assuming you are an active player you play an Oracle of Mul Daya or Crucible of Worlds. Could you play your land before they kill Oracle of Mul Daya? Would you be able to play lands off of Crucible of Worlds if they would try to destroy it?

The first of the questions is really the same as the first of your earlier questions.

Wasn't thinking just randomly typing.

-1: It might sound a little harsh, but "randomly typing" and not thinking about a question you asked less than 24 hours ago fits the criterion "does not show any research effort" pretty well. I'd probably remove my downvote if you edited, though.

Please leave it as is since removing the question would "break" my answer. @Jefromi

The content is actually worthwhile to other users in that the Oracle +lands is an extra special case.  When an Oracle resolves you can in fact drop both lands without your opponent ever getting priority, because of special rules related to lands.  OP may have not had any idea he was asking a question that covered special conditions, but "lucking into" a good question doesn't make it less worthwhile to answer ;)

Maybe I wasn't clear: it's the first of the questions that's a duplicate. If it were posted on its own, the right thing to do would be to close it. But the second of the questions is good, and I was encouraging the OP to remove the first and keep the second, and ikegami's answer to it.

APNAP doesn't factor in. APNAP is used when multiple players need to make choices simultaneously, and when stacking triggered abilities of multiple players. These questions are strictly about priority.
As the active player, you get priority after a spell resolves.

116.3b The active player receives priority after a spell or ability (other than a mana ability) resolves.

If you were to play a land then (a special action), you would get priority again.

116.3c If a player has priority when he or she casts a spell, activates an ability, or takes a special action, that player receives priority afterward.

So the answers to both questions are yes.

The other answers are partly correct. The active player gets priority after a spell is cast or an ability activated, and playing a land is a special action that does not use the stack. If a spell is cast that would destroy a permanent that allows you to play a land in a different way, you would not be able to play a land before it resolves. Rule 505.5b explains that you cannot:

505.5b During either main phase, the active player may play one land card from his or her hand if the stack is empty, if the player has priority, and if he or she hasn’t played a land this turn (unless an effect states the player may play additional lands). This action doesn’t use the stack. Neither the land nor the action of playing the land is a spell or ability, so it can’t be countered, and players can’t respond to it with instants or activated abilities. (See rule 305, “Lands.”)

Section 305, mentioned there, says the same thing:

305.1. A player who has priority may play a land card from his or her hand during a main phase of his or her turn when the stack is empty. Playing a land is a special action; it doesn’t use the stack (see rule 115). Rather, the player simply puts the land onto the battlefield. Since the land doesn’t go on the stack, it is never a spell, and players can’t respond to it with instants or activated abilities.

This rule mentions section 115, which also says the same thing:

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). By default, a player can take this action only once during each of his or her turns. 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. See rule 305, “Lands.”

(all emphasis added)

It works the exact same way as the planeswalker case, Mentioned in your other question
Once Oracle resolves, assuming that it's your turn, you have priority, and you have all day to take whatever actions are legal to you, until you pass priority.  This includes playing your second land for turn(which doesn't use the stack anyway), and you'll still have priority after that.
For instance, if you were to play Fastbond, you could play any number of lands, without your opponent receiving priority, assuming that no triggers are being put onto the stack.


text:
First strike and bioshift
Player A's board consists of:

1/1 first strike with 4 +1/+1 counters
1/1 creature

Player B's board consists of:

2/2 lifelink creature

Player B has 5 life and has to block the creature with 4 +1/+1 counters.
Can Player A, after dealing first strike damage, transfer the remaining counters to the 1/1 creature and then deal lethal damage to Player B?

The question I have is why it is even necessary for the first strike creature to deal damage. It's blocked, and you know you're moving the counters anyway. If the player is dead, it doesn't really matter if their creature died first.

Actually... To answer your comment is the factor of life gain. If an opponent before dying responds with gain x life. If the player kills the creature and deals 5 damage it shortens the number of turns player B has left to live

Pretend the 1/1 creature is actually a 2/2 lifelink. ;)

@wesdfgfgd If your opponent has the opportunity to "respond" with a life gain spell or ability, then you also have the opportunity to play Bioshift. But really, there's no need to specify that you're trying to deal lethal damage to your opponent. The question of whether you can both kill the creature and hit your opponent hard is perfectly valid even if your opponent isn't dead.

Yes, given that Bioshift is an instant.

The combat unrolls as follows:

...
Declare Blockers [CR 509]

Blockers are declared. [CR 509.1]
Damage Assignment order for attacking creatures is decided. [CR 509.2]
Damage Assignment order for blocking creatures is decided. [CR 509.3]
Players get priority. [CR 509.4-5]

Combat Damage Step (First Strike) [CR 510]

Attacker assigns damage. [CR 510.1]
Defender assigns damage. [CR 510.1]
Combat damage is dealt. [CR 510.2]
Players get priority. [CR 510.3-4]

Combat Damage Step (Normal Damage)

Attacker assigns damage.
Defender assigns damage.
Combat damage is dealt.
Players get priority.

End of Combat Step

Players get priority.

First Strike damage is dealt in 3.3 above, leaving you free to shift counters in 3.4 before normal damage is assigned and dealt in 4.1 and 4.3.
Note that the counters could also have been transferred in the Declared Blockers Step (2.4 above). However, it's more advantageous to wait until the First Strike Combat Damage Step (if possible) since two creatures get to take advantage of them.

510. Combat Damage Step

...

510.4. Fourth, the active player gets priority. Players may cast spells and activate abilities.

510.5. If at least one attacking or blocking creature has first strike (see rule 702.7) or double strike (see rule 702.4) as the combat damage step begins, the only creatures that assign combat damage in that step are those with first strike or double strike. After that step, instead of proceeding to the end of combat step, the phase gets a second combat damage step. The only creatures that assign combat damage in that step are the remaining attackers and blockers that had neither first strike nor double strike as the first combat damage step began, as well as the remaining attackers and blockers that currently have double strike. After that step, the phase proceeds to the end of combat step.

Yes, Both players get priority between first strike damage and normal damage.

Could you add a reference to the MTG Comp Rules for this?


text:
Can I use multiple items and spells in one action?
I was wondering if I could use multiple items and spells in one action. The rules say

Although an investigator cannot perform a component action
  from a single component more than once each round, he can
  perform component actions of different components.

So I guess the question is: "what is an component?"
I have a few combinations I would like to clarify:
Start action phase:

Feed the Mind (ritual spell)
Blessing of Isis (ritual spell)
Dynamite (item - weapon)
Holy water (item magical)
Travel

End action phase
Start action phase:

Blessing of Isis (ritual spell - I gain an Blessing)
Holy water (I gain another condition)
then flip my first received Blessing and resolve it(since I can not have two conditions) and put the last received Blessing in the back of the deck
Travel

End action phase
Another question I was wondering about was "preventing". Bandages and Whiskey state you can prevent an investigator from losing health or sanity. It's not an action so I must (?) use this during the encounter phase but do I have to use it before the other investigator (or myself) starts the fight? (that seems weird). Or can I use it when an investigator on my spot loses a strength/will test even if it's not my encounter?
Same goes with the Flesh Ward spell, can I cast it during someone else's encounter phase to prevent them form taking damage? Example:

John is on the same space as me
John has 3 health and 4 sanity left and is on a space with a Goat Spawn and a Skeleton
In the previous encounter John did one damage to the Goat Spawn (leaving it with one toughness) and none to the Skeleton
This encounter John encounters the Goat Spawn first and rolls 1 success reducing the toughness of the Goat Spawn to 0.
Does John still take one damage because his damage was lower than that of the Goat Spawn allthought John did kill it
If John takes damage can I then use my Bandage/Whiskey/Flesh Ward spell on him negating the effects of losing health and sanity?
John then rolls 4 success during the fight with the Skeleton and kills it.
After the combat encounters John does a clue encounter in which he loses 1 health. Does the Bandage/Flesh Ward still work?

Or is it more like this

John is on the same space as me
John has 3 health and 4 sanity left and is on a space with a Goat Spawn and a Skeleton
In the previous encounter John did one damage to the Goat Spawn (leaving it with one toughness) and none to the Skeleton
I discard my Bandages and Whiskey so if John takes 2 damage or loses 2 sanity he actually won't. But I discard my cards none the less.
To make sure John won't die I also cast my Flesh Ward on him with a success of three.
This encounter John encounters the Goat Spawn first and rolls 1 success reducing the toughness of the Goat Spawn to 0.
Does John still take one damage because his damage was lower than that of the Goat Spawn allthought John did kill it. Obviously my Bandages and Flesh Ward spell prevent him from actually taking the damage.
John then rolls 4 success during the fight with the Skeleton and kills it.
After the combat encounters John does a clue encounter in which he loses 1 health. Does the Bandage/Flesh Ward still work?

This game has so many variables to combine that it's hard to keep track of what is possible and what isn't.

I think this should be two different questions.

With the whiskey and bandages, you only need to discard them once the damage is dealt but before it is applied. That's how they work in Arkham Horror and I am assuming thats how they would work here. What is the exact wording on the card?

In the action phase you can perform actions that are prefixed with the text Action: or Local action: on any of the cards that belong to your investigator. "Component" is just a very general term for all these cards. There are so many of them, it would be tedious to list them all. These are items, artifacts, your investigator card, and so on.
The rule you quoted at the top is the explanation of how to handle component actions in the framework that you can do only two things in a round and cannot do the same thing twice. For example if you have a reusable artifact with an action to damage a monster on your space, you could use it only once per round. After that you will have one more action left.
In your post I don't know what you meant by this bullet point list in the action phase:

Feed the Mind (ritual spell)
Blessing of Isis (ritual spell)
Dynamite (item - weapon)
Holy water (item magical)
Travel

You can do any 2, and only 2 of these things in the same round.
As per preventing, you can use bandages to prevent damage right at the moment when the damage would be dealt. If the card says you can use it only in combat encounters, then you cannot use it while resolving a clue or other effect, it applies only in combat.
As for using something to help other players, you can only do that if the card says it's a local action or explicitly mentions. If it's a local action then you can only use it on players on the same space as yours.

From your list:

Feed the Mind (ritual spell)
Blessing of Isis (ritual spell)
Dynamite (item - weapon)
Holy water (item magical)
Travel

Here is my take on it: You can do two distinct actions per turn.  So, out of your list you have: two spells, two items, and one travel action.  You can do any two of those.  So, you could travel (one action) and cast a spell (second action). However, you could not cast Feed The Mind (one action) then cast (Blessing Of Isis) as this another "cast spell" action.
However, if during your combat your character did take some damage, they could still use the bandages to heal themselves.  The bandages are then discarded. Even if your character only took one point of damage, the bandages are discarded and you lose the extra healing.  In the same way, you can cast Flesh Ward during combat provided that you have not already done so as you can only cast it once per turn.
This is based on the first unwritten rule of cooperative games: if a rule can be interpreted in several ways, the right one is the least helpful to the players.

No, your claim that you can't cast 2 spells is wrong. The spells are "components" and the ruling on page 8 of the main reference guide "Although an investigator cannot perform a component action from a single component more than once each round, he can perform component actions of different components" outright says he can perform two different spells as they are different components.  It doesn't say you can only use one component of the same type or such wording.  If you interpreted it to mean otherwise, you'd run into all sorts of limitations on using same-type components.


text:
Spawn rules for the Overlord
We played our first two rounds of Descent a few days ago and we (3 heroes) always lost against the Overlord.
The biggest issue we experienced was the summoning of enemies in direct attack distance (still out of sight, but around a corner).
We were arguing about whether the Overlord can summon and move/attack his new summoned fellows in the same round but we couldn't find anything that clarified this in the rules.
I have no idea which edition we played, but I think it was 1E...

Not sure what you are looking for here. There are only three phases for the Overlord player. Start of Turn, where the Overlord would play cards (some allowing summoning new monsters, I think), and the Activate monsters where monsters are activated in groups, and finally End of Round.  monsters in the same group are activated at the same time (even newly summoned ones), most likely to avoid bookkeeping nightmares.  Page 8 under Overlord Turn Summary.

Since you weren't sure which version you played, I'll post my answers for both editions, although i'm significantly more familiar with 1E rules than 2E.
From the First Edition Descent Rules:
The overlords turn consists of:
Step 1: Collect Threat and Draw Cards
Step 2: Spawn Monsters
Step 3: Activate Monsters
You spawn monsters before you activate them, where activating them is considered moving and attacking.  Again, this is for 1st edition, and I haven't played second edition so I'm not familiar with the 2E rules and the PDF doesn't want to load for me right now.
The Second Edition Descent Rules seem to imply that you place and activate the monsters at the same time, in their respective groups(p. 8 & 16).  The FAQ doesn't have a specific clarification on the issue.
I would honestly be surprised if the overlord wasn't able to place and activate monsters in the same turn.  In 1E, you only expect monsters to last a round or two when thrown into direct combat with the players so I would expect the same from 2E.

Monsters do die quickly in 2E. They have scenario-by-scenario rules for where they can spawn--often at the entrance or an exit--so from the OP's description, it sounds like 1E.

For 2E, it depends on the scenario (this is usually spelled out under the Reinforcements section). Some scenarios say "place monsters" while others say, "place monsters -- monsters can act the turn they are placed."

In descent second edition, monsters placed as reinforcements at the start of the turn can be activated (including using their one attack action) that turn.  This is not true for monsters placed as reinforcements at the end of the turn.

He needs to watch:
1. the groupsize
2. the numbers of Monsters he's allowed to spawn
3. the Moment.
4. Conditions
The spawnig rules for Every Quest, are described in the Questbook
For Example:
Spawn 1 Zombie(2) in the Beginng(3), Keep Groupsize(1)
(In the Beginng allows the Overlord to use his Monsters)
Spawn 2 Zombies(2) in the Ende(3),Keep Groupsize(1), if THE token is worn by Hero(4)
(He needs to watch the Conditions (E.g. Some Events during the Quest, If its in the End He cant use his Monster)
If he keeps winnig, he's just a good overlord :D


text:
French Tarot (card game): Feasibility of playing a King on the first hand
I had a little debate with some friends about the feasibility of a certain type of play and wanted to get the communities opinion.
The question is whether playing a King(Regent) on the first hand is a good play or not in terms of probability. The reason is that there is a risk of someone being completely out of that suite and having the 1 of Trumps, playing that, and thereby getting roughly 10 points on the first hand. The idea is that even though this is relatively rare, the impact of it is so great it is not worth playing a King in this situation.
If we assume a 4-player game and you are on the defense, my argument is that the odds of the attacker being in this situation is the same (or slightly higher) than each of the other 2 defenders. However, since there are two defenders the overall odds of someone taking the 1 of trumps on the first hand are in favor of the defense. And the defense acquiring the 1 of trumps is just as important as the attacker acquiring it.
One counter argument I was told was that even if the attacker does have at least one of that that suite, then you can just wait for them to play it and play your King then and still win that hand. I think there is some merit to this, but feel my argument above is stronger.

Tarot is not poker. It is not a matter of probability and psychology, wishing that your opponent will bend over you. It is matter of card strength and strategy.
Do not play randomly your King (and its 4.5 points!) if you do not know if your opponent have cards of the same suit or not. It is far too risky for such a card. It is like playing the 1 of trumps randomly, wishing that your opponent will not have the trump card to take it. Play your King only if you are sure that your opponent will not take it. Kings have got too much points to be played randomly, because statistics say that it will likely win.
The only risk you can take is the following: Attackers often perform "coupes franches" (I do not know the English name) on one suit only. If this suit is revealed and if your King does not belong to this suit, the attacker will likely not be able to double it and will not take it.
If you love statistics, Wikipedia has got tables for this : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_tarot#Strategy But just like I said before, tarot is not poker and statistics does not matter in this game.


text:
My game of Rummikub came with a die. Why could that be?
My newly bought, first-hand game of Rummikub (from Philos) came with a die. However, the game doesn't seem to use a die. Is there any variant that uses a die, if so, what for?

Was this a second-hand copy, or new in box?

@goldPseudo It was newly bought; see update.

That does confuse the issue.  I'm tempted to go out and buy myself a new copy just to see if this is actually a thing rather than a bizarre packing mistake; I have never before needed a die when playing.

The company Antochia Crafts sell a wood set on Amazon (ASIN B07R1NSHSH). The materials list includes "1 dice" (sic). Their rules are not available on their website. Maybe someone who owns this expensive set can answer.

There is a game called Dice Rummikub, which uses dice instead of tiles; while related, it is its own game and requires more than a single die.
Short of being mixed into the box accidentally, or tossed in as a convenient first-player randomizer (because "high tile goes first" is just so complicated :p), I can't think of any reason for its inclusion in the regular tile-based Rummikub set.

I could be misremembering (I couldn't find a source), but I think my old set of Rummikub might  have included a die purely to decide who goes first.
I definitely remember buying a game that included a die that was only used to see who goes first. I remember only because it seemed so absurd as there are many other ways to decide who goes first.

Couldn't you just pick tiles to determine starting player?

I use to play this with my grandparents all the time and we used the dice to determine who went first, tho alot of players use a high tile for this as well we didn't know what else to do with the dice so that's what we used it for. I sure miss tho days some of my best memories love to hear others making those same amazing memories they last a life time cherish your loved ones ❤

Your answer could be improved with additional supporting information. Please [edit] to add further details, such as citations or documentation, so that others can confirm that your answer is correct. You can find more information on how to write good answers in the help center.

Thank you for trying to help, but your answer should probably be a comment on the question or one of the answers rather than in the form of an answer itself, as it doesn't seem to provide any new information.

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


text:
Flash Point without the Deck Gun?
I've played a dozen or so games of Flash Point so far and always find it necessary to have someone be the Driver/Operator, stay in the firetruck, and just use the Deck Gun all game. The right roll can put out five fires at once, the Driver/Operator can use the gun twice per turn, and there's the option to re-roll both attempts at no cost. In other words, it seems like the Driver/Operator is overpowering but essential to the game.
What changes can I make to the rules or to my general strategy if I want to remove the Driver/Operator and still keep the building from collapsing?

This is just off the top of my head, but if the issue you're having is that someone needs to be 'stuck' there, then how about giving everyone a special action to skip their whole turn to "radio the driver" to take the action.  This way, effectively, any player can be it without having to be in the truck, and people can take turns.   Try it out, and if it makes the game easier use the game's built in difficulty modification to re-adjust it harder.

Tried this once where any player could spend 2 AP to drive the firetruck (same as the ambulance) or 2 AP to fire the deck gun (without the ability to reroll). This seems a lot better, but I'll have to give it a few more tries to gauge how much this alters the game difficulty.

I agree that this is a major flaw in the base game. To counteract this (a little), my wife and I sometimes use 2 characters each, which is allowed in the official rules. That isn't a complete solution to your problem, though. You might have to part with the base game (and some of your money) to get rid of the problem completely.
I suggest adding the Dangerous Waters expansion to your game. Neither of the two Dangerous Waters maps use the fire truck at all and they are very exciting. I know the subway station in the Honor and Duty expansion doesn't use the fire truck either.

I agree that the fact the Driver/Operator can use the gun twice and reroll both attempts is a bit overpowered. A very simple solution would be to discard the reroll modifier, resulting in the special ability of the Driver/Operator to use the water gun at half the cost.
If it's still too easy, change the rules so the Driver/Operator only has a bonus towards driving the vehicle, but using the gun still uses up a total of 4 action points.

My problem isn't that the Driver/Operator is too good, per se, but rather that the fact that he's necessary. Doing away with the Driver/Operator is virtually a guaranteed loss.


text:
House rules to decrease luck factor in Boxcars
I just finished playing Boxcars for the first time. The game was enjoyable, but involved too much luck for my group (dice rolls determine start, movement, and destination) given the long play time.
To win, one player must return to their starting location before being caught by another player. Depending on the random locations, this can be either trivial or impossible. The rules [PDF] suggest optionally removing this catch-the-winner mechanic, but I think this might cause more harm than good. It also falls short of addressing the core problem. Some luck is okay, but there's just too much here. I feel like something could be tweaked to make this into a much more strategic and enjoyable game. How can I reduce the luck factor so this 4-hour game doesn't feel like a waste of time determined by the final few dice rolls?

We have looked at this game critically and found that we agree with your assessment that there is too much luck. Furthermore, the penalties and rewards for that luck are too extreme the way the rules were written.
DISCLAIMER: If you love Monopoly please stop reading this, you will love Boxcars. If you like games of strategy and planning, please continue reading.
This game is far too random, and doesn't offer as much as a viable means of strategy. Before I suggest to you possible alterations to the rules, we have to examine what's wrong with the game.
Too Much Luck
Random starting location, random destination, moving a random number of spaces each turn.
Double Jeopardy
If you happen to be traveling on someone else's rail lines, and you roll low, you are getting penalized AT LEAST double. Moving slower means increased number of turns, which means other players are gaining an advantage on movement alone. Since you are not on your lines, you are paying the bank or other players more for your crappy roll. It's not only possible but extremely likely that on a trip covering more than 10 spaces you will spend more than you make for the trip.
Feels like Monopoly
Monopoly is a good board game when you were 8. The same reason why people wouldn't want to play Monopoly is why you don't want to play this game. You will randomly get muscled out and there will be nothing you can do about it. No strategy, no plan, nothing. Just hope you get stuck in jail so you don't have to pay some stupid high rent because you went 3 laps around the board before you ended on a property you could buy.
There are more things we find to be a bit off but here are some rules we've tried that make the game less brutal. Consider using any or all of these, we have yet to find the perfect combination of these rules that allows for maximum strategy in such a random game:

You pay for using someone else's lines once. Once you decide to use a line that's not yours, you pay that person a 1 time fee. As long as you remain on that same line, you do not pay again, whether that's 1 turn or 10 turns. If you junction off onto another line, even another of the same person's lines, you pay again. You pay at each junction (think of it as a connection fee). What this does is it allows you to plan a route, at least initially, taking advantage of longer lines or lines that you may own. It just adds a lot more strategy. Optional: You may wish to keep the $1k per roll on un-owned lines as a tax to the bank.
You get to see your next destination before purchasing a line. Normally you go to your destination, cash in, purchase route, then see where you are going. This way you can see where you are going and decide if you want to purchase any route in between where you are and where you are going.
Roll a random sector of the map, choose the city. Perhaps you are headed to the southeast, but are blocked out of Miami entirely. It might be more cost effective to go to Atlanta cause you have a way in there. You won't get paid as much, but it will cost you less. Maybe you own lines into Miami, and it would be worth your time to go farther. This helps getting totally screwed.
Roll 2 destinations, pick one. Still random but a little more forgiving.
"Contracts". At the start of the game you get your start location, then roll 3 random destinations. Write them down and you get to pick which one you go to. When reaching that destination cross it off and you MAY roll another. The catch is you have to complete all the contracts you take, so eventually you will have to decide to stop adding to your list. At soon as you have the required money, and all destinations complete, you can then return to your home city and attempt to win.

We find these rules to help, why let a $x game sit on the shelf and never get played because of bad rules.

We roll both our starting location and our first destination at the same time, then choose one of those to be our home city, and start there. This reduces the odds of being stuck with a horrible starting point for the whole game.
Alternatively, you may try rolling only a region, and then picking a city within that region to be your home city. Again, this reduces the likelihood of being stuck with a terrible starting point.

Oh, the current version of the game already instructs you to do just this (roll for region and choose any home city).

After throughly reading the rules there are some simple house rules I have come up with that would limit luck and increase overall game strategy.

Starting Train has a movement of six spaces each turn.
Express moves eight each turn.
Super Chief moves at twelve each turn.
(Optional) Maintenance fees for trains; role two dice.
Starting Train: if double 1s are rolled pay $1000. Express; if total      equals six, five, four, or three pay $2000; if total is 2 pay $1000. Super Chief: if eleven, ten, nine, eight, or seven is rolled pay $4000. Follow     above rules for lower numbers.
Cost of $1000 per use of each bank owned track; if player uses two separate bank owned tracks per turn then total cost to bank is $1000. (This is used to simulate that although all companies are under one entity they are still somewhat independent and have their own corporate management to pay.
Cost of $5000 per use of each separate play owned company. If player uses track from two separate companies owned by the same player in one given turn then they owe that player $10,000.
There rent fee does not increase to $10,000 per turn when all tracks are sold.

These extra rules will help to add strategy and tactical thinking to a players game. By having to carefully lay out their route to avoid mistakes and long usage of an opponent track a player will have to be careful to make smart decisions.


text:
Does successfully opening the vault end your movement due to drawing the item cards?
The inside of the vault has icons that draw cards, so once you've cracked it does your movement stop? (Obviously it has already stopped if you only just discovered the vault and drew an event card, so I'm referring to when it isn't newly discovered.)
I know movement is stopped when drawing a card from discovering a new room with a card symbol. The rules and the errata/FAQ mention stopping movement "upon drawing a card" (usually from room discovery) so I've been interpreting it to apply in this case as well on the merit that it's "drawing a card", and from a room icon no less.

Yes, drawing a card for any reason ends your movement.
As you pointed out, the rules (page 5) make it clear that drawing a room tile with a card symbol does this:

The first time you discover a room with a card symbol, you must end your move in that room and draw the appropriate card.

The rules for movement (page 4) clarify this further:

Whenever a game effect makes you draw a card, you must STOP moving for the rest of your turn.

So any game effect which makes you draw cards (and if you're not cheating you should only be drawing cards based on 'game effects'!) ends your movement. This includes things such as successfully opening the puzzle box item, so try that at the end of your turn unless you really need the item!

You're right! It says it right near the beginning under "Move", actually quite prominently. Not sure how I missed that. Good call, thanks!

FYI my edition (2nd?) actually even says: "However, whenever a game effect makes you draw a card for any reason, you must stop moving for the rest of your turn." just as you wrote at the top.

The rules don't give a clarification on this exact point, but as you say, the wording is that you stop moving when you draw a card. I have always interpreted that literally, so if you draw a card from the vault or by any other means, you must stop moving.


text:
Is there an error in equilibrio puzzle #45?
Is there an error in puzzle #45 of the game equilibrio? seems like the middle brick on the third line is turned incorrectly. thanks

Are you speaking of the video game, or board/puzzle game: http://www.amazon.com/FoxMind-5512624-Equilibrio-Game/dp/B000PHQLVK?

yes, the board game


text:
Grand Tour USA (Helvetiq): How can you travel to Hawaii and Alaska?
Players can typically move by passing through bordering states following correctly answering a question. Although there are chance cards which allow for travel via oceans, they seem too infrequent to be the only means of getting to the 2 non-contiguous states. I can't find anything in the rules to address this issue; anyone have a fix?

try their facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/helvetiq/

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


text:
What type of game is Village idiot?
I love to play Village Idiot (I'm sure it goes by other names, but I don't know them), and I am wanting to play games similar to it, mainly shorter games.  Is there a definitive category or name that Village Idiot falls under, which would help me in my search for similar games?
Here is a link to the rules to the version of the game I play: http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/310871

It would be good to include a quick summary of (or link to) the rules in the post itself, just in case there's more than one game out there with similar names.

From the rules I have seen, Village Idiot is one of a handful of climbing card games. The most notable of these are The Great Dalmuti/Dilbert Corporate Shuffle.


text:
How Can I Improve Combat in DungeonQuest?
I've been playing DungeonQuest for a while with some of my friends, and what I've discovered is that there's a noticeable drop in interest during the combat, which is too complicated for new players to pick up easily and surprisingly slow for such a fast-paced game.
Does anyone who's been playing this for a while know of a better rule set or house rules to make it more fun?

There seem to be a few different sets of rules invented by other people frustrated with the official rules, which you may find useful. You can check them out from the BGG link I added to your question.

+1 because I really approve of people whose instinct is to make boardgames better, instead of accepting the rules as holy writ (and then saying "these rules suck")!

The worst part is that the rest of the game is pretty awesome. It's just when you hit a monster and your heart sinks.

Incidentally, @ire_and_curses, if you enter that as an answer, I'll mark it as correct.

Thanks, but I will decline. It's not much of an answer. There's no harm leaving this open - maybe someone will come up with something more constructive eventually.

Is this for the original version of DungeonQuest or the one that Fantasy Flight put out more recently?

the most recent.

While @ire_and_curses didn't think his was a particularly good answer, his comment led me to the official alternate combat rules (pdf link) on Fantasy Flight's website.
For novice players, the dice variant is very good (although I adjusted it to make Demons vulnerable to Strength or Luck, whichever is higher, as I felt that they're as magical as Sorcerors)
For more experienced players, you can then move to the classic rules, and from there to the standard rules.

I really don't like the combat stack, particularly its use for death blows - it seems like a misguided attempt to add some influence between one round and the next without much thought about what part of combat it might be representing. The rule-book claims this represents "players manoeuvring for a stronger attack", but why is this stronger attack being directed by which losing attacks were made in the past... and even by your past opponent's losing attacks?
Respecting the need to not slow combat any more, I developed some rule amendments - they seem to work well:

losing cards and cards from a stalemate are returned to the bottom of the deck not the combat stack

the combat stack, now representative of "environmental opportunity", is populated by turning cards face up from the deck at the end of the combat round to maintain a total of 3 face-up cards. These may be used in the same way as before for so called "death blows", although that's a misnomer as death is likely but not certain.

the winning player from the previous round draws replacement cards first

Drawn cards may be taken from the visible "opportunity stack" or from the deck. If taken from the opportunity stack, both players will know what they are.

A further simple enhancement to represent reinforced/renewed attack:
The attacking player may add more cards of the same type from his hand against a counter attack made by his opponent. So may the counter-attacker, in any order.

A further enhancement to represent exhaustion:
Players may only draw up to 3 cards a round to renew their hand. Hence their hand may contain less than 5 cards.

I also think monsters need to carry treasure (who works for free these days!) - otherwise the encounter is purely punitive. It's easy to add a treasure card draw for a kill.
Up to 2 other players are going to be bored by combat not involving them, so to me it looks like the game should be recommended for two players.


text:
Returning to Origin city when Married
Do you need to end your turn in the city with your origin marker in order to satisfy the condition on the Married status?
The status Married says, in part:

After you have an encounter in another city, you must return to your home before you may end your turn in any other cities.

It is ambiguous as to whether or not you must end your turn in this home city in order for it to count, or if you may simply move over it with your movement (rolling your check for making babies on the way) and then proceed as normal.
On the one hand, nothing else in the game functions by just passing over a space, but on the other, many cards make reference to their effects happening only "after an encounter," while this one does not.

Yes you must end a turn in your origin city before you may end your turn in any other. Your interpretation is correct, this game does not care about the spaces you pass over as you move (aside from the movement speed, though that's between spaces technically), only the spaces you end your turn on.

"End your turn in any other cities" defines return as ending your turn in your home. Otherwise, it would say "end your turn in a city". This is standard English and board gaming terminology. None of the roughly fifteen people with whom I've played ever suggested otherwise.

Players that I have played disagree with you - they have argued that you do not have to end your turn to gain the effect as it does not say that an encounter is required (as it normally would).  They also argue that, subjectively, the penalty to the effect would be too great if you did have to spend an entire turn there.  Do you have any more substantial evidence?

@SouthpawHare, ikegami - I've cleaned up this thread. Both positions have been stated. The votes can decide now.


text:
Persephone Super Moves in 2v2
Two questions about how Persephone's super move Mistress's Command function in 2v2 mode.
1) If Persephone hits with Mistress's Command and then tags out to an ally (2v2 mode) before the next turn (either through powering up at the end of that turn, or using a Super Cancel Tag out of Mistress's Command), does the effect of Mistress's Command come into play on the next turn with her ally now active? If so, which player controls the enemy character, her or her ally? (Naturally, teammates can collaborate with each other, but one of them has to have the authority to make the plays).
2) Does the Super Cancel Tag rule of "half damage rounded down" have a clause of "to a minimum of 1" that was overlooked in the manual and was errata'd in? It occurs to me that Persephone's Mistress's Command is the only move in the game presently that would be affected, and the difference between it doing 1 damage or 0 damage is probably non-trivial based in various technical cases.
EDIT: Onimaru's Clockwork Soldiers would also be affected by #2.

Game creator David Sirlin answered both of these questions recently on the forums.
1) Persephone controls the opponent on the following turn from the bench.

Abilities work from the bench. It says you control their turn.

2)  Mistress's Command (and Onimaru's Clockwork Soldiers) intentionally do 1 damage and there is no minimum associated with the rounding of the Super Cancel Tag specifically so that its effect will not trigger in such a scenario.

"Rounded down" is specifically so that MC and CS do 0. Very much on
  purpose.


text:
What is the effect of filling the Dragon Ball Meter?
What is the effect of summoning Shenron?
The rules regarding what happens when the Dragon Ball Meter is filled seem inconsistent.  The rulebook states the following (emphasis mine):

Once the meter is completely filled, at the end of that round all active Z-Fighters are healed to their maximum health, and all KO'd Z-Fighters are revived and healed to their maximum health.

However, the character cards, which have quick-references explanations of some of the rules, state (emphasis mine):

Place 7 Dragon Ball results on the Dragon Ball Meter to heal all Z Fighters to full HP, or revive a fallen Z Fighter.

(sic regarding one spelling "Z-Fighter" with a hyphen and one not)
The first ruling states that this effect heals everyone to full health, including all KO'd characters.  The second ruling states that you have a choice of either healing all non-KO'd characters, or healing one KO'd character.  Which wording is correct?
My assumption is that the second wording is correct, because the first wording from the rulebook is awkward; there would be no reason to say "heal all active characters AND heal all inactive characters" when you could just say "heal everyone, regardless of active status" if that is what you meant.  On the other hand, rulebooks are generally a more authoritative source than a quick-reference card.


text:
Does Mr. X reveal his location on every turn of the travel log that is circled?
When playing the board game Scotland Yard, does Mr. X reveal his location on every turn of the travel log that is circled? Or does he hide his location on every circled turn of the travel log and reveal it for all other turns?

Is there a reason why you suspect it is the latter?  Because it definitely isn't, and the game would be very short and unsatisfying if you tried to play it that way...

@Southpaw Hare : In that case, should you not edit his question so that only 1 question is asked instead of 2 questions?

@RobertMiller The issue is not the number of questions being asked, but rather, that I think this question(s) are on the borderline of being too simple or showing no research effort.  It's essentially the basic premise of the game.

Mr X. reveals his current location on, and only on, the circled turns, or at any time he is on the same space as a police player (in which case he immediately loses the game and the police players win the game).  All remaining turns (the majority) are played as hidden information.
Keep in mind that if Mr. X uses a Double Move Token to skip over a reveal turn, Mr. X must still reveal where he was at that time even though he is no longer there.  For this reason as well as convenience, it is a common house rule to leave the Mr. X token on his "last known location" at the last time of reveal.


text:
Pocketing the Queen
In Carrom, if both players have one one coin and the queen and one player pocketed their coin before the queen, what is the result?

Your question is unclear and is mistagged.  Could you please clarify?

I think I parsed this out a bit

According to the laws of carrom:

If a player pockets his last C/M by a proper stroke leaving the Queen on the C/B, he shall lose the board by 3 points. If the opponent’s score is 22 or more, he shall lose by 1 point. Also, if a player pockets his last C/M by an improper stroke leaving the Queen on the C/B, he shall lose the board by 3 points. If the opponent’s score is 22 or more, he shall lose by 1 point. If demanded, the opponent shall be awarded one additional point.


text:
Chess: Efficient training for recreational players
What is an efficient way to train one's self at Chess?
I really enjoy playing, perhaps 1-2 times per week. I used to play on an electronic board once per day and at one point I could start to beat it on a regular basis. However, I find it extremely hard to improve myself, and the literature is vast.
If I would like to get to the next level, what is a reasonable approach? Just continue playing, or is there a more systematic approach? Starting to memorize openings? Maybe that's overkill and there could be other things I might do first. I've just glimpsed into Bobby Fischer Teaches Chess, looks like reasonably leveled book. Any other suggestions?

Chess.com has a tactical trainer which I've found very good. It's available through their iPhone app as well as their website, although with a free subscription you're limited to 3 puzzles per day.
http://www.chess.com/tactics/
Each puzzle and player has an Elo rating, and if you solve the puzzle then both the puzzle's and your own rating are adjusted, and you're given another puzzle of similar rating.
Aside from this, record your games and go back through and have your opponent point out errors. When you're playing a game casually and it's clear you're down in material and position position, just concede and start another game. At that point you're just playing to hope your opponent slips up, which isn't a very good strategy.

Continuing to play is good in that you get plenty of practice, but one thing I have found in other games is that is far more effective coupled with recording your games and then running them back through some form of automated analysis. This will:

point out your errors, obviously, so you don't repeat them,
over time, give a clear picture of where your consistent errors are, so that you can work on them with outside materials like books,
and just as importantly, give you positive feedback when you play well!

In games involving chance this is even more helpful, to avoid the trap of doing what happened to work in the past (which may have been wrong, but which happened to result in good consequences). Even in chess there is some degree of chance, in the sense that a blunder may go unpunished by a fallible opponent. There simply isn't time to read every book, so you need to isolate the parts of your game that need a book most.

I don't know your level, but after learning basic tactics etc so you don't blunder away material, and improving your experience in that area, it starts being a matter of understanding positional advantages and disadvantages and strategies.
With regards to openings, always a thorn in the side for me. So I would adopt certain favourite openings as black I could use that I would know well enough what to do against the likely white moves, and what the continuation strategy would be. Of course in friendly games I would practise different ones, in tournaments I would stick to the tried and tested. As black the main aim in a tournament is usually not to lose rather than to win.
With white in a tournament, you have the advantage of going first, but what move do you play first? If you start 1 e4 you let your opponent pick the response. They'll probably choose Sicilian more often than not so know it, and also some of the other likely ones. If you start 1 d4 there are fewer "variations". As white, your usual aim is more to hope to win rather than avoid losing but it is important not to lose.
Of course if you study grandmaster games you'll know what openings have been commonly played and some of the positions it led to.


text:
Where do you put the reward you gain when attacking Draco/zombies?
When you attack a zombie or Draco, you earn some ressources.
Do you store them immediately (or on the Town hall building if you don't have storage room)?
Do they stay "somewhere in your gaming zone" (for instance witht he units you used to attack) waiting for the storage phase to be added to the storage building?
The latter would mean than no-one can get them by attacking you or by stealing them...
Sorry if I don't use the correct wording for game elements, I have the French version of the rules...

Just got the answer straight from the Publisher on BGG:

If you have a container, straight there. If you don't it goes on top of your Town Hall and has to be used this turned otherwise you will have to discard it!
  Indeed, it means that this resource is vulnerable to an attack this turn. Unless you have a defense and that could be a nice lure


text:
Does the Town Hall count toward the Architect mission?
In Vikings Gone Wild, The Architect Mission requires the player to have built 5 different types of buildings. Does the Town Hall count as one of those types?

Just got the answer straight from the Publisher on BGG:

Excellent question! No it does not!


text:
What happens if you run out of Beans?
What happens if at the beginning of my turn I have no Beans left in my hand to plant because I traded them all away on other people's turns?

The official Rio Grand Games  rules cover this eventuality (page 4) the last sentence under Plant Bean Cards

If the Active Player has no cards in hand, he omits this step.

I have no access to the Amigo Games version, or the German version of the rules. The Game Cabinet site does have a translation:

Playing Bean Cards - You must play the first card dealt to you on to one of your fields, unless you hold no cards.

You just skip the first step, since you are unable to fulfill the conditions.


text:
Does Mirrorworks still create a copy when the original has left the battlefield?
I have a Mirrorworks in play, play an artifact and my opponent destroys the new artifact before the trigger resolves. Can Mirrorworks still create a copy of it even though the original isn't on the battlefield anymore?
Can copies of cards that aren't in the battlefield be created?

@GendoIkari : The question is about how "create a copy works and whether that needs the availability of the card".

Sorry I misread the question as asking what happens if Mirrorworks is destroyed.

@Christian what exactly do you mean with your addition "Can copies of cards that aren't on the battlefield be created?"? Do you mean can you just choose an arbitrary artifact and create a copy of it, even if it was never on the battlefield, or do you mean can a copy be created if the artifact entered the battlefield and then something caused it to leave?

@Malco : I don't mean arbitrary artifacts. I added that sentence because GendoIkari did tag it as a duplicate of the general case of abilities that trigger being able to resolve without the permanent that triggered them still being in play.

@Christian Ahh ok I see

Yes, you will still get to copy the artifact.
This is covered in the special rulings on Mirrorworks Gatherer page:

If the artifact that caused Mirrorworks’s ability to trigger has already left the battlefield by the time the ability resolves, you can still pay 2. If you do, you’ll still put a token onto the battlefield. That token has the copiable values of the characteristics of that nontoken artifact as it last existed on the battlefield.

This is because of the following rule:

608.2g 608.2g 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; if it’s no longer in that zone, or if the effect has moved it from a public zone to a hidden zone, the effect uses the object’s last known information. See rule 112.7a. If an ability states that an object does something, it’s the object as it exists—or as it most recently existed—that does it, not the ability.

Added rule reference.


text:
Is this card worded correctly and balanced?
I created this card recently and just want to make sure that it's balanced and that its ability is worded correctly/functionally:

Wojek Lionheart (1)RW
  Creature - Human Soldier [Uncommon]
  First strike
  Wojek Lionheart may block while tapped and blocks each turn if able.
"The people may rise against us, but that does not excuse me of my oath to defend them."
  2/1

Is there a better way to word that second ability?

For examples of similar card text, consider Masako the Humorless, Hellraiser Goblin, and Mark for Death.

It's not possible to say if it is balanced because we don't know what else is in the set. So if you want to say if it's balanced or not, we need to know "balanced against what?"

My apologies; let's say current Standard, if that helps at all.

"(1)RW" makes me think: "cmc = 1, mc = RW". I would write that "1RW" or "{1}{R}{W}".

While the way you have the ability worded is 'proper', normally they give a creature this mechanic in the form of Vigilance. In this way, the card may be tapped by some external source and then made unable to block, but will not be unable to block because he attacked last turn (which is the most common reason he would become tapped). To have a creature that cannot be evaded by tapping him significantly increases his power level, but as noted in the comments greatly increases his complexity. I find it hard to justify the complexity increase for the increase gained when such an elegant alternative exists.
On a related note:
Being attack heavy is very much red's thing. It is part of red's color pie to force opponents to block (flavor wise, that's being so aggressive they simply must defend themselves), not very much in red's color pie to block themselves. Simply put, red is not a very block-happy color. Boros (the guild of this card) is very haste heavy,
I would compare your card to Truefire Paladin if you're looking for recent examples of similar creatures.
As far as tweaking it to make it red, I would do one of the following:

Make it cost RW and make it First strike, vigilance, ~ attacks each turn if able. ~ blocks each turn if able.
Make it First strike, vigilance, haste.

Bottom line: adding red does not encourage it to block. Adding red would make it much less likely to be able to block. If you want to keep the tap-blocking mechanic, I would make it cost 1WW.

I am aware of Vigilance, and was actually looking to increase the power level by that slight edge you mentioned; the "must block" clause was both a balancing factor and a way to fit him into the flavor of the Wojek. I do still have power level concerns, but the card I was comparing to was Nightguard Patrol (2/1 First strike vigilance for (2)W). Essentially, as far as the pie goes, I'd felt that being able to block while tapped encouraged a very Red-like aggression.

I agree with your idea that Vigilance is a simpler and more interesting implementation of the basic concept.  Also, that this card is mono white, not white and red!

@Lord_Gareth The thing is that the corner cases of 'can blocked even if tapped by external factors' are so small that it's simply not worth the additional complexity over simply declaring it with Vigilance in the first place.  Your comparison to Nightguard Patrol is an apt one, but that's also a point - you've made it harder to cast and given it a drawback in the process.  I would agree with corsiKa's first suggestion (First strike, Vigilance, must attack, must block, one mana cheaper); I think it perfectly captures the flavor.

First strike is written as First strike, not First Strike.
Also, "Wojek Lionheart may block while tapped and blocks each turn if able" matches more with other 'must attack/block' creatures such as Razorgrass Screen.


text:
Can Wishing Ring be applied on side-effects?
Yesterday I was playing Munchkin (the fantasy version) with some friends, and I ended up having my sex changed (I could use some female-only stuff, thou, but that's another story).
Back in topic, when I get sex-changed, I suffer a -5 penality to my next fight, which I assume lasts until I kill a monster or I suffer his Bad Stuff; either way, I have to actually fight him, not just encounter him and run away.
Assuming my interpretation is correct, it might be the case where all my buddies try to keep my penality standing as long as possible, by removing monsters in some way (with potions or charming spells), thus preventing me from an actual fight.
My question then is: can I use Wishing Ring (which I have obtained after being cursed) to remove the -5 penality? Because I don't think I can remove the whole Change Sex curse after I suffered it in the first place...

Until you get rid of that -5, you're far too distracted to think of using your wishing ring to get rid of that -5!

I think this is one of those situations that is pretty much up to the table to resolve.  See the interpretation in this thread:

A Wishing Ring can remove a curse and its effects at anytime.
So things like Big Feet, Tiny Hands and Chicken on your Head can be
  removed by a wishing ring even though after they have hit and are
  persistent.
There is only one exception to this that I know of. Sex Change. The
  effects of the Sex Change curse can be canceled only at the time that
  the Curse is played. After it has taken effect the change is
  permanent. Playing a Wishing Ring afterwards can remove the -5 if you
  haven't been in combat but it can't revert you back to your original
  sex.

But contrast with this opinion:

Wishing Rings have one function straight off the card, and that's to
  get rid of a curse. Whether it's to negate one that's incoming or one
  that's been lingering for a while, the Wishing Ring will undo any
  hated curse that would put your character in a detrimental situation.
  (Whether or not this applies to a curse that causes a sex change is up
  to the table in general, so long as it's after the fact.)

Munchkin isn't the kind of game where the interaction between different cards is always cut-and-dried.  I personally think it would be a bit mean to rule against a Wishing Ring being able to negate a Sex Change's -5 penalty, but it really does depend what kind of vindictive maniacs you have in your group!

Well, this is a very complete answer, thank you. Just to be sure, do you think that my interpretation of next fight is correct? BTW, they to avoid me getting rid of the curse because I am a vindicative maniac too ;)

Actually I think if you run away, it counts as having been in a combat.  You run away because you are in a combat which you are losing... you don't actually run away before you get into combat.

As thesunneversets is getting at once, the -5 is meant to ruin you just the once. If you can't win because of that -5, then you have to run away, since trying to run away isn't optional and happens when you determine you've lost the fight.


text:
Can non basic lands be tapped for colorless mana?
For example, Evolving Wilds has a mana fixing ability, but it doesn't say you can tap it for mana. Other non-basic lands have a mana ability listed on the card. Should I assume that Evolving Winds cannot be tapped for mana?
Basic lands don't have mana tapping abilities listed, but are assumed you can tap them for mana of the color they represent.

No, you cannot tap non-basics for mana unless they have an ability that specifically says otherwise.
Basic lands are handled with a special case in the rules:

305.6 The basic land types are Plains, Island, Swamp, Mountain, and Forest. If an object uses the words “basic land type,” it’s referring
  to one of these subtypes. A land with a basic land type has an
  intrinsic ability to produce colored mana. (See rule 406, “Mana
  Abilities.”) The land is treated as if its text box included,
  “Tap.gif: Add [mana symbol] to your mana pool,” even if the text box
  doesn’t actually contain text or the card has no text box. For Plains, [mana symbol] is {W}; for Islands, {U}; for Swamps, {B}, for Mountains, {R}, and for Forests, {G}. See rule 107.4a. Also see rule 605, "Mana Abilities."

http://wiki.mtgsalvation.com/article/Basic

Does that mean that prismatic omen allow all the lands to produce all 5 types of mana since lands become of all the basic land types

@LittleViking26 Yes. The rulings on gatherer support this. http://gatherer.wizards.com/pages/card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=151989

Wow thanks, and here I tought that Prismatic omen was just good to finally play that Coalition Victory card!

@LittleViking26 Prismatic Omen was generally used in Valakut decks so that you didn't have to play a bunch of mountains


text:
Power Tile Combo: Initiative combined with Crusade
When using the Initiative power tile (which destroys two units pre-battle) combined with the Crusade power tile (which gives Ankhs per units destroyed in battle):
Does the attacking player get ankhs for the units destroyed 'pre battle'?
If the is no battle because the defender had two units or less, does the attacker get any Ankhs?
The mystery here is that the escape DI card cancels a battle, but also works for initiative, which seems to indicate that units killed by initiative are in some sort of odd edge-case.

As you said in the question, Crusade gives you ☥ for units killed in Battle.
As you also stated correctly, the effects of the Initiative happen before the Battle. (The power tile itself shows that it's a day phrase tile, not a battle phrase tile.) Therefore the kills of the Initiative won't generate ☥.
And there is no mystery with the Escape DI card: it cancels the Battle. Therefore effects before the battle phrase can't happen. Therefore the Initiative tile won't have effects.


text:
Can boars go inside the cave in Caverna?
So there is some ambiguity in the rules about Boars where the example seems to conflict with the rule statement.  This leads to the question:
Can Boars go inside the cave (For example in the base room or the mixed dwelling)?
Evidence that any kind of animal may live in the starter dwelling:

The text says 'pair of animals'

Evidence that only 'farm animals' may live in the starter dwelling:

p20 example says 'The entry level room of your cave can hold 2 Farm
animals of the same type.'

These seem to contradict each other mildly (farm animals or any animal?).  This inconsitency may indicate possible errors in rules diagrams.
More evidence for inconsitency in diagrams:

Dogs are counted as farm animals in the example on page 6
It is stated on page 10, 'Dogs are not considered farm animals'

These two pieces of information explicitly contradict.  Therefore we must conclude there may be errors in the diagrams on the rules.  However, if boars are explicitly farm animals, there is no issue.  So this ruling depends on what is actually a farm animal.
Evidence for Boars as Farm Animals:

They are in the house diagram on p10.
On p10, they are indicates as breeding animals, and it is stated that
only farm animals breed.
They are in pastures on pp 6,20

Evidence against Boars as Farm Animals:

They are called Wild Boars on Page 1 of the Rules book.  Farm animals
are not wild in the common language usage of the term farm and wild.
On Page 5, picture, states 'A forest stable can hold 1 Wild boar, but
no other animals'  This differentiates boars from the other animals.
There is no 'boar farming' action (which also true of cattle).
On p20, an explicit distinction is made between a stable in a meadow
and a stable in a forest.  'Boars may be in forest' which is
presented in the context of an exceptionary clause to farm animals
being able to be stored.
It is not explicitly stated anywhere that 'wild boars are farm
animals'

In summary:

There is an implication that boars are farm animals.
There is an implication that boars are not farm animals.
There are clear and explicit errors in exemplary diagrams which may
weaken the strengths of either side of these implications, and also
possibly, the authority of the diagrams as opposed to the text.

So, absent a clear, congruous and consistent set of words, the original question becomes valid:
Can Boars go inside the cave?

Bret's comment may force me to revise the bold point.  I'll come back and review it later.

The rules state explicitly that Wild Boars are Farm animals on page 6:

Each animal is worth 1 Gold point. There are Dogs, and the Farm animals Sheep, Donkeys, Wild boars, and Cattle.

As you can see, Dogs are not included in the set of Farm animals. There is no inconsistency.
Wild Boars are indeed differentiated several times from other Farm animals within the rules, but this is just because they have special rules that apply to them as opposed to Sheep, Donkeys, and Cattle. They are still Farm animals.

Dogs are farm animals if the diagram on p10 is to be believed.  There are 17 non-dog animals and 2 dogs, and the scoring text clearly indicates 19 'farm animals' are scored, so in fact, there is an inconsistency.  However, this is certainly one more bit of evidence to consider when deciding which inconsistency should be ignored.  You do point out an amusing comma splice.

@Lighthart if you check "Details of Breeding" under the harvest section, it explicitly says "Dogs are not consideredFarm animals", and the scoring text says that "19 animals are scored; 2 dogs and 17 farm animals".

Can you explain the ambiguity you see?  I'm not seeing any.  Boars are allowed within any room that states that it can hold animals.
The example on page 10 clearly shows boars within the Entry Level Dwelling.  I don't see anywhere that suggest a different interpretation is possible.

Elaborations made to the original question, with a detailed list of where other interpretations might come  from.


text:
How can we play Game of Thrones as a league game?
Our group of players has increased in size quite a lot, and we wanted to start having tournaments and league games. However, we don't want to restrict ourselves to 2 player games only, like Twilight Struggle or Android: Netrunner (even though these are great games!)
We would like to have a league in Game of Thrones. How would you do it?
(The simplest answer is "rank everyone and give points to the top 3", or something like that. I'm sure there are better ideas out there.)

@user1873 Tried your suggestion. Let me know if it's clearer.

@user1873 tried again..

In simplest tournament form
In each round winners advance to next round, losers do not. If an alliance wins, they advance together for that round only. 2nd place matters not...
For a longer format
Everyone gets to play up to X games of Y game opportunities. Winners (individual or alliance) get 3 points each, losers get 1. After the Y
th opportunity has been played, count up total points. Top 4-6 players by points advance. If more than 6 are tied, have two tables, and divide the tied players between them, and then take the winners from both, and if needed the 2nd place players from both, to make a 3-6 player final.
In each of the x games, randomize from those present - I recommend using 3x5 cards with player names on them, and tracking of wins and losses.
2nd place - why not?
awarding points for non-victory is a complication that, while it can advance consistently passable players to finals, doesn't actually select for the best players. THe best players are good and consistent.
What If I want to push for solo wins?
In that case, Solo victory is a 3 point, alliance victory is a 2 point, and anything less is still 1 point
Why do losers get a point?
Because it pushes them up the rankings for being consistent in showing up. This is a benefit for league play.
Example
A 13 player league, players A-M, has 6 weeks and enough sets for 3 tables per week. The option to endorse solo wins over alliance wins is in place. Week 6 will be "finals"
Week 1, Everyone's present, and so the tables are 5, 4 and 4. AFGHM, BCIL, and DEJK are the table layouts. A wins solo, BC win as an alliance, and J wins
Week 2, A is sick. Tables are thus 6 each for two tables. BDFHJM and CEGIKL. KL win alliance, BD wins shared.
Week 3, D, K and M are stuck at work.  2 tables, 5 each. ACEIJ BFGHL. AC win shared, G wins solo.
Week 4,  N joins the league (late but enjoys play). there's a storm. Only ADGHN make it. H wins solo.
Week 5, Everyone shows. 5-5-4 tables. ADIKN BEGJM CFHL. A wins shared. BG win shared. H wins solo, as does N.
Final is H (with 9) G (with 8) A B (with 7), C & J (with 6).
    Wk  A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N
    1:  3  2  2  1  1  1  1  1  1  3  1  1  1  -
    2:  0  2  1  2  1  1  1  1  1  1  2  2  1  -
    3:  2  1  2  0  1  1  3  1  1  1  0  1  1  -
    4:  1  0  0  1  0  0  1  3  0  0  0  0  0  1
    5:  1  2  1  1  1  1  2  3  1  1  1  1  1  3
  Tot:  7  7  6  5  4  4  8  9  4  6  4  5  4  4

Now, if run without the penalty for shared, the numbers look like this:
    Wk  A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N
    1:  3  3  3  1  1  1  1  1  1  3  1  1  1  -
    3:  0  3  1  3  1  1  1  1  1  1  3  3  1  -
    3:  3  1  3  0  1  1  3  1  1  1  0  1  1  -
    4:  1  0  0  1  0  0  1  3  0  0  0  0  0  1
    5:  1  3  1  1  1  1  3  3  1  1  1  1  1  3
  tot:  8 10  8  6  4  4  9  9  4  6  5  6  4  4

The finals would be B (10), GH (9) AC (8). we don't go to the 6's because that would trigger a second table.
Note that the longer the league plays, the more important consistent play is.

What is an allied victory? As far as I am aware there can only be one winner in the Game of Thrones.

There should be some rule concerning alliances, I think I will go with something like:

10 pts for winner,
3 pts for second place
and 1 pts for third

But then I would allow players to promise each other some fraction of these points to others in exchange for help/alliance.
The open question is if that should be done on the last three rounds basis (If both declare help, then after the game points are split or just decided by winners at end).
And remember: You Win or You Die! :)

I didn't follow the friction of the points rule you mentioned. Could you please give an example?

I mean that I could promise that If I win I would split earned points (for example 2 points to my ally and 8 for me 2+8=total 10, if he was second then he gets 2+3=5pts and I get 8pts). That rule is added so that making alliances would be fun and to give reason for weaker player to support winner.


text:
What are my cards good for once they have rotated out of Standard?
So I'm a little upset, but I am realizing this is just part of MtG.  I spent some time last year putting together some nice decks and stocking up on quite a bit of the M13 cards.  And then work / life got in the way I didn't get to play as much as I thought.
Now, M13 has rotated out.  I can still use my RtoR and GC and I've already ordered a deck builder's set for M14 which should get here today.  I realize that I can still technically use M13 for casual gameplay, but not sure I want to continue investing time deck building with them.
Should I just sell them?  Do I gain anything by holding onto them?  Maybe just keeping the rare cards?

note: m14 contains some cards that were in m13. The m13 versions of those cards are still legal in the standard format.

It is a ton of fun to play vintage constructed. That is what my group plays and some of the decks with old and new cards mixed together are brutal and so much fun to watch.

Agreed, vintage allows for some stunning decks, and is far more fun

Based on how your question is worded, I assume you are talking about standard.
I believe you're really asking a more general question, "What are my cards good for once they have rotated out of Standard?"

They can still be played in alternate formats, such as Modern, Legacy, and Commander (and casual, as you've noted)
Some cards may be reprinted in standard again in the future, in which case you can use your old printings instead of buying new ones
From an investment standpoint, some cards may appreciate in value

I personally hang onto all of my old cards as my collection hasn't gotten too unwieldly in size yet. Whether or not your want to sell yours off is really just a personal decision about whether you think you'll be interested in different formats in the future.
If you don't want them anymore, you might also consider trading them for more current cards with players who do play other formats.

Exactly the kind of answer I was looking for.  I've modified my question to be more general, as you stated.  Thanks.

it costs more to get started in the older formats (Modern, Legacy are the most viable) but 9 times out of 10 your cards will be worth the same 6 months later, and often worth more than you paid for them (particularly in legacy, where many cards cannot be reprinted due to the reserve list). This makes the older formats actually cheaper in the long run.


text:
Card Organization: Multi-Color Cards
As my collection has started growing (new to MtG) I'm now needing to organize.  I've done quite a bit of blog reading on the different methods and strategies but one thing I can't quite seem to determine is how to handle multi-color cards.  I have 2 examples:
One Thousand Crashes
Initially what I'm doing is calling this a white since it is the first colored cost symbol.
Beckon Apparition
This one is an either or so I have no real good idea what color to put it with.  Any suggestions on these types of cards?  Is it just preference on my part?

I just put all my multicolored on three pile's. common uncommon rare/mythic. and since there are not that many multi collord, the piles are not that big.

In general, I think how you organize really depends on what you want to do with your cards.

If you like to look at your collection for inspiration when building decks, try organizing cards by color and then by function — keep all of your blue counterspells together, keep all of your black creature removal together, group your red creatures by their mana costs so you can easily plan around a curve. Here's an example of someone doing this with a very large set of cards. Group multicolor cards by their color combinations (and function as well) so that it's easy to see look for cards that match the colors of a deck.

If you mostly use other resources, like Gatherer, to choose cards, then you can optimize for finding individual cards quickly instead. This means you'll likely want to organize alphabetically or by set and serial number (don't do anything special for multi-color cards).

Alphabetic organization may be better if you're likely to have lots of different editions of the same card.

Organizing by set and serial number doesn't involve shifting as many cards when you get new ones, but you might have to search slightly longer for often-reprinted cards (alternatively, move them all up to the most recent set when they get reprinted — e.g. both the Mirage and Innistrad versions of Dissipate just go in the Innistrad section).

In both cases, you don't really have to do anything special for multi-color cards.

If you don't like to spend a lot of time organizing or have a hard time keeping cards in order, try organizing color, or by block and color (and not alphabetically, because it's too much work). It'll take you a bit longer to find individual cards, but it's really easy to put cards back after you've taken them out. Group multicolor cards by color combinations; in most cases you can just put the hybrid cards in their matching multi-color category.

If you tend to mainly build competitive-oriented decks, it makes sense to separate out your "staples" — cards like Brainstorm and Lightning Bolt — so you have an easy time grabbing the cards you expect to use most.

Regardless of what else you do, if you play Standard, you'll also want to organize by sets, because it's easy to handle rotation that way.

I follow the same procedure for organization that my LGS does.  I have a big 4 row box. In each row, I have a set.  So, right now one of my boxes has (in order): Innistrad, Dark Ascension, Avacyn Restored, M13.  What do all of these sets have in common?  They rotate out at the same time.
Now, for organizing each set, I follow WoTC's number system, and I put like cards together in penny sleeves (clear sleeves that generally cost $1 per 100). This way, they are organized by color, and then alphabetically.  This makes searching for cards much faster, at least for me.
Now, the order that WoTC does things is Colorless/White/Blue/Black/Red/Green/Gold/Hybrid/Artifact/Lands.  Also, if you look at the bottom of each card, there is a number associated with it.  For instance, the One Thousand Lashes you linked, is card number 183.  So, it would go 183rd in my box.
I hope that this helps.

When you say hybrids, are you talking about any card that requires more than 1 color?  Or is there a distinction between hybrid and multi-color?  Hybrid being either/or ?

Hybrid's are cards like the ones you linked, that could be either or.

Colorless cards (Eldrazi for example) are first in WoTC's order if I remember correctly :)

Yes, colorless would come first.  But I've only just begun playing when Innistrad came out, so was unaware of colorless cards.  Edited to show this.

I would recommend against sorting the cards by the first color symbol. It's not going to be as useful that way, especially for hybrid mana. What if you want to put Dryad Militant in a while deck but you sorted it green, or the other way around?
Instead, I recommend using a system similar to the Return to Ravnica Holiday Gift Box. It comes with dividers and a sheet of stickers to put on the dividers that classify things in the way magic players often do: it has stickers for the types (sorceries, instants, planeswalkers, etc) and for the guilds and shards, and the vanilla colors. I don't know if there's still boxes available, everywhere I checked they sold like hotcakes, but the system they used is clearly in use (they don't release things like that without doing appropriate market research to determine consumers' needs).
(Note this isn't to say the other answers are bad, just trying to think outside the box. Or inside the box, depending on how you look at it...)

"this isn't to say the other answers are bad." Good. Because my answer is pretty much what you said. ;)

Wizard's numbering system orders the cards alphabetically by colour, taking the following order into account (see pentagon of colours back of card, start at white going clockwise): White-Blue-Black-Red-Green.
After that, hybrid mana cards are listed, then gold-bordered multicoloured cards, then artifacts, then lands.
When accounting for hybrid and multicoloured order, I believe it goes by the same priority. White-Blue cards are listed before White-Blue-Black which is before White-Red, which is before Blue-Red, etc.
Personally I sort my Hybrid/gold cards together by "guild" as in Ravnica, or "shard" as in Alara, and then the wacky 4+5 colour together, sorting them in WUBRG order.

When I am ordering cards I order them by number of colors used and the colors themselves or lack of color as the case may be.
Single Colors:
White, Blue, Black, Red, Green
Cards with no color.
Artifacts, Different land cards
Two Colors:
White/Blue, White/Black, White/Red, White/Green, Blue/Black, Blue/Red, Blue/Green, Black/Red, Black/Green, Red/Green
Three Colors:
White/Blue/Black, White/Blue/Red, White/Blue/Green, White/Black/Red, White/Black/Green, White/Red/Green, Blue/Black/Red, Blue/Black/Green, Blue/Red/Green, Black/Red/Green
Four Colors:
White/Blue/Black/Red, White/Blue/Black/Green, White/Blue/Red/Green, White/Black/Red/Green, Blue/Black/Red/Green
Five Colors
White/Blue/Black/Red/Green
I normally don't group by expansion but that is something that can also be added to help in finding cards that are still legal based on the rule set you are playing. Also if you tend to favor certain colors it would make sense to move them to the front of the grouping order. I just started with white because that was a place to start.

You have an entire section for Yore-Tiller Nephilim, one for Witch-Maw Nephilim, one for Ink-Treader Nephilim, and one for Giant-Eye Nephilim, and not one for poor Dune-Brood Nephilim? For shame! (And those are the only five that have color combinations thus far.)

@corsiKa I knew I as missing a color combination! :) And it never hurts to plan ahead so you have a place to put a combo when it appears!


text:
What happens when the Runner stack is empty?
When the corporation R&D is empty the corporation loses.  What happens when the Runner's stack is empty?
I think that: He must finish the game with only the cards on the table.
or
I doubt that: He reshuffles the heap into a new stack.

Your instinct is correct; the runner continues to play with the cards that he/she has in play.
It would have been nice if the rules clarified this a little, but since they don't specify that anything special happens you carry on playing.
Despite the runner being able to continue playing, the runner can no longer draw cards and therefore becomes prone to getting flat-lined (having to trash more cards than there are in their hand) and losing that way.
This is fairly rare occurrence, since the corporation draws every turn, whereas the runner doesn't necessarily. Usually the corporation would deplete their deck before the runner, ending the game that way.
Related Links:

http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/853237/depleted-runner-stack
http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/877799/if-the-runner-runs-out-of-cards-in-his-stack-can-h

I've been playing the game since it came out and only realized the runner didn't reshuffle until two days ago! Our Anarch games are going to change drastically, as our primary strategy was to rip through our decks with Wyldside and Disel to get all our Viruses back quickly. Changes things quite dramatically for us

I disagree that this is rare, runners tend to play a lot of draw effects like Diesel or Earthrise Hotel since they don't need to worry about decking out like a corp does and of course there is MaxX her deck is going to empty as would a well built Geist deck. These decks usually play Levy AR Lab Access to reset the deck, but even then they wait until they need it.