text:
MTG: Zegana, Mul Daya Channellers and Green Suns's Zenith
Suppose I have Mul Daya Channelers (only her) in play and have some creature on top of the library so Mul Daya is 5/5. Now I play Green Sun's Zenith and find Prime Speaker Zegana and put her into play. Now her ability triggers, but is this before or after I shuffle Green Sun's Zenith into the library? Potentially Mul Daya could be 2/2 if I shuffle first and end up with a non-creature up top.

Short answer:  Prime Speaker Zegana will get 5 +1/+1 counters, and you'll draw 6 cards.
Long answer:
This is what happens, step by step:

1: Search your library for a green creature card with converted mana cost X or less.

Note that technically, we can't change the order of the library while we search it, even if in practice we often do so because it matters only in very corner cases (like this one). It's usually not a problem because the cards that let us search the libary always make us shuffle it afterwards. So the top card of the libary will be the same one until we shuffle.

2: put it onto the battlefield.

We put Prime Speaker Zegana on the battlefield. Its replacement effect see a 5/5 Mul Daya Channelers on the battlefield, and thus it enters the battlefield with 5 +1/+1 counters. Prime Speaker Zegana triggered ability triggers (but it doesn't go on the stack yet).

3: then shuffle your library.

The library is shuffled. Now a new card will become the top card of the library. We must reveal that card because of Mul Daya Channelers ability.

4: Shuffle Green Sun's Zenith into its owner's library.

We shuffle Green Sun's Zenith into the library. Technically, we are shuffling a second time. Usually it's just fine to use a shortcut and shuffle just once, but because shuffling a second time will cause another card on the top of the library to be revealed, we can't use a shortcut this time.

5: Prime Speaker Zegana triggered ability is put on the stack.

Triggered abilities wait to be put on the stack until a player would get priority. After this, and when both players has passed priority, the triggered ability will resolve and 6 cards will be drawn.
Note that spell don't resolve as one big event, they can have several steps that we must follow in order:

608.2c The controller of the spell or ability follows its instructions in the order written. However, replacement effects
may modify these actions. In some cases, later text on the card may
modify the meaning of earlier text (for example, “Destroy target
creature. It can’t be regenerated” or “Counter target spell. If that
spell is countered this way, put it on top of its owner’s library
instead of into its owner’s graveyard.”) Don’t just apply effects step
by step without thinking in these cases—read the whole text and apply
the rules of English to the text.

PD: also, even if the top card of the library when Green Sun's Zenith starts to resolve is the same Prime Speaker Zegana that we'll put into play, it would still get 5 +1/+1 counters. Because the replacement effect look at the other creatures just before Prime Speaker Zegana enters the battlefield, and at that time Mul Daya Channelers was still a 5/5.
It's for the same reason why Prime Speaker Zegana entering the battlefield at the same time that another creature (for exampel with Tooth and Nail) won't count that other creature for getting +1/+1 counters.

I think you've got the right answer here. I was unsure whether Zegana "looks at the battlefield" after the Zenith resolves or not, and completely missed 608.2c. I was pondering the implications of 608.2g and couldn't find clarification if the "effect" that puts Zagana in play was the full resolution of the spell or not.

One wrinkle this example brings up is a technicality. Should an extra card in the deck need to be revealed because Zenith shuffles the deck twice? I found rulings in gatherer with top-card reveal effects that says when you draw multiple cards you must reveal them as you draw them — but I saw no such clarification for multiple shuffles… This has implications, for example, if the other player is playing Cranial Extraction-type cards. Is this an exception to the one-shuffle shortcut?

@ghoppe Yes, two cards will have to be revealed, I missed it.

The double reveal could have a real implication on gameplay. If the Mul Daya happened to have a Dead Weight, if the creature on the top of the deck was not consistently a creature (perhaps it was a land after the search, and a creature again after the zenith-reshuffle) Mul Daya would die to state based effects, correct?

@corsiKa State based actions are not checked until the spell has finished resolving, so Mul Daya Channelers would not die while enchanted with Dead Weight when a non-creature card is briefly revealed in the middle of the resolution of the spell. There is probably some combination of cards that would make it matter, but I can't think of any (besides cards that trigger when a library is shuffled, of course).

Because no one gets priority until the spell finishes resolving, the only way I can think of the first reveal mattering in gameplay is if there were a permanent which had a trigger depending on what card is on top of the library. I'm not aware of any card which does this.

This wouldn't happen with this specific card context, but it could matter another way: If the top card between the shuffles is a land, the channelers now have a mana ability, which means if the Zenith or some replacement effect had asked you to pay mana between the shuffles, you could tap the channelers, see rule 605.3a.

Wow, okay. This was a bit more technical than I anticipated. Now for a maybe silly question, if the first reveal is a land, could I tap Mul Daya immediately for the two mana before the shuffle, or would I need to wait for Zenith to resolve? I'm in doubt, since I vaguely remember mana abilities to behave slightly different than other activated abilities in some cases, though I'm not sure(?).

@zo0x: Not unless you are asked to pay a cost. 605.3a A player may activate an activated mana ability whenever he or she has priority, whenever  he or she is casting a spell or activating an ability that requires a mana payment, or whenever a  rule or effect asks for a mana payment, even if it’s in the middle of casting or resolving a spell  or activating or resolving an ability.

Okay, good to know.


text:
Storage Wars: MtG Black Lotus, others, actual worth?
Storage Wars had an episode in 2012 where Daryl Sheets finds a bunch of MtG cards, some loose, some bindered. They sell the entire lot at Frank and Sons Collectible Show for $700, basically the price of the three cards below. (If you read online, you can find that all the other cards were commons/uncommons )

Question: What are these cards really worth in their present condition? (And did Daryl Sheets get ripped off? )
Google search link for this episode

Cannot tell from the picture how serious the damage to the lotus is.  That could be a mild crease or it could be a full tear that's been repaired, which could take several hundred dollars off the retail value.  The other two, if you look closely, have square corners, they are collector's edition cards, not "real" magic cards, worth maybe $50 each at most if you're a retailer that can find buyers interested in them.  Given the incredible hassle of parting out an retailing a collection, I doubt he got ripped off, unless there were playsets of dual lands in those "uncommons."

@Affe that comment should probably be an answer. i dont think someone will be able to come up with better. it looks like a repaired tear to me

@Rawrgramming he can't give an appropriate answer because he doesn't know the condition of the cards as well as the entire collection unless he is willing to watch it. If OP places a list for him pretty sure he can answer easily.

There is no list of the cards anywhere. All that is revealed on the show and online is that all the other cards are singles : commons and uncommons.

It's not really fair to judge if he got a decent price or not based just on retail value.  Just like trading in a car, you usually could have gotten more money selling it yourself, but the additional time requirements and overall hassle do not always make economic sense for your situation.  I need a new car now, not after I eventually find a buyer for my old one, Darrel needs to get whatever value he can out of his locker before the next episode so he can buy another locker, not when he eventually finds a Magic collector interested in that card.
So since he knowingly chose to turn them in to a dealer instead of attempt to retail them himself, it's more fair to look at buy-list prices than retail prices.  As of May 2013 Star City Games is offering 1000USD for a Mint Condition Unlimited Black Lotus (white-bordered printing), Troll and Toad is offering 1130USD.  (Just two of the largest and best known Internet retailers, chosen arbitrarily by me.)
Now the Lotus in that picture appears to have a rip in the lower left corner, which makes it basically worthless to collectors (who wouldn't usually be all that interested in the white-bordered printing anyway).  It only has whatever value it has to people who actually want to use it while playing the game.  Ever tried to sell a comic book with torn cover?  More or less the same.  I am no professional dealer, but I think giving around half the mint price for a torn card is very fair.
The other two have square corners, meaning they are from a special set of printings known as the "Collector's Edition," which are not considered "real" Magic cards and cannot be used in official tournaments.  They have some street value because some people like to have the "almost real" version when playing the game in formats where fake cards are allowed.  The current buy list value for both combined is $65 in May 2013.
If the card is not torn and is only creased, then yes he probably could have eventually done a bit better by retailing it, but we're back to the used car analogy.  It's also arguably even harder to move that product than a car if you're not already an established retailer.  A retailer like Star City Games can sell a white-border Lotus for $1500 online because Ben Bleiweiss is a household name in the collector community and people trust him not to sell them a counterfeit card.  If a seller with no history of moving Magic cards at all tossed a damaged Black Lotus up on eBay expecting people to be willing to pay anything resembling retail for it, they will find themselves relisting that auction for a very long time.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Commerce in Seven Wonders: possible to buy the same resource more than once in the same turn?
Situation: one of my neighbors has a single resource card; I want to build something that needs two of that resource; my neighbor's card is the only way I have access to that resource (i.e., I have none, and my other neighbor has none). Can I pay my neighbor for 2 of that resource (i.e., double the price) even though s/he has only one card? Or am I simply unable to build the structure which requires 2 of that resource?
For example: I want to build an Aqueduct, but only have a Stone Pit. My left neighbor has a Mine. My right neighbor has no stone. Can I pay my left neighbor 4 coins and get the 2 stones that I need? Or am I unable to build?
This is not clear to me from reading the official rules. All the rules state is, "It is possible, during the same turn, to buy one or more resources from both neighboring cities." It does not clarify if the neighboring player must have 2 available stones in order for me to purchase two, or if one is sufficient.

+1 for making me look in the rules to justify what I had merely assumed was correct. Welcome to the site!

You may only construct structures/wonder stages if you can produce the required resources in their cost, or your adjacent opponents have the missing resources you require (and you have the coins necessary to purchase those goods).
The rules are probably not as specific as they should be, but you can glean the correct answer by looking at the examples given. Unless a structure is free, you must have the resouces to build it and/or the coins necessary to buy the resources from your neighbors.

Some cards have a resource cost. To construct them, the player must produce the corresponding resources AND/OR buy them from one of his or her two neighboring cities.

The rules then give an example of the Giza board, its current production, and the fact that it cannot build the Aquaduct.

The resources of a city are produced by its Wonder board, its brown cards, its gray cards, and some yellow cards. To build a structure, a player’s city must produce the resources indicated on its card. Example : Giza produces 2 Stones, 1 Clay, 1 Ore, 1 Papyrus and 1 Textile :

its player cannot build the Aqueduct (cost : 3 Stones) as his city only produces two of the three stones required by that structure.

It is clear that since Giza requires 3 Stone to build the Aquaduct and cannot build it, but it would be quite odd if its neighbor's could buy 3 stone from Giza and build it themselves. This is further driven home buy the split '/' resource icon explanation on the last page of the Quick Rules or the regular rules tells you that only one of the pictured resources is available to you and your neighboring cities, not both. As well as the double resource icon providing two of the pictured resource.

the card produces one of the two pictured raw resources each turn.
Clarification : the player can use one OR the other resource to build a structure (or a wonder phase) but NOT both in a given turn. Neighboring players may purchase either, regardless of what the owner chooses to produce.

And finally, the last 2 Stone example from the rules, showing that both neighboring cities can buy her 2 stones and she can also use the same 2 stones in the same turn. This indicates that the resources a city has a available is the maximum that they can produce, and that both neighbors can buy 0, 1, or 2 stone the same turn the that the city owner uses 0, 1, or 2 stone.

Example B: during a game turn, both neighboring cities buy from her 2 Stones for a total of 8 coins (2 per resource). In the same turn, she can build a Library (cost : 2 Stones + 1 Textile) thanks to her resources, even though she has sold them to her neighboring cities.

The general consensus is that you cannot buy more than what they can produce:

If these resources are produced by a neighboring city...the player will be able to purchase the missing resources through commerce.

One stone is produced by the neighboring city, but two stone are not, so you can't buy two stone.

It looks like this is clarified in new version of the game.  From These rules.  Bold emphasis from the rules!

Each resource symbol can only be bought once per turn by the same player

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

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


text:
Is it possible for players to gain an advantage from colluding in blackjack?
Blackjack basic strategy makes the assumption that the player is playing independently, with one person's decision to hit/stand having no affect on another player's decision to hit/stand.  If the results of every single hand were independent from each other, then there would be no way to improve upon basic strategy and gain a positive expected return.
Blackjack hands, however, are not independent events.  Card counting takes advantage of the fact that the next hand is not independent of previous hands, due to the limited number of decks in the shoe.
A few days ago, I realized that there might be another way to gain an advantage by using the fact that the results for individual players during a single round are not independent of each other.
For example, most players will win when the dealer has a weak hand, and most players will lose when the dealer has a strong hand. Also, one player's cards reveal information about the probable outcome for both other player's hands and the dealer's hands for that particular round (even when there is a continuous shuffle machine being used).
If player A and player B have expected returns that are not independent of each other, is there a way for them to work together to alter their strategy in a way as to decrease the house edge?

Because of the common use of a shoe, many Blackjack tables, several hands are not independent. Only when the deal is from a freshly shuffled deck is the hand independent of the prior hand.

In a loose sense, players can collaborate by signaling each other their hole card when the deal is one up one down. this allows far better optimization by almost doubling the known number of cards for the sharp who counts. Especially true if one or more goes for small bets and lots of draws.
The more cards are known to a sharp, the better he's able to account the odds.
Note that signaling, if caught, is potentially grounds for removal from the facility and forfeiture of any chips.

Looking at it purely mathematically, given that there is no hidden information, there is no difference between a "team" of blackjack players playing as you describe, and one player playing multiple hands. So why don't card counters typically recommend playing multiple hands?
Card counting works because the player's winrate is dependent on the distribution of cards remaining in the deck. Most of a card counter's edge comes from adjusting their bet before the hand is dealt. Playing multiple hands means getting less information between placing bets, not more.
It is true that one player could alter their playing strategy based on the results of another player's hits, but there are some serious problems:

If you're talking about the information gained from the dealer's hole card, this is unaffected by your decision to "collude"
The times when the probabilities seriously change based on the turn of one or two cards, the shoe is probably marginal so you should be betting near the lower end of your spread anyway
Flagrantly altering your strategy based on a card count is so obvious a card counting flag that even card counters will often advise against doing it, especially given that the edge will be marginal

After looking at other answers, I feel it's worth mentioning in a footnote that I stuck to the math because that was what OP was really asking. There are reasons (like outright cheating) that it might be advantageous to have partners, but not anything like what was described in the question.

I think that if one was betting table minimum and the other max bet x 2 or or close to it, with the small player in front of the gorilla, taking advantage of the count if they know it, and trying to hole card the dealer, they could make a decent living.  The ideal situation would be the gorilla playing 5/6 with the small player at 4.  The small  player would try to act like a hunch or amatur player.
This is going to work at only the lowest of venues as any decent surveillance operator is going to see right through it even if they try to cap black with green or red, and have more than one stooge to be the small player.

This sounds really interesting, would you mind explaining a bit more? It's pretty jargon-y as is and I don't know enough to understand it.

The small player bets table minimum.  The big player "gorilla" bets table max x 2 hands.  The gorilla signals the small player how to play his hand, tapping his cigarette or riffling his chips, depending on what he wants him to do.  Don't try this as the wild deviations from basic strategy will bring heat from the pit and/or surveillance.  By capping a bet I mean putting a smaller denomination on top of a larger one to disguise the amount of the bet from surveillance.  They are busy watching for big chips $100/500/1000.

By changing out the stooge, I mean one time he is uncle Ho from the old country, next time a ditzy young female. Those kind of players are not expected to play perfect basic strategy. That way surveillance or the pit does not make the connection between the two players.  I hope this has removed some of the confusion from my answer.

By hole carding I mean trying to get a look at the dealers down card.  The best place to do this is from third base when it comes out of the shoe or from the third or fourth betting spots when the dealer uses the peek to see if he has an ace. I hope this has removed some of the confusion from my answer.

A way for colluders to gain an advantage in blackjack is the "Big Player" tactic, discussed in my answer to this question: Why is card counting considered illegal in Blackjack?
And in one of his "Bringing Down the House" series of books, Ben Mezrich talked about how a skilled player would insert the "cut" (and shown) card at exactly a particular place in the deck.
Depending on whether they wanted the dealer to draw or "miss" the card, the players would either draw or stand on the round that the particular cut card was dealt. That gave the players a ONE HAND advantage that was apparently enough to more than cancel out the house advantage.

When you break it down statistically and you're dealing with someone who can card-count, ace-track, shuffle-track, and perform / maintain a running tally of any other relevant factor in the game, it will always be to their advantage to be in control of as many hands as possible.
Playing on a team allows for a single mindset or approach to be taken towards every position on the table. Because a professional card counter is very 'informed' of the state of the remaining deck, they want to be able to manipulate the way those cards are dealt to the players as much as possible. This is why they would want to play every position on the table, as long as it doesn't interfere with their ability to count. Because of casino policies this may not be possible without having teammates who are under your 'command' and play the hands that you are not able to safely play without being asked to leave.


text:
What is a good generic strategy for playing as Yarpen?
In the Witcher Adventure Game, you can play as one of four characters trying to complete a set of quest. Yarpen is possibly the hardest character to play. He does not have a go to quest deck her can go to. However, I suspect that companions are key to Yapren's success.
Is there a good generic strategy that can be applied to Yarpen?

Meta


text:
Debt condition abuse?
The rules states that you cannot have two of the same conditions.  You can take a debt condition to gain two additional successes on your influence test to gain assets from the reserve. Thus if you already have a debt, does that mean that you automatically gain two additional successes for each gain asset actions?

Couldn't that just mean you aren't allowed to take the debt-for-success option if you already have a debt?

@JonathanHobbs: That was my feeling too but I was looking for an official source if there was any.  The accepted answer does provide it.

An official source? You answer your own question ... in the body of the question!

If you have ANY condition (whether it be debt, or a dark pact, or hallucinations), you cannot gain it again while it is in play.  So, if you take a debt (getting 2 additional "bucks" or influence for that purchase), on any subsequent turn while you are still in debt you cannot do that again or get the bonus.  It only happens once.
If, on a later turn, you are able to rid yourself of your debt (e.g., through its reckoning event), you can take on another debt to get the 2 additional bucks for another purchase.  But this is only available if you can clear the previous debt condition, since you only get the 2 bucks when you gain the condition card.
EDIT: The official ruling is found in the Reference Guide on p. 4 under the "Conditions" header: "An investigator cannot have multiple copies of the same Condition. If he would gain a Condition that he already has a copy of, he does not gain another copy of that Condition." and "If a Condition’s effect does not list a limit, it may only be used once per instance of the triggered event."
It is probably discussed in the manual too, but I find it is easier to look things up in the Reference Guide, generally speaking.
The above should be understood in conjunction with the Bank Loan text on the board: "When performing an Acquire Assets action, you may gain a Debt Condition to immediately add 2 successes to your test result".  Again, you can only gain a condition you don't have so this only triggers once, when you gain the debt.

This is the official ruling, 100%.  I've added a reference for you.

The quotes aren't relevant. They just says you can't have the same condition twice, which is not in dispute.

@Sardathrion, I don't know the game at all, yet I can confidently say this is how the rule should be interpreted. Gaining the debt condition is obviously what's called a cost, an action that must be taken to gain a benefit.

@ikegami, I guess what was left out of the quotes was that you only get the 2 influence when you GAIN the debt condition.  If you already have one, you cannot gain another, so you can't get the bonus again on later turns until you remove the debt.

That would indeed be a relevant quote, and the very answer to the question. I was searching for a copy of the rules online to check for that very wording.

Yup, for that you need to actually consult the board.  It says: "When performing an Acquire Assets action, you may gain a Debt Condition to immediately add 2 successes to your test result".  Since you can only acquire a condition if you don't have it, this does not stack.  I've added those details to my answer.

@Twitch_City: Indeed, the wording is unambiguous. Maybe finding ourselves in this situation close to midnight after a few glasses of fine whiskey might have impaired our abilities... Ah well ^_~  Still, probably worth keeping this for posterity in case that happens to somebody else.

As was already mentioned, the reference guide states:

An investigator cannot have multiple copies of the same
  Condition. If he would gain a Condition that he already has a
  copy of, he does not gain another copy of that Condition.

However, this rule does not prevent a player from making a choice to gain a condition, and then failing to actually gain it.
This issue is solved in the official errata:

In the Reference Guide, on page 4, the third bullet point
  under “Conditions” should read as follows: “An investigator
  cannot gain a copy of a Condition that he already has. An
  investigator cannot choose to gain a copy of a Condition
  that he already has.”

Whoa! You guys, you cannot take out a loan if you're in debt. That rule is there to mimic real life, where taking out a loan with bad credit is impossible. No the debt doesn't stack, but as long as you're in debt, you can't get the bank loan, because you can't gain the debt card, because you can't have more than one debt. From the reference guide under Bank Loans:

If an investigator already has a Debt Condition, he cannot acquire a bank loan.

Boom. Done. Pay me.

-1. There is no "bank loan" condition in Eldritch Horror but there is one in Arakham Horror, a different game. Real life analogies are pretty much irrelevant when playing a board game about mythological horror trying to destroy the world.


text:
Delayed and detained
Say your investigator gets delayed (cannot perform any actions bare "standing up") and then get Detained (for example, via a Mythos card). The Detained condition states that the investigator can only perform one action: roll influence to escape the detention. However, this means that you cannot "stand up" thus are still delayed.
I can see these solutions: (i) Stand up, you cannot roll influence and thus get the full bore of the Detained. (ii) You roll influence thus potentially escaping the detention but are still delayed at the end of your turn. (iii) You cannot have both conditions at the same time.
Is there an official one?

The influence roll on the Detained card is a Local Action, meaning any investigator on the space, yourself included, can roll to perform the action.  Normally, you would be able to roll on it to try to remove the Restriction.  However, being Delayed adds an additional restriction indicating that you cannot perform any actions.
I believe the question is based around if the act of standing up from being Delayed is an Action.  As the rule book states:

A Delayed investigator cannot perform actions.

The only logical way for an investigator to cease detainment is for the act of standing up to not count as an action.
The net result for your round would be:

Any investigators before you, who are also on your space, can roll as a local action to try to discard your Detained card
On your turn, regardless of Detained status, you stand up and perform no other actions due to being Delayed
Any investigators after you, who are also on your space, can roll as a local action to try to discard your Detained card
During your encounter phase, if the Detained was not removed, flip the card and encounter the back

This is how we ran it when it came up during play... ^_~


text:
Unlcear about noise making as a useful tactical move
One of the actions one can take is to make noise. This adds one noise token to one's current location. In addition, as far as I understand the rules, each character makes a noise automatically.
This means that making a noise is only useful in a very narrow set of circumstances: zombies have no line of sight, there is no big group of characters, and no other noise around (breaking doors, some spells, etc...)
Have I missed something?


text:
How to play order of cards and triggering effects in Harry Potter Defense Against the Dark Arts
This question is for the 2 player Harry Potter Defense Against the Dark Arts dueling game and not the 4 play cooperative game.  It wouldn't let me add the new label for the dueling game.
How do we process the effects of additional cards we draw?
Meaning, do I need to be strategic with the order of how I play my cards or can I retroactively change my actions based on subsequent cards I draw.
For example, if I have these 5 cards.

Alohomora  -  Spell  Gain 1 coin
Diffindo  -  Spell Banish a card from my hand or discard pile
Wand  -  Item Gain a lightning bolt
Book  -  Item Gain 2 coins
Ascendio  -  Spell  Gain 2 coin/ Draw a Card

A) I use Diffindo to banish the Alohomora
B) I get a lightning bolt from Wand
C) I get 2 coins from Book
D) I get 2 more coins from Ascendio and draw an extra card
E6) Cat  -  (Drawn from Ascendio)  Ally.  If we play 3 spells, we gain a lightning bolt
I play my Cat as my Ally but I now take back banishing the Alohomora because I want to utilize the Cat ability to get another lightning bolt.
Is what I did legal, take back banishing the Alohomora because I drew the Cat?  If it's illegal, I guess that means I need to be more strategic when playing my cards.

"Take backs" are generally not handled by the rules and are more of a social question: how does your group play? If your group plays loose with the rules, they may allow take backs.

Generally no, it's not allowed.
Once a card's effect has taken place, you can't reverse the decision. As L. Scott Johnson aluded to in his comment, this is something that friends at the table can allow, especially if the outcome hasn't changed because of something that was triggered by the effect.
For example, if you banish a coin to draw another card, and receive another coin. If you had kept the first coin and banished something else you could now have afforded buying a new card so you want to change your mind about what you banish. At this point you've cheated by looking at what will happen in the future depending on what you decide to banish. That's like looking at the top card before deciding what you want to do.
In your example however it more comes down to a gentlemans agreement since the card you banished doesn't affect what you were allowed to do while it was in play. So I wouldn't be surprised if your opponent allows it if you ask.
I would personally however say that this is a good lesson in tactics and use it to learn how to plan what you need to do in a turn to minimize mistakes like this.

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


text:
In Harry Potter Hogwarts Battle, can we use the Transfiguration proficiency when the Basilisk is out
In Harry Potter Hogwarts Battle, game 7, we ran into a situation with the Basilisk and the Transfiguration proficiency.
If the Basilisk is out, it says we can't draw any additional cards.
The Transfiguration Proficiency says whoever has this proficiency can discard an Item to search our deck for a card with a value of 5 or less and add it to our hand.
Is this allowed under the rules while the Basilisk is out?  Can we use our Transfiguration ability to get a card in our deck to put in our hand?

According to the other site it is allowed. Though I checked the linked FAQ and the designer's comment that the ruling is based on, only touches the issue peripherally. If I could find a decent exact quote, I'd post this as an answer.

Yes. In many cases like this the right answer can be found by looking for "keywords". In this case the keyword is "draw": the Basilisk does not allow you to "draw" additional cards. If an ability does not use the word "draw" then it is allowed even if it involves adding a card to your hand. In this case, "searching" your deck or discard pile and "adding" a card to your hand is not "drawing" an additional card as the term "draw" is not used. So the answer to the question should be Yes, you can use Transfiguration when the Basilisk is out.

Added an explicit answer to the question (Yes).

Yes, you can search for cards when the Basilisk is out.
This is confirmed by game designer Andrew Wolf on BGG (although he is talking about the Charms Proficiency, but the meaning seems clear):

Searching your discard pile for a card to put in your hand is not considered drawing, and as such, not prevented by the Basilisk.

BGG User David Jones used that answer when producing a comprehensive FAQ (page 5):

Q: If the Basilisk is in play, do “search” abilities count as card draw?
A: No.  As with a previous example regarding “discard,” the word “draw” is also a keyword.  In later years, the players will encounter abilities that allow them to search their discard or player deck for a card and put it into their hand.  Because these abilities do not use the keyword “draw” they can be used while Basilisk is in play.


text:
Suzy Lafayette super power
From the rules :

Suzy Lafayette (4 life points): as soon as she
  has no cards in her hand, she draws a card from the draw pile.

So it looks like a recipe to have Suzy performs a suite :
draw card/play card => has 0 card in hand
draw card/play card => has 0 card in hand
draw card again
...
Doesn t it hurt the gameplay ?

It doesn't hurt the gameplay. It's a decent special ability, but not overpowered. Here are situations that discourage or prevent action chaining:

She can't play more than one Bang! card per turn (unless she has a Volcanic),
Dueling is dangerous when she holds no other cards,
Mancatos are not playable unless someone is shooting at her (so not on her turn),
Emporio, Dligenza, and Wells Fargo result in card draw, so do not trigger her ability,
She probably would not play a gun that is a downgrade.

Situationally, she might also not want to use a Gatling or Indians if it might kill a teammate, or a Beer if she and her teammates are at full life, or a Panico if seated next to teammates.
While I don't see it explicitly in the rules, my group has always played that you can't play a duplicate card. The rules do say

There is no limit on the cards you can have in front of you provided that they do not share the same name.

so there is no reason to think she could play a Barrel, Mustang, or Scope if she already has one. For weapons, the rules say

If you want to play a new weapon when you already have one, you
  must discard the one you already have.

which leaves a bit of ambiguity about whether Suzy could discard a Remington to play a new Remington. (Is it a new gun if it's the same as the old gun? My group says "no".)
Suzy with a Volcanic is a dangerous combination, but she is by no means overpowered. Calamity Janet and Slab the Killer are also particularly scary with a Volcanic.

With the wild west show card Showdown in play and Suzy with a volcanic it becomes a very fast game. :)

Yeah, that seems too much! I haven't played the expansion, but reading reviews the consensus seems to be "lots of flavor, bad balance". I guess that's an extreme example of bad balance!

Maybe but you should also remember that you have to have suzy, a volcanic, showdown and hope that you have range at least on the people sitting next to you in order to pull it off. A mustang on either side could put an end to it pretty fast.


text:
Can I play a straight with phoenix on top of a 1-A straight?
Is it authorized to play a 2, ..., Ace, Phoenix straight on top of a 1,..., Ace straight ?

Was this actually a situation you encountered??

As a matter of fact, yes :-D at the daily lunch session at work

Wow! In a very large number of games, I've seen someone have a 1-Ace straight twice ever (same person both times), but both times it used the Phoenix.

Heh. We're not your average tichu player I guess ;) j/k

No.
When using the Phoenix as a wild card, it must always take the value of another regular card from 2-A. Because there is no card with value "Ace + 1", there's no card there for the Phoenix to stand in for.
Only a bomb can go over any Ace high straight.


text:
Points of influence gained by Lord power
In Oriflamme, say you have 4 cards of your family in a row and reveal the second one which is a Lord.
Do you gain 3 points of influence (because the Lord has cards of your family as direct neighbors) or 4 points (because you have 4 adjacent cards of your family) ?

The rules say:

LORD: Earn 1 (influence), plus 1 (influence) per adjacent card that is
in your family.
Each adjacent card in your family earns you 1 (influence) regardless
of whether it is revealed or covered.

So you would count all adjacent cards.  if you have a total of 4 adjacent cards you would score 5 points.  one for the Lord and 4 for the adjacent family members, revealed, covered or not.
Note these need to be adjacent to the Lord,  just having family members in the row, as you give in your question, would not be enough.  Adjacent means they have to be part of a stack next to the Lord card.

as usual I forgot the concept of "stack" which makes it possible to earn more than 3 points by round with the Lord. Thanks !


text:
Proper way to play Ghostly Possession Enchantment Aura?
When playing Ghostly Possession, since it would make the enchanted creature useless by both preventing all combat damage that would be dealt by and also dealt to enchanted creature then what is the purpose of even giving the creature flying?
Not fully understanding the proper way to utilize this card or the benefits.

If you play it on your own creature, you now have a flying blocker that can't be dealt damage. That's not 'useless' at all. If you play it on an opponent's creature, you can stop it from dealing damage, in exchange for giving them a really good blocker.

Would the enchanted creature still deal dmg or just make it a good blocker which can not kill any attackers? I seen the damage dealt by as both attack and block damage.

@Damainman, Something prevented does not happen. It does not deal damage. It cannot be dealt damage.

The coolest thing I've seen in limited was enchanting an Geist of Saint Traft. Geist's Angel is a sepprate object to the game and not effected by the enchantment.

That's definitely another good use. :)


text:
How to properly play activated abilities of twilight drover and other creatures?
When playing Twilight Drover with multiple counters, I have the following questions which also apply to other creatures:

How many times can I play the activated ability within one turn when it does not have the TAP symbol? I want to clarify as some people say once and other people say as many times as long as I have mana for it.
Can I only play the activated ability on my turn or can I also play it when it is not my turn?
If the creature had two different activated abilities and neither ability had the TAP symbol nor asked you to only choose one, then can you play both of the abilities or only one of them?
Can any of the activated abilities be countered?

1: Activated abilities always have the pattern "cost:effect", and as long as you can pay the costs, you can activate it as often as you like. There are a few exceptions where you have a limited number of activations per turn, but those will always be printed on the card. Note that the TAP symbol is a cost like any other, and if you manage to untap your permanent, you can use that ability again without issue.
2: You can activate non-mana, non-Planeswalker abilities at instant speed. Again, exceptions are printed on the card.
3: There are no such restrictions, except for Planeswalker abilities.
4: Yes, but very few cards do that, like Stifle. An ability is not a spell, so cards that counter spells do not work on abilities.

Easy +1, of course, but a tiny caveat: abilities can also be countered for lack of a target, the same as spells.  For instance, suppose there were a card that read 'sacrifice a creature: ~this~ deals 3 damage to target creature and 3 damage to that creature's controller'.  Then if e.g. you sacrificed a creature targeting an opponent's Grizzly Bears, and they bounced the Bears in response, then they wouldn't take 3 damage because the ability is countered.

For your #2 answer, you state non-mana abilities. Does that mean I can only use the activated ability of the Twilight Drover on my turn and can not activate it when it is not my turn? On a side note I read there are some exceptions to your #1 answer, such extort. If i read correctly, Extort can only be activated once.

@Damainman No, by default you can abilities whenever you could play an instant, that means whenever you have priority, which also happens on enemy turns. The timing of mana abilities have special rules, you can use them pretty much anytime; for example the abilities of basic lands are mana abilities. And Extort is not an activated ability, it's a triggered ability that you can only activate when it says you can, and only once.

@StevenStadnicki Yes, rules can counter spells and abilities as well, but I didn't read his question that way. I suppose he meant "countered by spells or abilities"

Just to clarify further, if a creature has summoning sickness then can activated abilities still be played as long as the activated ability does not have a tap symbol? That is how I interpreted Rule 302.6.

@Damainman That is correct.


text:
Do triggered abilities still trigger if the creature is tapped?
For example if Falkenrath Noble was tapped and another creature dies then would his triggered ability still trigger or only if it was not tapped?

The thing to remember with Magic is that the wording is very specific for a reason; if a card says whenever it means whenever, if it says tap and do this it can only be activated if the creature can be tapped. For anything from when to play a card to who/what its target can be simply consider the specific wording of a card; if it says whenever creature attacks is means that you only need to declare the attack, if it says whenever creature deals damage it has to deal damage first. Sounds obvious but it’s easy enough to forget.

You might be being confused with the old magic rules were Artifacts' static abilities were toggled off if they were tapped, but that no longer applies under the new rules, and never applied to creatures!

@Nick, Side note: Howling Mime still has its original behaviour through a change in wording.

@ikegami Hmm, I wonder why they kept it for Howling Mine but not Winter Orb?

Yes. Whether an permanent is tapped or not has no effect on its abilities. This is the case for abilities of all kinds (static, triggered and activated).
Three things change when a creature is tapped:

It is considered tapped by anything that cares.
It cannot be tapped. (Effects instructing to tap the permanent are skipped. Costs consisting of tapping the permanent can't be payed.)
It cannot attack.

Do note that the first two items can indirectly prevent abilities from triggering ("Whenever an untapped creature dies, ...") or from functioning ("..., tap it. If you do, ...").

It being tapped does have an influence on its ability if it's an activated ability, as in it cannot activate an activated ability that has tap as a cost to activate if it is already tapped.

@CLockeWork, See update.

Happy with that @ikegami

I didn't mean for the rewrite to be so extensive; Glad you like it.


text:
Does Shelob make Legendary Food?
Shelob, Child of Ungoliant has the ability

Whenever another creature dealt damage this turn by a Spider you controlled dies, create a token that's a copy of that creature, except it's a Food artifact with "2, Tap, Sacrifice this artifact: You gain 3 life," and it loses all other card types.

According to the rules text, "loses all other card types" includes subtypes. However, since "Legendary" is a supertype, does that mean that the Food token does become Legendary if it comes from a Legendary creature dying?

Note that even if the food token is legendary, it still retains the name of the creature it copied, so you would only face a legend-rule conflict if you have a second legendary food token of the same name.

Not just food, I believe - if I happen to have a copy of the same creature then I have to choose which one sticks around, right?

Yep, that's correct; 704.5j says "if two or more legendary permanents with the same name are controlled by the same player, that player chooses one of them, and the rest are put into their owners' graveyards." Nothing in there that those permanents have to also be the same type(s).

There's a reason mirror box is on my shelob maybe list

Yes, legendary. I base this on rule 205.4b, which

205.4b An object’s supertype is independent of its card type and subtype, even though some supertypes are closely identified with specific card types. Changing an object’s card types or subtypes won’t change its supertypes. Changing an object’s supertypes won’t change its card types or subtypes. When an object gains or loses a supertype, it retains any other supertypes it had.
Example: An ability reads, “All lands are 1/1 creatures that are still lands.” If any of the affected lands were legendary, they are still legendary.

and given that a ruling on gatherer mentions "losing all other card types and subtypes", but not supertypes.

Nice! And then if someone animates their Snow-covered Forest and makes it their Ring-bearer I can have a Legendary Snow Basic Food token.

The token will be legendary food

205.4b An object’s supertype is independent of its card type and subtype, even though some supertypes are closely identified with specific card types. Changing an object’s card types or subtypes won’t change its supertypes.

Types and subtypes are inextricably linked, because each subtype belongs to a specific type, so changing the types necessarily wipes away the subtypes.  Supertypes are not linked in the same way, and changing types does not change the supertypes.


text:
How to play a planeswalker such as Sorin, Lord of Innistrad?
When playing Sorin, Lord of Innistrad, I know I add 1 loyalty counter at my upkeep. However if I have 6 loyalty my questions are:

Can I play the -2 ability twice or only once per upkeep?
My other question is can I play +1 and then -2 on the same upkeep?

You may wish to read this.

I know I add 1 loyalty counter at my upkeep.

huh? no. Outside of the effect of a spell or ability, you only add loyalty counters onto Sorin when you place it on the battlefield, and when you activate its +1 Loyalty ability.

Can I play the -2 ability twice or only once per upkeep?

No, for two reasons.

You can't play it during your upkeep at all. Loyalty abilities can only be used "as a sorcery". (On your turn, in a main phase, when the stack is empty.)
You can only activate an ability of a given Planeswalker once per turn.

My other question is can I play +1 and then -2 on the same upkeep?

No, for the same reasons.

606.3. A player may activate a loyalty ability of a permanent he or she controls any time he or she has priority and the stack is empty during a main phase of his or her turn, but only if no player has previously activated a loyalty ability of that permanent that turn.

Thanks, I will accept your answer shortly. Have a 10 min counter. That makes sense and clears up my confusion.

Added the rule.


text:
Do tokens ever go to the graveyard and can they be sacrificed or exiled?
If I had a card that said something like, "Enchanted creature gets +1/+1 for every creature in your graveyard". Would that also apply to tokens which died in previous turns? Also if I play a card which says, return target creature from the graveyard then can I choose a token?
Right now I use Dice to represent tokens, but not sure what to do once any of my tokens die.
Also for cards which say sacrifice a creature or exile a creature, would these apply to tokens?

I'm certain whatever card you're referring to would say  …for every creature card in your graveyard… Similarly, reanimation spells always say "return target creature card" to the battlefield (or your hand). The graveyard never contains creatures, only cards. Tokens are not cards, they are only permanents on the battlefield.

If I had a card that said something like, "Enchanted creature gets +1/+1 for every creature in your graveyard".

There cannot be such a card.
Since "creature" means "creature permanent" which means "creature card or token on the battlefield", and since a card or token cannot be in the graveyard and on the battlefield at the same time, the enchantment would never affect the attached object's power and toughness.
The ability would likely read "Enchanted creature gets +1/+1 for each creature card in your graveyard" like Jarad, Golgari Lich Lord's, which means it wouldn't count any tokens since tokens aren't cards.

Let's assume there's a card that has the ability "Enchanted creature gets +1/+1 for each creature card and each creature token in your graveyard".

Would that also apply to tokens which died in previous turns?

Tokens go to the graveyard just like a card would. However, they only stay there for a very short period of time. The next time State-Based Actions (SBAs) are performed, they will cease to exist.
Tokens placed in the graveyard on a previous turn will have ceased to exist long ago.
In fact, the effect checking for tokens in the graveyard wouldn't even see the tokens that died this turn except for an extremely short (and practically useless) period of time. The longest scenario might be when the tokens are put into the graveyard during the resolution of a spell or ability, because the SBAs will be only be performed after the spell or ability finishes resolving. It could matter if your opponent has Hidden Predators, but that's about it.

if I play a card which says, return target creature from the graveyard then can I choose a token?

There cannot be such a card.
Again, creatures (aka creature permanents) cannot be found in the graveyard. It would be impossible to pick a legal target.
The effect would read something like "Return target creature card from your graveyard to the battlefield". This excludes tokens since they aren't cards.
You will never find "Return target creature card or token from your graveyard to the battlefield." for two reasons:

Even if there was a token was in the graveyard when targets were chosen, it would have ceased to exists by the time the spell or ability resolved.
A rule prohibits the tokens from changing zones once they've left the battlefield.

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

Right now I use Dice to represent tokens,

It's a poor (and illegal) choice to use a die to represent a type of token since a die can't be tapped.

but not sure what to do once any of my tokens die.

Your tokens would move the graveyard, and soon after they will cease to exist. Most people don't bother physically moving them to the graveyard. Simply adjust the count.

cards which say sacrifice a creature or exile a creature, would these apply to tokens?

Yes. "Creature" means "creature permanent" which means "creature card or token on the battlefield".

Note that there isn't any card that reads "for every creature in your graveyard". That wouldn't make sense, since creatures only exists on the battlefield. Outside of the battlefield, they are creature cards or spells. So it would read "for every creature card in your graveyard". And because tokens are not cards, Hidden Predators would never trigger becase of that ability.

@Pablo, ug, missed that. Fixed

I use dice for tokens; I think it works just fine. For casual play, at least. When you have a bunch of the same type of token on the battlefield, that's an easy way to deal with it.  It's generally easy enough to track if you tap some of them. Again, for casual, not tournament play.

I have used dice for tokens as well. I'll use two 10-sided dice. One dice is for tapped, the other for untapped. But it's only for 1 deck and it's still quite annoying, even in casual play. I add a 6-sided if needed to count up to 60.

@Chris G, Fixed.

Once a creature token "dies", it goes to the graveyard and then ceases to exist. (Some one can came along and quote the Expanded Rules.)
Creature tokens still count as going to the graveyard (for the purposes of cards that say "If a creature died..." or "Put a +1/+1 counter on this creature every time a creature dies."), but they are NEVER considered to be in the graveyard. Therefore, they won't count for the enchantment you mentioned, they can't be reanimated, etc.
Creature tokens count as creatures in every way; You can sacrifice and exile them to pay costs normally.

Technically there is a brief moment where they get the +1/+1, but it is too short a window to matter except for weird situations. Added an answer with an example, but yours is correct 99.9% of the time. (I just like weird conditions)

Tokens aren't exiled when they go to the graveyard; they cease to exist completely.  See rule 110.5f: "A token that's phased out, or that's in a zone other than the battlefield, ceases to exist."

Updated the answer to include the information mentioned by the comments. Thanks guys!

Re "but they are NEVER considered to be in the graveyard." NOT TRUE. They will be in the graveyard from the time they are placed there until the next time SBAs are performed. Therefore, they WILL count towards the enchantment, if only for a very short will. This can matter for [mtg]Hidden Predators[/mtg]

If you look really hard you can find instances where it matters, but in general you can think of tokens as just ceasing to exist once they leave the battlefield (while triggering just as if they were a card, i.e. activating morbid when going to the graveyard).
So to answer your questions:

Would that also apply to tokens which died in previous turns? - Nope, they ceased to exist
Also if I play a card which says, return target creature from the graveyard then can I choose a token? - Nope, they cease to exist before you have the opportunity to do anything
Right now I use Dice to represent tokens, but not sure what to do once any of my tokens die. - You are fine, just pay attention and see if anything cares about the token going to the graveyard (outside of odd cases like below nothing sees a token in the graveyard). So in your +1/+1 instance you would not get +1/+1.

To go into details, here is comprehensive rule 110.5f.

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

There is technically a brief period where the token is in the graveyard (before state-based effects are checked). However no one can do anything during that time.
If you have a weird effect like Hidden Predators in play the distinction could matter. Also note that while Hidden Predators has an intervening if clause only the if is checked on resolution, not the original trigger condition.
To clarify again however, there is never a point in time where you can take any action and a token exists in the graveyard. This is typically simplified to tokens never exist in the graveyard they only enter it, that is close enough for all but the most odd ball cases.
Also it is important to note the other odd rule with tokens, they get stuck once they go somewhere, this happens when something like Cloudshift plays tricks without waiting.

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

another odd-ball corner case involving Tokens ceasing to exist is Withdraw and a token copy of Simian Spirit Guide. If the first targeted creature is SSG, then the token can be exiled from your hand to pay {1} mana to prevent the second creature from being bounced (all before state-based effects are checked and the token ceases to exist).

@user1873: No, 110.5g says that the token can't be exiled from your hand, so you can't use it to pay {1}.

@jwodder, they must have updated the rules to take that loophole into account. I do believe that it worked at one point.

A creature that gets +1/+1 for each creature card in the graveyard won't work with tokens, even for a brief moment, because tokens are not cards. So it wouldn't even work with something like Hidden Predators.

Re "To clarify again however, there is never a point in time where you can take any action and a token exists in the graveyard." This is not true. If an effect has two effects, the first of which sends a token to a graveyard, the second will be performed with the token in the graveyard. SBAs are not performed until after the spell or ability finishes resolving.

Your answer to his question is wrong too. It has nothing to do with the question, and there could actually be tokens in the graveyard in some circumstances. Kudos on mentioning Hidden Predators. I hadn't noticed that you did when I posted mine.

@ikegami: You are using an odd definition of action that does not match one I have ever seen. I am defining action as something that you get to take such as playing a spell or activating an ability. Of course odd things happen during the resolution of a spell or ability but that is not taking an action, that is resolving a spell or ability.

@user1873: Since 110.5g causes it to not change zones, you could add infinite mana otherwise (say if it were a replacement effect).

@Guvante, What you describe is an effect. An effect consists of one or more instructions that instruct you to perform an action such as destroy. This is official MTG terminology.

I think tokens can die but they never go to graveyard. they remain on the zone then cease to exist when state-based actions check next time. lets say if 3 tokens die this turn i cannot play ravenous trap for a 0 cost.

Welcome to the site and thanks for your answer. Unfortunately it is wrong - to start with, the definition of "dies" is "is put into a graveyard from the battlefield" so your first sentence is contradictory. Please check out some of the other answers here.

You're right about ravenous trap, but that's because it specifies creature cards and tokens aren't cards, not because the tokens didn't go to the graveyard.


text:
7 Wonders, Babylon Side B: Using Resources and Coins from 2nd Wonder
When using side B of Babylon, after acquiring the 2nd Wonder Stage, I am able to purchase the last two cards in my had. Can I then:
1) Use coins from the sixth card (which I burn) to pay for the seventh card?
2) Use a resource of the sixth card that I payed for to acquire the seventh card?
Example:
John (playing with Babylon on side B, already completed his 2nd Wonder Stage) has three coins left in his sixth turn. He knows that he cannot use any coins his neighbors may give him at the completion of turn number six. He is holding two cards, neither of which he can afford. However, if he trashes the sixth card to gain 3 coins, he can afford to purchase the seventh card using resources from his neighbors. Is this allowed?

Yes, as per the duplicate question. The answer from the designer covers this very case. Perhaps the duplicate question should have a more informative title.


text:
In Robinson Crusoe, Can I do single-pawn actions multiple times on the same card?
For example, can every character use one of their pawns to do 3 'gathering' actions in a round? All three actions would require dice rolls.

From the official rulebook: (p.6)

Note!
Each Action can be taken multiple times in the same round,
except for the Threat Action, which is always a one time Action taken
on a specific card, after which the card is discarded.

Only restrictions regarding "Gathering resources" are (p.9)

This [Gathering] Action cannot be taken directly on the Island tile with the
players’ Camp since players get resources from that tile during the
Production phase.

and

You can gather only once per round from each source; i.e. if one
player assigns his pawn(s) to gather from one source, no other player
can gather from that same source this round.

Addtionally, from the FAQ 1.0 (made by Ignacy Trzewiczek himself) (p.10)

If I put one of my pawns on any Action, will the second pawn placed
there automatically support me? Or could we, for example, place 3
single pawns on the Weapons track, to build 3 Weapons (and roll the
dice three times)?
It's your choice if you want to treat each pawn
separately.


text:
In Hive, can Beetle hop over to another lane?

Here. Is it possible to move this way?
I figure that neither the rule of hive continuity nor tile sliding rule are  violated here. The rules also don't mention any direct contact requirements like with the Spider. So... is the move valid?

No, the one hive rule is continuous, even during a move.  At least in the version of the rules that I have, the second example under the One Hive rule states

Moving the black Queen Bee to a position where it re-links the Hive is
  also an illegal move as the Hive is left unlinked while the piece is
  in transit.

This would apply to your beetle move as well, since while it was in transit, it would not be connected to the hive at all.

Well, my perception of that example was that it illustrated that even while moving you have to keep the hive's connectivity. That is, because of that Grasshopper at bottom-left you cannot take off the Queen Bee. At the same time, for most moves (especially with Grasshopper) you really must disconnect the piece you're moving. So, to me it wasn't really clear that pieces must slide along the hive's edge all the time.

The issue here is not about breaking the piece away from the hive to move it; you do this when you move ants, spiders, anything. The issue is the beetle may only move one space and it must "slide" around the hive. Therefore it may only slide into the 2 adjacent hexes as shown in the photo (or climb onto the spider). Even spiders and ants could not carry out the move indicated and count it as a single step - ants and spiders would also need to first slide into the adjacent hex before sliding back out to the spot indicated - 2 steps on their journey where spiders must carry out 3 steps per move.

I am pretty sure that all piece movements are considered to be of a sliding nature around the outside of the hive as the baseline movement.
The clarification on Spider isn't specific to Spider, that is just where they mention it.
A basic move (as the Bee or Beetle not going up or down does) is defined as moving around the outside of the hive, making that move illegal. Put another way, each move you make like this involves still touching at least one similar piece.
Note that the Spider and Ant both make compound moves by having repeated normal moves.

To me, putting that rule restriction under the Spider piece rules and not under the general Movement section suggests that it limits how spiders move and not how every piece moves.


text:
How to "dematerialize" a deck in the Magic Assistant card manager?
(I'm hoping that a question about a utility related to Magic: The Gathering is on topic here, otherwise I apologize.)
I am trying to organize my collection using the open source Magic Assistant program. Since much of my collection is already built into decks, I've created a number of them and added cards from the database. The remainder of my collection has been added into my "main" collection area, so every card I physically own is accounted for exactly once. Now, I want to break down a few of those decks and use the cards elsewhere, but I don't want to lose the card lists.
It seems like I want to use something called a "virtual deck" here, but I'm not sure exactly how these work. I have figured out how to build a virtual deck from scratch, and later "materialize" it into a real deck. This moves the cards from "main" collection into the deck and converts it to a physical one.
What I can't figure out is how to go the other way and "dematerialize" a deck. I have a physical deck, and I want to move all the cards back into the "main" collection, but I don't want to lose the deck list. So far, everything I've tried has resulting in either:

The card disappearing from the deck and moving back into my "main", or
An extra copy of the card ending up in my collection.

Is this something that's supported by Magic Assistant? If not, is there any way to do it manually, other than moving all the cards out and re-creating the virtual deck from scratch?

It looks like you can accomplish this by doing the following:

Open up the deck you want to convert.
Select the entire list of cards.
Right click and click Edit Card...
Change the Ownership dropdown to "Virtual" and click OK.
Copy the list of cards, and paste into the main collection.

This will result in each card appearing as physically owned in the collection and virtually owned in the deck. If you do this, you may want to also modify the deck's properties to make it Virtual so that cards you add to it in the future will be virtual.

Cool, this works; I did have to add "Own Count" to the field list, to distinguish virtual cards from real ones, but it makes sense.

It looks like virtual cards and real cards are colored differently in the list when they are not selected.


text:
Does Exalted still apply if additional creatures are later included?
I want to confirm that my interpretation of the Exalted keyword is correct, specifically when creatures are added to the attack as an effect during the declare attackers phase.
As an example, supposed I had Alesha, Who Smiles At Death and Angelic Benediction in play. My Alesha now has Exalted:

Whenever a creature you control attacks alone, that creature gets +1/+1 until end of turn.

Alesha also has an attack trigger:

Whenever Alesha, Who Smiles at Death attacks, you may pay [W/B][W/B]. If you do, return target creature card with power 2 or less from your graveyard to the battlefield tapped and attacking.

If I use Alesha's triggered ability, I have to do so during the Delcare Attackers step, at which point a second creature will now be attacking. So Alesha is not longer "attacking alone". However, as I understand the timing rules,  Exalted triggers at the same time as Alesha's ability, so I can choose to have it resolve first, and she will get the +1/+1, then the second creature will enter the battlefield attacking?
Is that correct?

I think the key is that exalted triggers on the declaration of a single attacker; it doesn't matter what the combat looks like after that declaration.

@Samthere that was what I assumed, but the wording on the cards says "attacks alone" and doesn't mention a specific step (e.g. "is declared as an attacker" or "during your declare attackers step"), which many other reminder texts do, so I wasn't sure.

That is correct. Exalted triggers, and the creature that's attacking alone gets +1/+1 until end of turn. It doesn't matter whether that creature continues attacking alone for the rest of the turn (of course, it can't once the combat phase is over).
There's a Gatherer ruling on Angelic Benediction to this effect:

10/1/2008: Some effects put creatures onto the battlefield attacking. Since those creatures were never declared as attackers, they’re ignored by exalted abilities. They won’t cause exalted abilities to trigger. If any exalted abilities have already triggered (because exactly one creature was declared as an attacker), those abilities will resolve as normal even though there may now be multiple attackers.


text:
What's this circular board with a spider in the middle
This was hung on the wall at a BBQ restaurant, but I'm not familiar with the board. It's almost like a dart board, but it's wooden with triangles on the sides and holes in the corners.

Well, the easy answer is that it's definitely a Carrom board. In particular, American Carrom which has much larger pockets than traditional Carrom boards: Your board exactly matches this image from BoardGameGeek, which is one of the board layouts the Carrom Company used for their Crown Combination Game Boards.
Of note, it's likely that the board is double-sided and would've originally had nets in each of the corner pockets (it looks like OP's picture shows the remains of one on the top right).
However, the design on the surface really has nothing to do with Carrom except possibly for the black line around the edge representing the base line (not sure if the measurements are correct for that) and the markings in the corner representing the diagonals. It's not uncommon for Carrom boards — especially American Carrom boards — to be printed with designs suitable for other games — often using the Carrom rings/discs themselves as playing pieces — so it can serve multiple purposes (checkerboards are quite common, for example). Many of these types of combination board were sold with the promise of "Plays more than 100 games," and the BGG page on American Carrom claims there are over 500 possibilities although that really depends on (a) what boards (if any) are printed on the other side, and (b) how loose a definition of 'different game' you use when counting.
The circular layout in particular seems to be used for a game called "The Spider and the Flies". I suspect the triangles around the border were meant for playing Backgammon (or any of the many many games one could play on a Backgammon board). The numbers on the corners, I can't even begin to guess at.
I do doubt darts was one of the games this was meant for though.

The main image for "The Spider and the Flies" on BoardGameGeek exactly matches the OP's board, but with nets in the corner holes.

What a great answer


text:
Can # Colorless pay Colorless Mana?
Looking at the notes for Inspiring Statuary, I noticed:

Is this accurate?  Is it specific to the Improvise ability or does it go for any # colorless cards (for example Cloudpost)?

In the most general sense, rulings on Gatherer are always accurate. They are as official as the card text and the comprehensive rules.

Improvise has the following definition in rule 702.125a:

Improvise is a static ability that functions while the spell with improvise is on the stack. “Improvise” means “For each generic mana in this spell’s total cost, you may tap an untapped artifact you control rather than pay that mana.”

A generic mana cost is represented by a number in a circle, and can be paid for with any type of mana. Colored and colorless costs are not generic, so they cannot be paid for with improvise.
Cloudpost is a different matter. Cloudpost adds colorless mana to your mana pool, and that has always been the case. Its current text is

Cloudpost enters the battlefield tapped.
{T}: Add {C} for each Locus on the battlefield.

There is no such thing as generic mana. Any card that is printed as adding {1} to your mana pool actually adds {C}.

So then would something like Affinity for Artifacts take off {C} costs?

No, affinity reduces generic costs. There are currently no printed effects that reduce colorless costs.

Note that explicitly distinguishing between colorless mana symbols and generic mana symbols is a relatively new thing (says I, who hasn't been really actively playing since the original Ravnica, so most rules changes the last ten years seem relatively new to me). This is why many older lands which according to old printings produce what looks like generic mana actually produce colorless mana. Let's look at the Cloudpost you linked:

(This copy of) Cloudpost was printed in Mirrodin, long before the distinction was made. Therefore it's printed with a generic mana symbol. However, the card text on the right (which is the current official text legally considered to be printed on the card) uses a colorless mana symbol.
Generic mana is part of a cost, and can be payed with any sort of mana (and is also the part of a mana cost which is most often reduced by various effects like inspire). Colorless mana is mana you can add to and have in your mana pool. It works basically the same way as any coloured mana, in that you tap lands to produce it, and you use it to pay for mana costs signified by either its specific symbol, or by the generic mana symbol.

While using different symbols for each is relatively new, the distinguishing between the 2 has always been there.

Lands have never produced generic mana. Previously, the {1} symbol simply had 2 different meanings depending on where it appeared.

@Gendolkari I don't know enough rules history to know whether you're right. From what I know of Garfield's game design, I wouldn't be surprised if there was no distinction originally, but it might very well be old. I made it more explicitly about the symbol.

Originally (1993) the two were distinguished by using words to spell out colorless mana, e.g. Alpha's Sol Ring). This was only changed to overloading the generic mana symbol in 2002 with Onslaught, e.g.
Grand Coliseum. The diamond symbol for colorless mana was finally added in 2016 with Oath of the Gatewatch, e.g. Corrupted Crossroads.


text:
How does roll and move affect games like Talisman?
I'm wondering if the roll and move mechanic has any real effect on how Talisman, or any similar game, plays out. Would the overall experience be fundamentally changed if, for instance, you could only move one space at a time? I'm just trying to understand how it enhances the game relative to the other mechanics.

Roll and move is obviously there to create randomness.  Talisman is all about randomness, you never know where you're going to go or what you're going to draw.  Having more control over that introduces a lot of balance issues, because there are spaces that are not meant to be visited over and over again.  Of course, there are a number of Talisman cards that do give you more control over where you are moving, but they are all "temporary" in the sense that they can be stolen, destroyed, etc.
The biggest issue I would see with one move at a time in Talisman is the impact on PvP.  Some classes are designed for fighting other characters, while others are designed to avoid such fights.  With one move at a time, there would not be a way to escape other characters, so you'd need to introduce other ways for characters to get away from someone else.  Even with that, there would still be the potential to "grief" people by "camping" at a location that you know they need to get to.

As bwarner said, roll and move is meant to create some uncertainty and randomness.  In addition, in Talisman (and some other games, like Titan) the player can choose the direction of movement after seeing the roll, giving him the chance to aim for some spaces and avoid others.  With "always move one space" a player will either have to pass through every space on the way to his goal or thrash between two spaces.  That doesn't feel like much fun to me.
In addition, Talisman does have a "move one space" mechanism: when you get turned into a toad.  So if that's ever happened to your character you should have some sense of how that mechanic works out.  (Granted, toads have other limitations too, so it's not a completely equivalent situation.)  I don't know about you, but when I've been limited to toad movement my two reactions are: (a) "this is taking forever!" and (b) I don't want to have to go through that space".

Some Talisman expansions add cards that allow you to move one space without becoming a Toad, like Terrance, a pet from The City expansion.


text:
Are there standard board sizes for the industry?
I've been looking around on the internet and it seems 'quad fold' is the most common type of board. Is this true? What are the standard dimensions? Is there a comprehensive list of sizes somewhere? Does it depend on which side of the Atlantic I'm on?
My board game knowledge is pretty 'bleh', so feel free to go into painful detail about box and board sizes.

There are some common sizes and yes, they depend. It's not really about which side of whatever ocean you're from, but rather about what factory you make them in. For example, if you ask a factory that produces a 60x42 cm board (random values, here!), they will have these settings in their printing, cutting and folding machines. They will probably accept if you ask for a 59x43 cm board, but it will cost you more.
If you intend to make a game of your own and build it with cardboard and duct tape, there is absolutely no standard. I've never heard a player saying "That board could use 1 more centimeter in width".
As for the box, things get a little bit more tricky. Because boxes are to be aligned in the shelf (at the shop or at home). Having different sizes means playing Tetris to put them all in place. A very interesting discussion that took place on BoardGameGeek will tell you about the boxes and the standards linked to each manufacturer. Yes, you got it! That depends on the manufacturer!
Again, if you intend to create a new brand and flood the market with tons of your games, you could choose whatever size you like, that will be your standard. Just remember what XKCD said about standards…

Publishers and designers who use consistent (if not standard) sized boxes (such as Queen Games, Friedmann Friese, etc) often end up with semi-standard board sizes as a side effect. If the inside of your box is 12x8" then you're going to end up with boards that are a multiple of that size, usually a 2x2 or 2x3 of folds of that size.


text:
In cribbage, do you get points for doubles after getting to 31?
My opponent pegged for getting to 31 by playing a jack. If I play a jack after that, do I peg for the doubles?

No.
According to the rules of cribbage:

Card combinations cannot span a reset; once the total reaches 31 (or a Go has been scored) and counting has re-started at zero, cards already played cannot contribute to runs or pairs.

No - cards from one round of play cannot be combined with cards from the next.
From http://www.bicyclecards.ca/game-rules/cribbage/85.php?page_id=32

The player who called Go leads for the next series of plays, with the
  count starting at zero. The lead may not be combined with any cards
  previously played to form a scoring combination; the Go has
  interrupted the sequence.


text:
Are there games with board presentation similar to Talisman and Relic?
I'm referring to the way the art for different spaces spills over into other areas of the board, creating a panorama or telling a story with the outer and inner regions of the board. Are there any games with similar presentation?

In that graphical sense a really wonderful game that strikes me as similar is Yggdrasil.  It is Norse mythology based, cooperative, a good challenge, and pretty enough to be a poster.

That picture is a game in progress.

There is also Tannhauser from Fantasy Flight Games. See boardgamegeek for some pics of the boards.


text:
Does the initiative from flux missiles apply to just the missiles or the whole ship?
Does the initiative from flux missiles apply to just the missiles or the whole ship? We had a question about this because if they did apply to the whole ship, then that would be 2 initiative for no power which seems too overpowered.

I believe that they are intended to apply to the entire ship. I've come to this conclusion for two reasons:
First, the text of the ROTA rulebook reads:

Two modified Ion Missiles capable  of warping the flux grid, giving two Initiative.

If they were intended to apply only to the missiles, it seems likely that it would be indicated in this text.
Second, the energy cost is only one of two costs related to a technology: you should also consider the research cost. The research cost of a Plasma Missile is 14/7, whereas the Flux Missile is 11/8. Comparing this to the Ion Cannon (no research cost) and the Plasma Cannon (6/4) shows us that the price difference on the missiles is half that of the cannons. That, it seems, is where you're paying for the increased initiative.


text:
Do Untap triggers still trigger when the creature is untapped?
I control an untapped Goblin Sharpshooter, My opponent controls a 3/3 Beast Token, I Cast Lightning Bolt on the Beast, to kill it. Do I have to tap my Sharpshooter before the beast dies to get the trigger allowing me to untap it? Or will it trigger regardless, allowing me to ping with the trigger on the stack?
This is relevant as being able to wait gives me the opportunity to know that my sharpshooter will definitely untap before I tap it.

You do not need to tap it before the creature dies, you will have an opportunity before the untap trigger resolves.
Goblin Sharpshooter does not contain an intervening "if" clause, but rather a normal triggered ability [CR 603.1]. This means that whenever the event occurs, "a creature dies," an untap trigger is placed on the stack [CR 603.1] . As with all objects, you and your opponent have the opportunity to cast spells and activate abilities in response to to the objects on the stack before they resolve [CR 116.4].
Intervening "if" clauses require that the event that they are checking is true when being placed on the stack and when resolving [CR 603.4]. For Goblin Sharpshooter to not trigger because it is untapped would require a triggered ability like:

Whenever a creature dies, if ~this~ is tapped, untap it.

603.1. Triggered abilities have a trigger condition and an effect. They are written as "[Trigger condition], [effect]," and begin with the word "when," "whenever," or "at." They can also be expressed as "[When/Whenever/At] [trigger event], [effect]."

603.2. Whenever a game event or game state matches a triggered ability's trigger event, that ability automatically triggers. The ability doesn't do anything at this point.

603.4. A triggered ability may read "When/Whenever/At [trigger event], if [condition], [effect]." When the trigger event occurs, the ability checks whether the stated condition is true. The ability triggers only if it is; otherwise it does nothing. [...]

116.4. If all players pass in succession (that is, if all players pass without taking any actions in between passing), the spell or ability on top of the stack resolves or, if the stack is empty, the phase or step ends.


text:
What is the safest way to approach discussing a prize split?
This came up for me at a tournament this weekend. I made it into the final where the first prize was sealed product with a value for the sake of discussion to be $100, and second prize was store credit to the value of $50.
I discussed with the store owner prior to discussing with my opponent, because I did not want to put myself into the position of accidentally offering a bribe and being disqualified.
after this discussion the split was offered, my exact words being "shall we split?", the response being essentially "yes" and we then discussed resolving that. We split the $50 store credit quite easily, and agreed that the best solution was for one of us to take and sell the sealed product and then split the proceeds after the fact.
this seemed like an optimal solution in this situation, but there are plenty of situations where apportioning prizes can be much more challenging. a prime example being when one player wants "bye"s to a tournament that the other is not attending.
1. What is the safest way to evaluate the value of the prizes during a split, without accidentally offering a bribe.
2. If players initially agree to a split, is the subsequent debating of the value of prizes vs byes potentially still going to lead to bribery?

A 'split' is only possible if everything is divisible.  It is basically just a shortcut for all remaining (generally 8 or 4) players all having to go around and individually agree with each other to evenly share any product they may win.  Then separately all going back around and all agreeing to drop from the tournament.  This is all completely allowed.  The 'Split' rules just spell out explicitly and reassure organizers (who aren't by any means expected to be rules wonks) that this particular scenario that comes up often when FNM runs late is allowed by DCI.
You can make an agreement to share prizes any way you like, then actually play the match for real and report the real result.  Or ID, or one player may choose to concede/drop.  As long as there is no link between prize agreement and match result, it's fine.
If specific match results (including dropping from the tournament) are discussed, requested or offered, it's bribery, simple as that.
Sometimes it is not possible to agree to share a prize (like byes and blue envelopes) without implicitly offering a match result because DCI requires the prize be awarded to particular finishing positions.  You are allowed to agree to split however you like only in the final round of the tournament.  Basically at this point you're not harming other people's prospects in the tournament, forcing someone to play for a prize they won't use is stupid, and forcing "fake" matches harms the integrity of the game far more than letting people work out dividing prizes they don't want/won't use.
So to your two questions:
1) Don't mention or make any arrangements about match results and you can agree to do anything you want with transferable prizes you have won or may win.
2) If you've made an agreement that requires reporting a particular match result such that one player advances to claim a particular prize, that is bribery.  If it's the final round of the tournament it's allowed for a player to drop.

so where there are prizes + byes (and there hence has to be a clear winner) as long as both players do not discuss byes as part of the split and one of them drops, everything is fine?

It seems pretty rare that there would be such a prize in consideration before the final round, when it is acceptable for a player to agree to drop.  Honestly I cannot imagine a person being granted an unearned blue envelope or bye having the cajones to then sit there and try to negotiate over what % of their product winnings they think it's worth.  Social convention is certainly to just give it all away.

How far any particular judge is going to dig to decide if there was too much "wink-wink-nudge-nudge" after "Would you like all of the packs I win today?" is, well, judgement.  Some people accept that some amount of that is a reality of paper-based play at that level, others feel they have a commission to 'clean up the game.'  I would not personally pry into it if you genuinely had no intent or ability to attend the following event.

Usually these kinds of investigations/DQs happen around the IDs and concessions that send someone into the T8 in the first place, not what happens once there.

You may only split cash and sealed product prizes, and only evenly. From the Tournament rules (chapter 5.2):

Players in the single-elimination rounds of a tournament offering only cash and/or unopened product as prizes may, with the permission of the Tournament Organizer, agree to split the prizes evenly. The players may end the tournament at that point, or continue to play. All players still in the tournament must agree to the arrangement.

With the example:

Example: In the finals of a 1-slot Pro Tour Qualifier that offers a travel award and an invitation to the winner, the two finalists may agree to split the tournament prizes, but this agreement cannot alter the results of the match. One player must drop from the tournament, leaving the travel award and the invitation to the player who did not drop from the tournament. That player is then free to split the remainder of the prizes as agreed upon. The travel award and invitation are a single item and may not be split.

My guess is it is probably fine to treat store credits as cash for purposes of splitting, but I'm not a Magic judge so do not take my word for it.
However, evaluating the value of byes/invitations for another tournament is by the definition above collusion, and definitely off limits.

the way I am reading this implies that a tournament offering for example 4 force of wills for 1st and 2 wastelands for 2nd would not be allowed to split as they are not sealed product. Is that correct?

That would be my interpretation also. I'm not sure how common such prizes are in sanctioned events though.

Certainly for legacy they are pretty common, and there are plenty of massive tournaments which do it (see Bazaar of moxen where top prize is power 9 for example) I guess we need to wait for a judge to weigh in with some official guidance

You could agree with another player "Hey if we end up 1 and 2, would you like to sell the force of wills and wastelands and split the value?" at any time, there is no rule against that.  If there is any influence on any match result, then it is bribery.


text:
How does Diver movement work in forbidden island?
I played my first few games of Forbidden Island last night, and one of the roles we played was the Diver. We weren't 100% sure of the meaning of his special ability, so I wanted to ask if anyone had any clarification to make sure we play correctly in future.
The Diver's ability (from memory, edit if incorrect) says:

The Diver may move through any number of flooded or sunken tiles for 1 action

does this mean that the Diver can move to any land tile connected by flooded/sunken tiles? Or does it mean that moving through any number of such tiles is 1 action, and emerging onto land again is a second action?
to illustrate, here is an example:
let X be a sunken tile, T be a regular tile, and FT be a flooded tile.
T1 - FT1 - X - FT2 - T2.
Does moving the diver from T1 to T2 constitute 1 action, or 2 (one to move to FT2, and one to move the last square)?

You got it right the first time. In your example, it takes the diver 1 move action to go from T1 to T2. The Diver is incredibly useful for quickly getting around the island while it's flooded. It's not as overpowered as it would initially seem... until tiles start sinking, the Diver hasn't any other special abilities. In later stages of the game, you can ensure he'll probably survive.

Isn't the diver impossible to lose due to his ability to use swim when moving away from a sunken tile?

No. If the Diver is caught in a sunken tile and there's no adjacent tile to get to, you lose, just like all the other roles.

Neither the pilot nor the diver may die unless they are on the last tile. End of page 7 of the rules. "Exceptions: The Diver may swim to the nearest tile. The Explorer may swim diagonally.
The Pilot may fly to any tile."

Oh good, I stand corrected.

@Guvante Regarding the diver, what if there are no remaining tiles that are available only by moving in a straight line up/down/left/right? How can the diver swim to them?

Nevermind, I just found the answer from the creator of the game, himself. The answer is that the Diver can 'turn' on flooded and/or missing tiles: http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/524604/diver-questions


text:
Firefly artful dodger starting drive core
In firefly, the bonus ship (the artful dodger) available in more recent printings of the game has several differences, including a different drive core.
During set-up, the players are supposed to take a drive core from the set of starting drive cores, however there is no such card for the artful dodger. The same drive core is however available for purchase within the game.
Should the pilot of the artful dodger play without any card for their starting drive core, and take the effects as written? or should they claim the corresponding core from the purchase decks, removing it from the pool for other players?

The latter.

To use the Artful Dodger, during set-up pull a "Modified Radion Accelerator Mark II" drive core from the Osiris Supply Deck to serve as the Artful Dodger's starting drive core. With its faster core and higher crew capacity, captaining the Dodger means working fewer delivery jobs and focusing on riskier, more profitable crime jobs.

That's from the product's BGG page. It looks like a quote from an official source.

While this is the official answer for the base game, the boxed Artful Dodger add-on came with its own drive core card. So (assuming you don't have this add-on) it would also be reasonable to make your own starting drive core, and leave the Osiris deck alone.