text:
How can I make a fast, MTG Modern Glimpse-based mill deck?
I have always been fascinated with MTG milling decks and, since Ravnica, have wanted to build a fast Glimpse the Unthinkable based mill deck. I've tried numerous times but the deck is always too slow, puttering out before I finish off my opponent. Further, it's tough to find a balance of aggressively milling while simultaneously defending myself from attacks.
So, is there a way to make a speedy Glimpse the Unthinkable mill deck?
My deck constraints are:

Build around Glimpse, the Unthinkable
Only use Modern legal cards

The latest iteration of my deck is:
Lands

Island x12
Swamp x9
Watery Grave x2
Drowned Catacomb

Creatures

Hedron Crab x4
Wall of Frost x4

Planeswalker

Jace, Memory Adept

Enchantments

Memory Erosion x4
Jace's Erasure x4

Instants

Grasp of Darkness x4
Visions of Beyond x4

Sorceries

Glimpse, the Unthinkable x4
Mind Funeral x3
Mind Sculpt x2

Artifacts

Keening Stone x4

The older versions of this deck relied on Ravnica Transmute cards like Shred Memory, Muddle the Mixture, and Dimir Infiltrator to quickly retrieve the Glimpses but, without mana acceleration, it still took 5-6 turns to get three Glimpses out.

Also try Modern Deck Help @ Wizards

Nephalia Drownyard seems like a card you might be interested in

I'd drop the Wall of Frost and run Fog Bank instead. It's cheaper and it will block flyers. Also, Jace's Phantasm is super cheap to cast and will be a huge flyer after just a single Glimpse. It can also let you win by dealing damage.

If you want a fast glimpse the unthinkable deck, then the best you are going to do is definitely going to be cutting those wall of frost, and some of the mill enchantments. play 4 ghost quarter (think of it as a 0 mana spell that mills them for 1 card, you can also kill your own land for more hedron crab triggers), and 4 Archive Trap, a spell that does a lot to win you the game when your opponent isn't expecting it after ghost quarter, or turns your ghost quarter into the extremely powerful and mostly banned Strip Mine when your opponent is familiar with your deck.
You would probably be looking to extend your longevity with spells like damnation or black sun's zenith to keep the opponent's side of the board under control. Snapcaster mage will let you reuse your glimpses for additional mill, and provide a defense to slow your opponent down, but remember it cant cast your Archive Traps for their trap cost.
you will want 4 Dimir Signet, because a turn 3 play of Signet into glimpse the unthinkable is a very efficient ramp turn. Mind Funeral and Mind Grind are also both very good cards.
Additionally, you will make better use of those hedron crabs by using fetchlands such as scalding tarn and Marsh Flats, allowing you to get 2 activations per turn, cheaper alternatives include Terramorphic expanse and evolving wilds
I would suggest the following changes:

-4 Jace's Erasure
-4 Wall of Frost
-4 Memory Erosion
-4 Keening Stone
-4 Grasp of Darkness
-2 Visions of Beyond
-9 Island
-7 Swamps
-1 Drowned Catacombs

and bring in:

+1 Hallowed Fountain
+1 Plains
+2 Watery Grave
+4 Scalding Tarn
+4 Marsh Flats
+4 Ghost Quarter
+4 Dimir Signet
+1 Mind Funeral
+2 Mind Grind
+4 Snacpcaster mage
+4 Damnation
+4 Archive Trap
+4 Path To Exile

I cut a land as the dimir signets help fix your mana, it might be worth cutting another, it depends on how it plays.
Visions of beyond is a bit overkill, as long as you can average about 7 cards milled per card you play, you can win within 4-6 turns, and visions can slow that down, as winning revolves around spending your mana effectively in the early turns. I kept 2 in though as sometimes you just draw all removal and no mill
Damnation might seem counter productive if you have hedron crabs on the field, but with fetchlands, you can hit 6 cards milled per crab with just one land drop, meaning they will usually provide enough mill to be worth playing out even if you then kill them.
Mind Grind is there to mitigate when you get mana flooded, so that you can get a higher return per card due to having so much excess mana, it's not something you would want to cast for anything less than x = 4.
Splashing white might be beneficial also, path to exile gives you another route to activate archive trap, and does what grasp of darkness did cheaper. it can also turn a snapcaster mage who gave you a flashback mill last turn, into another land to activate hedron crabs for further mill.
these changes should help speed the deck up, and increase your survivability in a more synergistic way than previously. feel free to tinker with numbers based on your own knowledge as i haven't played the deck, but i advise against tinkering the cards that were totally removed back into the deck.
A faster mill deck
Having said all of the above, if you want a fast mill deck, there are definitely better choices than Glimpse the unthinkable.
abandoning the idea of glimpse the unthinkable, a mill deck that will usually run much faster than glimpse the unthinkable can would be the protean hulk combo deck. If you were to play acceleration such as ramp spells (rampant growth, harrow etc) and Heartless Summoning to accelerate casting your Protean Hulk you will be able to get it onto the battlefield around turn 4 or 5, any of a number of spells would allow you to sacrifice it (fling, viscera seer, birthing pod, and many others, just search gatherer for rules text "Sacrifice a creature").
once you have managed to summon and sacrifice your hulk, your milling combo comes to fruition. It's ability to search for a cumulative 6 converted mana cost worth of creatures allows you to search for the 4 hedron crabs in your library, and the 4 dryad arbor, all of which translate to only 4 converted mana cost of creatures. They all enter the battlefield, each dryad arbor triggers all 4 hedron crabs, which is 16 hedron crab triggers which is 48 milled cards. the final 2 CMC can be used to find a viridian emissary, which would either die instantly to the Heartless Summoning, or be sacrificed to the viscera seer or another sacrifice outlet, and give you a basic land and another 12 milled cards.
i will leave the building of an actual 60 card deck of this combo to you, if you wish to pursue it, since it is not strictly an answer to your question. above should give you an idea for the options, and key cards of the deck.

Unfortunately, cards like Damnation and Snapcaster Mage are very expensive; I'm more of a casual player. However, I think your points on Archive Trap with fetch lands, Mind Grind w/ Mind Funeral, and Dimir Signets are all reasonable. Thanks again.

@Craig Damnation has a cheaper cousin in Black Sun's Zenith, but I understand your issue. upping the count of mind sculpt and mind grind may well be the best choice to replace snapcasters.

I think you do need the card draw, especially with Dimir Signet reducing the density of "business" in your deck a bit. If you don't like 4x Visions, Thirst for Knowledge might be able to fill in nicely.

If you want my 2 cents:
If you want to make a glimpse the unthinkable style of deck, than you're really making a sort of burn deck, except your opponent's life-total is somewhere between 45-50 life.
With that in mind, imagine all of your cards in the context of a burn deck.  Does your burn deck want wait until turn 7 to play those keening stone?  Do you even need more than 1 of your instant-game-winning card at the same time?(if you don't need more than 1 at a time than you shouldn't run 4).  does a burn deck want to run cards that stall the other guy without being able to deal damage? like Wall of Frost?
does a burn deck want to run inefficient cards like gut shot or  in your case Memory Erosion and jace's erasure?
thought scour will help replace itself, and tomes scour will help too.  Breaking/Entering is like a smaller glimpse, and maybe you want to run some fetchlands to help out with that hedron crab  There are cheap fetches such as terramorphic expanse and evolving wilds.  They might slow you down a bit if you don't actually have hedron crabs out, but that's a call you'll have to make.  you can always use the zendikar ones if you must.
the new sets: Gatecrash and Dragon's maze have dimir cards that also can mill some.  You might look into those sets to see if any are good enough.

+1 Definitely cut back on the number of Keening Stones and Memory Erosion's / Jace's Erasure. I think you're overestimating how many cards they will actually mill.

I appreciate the points on keening stone, memory erosion, and jace's erasure. I concur that they've been too slow to be really useful.

My mill deck consists of this and it has worked pretty well so far:

12 Islands
12 Swamps

4 Hedron Crab
4 Glimpse the Unthinkable
4 Avatar of Woe
4 Sewer Nemesis
4 Mind Sculpt
2 Jace, Memory Adept
4 Breaking/Entering
4 Jace's Phantasm
4 Duskmantle Guildmage
2 Traumatize

However, I want to add 4 [Liliana's Caress] and don't know which cards to replace for them. I am thinking of getting rid of 2 Traumatize but not sure which other 2 to replace I am very much wanting to keep my ratio of 24 lands 20 creatures 16 (other) for deck.

Why do you want to add Liliana's Caress? It doesn't deal damage when you are milling (because the cards are placed in the graveyard, not discarded) and I don't see any discard spells in the above list.

thanks for the heads up before I edited deck didn't realize that until you said it dumb me for not reading carefully

Let's look at a successful tournament list for inspiration!

U/B Mill (Modern)
Dan Paille — 8th place, SCG Invitational Qualifier, 11/03/2013

4 Darkslick Shores
3 Scalding Tarn
4 Watery Grave
2 Island
1 Swamp
1 Sunken Ruins
1 Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth
3 Shelldock Isle
3 Ghost Quarter

2 Snapcaster Mage

2 Jace, Memory Adept

4 Glimpse the Unthinkable
4 Breaking
3 Archive Trap
2 Haunting Echoes

4 Visions of Beyond
3 Howling Mine

4 Thoughtseize
4 Surgical Extraction

3 Ensnaring Bridge
3 Damnation
1 Hero's Downfall

Sideboard
1 Inquisition of Kozilek
3 Echoing Truth
3 Engineered Explosives
1 Ratchet Bomb
1 Infest
3 Crypt Incursion
3 Fulminator Mage

This deck is targeting a specific metagame, but there are some general conclusions we can draw:

A core of aggressive mill cards. Glimpse the Unthinkable, Breaking, and Archive Trap are fast. The Jaces, Haunting Echoes, and Snapcasters flashing back your early mill cards round out the top end. Really the main takeaway here is that you want about a quarter of your cards to mill the opponent, and a couple of those should be repeatable mill (Jace).
Card draw. It takes about five of your mill cards to kill an opponent. Unlike a burn deck, your cards aren't quite fast or flexible enough to just run a deck full of kill cards. Thus, without card draw, it's easy to get into nasty situations where you're treading water hoping to topdeck the right card. Visions of Beyond is an Ancestral Recall in this deck. This decks' designer is taking a risk with Howling Mine, which draws cards for both you and your opponent, but he's counting on mill being an unexpected deck, so most of the extra cards his enemies draw won't interact well with his.  This decks sneaks a bit of extra card advantage in with Shelldock Isle.
Discard, not counters. Most dedicated combo decks will be faster than you, so you want to do something to slow them down. Likewise, a lot of other decks may sideboard "silver bullet" answers that you really want to take out. However, using counterspells requires holding mana open, sometimes for turns on end — which you can't do, since most of your kill cards are sorceries, and you want to cast a bunch of them quickly to power up Visions of Beyond and Haunting Echoes in the later game. Discard spells like Thoughtseize (or its budget-friendlier cousins Duress and Inquisition of Kozilek) offer very mana-efficient disruption that you can use on your own timetable rather than your opponent's (though you do need to keep your opponent's deck in mind for optimal timing).
Anti-creature speedbumps. Your pinpoint disruption will slow down combo decks, but it does very little against aggressive creature decks that don't really care about losing a single card (especially if it costs them two life). This particular version picked Damnation and Ensaring Bridge (you're emptying your hand very aggressively) take care of a lot of threats at once. Ensnaring Bridge is also good against the kinds of midrange decks that can use one big creature at a time to get past your Damnation.
Land destruction. Big formats are full of powerful lands. In Modern, a particular concern is Tron. Once the Urzatron is assembled, the deck is very hard to stop (especially if they've fetched the Eye of Ugin as well). Ghost Quarter in the main deck and Fulminator Mage out of the sideboard help you aggressively attack their lands. Ghost Quarter also covers a gap in your Damnation strategy: it kills removal-dodging manlands like Inkmoth Nexus and Treetop Village.
No Hedron Crabs. Modern is full of creature-based decks, as are many casual environments. So pretty much everyone is running creature removal. Without many other targets in your deck, they will just throw their removal at your your Crabs. The card's also a terrible late-game topdeck since it hardly does anything on its own.
Against tournament decks, Surgical Extraction is your best friend. This card is a really important part of the deck. Without it, you are actually accelerating any graveyard deck you fight against. Combined with your aggressive mill plan, Surgical Extraction can neuter a lot of combo decks. It's also a lynchpin against Tron: extracting any of their Urza lands buys you three extra turns at least — and removing Emrakul in response to its shuffle trigger is the only way to mill them out at all.

The sideboard is even more metagame-specific than the main deck, but we can draw some general conclusions:

An answer to a variety of controlling permanents — in this case, Echoing Truth out of the sideboard. Unlike a combo deck, you don't actually care very much about having a few of your cards countered. But there are some permanents that just shut you down cold (Leyline of Sanctity soft-locks you, for example). You need a way to get rid of these. Since blue/black is rather poor in non-creature removal, Paille chose to run a bounce spell — follow it up with Thoughtseize or take a "big turn" (like Glimpse, Glimpse, Jace mill) before they can recast their card.
Sideboard hate for the fastest or most disruptive decks you expect to see, ideally with overlap. Crypt Incursion is a good example here. It gives you a lot of life gain against aggro decks and stops Living End, which is a graveyard deck that can cause problems for you since it's fast and fairly resilient to Extraction (all of their combo pieces are interchangeable, except for Living End, which doesn't need to be in the yard to work). Likewise, consider how Engineered Explosives and Ratchet Bomb do double duty against Affinity and Twin.

The most important thing to remember is that Glimpse-based mill doesn't play like a typical combo deck, where you're trying to assemble a card from column A and a card from column B. It's more like burn: a bunch of interchangeable kill cards and a few answers to slow down fast decks or get past silver-bullet showstoppers.

+1 for comparing mill to burn. Unfortunately, mill spells rarely have dual purposes. Using Glimpse-type spells as a wincon is like using Lava Spike or Flame Jet to win.

Your mill deck doesn't have to be that fast if you can disrupt your opponents plans.
With that in mind, your mill deck needs something like: 4xSurgical Extraction, 2xExtirpate, 2xHaunting Echoes Therefore, after you've milled, you can remove some dangerous multiples from your opponents library and hand, both accelerating the mill and ensuring you survive long enough to execute the plan.
Also, if your win condition is casting sorceries like Glimpse the Unthinkable, then you may want to consider that workhorse: Snapcaster Mage
You should also consider reset buttons. Others have suggested mass removal. But I think if you use the Snapcaster, something like Devastation Tide is even better. Not only will it disrupt your opponents plans if your mill isn't going fast enough, but if your Snapcaster is on the battlefield, you get to cast it again.
If you add those cards you should probably remove the slow enchantments and keening stone.


text:
If a +1/+1 counter is removed after a creature takes damage, does it die?
I have two creatures out.  Creature One gives Creature Two +1/+1.  Creature One is a 2/2 and Creature Two is a 4/4 after adding the +1/+1 from Creature Two.
My opponent casts a spell doing 3 damage to all creatures.
Now here's the question:  Does killing Creature One immediately remove the +1/+1 from Creature Two ending in her death as well?  Or does all the damage get applied then counters are removed leaving Creature Two with 1 toughness left?

Does creature 1 give creature 2 a +1/+1 counter or does creature 1 say something like 'other creatures you control have +1/+1'? If it is a counter then no, the counter remains, counters don't care where they came from, if it is not a counter, then yes it dies, since the static effect buffing it ends. For examples Bond Beetle vs Goblin King

Few points that should add up to an answer.
A Counter is not the same thing as a Static Ability that raises Power/Toughness.  Abilities that add counters will use the actual word Counter in them.
Once a counter is placed, killing the creature that placed it does not do anything.  So if you have an Adaptive Snapjaw that evolved and is now 7/3 due to a +1/+1 counter on it, that counter does not go away just because the other creature that caused it to evolve dies.
On the other hand if you have an Elvish Archdruid making all your elves +1/+1, that is a static ability.  All your elves get smaller immediately when he dies.  Sometimes new players do get in the habit of putting physical markers on other elves to track such an ability.  This is a bad habit, I would recommend against doing it.
Damage does not reduce toughness.  The xBox game does it wrong, pretend you never saw it.  A 3/3 with 2 damage marked is just that, a 3/3 with two damage.  It is no way shape or form a 3/1 for any purpose.  So if your 3/3 with 2 damage marked is an Elf, and your elvish arch druid dies, he will become a 2/2 with 2 damage marked, and promptly go to the graveyard as well.

Thank you very much, this exactly answers my questions.  You were very right in that I learned the 3/3 that takes 2 damage is a 3/1 from the Xbox game, I'll ignore the game from now on.  If they got that wrong I have no idea what else they could've gotten wrong.

the Xbox game is mostly quite good in its rules implementation; that way of representing damage was a rare case of them using a convenient visual shorthand that doesn't quite reflect what's actually going on under the hood.  I'd say it's unfair to describe it as them having "gotten it wrong".  I assume they made the decision after giving it due consideration.  Mostly you don't have to worry about DotP giving you the wrong idea when it comes to transitioning to "proper" Magic.

Sorry, I didn't think I was being super critical of the entire game or something.  It is a plain fact that representing damage as reduced toughness is incorrect.  It may have been the right software implementation decision at the time, but particularly with the arrival of "evolve" the widespread misunderstanding about that it caused has been kind of a pain for judging casual FNMs :)

Yes, it dies.
Damage remains until it's removed in the cleanup step. If your 4/4 with three damage on it is reduced to a 3/3 (in any way that doesn't remove the damage from it) it suddenly has lethal damage on it and dies.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Playing the Role of an Arkham Master in Arkham Horror?
I am teaching the game to a ton of new people Thursday. I was going to be playing with only 3 others and planned to join in myself, but now that we're up to 8 players including me, I figured the game would be more fun if I keep things moving.
As a result I've decided to play the role of ARKHAM MASTER! Stay out of the game as a player and act as rules guardian, referee for things 1st player normally resolves, reader of cards, and general knowledge base.
My post is two fold: How can I keep the game running smoothly? With only one experienced investigator (has played a single game a month ago) still in the group. We have either 4.5 hours or if we're lucky, 6 hours to play the game in, and I think we all know that even with an experienced group 6 hours can be too short.
I'm playing Vanilla, and they're up against Yig, so as a light sleeper, that should make it easier. I'm incorporating Epic Battle and I'm also playing a house rule where the Ancient one awakens at Current Doom - Seals in Play even on a Seal or a Gate Close Victory to assure an Epic Ending.
Another thing I wanted to ask was on teaching. Arkham has a lot of rules, is there a new player cheat sheet or anything? If not what rules would you say a player MUST know if an Arkham Manager is in the game? My first thoughts are skills, skill checks, phases, derived checks such as combat and horror, movement points, clues, closing, sealing, and otherworlds. Also the win/lose conditions.
The other half of my post would be this: For those that have played games like Descent: Journeys in the Dark. I thought it might be fun (NOT FOR THURSDAY) to play the role of the Herald, actively orchestrating the forces of the Mythos to pave the way for the Ancient One's awakening. Obviously you'd have to be very careful about what rules you alter as the "Herald" to not totally break the game in favor of the Mythos. Has anyone tried this before?

Hi, welcome to the site. Interesting post, but I think a bit too murky for a single question, and unlikely to get a satisfying answer. There are really three different questions here. I'd suggest you split them accordingly: 1) What should I do to 'gamesmaster' a game of Arkham?, 2) What's the best way to teach a new player to play Arkham?, 3) Are there any house rules to play as the Herald?

You can find a good bit of info addressing your questions through ones already on the site:
Keep the game running smoothly:
How can we play a shorter but satisfying game of Arkham Horror?
"Quick" reference sheet:
What do you recommend putting in an Arkham Horror quick reference sheet?
On playing a 'Herald':
What can I do to ensure that my friends' first game of Arkham Horror with me is as awesome as possible?
But roughly, keeping people on task helps the game speed greatly. Having people know a general idea of where they'll want to move before their turn starts makes movement phase go much faster. It also isn't necessary all the time to make everyone wait for combat. If the outcome of the fight can't affect them, let them take their turn. Taking control of reading encounter cards for people helps trim down on the back-and-forth that can happen when the players don't know where each other are on the board.
Before playing, the players should know:
A rough detail of the four phases

Upkeep: Wiggle sliders & refresh cards
Movement: Move up to your speed. Stop at monsters & fight if necessary
Encounter: If you're in a spot with a picture, get a card
Mythos: A new gate & monsters show up. Too many gates and you lose

Skill checks: Number on the relevant stat + possible helpful items you have - number in the (). Get one success
Combat: Will check at the blue # penalty. Get one success. Then fight checks at the red # penalty. Weapons help. Need blood drops # of successes for combat
Gate closing: Go to a gate token, have a couple encounters where the token takes you, come back & make a fight/lore check. Repeat to win
Clues: Can spend 1 clue to roll 1 more die. Repeat as desired. Also you need 5 to make sure a gate never comes back
If find they don't need to know specifically how many monsters can be on the board, how many can go in the outskirts, & how many gates before losing. 8 players are going to need to be closing gates from the very beginning regardless.
For 'Herald' play I haven't done much more than drawing a few mythos cards and picking which one takes effect, drawing more monsters than necessary and choosing where they get placed, and not reading players the results of choices/success/failures from encounter cards before the result is decided.

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


text:
Teaching Arkham Horror to new players
I am teaching the game to a ton of new people this week. I was going to be playing with only 3 others and planned to join in myself, but now that we're up to 8 players including me, I figured the game would be more fun if I keep things moving as a non-player Arkham Master. Staying out of the game as a player and act as rules guardian, referee for things 1st player normally resolves, reader of cards, and general knowledge base.
My concern here is on teaching the game quickly without making the players feel like I'm leaving out important decision making details.  Arkham has a lot of rules, is there a new player cheat sheet or anything? If not what rules would you say a player MUST know if an experienced player is moderating the game? My intuition says to explain skills sliders, skill checks, phases, derived checks such as combat and horror, movement points, clues, closing, sealing, and otherworlds and the win/lose conditions for the game.  Has anyone taken the time to teach new players AH more than a few times?  What process do you use to explain the game?

Does this answer your question? What do you recommend putting in an Arkham Horror quick reference sheet?

Also related: What can I do to ensure that my friends' first game of Arkham Horror with me is as awesome as possible?

If you are acting as a guardian, you can simplify a bit the part about the monsters movement  as you will do it and focus more on the parts of the turn their players can actually do an action.
Giving them a quick reference card before you explain the things can help them follow better your explanation.
Also with many new people I'd maybe do a pre prepared sample turn with just 2 or 3 characters and monsters to show them the mechanics of the game.


text:
Ensuring a game of Arkham Horror runs quickly even with new players
I am teaching the game to a ton of new people this week. I was going to be playing with only 3 others and planned to join in myself, but now that we're up to 8 players including me, I figured the game would be more fun if I keep things moving as a non-player Arkham Master. Staying out of the game as a player and act as rules guardian, referee for things 1st player normally resolves, reader of cards, and general knowledge base.
How can I keep the game running smoothly? With only one experienced investigator (has played a single game a month ago) still in the group. We have either 4.5 hours or if we're lucky, 6 hours to play the game in, and I think we all know that even with an experienced group 6 hours can be too short.
I'm playing Vanilla, and they're up against Yig, so as a light sleeper, that should make it easier.  What techniques, homerules, and other adjustments have you developed to counter game-length creep?

I've voted to close this as a duplicate because, though the other question isn't about new players, the advice essentially all applies whether the players are new or not, and the remaining unique thing about this question is quickly teaching, which you've already asked another question about.

It may sound silly, but in these cases (especially with so many players) the "we came here for kicking monster asses, not for pleasure" attitude should help immediately. Focus is a key word. Make sure those aren't playing at the moment are planning for the next round, it could help the focus effort.
In addition, I'd try to hint or even say straight up that they need to get themselves up with a strategy; it could be some kind of role separation - who closes the gates? who clears the monsters? Who gets the weapons and distributes them? - it could be geography separation, etc. But it'll keep the players focused on what they should do every turn instead of re-strategizing everything every time a monster pops up.


text:
Playing Arkham Horror in a counter-players role as the Herald of the Ancient one or something similar?
For those that have played games like Descent: Journeys in the Dark where an Overlord player is pitted against a heroic party, actively working against the players and laying down traps and other such machinations to keep the game interesting, I thought it might be fun to play the role of the Herald, actively orchestrating the forces of the Mythos to pave the way for the Ancient One's awakening.
Obviously you'd have to be very careful about what rules you alter as the "Herald" to not totally break the game in favor of the Mythos. Has anyone tried this before?

No/Yes questions like this are not a good fit for the Q&A format. Additionally, the rules for heralds already exist, and the Ancient One and all bad things like Mythos cards are handled by random draws. The opponent in this game is the game system. What you are proposing is a complete rewrite if the rules, so that the opposing player has meaningful decisions, instead of players trying to beat the game system. This question is too open-ended to get a meaningful/correct answer. Even if you suggested rules and asked, "would this work?" You wouldn't get any useful answers.

I'm asking what players might think and what experiences they're had.  As for the rules for heralds, I'm using the term in a different way.

I suggest reading http://meta.boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/535/how-should-a-question-about-house-rules-be-written

To answer the question...the kind of game you're thinking of, really, is Mansion of Madness, which is the Descent version of Arkham Horror.  Players play one of eight investigators and move through a location as they try to uncover a secret plot.  The story teller acts as the Herald or Overlord, by moving monsters to certain locations and playing cards on the player characters as they move through.  Generally speaking, it's very weighted against the players, unless they've played the scenarios a number of times and know what to do in each situation.
What you're proposing is basically the same idea.  Arkham Horror would turn into Mansions of Madness very quickly given the changes you've proposed.  I would say, from the number of times I've retconned certain turns in Arkham Horror, that the game is hard enough with the board being as random and cruel as it is.  If you had someone actively choosing Mythos cards or moving monsters, you would have a much harder and significantly different game on your hands.
My advice to you would be to pick up Mansions of Madness.  It's a long setup for a game, but I like it and what it does to the players as they frantically run around, trying to not die.


text:
In Smallworld, do Fortresses pay the +1 VC only on the turn they are placed, or do they each pay for every turn that the race is active?
The question is regarding the fortresses. If they each pay +1 VC for each turn that they are on the map and your race is active, then they become quite powerful because the VC will be building exponentially. Is this the case, or do they only each pay one VC on the turn that they are placed and then are only good as a defensive bonus for there on out?

They're increasing linearly, not exponentially.  And that's only if people don't attack them.

Or, arguably, quadratically, if you count the total effect while having been in play.

They work at the end of each your turn (not only when they are placed).
Even if it might by ambiguous in the Smallworld rules,

Fortified
Once per turn, as long as your Fortified Race
is active, you may place 1 Fortress in a
Region you occupy. The Fortress is worth 1
bonus Victory coin at turn's end, unless you
are In Decline. The Fortress also augments your Region's
defense by 1 (just as if you had an additional Race token
stationed there), even if you are In Decline.
Remove the Fortress if you abandon the Region
or when an enemy conquers it. There can only
ever be a maximum of 1 Fortress per Region,
and a maximum of 6 Fortresses on the map.

Everywhere else, symbol +1 VC on a land or token (such as Fortress) says that it works each turn.
If it were only about the end of the current turn, then the sentence at turn's end, unless you are In Decline wouldn't make sense (as you cannot place anything when you are in decline, unless you are Stout, but you cannot be Stout and Fortified at the same time).

Oh but there are ways you can be Stout and Fortified at the same time if you are playing with more than just the base set. I believe the Tales & Legends and Realms expansions have options for multiple powers. Still, your explanation of the rules would stand. You are either in decline or you are not, regardless of what you can do while in decline. Fortresses give points every turn you are active (not in decline).

At the end of each turn where your active race occupies a Fortress (including the turn in which it was placed), you get 1 point for each occupied Fortress.
This is not an exponential point growth. For example, on the third turn you held a Fortress, you do not get 3 points, you just get the standard 1 point each turn.

Yes, you are correct... I was saying exponentially because at the end of turn 1 you receive 1 coin, turn two... 2 coin for a total of three for both turns, turn three... 3 coin for a total of six for all three turns, turn four... 4 coin for a total of ten received etc... With a race like the Skeletons or the Amazons, this power becomes quite overwhelmingly powerful, especially in a two player game. (this is of course if your opponent is not able to attack any of the fortresses to elliminate them.)

I'm not clear how this answers the question..?


text:
One Deck Dungeon Paladin Heroic Feat
The text of the Heroic Feat for the Paladin states “Store a (Heroic Die) here when you open a door with 4+ (XP). You may only store one die at a time.”
What does “with 4+ XP” mean?

Does it mean the door has to have a loot of 4 XP? But Loot isn’t specified.
Does it mean that I have to have 4+ XP on my character?

And if it’s the second option, does this mean that if I’m level 2 (which costs 6 XP), that I have to get 4 XP after starting that level before I can once again get the die, or do I always get it? That seems a little too easy, so I’m guessing not.

The Paladin's ability triggers when you open (flip) a door card and reveal a monster or peril worth at least 4 XP.
The "with" in the description applies to the door card, not to your character, so having 4 XP in your possession won't trigger anything.
The description also doesn't mention taking the card as loot as it triggers when the door is first opened or flipped to reveal the contents. You do not have to stay and encounter the monster/peril and can choose to flee after gaining the Heroic die. Note that if you return later, the ability will not trigger again as the door is already open.

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


text:
1953 version of Scrabble includes 4 wooden dice - why?
I have acquired a 1953 version of Scrabble.  Included with the usual 100 wooden tiles are 4 wooden dice.  Each face of the dice  has the dots imprinted using one of these 3 colors; red, green or black.  I am not familiar with Scrabble using dice.  How do the dice get incorporated into the game both in use & scoring?

Hmm, neither http://www.donaldsauter.com/scrabble-dating.htm (history of Scrabble hardware) or http://www.donaldsauter.com/scrabble-rules.htm (history of Scrabble rules) mentions anything about dice. Is it possible that the dice came from a different game?

Perhaps a better question would be, "Did Scrabble's 1953 edition include 4 wooden dice?", or somesuch. :)

Sounds like 4 stowaways from a game of Kismet, which was Yahtzee with green, red and black spots on dice.

Kismet was my first thought, too. What a fun game :-)

I certainly appreciate your suggestions.  I am not familiar with Kismet  but did look at  Kismet images of dice used in this game. Kismet dice have  different colors used on different numbers on the die itself ( one dice has different colors used for the dots).  Each of the 4 dice that I have found in the 1953 Scrabble game uses only 1 color i.e. one dice has all green spots for its numbers, etc.  The wooden dice match the wooden scrabble tiles - the wood type used and the finish applied is the same.  These dice look like they belong to Scrabble, although maybe they don't.


text:
Does the 30-point rule apply to every non-manipulating move, or only to the initial move?
In rummikub, how exactly does the 30-point rule work? Is it:

The very first move of each player must be independent of existing stones and with a value of at least 30. There is no 30-point rule in the remainder of the game

or is it

When a player plays without using any other stones, e.g. puts a run or a group composed completely of his own stones, this must be at least 30 points.

We weren't sure when playing. Which one is it? We played with the latter, but now it seems it's actually the former.

I am going to guess that you were most likely playing Sabra Rummikub. You almost got it right with the former. The pagat page indicates that:

The first meld made by each player must consist of one or more combinations formed entirely from that player's hand, where the total numbers of the tiles used add up to 30 or more. If a joker is used, it counts as the number of the tile it represents.

So, for the first meld of each hand, you must meld 30 points, since the game is made up of multiple hands.


text:
Can I summon Interplanetarypurplythorny Dragon using Witch of the Black Forest's effect
Just wondering if this is a legal use of the card's effects since IPPT Dragon's effect does state that when a monster on my side of field is destroyed I can special it. Considering that my card being destroyed is Witch of the Black Forest, and that the card I choose using Witch's effect is IPPT dragon, would I be able to special IPPT Dragon?
I know Witch is a banned card, this is for my own personal duels.
IPPT= Interplanetarypurplythorny

I like the name Interplanetarypurplythorny Dragon!   Interplanetarypurplythorny!!   Interplanetarypurplythorny!! It's a nice name, does anyone else think so?

i hate using cards with long names in tournaments, tiny box to write down the card name, i hate bags of fun writing Number 38: Hope Harbinger Dragon Titanic Galaxy down... not

@WhatsThePoint don't forget Number 81: Superdreadnought Rail Cannon Super Dora, it's double Super, so it's double Nice :D

You will not be able to get the Interplanetarypurplythorny Dragon from the effect of Witch of the Black Forest's and activate its effect.
This is because the last thing to happen isn't a monster being destroyed but rather a monster being added to hand.
If you already had Interplanetarypurplythorny Dragon in your hand and Witch of the Black Forest is being destroyed, you still retain the priority to activate an effect after the mandatory effect of Witch of the Black Forest goes on the chain.

Note that in the second case (IPPT in hand when Witch is destroyed), both effects will form a Chain because they have the same triggering condition. This has nothing to do with (retaining) Priority (and never had).

Change the word priority for ability. The definition is still the same. You have an OPTIONAL effect and a MANDATORY effect that you can activate. (IPPT is optional whereas Witch of the Black Forest is MANDATORY.) Priority still applies because your opponent can cut in with an effect if its their turn.

Well, no, they can't, that's my point. Witch takes chain link 1 because it's mandatory, Dragon takes chain link 2 because it's optional (if it's activated). THEN the opponent can activate stuff.

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


text:
Is this play involving Red Eyes Darkness Metal Dragon & Lightpulsar Dragon valid?
I was playing against a kid on dueling network and he swore that this play wasn't legal and I pretty much just ended the match to avoid arguing. I know I might be wrong, but here's how it went (basically OTK cause he had no Effect Veilers, Battle Faders & only 2 cards on backrow which he didn't activate):
In my hand I had 2 Galaxy Eyes Photon Dragons. On the field I had Red Eyes Darkness Metal Dragon (I'm going to write REDMD for short) & Lightpulsar Dragon.
I special summoned Galaxy Eyes Photon Dragon tributing REDMD & Lightpulsar. Since they technically should both go to grave together I special summoned REDMD using Lightpulsar's effect.
I special summon Lightpulsar using REDMD effect.
Special summon another Galaxy Eyes from hand, again special summon REDMD using Lightpulsar's eff, then special summon Lightpulsar.
Overlay for Heiratic Overlord, detach one, tribute REDMD first (important) & then Lightpulsar to pop his backrow. Lightpulsar effect I special summon REDMD again, REDMD special summon Galaxy Eyes photon & attack for OTK.

Which part in particular was the other kid saying wasn't legal? Or just the sheer unfairness of it all?

being able to ss redmd when i tributed them to ss galaxy eyes pohton

He was right, Lightpulsar misses the timing in this example. See user4939's answer and my comment for details.

This rulings page for Lightpulsar Dragon says:

If "Lightpulsar Dragon" and "Red-Eyes Darkness Metal Dragon" are
  destroyed on the field simultaneously by the effect of "Dark Hole",
  that "Red-Eyes Darkness Metal Dragon" can be Special Summoned from the
  Graveyard by the effect of "Lightpulsar Dragon".[6]

And that is allegedly a ruling from an official Konami FAQ, though the link to it was broken.
If REDMD and Lightpulsar Dragon are fine to combo in this way then I don't really see the problem with your OTK.  It's not like Lightpulsar Dragon isn't known for featuring in lots of OTK decks... anyone can just google it to see that!

The problem is timing. Lightpulsar's effect is an optional Trigger effect featuring "When", so it can only be activated if nothing happens after its triggering condition. In this case, after it is sent to the graveyard (its triggering condition), a Monster is Special Summoned, so it will miss the timing. In the ruling, nothing happens after the destruction by Dark Hole, so missing the timing is not an issue. See also user4939's answer.

It doesn't work that way, due to the fact that Lightpulsar is being tributed his effect does not go off, and the same for Heliopolis. Lightpulsar must be "destroyed" or "sent" as the final resolution to an effect. When Dark Hole kills them both the last activation is Lightpulsar which is why he can summon D-Metal but in the instance listed above Lightpulsar misses timing in all 3 instances. It's just like why you can't use Lightpulsar to synchro with and get D-Metal back.
e.g. Dragunity Phalanx and Lightpulsar on field, synchro for scrap dragon, grab D-Metal, D-Metal grab Pulsar, scrap hit Pulsar and opponent's card, pulsar effect grab another D-Metal, summon Pulsar. 28,28,28,25. Konami issued a miss timing rule with Lightpulsar Dragon.

Technically, they didn't "issue a miss timing rule", it's just that Lightpulsar is an optional Trigger effect and those will miss the timing if something happens after their triggering condition is met. There are "If ..." optional Trigger effects (at least there's no other name for them) which can't miss the timing because of that "If" (instead of the usual "When"), but since Lightpulsar does have the "When", it's a regular optional Trigger with the timing problem.


text:
morphing jar in a chaos dragon-like deck. yes or no?
I've been using morphing jar a couple times and it's helped out sometimes. Sometimes it hasn't.
Wondering if someone with a little more experience would run it.
Of course, engine consists of most Chaos Dragon deck cards (cause I don't have all of them aha)

It might be helpful for you to post the entire deck contents.

This is entirely dependant on the metagame you're playing in. And also on the current format (that is, Forbidden and Limited List).
For instance,

if your metagame highly favors decks that destroy many monsters by effects, even face-down ones, Morphing Jar is not a good idea because it will often be destroyed before even getting the chance to flip for its effect.
If your metagame favors fast swarming decks that can do insane amounts of damage in a single turn, Morphing Jar is a bad idea because it will often take the spot of a card that might have saved you, while he only lay there and stopped one attack, which wasn't enough to save you from losing.
If you metagame favors many Set Cards or decks that play out their hands almost every turn, Morphing Jar is a double-edged Card because on the one hand, it can really help you in getting a new hand after playing everything down, but on the other hand, it can help your opponent even more if they just played out their entire hand and get a fresh 5 Cards essentially for free.
If your metagame favors slow setup decks that collect combos or do little for several turns, Morphing Jar is generally a good idea because it will have disruptive power and might just survive into your turn so you can play down your entire hand and Flip Summon it to get the most out of its effect.
If your metagame is full of Dark World decks, Morphing Jar is a terrible idea. Read any Dark World Monster and you will know why.

Bottom line, Morphing Jar is one of those general Cards that are only as good as the metagame they're in and depend much more on those circumstances than on the deck you're playing.
Watch what decks others are playing and how typical turns play out, then think about the impact a Set Morphing Jar would have. If you do that for many different (but common) situations, you will get a very good feeling of how well Morphing Jar fits into your metagame.


text:
House rules to speed up Citadels play time?
I enjoy Citadels, but find the game can often quite a long time. Since players must draft their role card in sequence, there ends up being a lot of down time while other players make their selections. The game is particularly prone to analysis-paralysis. Even limiting the game to a small number of players (4 or 5) and triggering the end game sooner (first player to build 7 buildings instead of 8), the game can still draw out. Any more ideas on how to improve the flow of this otherwise great game?

I played this game intensely a few years ago with 2 and 3 players (sometimes up to 4) and the analysy-paralysis problem disappeared after, say, 2-3 games with the same group.
I tried the same solution of lowering to 7 buildings (in fact, it is even suggested on the rulebook) and worked quite well for 2 players, never tried it with 3-4 players.
I personally think the hard time-limit is a too crude option. I'll try instead to insist on the players to 'think fast' in order to make a more agile game.
Notice that you can begin to think about which characters are the best for you on advance, while other players make their choose. And never forget that a little randomness on your decissions are desirable, as you'll be a perfect target for assassination and/or robbering the moment you become too predictable.

Citadels is more likely to drag due to the experience level of players vs. number of players involved.
I too have had some lighting fast games with 2-4 players, but ultimately the speed of those games came down to myself and the other players being highly experienced with the game, knowing each role available, its power, and being able to make those choices (as well off call the roles as the King) in a short manner due to our experience.
The one time I played an 8 player game as well as my experience with 6-7 player games is that there will be 1-3 new/rusty players who do not remember the roles and are unable to make truly informed decisions and thus deliberate for awhile. They tend to forget which role they choose and do not immediately respond when their role is called out during play. Likewise if they happen to become king then they take a long time to call of the roles even with them in front of them.
The solution is simply to try to play more often and with experienced players, your time issue should self-correct over time. Additionally I've found that just about any competitive strategy game like this can drag if people tune out when its not their turn vs. paying attention and planning/thinking ahead as the turns progress.

This is a crude instrument but you could try running a timer on decisions then deducting a player one gold OR their lowest value building if they exceed say, 2 minutes on a decision. I'll be honest and say I haven't tried this myself but my group tend to play quite fast.

Two minutes on a decision is waaaaaay too much!

I agree, and actually Joshuas answer contains the true reason for drag, typically I am always playing with one or two new players and so getting on their case too soon doesn't make it very fun for them.


text:
Can you attack yourself?
Seems like there would never be any reason to attack yourself in Stratego.. unless you do screw up the placement of your pieces like a noob. So I ask, can you attack yourself? Of course, it doesn't say so in the rules, probably because they hope no one is stupid enough to need to. I'd like an answer with some kind of reference or "proof".

There's an old Doctor Who adventure where a chess game is resolved by the white and black pawns teaming up to take on the king.  I love the idea of a Stratego puzzle that can only be solved by attacking one's own pieces :)

I had never considered Stratego puzzles (in the same vein, presumably, as chess puzzles) before. They seem like they'd be really fun!

No. From p. 4 of these rules:

[Pieces] cannot move into a onto a square occupied by another piece (unless attacking).

And from p. 5

To attack on your turn, take your attacking piece and lightly tap your opponent's piece.

You can only attack your opponent's pieces, and your own pieces cannot share a square in any way.

I saw that 2nd quote in the rules, but it didn't seem to direct. I guess it's the closest to answer out there. Thanks man.


text:
7 Wonders Resource Clarification
I am trying to learn how to play the Game 7 Wonders. How many of what resources do each of the wonders start the game with?
The instruction manual never actually tells you how to know what resources each wonder starts out the game with.

Bear in mind that nobody really "starts out" with resources in 7 Wonders - you just start out with the power to get N amount of resources each turn, if you need it to pay costs on cards.  You probably knew that already, but I thought it might be worth pointing out - 7 Wonders works quite differently in this respect from other popular resource-involving games like, e.g., Settlers of Catan...

This question indicates a common misunderstanding of the way resources work in 7 Wonders. Resources are not collected and spent; you can build any card (building or Wonder stage) that requires resources as long as you have your own access to those resources, or pay a neighbor for the temporary use of theirs. If you do not have the required resources, and cannot acquire them from your neighbors, you can't build the card or Wonder stage.
Coins work differently as a building cost; when they are required, such as for the brown split-resource cards, they are paid to the bank.

The resource is pictured in the upper left. You can see it in the rules on page 8 or 9

The Colossus of Rhodes: Ore
The Hanging Gardens of Babylon: Clay
The Pyramids of Giza: Stone
The Lighthouse of Alexandria: Glass
The Mausoleum of Halicarnassus: Textile
The Temple of Artemis in Ephesus: Papyrus
The Statue of Zeus in Olympia: Timber


text:
Card game with jokers and set completion
I was playing a game and no one knows the name, or origin of the game.
The game is played with normal playing cards. Anywhere from 3 to 13 players can play.
SETUP:

A single joker is used.
A single set of numbers per player is used. (4 cards, one of each
suit, all the same number)

All the cards are shuffled. Cards are dealt out until all are in players hands. One player will have 5 cards, the rest will have 4.
PLAY:
The player with 5 cards in their hand is the "playing" player.
That player now makes a series of offers to the next player (clockwise).
First, a single card is offered, if the card is accepted then the next player takes the card and becomes the current player and play continues.
If the first card is not accepted, another card is offered, it is added to the first card, and the next player may now choose either of the two offered cards.
If neither the first offer or the second offer is accepted, the current player simply chooses a third card and gives it to the next player.
A turn would look like this:

Bob places a card face down on the table and offers it to Alice. Alice can accept the card, and then becomes the current player, who must then do a turn of her own with the next player, or can refuse it an ask Bob for another card. If she refuses it, Bob would then choose another card from his hand, and place it on the table next to the first one. Alice can now choose either of the two cards on the table. If she does, she will become the current player, and will have to play a turn with the next player after her. If she does not take either of the cards then Bob will choose a card from his hand and give it to Alice.

OBJECTIVE:
The game ends when any player who has 4 cards in his hand has a whole set of a single number, emphasis on 4 cards, he can not also have any other cards in addition to the 4, so if a player has 4 cards of the same number AND another card (meaning they are the current player) they must try to give their 5th card which is not in the set to the next player.
When any player completes the game like this, everyone wins except the player with the Joker - who loses.
In other words, players are trying to complete sets, and not be left with the Joker. So a player with the Joker will always try to get rid of it by giving it to other players.

Those are the rules, the way its played is that you play "cooperatively" by talking about your cards, and which cards you are giving the other player, of course, you are welcome to lie and trick people. And that is the game.
What is the name of this game? What is it's origin?
And, perhaps, maybe I remember the rules wrong, was told it wrong, or there are more rules?

The game your are playing is a strategic version of "Vatra" or "Fire".
https://www.pagat.com/passing/pig.html#vatra
This comes from the same family of games as spoons and pig.
The rules are pretty much exactly as you mentioned them.  The only difference being the offering of the second card.

Yes, certainly similar. This might be it - but where would the extra card variant come from? Thank you.

@InbarRose It's the Travelling Card variant listed in the link.

I mean the extra offer.

@InbarRose Sorry, I'm not sure.


text:
Sample Wares Intrigue Card Disambiguation
The card Sample Wares states:

Assign 1 of your unused Agent to a Building in Builder's Hall.  You immediately use the effect of that Building as though you controlled it.

This is very strange wording. The rules regarding buildings says:

Owner Benefit: Once a new Building is in play, it is available for
  anyone to assign an Agent to, just like any other Building on the
  game board. However, when someone other than the owner
  assigns an Agent to that Building’s action space, the owner gains
  the benefit described in the tile’s “Owner” line.

First of all the Sample Wares card uses the term "controller" where the rules use the term "owner". To resolve this I will just assume they mean the same thing.
The rules say that the owner benefits are only relevant when a player who isn't  the owner moves there. This implies when the owner moves to a build he owns he gains the regular benefit of the building, without regard for his ownership. The Sample Wares card specifies that the player should use the building as though they are the owner, which according to the rules would mean there is no special benefit and the player would get the regular benefit of the building.
The question is then why would the Sample Wares intrigue card specify "as though you controlled it." it could just as well leave this part out. So the card seems to imply that there is some additional affect that should be considered.

My own ruling on this when I play: This extra clarification of "as though you controlled it." is to imply that no other player should get the owner benefit, and that the card simply lets the player take the regular benefit of the building without any other player getting the owner benefit.
I think this is probably what they meant, but the wording is confusing and it causes some argument when I play. Does anyone have a better clarification on this?

What argument arises when you play?

That you get the owner benefit only.

This has been answered by designer Rodney Thompson on BGG here

You gain the primary benefit of the action, not the owner's benefit. The part about "as if you controlled" the building is simply there to dispel any questions about where the owner benefit goes. Just like when you assign an agent to a building you control, you gain only the primary benefit, not the secondary benefit.
However! If you are playing with the Undermountain expansion and have completed the plot quest Impersonate Tax Collector, you would gain both the primary benefit and the owner benefit.


text:
How soon is "Just Played"
Ainoa and some other general have an ability which reads:

Force an opponent to move an Agent he just played to a different District

Does this mean I have to use the ability at the same time as the player is playing the Agent? Or can I wait a another players turn, or right before they place another Agent to refer to the "Just played" agent from previously?
For instance, if it is possible to wait, then a tactic that could be used is to wait and see what other players place first, or if the player next turn uses a relic - the ability can be used then on the previous Agent.
The rules are not clear on this.

My understanding of this is that it should be from the current round of play.
I must admit but it's been a while since I've played Arcana. Good game, with enough innovations to have a place among my deck builders!

Please, explain why you think this is how it works or add a reference to some reliable source. Avoid answering with vague opinions and share your knowledge or research.

Yes, this is not a ruling/clarification from AEG or FFG. It's an interpretation. Have not been able to find any official rulings.


text:
Confusion on militia rules (The optional event)
According to the rules of Arcana, at the end of the resolution phase all militia should be returned to their pile.
However, there is an event (part of the optional rules) which says that all militia should be returned to their pile at the start of the intrigue phase. Which would suggest that they were not returned the previous turns resolution phase.
But nothing in the rules suggests the option of being able to keep militia in play, so why is there an event card that specifically mentions they should be returned at the start of the intrigue phase?


text:
Does having Smallholder and Acreage when Sowing yield extra grain?
If I have the smallholder, and I sow I should get extra to place one extrs grain when I do so as long as I have two or fewer fields.
Acreage does not count as a field when scoring points, but I can sow grain on it.
If I sow grains on Acreage while I have two or fewer fields, do I get to place extra grain when Sowing on the fields and on the Acreage?

Acreage counts as two fields for Smallholder, so you will not get extra sowing unless it is your only field.
Source:

Acreage, Bean Field, Lettuce Patch and Turnip Field count towards the indicated maximum of 2 fields, and you receive extra grain or vegetables on them because of the Smallholder. The Acreage counts as two fields.

It is worth noting that this is an "unofficial compendium", so it is not as definitive as an actual rulebook. But it has been compiled based on rulings from the designer, as well as discussions in the rules forums at boardgamegeek.com.


text:
Identify a numbers game where you strike out numbers
In this game you start out by jotting down numbers 1 through 19 on a squared paper into 9 columns (and skip 10, there are no zeroes).

Then you start striking out numbers that are adjacent (diagonally doesn't count) and are the same numbers or have a sum of ten. Also, the struck out numbers don't count either, for example, if you have 4 5 6, then you can strike out 4 and 6 (their sum is 10).

If you have struck out all the pairs you can find, you write the left over numbers again and look for new pairs. You win if you've struck out all the numbers.

My question is - does this game have an actual name or is it "that numbers game that everyone played in high school"?

Is it the same numbers every time? Seems like the replay value would be minimal if it didn't change.

Yes, the numbers are same. It's not really meant to be a real puzzle, just something to pass the time with.

You start with an odd number of digits and cross out digits in pairs. When you write out all the remaining digits do you then have to get rid of both sets of digits?

Well, the game can conceivably go on forever, I you can't get rid of all the numbers. You just keep on writing out the remaining numbers when you can't find any more matches.

Only thing I've been able to find refers to the game as TenPair
http://www.logicgamesonline.com/tenpair/

Yes, that's the same game. I guess "TenPair" is as good a name as any.

The game is widely known as Numberama. I found it on the google play store(android) and enjoy it a lot.
It's also referred to as Digits, Numbers Game and TenPair.
It can be played traditionally using the digits of the numbers from 1-19, or using randomized digits.


text:
What does current focus mean?
I've started playing with friends and for spells, the bonus on the hit dice is current focus.

Determine a magic attack's success by making a magic attack roll. Roll 2d6 and add the attacking model's current FOCUS. roll an additional die if the roll is boosted. Special rules and certain circumstances might modify the attack

What does it mean? Is it the remaining focus you have at the time of the spell? And if so, is it counted before or after you spend the focus?
Example:
With my warcaster, I have 6 max focus (the number of focus I have at the beginning of the round) after spending some of my focus on my warjacks, I have 2 left available. I decide to cast a spell that costs me 2 focus.
So my bonus to hit is 6, 2 or 0?

From the PrivateerPress forums:

FOCUS (in all caps) refers to the warcaster's FOCUS stat, which will only change if affected by an ability (Eg pDenny's feat). Focus (lower case) refers to the number of focus tokens.
In the case of a spell, your magic attack roll is FOCUS + 2D6, using your caster's FOCUS 6.


text:
Does a card that affects 'each' creature affect creatures that enter the battlefield after it resolves?
My opponent casts Predatory Rampage, which resolves, then he attacks with his creatures.
In my hand, I have a creature card with Flash. If I summon this creature before the declare blockers step, will it be affected by Predatory Rampage's blocking requirement?

I think the answer is yes, but if you don't want to block with it, why wouldn't you wait until the Combat phase is over before casting it? :)

ghoppe, the actual situation was that I had a Cloudshift and wanted to use it to save one of my creatures from blocking. Obviously I just declared it as a blocker then Cloudshifted, but I was very curious about the rules anyway.

Yes.
That's an easy one, as it is in the Gatherer rulings:
Each creature your opponents control blocks if able, even if that creature wasn't on the battlefield or wasn't controlled by an opponent when Predatory Rampage resolved.

Woops, thanks for this. I need to pay more attention to the rulings!

While this is true for this example. It's not true as a general rule. Ikegami answer is more complete.

It varies a lot depending on the specifics.
In the case of Predatory Rampage, we're talking about two continuous effects generated by something other than a static ability. One modifies the characteristics of objects, and the other doesn't. Both of those situations are covered by 611.2c.

611.2c If a continuous effect generated by the resolution of a spell or ability modifies the characteristics or changes the controller of any objects, the set of objects it affects is determined when that continuous effect begins. After that point, the set won’t change. (Note that this works differently than a continuous effect from a static ability.) A continuous effect generated by the resolution of a spell or ability that doesn’t modify the characteristics or change the controller of any objects modifies the rules of the game, so it can affect objects that weren’t affected when that continuous effect began.

As such,

"Creatures you control get +3/+3 until end of turn." affects only the creatures that existed when Predatory Rampage resolved.
"Each creature your opponents control blocks this turn if able." affects all matching creatures at all times.

Both of these are covered by rulings in Gatherer.

For completeness: "An object’s characteristics are name, mana cost, color, color indicator, card type, subtype, supertype, rules text, abilities, power, toughness, loyalty, hand modifier, and life modifier. Objects can have some or all of these characteristics. Any other information about an object isn’t a characteristic. For example, characteristics don’t include whether a permanent is tapped, a spell’s target, an object’s owner or controller, what an Aura enchants, and so on."

I trawled the Comprehensive Rules for an authoritative answer to this excellent question (the ruling on Predatory Rampage may say how it works, but it doesn't say why it works!) and I think the following rule explains all.  Bolded by me for emphasis of the most important line:

611.2c If a continuous effect generated by the resolution of a spell or ability modifies the characteristics or changes the controller of
any objects, the set of objects it affects is determined when that
continuous effect begins. After that point, the set won't change.
(Note that this works differently than a continuous effect from a
static ability.) A continuous effect generated by the resolution of a
spell or ability that doesn't modify the characteristics or change the
controller of any objects modifies the rules of the game, so it can
affect objects that weren't affected when that continuous effect
began.
Example: An effect that reads "All white creatures get +1/+1
until end of turn" gives the bonus to all permanents that are white
creatures when the spell or ability resolves -- even if they change
color later -- and doesn't affect those that enter the battlefield or
turn white afterward. Example: An effect that reads "Prevent all
damage creatures would deal this turn" doesn't modify any object's
characteristics, so it's modifying the rules of the game. That means
the effect will apply even to damage from creatures that weren't on
the battlefield when the continuous effect began. It also affects
damage from permanents that become creatures later in the turn.

Interesting that "All white creatures get +1/+1" and "All white creatures get +1/+1 until end of turn" behave differently with respect to newly created creatures!

@Nick: How so? Are you maybe confusing static abilities with continuous modifiers (=a continuous effect generated by the resolution of a spell or ability)? If such an effect had the text "All white creatures get +1/+1", it would work exactly the same way "All white creatures get +1/+1 until end of turn" does, except for the fact it wouldn't end at the end of the turn.

@scenia Well yes, I meant a permanent with +1/+1 to all affects newly created creatures afterwards, but a +1/+1 until end of turn instant will not affect newly created creatures.

@Nick Thought so. The difference there (or rather, the thing that makes a difference) is not the "until end of turn", but the fact one is a permanent and the other an instant. The instant creates a modifier that is placed onto all currently eligible creatures. Then it's done and doesn't care what happens any more. The permanent, on the other hand, constantly applies its effect as long as it's in play. If a new creature appears that meets the criteria, since the permanent is in play, it will be affected. If the permanent leaves play somehow, the effect immediately stops on all creatures.


text:
Tapping land for mana with free cast and X in cost
If I have Galvanoth out and the card that is revealed is Skyscribing, am I able to tap lands to pay for the X amount?  Would this be any different with Jeleva, Nephalia's Scourge?

For the second part of your question, are you referring to revealing Jeleva with Galvanoth? or playing skysribing with Jeleva?

Playing Skyscribing with Jeleva

No, in both cases, you cannot tap additional lands to pay for the X. X, if it's not specified on a card, is always considered to be zero. In both cases, the spell's cost is not being paid for, it's being replaced. Galvanoth and Jeleva aren't saying "Add mana to your mana pool equal to the casting cost", they are replacing the cost altogether. So you can't add anything addional to the spell.
Relevant Gathering rules for Galvanoth:

If the card has an X in its mana cost, you must choose 0 as its value.

In both case, you are casting a card without paying its mana cost, so the answer is the same: The only legal choice for X is 0.

107.3b If a player is casting a spell that has an {X} in its mana cost, the value of X isn’t defined by the text of that spell, and an effect lets that player cast that spell while paying neither its mana cost nor an alternative cost that includes X, then the only legal choice for X is 0. This doesn’t apply to effects that only reduce a cost, even if they reduce it to zero. See rule 601, “Casting Spells.”

There's even a ruling on Galvanoth confirming this:

If the card has an X in its mana cost, you must choose 0 as its value.

When you cast a spell, first you determine what cost you're going to pay from among your options. For example, when casting Force of Will, you choose between {3}{U}{U} and "exile a blue card from your hand and lose 1 life." Effects such as Galvanoth and Jeleva only give you one option, "without paying its mana cost."
For an {X}-cost spell, you choose X and use that choice to set the cost of the spell... but if you're casting the spell without paying {X}, your only legal choice for X is 0.
Once you've made all other decisions about casting the spell (hybrid color choice, phyrexian mana, modal spell modes, targets, etc.), you apply cost increasers (such as Sphere of Resistance), then cost reducers (such as Helm of Awakening), and then finally you apply the effects of Trinisphere. (Note: Your choice for X comes a long time before cost increasers and Trinisphere, so when you're casting your spell for "free," X is still going to remain 0, even if there are a bunch of taxes in play.) Then the spell is cast, and players get priority to do other things.
While you can tap more lands than the mana required to cast the spell, that won't generally do anything -- you'll just be floating mana. It also doesn't help much strategically, since (a) the floating mana is lost as soon as the turn advances to the next step or phase, and (b) you're required* to announce floating mana when you pass priority.
* While you're supposed to announce floating mana every time you pass priority, it's unlikely anyone is going to care if it's obvious that the amount has not changed since the last time you announced it, for example during the resolution of a series of Storm spell copies.

No.
A ruling on gatherer for the Galvanoth says as much:

If the card has an X in its mana cost, you must choose 0 as its value.

X always = 0 for CMC (converted mana cost) when X cannot be tapped for mana.  As far as the 2nd question Jeleva's CMC would be 4. (edit) But the X amount paid would thus be 0.

This does not answer the question asked, and is also incorrect. ({X} counts towards a spell's CMC while that spell is on the stack, although it is considered 0 everywhere else.)

Every where else is the context of the question and my answer.

The question has nothing to do with CMC. It's dealing with alternate costs. The question also doesn't ask what Jeleva's CMC would be (you're correct that it's always 4, though), but rather the result of Jeleva's triggered ability casting an {X}-cost spell.

You need to reread the question its asking about Galvanoths ability with revealed cards...

In both cases X = 0

Your answer gives a thorough explanation of X costs and subjective changes to X that don't apply at all to the situation that the OP is describing.

Galvanoth doesn't care what the revealed card's CMC is. Jeleva doesn't care what the exiled card's CMC is, nor what her own CMC is. The entire concept of CMC is irrelevant to this question.

As is floating mana?

X is part of CMC and X has a CMC itself

This really has nothing to do with the question.

@Grimnoff, CMC really is not relevant to this situation. Perhaps you are overestimating or misunderstanding the scope of CMC or when it is used or relevant in the game.


text:
Do Law Offices affect ties you're not part of?
If you own a Law Office tile and two other players are tied for a goal (but you are not), do you win that goal?
Do you have to be one of the players that is part of a tie in order to win that tie with Law Office?  From the way that the tile reads, it does not seem to clarify whether it refers to only breaking your own ties, or if you can benefit from goals that any other players are tying.

My base instinct is to assume not, but I was reminded of a similar ruling in Eminent Domain, which had the same situation on the promo card Exclusive Victory (see left card in the image below).

In that game, the card does allow you to win the game if any players tie for first place, even if you're not one of them, resulting in you taking first instead of them.  Online rules clarifications confirm this.

Effect: If the game ends in a tie, you win the game. (Even if you're not one of the tied players)

Does the Law Office tile in Suburbia work the same way as the Exclusive Victory card in Eminent Domain?

The rules seem pretty clear about this:

In addition, at the end of the game when goals are being scored, the player with a Law Office scores points if he is tied with another player for achieving one goal (public or his own private goal, which he picks from any of his tied goals) as if he had won it. If two players have the Law Office, they may each score the same tied goal.

(emphasis mine)
So no, it does not let you win a tie that you're not part of. (It doesn't work the same as your example from another game.)

As a general rule of thumb, you should take the approach that if the author/designer's intention was the unusual interpretation of a rule, they should specifically say so, so even if the rules weren't clear - as the previous answer pointed out - you still could reasonably assume that the "normal" procedure would apply, and that is that tie breakers don't favor a third party.
Certainly there are situations where people may disagree what the "normal" is, and a missing rule for one interpretation is not always and automatically an evidence for the opposing interpretation, but I think here we have a quite obvious case, so even if you missed the expressly statement for the "normal", you should have trusted your base instinct.


text:
Skills as a Victory Tie-Breaker
How are skills counted for the victory condition?
The first tie-breaker for winning the game is the number of statuses each contested player possesses, followed second by how many skills they possess.  When counting skills for this reason, are skill tiles counted as 1 skill regardless of level (Talent vs. Mastery), or do Mastery skills count as 2 skills each (similarly to how they are most commonly gained by receiving a skill twice)?

Master level skills still count as one. The rules don't cover this directly. However, page 13 says:

Certain paragraphs will instruct you to lose a particular skill. If you have that skill at the Talent level, put it back in the Skill Bank. If you have the skill at Master level, turn it back to its Talent side.

It seems fairly clear that a Master level skill still only counts as one skill. The rules have special cases throughout for how you handle gaining and losing skills at different levels, with the result being that you can only ever have one skill token for a particular skill you have.
In other words, for each skill, you either have it or you don't. This is true regardless of whether you have the skill at Master or Talent level.
As extra evidence, the game is designed so that you have only one skill token and flip it. If being a Master was equivalent to having the skill twice, you'd represent it by having the token twice instead of the token having two sides. As such, the game designer didn't consider this interpretation and so the rules don't cover it.


text:
Fabulous Wealth as Sultan
Does being Sultan bypass the special requirements for being Fabulously Wealthy?
When gaining the Sultan status, a player automatically moves their wealth counter directly to fabulous (the highest option).  However, being Fabulously Wealthy also has a requirement that the player must possess a treasure.  Does being Sultan supersede this rule, or would a Sultan without any treasure be immediately moved back down to Princely regardless of their status?

Why would it? Nothing in the Sultan status says you can't lose wealth. It simply raises your wealth like so many other effects, and the rules clearly limit your wealth to Princely if you have no treasure.


text:
Accessing Tale 2,600
Is there a way to access passage 2,600 in The Book of Tales through normal play?
Passage 2,600 in The Book of Tales appears to be a humorous easter egg referencing the fact that it is the last passage in the book and congratulating you for reaching it.  Can this passage be accessed through any adventures in the game, or is it simply a joke to be found by those who happen to read it (by accident or otherwise)?

Unfortunately, your intuition is correct. It's an unreachable easter egg. Kevin Maroney, developer of the 2nd and 3rd editions of Tales of the Arabian Nights, states in this BGG thread:

Nope. It's an unreachable Easter Egg, a tradition going back to the first edition in 1985 (paragraph 1400) and continued in the 1999 second edition (paragraph 1600).

Not so unfortunate!  I think it's an amusing addition. =)


text:
Should the Deck Marker change more frequently?
The Deck Marker never changes for me - should it?
The Deck Marker has three symbols - Morning, Noon, and Night.  According to the rules, it begins the game on Morning, and then change each time the Encounter Deck cycles.  Once it is at Night, it remains on Night indefinitely through any subsequent shuffles.

Place the morning marker next to the deck.  When  there  are  no  more
  cards  in  the encounter deck, reshuffle the discards and re-use them.
  Also, replace the morning marker with the noon  marker. If  you
  reshuffle  a  second  time,  replace  the  noon  marker  with  the
  night  marker.   (If you need to use the deck a fourth time, leave the
  night marker in place.)

The only problem is, the game never seems to last long enough for the Encounter Deck to cycle, even once.  I've played the game about a dozen times, and I've never seen the Encounter Deck run out.  Ever.  This includes some games with the maximum of six players, which should be very long.
Are we doing something wrong, or misunderstanding how the Marker is supposed to be used?
Since we've never played in any time of day other than morning, there seems to be a good chunk (upwards of 2/3s?) of content we're missing out on.  Is this normal?

Good question! In my experience we've never seen the encounter deck cycle either. I have however played games where for variety we've started on a different phase.

@Ginji  Is this common enough that there are well-known house rules on the subject?  Knowing that might help answer the question more thoroughly.

As you say, from the rules:

Shuffle the deck of Encounter cards and place it to one side. Place
the morning marker next to the deck.  When  there  are  no  more
cards  in  the encounter deck, reshuffle the discards and re-use them.
Also, replace the morning marker with the noon  marker

If  you  reshuffle  a  second  time,  replace  the  noon  marker  with  the  night  marker
(If you need to use the deck a fourth time, leave  the night marker in place.)

There is nothing in the rules or FAQ that would enable you to go through the deck faster than one per turn. For a game that plays a wide range of players (2 to 6), that creates a wide range of rounds required to get through the deck. Combined with the many options in the story book, this could result in small groups not seeing significant parts of the stories over time. Which is what has been widely reported.
Suffice to say it requires some changes to make it work well, and there are a number of options, some suggested in the above links:

Divide the encounter deck into smaller decks each marked with the morning, noon, and night tokens, simply switching to each deck as you finish the previous one. This will work well for player counts where you do manage to get almost through, or through the deck at least once.
Start the game at a different phase, either by consensus, or randomisation. This is good for groups that play together frequently and want to experience the different stories over a longer period of time.
Change the phase at the start of each round (i.e. when you reach the starting player). Works for any player count, and can add more variety into the game. Story wise it allows everyone to play through a morning, noon and evening phase and can make a story of a thrilling day.
Switch phase with each player. Doesn't work with player counts of 3 or 6 as players will always have the same phase on their turns. Will work well for other player counts.
Randomise the phase for each player using the destiny die, utilising a pre-determined specification for the -, +, and blank results (e.g., - is morning, blank is noon, and + is evening)
Utilise predetermined triggers in destiny and story points to decide when to change the phase, e.g. when someone reaches 6 total points, go to noon, when someone reaches 13 total points switch to night. Could be a group wide change, or per player change.

And many, many more variations. Changing the phase doesn't seem to increase or decrease difficulty, so there's no reason to stick to the rules as written when they don't give the variety needed in a story telling game. As with all house rules, it's best that they are identified as house rules, be explained clearly, and all players agree to utilising them.
As the FAQ states:

The    Golden    Rule    of    Tales    of    the    Arabian    Nights    is,   "Whatever    makes    for    the    most    entertaining    story,    makes    for    the    best    game."

So choose the option that give your group the most entertaining story, whether that be sticking to the rules, or implementing one of the variations above, or something else.

Number 3 looks like a great solution to house rule, I've been playing this game for 4 years, I don't think I have ever seen a game last until night!

#3 is the way I have always played. As you say, the golden rule applies, and this just makes the game more fun.


text:
Can you cancel specific hits?
When you cancel a hit, can you distinguish between the the original cause of the hit?
The shadow card Black Breath says that it triggers "if your Leader re-roll scores at least one hit".
In the scenario that the shadow player scores some number of hits on the Combat Roll and exactly one hit on the Leader Reroll, and the Free Peoples player has an effect that can negate a hit, can the Free Peoples player choose to negate specifically the hit of the Leader Reroll in order to prevent Black Breath from activating?  Or are hits no longer distinguishable from each other by the point in which they can be negated?

Can you give an example or two of an effect that negates a hit. I'm asking because particular wording of such an effect could be important

According to Board Games Geek cancelling a hit "simply means that one less casualty is inflicted". In the context of your question that would mean that you cannot prevent Black Breath from activation this way.


text:
Purpose of Legolas' affliation to the Elves
What is the purpose of Legolas' affliation to the Elven Nation?
Each companion of The Fellowship has a nation shown on their card which indicates that the character can activate that nation by visiting a settlement of that nation.  Legolas is linked to the Elven Nation; however, the Elves already begin the game activated, seemingly making this pointless.
Is there any other significance to Legolas' ability to activate the Elves?  Can the Elven Nation somehow become inactive and need to be re-activated?  Are there event cards that make mention of a character's national affiliation in some other useful way?

No, a nation cannot become inactive once it is active.
Legolas just has the nation symbol for thematic purposes. He is an Elf, so he has the Elven symbol.
This is consistent with the other Companions: Gimli has the Dwarven symbol, Boromir the Gondor symbol and Strider the North symbol. But for game purposes Legolas' symbol is indeed pointless.
Similarly, the Shadow characters also have a nation symbol, which are also pointless for game purposes.
However, the expansion, 'Lords of Middle Earth' makes him inconsistent with the others.
The expansion has alternate versions of the Companions who don't have a nation symbol. They can only activate their respective nation with an ability using an Action Die. But because the Elves start the game active, they did not remove the nation symbol from the new Legolas. It is still pointless for him to have it.


text:
Islands as Coastal Spaces
Do Islands count as Coastal spaces?
One specific effect in the game makes reference to coastal spaces, which do not appear to have a clear definition or specific terrain icon.  Do islands count for this purpose?  By definition, islands are surrounded by coast and thus contain coast; however, they are not part of the coast of any mainland continent or landmass.

Yes most islands count as coastal spaces, not because they are islands, but because of the definition of coastal space in Tales of the Arabian Nights. I don't have the rule book on hand at the moment, but from what I remember a coastal space is defined as any non-sea space with a water route leaving it.
This definition would match most but not all island spaces as coastal (notably the one south of P'an P'an, which connects only to P'an P'an).

This is inevitably the conclusion my gaming group came to, and I forgot to answer my own question.  Thanks for adding an answer to an old question.

Barring any rules to the contrary, coastal is generally interpreted as "next to water", so I would say that an island certainly counts for this.


text:
Phantom Province Houserule
The gaming group that introduced me to Dominion plays with a houserule known as Phantom Provinces, explained as such:

After the normal condition for ending the game is reached (including running out of provinces), the game continues until all players have had an equal number of turns instead of ending immediately.  During this time, there are an effectively infinite number of provinces to buy (even if the pile ran out as said condition).

This is designed to counter a perceived advantage with going first and disadvantage with going last.  Is there statistical evidence for or against the validity of this rule?  Is this rule in popular use?

perceived advantage? I think simulations have been performed that place the actual advantage at 2-3VP using some basic strategies Big Money, BM Enhawnced, etc.

@user1873, if you can find a link to those simulations (or otherwise back up your statement), then that's a fantastic answer.

@PaulMarshall, not exactly. That only confirms that peoples perceived advantage exists, and is somewhat quantifiable. This question requires that at a minimum, because it is asking if making all players have an equal number of turns removes that supposed advantage.

That at least means that there's statistical evidence for the validity of doing something, though whether the rule itself is good is another matter.

In this question i discuss all the other advantages of going first besides the extra turn. http://boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/7815/is-it-advantageous-to-go-first-in-dominion/7824#7824

There is certainty a first-player advantage in Dominion. However, that particular house rule gives a possibly even more significant second-player advantage. The reason for this is that the first player can never safely end the game. He has very little control over how the game ends. The best he can do is to build up a significant lead, then end the game and hope. Meanwhile, the second player (assuming a 2 player game) can end the game exactly when he needs to in order to win.
There is a lot of discussion about this exact rule here: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=9791.0.
And here is a well-written article explaining the reasons behind the first-player advantage:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=1467.0
There are definitely statistics to support this advantage. http://councilroom.com/ contains statistics from thousands of online Dominion games with top players. You can pick almost any good player at random and see that their win percentage as first player is much higher than their win percentage as second player. It appears that the search functionality on councilroom is down at the moment, but here is a link to statistics gathered from there: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=54.msg723#msg723. Finally, there is a lot of discussion on the statistics of first-player advantage here: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=946.0.
This advantage was designed to be countered by playing multiple games, and having the winner go last in the next game, which is actually written in the original instruction book.

Very informative!  Interestingly, this answer and the attached discussions speak a lot about 2-player games as if that was the most common scenario, but I had not even considered that, as I've never played with only 2 players.

Good point. It's worth noting that among what I would call the more "serious/competitive players", 2 players is by far the norm, probably because it plays as a more competitive game, with a little less luck. But I suppose 3-4 players would be more common as a whole.

I play this in a club environment, where we are all quite competitive and serious gamers, yet there's too many of us to not want to play group games over two-player games when able.

The creator of Dominion has stated that the reason for the first player advantage is that he or she can effectively get more turns. If you force everyone to have the same number of turns using phantom Provinces, then you should nullify the first player advantage.

Getting an extra turn is definitely an advantage. But going first is
  only an advantage if you get that turn. If you go first but don't get
  an extra turn, a tiebreaker going to the other guy amounts to just
  randomly stealing a deserved tie from you. You didn't play worse, you
  just randomly went first. A tiebreaker there doesn't solve the problem
  of an advantage due to going first (and does nothing for cases with no
  tie); it just randomly awards victories in some cases where there was
  no such advantage. It's the same as flipping a coin.

http://boardgamegeek.com/article/2809700#2809700
So among casual gamers, up until the creator of Dominion, the phantom Province houserule seems like a pretty reasonable fix.
At the "expert" level, as GendoIkari points out, this house rule does no good. Besides the issue of game ending, there are also powerful mega turn decks that get weird. Let's say King's Court, Bridge, and Worker's Village are on the board. You can start to create decks that can buy 20 Provinces in one turn. In these games, the SECOND player gets the advantage. Let's say both players are building power decks, and on a given turn, both P1 and P2 can buy 7 provinces in a turn. If P1 buys 7 provinces, P2 can build for another turn. Now P1 has a stuffed deck, and if he buys 1-2 provinces on the next turn, P2 can pounce and buy 12+ provinces and win. On the other hand, once P1/P2 are able to buy 8 Provinces, if P1 doesn't go out with a bang, P2 will buy out the pile and P1 won't have bought anything.
I would say that if your group (1) doesn't count points so that people know who is in the lead and by how many points, and (2) doesn't produce decks that can buy >2 Provinces per turn, playing with the house rule is more fair than playing without it (of course, playing a bunch of games and exchanging 1st player position is best).

Note that that quote from the designer is linked to from the last link in my answer; and it is widely believed that Donald was mistaken; first-player advantage exists even when both players get the same number of turns.

The main problem here is that player 1 does not have an unlimited amount of Provinces to buy.
So if there is one Province left and p1 buys it, p2 could buy 10 Provinces that are not there.
If you're going with this house rule, you should let p1 buy phantom Provinces as well.

I'm pretty sure the rule as stated allows player 1 to to buy unlimited provinces as well.

Okay, I might have misread it. In that case, it might work.


text:
Geiger's ace artwork
Which of Geiger's ace moves is pictured on his ace card?
As with all Yomi characters, Geiger has two possible options on his ace cards, with only one represented in the artwork.  Unlike other characters, it is not immediately obvious which one is being pictured.  What is the official intent on which move - Cycloid Revolution or Time Spiral Hurricane - is being shown on the card?

I would guess Time Spiral Hurricane, as there are lots of cogs, which are traditionally associated with clocks and watches. I had a theory that the title the same orientation as the image applied to it. I couldn't find enough aces on bgg to prove/disprove it though.

(and some images on aces don't have an obvious orientation)

@tttppp Orientation is irrelevant - all characters have 4 aces with 2 facing each direction.

Ah, ok. I had a look through the Fantasy Strike website, and found a few examples of aces both ways up. Also it looks like most of Gieger's cards have cogs on them, so I'm not sure how much to read into that!

@tttppp Well, I'm not particularly interested in wild guesses.  If you don't know, you don't know.  It's ok, thanks anyway.

Game creator David Sirlin confirmed that the move pictured is Cycloid Revolution.

The art is Cycloid Revolution. It's sort of like Venom's huge ball super in GGXX.

It can be assumed that Time Spiral Hurricane would look similar to the Sonic Hurricane of Guile from Street Fighter, an inspiration for the character.


text:
Sudden Death Mode
When playing Puzzle Strike online, my friends and I encountered a sort of "Sudden Death" mode that activated after many turns of a particularly slow game, resulting in 2-Gems being anted each turn instead of 1-Gems.  We could not figure out exactly what the trigger of this was - likely some specific number of turns - or whether or not this rule was supposed to be used in the physical version.  I do not believe the rule exists in the Version 1 Rulebook.  What is the trigger of this Sudden Death mode that increases the ante, and is it universal to all versions of the game?

The online version uses the 3rd edition rules which state

In a 2-player game, the ﬁrst moment there are two  simultaneously
  empty stacks in the bank, Panic Time is  activated and everyone must
  ante 2-gems from then on.  Even if chips later return to bank and ﬁll
  up some stacks,  the game does not return to Normal Time. The ﬁrst
  moment there are three simultaneously empty bank  stacks, Danger Time
  is activated and everyone antes 3- gems from then on. The ﬁrst time
  four stacks are  simultaneously empty, Deadly Time is activated and
  everyone must ante 4-gems from then on. Note that if  you would ever
  ante a certain kind of gem that the bank  is out of, you must ante it
  anyway with a stand-in gem of  some sort.
For games with 3 or 4 players, the same sort of thing  happens. The
  number of empty stacks needed to activate  Panic Time is actually X,
  where X is the number of players. X+1, and X+2 empty stacks are when
  Danger Time and Deadly Time  activate. The 2 vs. 2 Team Battle mode
  counts as 4-player game for purposes of the Panic Time rules.