text:
Which MTG booster packs have the highest rate of return on investment?
Most players will tell you that buying booster packs for values is a loosing investment, and for the most part this is true because the average expected value of cards in a set is lower than the retail cost of the booster.
So my question is this:
Which M:tG sets have the highest average expected value, and what is the break-even point for pricing against that set's EV?
I would assume that this set would be one with a high number of mid-priced ($2-5) uncommons, and other commons that help to keep the value of more valuable cards afloat.
My first guess would be Darksteel, as it has a number of commons/uncommons that are well priced for their rarity (Aether Vial, Echoing Truth, Darksteel Citadel, Skullclamp, Darksteel Ingot), is a small set, and has at least two big money cards in the Swords of X and Y.

Be careful - the ROI can be pretty good until the game goes out of style and they are worth approximately nothing. Remember that this is a game here (a fun one, to be sure, which presently gives every appearance of having good staying power), and that it's popularity could precipitously drop at any moment for no visible reason.

@MichaelKohne While that's a fair point, given that it's one that people have been making for a decade now it's starting to lose a little bit of its merit...

@StevenStadnicki - credit where credit is due, WOTC has managed to keep the game fresh and interesting for a lot of fans, and not making changes that drove people away. And if you are going to buy any part of it to try to make a buck, sealed packs is probably the thing to buy (as opposed to individual cards), but it's still a gamble, NOT an investment.

@StevenStadnicki, I realize I'm replying to an old comment, but the game was nearly two decades old even when you made it.

Anything after you wait long enough.
Of course, this is assuming you don't actually open the packs, but seriously, take a look at these prices:
$10 for ONE Lorwyn booster pack
$25 for THREE Time Spiral boosters
Over $100 for a Zendikar or Worldwake fat pack
Almost $20 for a Zendikar fat pack box with no cards in it
Since Magic is such a highly collectible game, people will tend to pay more for rarer items. This includes the booster packs themselves. Even though the cards from each of those sets are pretty cheap, the packs themselves are virtually impossible to find, so the price goes skyward. Sure, you could buy some Darksteel boosters and pray you get awesome cards and make a profit, but considering those are around $8 apiece now that's virtually impossible.
The other problem is actually finding people to buy your singles (you could sell in bulk, but that's going to hurt your profits even more). Considering that there's massive websites now that are devoted to nothing but selling singles and aggregate the results from tons of different sellers, you're going to have some tough competition. Even if people learn that they can buy cards from you, you'll have to at least match the prices offered on these sites if you want to stay marketable. You also have to have a LOT of cards available for sale, so get ready to buy 10 booster boxes so you can boast having all the mythic rares in a set (just like every other major card seller will).
The owner of our local card shop does a great business selling fat packs of sets that went out of print over a year ago online, and easily gets more than $80 for them. He personally told me he took all of his money out of the stock market and put it into Magic because the rate of return is infinitely better. See those Avacyn Restored Fat Packs for $35? Imagine what they'll sell for in 2016 and you'll pity yourself for not buying an extra 5 now... (see Steven's informative comment on the block sets generally being a better investment than core sets as well).
I know this isn't exactly what you were asking for, but if you want to make money buying and selling Magic products, actually opening them is probably one of the worst ways to do so IMHO. There's always the risk that prices will go down if the economy worsens or the game goes out of style, but that risk is inherent is virtually any investment nowadays.

Generally this answer is pretty good, but one cautionary note: core sets are a notoriously bad way of 'investing' in Magic cards.  It's only been the last few years that they've been anything but reprints, and generically most of the 'interesting' cards in the core set are either not quite at the power level of the top cards in other sets, or get several years' worth of printing.

Legal disclaimer: be warned that the value of investments in Magic product (or anything else really) can go down as well as up...

What goes up must come down. Inflation can't last forever.

So tl;dr is: keeping out of print sealed product sealed is universally a better prospect for value appreciation than opening it? :)

@Affe I'm not claiming to be an expert on the topic, but I haven't found much evidence to the contrary.

I'd imagine it absolutely is. It also begs the question, are there any sets, out of print or otherwise, that have a higher average value cracked than their purchasable value. From the Vault sets obviously do if you find them at retail, as do some other precon products, but I'm wondering more for boosters.

@WLPhoenix I doubt it. Like you said, packs are purposely priced so their average value is less than that of the cards they contain.

@CrazyJuggleDrummer I'd say you're right but it's the other way around. The card prices lands at a level where they're always above the pack prices. Remember that it is the market that sets the individual card prices. If you'd make money of of packs people would buy packs and sell the cards like crazy until the prices adjusted. That might actually be your shot, the first few weeks the prices of most cards are usually much higher than later. Especially the good cards right before the first big tournament.

A few months ago I wrote a Linux shell script which calculates the prices for each set; it's imperfect, and can use significant polish, but it may shed some light on this question. Please note that it does rely upon some assumptions which do not necessarily hold for all of the sets in consideration:

A booster pack contains 15 cards: one rare/mythic rare (with a 1/8 chance of mrare), three uncommons, and 11 commons. (This does not hold for early sets.)
All cards of a given rarity are equally probable in each card "slot" of that rarity. (It should be noted that it does not distinguish a land slot, but includes it as a common. This should pull down the average for Zendikar specifically. Also, it allows a theoretical M14 pack containing 11 Merfolk Spy's.)
The "average" prices, which are obtained from TCGPlayer's website, are reliable. (If a set does not have proper data from this source, it is ignored. Most sets do, fortunately.)
Foil cards are ignored entirely.

Under these constraints, the booster packs with the highest EV, as of this date (1/13/2014), would be:
$162.09 Arabian Nights
$87.43  Unlimited Edition
$35.63  Legends
$12.40  Revised Edition
$11.48  Modern Masters
$11.25  Portal Second Age
$9.92   Alliances
$9.07   Future Sight
$8.37   Tempest
$7.49   Portal
$6.87   Worldwake
$6.73   Coldsnap
$6.69   Shadowmoor
$6.66   Fifth Dawn
$6.64   Urza's Saga
$6.50   Darksteel
$6.40   Lorwyn
$6.34   Eventide
$6.21   The Dark
$6.16   Ravnica
...
$4.71   Theros
...
$3.35   Homelands
$3.16   Dark Ascension
$2.95   Chronicles

Obviously, most of the first few sets are off, since they didn't have 15 card packs. (Beta and Alpha are omitted because the sheer rarity of the cards there means some don't have prices listed.) I included Theros, the most recent set, to illustrate that, by these calculations, a pack of even the most current set is expected to be worth more when opened ($4.71) than when sealed ($4.00) -- which should be taken into consideration when interpreting these values. (Theros was actually nearer $5.50 when I originally wrote this script -- quite a value drop.) Also, it's interesting to note that the weakest three sets are Chronicles, Dark Ascension, and Homelands.
For those interested, the bash scripts are PriceCheck and MassPriceCheck;
./PriceCheck -s /path/to/pricefile

takes a downloaded version of the price page for a set (pricefile) and prints the EV of a pack under the assumptions above. (Without the -s ("simple") flag, it'll also print the EV of the individual card "slots" as well.) When executed in the same directory as PriceCheck,
./MassPriceCheck

downloads all of the pricefiles for each set (including garbage pseudosets listed there, like Duel Decks, which I haven't bothered to write code to exclude), dumps that into the directory
./junk/

and runs PriceCheck on each of the pricefiles systematically. The scripts are pretty terrible, but they weren't really meant for anything more than sating my own curiosity, if that assuages any guilt.

An interesting point here is how you calculated the cards with the lowest value. Did you have a threshold where cards with value lower than X had 0 because no one wants to buy them? The cost of selling bad cards is much higher than selling great cards. Compare the work of finding a buyer for a Tarmogoyf to finding one for a Squire.

"Also, it's interesting to note that the weakest three sets are Chronicles, Dark Ascension, and Homelands." -- Well, homelands is generally considered one of the worst sets in the game's history, and Chronicles is probably the most over-printed. DKA is a bit surprising, though. (I wouldn't have been surprised to see The Dark, as it's almost in the same boat as Homelands.)

Your price assumption may not be as valid as you think: the people actually selling cards on TCGPlayer are the presumably the ones with the low end prices, not the average prices.

@AndSoYouCode No, I didn't include any exceptions for excluding low-value cards -- simple modifications to the scripts could achieve that, however. It's mostly just to get a relative idea of the pack values. If you're interested, you can add a threshold (X) to the calculation by appending
 | awk '{if($1 > X){print}else{print "0"}}'
to the end of line 9 in the PriceCheck script -- naturally, replacing X with whatever number means "valueless" to you.

@Jefromi I do not presume that the assumption in question is true; but between the insanely inflated prices at "High" and the damaged cards sold at the "Low" end, assuming that average prices were representative was necessary for the calculation. Because of that, the EV calculations really only have meaning when compared with each other.

could you share your python script or perhaps re-run it on the current set lists?

@ChrisMcCleary He didn't write a Python script, he wrote a Linux shell script, and he did share it in the pastern links in this post.

I know I'm somewhat late to the party here. But for the highest rate of return, I would look to see what is being played in eternal formats like Modern, Legacy or Vintage. Cards that are played in multiple decks in eternal formats are usually more expensive than other cards.
For example, Tarmogoyf is played in most green or green-splashed decks such as RUG Delver, Junk, Maverick (sometimes), BUG, etc. and is one of the most expensive cards printed recently.

I play mostly Standard Constructed and my observations for it are such that the highest return rate boosters are the ones from the oldest block set that is currently in standard, which is the case up until before a new block is released.
For example once the Innistrad block came out the most return rate would be in the Scars of Mirrodin boosters e.g. the dual lands shot up in price.
This would not apply for non-standard players. As mentioned above Zendikar is absolutely very expensive because of the full artwork lands and the fetches.

I've been following this question for sometime now and have to post an answer because I don't have enough reputation :(.
That said, here are more current Estimated Values for these sets, and I've written more on my blog about how to estimate value against current prices.
In general, the estimated value will always be lower than the market going rate for a pack to account for the potential the pack has to contain a certain high-value card.
I like the question though and used google sheets to importhtml from TCG and calculate approximate estimated values like Kite (I also, didn't take into account that AN only had 8 cards per pack... that said, the estimates should be pretty good...)
Here they are, with High, Mean, and Low prices:

Arabian Nights   330.43  250.42  213.19
Unlimited    194.83  166.88  135.04
Antiquities  126.84  84.57   70.37
Legends  76  46.16   36.73
Revised  38.86   16.46   11.7
Future Sight 28.86   13.2    9.41
Alliances    25.53   11.73   8.14
Zendikar 29.97   11.36   7.2
Planeshift   22.47   10.65   7.44
Fifth Dawn   26.38   10.6    6.29
Timeshifted  24.28   9.46    5.37
Darksteel    25.95   9.07    5.62
Shadowmoor   24.13   9.05    5.42
Eventide 23.56   8.96    5.41
Coldsnap 22.97   8.74    5.14
Urza's Saga  23.7    8.72    5.44

You can make a copy of the Google Sheet with my formulas that I used as well here


text:
Does a Xantcha I cast trigger a Warstorm Surge I control?
Xantcha, Sleeper Agent has the ability:

As Xantcha, Sleeper Agent enters the battlefield, an opponent of your
  choice gains control of it.

Warstorm Surge has the ability:

Whenever a creature enters the battlefield under your control, it
  deals damage equal to its power to any target.

If I cast a Xantcha, my opponent will ultimately gain control of it. But is it ever on the battlefield under my control, such that it will trigger my Warstorm Surge?

No, it enters the battlefield under the opponent's control and is not even momentarily under your control. If you both had Warstorm Surges, it would trigger theirs and not yours.
"As (this card) enters the battlefield" is a replacement effect that altogether changes how it would enter the battlefield. In this case, it replaces the card entering under your control with entering under theirs. This is like how a Mistcutter Hydra does not enter the battlefield as a 0/0, then gain +1/+1 counters (it would die) — it enters with those counters and, from the rules' perspective, had them all along for as long as it was on the battlefield.
We can check this in the rules for replacement effects:

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

It would trigger your Warstorm Surge (and not an opponent's) if it instead said:

When Xantcha, Sleeper Agent enters the battlefield, an opponent of your choice gains control of it.

... because that is a triggered ability that would have to go on the stack and resolve first, after Xantcha enters under your control.

Xantcha will enter the battlefield under your opponent's control, not your control, so she will not trigger your Warstorm Surge.
Xantcha's quoted ability is a replacement effect that modifies how she enters the battlefield, so it applies before she enters the battlefield.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Does the event card "Build Master" force you to put the card back under the same pile as you choose to search in?
I have a Dutch version of the Catan card-game so bear with me a little regarding translation to English.
My question refers to the event card that allows both players to search through a pile and put back one card from their hand. This event card is called "Bouwmeester" in Dutch, roughly translates to "Build Master" in English.
The Dutch text on this card is unclear about whether, when you choose to take a card from a pile, you need to put back your card under the same pile or may put it back under any pile.
So what is the formal ruling of this event card?

It is the same pile.
As in the English rulebook (p22):

Examine your chosen stack. You may choose any one card from that stack. You may also choose not to exchange any cards. Place your discarded card at the bottom of the stack and return it to the table face-down.

Thank you for your answer, but I'm just wondering something. The original game is in German (I think), could it be that the English one is badly translated as well? :)

It's possible, but I doubt it. I've looked over the German rulebook, and whilst I don't have sufficient grasp of the language to translate it fully, it seems to me to be referring to a single stack as the subject of the exchange, as are the English rules.

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


text:
How to avoid the situation in which player 2 knows for sure that player 1 chose the King?
In Citadels/Machiavelli the rules state that the current king, in order to start a round, needs to look at the first character card and put it face down on the table. Then put a certain number of character cards face up on the table. If the King card is amongst the open cards a new character card is put face up instead of him.

I think that applying this rule results in a situation in which the first player is unable to get the King character because the second player would then know for 100% sure that the first player chose it. Consider the following situation: The King was amongst the face up cards and is replaced by another character. Player two therefore knows that the king card is availble to player one. If then player two receives the character cards and the king is no longer there, player one MUST have chosen it.

Considering the fact that the whole process of character selection in Citadels is very well balanced and you never really know for sure who took which character, I feel that somehow there must be a way to change this rule a little so that the problem is avoided. How would you implement this rule in such a way that the problem no longer exists?

Possibly its a feature, if player1 knows he cannot pick the king safely then it prevents one player from always going first?

@Nick nice suggestion but this game punishes you bluntly for this kind of behaviour. If player 1 takes the king a few turns in a row to ensure the throne, I reckon at any time he will be either assassinated or robbed very soon. I don't think the rule was made for the reason you suggest because the chance that the king is amongst the face up cards is fairly small, and based on random card draws.

Remove the appropriate number of random characters face-up, if a King is revealed reshuffle. Then randomly select a character card and place it face-down
This will still have you reshuffling the character cards 25% of the time in a 4-Player game (if you remove the King from the face-up random cards, you reshuffle 100% of the time), but it is much better than The only two other possibilities that come to mind. In this way, the second player doesn't know if you chose the King or it was removed face-down randomly.

Remove the exception for choosing a new card if the King is revealed face-up
Allow the First Player to choose between the Last Players face-down discarded card, or their original choice

Both of these suggestions have their own issues. If you allow the King to be removed face-up, you are changing the odds that the First Player changes each round. In a 4-Player game, you have tripled the chances from 12.5 to 37.5, that the King is unavailable.
With the latter suggestion, the first player knows all the roles that were chosen. This means that they are certain to hit with the Assassin or Thief.
BTW, The first player sets aside one character card face-down with-out looking at it, according to the rules (not that this isn't easy to deduce).

I was going to clarify the 'without looking' part, but then it just gives the King a trivial deduction problem, so having the king look at the face down card probably just saves time.

Why not just discard the face-down card AFTER having dealt with the face up cards?  Seems like it gives the same final result, without having to shuffle if the king is face up.

My Duch rulebook printed in 2000 states that the king is allowed to look at the card, so perhaps this is a revision considering that the card is easily deductable.

I think between user1873, bwarner and me looking in my rulebook again, we have found a solution: open the face up cards first, if the king is there reshuffle and open again, THEN look at the first card and put it face down. This way player one can safely choose the king because player two cannot know the face down card. When I just read my rulebook again I think this is actually what they are trying to say, it's just not very clear. I'm glad we found the solution. :)

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


text:
Where to buy or how to cut blank hexes for own game prototype?
Fellow board game player wants to test his game prototype, which uses a number of hex pieces (prefreably smaller than Catan or Eclipse ones). Is there a place to buy some blank ones? We could then use adhesive paper labels printed on inkjet printer. Or maybe there is a place to send full-hex graphic design and receive cutted pieces? Alternatively, do you have working DIY methods for cutting uniform hexes?

Yes, you can buy blank hex pieces. Print&Play Productions offers cardboard hex tiles in several different sizes through Boards & Bits.
Chipboard Shapes - Hex 1.19" [35 pcs] $2.00
Chipboard Shapes - Hex 1.5"  [20 pcs] $2.00
Chipboard Shapes - Hex 2.2"  [11 pcs] $2.00
Chipboard Shapes - Hex 2.6"  [22 pcs] $3.00
Chipboard Shapes - Hex 3.9"  [8 pcs]  $3.00

You could also get wooden hexes from WoodNShop for $0.15-$0.42 each, or at a discount by the 100s. I am unsure if these would fit your purposes for tile laying, as I have heard complaints that the tile dimensions are not uniform enough for such a purpose.
 C/O HEXAGON 1/8 X 1 $0.15
 C/O HEXAGON 1/8 X 2 $0.20
 C/O HEXAGON 1/8 X 1 $0.32
 C/O HEXAGON 1/8 X 1 $0.42
 C/O HEXAGON 1/4 X 2 $0.20

There is also plastic tiles, if you are so inclined. With a little bit of work to remove the mesh backing, you could use actual hexagonal tiles from your local hardware store.
I don't know of any board game manufacturer that creates hex tiles with custom graphics. Board game maufacturers are capable of creating protype board games, but my guess is the cost is prohibitive.
If you want to cut your own uniform hex tiles, you are going to need a die cutter ($600), and a custom die.
You probably don't even need hex tiles for testing purposes. If the hex tiles need not be rotated, then square tiles can be offset every other row for the same effect as a hex tile. If orientation is important, wooden tiles/disks can be substituted for hex tiles.

if the material is thin enough, you could also likely use something like a versalaser .. though it is likely incredibly cost prohibitive

Quilters and schools often use die-cutters to make shaped pieces. Hexagons are one of the standard die types, and are available in a variety of sizes. Many cut multiples at once, tho the standard sized template is a 5x8" block with 1 large, or 2, 4, or 6 hexagons of smaller sizes (3", 2", 1" face to face)
Search for Hexagon die cut to find more variety than is worth listing here. Craft stores and school supply stores often also have them.
To use them, however, you'll want a die-cutting press - itself a hundred dollar item.

FYI: It isn't going to look as pretty as real hex tiles but if you are just prototyping a game then you can functionally simulate Hexes tiles with Square tiles since six squares can fit around each square if you stagger rows.  Drawing dots one quarter and three quarters down each edge and connect the nearest dots with lines makes the hex nature of squares more apparent.
Real life example of someone using just square tiles to create a hex board:  https://www.boardgamegeek.com/image/786116/beehive

This is not a bad idea, but it comes with a caveat. Hex can have 6 different orientations in same position, while square has only 4. So it comes down to importance of orientation of each piece in that board.

Another source worth checking out, specifically for the games market, is Blue Panther LLC: they seem to make pieces specifically for gaming and can do custom cuts or engravings when you're ready to take that step.  Have a look at http://www.bluepantherllc.com/ for the details.
I've done my own prototyping with wood pattern blocks, an educational tool you can find at a lot of school-supply stores; I was lucky enough to find a bag of nothing but hexes, but the shop I got it from has no idea what the model/part number on that bag was (if any) and I can't seem to find specifically hex-shaped pieces online, just a set of hexes, triangles, squares, etc.

Disclaimer: I own this business.
Prawn Designs, based in California, sells custom bits and bases, including hexes.

Bob - you should warn people if you are going to post a link to your personal business (http://www.prawndesigns.com/about.shtml). It's not wrong, but you need to reveal a disclosure that you may not be an unbiased source :)

Why downvoting? It's indeed not wrong and his accessories choice is really nice. PS: not "warn" but "inform".

Hi Bob, welcome to the site! To protect us against spam, even relevant self-promotion requires disclosure. Since your answer does address the question at hand, I've made the necessary disclosure on your behalf.


text:
What happens if a wizard uses a spell against a monster that is immune to it?
In Dungeon! a wizard must choose to use a spell, let's say lightning, before the monster of a room is revealed. What happens if the monster is revealed and it appears to be immune to lightning, as shown by the "-" sign?

It is treated the same as if they rolled a number that was too low.  They are defeated and suffer the usual consequences.
There are various different versions of the rules.  The ones here show it on page 10, third paragraph.

Are you sure, do you have any reference to the rules for this? It seems strange because using a spell means that the monster cannot retaliate, so if the spell fizzles because of the immunity then in fact nothing would really happen. I wonder if the wizard would loose the spell card then?

You are correct that a wizard takes no damage when failing with a spell, but still loses the spell.  There are - monsters for things other than spells though too.

Your link seems dead. Mind updating it?

Its a PDF, so it probably won't work on phones and such.  Sorry, I don't know of a better location to link to the rules.  I got it from http://www.boardgamegeek.com/filepage/3102/new-dungeon-rules-pdf

Is "New Dungeon" the same thing as "Dungeon!"?

It wasn't just a mobile issue; it appears BGG files use a different-than-normal download system. I updated the link to the pdf on BGG; seems to work now.

In WOTC's Dungeon!, the rules imply that, if a monster is immune to the spell, the spell simply fizzles.
However, they also state that "Each Monster card includes icons for the Fireball and Lightning Bolt Spells," so theoretically no Monsters are immune in this edition.

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


text:
Playing Munchkin with only 2 players
I'm looking into playing Munchkin with only two players. According to the box and the rules the game was made for a minimum of 3 players (probably for good reasons), but I haven't been able yet to understand what specific aspect it is that implies this minimum. What are the limitations of playing with only two players that make the game unplayable with it's current rules set?


text:
Common rules or house rules to resolve catching dispute
In Ghost Catch (Geistes Blitz original name) the idea is that you grab the correct item before any other player can. Obviously the one player having the correct item in hand wins the round. However incidentally we end up with the situation that 2 players each hold one end of the correct item. Or players grab for the correct item but none of them manages to actually get it and it falls off the table. Or even worse, one player grabs for the wrong item but accidentally tips over the correct item and another player therefore doesn't manage to grab the correct item. We have come up with the house rule that then no one wins the round, the card is being shuffled back into the deck, and so the same round will come up again later in the game.
I feel this is not always fair, and if this happens near the end of the game and the deck is very small players can predict what the next card might be and gain an unfair advantage.
I'd like to know whether there is an actual rule or perhaps an errata or a successful (house) rule to solve these kind of situations.


text:
Does a herbivore gain 1 star if he attacks but the damage is ignored due to armor plating?
This scenario came up in a game played tonight:

The King is in Tokyo City and has an Armor Plating card ("Ignore
damage when that damage would only make you lose 1").
Alienoid is not in Tokyo and has a Herbivore card ("Gain 1 star on your turn if
you don't damage anyone").
Alienoid, after his second and final reroll, has rolled a single Attack (along with a few hearts).  We all agreed that The King should not take any damage because of his Armor Plating.

Our question:  Should Alienoid gain 1 star since he didn't damage anyone?

Yes, Alieniod with Herbivore should gain 1 Star for not damaging anyone.
Herbivore specifically tells you to gain a Star if you don't damage anyone, so assuming Alienoid doesn't buy a card that damages anyone, they will gain 1 Star from Herbivore. The rules specifically call out the matter:

If an attack somehow ends up doing no damage (due to Camouflage for example), then it is no longer considered an attack for the purposes of cards like Poison Spit or Herbivore.


text:
When are suspend card counterable
When can you counter a suspend card (when it is suspended or when the final time counters get removed) and would I need to play a counterspell (counter a spell) or a stifle (counters an ability) to do so?

When you move a suspend card from your hand to the exile zone, you are performing a special action, much like playing a land. This cannot be stopped by a Counterspell, nor even by a card like Stifle.
Each of your subsequent upkeeps, a triggered ability removes a time counter. This can be stopped by a card like Stifle. (Note: Stifling the "remove a counter" trigger won't permanently stop the spell, you will simply delay the spell by a turn.)
When the final time counter is removed, another triggered ability (which can also be the target of Stifle and friends) will cast the suspended spell upon resolution. At that point, the spell will finally be on the stack, and a legal target for cards such as Counterspell.

Only thing I would add is that Stifling the "remove a counter" trigger doesn't permanently stop the spell; it just delays it by a turn. If you actually want to stop the spell altogether, you'll want to wait for the last counter to come off.

Suspended cards have three abilities, two of which may be countered. To understand why, we first need to understand how to counter a spell, and the various abilities associated with the Suspend keyword.

701.5a To counter a spell or ability means to cancel it, removing it from the stack.

Now we know that a spell or ability must be on the stack in order to be countered. Now we explore the three Suspend abilities, and determine which can be countered and which can't.
First Ability

Suspend N—[cost]” means “If you could begin to cast this card by putting it onto the stack from your hand, you may pay [cost]
and exile it with N time counters on it. This action does not use the
stack

The first ability is a special action that does not use the stack. It cannot be countered or even responded to at all.
Second Ability

At the beginning of your upkeep, if this card is suspended, remove a
time counter from it

The second ability is a triggered ability that uses the stack. It can be countered by Stifle. This typically only serves to delay the suspension by a single turn.
Third Ability

When the last time counter is removed from this card, if it’s exiled,
play it without paying its mana cost if able. If you can’t, it remains
exiled. If you cast a creature spell this way, it gains haste until
you lose control of the spell or the permanent it becomes.

This final ability is also a triggered ability which puts a spell on the stack. The triggered ability may be countered with Stifle, or the spell may be countered by Counterspell. If the ability is countered, the previously suspended card remains in exile, where it is typically never able to trigger again. Countered spells go to the graveyard.

WRT third ability: The ability doesn't "end up as a spell on the stack," but rather the resolution of the ability puts a spell on the stack (and moves a card from the exile zone to the stack zone). If the trigger is countered with Stifle, the suspend card itself stays in exile forever (barring Pull from Eternity/Riftsweeper style shenanigans) without ever having seen the stack or been a spell.

@BrianS Corrected.


text:
Civilization - Through the Ages with old game
I own the 'old' version of Through the Ages: A Story of Civilization from 2006.
There is also a new version (Through the Ages: A New Story of Civilization) from 2015.
Some rules have been added and cards have been changed (among others).
I'm wondering if I can play the new rules, or some adapted rules with the old game.
It's too much work creating/altering the cards, but if there are not many changes it might be worthwhile. Or can some or all rules of the new game be played with the old game as well?


text:
Power strength too important in Through the Ages
In Through the Ages, there are some optional rules to prevent power is too important, e.g. by not ganging up on the weakest player.
However, still a lot of event cards affect the weakest and strongest player. So if one player is the weakest, he wants to increase his strength, but then another player will be the weakest, who increases his strength, so it is a neverending story.
Do I miss something here or should I use a different strategy?

Indeed military power is important (as in the real world).  Indeed the weakest nation suffer from Aggression/War and several events.  However having the most military power is not the safest way to win a game with 3/4 players.  Most often the best players keep their military strength somewhere in between, so they can stand an Aggression/War attacks and will not lose to events but not waste all their resources on military.  Note that two player game is much more about military strength since each point you steal from your opponent is 2 points swing.
If you don't like this arm race there are few ways to reduce it:

4 players games - more players means military strength is less important.
Peaceful variant - no War and Aggression cards - just a culture race.
Through the Ages: A new Story of Civilization - the new edition decrease the dominance of some military cards, most known is Napoleon which decrease from a 3-action-pick to a situational nice leader.

Experts can handle low Military: they have ways to neglect the negative affects of low military, so that they can focus on engine building and "change gears" when time seems right.
Examples: seeing but not seeding most of the 5 events that involve military at age I, or timely seeding Iconoclasm that can remove Napoleon on the right time.  Having a effective tactic card in hand + enough resources ready for countering a War.

Thank you very much for this insight... What I noticed mostly now is that the weakest player has a huge disadvantage, because most of the cards target either the weakest or highest.

Note: on BGA you can play both the first addition and the second. https://boardgamearena.com/

This is probably opinion based but I've played this game many many times and was involved in the play testing of the expansion.
Its my view that TTA is more a tactical game than a strategic game.  If you approach it with a long term strategy and that cards you wont don't appear till late in an era, get taken by others or that elusive tactic you want doesn't appear you cant do much about it.  I'd advice playing the game more reactively and assessing each current situation rather than trying to plan to much long term.
if you think you will suffer being the weakest player there are many things you can do to mitigate this.
1) Don't play events.  the points you lose not doing this is very small compared to what the final score are likely to be.  If your not playing events then the events you don't want are less common.
2) Play colonies if you have them.  If you can bid enough for a stronger player to have to keep rebuilding their strength then the won't be spending resources of other things.
3) Try to compete with strength.  As with all board games its not about having the largest score, its about just have a larger score than your opponents.  If you need to spend a bit building an army rather than things that score points then do that.  Having an awareness of the tactics and trying to pick up at least one cavalry or infantry units card will help.
I wouldn't say that the military strength aspect is to important.  But it is something you have to just be aware of when making decisions as its one of many factors in the game.  With the exception of wars I don't think the negative effects are that devastating if you know what might be coming.

Thank you very much for these tips, especially the first ones, for a 4 player game more events are played per turn, but in any way military is somewhat important, or at least shouldn't be ignored.


text:
How big is a Consuming Aberration after it is stolen with Act of Treason?
Suppose I take a Consuming Aberration with an Act of Treason. Consuming Aberration says: Consuming Aberration's power and toughness are each equal to the number of cards in your opponents' graveyards.
Therefore, which graveyard do we count to determine how big the Consuming Aberration is in this instance?

Is this a trick question? Consuming Aberration is Dimir. Clearly Act of Treason doesn't resolve because you counter it. :-)

You would count the cards of the graveyards of the opponents of whoever controls the Consuming Aberration. "You" in Static Abilities, such as the one setting Consuming Aberration's power and toughness, refer to the controller of that card. Act of Treason gives you control of the creature, so the Static Abilities are yours. Per the Magic Comp rules (emphasis mine):

109.5. The words “you” and “your” on an object refer to the object’s controller, its would-be controller
  (if a player is attempting to play, cast, or activate it), or its owner (if it has no controller). For a
  static ability, this is the current controller of the object it’s on. For an activated ability, this is the
  player who activated the ability. For a triggered ability, this is the controller of the object when the
  ability triggered, unless it’s a delayed triggered ability.


text:
Do my creatures get a boon from previously played spells?
Suppose I am playing modern BW tokens and have a Hero of Bladehold on the field.
I cast Zealous Persecution in my main phase.
Do the tokens created my my Hero also get the +1/+1 bonus from the Persecution?

No, the token creatures aren't on the battlefield when Zealous Persecution resolves

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. If a single continuous effect has parts that modify the characteristics or changes the controller of any objects and other parts that don’t, the set of objects each part applies to is determined independently.

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.

Additionally, any of your opponents creatures that enter the battlefield after Zealous Persecution resolves don't get -1/-1 either.


text:
In Game of Thrones naval battles, do land units on the ship count?
If I have moved units on to a ship, and then that ship gets attacked, do I add their points to my defense power?

In the board game A Game of Thrones: the Board Game, land units do not board ships, and thus do not occupy the same location. Rather, ship units allow you to treat two coastal locations as adjacent for the purposes of using March orders on land units.
From the 2nd edition rulebook, page 23:

Any two land areas are considered adjacent for the purposes of
  marching and retreating when they are connected by consecutive sea
  areas (or a single sea area) each containing one or more friendly Ship
  units. In other words, Ship units in consecutively adjacent sea areas
  form a direct “bridge” for Knights, Footmen, and Siege Engines to move
  directly from a coastal area to another coastal area in one move.

As a further note, when using the Support order: whilst ship units are able to provide support to adjacent land or sea locations, land units can never provide support to sea locations; as on page 18:

Ship units may support adjacent combat in a sea area or a land area.
  Footmen, Knights, or Siege Engine units, however, may never provide
  support to combat in a sea area.

However, it would be possible, for example, to use a ship with a Support order to transport land units into an enemy-controlled location, and then have that ship support the land units in the subsequent battle.

So you would never board troops on to a single ship, then use a march order on the ship to move the troops to another location?

Not quite - you use the March order on the land units, which then can use your ships as a 'bridge'. The ships can have any order.

Excellent! Thank you very much, looks like I've been playing wrong, but at least it was only for two games :)

No worries, glad I could help. :)


text:
What to keep in mind when copying a small card game?
There's an old card game I want, but it's been out of print for 15 years and currently going for >$1000 used. There are just 80 cards in the game, and I've got a friend who does own it.
My plan is just to scan the cards, print them two-sided, laminate them and cut them out with a knife. I could also get plastic pockets and print the front and back separately.
What are some common pitfalls in printing a card game, and what am I likely to have missed?
(Don't worry, of course I'll mail a fit donation to the manufacturers.)

I am not sure asking advice about potential copyright infringement is allowed on this website.

If you do not copy the actual cards (not using their images), it might not be illegal. (like magic workstation for MTG. and isotropic for dominion)

@ColinD It's honestly not clear that Isotropic and Magic Workstation are legal as much as they are tolerated - though I wholeheartedly agree with your first point.

I am very curious, what is the game?

@Andrey: It's Knightmare Chess (2). I did email SJG about permission to copy my friend's game, but for some reason they wouldn't allow it, even with economic compensation.

@Anna wow i have that somewhere.  There is right now a copy of it for 200 on ebay, the price is a little exaggerated.

@Andrey: Yeah. And I want to own it, but not that badly.

Copyright concerns aside, I can help with the printing. I recently made a 100-card game (actually a Fluxx variant) like so:
I printed out the cards in sheets of nine cards (onto standard A4 paper), then chopped them out with scissors. This might take a while if you've got too many, but 80 should be OK.
To make them more sturdy, I bought 100 penny-sleeves and got a bunch of old, unwanted Magic cards (try your FLGS or CCG-playing friends if you have none). I simply placed the printed cards (on paper) into a sleeve with a Magic card to make it firm and less vulnerable to breaking while shuffling/dealing/etc.
If the card-backs are significant (they weren't for me), you could print them out too and place them in the other side of the sleeve, but honestly that sounds like a lot of work. For instance, if there are two types of card, you could put some Magic cards in backwards, or use different CCGs, or different colours of Magic card.
Not particularly high-quality, but considering the cost is the cost of printing a dozen sheets of paper and about a quid for the sleeves, it's prototype-gaming on a budget!

As commenters have pointed out, the copying that you are describing is illegal in most countries.
This isn't legal advice (and it depends on where you're located), but a quick Google search about copying and protecting card games seems to suggest that you probably can make a copy if you don't directly copy the artwork or wording used in the original game. It sounds like you can write out the rules in your own words, and make your own cards. Of course, some would say this is ethically questionable. And who knows what the issues are if the game mechanics are patented in some way.

(Don't worry, of course I'll mail a fit donation to the manufacturers.)

There's a better way. If the game is out of print, but the manufacturers are still contactable, why not just write to them? You can avoid the issue of illegal copyright infringement if you have permission.
Something like "I am really interested in a copy of this game. Is it possible to buy it from you still? Are you likely to reprint it anytime soon? If not, would you mind if I photocopied my friends copy and mailed you $70?"

Does this answer the question? It sounds like the OP is asking for practical advice with printing and laminating cards, rather than copyright concerns.

I think it answers "what am I likely to have missed" :)

If you have any legal concerns about what you're doing, I would actually recommend not sending the manufacturers money - it could easily be interpreted as an acknowledgement that you know what you're doing is in the legal wrong.

@StevenStadnicki I'm not advocating sending them money in response to illegal infringement, I'm advocating asking them for legal permission to make a copy (and offering money).

I have just built a prototype for a card game.  Since I was not using any art, I ordered the printing of the cards on those small business cards.  They are thick and sturdy enough to last a long while and easy to shuffle too.
The most of the card rules are common, so, not a lot of text needed to be on the cards them selves.

I'm also working on a custom Fluxx deck, have done a little research, www.makeplayingcards.com has a lot of customization options. Not sure they are the cheapest (but you can order a single deck if you want, $12 for 54 cards), but was referred by a friend who says quality is good.
Johno, would be interested in comparing notes on custom Fluxx decks...


text:
Is Consume-Trade on Alpha Centauri always a good start?
I've found that when I start with the windfall world Alpha Centauri, I always open Consume-Trade. If my hand is good, I probably want cards to pay for settling and development. If not, I need more cards.
Is that ever not the right opening?

Good question, welcome to the site! :D

Consume/trade is always a safe opening play with Alpha Centauri.  It's never going to be a bad thing to do.  More generally, trading when your hand won't overflow and you have a worthwhile good is often a solid play, regardless of whether it's the first turn.  But here are some situations in which you might want to delay the first turn trade as Alpha Centauri.
If you have a development that will let you place a military world and have no otherwise settleable worlds, you might want to call develop so you don't miss the settle.
If you have a pair of cheap worlds to settle in a two player advanced game, you might want to call settle/settle to try and get the worlds down and catch your opponents off guard.
With the first expansion, there is a goal worth 5 points that requires having the most developments, and there is also a new start world (Ancient Race) that starts with only 3 cards.  You might want to call a first turn develop to put card pressure on Ancient Race, so you can get ahead or make them flush their hand to keep up in the development race.

Renaud, are you kind of a god? o_O !!

I agree with this strategy. Points to consider:

If you Trade on Turn 1, you can produce on Turn 2 without likely helping anyone much (except for Earth's Last Colony.) Many players won't have production worlds on the table yet.
If you do this, you'll have 7 cards on Turn 2 (more if someone explores) this gives you the resources to drop that phat Galactic Federation, Merchant League, or similar early!


text:
How to interpret 3rd hand not covering?
Consider West on lead in the middle of the game.
Dummy
QJ976

Declarer
A103

West leads 8 from the suit. Declarer plays 6 from dummy. East plays 5. Declarer wins with 10.
Couple of questions about this

What do we interpret here from opposition's play - is the K with West? Or is it with East & East didn't cover for some reason? If yes, then what reason?

Was playing 6 from the dummy the right play? Or would it have been better to play the Q hoping for East to cover with K if he did have it?

Please give the contract, the whole hand, the play so far (if it's not the first trick) and East/West's lead and signalling agreements.  All of that could be relevant.  Bridge is complicated.

The bidding is also relevant (because it tells us what the defenders know about declarer's hand).

At a minimum, we need to know if the declaring side is short of entries to dummy and or short of entries to hand.

It's hard to say exactly without knowing the rest of the hand.  Does East have reason to guess that South has the ace?  What does West's lead of the 8 mean?  Where in the hand are we?  What is the contract?  NT or trump suit, and is this trump or not?
Either way, W probably isn't underleading A8x.  Even if there were no other suit to play, there's just no reason not to play A. So E knows A is in South most likely; there's no reason for E to play the K there.  But, E also might have only two - 5 is a weird choice otherwise.  Why play 5 from K52 or K54?  It's not like E wants to encourage...
On the other hand, W really shouldn't underlead Kxx or Kxxx.  No matter the contract, it's probably a bad lead.  It's possible W has no choice - if this is the only suit left, for example - but if this is early and W likely has a choice, it makes more sense for E to have the K based on this lead.  It's just unclear why W led the suit in the first place.
You also may want to see their carding agreement - 8 from 842 is a reasonable lead in some agreements, it's not in others.  Would they lead 8 from 82?  2 from 842?  It's possible you can eliminate some holdings from the lead of the 8, but again this depends on their card.
As far as the play of the 6 goes, Declarer is announcing that they have the T by not covering, so they should cover with the 9.  There's just no reason not to, not even transportation-related reasons.  Put the 9 on and see if that draws out the K.  It might, might not, who knows, but you can always cover with the T anyway if you prefer to be in hand.

Those underfed aces can be oh-so dangerous.


text:
In Duplicate Bridge, does the person holding a particular set of cards open the bidding in all times that particular deal is played?
Say the same deal is played by 5 different pairs of people. Is the person opening the bid each time that particular deal is played have the same set of cards in his hand? Or is the dealer/opener also changed?
For e.g. take a deal where North has
AKQxx
Axx
xx
xxx
Now North opens the first time this deal is played.
Now every other time this deal is played by 4 other people, is the person who has this same set of cards or not?

In pair competitions, yes absolutely ; everything about each hand is identical every time it is played. The dealer and vulnerability is determined by the board number usually - a sixteen board rotation covering all combinations of dealer and vulnerability. The holder has a number and the dealer and vulnerability marked on it.
See this picture from wikipedia:

The red sides indicate Vulnerable, and the dealer is marked as well.  Here NS are vulnerable and E deals. It will be played that way at each table.  Board 2 always has that configuration every time you play anywhere, as would board 18 and 34.
In Swiss teams it’s similar except you’d make sure the other team plays the opposite direction- so team A is NS at one table and EW at the other table, but the board is played the same. Thus one player is designated as Dealer (by the Board markings) at one table; and a player of the other team sitting in the same seat will be the designated Dealer when the Board is played at the other table.
Board-a-Match team games work the same as Swiss.


text:
Bridge: Opening lead from AK - why K instead of A
Many books, including Goren, recommend leading K from both a AK (or AKQ) and also a KQ.
Why an ambiguous lead like this? Why not A from AK and K from KQ?
Consider a trump contract. Partner leads K from a non-trump suit. I have a void in that suit. Do I ruff assuming it's from a KQ or do I discard assuming it's from a AK?

The reason that K is traditionally lead from AK is because there are two important circumstances where a different signal is requested from partner (rather than attitude). The Ace lead is reserved for these particular circumstances because it is very important that there be no ambiguity in these circumstances:
Notrump:
The Ace lead against notrump signals a nearly running suit headed by at least AK, such as AKJT53, and requests partner to unblock an honour if he has one, else to give count.
Suit:
The Ace lead indicates a desire to ruff, either in own hand or partner's, and requests a partner with length to show attitude and a partner with shortness to show count. This lead might be made from singleton A or doubleton Ace small, or from A empty fifth or sixth.
In the former case it should only be made by a defender without entries, because it is partner who must get in to generate the ruffing leads. In the latter case it must be made only by a partner with entries who can get in to eliminate declarer's tricks in the suit.
As partner of K opening lead in a suit contract:
 When partner leads the King against a suit contract, the guideline is to show attitude unless you have two or more touching honours, in which case you play the highest of the touching honours. For example:

Play your highest card from a small doubleton;
Play your lowest card without an honour in hand;
Play low with precisely Qx;
Play low with Jx, or Tx - unless dummy has come down with precisely Queen third and you desire an immediate ruff;
Play the Q from QJ doubleton or longer;
Play the J holding JT9 doubleton or longer;
Play the T holding T98 or longer;
Play your second highest card from Qxx or longer.

Thus the play of an honour from third hand in this situation always denies the next higher honour, and shows either shortness or the next lower card (and possibly another).
Partner will almost always be able to read your card in order to play sensibly at the second trick.
As partner of A opening lead in a suit contract:
Only encourage holding length with either the K or a quick trump winner with which to provide partner with his ruff. Otherwise discourage so that partner will switch to another suit before declarer's tricks get established.
There are other Signalling agreements besides these standard ones, but if these suffice for repeat World Champion Bob Hamman they are certainly sufficient for casual partnerships and beginning players.

Very thorough .

One reason to lead K from AK is that it's actually less ambiguous. Sometimes it is sensible to lead an unsupported ace to see dummy and partner's signal before deciding how to proceed with the defense. For instance, opening leader may have Ax in a side suit, trying to get a ruff if partner encourages to show the king. It's almost never right to lead from Kx when partner hasn't bid that suit since it it's much more likely to blow a trick.
Moreover, partner rarely has a void when you lead from KQxxx, and even if partner does have a void, it's almost never best defense for partner to ruff the K when it hasn't been covered by the A -- ruffing the K causes declarer to play low, so the Q hasn't been established as a winner.

How is it less ambiguous? You will always lead K from both AK & KQ. But leading an unsupported A is less common. Also, this is not from KQxxx, more like KQJxxxx in a minislam contract by the opposition.  You aren't worried about establishing the Q. You are more worried about making 2 tricks to defeat the contract - and the ruff might be one of them.

I've also often heard to always lead high card from a doubleton, and middle card from 3.  So leading the K in AK incorrectly implies that there are three cards in that suit (AKx).  And I've also heard that, in general, leading an Ace is bad unless it's from AK.

@user93353 Leading an unsupported ace against a high-level contract is far more common than all of the following situations being true: (a) opening leader has a 7+ card suit, (b) partner has a void, (c) the suit might be headed by the AK or KQ, (d) it matters whether partner ruffs at trick 1, (e) the A is not in dummy.

@ryanyuyu Rules of thumb for leading from an honor sequence are quite different from rules of thumb for leading from an unsupported honor or worthless suit.

@ryanyuyu: Please, please, please don't play Middle-Up-Down opening leads from three small. The only possible exception is when your partnership defence is so atrocious that it is important to always find a reason as to why it is partner's fault rather than your own. I will play either high or low opening leads from three small to suit partner's preference, but if you insist on playing M.U.D. I will choose another partner.

My preference is to lead a K from a "truncated" or "weaker" suit (as defined below) if I can, and an A from a stronger suit.
A suit without an A is a "truncated suit, by definition. So if I have KQJ or KQT, I will lead the king.
I will also lead the K from AK blank because the suit is "truncated" by having no lower cards. I don't fear your ruff in this instance, because if I have AK and you have a void, the opponents would have 11 cards in this suit, which would be their trump suit, instead of their actual one.
Unlike Goren, I would lead an A with AKx, and certainly with AKQ, because that's a nice strong suit. Here, I feel there's a chance of a ruff, but if you can ruff my x on the third round, that's what I want you to do. At times, you might even want to ruff my queen if you can, to gain the lead for e.g. a finesse through declarer.
Another answerer pointed out that some people reserve the ace leads for only the strongest holdings, either a long one, like AKJT etc. or a "ruffing" one like Ax, or Axxxx. Depending on what else I held, I might lead the A, then the x from Ax, but I want to differentiate AK (lead the king) from AKx (lead the A).


text:
Declarer play for a 4-4 trump fit
Is there any theory or advice in how best to plan declarer play in a 4-4 trump fit. In what situations do you draw trumps, in what situations do you not draw trumps and any other advice?

The tag [tag:fit] is a new tag. Tags without tag wikis are automatically deleted after 6 months. Could you please add a tag wiki to it to prevent this?

Count, count, count; and when you are done counting, count some more. Count your tricks, count your losers, and count your winners; count the opponents' distribution and count your opponents' points and count your opponents tricks. When the cards have all been returned to the board you can start counting the next board. Until you are the best player in the world, and perhaps not even then, you can stop looking for more things to count.
In Notrump contracts you are advised to plan your play from the count of your tricks. Do this as Dummy comes down, as there is no point to a line of play that is not based on an expectation of sufficient tricks.
In suit play you are advised to plan your play from the count of your losers. Do not play from Dummy until you have a line of play for the entire hand that has an expectation of reducing your losers below 7 - (level of bid).
Contrary to the estimable Mr. Au, there is no magic formula for where to ruff or when. Esoteric plays arise from adjusting his rules to suit the need and count of a particular hand. There also is frequently a need to partially draw trumps when one needs to ruff, either for tricks or control. One particularly common scenario is to leave a single boss trump out and then cross ruff, forcing that opposing trump to over ruff a single trump of your own rather than a pair, leaving the other as counter to a loser elsewhere.

The advantage of a 4-4 trump fit is that you may use either hand for ruffing, and draw trumps from the other hand.
So the idea is to identify the hand with one (or more) suits that are shorter than the same suit in the opposite hand. Then lead "long" cards from the opposite hand into the short suit hand for ruffing. Use the trumps in the long card hand to draw the opposing trumps. The reason you ruff first is because if you draw trumps first, you may not have enough trumps left in the short suit hand for ruffing.


text:
Do you need military power when using the Rebel Sneak Attack to settle an additional military world?
The card Rebel Sneak Attack, among its other powers, grants the ability to discard itself from the tableau to allow you to place an additional military world.
Do you need to have sufficient military strength to take over the world, or do you get it for zero cost? If you need the military, then this card seems like a weaker version of Improved Logistics, for only one lower cost.

You still need to have sufficient military power to place the world. Nothing about the placement text implies that ordinary requirements are suspended. Indeed, the game designer says (emphasis mine):

Yes. And, just like IL doing a normal Settle after a declared
  takeover, the player doing this declares this additional settlement
  during their powers and payment step, discards RSA, pumps Military if
  needed, etc., and then delays the resolution of this additional
  settlement until the pending takeover is resolved. If the declared
  takeover fails, then the RSA additional placement is lost, RSA is
  still used up, etc., with the world itself then being returned to its
  owner's hand.
Exactly the same restrictions as IL after a takeover apply to an RSA
  additional settlement after a takeover, along with the additional
  restrictions noted on the RSA power.

Regarding your Improved Logistics comment: Improved Logistics is a bit of an aberration - it's really, really good. But this card allows takeovers, which is a two card swing (from them to you), which you seem to be discounting. Also, consider that Rebel Sneak Attack would be extremely powerful if it allowed placement of any military world for free (think high value Rebel Homeworld, etc.).

I forgot about takeovers - my gaming group plays entirely without them. Yes, it means that several cards are only good as discard fodder.  (We also occasionally play without the prestige-gives-you-cards-and/or-VP-every-turn rules, to slightly nerf the military track.)


text:
When trying to quickly end the game, is it better to skip building cities?
In Roll Through The Ages, there are two game-end conditions: all monuments have been built (collectively among all players), or any player has purchased 5 developments. I've played this game about five times, so I'm still pretty new to this. I usually play to build cities first, and then end on monuments and developments more-or-less simultaneously, but I wonder: If you're trying to finish the game very quickly on developments (while your opponents are still building up their cities), is it better to just try to buy a development every turn, or should you aim to build a city or two on the way there?

Just for clarification, you arent using the Bronze Age expansion rules.

Additionally, you concerned at all with points, or just the number of turns to end the game?

I'm not playing with the Late Bronze Age expansion at the moment (though I hear it's marvelous). I'm concerned with points because I'm hoping to win with this rushing strategy, but I know there will be a tradeoff between speed and points (starving yourself to death will end quickly, but may well have negative victory points at the end).

If you are trying to rush the game - which is certainly a valid strategy if your early rolls force you in that direction - just buy developments whenever you can. If you have fewer cities, every turn you spend playing catch-up is a turn your opponents with more cities can buy either more-expensive (and more VP) developments or monuments. You're trying to dash across the finish line before they can reap the benefits of their well-developed engines. You won't be able to make much use of your developments, so just get what you can afford and gives you points.
One advantage of this is that if you are threatening the end of the game, say with 4 developments, your opponents will have trouble committing to the big, efficient monuments (that aren't worth anything if incomplete) and will have to settle for the smaller ones that are worth fewer points per worker. This is particularly troublesome for them if you're later in the turn order.
If you or your friends finds that a rush strategy makes the game too short, you may prefer the official Late Bronze Age variant that user1873 alluded to.

While it is true, that with perfect rolls you can end the game in 5 turns (the fastest possible), I don't think that is as likely as I'd you buy a single city, and then buy developments. This question truly needs a statistical analysis that can determine how likely you are to win the game on a Turn 5-x with one strategy of buying a development card each turn, another buying a city, and then developments, etc. I have a feeling that the 1 city strategy will end the game sooner on average

I agree that you will probably have 4 cities even in a rush strategy. I decide to rush based on the results of the first 2-3 turns, rather than a priori; maybe you get an unhelpful coins roll when you could really wanted workers on turn 2, so I take a development I can afford and just go from there. It would be strange not to toss 3 workers at city #4 at some point there; trying for the fifth is what I'm arguing against.

Since you can.reroll anything but skulls though, that is the heart of the issue. For example, it might make sense to stop rolling if you hit 3 coins, but in all other first turn rolls it might be better to reroll any 1-2 coin rolls (45% chance or less of hitting it). At a minimum, I think this question needs a first turn analysis for all 216 first roll results and the "proper move"


text:
Can you win with two creepers when the goal only has one creeper?
In various flavors of Fluxx, there are Creepers; they all say "You cannot win if you have this card in front of you, unless a card says otherwise." In Cthulhu Fluxx, there are frequently Goals that have creepers on them.
If there's a Goal out there that has a Creeper and a Keeper on it, and I have the right Keeper, the right Creeper, and one other Creeper, can I win?

No. The Goal will specify which Creepers are allowed for that Goal to succeed. Any surplus Creepers do not have their "unless a card says otherwise" triggered, so you cannot win.


text:
Can you play a piece of Ninja Gear that gives a flat bonus to turn a failed roll into a success?
In Ninja Burger, you attempt to deliver tasty food to people. Along the way, you need to pass skill checks (such as Climbing at -2 to get to the International Space Station, because nowhere is outside our delivery zone). To help with this, there are various things that help, including Ninja Gear, some of which gives a flat bonus to, say, Climbing rolls. (There are other pieces of gear that grant an automatic success after you have failed; I am not asking about these, they're clear enough.)
Can you play (and apply) Ninja Gear that gives a flat bonus after you have failed the roll, or do you have to have the gear in play before rolling?
The manual says two things about this :
1) "If you come to a hard roll, don’t be shy about asking for help" (implying that you need the gear before the roll)
2) "If you fail any roll, and cannot turn your failure into success by making a legal re-roll, playing a card, or using a special ability, you have failed the mission." (Implying that playing a +1 bonus after the roll might work.)

Yes, in the rules under Fortune Cards (page 4):

If you fail a skill roll, but you have a useful item in your hand and enough money, you may buy that item from your hand. If it gives you an automatic success or increases your skill enough that you succeed, then you made your roll!


text:
Which "end of round" effect resolves first: dealing in a dead player, or game end due to low honor?
In Ninja Burger ("No matter how alert your guards, how deep your bunker, or how secure your office, we deliver in 30 minutes or less"), one possible game end is if the average Honor of all players at the end of a round is less than 4. The winner is the player with the highest Honor at the time.  Also, if a player has zero Honor at the end of a round, they "apologize to their ancestors," draw a new ninja and a new hand, and restart with 6 honor.
Which of these effects happens first, since both just say "at end of round"? If a player's zero Honor brings the average low enough to trigger the game's end, but their new character with 6 Honor doesn't bring the average that low, does the game end or not?
(Bonus complication if you say "the game ends": if 6 Honor is enough to win the game at this point, does that mean the player who had zero Honor - but restarted with a new ninja that has 6 honor - wins? Or does the game end before that player can restart with a new ninja?)

The game ends, the player with zero honor doesn't get a new ninja until just before a new round starts, and only if the round hasn't ended. In the rule book under Phase 8: Check Honor, besides the checks to see if the game has ended because a single player has 5 more honor than every other player, or the franchise honor is so high or low that the manager's position becomes open, it says this:

If no one has won, a new round can start. Before the round starts, though, any ninjas whose Honor has gone to zero or less must make amends ...

Thanks, that's very clear. I was looking at the "You Have No Honor!" section right below it, which uses the more ambiguous "at the end of the round."


text:
If I use a Mystery Play in Fluxx, does that count as a play?
As far as I know, Free Action on a New Rule means it doesn't count as a Play when used. If I use the Mystery Play rule or any of its analogues does it count as a Play?
Analogues of Mystery Play include (some with slight variations such as conditional requirements for use):

Wormhole in Star Fluxx
Magic Shoes in Oz Fluxx
Egads! in Batman Fluxx
Open The Door in Monster Fluxx
Magic Portal in Adventure Time Fluxx
Chemical X in Cartoon Network Fluxx
Time Doorway in Regular Show Fluxx
Great Idea! in Stoner Fluxx

Free Actions do not count as a Play so Mystery Play and its analogues do not count as a Play and can be used anytime during your turn either before, during, or after drawing and playing.
Reference: http://faq.looneylabs.com/fluxx-games/faq-for-fluxx-unthemed-versions#723


text:
What happens when running out of Cherry Trees in Tokaido: Crossroads?
In Tokaido, when you play with the Crossroads expansion, you can choose a Panorama or a Cherry Tree card.
What happens when the 6 Cherry Tree cards are gone and someone lands on a pano spot?

You simply don't get one.  The rules for crossroads state :-

When a Traveler stops at a Panorama (Sea, Mountain, or Rice Paddy)
  space, he must choose between:  • Taking a Panorama card of the
  corresponding type (basic game rules).  • Taking a Cherry Tree card
  (if the card is available)

So if a Cherry card is not available you just don't get one and must take the panorama. Of course remembering the basic game rules :-

Each traveler can create only a single panorama of each type; a
  traveler who completes a panorama can no longer stop on the spaces
  corresponding to that type (Sea, Mountain, or Paddy).

To clarify If you have completed the panorama corresponding to that space and the cherry tree cards have all gone you may not choose to land on that space.

If player completed the corresponding panorama but there is still cherry tree card to choose from, can player stop there?

I believe there that the expansion rule supersedes the originals.  'when a play stops at a panorama space they may'.  so if they have completed a panorama but the Cherry tree is still available then they may choose to take that option.


text:
Lab challenge: Can a cure be tested multiple times
One of the steps for developing a cure in the "Lab challenge" is to test it. To do it a card of the cure color must be put on the test space and one disease cube of the color can be removed from any city.
Is it allowed to test a single cure multiple times? This would make it possible to treat the disease in a far away city (and reducing the number of city cards available for the cure).
I cannot find anything about it in the rules.

The game designer answered it on BoardGameGeek.
Each cure can only be tested once, because there is only one card supposed to be on each field (although this is never actually stated in the rules). Note that the test card stays in place if the sequence card is exchanged within the color.


text:
In which order are cards drawn from the dungeon pile
In "Welcome to the Dungeon" in what order does the hero draw cards from the dungeon pile? So is the last card added to the dungeon drawn first or last?
In many cases this does not make a difference, but for example for a mage it may be important which card comes after the demon.

According to the publisher, you do not shuffle the cards, you simply flip over the most recently added card, and then proceed, finally ending with the card that was added first.
So as you play you are building up the stack of dungeon cards, and then you go back through them in LIFO order (last in first out).

This sounds clear. Can you provide a source for this?

Al that the rules say is: "Next, one by one, reveal the cards from the dungeon pile." I have always played that the cards are shuffled first, however this does not seem to be rules-as-written. I would suggest clarifying how you are going to do it at the start of the game and ensure every round is played the same way, whichever approach you choose.


text:
What's the relation between Mansions of Madness, Elder Sign and Arkham Horror?
What's the relation between Mansions of Madness, Elder Sign and Arkham Horror?
All of them are published by Fantasy Flight Games and they are based of Cthulhu Mythos. So my question is, is it possible to use them together in someway?
If I get all three games, Can I share something between them?, Can I mixup the card decks? e.g: characters, miniatures, dices, adventures...etc

Mansions of Madness, Elder Sign, and Arkham Horror are all games whose themes pull from the Cthulhu Mythos.
In Elder Sign and Arkham Horror you play as investigators cooperating in an attmpt to prevent/drive away an Ancient One entering this world, but the mechanics of both games are very different. I'll describe the games generally.
Arkham Horror has you play investigators wandering around the town of Arkham, having encounter fighting monsters, traveling through gates to other worlds, and sealing said gates. When you seal enough gates (or some other less often-fufilled victory condition), you win. Game play is driven by skill checks. Each investigator has 6 skills and will use them (along with potential skill boosting items) to make skill checks to succeed at various tasks (Understand lore, escape a house before it collapses, kill a monster, etc.)
Similarly, Elder sign has you playing these very same investigators trying to prevent the ancient horror from entering the world, but there's no board to speak of. Instead, your turn consists of picking one of the encounter cards on the board, gathering a pool of specialized dice, and rolling them, trying to match the necessary results displayed on the cards. Winning gets you various rewards. You win when you get enough 'Elder Sign' tokens, which could be direct rewards from completing a mission or by cashing in some of the trophies you've earned.
Mansions of Madness pits a team of investigators against a 'Keeper', who is trying to fufill some hidden agenda of his. The investigators explore a pseudo-randomly generated building trying to discover, and then prevent, the Keeper's goal. The Keeper meanwhile tries to nudge the investigators in the right direction so he can fufill his secret goal easier. The 'board' in this game consists of modular parts that get rearranged depending on the particular scenario being played.
So mechanically and piece-wise, the games are very different. The only pieces you can use in any of the other games are the markers for the investigators.
In Arkham Horror, the investigators have standing cardboard-y pieces with their images on them. In Elder Sign, the investigators have smaller cardboard-y pieces with their images on them. In Mansions of Madness, the investigators have moulded plastic figures in their likeness. Any of these markers could be used in any of the games equally as effectivelly.
Additionally, the monster figures from Mansions of Madness can be used in Arkham Horror. Arkham Horror's monster tokens are squard cardboard pieces with various monster fighting statistics on them. In Mansions of Madness you have the same sized tokens, but the printed stats are totally different, making them non-interchangable. But Mansions of Madness has you slot these tokens into larger monster figures (the tokens are still readable if you look under the base). So you can use these figures for your Arkham Horror play.
Finally, the figures that come with Mansions of Madness are all unpainted. Fantasy Flight sells painted versions of all of these figures, and more, on their website. So if you like the idea of having investigator minis, but don't want Mansions of Madess, you can still get whichever figures you like.

Aside from the shared Cthulhu mythos, there are some shared characters and concepts - but mechanically, they function completely differently.
About the only thing I think you could use across the games would be the character and monster miniatures.


text:
Can you throw animals into the stewpot if you don't have enough pasture room for any of them?
In Agricola, the Fireplace and Cooking Hearth both allow you to convert animals to food "at any time." Can you use this ability to cook animals if you don't have room in your pastures?
In particular, if you have zero pastures and grab four sheep, can you cook three of them and keep the fourth as a pet (or cook all four), or do you only get to keep/cook one of them, while the other three presumably wander off and get eaten by wolves as you dither over which one to eat first?

Wow, hard to believe we haven't had this question before!  Most groups I've seen have played this wrong, at least for a couple games.

Yes, you can cook them directly. From the rulebook, p.9:

1 Sheep (Stage 1): Place 1 Sheep on this space in the Replenish phase (Phase 2) of each round. A player who selects this action takes all the Sheep from the Action
  space and must either put them into his farmyard or use an Improvement
  to turn them into food. Sheep that cannot be pastured or turned into Food are returned to the general supply.

The same applies to the other animal spaces.
This is an important tactical option. The threat of having all the sheep grabbed and devoured often forces a player with pastures to pick the sheep up sooner than they might like.
So in your example, yes you may cook three and keep one, or cook all four immediately, at your discretion.
On the other hand, during harvest you may not send a newly bred animal straight to the stew pot if you don't have room.
On p.4 of the rules:

Baby animals and parent animals may not be converted into Food immediately after the birth(for example, if you only have room for two animals of that type); they simply run away if they cannot be accommodated.


text:
Which Factions sharply change the way that Alien Frontiers plays out?
I've picked up the Factions expansion for Alien Frontiers, and have played a single game with it. I ended up with the Proxima Centauri Scholars, which have the ability to place the various Fields once per turn. The fields (positron field, isolation field, isolation field) are only rarely placed in a normal game; they're moderately powerful, and give more options to attack other players, but they require discarding Alien Tech cards. Adding the Scholars to the game makes it much more directly aggressive, with the Scholars doing the vast majority of the attacking. This is a very sharp change in the way the game normally goes; one of the players at my game became rather dejected because I had the option to stomp on anyone I wanted, at a moment's notice. (The Isolation Field is extremely effective versus Burroughs Desert, and still pretty darn powerful elsewhere.)
I've decided to remove the Scholars from future Alien Frontiers games, because it very sharply changes the way that the game plays out, making the game antagonistic in an unbalanced way: one player has a nigh-monopoly on one of the better aggressive tactics. What other Factions cause such large changes in how the game is played, and why?


text:
Can you heal at the moment you get KO'd?
During my last game of Fortune and Glory, I played the event card Blizzard on another player (do d6 Wounds if the player/villain is in an Ice space). I rolled 6 damage, and he was playing Shelly Hargrove, who can take a maximum of 4 Wounds. He prevented 2 Wounds between his Defense and another item, but then he used the Spunky ability to "heal" two Wounds, thus avoiding being KO'd. Here's what the Spunky ability says:

May pay 2 Glory at any time to Heal a Wound (except during a Fight Round).

Can you use abilities that heal you to prevent Wounds that would KO you, or does being KO'd prevent healing?

For reference: the rulebook.
There are 2 key phrases:

May pay 2 Glory at any time to Heal a Wound (except during a Fight Round).

So lets assess 2 possibilities - Fighting and Everything Else.
Fighting:
If you are KO'd in a fight then it is clearly a no as this ability doesn't work during a fight round.
NOTE:

Sometimes a card will say that it
  cannot be used ‘during a Fight Round’. Cards like this may
  however, still be used between Fight Rounds.

If you survive with at least one wound you can use this in between Fight Rounds as the round ends before another begins.
Everything Else:
Since the ability may be used at any time then you can use it while taking damage to prevent KO*. In your example an event occurred, not a fight so this ability can be used.
*Nothing it the rulebook explicitly says a KO prevents this ability so I would interpret it this way.

Since it heals damage, wouldn't you get KO'd first before you heal? (And the game clearly defines what happens when you get KO'd.)

My interpretation is based on experience with many other games where this is how it would work. 'Any time' normally means just that even when it seems odd like in this instance. If they had intended differently there would normally be an exception in the FAQ and there is not in this case.

Does seem strange to be able to use the heal for this. As the event does 6 hits the question to me is if the hits are all done at the same time or one at a time allowing for someone to use an ability in between.

Lots of games have some kind of instant heal ability. It comes at the loss of 2 Glory which can hamper your character later. In the example you would need 4 Glory to prevent the damage which seems fair.


text:
How can I catch up in Alien Frontiers?
If I've fallen behind in Alien Frontiers, how can I catch up?  If the leading player(s) have more ships and colonies on the board, they're going to pull ahead even faster, so that an early lead turns into further victory.
I've seen the lead player dragged down by someone else, but that doesn't help the hindmost player win - it just means that the second-place player wins.  What can the hindmost player do to catch up to the rest of the players?

Get lots of dice. Not only are dice resources, but the more dice you have, the more powerful each one becomes. First, you can make better combinations; second, you can gain resources and spend them in the same round without the threat of having them stolen. Usually the sixth die paints a target on you for aggression, but if you're in last place you might be able to avoid that.
Get your colonies down. Until they're all down, you can play with the balance of power all you want, but you can't win.
Look for ways to disrupt your opponents' majorities and solidify your own. This means having alien tech cards with useful secondary abilities that will let you boost your score once you're within striking distance.
Force the second-place player to do the work of stopping the leader. Don't waste your own resources. If the second-place player isn't trying to pull down the leader, you're not going to win anyway, so you might as well play for the case you can win.


text:
When is the right time to do a scholar-only run?
I've seen people win In The Year Of The Dragon by ignoring the disasters, taking the losses, and simply taking as many scholars as possible to build victory points almost exclusively via the scholar action. How successful is this strategy? Does the layout of disasters matter for this? Are there any other related strategies, such as almost-all-scholars-plus-something-else?

You can't stand all disaster you need to at least protect your scholars.So you always need other people that you sacrifice for the disaster effect.
But if a lot of disaster are in the beginning of the year this can be possible. Also you need to play against beginner player as experienced players will block you or do more point than you , by having more room than you.
Getting the geisha soon is also a plus for this strategy.
I've already see someone win by this strategy but more often they will fail. In my opinion you need to mix other source point to achieve victory.

The only disasters you really need to prepare for are famine and plague; all other disasters will only make you dismiss one person. (The Tribute "disaster" can make you dismiss 4 people, but since you can always get up to 3 coins, it's really just going to make you miss one action to get the coin.)


text:
Can you combine the Orbital Teleporter's ability with other Alien Tech cards?
Consider the following:

I have an Orbital Teleporter and a Stasis Beam
I roll 5,5,6
I have 3 ore

I place the 6 at the Solar Array to claim 3 energy, then use the Orbital Teleporter to move the 6 to the Colony Constructor. I use the Stasis Beam to reduce it from a 6 to a 5, then place the other two fives and pay three ore to use the Colony Constructor to place a colony.
Is this legal, or am I not allowed to alter a ship I'm moving with the Orbital Teleporter?

No, while there is no restriction on using different alien tech on the same ship, the rules for Orbital Teleporter specifically prevent a ship already placed from having its value changed when moved to another facility. Stasis Beam also doesn't work on placed ships. Rules, page 14

Orbital Teleporter - Each turn you may pay two fuel to move one of your docked ships from one orbital facility to a different orbital facility. You may only move one of your ships with the Orbital Teleporter but the moved ship may be used at the new facility in conjunction with other as yet unplaced ships from your fleet. You may not reuse the ship at the same facility from which it was removed. You may not change the value of the ship as it moves from one facility to the other.
Stasis Beam - Each turn you may pay one fuel to decrease the value of one of your unplaced ships by one point. You may discard a Stasis Beam to place the Isolation Field on a territory or, if the Isolation Field is already on a territory, move it to another territory. (Page 15)

Card Reference (scans), and card reference 2.

Orbital Teleporter - Pay (E E) to reuse one of your ships at a different facility.
Stasis Beam - Pay (E) to subtract one point from one of your unplaced ship.

Technically, you could achieve what it is you want by using one of your '5's on the Solar Collector, since it also gets you 3 energy. Then use the Stasis Beam to change the '6' to a '5', then use the remaining 2 energy to move the '5' from the Solar Collector with your remaining '5' and newly Stasis Beamed '5' onto the Colony Constructor.

I was afraid of that. It seemed clever when I did it in the game, and nobody called me on it, but now I can't do it again.

@PaulMarshall, as I indicated, you could have the same outcome of you played it slightly differently. No harm, no foul.

The example isn't perfect; if I'd been going for a triple-4, then I wouldn't have been able to get one free energy via Solar Collector + Orbital Teleporter. And I can't use both the Shipyard and the Raider's Outpost if I need to modify a die as I move it. (Say, I have 2355, and I want to use the Shipyard with the 55, then change a 5 to a 4, then use the Raider's Outpost with 234.)


text:
Can you ever get a player down to just 2 ships?
Alien Frontiers has been carefully designed to prevent any player from being reduced to two ships: you can't use the Terraforming Station (which converts one of your ships into a colony) if you only have three ships, and you can't use the Plasma Cannon to destroy somebody's ship unless they have at least four.
Can you use the Plasma Cannon on someone with four ships, if one of those ships is sitting on the Terraforming Station (thus reducing them to three ships when their turn comes around, or two if you use the Plasma Cannon)? Are there any other ways to reduce someone to two ships?

No, David MacKenzie of Clever Mojo Games clarified this point in a FAQ on BGG.

Q: The RED player has four red ships on the board...one on the Lunar Mine, two on the Orbital Market, and one on the Terraforming Station. GREEN discards his Plasma Cannon card and removes the red ship from the Lunar Mine.On RED's next turn, the ship on the Terraforming Station returns to the shipyard stock and RED is left with only two ships.
This is a legal move by a strict reading of the rules.. [...] However, it breaks the intent of the rules, which is to insure that no player has fewer than three ships of their own color. During play testing we found it nearly impossible to recover after being reduced to only two ships, so we tried to insure that it would not happen. It now seems that we missed one situation that could lead to this exact problem. The cure is to adjust the wording of the Plasma Cannon's discard power as follows...
Plasma Cannon - You may discard a Plasma Cannon to return one ship belonging to another player to the ship stock. The target player must not be reduced to less than three ships of their own color for use on their next turn.

And a rule book edit

RED has four ships on the board...one on the Lunar Mine, two on the Orbital Market, and one on the Terraforming Station. GREEN would like to discard a Plasma Cannon to attack RED and removed the RED ship from the Lunar Mine, but cannot because doing so would leave RED with only two ships after the RED ship on the Terraforming Station returns to the shipyard stock next turn.


text:
Does the Extremely Clever Disguise discard your Training cards?
In Ninja Burger, you can pick up various forms of training (such as Training Course: Combat), which give you a permanent +1 bonus to a skill (and can be used as an auto-success if played in response to failing a roll). They have one last line of text: If your current character is lost, discard this card.
How does this work with the card Extremely Clever Disguise, which lets you discard your character and pick a new one? (Because you've just been disguised as your old character until now.) You're not exactly "losing" your ninja, but you do discard the old character card.

You discard Training Course: Combat, because the rules text on the card specify, "If your current character is lost, discard this card." It did not specify how you lost it, only that you did. If it had said, "If your current character is lost, because you have no honor, discard this card." you would have a different answer. In general, I would play cards as written.

You Have No Honor! -If your Honor is zero at the end of a round, you must apologize to your ancestors. This requires you to go to visit them, and unfortunately it will not be possible for you to come back. Discard all your cards and money. Now draw a new Ninja card and three Fortune cards . . . and see if your new character does better than your last one! You start with 6 Honor.


text:
Can you leave Tokyo voluntarily?
In King of Tokyo, you gain victory points for entering (and starting your turn in) Tokyo, but it's very painful to stay there - all of the other monsters are trying to kill you. Can you leave Tokyo voluntarily? If so, under what circumstances?
This came up because there's a demo video that shows players leaving voluntarily, but the rules don't seem to have anything about it; I don't see any way to leave Tokyo except by yielding after taking damage.

No, you can only leave Tokyo as the immediate result of taking damage (from an attack) while in Tokyo.
The rules (PDF) state (under "Becoming King of Tokyo"):

If you are attacked while in Tokyo and you don't want to be there anymore ... you can yield to the Monster that attacked.

This is the only reference to leaving Tokyo in the rulebook, and the only opportunity to leave.
(It also makes sense thematically; monsters wouldn't just wander off, but would only leave if forced, and only long enough to lick their wounds before they dive straight back in.)

If you're attacked but don't take damage (e.g. you have Camouflage) you can leave Tokyo. If you take damage without being attacked (e.g. someone buys Oil Refinery) you can't leave Tokyo.