text:
Can the Crate of Alcohol be played if the wind isn't favorable?
In Mad Zeppelin, you're a Traitor trying to throw cargo off of the airship Nostria to your black-market compatriots on the ground. At the beginning of the turn, the current first player throws three dice, which shows what color of Traitors can throw cargo overboard.  (The idea is that the dice show the "wind direction," which would be more plausible if the winds weren't capable of blowing north, south, and west at the same time.) So, on any given turn, a Traitor might or might not be able to throw cargo overboard, depending on the colors showing on the dice.
This is well and good until you get to the Crate of Alcohol cargo card; it says that "This card is not thrown overboard." Does that mean that a Traitor can play the Crate of Alcohol even if the wind isn't in their favor? The rules themselves assume that all cargo cards are "thrown overboard," so it's a bit confusing.
A second thought: if playing the Crate of Alcohol doesn't count as being thrown overboard, does that mean you can also play a second cargo card during that Traitor's turn?

A user on Board Game Geek sent a list of questions to the game designer, and the purpose of the Crate of Alcohol was included. A full list of these can be found here.
Regarding the Crate of Alcohol, game designer Oliver Pauwels replied:

"Crate of Alcohol" pay 3 gold coins (as indicated on the bottom of the card) to activate this effect. Once you've paid the fee, the card is placed in front of you and stays there for the rest of the game. This does not give you any points, but it does lower your cost to throw cargo overboard for the rest of the game. A player can have more than one Crate of Alcohol in play, and the effects are cumulative (so two of them would reduce the cost of all cargo being thrown overboard by 2). Since no level 4 cargo are ever thrown overboard, this cost reduction NEVER applies to level 4 cards (for instance, a 2nd Crate of Alcohol still costs 3).

Additionally, the Crate of Alcohol is a Level 4 cargo. Pauwels also notes

[T]he level 4 are special cargo. NONE of these cargo are thrown overboard and as such the color of the die rolls do NOT apply to use of level 4 cards (use them any time).

So it doesn't matter what color die you roll, but they are never counted as being thrown overboard.

Wow, I sure wish those rules about all level 4 cargo were actually in the rulebook. I suspect the translation was a wee bit faulty, considering that the designer is French and was apologizing for his English in that thread.


text:
Can I throw more than one cargo overboard during a single Traitor's turn?
In Mad Zeppelin, during each turn, each player gets two chances to play a Traitor card and take actions with that Traitor. Each traitor searches for cargo and gold, then activates their ability and/or throws cargo overboard.
The exact phrasing for throwing cargo is just slightly vague, though:

Throw Cargo overboard. If your current Traitor’s color has been rolled on the dice, show a Cargo card from your hand. You must then pay Gold to the Safe equal to the number of Gold coins on the card.This represents bribing the ever-present guards on the Nostria. After paying the guards, the Cargo card is “thrown overboard.” Keep it face-up in front of you.

Does this mean only throwing one cargo overboard per Traitor played, or can a Traitor throw cargo overboard more than once per turn?

Yes. Per a post on Board Game Geek where game designer Oliver Pauwels responded to concerns about the vagueness of the rule book:

Can more than one cargo be thrown off in a single round?
Yes, as long as you have enough gold to pay : )

Wow, that makes Sadine Rochat (throw Level 2 cargo overboard for free) brokenly powerful, and she was already great. But at least it rescues Henchman 111 (1-gold discount per cargo) from the Pile Of Not Nearly As Useful As Everyone Else.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
If a Hero makes a Speed/Sanity/other non-Might attack, when does the Traitor reveal that the target lacks that trait and can't be attacked that way?
This came up in a game involving Haunt 23, Tentacled Horror. (Spoilers will be kept to a minimum.) There are multiple different types of monsters in that Haunt: some of them have a Sanity trait, and others don't. One of the Heroes had the Ring, which let him attack with Sanity instead of Might. He attacked a monster that had a Might trait, but no Sanity trait, using the Ring. At the time, I told him that the monster had no Sanity trait and that he'd need to try a different type of attack, and he ended up doing a Might attack using the Sacrificial Dagger instead.
Was this the right thing to do, or should the initial attack have failed entirely? Or should we have explained which traits the monster does and doesn't have the instant the monster went on the map? The rules just say "you can't use a trait to attack against a monster that doesn't have that trait," but it's unclear on how to handle the attempt. This is particularly vexing, because all monsters have hidden traits and this is going to come up again.
(I looked at the updated Secrets of Survival and Traitor's Tome, and it turns out that the specific Haunt I was looking at no longer has that problem, but I'm sure this question will still apply to other monsters.)

As the ring only allows you to attack a monster that has a sanity trait in the first place, he shouldn't have ever been allowed to attempt the attack. So if by "attacked" you mean "rolled the dice for the attack", then he should have already been corrected sooner. If by "attacked" you mean "declared that he was using the ring to attack", then I believe you did the right thing.
I don't think there's a specific thing that addresses this in the rulebook, but if the legality of an action (such as using the ring to attack) depends on certain factors (such as whether the monster has sanity or not), then the heroes should be allowed to ask if the monster has a sanity trait, and the traitor should answer. (NOT what the sanity value is, just whether or not it exists). This is the only way that the heroes can make a legal decision.

Good point; as it happened in the game I played, I stopped the Hero from rolling dice. Mind you, the existence/nonexistence of a trait can be an important strategic decision, too: the game I played had a character loaded for bear (both Ring and Sacrificial Dagger), but the lack of a trait could be a very unpleasant surprise for a Sanity 8, Might 2 character.

Right, I believe that the traitor should only be forced to answer which traits exist at the moment when it becomes a question of if a particular action is allowed by the rules or not. So the heroes would have to decide whether to enter the room with the monster without knowing if it has sanity.

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


text:
Does the ship saved by the Bio Integration Circuit get rolled on the turn the Circuit is used?
The Bio Integration Circuit says:

Discard at the beginning of your turn to reclaim your ship docked at the Terraforming Station instead of returning it to the stock. Reclaimed ship goes to Maintenance Bay.

As it happens, you also pick up all of your dice/ships and roll them at the beginning of your turn. So do you get to roll and use the ship saved by the BIC as well? The rules are mum about the order of multiple effects at the beginning of your turn.

The first thing that happens on a normal turn is you pick up all of your ships, including any in the Maintenance Bay, except that a ship at the Terraforming Station goes to the stock.
In order for the Bio Integration Circuit card to move a ship from the Terraforming Station to the Maintenance Bay, it must happen before this phase, as otherwise your ship would no longer by at the Terraforming Station. Hence the sequence must be:

Play the card
Move the ship from the Terraforming Station to the Maintenance Bay
Pick up all of your ships, including any in the Maintenance Bay

So yes, you do get to use the reclaimed ship on the turn that you play the Bio Integration Circuit.


text:
What happens when a military token is placed on a conquered location during a Competitive game?
Conquest of Planet Earth is an homage to every bad science fiction movie: bug-eyed aliens are trying to take over Earth, ostensibly because their Overlords said so. (Personally, I think it's just that Mars Needs Women, or possibly Mars Needs After-Dinner Mints.) You play as the aliens, crushing the Hunam resistance and conquering various bits of the planet.
During the game, various events can place tokens belonging to the human military on top of locations. Because the Random Number God hates you, those tokens can appear on top of places that you've already conquered, but don't have any units in.
What happens when a Hunam military token lands on a location you've conquered? I couldn't find any rules stating that the location is un-conquered. There's rules about starting a combat immediately if you have a unit there (which might kill the alien), but nothing about changing the state of conquest if you lose the combat. The battle rules make the implicit assumption that the aliens are invading the human space.
(As a side note, there are rules for Resistance Counters un-conquering Locations, but only in the Cooperative game where the aliens work together and the Hunam Resistance is weak. In the Competitive game, where the aliens are competing to get to 8 victory points first, there aren't any rules for this. The Cooperative rules are explicitly not part of the Competitive rules.)

Since this is a silly game, and you wrote it twice, I'm not actually sure: is "Hunam" a typo?

Technically, yes (the game calls 'em humans), but I rather liked Star Control II, and that's what the Spathi called the, er, inhabitants of Earth.

The Conquest Marker remains
You couldn't find any rules about unconquering the location, because you do not do so. This is supported by several rules in the rulebook. Page 16, under Resistance Counters

Occasionally a card will call for one or more Resistance Counters to be placed onto the board. [...]
Moving Into a Space with Resistance Counters
If you move Aliens onto a Space with one or more Resistance Counters, you will need to Fight those Resistance Counters during your Battle Phase in addition to the normal Resistance drawn for that Location. If the Location has already been conquered (and has a Conquest Marker on it), you must still fight the Resistance Counters.

So, nothing happens to your Conquest Marker, but if you or an opponent enter the Location they will have to fight the Resistance Token. This is further supported by the rules for stealing Terror Points from an opponent, replacing their Conquest Marker with your own, on page 17 under:

Stealing Conquests
If a player ever has one or more Aliens in a Location with an opponent’s Conquest Marker during their own Battle Phase (and there are no enemies present), that player may simply replace the opponent’s Conquest Marker with their own, stealing the glory and the Terror Points for themselves. Note that this swap of markers only happens during your Battle Phase and only if there are no enemies currently at that Location (Alien or Resistance). Also note that this only happens in the Battle Phase, so simply moving through a Location with another player’s Conquest Marker during your Action Phase will NOT swap it for your own.


text:
What happens when Patchface discards somebody's last character card?
In the Game of Thrones board game, each player gets a set of character cards that give bonuses to combat and can be played once each. Once a player has played all of their cards, they pick up all of their previously-played cards to use them again (except for the last-played card; that stays in the discard pile).
What happens when the character card Patchface causes you to discard your last character card? By a truly abusively literal reading of the rules, you don't get to pick up your discards. (The rules say something like "if you have played your last card...") This is obviously wrong, but which card must stay in the discard when you pick up your discards?
An example: I have two cards in my hand (MOST_POWERFUL_CARD and ICKY_CARD), and go to battle. I play MOST_POWERFUL_CARD, so that it will not be my last card played when I get into a battle next time. (I want ICKY_CARD to be my last played card, so it won't be in my hand when I pick up my discards.) My opponent plays Patchface, and causes me to discard ICKY_CARD. Combat resolves, and I win because Patchface is useless in combat. Now I'm going to pick up all of the cards in my discard, but I must leave behind my "last played" card. Which card stays in the discard: MOST_POWERFUL_CARD or ICKY_CARD?

1st or 2nd edition? (Or is FFG's official rules considered 2nd Edition?)

+1 Great Question, I had to do a double take on the rules to find what I think is a difinitive answer.

The House card discarded by Patchface stays in the discard pile, all other cards are returned to the non-Baratheon players hand.
I don't believe that an official answer exists for this situation, as noted here in this BGG thread. I believe that a literal reading of the rules leads to a definitive answer. Important information of note from the rule book (page 19), under 3. Choose and Reveal House Cards:

"Playing a House card during combat is mandatory. Both attacker and defender must play a card." (rule book, page 19)

"At the end of a combat, if a player used his last (i.e., seventh) House card, he then returns the other six House cards currently in his discard pile to his hand. The last played card remains in the discard pile."

"Note: All House cards, whether available or used (i.e., discarded), are public knowledge. As such, a player’s discard pile or hand may be examined by others players at any time except during Step 3 of combat.

From the rules, I agree that you must pick up six House Cards, otherwise it would be impossible to satisfy the mandatory playing of a house card during the next combat (1st rule quote). The rules indicate using your seventh House card as the only rule (besides card rules text, like that of Roose Bolton) that makes you eligible to pick up the other six House cards in your discard (2nd rule quote). Luckily, the rules define two possible statuses for House cards, available or used (i.e. discarded) (emphasis mine) (3rd rule quote).
From the FAQ1.0 2nd Edition, we know that Patchface's ability applies after a player would pick up their six other cards, after playing their seventh. Since the non-Baratheon player isn't playing their last card though, the sixth card (played by the non-Baratheon player) is discarded, then Patchface discards their seventh and last card, making the non-Baratheon player pick up all their other cards including the House card played this combat. The House card discarded by Patchface stays in the discard pile.

Q: If a House card’s text ability says “after combat...,” when is that card resolved?
A: At the end of the Combat Clean Up step of Combat Resolution (after played House cards are discarded to their respective discard piles).
Q: If the Baratheon player plays his “Patchface” House card but his opponent is playing his last remaining House card, does the Baratheon player still get to discard one of his opponent’s House cards?
A: Yes, Patchface’s text ability would allow the Baratheon player to discard one of his opponent’s six House cards at the end of the Combat Clean Up step.


text:
Can both monsters in Tokyo yield at the same time after an attack?
In a 5- or 6-player game of King of Tokyo, there are two spaces in Tokyo: the city, and Tokyo Bay. Normally, if a monster is inside Tokyo, and a monster outside Tokyo attacks, the monster in Tokyo has the option to leave Tokyo, yielding to the outside monster.
How does this change if there are two monsters in Tokyo? If a monster outside Tokyo attacks while there are two monsters in Tokyo, can both monsters yield, leaving Tokyo Bay empty? Or is one of the monsters forced to stay behind and take another beating before they can leave?

Yes. From the rulebook:

If the monster in Tokyo Bay is attacked it can choose to abandon Tokyo Bay. In this case the monster that attacked must move in unless it is moving into Tokyo City, in which case Tokyo Bay becomes temporarily unoccupied.

If both monsters yield, as this indicates, the attacker would move into Tokyo City and Tokyo Bay would become temporarily unoccupied.


text:
How does Only A Test affect the end-of-round honor bonuses/penalties?
In Ninja Burger, you can play the card Only A Test in response to failing a mission; it turns out that your manager was just testing you, and does not blame you for failing.
How does that affect the end-of-round honor bonuses and penalties? There's normally an extra Honor penalty if only one person fails, and there's an honor bonus if everyone succeeds. If Only A Test hid your failure, can you prevent everyone from getting the honor bonus if everyone else succeeded? Similarly, if your "test" is the only failure, do you lose the "additional" Honor even if you didn't lose Honor for failing the mission?
EDIT: Full text of Only A Test:

Play this card immediately after you fail a mission. It was only a test! You suffer
no loss of Honor or other penalties. Your manager made the task very difficult in order
to evaluate you and sharpen your skills, and he does not blame you for failing.
You cannot use this card to save yourself from a failed Errand!

What is the exact text of "Only A Test"? This question isn't covered in the FAQ, and I am unable to find an image or exact rules text anywhere on SJG.

Only a Test has you treat a failure as if you didn't fail. If you were the only failure, and Only a Test was played on your "failure," everyone would receive an honor bonus (+1 Honor) and you would not receive the additional (-1 honor) penality for being the only "failure." A moderator on SJG Forum said:

You still fail, the manager just kinda hides the fact. So, in the context of the game, you did not fail. And yes, it will affect the game that way.

So that makes it equivalent to the way my group played Order Cancelled (except that Order Cancelled is played before the mission, not after it). It's straightforward, at least!


text:
In Quarriors, can the Portal Dice be used multiple times?
Say I've culled most of my dice. I have 3 portals, 3 basic quiddity dice and 1 assistant.
I draw all but 2 portals from my bag, and the one portal die I do draw I roll a "2 portal". I draw two portals from my bag and roll them, and put the portal die I just used into my Used pile. Both portal dice come up "2 portal" I set one in my used pile, and refill my bag from my used pile.
I imagine you can see where this is going. Is it okay to tournament-short-cut 2 of the three portal dice to "1 quiddity" and then roll the last one? Or can dice rolled this turn not go back in the bag?

As of the Quarmageddon expansion, the rulebook has been updated. The change is this: dice (such as Portals) that are spent during the turn are placed into a separate Spent Pile, where they are ineligible to be put back into the bag until the end of the turn. This is a change from the earlier FAQ, and makes it much less likely that in the given situation, the Portals would end up producing Quiddity.

You can actually shortcut all three of them to 1 Quiddity.
I had a similar question myself, and found on another forum the official answer from a representative from Wizkids, the game publisher (released 8/15/2011):

Q) Can portals keep pulling themselves?
A) Yes, but if you are only pulling portals, the player may declare that the end state of 1 Quiddity is reached and not have to keep rolling them (simulate infinite rolls)."

The moment you try to use your first +2 portal, it goes into the used pile. Since now you have two dice in your bag/used pile (the portal you pulled on the first go plus the one you just used), you can reroll them. At this point you're only pulling portals, so you can actually shortcut all three of them and get the +3 total Quiddity you want.

This is no longer the case as with the release of the Quarmageddon expansion, there was a rule change to introduce a Spent Area which lies between Active and Used.  Dice only go to the Used pile at the end of the turn.  So when you spend a Portal, it won't be returned to your bag for re-rolling purposes anymore.

Although, I can't figure out why (in reality) you would only have the dice in your example. Because you only cull a die when you score with another die.  And your assistant is now the only score-able "creature" left in your pool...it could happen, but it shouldn't (if you actually want to win).
Anyhow, the rules states "immediate effects" such as Portals are resolved immediately and multiple immediate effects are resolved in any order you wish.  The 2 portal you rolled is  actively used to draw the two additional portals...after that it  would be moved to "Used" and could be drawn by one of the other portals, but one of your portals would alway be in play as a "portal"...
If the last portal roll came up as a 1 portal and the drawn die rolled 1 Quiddity.  You'd never get to that last portal in the bag.
So, since you can't guarantee the last "in-play" portal would alway roll a "2" portal when the others each rolled quiddity.  you could only  theoretically "short-circuit" one of the dice to the only non-portal action of 1 Quiddity.

The actual situation that came up a players deck was culled to 4 creatures (various), 1 assistant, and 3 portal dice. Since the creatures rolled where not important to the actual question I simplified the scenario a bit to avoid anyone being distracted by the fact that I had a wizard or dragon or whatever.

My understanding is that when the bag needs to be drawn from and cannot be, the Used pile is emptied (same mechanic as in Dominion, from which it draws inspiration). In this case, it would seem like your portal dice will be re-rolled, moved to the Used pile and returned to the bag until you've rolled your Quiddity. Should you somehow have no dice in your Used pile OR in your bag and you need to draw, I say the drawing effect is lost.
Caveat: I've never played Quarriors, but I have read the rules (and look forward to playing it). I also know it's inspired by Dominion which I HAVE played. If it turns out I've totally misinterpreted the rules, be gentle, I'm only trying to help!

The rules seem to suggest that the Portal die you just used would go in the used pile before you put the used pile in the dice bag. However when it was demoed to me there was one instance where the demoer used a portal die and had an empty bag. He set the portal die aside, put the rest of his used pile in the bag, then put his portal die into a new used pile and then drew the 2 dice. I'm not sure that is really a citable source as for all I know he was a volunteer who had just learned the game that day.


text:
How is co-operative play made more difficult in the Something Wicked expansion for A Touch of Evil?
I have read in the description of the Something Wicked expansion for A Touch of Evil on BoardGameGeek that the expansion contains additional rules that include "expanded challenge for cooperative play," but I don't see the rules posted in the files section. We've had a fairly easy time at beating the base game co-operatively and so I'm curious what changes in a co-op game with this expansion. A different shadow track? Bonuses for the Villain? More frequent mystery cards?

I don't have a definitive answer. But here's a detailed review. And here's a rules summary, including the new expansion on the last page. I think what you really want to see is the Advanced Mystery Phase Chart, which sounds like it makes the game a lot more challenging. But that doesn't seem to be online anywhere.

Unfortunately, Flying Frog Productions seems to be very worried that people will not buy their expansions if the post the rules for them. With that being said, what the most likely mean by, "expanded challenge for cooperative play," is that a new Advanced Cooperative Mystery Phase Chart is rolled on (2d6) versus the old chart (1d6 - quoted below) before drawing and reading the Mystery Card.

1 Darkness Falls - The Shadow Track immediately moves 2 Steps closer to Darkness. The Heroes may collectively take 5 Wounds divided as they see fit to prevent this.
2 Creeping Shadow - The Shadow Track immediately moves 1 Step closer to Darkness. The Heroes may collectively take 3 Wounds divided as they see fit to prevent this.
3-4 Minion Attack! - Roll once on the Villain’s Minion Chart and place that Minion at a Random Location.
5-6 Scattered Clues - Draw a Random Location and place 2 Investigation in that space.


text:
Clarifying Bearing off
At the end of the game (bearing off), which of the following moves are valid?

No, the second one is not valid.
There are many different rule sets for Backgammon.  However, I'm unaware of any which would allow it.
This quote is from Wikipedia.  It is footnoted as coming from both Backgammon for Winners, and Hoyle's Rules of Games.

A die may not be used to bear off checkers from a lower-numbered point unless there are no checkers on any higher points.


text:
Periodical chess problems by RSS
Is there somehow I can find an RSS feed of daily chess problems at different difficulties? I like chess and would like to get reminded to practice now and then.
Update: I've found Brian's Daily Chess Pouzzles, but they're all too easy, almost all of them 2-3 moves to mate or win heavy material.

It's not an RSS feed, but if you're after Chess puzzles, in addition to the daily puzzle and free tactics, Chess.com also has a variety of subscription options that offer unlimited daily tactics puzzles (and computer workouts).
If you then download the Chess.com app for your smartphone, iOS or Android, (or set up email alerts), you will can be reminded with notifications (in addition to having an endless and expansive Chess resource). Not RSS, but a considerably better alternative I think.

Again, not an RSS feed, but ... one of my favorite sources of chess puzzles is http://ChessTempo.com
Much like chess.com, but doesn't have the 3 puzzle/day limit.  Also has endgame technique puzzles.

No knowledge of the area whatsoever, but a bit of quick googling turned up this page, which appears to have an RSS feed. Maybe that's the kind of thing you're looking for?

I subscribe to "Daily Chess Puzzles - Chess.com" and the puzzles start easy on Sunday and get progressively harder until Saturday, where they're the most difficult.

I don't think this will give an RSS feed but Chess.com has a daily puzzle along with 3 targeted tactical problems per day for free users.


text:
Can't remember the name of this card game
There was a game we played a few years ago... a friend taught us but can't remember how to play! I remember we named it "Slummy" because it was a cross between rummy and solitaire (and we didn't know the name). I know there were cards on the table as well as in your hand and it was played with 2 decks. You can play with 2 or 3 people (maybe more.. don't know) I have searched everywhere, and spent hours looking. I also bought a card game book trying to find it.
HOPEFULLY someone will know. It's driving me nuts!

Any other details you can share?  A 2 deck game that is a mix of rummy and solitaire isn't much to go on.

hard to remember... we were all drinking all weekend! lol I know it had cards down... like solitaire, and cards in your hand.. I think you could play on each others cards. But thats all i remember.  I cant find ANY card games that are a mix of both.   Picture dbl solitaire, but holding hands as well :)

In some versions of asian rummy, you can lay down some of your sets or runs. These sets/runs are much different than Klondike Solitaire alternating suit runs. Are you sure the game plays like solitaire, In what way? Check 2+ player card games http://www.pagat.com/number/2_players.html

nope, ive looked through all those... it plays like solitaire in the way that you have some cards down in front of you... then in between players you build on the stacks (A-K... or maybe something about the kings first??)

Is it anything like Slam or Ligretto? http://boardgames.about.com/od/spit/a/spit_rules.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ligretto

its not spit... i know that one.  Parts of Ligretto sound familiar, but we did not use special cards.  Thanks evryone for trying to help!

Sounds a bit like "Sevens" in which the sevens start on the table and players take it in turns to play cards onto the runs, building up or down. I don't remember the specific rules though!

Did each player have a deck, or was it two decks no matter how many people were playing?

2 decks for 2 or 3 people (we never played with more)

@GeoffGoldsmith, King's Corner is played with a single deck, with community piles, Kings start the piles and is kind of like solitaire. http://www.members.shaw.ca/bvwhit/kings.html

What was the goal of the game? Was play simultaneous or turn-based?

@PatLudwig: I have voted to close this question as being too localized. It seems like an "invented," not established game, that only a few people would know how to play.

The way rummy figures in doesn't seem very clear from your description. It sounds similar to Pounce; in that game you have a personal tableau, common piles of cards that you're building on, and a bunch of cards you hold--although it's a stack, not a hand.
If you remember the objective of your game, that would be helpful.

This would be my guess too

From the information given, this sounds a lot like the game Speed, but speed doesn't need to be played with 2 decks.


text:
What are the key card combos to look out for in Agricola draft?
I do quite a lot of Agricola drafting, and one thing I've been noticing is that just taking the most powerful Occupations each pick is often not enough - finding synergies is usually better.  To give an example, I'm just finishing a game where I took Mason, Architect and Wooden Strongbox inside of the first three picks: individually none of these would be considered especially strong, but as a team they allowed me to pull forward to an unbeatable lead in the late game.
I could give lots more examples of obviously good combos I have seen or managed to draft myself (Bricklayer/Clay Plasterer? Well Builder/Village Well/Water Carrier/Flagon? Renovator/Manservant/Plough Driver?) but what are the strongest combinations that a top player should always be on the lookout for from the moment they sit down to an Agricola draft?

It would depend on how you are drafting. If it's a passing draft you need to look for which cards are more powerful and probably build a synergy with those. But also notice which weaker cards are likely to come back around.
I can't really go into specifics as there are so many combinations you named a few there.

A baking strategy needs some card power to pull off well
Anything encouraging you to early renovation would go well with any of the
stone house occupations
Room builders can get ridiculous
Occupations that encourage more occupations
Several Day Labour/Travelling Players bonuses

Combinations that probably don't work are Axe and Clay room builders as they are working cross purposes.
Another thing to consider in passing drafts is you can draft for wood cards even if you pass them as they are likely to be played, Church Warden, a bad example would encourage you to draft for plenty of family growth, even late family growth as long as you could ensure five peeps by round 14.

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


text:
Can you trash Crisium Grid to make the run Successful?
As the runner, can you, when you encounter a server that has Crisium Grid, trash it to make that run successful or do you have to make another run after you trash it?

This is a little technical.
The run is successful, but doesn't count as successful for card effects. This distinction usually doesn't matter.
The point you access cards (and are therefore able to trash) is after the success or otherwise of the run is determined. If you need to make a successful run, e.g. on HQ to trash Off the Grid, then you need to make a second run once you have trashed it.
If you make a run with a card that has mandatory replacement effects on a successful run, e.g. Keyhole, you may access cards (and therefore trash Crisium Grid) since the Keyhole thinks you weren't successful so its replacement effects don't happen.
There's a slightly clunky interaction with Security Testing. The original run does not get you credits because it doesn't count as a successful run for purposes of card effects. However if you make a second successful run after trashing the Crisium Grid, it is not your first successful run of the turn on that server, so you don't get credits there either.
Hope that's clear.


text:
Can I discard a race or class card directly from my hand to avoid charity?
In Munchkin (or any of its various sets) the rules say that "You can discard a Class card at any time, even in combat: "I don't want to be a wizard anymore." When you discard a Class card, you become classless until you play another Class card." It also says the same thing for Races, Accents, etc. for the various game sets.
This wording suggests that the intent is that you can discard an "in play" Class at any time, but it isn't clear about such cards in the player's hand. I would prefer to discard the extra Elf card in my hand so that my opponent doesn't get it during the Charity phase. Can I discard the card rather than give it away?
Note: The rules I am using are the most current rules from the 1st Edition, 23rd printing of Munchkin published May 2012.

You can't voluntarily discard a card from your hand, you can only play it or give it away.  But you can freely discard races and classes in play or sell items in play. During charity you can play cards instead of giving them away if you want to.
So, you can play a race, discard it, play a race, discard it, wash, rinse, repeat.  Unless you had some type of curse preventing you from discarding your race; then you are stuck having to give it away to someone else.

You cannot normally discard cards directly from your hand (unless a card says otherwise). This does not prevent you from playing the race card, whether it matches your current race or not from your hand, to prevent your opponent from getting it. The rules say that charity is the last step ((4)Charity) of your turn (page 2), and under the When To Play section for Classes and Races (page 6) it says:

Classes and Races - These cards may be played as soon as they are acquired, or at any time during your own turn. ...

The FAQ also supports this, giving an example of how you can change races on your turn by discarding races from the table and adding (or not) a race from your hand. It also gives an example of replacing a Class card to avoid charity, and as stated previously the timing on playing Race/Class cards is the same.

Q. When using Super Munchkin or Half-Breed (or Double Agent or Bilingual . . .), can you discard one of your Races or Classes and replace it with another, or just not replace it?
A. You can turn from a half-breed dwarf-elf to a half-breed dwarf-human, or, if you have the Halfling card, dwarf-halfling. This doesn't make you lose Half-Breed. Super Munchkin works the same way for Classes.
Q. Can I replace my current Class with the same Class to avoid charity?
A. You can discard a Class at any time. You can play a Class at any time on your turn. There's no requirement that the new Class be different from the old one. So, yes.


text:
Do MTG Core sets contain new (never before seen) cards? How does this compare with expansion sets?
(I clearly didn't format my prior question appropriately so I'll rephrase things).
Do MTG Core sets contain new (never before seen) cards?  Or is it just cards for the prior year's expansion set?
Assuming that there are new cards, how does this compare with the ratio of old to new cards available in expansion sets?

Are you wanting to play specific formats, such as Standard? This is necessary info, because the formats you are interested in will affect the sets of cards you'll need to buy.

It's not clear what you mean here. Presumably, you don't want an answer of: "find the cheapest card and order one thousand of them." Do you just want a broad variety of newly-introduced cards? Do you want to buy just the effective ones, or do you just want all of them?

I'd recommend asking friends who have large collections to help you out by giving you cards. That's the cheapest way to get more cards, but I don't think it really answers your question.

Sorry for the confusion guys.  I've revised the question to (hopefully) be more clear.

@JonathanHobbs Yes. Exactly.  I want a broad variety of newly-introduced cards.

I answered your question, but I'm not sure it addresses what you actually want to know. Given the previous iteration of your question, I don't think you're just curious about the ratio of reprints, or want to collect every card with a different name. For instance, if you're just starting out, the fact that core sets contain many reprints of older cards is irrelevant, since you won't have the older versions anyway.

@HaoYe Right. I think you answered the question though. I now know that I could buy a core set and have a lot of new cards to build decks with.  Same with expansions.

In response to your specific need, there will be very few cards in Magic 2015 that existed in any set since Magic 2014 and even then it'll be a limited overlap. This is simple pragmatism on Wizard's part; if half the cards in the new set are already in even the new players' hands, then people aren't as interested in the set. So if you're looking for cards that don't exist in your collection, you should be fine.
A lot of the "reprints" will actually be from old sets like Mirrodin (for example, Darksteel Citadel is back, and we can expect to see a lot of the old Convoke cards from original Ravnica: City of Guilds), and you will never have seen them before. So you should get a good sample of new blood for your collection.
On the other hand, if you want definite new blood, getting a booster box of Theros or another "Fall set" would be a more reliable way to go.
Hope that helps.

Some Background Detail on Core Sets and new Cards:
Historically, there was a shift in 2009, when the set Magic 2010 was released.
Up to that point, core sets were basically "Standard enablers". Their job was to provide a set of cards to allow players to build basic decks for the main 2-year rotating format, which would then be "powered" by the main mechanics of the "Expert" sets. They also acted as an intro product to the game, but this was fundamentally a secondary role. The main evidence of this focus was the fact that Core Sets didn't provide any new cards, and little to no new art, which meant that they were generally a hodge-podge of cards with no unifying theme, a poor limited environment and (generally) a lower power level.
Magic 2010 changed this by saying "Look, this is the product that lays out what Magic is", not just what it's doing this year. We're going to have the Magic rings, the Necromancers, the wacky Goblin hijinks, the Fireballs, and if a card we want for it doesn't exist, we will make it exist. Note that this is the inverse to the expert set's dictum "If an existing card will fit with our theme, we should put it in".
As Hao shows, this leads to the Core Set having a limited number of new cards. But it's also meant that the reprints they pull in are better chosen, and generally chosen with an eye to new players seeing new cards.
The set is also far more "draftable", which I would argue is the best way of gaining value from your booster packs. I've been regularly drafting newbie 2014 on Magic Online, and it's a blast.

You might want to reword your opening statements. It's very confusing, and makes it sound like there won't be many reprints when there are. Also, your statements are geared towards "current standard cards won't be reprinted as much" but that isn't want the OP appears to be asking about.

Core sets do contain new cards, but at a lower ratio than typical expansions. This article indicates that about half (112/249) the cards in Magic 2014 were new, while the rest were reprints. I would guess that the ratio will be about the same for Magic 2015.
By comparison, in Theros, out of 249 cards, there were 12 reprints, and 5 functional reprints (nearly identical functionality, but a different card name).

~1/2 reprints has been true of the core sets since M10.

Core sets have been discontinued, so they don't contain any cards.
In 2021, core sets were discontinued, with Dungeons and Dragons: Adventures in the Forgotten Realms being released in the publication slot that would have seen M22 released. Similarly, in 2022, no core set was scheduled for release, either; the game's developers have stated that their Jumpstart product was sufficient to meet the needs of introducing new players to the game.
As such we can say that, moving forward, the Core Set will contain both no reprints and no new cards, since it doesn't contain any cards, since it doesn't exist.

Just because they are currently not being produced doesn't mean that they no longer exist and no longer introduced new cards. Core sets did introduce new cards and did for 7ish years after this question was asked.

@JoeW They no longer exist in Standard, and will not introduce any new cards moving forwards.

And that still does not change the fact that they still exist in the past and introduced new cards when they where released. The fact that they are no longer being produced is irrelevant.

@JoeW The fact that they used to exist is irrelevant. The only relevant part is the current and future meta.

The fact that they used to exist is the point, they did exist and they did introduce new cards. It doesn't matter that they are no longer being introduced just as it wouldn't matter if MTG stops getting produced.

@JoeW I understand the point you're trying to make, but it's wrong. The old sets don't really matter. Only the new sets that are currently being sold matter. This is the correct answer; the other answers are now incorrect.

No, my point is not wrong core sets introduced new cards and the fact that they are not longer making it does not make that false.


text:
How does Hazoret's Undying Fury work with Aftermath cards?
I cast Hazoret's Undying Fury, and of the four exiled cards, one of them is Appeal//Authority, which, according to the April rules change, now has a CMC of 3. I cast Appeal, placing it in my graveyard at resolution.* Can I now also cast Authority for free? The Gatherer rulings on this don't seem that clear to me. If it has a combined set of characteristics in any zone except the stack, then would Hazoret's Undying Fury see both halves as valid free casts? When Appeal//Authority moves from exile to the graveyard, does the zone change cause Hazoret's Undying Fury to see the card as a different object?
*Note that I'm not asking whether the Aftermath half of a card can be cast from exile. It's clear in the Aftermath reminder text that it can't:

(Cast this spell only from your graveyard. Then exile it.)

This is specifically asking whether after resolving the top half of an Aftermath card using Hazoret's Undying Fury a player could cast the Aftermath half from their graveyard for free.

You can't cast Authority from the graveyard for free.
Appeal//Authority is not in the graveyard when you are instructed to cast the cards Undying Fury exiled. If you haven't cast Appeal, it's in exile. If you have cast Appeal, it's on the stack.
Keep in mind that Undying Fury only has you cast spells (which is to place it on the stack, make some choices, and pay its costs). They don't resolve immediately. The spell will only resolve when it's the top item on the stack after all players have passed priority in sequence, which can't happen before Undying Fury has finished resolving.
The only way Appeal//Authority could be present in the graveyard when Undying Fury instructs you to cast it is if some replacement effect caused Undying Fury to place the card in the graveyard instead of in exile. This effect would be phrased "If a card would be exiled, put it in the graveyard instead." If such an effect existed and was applied, then you could cast either Appeal or Authority for free (but not both) since Undying Fury is the one that put it in the graveyard.[CR 400.7][CR 400.7h]
You can't cast Authority from exile.
Undying Fury could cast Authority from exile, except Aftermath forbids Authority from being "cast from any zone other than a graveyard",[CR 702.126a] and restrictions take priority over instructions.[CR 101.2]
You can't cast Authority from the stack.
Casting Appeal places the card on the stack. At this point, the Appeal//Authority card that Undying Fury exiled no longer exists as far as Undying Fury is concerned.[CR 400.7]

101.2. When a rule or effect allows or directs something to happen, and another effect states that it can’t happen, the “can’t” effect takes precedence.
Example: If one effect reads “You may play an additional land this turn” and another reads “You can’t play land cards this turn,” the effect that precludes you from playing lands wins.
400.7. An object that moves from one zone to another becomes a new object with no memory of, or relation to, its previous existence. There are nine exceptions to this rule:
400.7h If an effect causes an object to move to a public zone, other parts of that effect can find that object. If the cost of a spell or ability causes an object to move to a public zone, that spell or ability’s effects can find that object.
702.126a Aftermath is an ability found on some split cards (see rule 708, “Split Cards”). It represents three static abilities. “Aftermath” means “You may cast this half of this split card from your graveyard,” “This half of this split card can’t be cast from any zone other than a graveyard,” and “If this spell was cast from a graveyard, exile it instead of putting it anywhere else any time it would leave the stack.”

Thanks for the edit on my answer @ikegami, just for my own reference where do you pull your rules quotes from? Also how quick are they with updating the rules for new set mechanics, especially for mechanics that have only been spoiled and not yet printed?

I google "MTG rules" to get to the official page. I don't know how far in advance of them coming into effect (if at all) they are updated.

@Malco As a rule, the official rules are not updated to reference a new set's mechanics until some time after the complete official spoiler for that set is released. Specifically, sometime after spoilers are completed, Wizards posts an article on their website listing the rule changes that will go into effect with that set's release, and sometime between that and the prerelease, the rules PDF files are updated. I don't know exactly when it is, either, but there's not a long window between the release of the rules updates and the release of the cards.

@ikegami I see, thanks. I had forgotten that Aftermath was introduced in Amonkhet so I thought you had some sort of special site that had the rules early, hahaha.

@Malco The full rules are usually posted by a set's release date, though occasionally they are a little late, especially for larger updates. However they also usually have the CR entries for new abilities in the Mechanics of X articles that come out around when previews start.

There's one other reason you can't do this - one I consider to be a fairly important reason - which is that Hazoret's Undying Fury ("HUF") only lets you cast any of the exiled cards immediately. Any card among the four that you don't choose to cast at that point stays exiled, and any of the cards you do choose to cast goes on the stack just as if you'd cast it from your hand. Once that happens, HUF's effect is done. It does not allow you to do anything you couldn't ordinarily do with those cards at any later time in the game. (Such as casting the aftermath half from the graveyard for free.)
You can compare something like Bring To Light, which also exiles a card and gives you a one-time choice of whether to cast it without paying its mana cost. While the Gatherer rulings don't specifically detail its interaction with aftermath cards, they do make a point that you don't get a choice to cast it later in the turn.

This answer isn't really correct. Even if Hazoret's Undying Fury didn't restrict you to casting the cards immediately, you still wouldn't be able to cast the Aftermath halves of cards with it. Cards that do allow you to cast the card later, like Mind's Desire, still only let you cast the card exiled with it from exile. Once you cast the spell and it moves to the graveyard, it's a different object and Mind's Desire's effect no longer applies to it.

@murgatroid99 I don't think your comment is accurate. There are multiple reasons you can't do what the OP is asking about, and what I've identified in my answer is definitely one of them. I don't mention the other reasons (because other answers have already done so), but that doesn't make my answer incorrect, only incomplete (again, intentionally so). Perhaps I shouldn't call this the "main reason", though.

I'm telling you, the "reason" you gave doesn't make a difference with regards to the original question. The fact that you can only cast the spells immediately has no bearing on whether you can cast spells with Aftermath.

And I'm claiming otherwise: that the reason I gave does make a difference with regard to the original question. This reason is every bit as effective at making it impossible to cast the Aftermath card for free as the reason that it's a different object.

How does it make a difference? In what way does the fact that the spells are cast immediately have any bearing on whether you can cast Aftermath spells? I already pointed out that you can't cast Aftermath spells with a similar effect that does not have that restriction. And there are effect that allow you to cast spells from the graveyard, and those allow you to cast Aftermath spells, even if you can only cast the spell immediately.

It sounds like you're making a "straw man" argument: this question is not about casting aftermath spells in general. This question is about casting the specific aftermath spell whose non-aftermath half was already cast (and resolved), using the same effect that allowed you to cast the non-aftermath half.

Let us continue this discussion in chat.

Unlike @murgatroid99, I believe you are right and that the the main/primary reason it can't be cast from the graveyard is that it's not in the graveyard. In fact, if a replacement effect caused it to be in the graveyard instead of exile, 400.7 would be defeated by 400.7h, so 400.7 never applies. I have revised my answer.

This will probably be something that will end up being covered in the special rulings once the cards are actually announced but I will do my best on explaining the probable course of action.
Part 1: Can you choose to cast Authority before it enters the graveyard?
You would not be able to cast Authority for free with Hazorets's Undying Fury. Aftermath represents three static abilities including:

This half of this split card can’t be cast from any zone other than a graveyard

So you would not be able to cast Authority at all with Hazoret's Undying Fury.
Part 2: Can you choose to cast Authority after it enters the graveyard?
At the very least by the time Appeal//Authority has entered your graveyard Hazoret's Undying Fury will have already finished resolving so it won't be a valid card to choose from. This is in addition to the fact that Hazoret's Undying Fury is not looking to cast anything from the graveyard in the first place.

Careful with the wording in this answer. Hazoret's Undying Fury does not have any targets.

@eyeballfrog correct, answer has been updated.

No, since by the time Appeal is done, so is Hazoret's Fury.
As part of resolving Fury, you put the spell(s) on the stack.  Then Fury is done.  Then the spell(s) resolve.
At that point, Appeal//Authority is in the graveyard, and since Fury is done, you can't cast Authority for free.


text:
What should the Overlord change when adding a fifth hero in Descent: Journey Into the Dark, 2nd Ed.?
My board game group and I started Descent: Journey Into the Dark, 2nd Ed. last night. This group usually fluctuates between 4 and 6 players and this session we had five, the upper limit for the game. Everyone had a great time beating me to a pulp, as I was the Overlord; the heroes won all three encounters with ease. Next week the group wants to play this again. The problem is that we are probably going to have the 6th player back. If this happens, I need to increase the difficulty in order to have a fair shot at being effective as the Overlord.
What are changes that I can make to increase the difficulty for five heroes while still keeping the game fairly balanced? I already feel like the game is stacked against the overlord pretty heavily, although we did the easiest encounters to get a feel for the game, so maybe that changes by the end. Some suggestions I've read:

Increasing monster health
Taking a "short turn" after the 3rd hero takes their actions. This consists of  drawing an Overlord card and taking actions with one monster group.

We do not want the Overlord to be controlled by two players, so I'm looking specifically for ways to play with five heroes. Also note this is for 2nd Edition.

We've been playing with six players (5 heroes + overlord). The only changes we've made are to:

Play all white minion monsters with red stats. They still count as white minions for hero powers.
Add an additional treasure.
When calculating the boss monster's HP, increase it by one hero.

I think it's a little bit easy for the heros, but it's been close.

You could play a scenario designed for 6-7 players, like Enduring Evil. The forums at FFG note some of the issues that make the game stacked against the Overlord as you add heroes.

The number of extra attacks and LOS coverage
it will be next to impossible to get a spawn in within striking distance of the party

One possible solution that was suggested it to have two teams competing for victory, and the Overlord in the middle, but this doesn't work well for 6 players since you will have one team down a hero though.

The Enduring Evil campaign was designed for the 1st Edition and doesn't really look compatible with the 2nd Edition. Instead of spawns, 2nd Edition uses reinforcement. The forum also refers to the 1st Edition, and while some concerns are the same, it doesn't really offer solutions to issues like group limits that are imposed in 2nd Edition.


text:
How much money would I have to spend to play in tournaments?
In posing this question, I realize that it may be out of scope for boardgames.SE; this question could be subjective and the monetary costs vary quite a bit between cheapest and most expensive decks. Having said that, I think this could have value if it falls within the Q&A format appropriately.
I've been a casual player for awhile, but I've rarely dabbled in tournament formats. I think I spent some time between Mirrodin and Ravnica playing Standard, but beyond that I have had very little exposure. I am realizing that I'd like to start participating in the more competitive tournament side of Magic, but I'm concerned about the cost.
I get the sense that it is a much larger initial investment to start in Vintage and Legacy because there is a solid base that most decks use in land and mana artifacts, and the upkeep may be minimal as new cards come out that fit a deck, whereas the initial cost in Modern and Standard is lower, but there are continual costs as new sets come out that consistently change the format. Beyond that, I don't have a great sense of how much these costs are, and the average costs of these would partially determine what style of tournaments I'm likely to be attracted to.
What is the average cost of a deck for each of the major tournament types? These would at least include Vintage, Legacy, Extended, Modern and Standard, plus any others I may be unaware of.

I think your last paragraph has made this question too broad and hard to answer. The answer also depends on the market where you live. Also consider that much of the testing that's required for competitive play can be done with proxies, so that in the end you can just buy the specific cards you have decided fits the local metagame best.

The broadness was my initial concern with posting this and I wouldn't be surprised if the community closed this because of it. Really I'm trying to figure out the cost differences between tournament formats, and if there's a better way to word this question, I'm open to suggestions. The idea of testing with proxies is good, but that doesn't really change the cost of the decks in the end. I like the suggestion though.

It makes a massive difference, since you asked about deck building also.  Between buying 4 of every card in every new set so that you can do your deck building before deciding what to play, or just by the deck you ultimately decide on before the tournament?

@Affe Wouldn't you decide what to put into a deck before buying it? I'm not asking how much it would cost to buy every card in every set so that I can potentially play with anything. I already know that would be expensive. I'm asking how much the average deck costs to build and maintain for tournament formats. I'll edit to make that clearer.

The easiest way to compile the information you're looking for that I know of is with tcgPlayer's deck search:
http://magic.tcgplayer.com/db/deck_search.asp
Choose a "Format"
Choose "Places Finished" : 1st, 2nd, 3rd-4th, 5th-8th
Choose "Deck Origination" : Event and Article Decks Only
Only took me a minute or two to compile that for the most recent star city games legacy open the top 8 decks had a min price of $1100, max of $2500 and median around $1600.

@SocioMatt If you've gone off and done the same for other formats, perhaps you could come back here and contribute the information!

For tournaments lets elaborate the types available:
Draft: 3 pack boosters, usually 10-15 $ price range, and may last around 3-5 hours.
Standard: sets that are from previous year and including this year. The cost of playing a constant standard environment is usually very expensive as most of the packs rotate. There are cases for like the zendicar and scars block that it made every single deck into a single deck. Sometimes to win may cost more than just playing for fun. The current standard is good played a homebrew and it can still win.
Modern: Sets from 8th edition moving forward. The idea of this deck style is to enable all types of standard decks to be viable in modern to increase diversity. Wizard constantly nerf spells or ban them for being to fast. Cost depends on card choices mono red for example is usually is a 100-200 $. You don't need fetches, all you need is skill, and luck.
Legacy: The 2nd most expensive format ever, as it has 50-100+ lands, spells that have a price range of 20-110+ aka JTMS, and the most diverse decks you will ever see which is the plus side. Mono red hardly works in this format as turn 3 batterskull can cost you a card to pitch which would be 3 damage. Goblins also cost over 200 as the lands to interrupt lands played by opponents is needed.
Vintage: Moxes and everythign stated on top. Mostly combo decks that end in turn 1 with either 5 - 6 cards in hand of average.
What is your best investment as a competitive player?
Well, my recommendation would be draft as high priority, use the draft games to improve your card collection and play the most average win percent on standard(Percentage may mean its chance of winning), and then modern to use your remaining card pool and make something awesome.
My tips:
Do not invest on any Return to ravnica or gatecrash lands. Next set dragon maze will have a chance for a dual land on every pack. Making lands extremely cheap.
When building a deck make sure you don't destroy your deck after side boarding. Seriously this happens a lot, people get intimidated by decks and put so much counter that their decks are no longer viable. Put enough but don't destroy your deck.
Good luck

Can't disagree more on getting the shock lands. If you want to be competitive you must play shock lands. That's not a should, that's a must. They're already very cheap considering their power, clocking in at about ten bucks per, but it's unlikely they'll drop much lower. The chances to get one in Dragon's Maze is going to be about the same as it is to get one now. When you compare shock lands to other utility lands, they're very affordable.

The chances of obtaining shocklands are much higher actually as each booster pack doesn't have a normal land except a gate, a shock land, or a mythic land.

Sorry wes, the chance of getting a shock land in dragon's maze will be about half the same as getting one in rtr or gatecrash. Citation: http://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/41772272135/im-somewhat-confused-is-the-pre-release-article Being so low of a chance, and seeing that Dragon's Maze is a small set that will not sell as many packs, the price is not going to drop significantly.

Vintage almost always runs power-9 and other "tenth power" cards such as Mishra's factory and Library of Alexandria.
Vintage decks tend to get into the ten thousands.
the major expense of Legacy decks is lands.  Other cards can be fairly expensive, but not as much as the lands.  Outliers include things like Jtms, FOW, Moat, Goyf, and candleabra.  you can also run fetchlands, which tend to be a bit cheaper than straight-up duals
You can generally put together a decent legacy for around $600.  Affinity, Elves, and Goblins can be as low as $200, depending on the build.  Some of the more expensive legacy decks, which run playsets of jace or moats can get up to $2000.
Modern decks vary in price.  I estimate the cost of a typical tron deck at $300 to $400, but you can definitely go cheaper with things like burn  The cost of modern is kinda in flux at the moment, and with modern masters on the way, IT might be going down.
Standard decks should normally run you around $200 for all of the best stuff, but when one card dominates the format as much as say... Jace, the price can go way up.  But you can go way lower than that, especially if you're running mono-red, mono-green, or something like that.
Before, RTR, I ran a $40 mono-green deck that could come in first place at the local FNM through tier-1 delver and wolf-run decks.
right now standard is a bit inflated with all the legacy and modern playability of the cards(like shocks) keeping the prices up.

If you're just looking to play at some of the local FNM tournaments, you should pick up an event deck, they retail for about $25, but sometimes they have more value than the MSRP so your Local Games Store might charge more than that.  If they do, I'd recommend checking out nearby LGS's to see if they have the event deck at MSRP.  Some LGS's do, and some don't.
an event deck is a simple deck that has about 7 rares, but is geared toward being a decently playable deck.  It will generally run a bunch of good commons and uncommons, and it is expected to win about 25% of the time at a competitive tournament.

vintage is a little weird though since it's almost never played as a sanctioned format and is usually a proxy tournament when played at all.

@Affe that's because each vintage game has three stages: shuffling, dice roll, and mulligans.


text:
When is it beneficial to freeze the discard pile?
I started playing Canasta this past weekend with some of my relatives. We played with four people, two teams of two. I understand most of the strategy for the game, but freezing the pile generally seems like a terrible idea.
I noticed that, in general, the team that froze the pile wasn't the team that ended up picking it up. What it did create was large discard piles, and whoever picked it up got a lot of points that hand, along with the wild card that the other team used to freeze the pile in the first place.
In some cases, the reason a player froze the pile was to avoid discarding something that the other team had already melded, but it still seems more beneficial to dump a card on a relatively small discard pile that you know will get picked up. Plus you wouldn't be losing a wild card in the process.
I also understand that this gives you some leeway in discarding; suddenly you're able to discard cards that have been melded and are on the table since there is a low chance that the opposing team is still holding onto them.
I feel like I might be overlooking some other benefits of freezing the discard pile. When is it beneficial to freeze the discard pile? In what circumstances might this be a good play?

When your team doesn't have enough points to start, but the other team has started, they will be able to take the pile more often and you don't want to keep cards because they have them open.
Sure, freezing the Box costs a wild card, but a lot of time I prefer to lose a wild card instead of giving the box to my opponents over and over.
Also a really good strategy is to freeze the box to let it grow; you keep a trap in your hand to get the box.


text:
Can Operations be attacked in Pixel Tactics?
In Pixel Tactics 2 and some other versions, there are Operations (Ongoing Orders) that sit in the reserve spot of your unit. Do these count as heroes that can be attacked, or are they there for 4 Waves no matter what?

You cannot attack Operations. They are not part of your unit and only reside in one of 3 reserve slots which hold only Traps or Operations. Neither can be directly attacked as they have no attack or health.
On the other hand, some cards can increase or decrease the amount of timers on various Operations. In this way, you can lengthen or reduce the time an Operation is in play even though it cannot be removed directly.


text:
Will using Nephalia Smuggler save a creature targeted by a destruction spell?
If an opponent targets one of my creatures with a destroy spell, and in response I tap Nephalia Smuggler to exile that creature and return it to the battlefield, does the destroy spell fizzle due to its target having vanished? Or is the target considered still valid, since it's still on the battlefield after the effect of Nephalia Smuggler has been resolved?

Short answer:
If the spell only has one target, it will be countered on resolution since the creature it was targeting no longer exists.

First, a correction. The creature isn't still on the battlefield after the effect of Nephalia Smuggler has been resolved. The creature that's there then is a brand new creature with no relation to any creature that was previously on the battlefield. That the old and the new creature were created by the same card is irrelevant. [CR 400.7]
The answer to your question depends on the exact wording of the "destroy spell". What happens depends on if the spell targets, and on if it still has legal targets as it would resolve. If it has targets and all of them have become illegal, the spell is countered. Otherwise, the spell continues to resolve, doing as much as it can with its remaining targets. [CR 608.2b]
For example,

If the spell is Assassin's Strike:
Since this spell's only target no longer exists when the spell would resolve, Assassin's Strike is countered on resolution. None of its effect occurs, so you don't discard a card.

If the spell is Hex:
One of its targets no longer exists when the spell would resolve, so one of its targets is illegal. It still has five valid targets, so it isn't countered. It continues to resolve as it normally would, doing as much as possible with the remaining targets. Five creatures are destroyed, but the smuggled creature is not affected.

If the spell is Day of Judgment:
This spell has no targets, so it resolve normally. It proceeds to destroy every creature on the board, including the smuggled creature.

Referenced rules:

400.7. An object that moves from one zone to another becomes a new object with no memory of, or relation to, its previous existence. There are seven exceptions to this rule: [None of the exceptions matter here.]

608.2b If the spell or ability specifies targets, it checks whether the targets are still legal. A target that’s no longer in the zone it was in when it was targeted is illegal. Other changes to the game state may cause a target to no longer be legal; for example, its characteristics may have changed or an effect may have changed the text of the spell. If the source of an ability has left the zone it was in, its last known information is used during this process. The spell or ability is countered if all its targets, for every instance of the word “target,” are now illegal. If the spell or ability is not countered, it will resolve normally. However, if any of its targets are illegal, the part of the spell or ability’s effect for which it is an illegal target can’t perform any actions on that target, make another object or player perform any actions on that target, or make that target perform any actions. The effect may still determine information about illegal targets, though, and other parts of the effect for which those targets are not illegal may still affect them.

I see: so in general, the takeaway is that cards moving between zones cause new objects to appear, and 'target' refers to an object, not a card, and is chosen at cast time. (Unless, I guess, the effect says 'target card'.)

Actually, I think for all those cards that say 'target card', then if that card bounced out of the zone it was in the target would still fail to resolve.

@nornagon, A card is an object too, so you were right the second time.

If the only target of the spell was the creature that Nephalia Smuggler exiled, then the spell would be countered on resolution. (Note: fizzle is now depreciated, and is no longer used within the context of the rules. It used to appear in older versions of the rules for historical reasons, but only in the Glossary.)

608.2b If the spell or ability specifies targets, it checks whether the targets are still legal. A target that’s no longer in the zone it was in when it was targeted is illegal. ... The spell or ability is countered if all its targets, for every instance of the word “target,” are now illegal.

The creature that is on the battlefield after Nephalia Smuggler's ability resolves is a new Object. The spell that was targeting the old creature is not targeting this "new" one.

400.7. An object that moves from one zone to another becomes a new object with no memory of, or relation to, its previous existence. ...

(Sorry about the -1. It is not deserved, but I cannot remove it.)

@ikegami, it.doesn't matter. I was just continuing an experiment that was started in meta ( http://meta.boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/857/enough-with-the-mtg-comp-rules). I personally think that the CR.quotes are the best for everyone, but have been trying to provide answers that just use another authoritative source, the Basic Rulebook.

The downvote can be removed if there's an edit to the post.

There are two possibilities. If the opponent's spell had multiple targets, it would resolve but would be unable to affect the creature that was exiled by Nephalia Smuggler (it would still have any other effects on the card). If the opponent's spell only had a single target, the creature that was exiled, then the spell would be countered on resolution and would have no effect. From the Basic Rulebook (page 10):

TARGET - ... When the spell or ability resolves, it checks the targets to make sure they’re still legal (they’re still there, and they match the requirements stated by the spell or ability). If a target isn’t legal, the spell or ability can’t affect it. If none of the targets are legal, the spell or ability is countered and does nothing at all.

The creature exiled by Nephalia Smuggler left the battlefield and went to a different zone. When it did this, it became a new object, and hence this "new" creature it isn't being targeted by your opponents spell.

LEAVES THE BATTLEFIELD - A permanent leaves the battlefield when it moves from the battlefield zone to any other zone. It might return to a player’s hand from the battlefield, go to a graveyard from the battlefield, or go to some other zone. If a card leaves the battlefield and later returns to the battlefield, it’s like a brand-new card. It doesn’t “remember” anything from the last time it was on the battlefield.


text:
How do I take advantage of the Japanese Anti-American offense?
I tried the shuck-shuck approach while playing US and moved my Pacific fleet to the Atlantic (Japan didn't attack Pearl Harbor). However, Japan then used its entire fleet to invade Western United States. I quickly fell (due to a blunder), which decided the game.
How could the Allies have maximized on Japan's abandonment of the mainland? The UK lost its Indian Ocean fleet and didn't have resources to build a new one. Mainland Asia eventually came under British control, but there wasn't a chance to take Japan itself.

Some other information about the board state:
Germany destroyed the UK fleet on its first turn, then immediately followed the Japanese invasion of the US by destroying the entire American navy. Japan's navy sailed through the Panama Canal and captured London. Russia was still barely holding off Germany.

This is an interesting story, but you're asking too much at once.  Could you add one more line restating your one, central question?

For example, the answer to "What should the Allies do if Japan uses all their resources to invade the US?" is different from "Was it a mistake to move the US Pacific fleet to the Atlantic?".

I think I know you from another site.You might study the real World War II for tips.  (America didn't invade the eastern hemisphere until it had won the battle of Midway,) Or see my answer below.

Related:http://boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/3657/should-japan-and-the-us-meet-on-another-battlefield-than-the-north-pacific-in-ax?rq=1

Shuck-shuck is usually a good American strategy. But there are always exceptions to the rule, stone-scissors-paper style. This game is an exception.
Japan vs. US is seldom played by the Axis, because it is the least promising (as discussed in the next paragraph). Instead, the Axis typically concentrate on either the UK or Russia, to make use of their advantage on the Eurasian continent, and hope that the US remains isolated. To counter this, theorists like Don Rae developed the shuck-shuck strategy for the US.
Ordinarily, Japan vs. US is the least favorable to the Axis, because Japan starts with 25 IPCs, versus 36 for the US. (I'm using the strengths of the Classic edition.) This will change to 29 for Japan vs. 32 for the US after Japan captures the two US-controlled Chinese territories. That's a pretty even match that should lead to a stalemate. Then the UK (30 IPCs) and Russia (24 IPCs) have a decided advantage in Europe against Germany's 32 IPCs. (If Japan focused on Eurasia, the Axis would have an advantage of 57 to 54 IPCs.)
In this case, the UK should run shuck-shuck, or build a factory in South Africa, anything to divert the Germans from Russia, and let the U.S. fight Japan. Instead, the U.S. soldiers involved in shuck-shuck would have done better to defend their homeland. In essence, the allies lost because they traded the whole US for Japanese Asia.
It is noteworthy that in axis and allies, America is at a fraction of its historical strength (more like 90 than 36). In the "real war," America had the potential of pursuing a European-based strategy, shuck-shuck or another one, and a Pacific war against Japan. In the game, it has to be a choice of one or the other, and America made the wrong choice in the game.

One thing that you could do would be attacking anything in the Japanese sea zone with the American fleet.  The British would then advance on Japanese controlled Asia and with the Americans keeping the Japanese from building ships, it will make it a lot easier as the game continues.  The US will still need to build a slightly bigger navy in order to destroy the rest of the Japanese.  Try not to break up your navy into several smaller armadas.  Just hold off the Germans the your British in Europe and the Russians.  Once Japan is relatively helpless, you can take all but one ship from the Pacific and then, if you can keep Japan at bay, you can start to creep into Europe to help your allies.  Hope this helps!

So, hold off the shuck-shuck until I control the Pacific?

Yes, just try to keep the British fleet in the water, and avoid conflict.

Have you played A&A 1941 much? The German fleet can reliably all but completely annihilate the British fleet  on their first turn. Germany 1 dest, 1 sub sz-16 to sz-14. 1 battle, 1 sub sz-5 to sz-8 and sub from sz-9 to sz-8. This makes the British fleet at sz-10 practically useless.

Sorry, I should have clarified.  I was thinking that you should bring your British fleet in the Pacific to Europe.  There really is nothing they can do.  Don't get into conflict with those ships.  There's nothing you can do in the Atlantic.


text:
How quickly does a player have to say "Uno" to avoid drawing extra cards?
I was playing with my fiancée and some friends, and she's adamant that if you can yell Uno before someone who has just played their second to last card, they are required to pick up the penalty amount of cards.
Is this kosher?

A house rule I have used in the past is to allow the player to say UNO before they play their card since the rule appears to be set up as a way to let the other players know you only have 1 card left and it really doesn't matter if that happens before you play your card or as you play your card.

Being that she's your fiancée, she is correct in that she makes the rules. If it wasn't for that rule, gaming amongst significant others wouldn't happen. =)

Unfortunately she is my wife now, and thus I will no longer be questioning her authority.

She's basically right, but timing matters here. Your correct play is to say "UNO" as you play the card, which can't be interrupted. The player about to go down to one card may not be caught until his second to last card hits the discard pile. After that though, he's fair game! From the rules:

When you have one card left, you must yell "UNO" (meaning one).
  Failure to do this results in you having to pick two cards from the
  DRAW pile. That is, of course if you get caught by the other players...
A player who forgets to say UNO before his card touches the discard
  pile, but "catches" himself before any other player catches him, is
  safe and is not subject to the penalty. You may not catch a player for
  failure to say UNO until his second to last card touches the DISCARD
  pile. Also, you may not catch a player for failure to say UNO after
  the next player begins his turn. "Beginning a turn is defines as
  either drawing a card from the DRAW pile or drawing a card from your
  hand to play.

Newer rules on Mattel's web site have a FOUR card penalty:

@Saloman Miguel - Nope! Re-read the rule I quoted: you may not catch a player for a failure to say UNO after the next player begins his turn. So if you've started your turn, it's too late. I think it's fair to assume the rules expect the game to be played in a single sitting. If a single game was spread overnight, and you haven't had your turn yet, I think it's still in the spirit of the rules that you've missed your chance to penalise your friend if you've left it for hours to notice. The point is you notice immediately, or the player gets away with it.

If a person said "Uno" before putting the card down, they need to withdraw three cards.

Recommend checking the operation of your Caps Lock button; and expanding on this answer such that value is added.

I recommend reading the rules... such as the quote in ire_and_curses answer.


text:
Can I play a card using flashback without it having been successfully cast first?
For instance, if I try to cast Army of the Damned and my opponent uses Cancel to stop it, can I still cast Army of the Damned from the graveyard for it's Flashback cost?

Sort of an aside, the phrase "successfully cast" is no longer part of the rules of Magic.  A spell still counts as "cast" if Cancel is used to stop it.

Cards in the graveyard do not have a "memory" of how they were placed there.  Just the order

@Andrey, and if playing in a tournament, even order doesn't matter so much (sometimes) 404.2. Each graveyard is kept in a single face-up pile. A player can examine the cards in any graveyard at any time but normally can’t change their order. Additional rules applying to sanctioned tournaments may allow a player to change the order of cards in his or her graveyard.

Yes. The only requirements for Flashback are that the card is in your Graveyard, you are able to pay the alternate Flashback cost, and you are capable of casting the Flashback spell at that particular time (you have priority, if the Flashback spell is a Sorcery then it is you turn's first or second Main Phase and the stack is empty, etc.).
Keep in mind that if your opponent Cancels your Army of the Damned spell, that you must wait until Cancel to resolve before your spell will be in the graveyard. If it was Dissipated, it would never hit the graveyard at all.

702.33a Flashback appears on some instants and sorceries. It represents two static abilities: one that functions while the card is in a player’s graveyard and the other that functions while the card is on the stack. “Flashback [cost]” means “You may cast this card from your graveyard by paying [cost] rather than paying its mana cost” and “If the flashback cost was paid, exile this card instead of putting it anywhere else any time it would leave the stack.” Casting a spell using its flashback ability follows the rules for paying alternative costs in rules 601.2b and 601.2e–g.

Yes. Flashback simply lets you cast the spell from your graveyard, it does not matter how the spell got there.


text:
Does Goblin Arsonist's ability deal 2 damage when there are two in play?
Does having two Goblin Arsonist on the battlefield cause their ability to deal 2 damage when one dies?

No, it deals 1 damage
Whenever you see a card's own card name within the the rules text of a card, it isn't referring to all cards with that name. It is referring to itself. I believe at one point, the Oracle text replaced this self reference with ~this~ (or perhaps, the database allowed searching using "this"). You can think of the triggered ability in that way:

When [~this~] dies, you may have it deal 1 damage to target creature or player.

From the Comprehensive Rules:

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

If you were looking for abilities that would trigger multiple times, you need cards that trigger "Whenever a Goblin ...". These cards only care about the creature subtype in question. For example:

Boggart Mob - Whenever a Goblin you control deals combat damage to a player, you may put a 1/1 black Goblin Rogue creature token onto the battlefield.

Boggart Shenanigans- Whenever another Goblin you control dies, you may have Boggart Shenanigans deal 1 damage to target player.

Two Shenanigans won't trigger off of themselves, because of the another, but both will trigger when another Goblin permanent is sent to the graveyard from the battlefield. (Note: Boggart Shenanigans will do 1 damage twice, which is not the same thing as to deal 2 damage once.)

I suppose the templating for a Goblin Arsonist that would double its ability would begin something like: "Whenever a creature called Goblin Arsonist dies..."

@thesunneversets, if we mean double in the OPs sense, not the FoR sense, then something like the Dwarven Shrine template mixed with Zubera's and the Burst cards, "When ~this~ dies, it deals X damage to target creature or player where X is one plus the number of creatures with the same name."

@thesunneversets Actually I think the template is "Whenever a creature named Goblin Arsonist dies…" viz. Relentless Rats

Aha, I see what you mean, I didn't get the idea that the OP cared about whether the 2 damage was dealt as one event or two! But I fully accept that it's more fun to be extra-pedantic about Magic questions :)


text:
Does Mogg Sentry gain +2/+2 for each spell?
I was playing with a friend who has Mogg Sentry on the field I then play Champion of the Parish and Vexing Devil.  Does Mogg Sentry become a 5/5 creature until end of turn or is it just a 3/3?

Mogg Sentry becomes a 5/5 until end of turn. Mogg Sentry's ability triggers once for each occurrence of "opponent casts a spell."

603.2c An ability triggers only once each time its trigger event occurs. However, it can trigger repeatedly if one event contains multiple occurrences. See also rule 509.4.

To play a non-land card is to cast it.

701.11b To play a card means to play that card as a land or to cast that card as a spell, whichever is appropriate.

You cast two spells, so Mogg Sentry's ability triggers twice.

603.2. Whenever a game event or game state matches a triggered ability’s trigger event, that ability automatically triggers. [...]

Each resolves to create a continuous effects granting itself +2/+2. As such, Mogg becomes a 5/5 until the end of the turn.

If you want the step by step description of what happens, let me know and I'll oblige.


text:
Can Conjurer's Closet be used to keep a stolen Commander?
We had this situation come up in a game last night, and we think we stumbled upon the right answer, but we're not sure.
So, Player A's Commander (Sliver Overlord) was stolen by Player B using a Zealous Conscripts. Player B also had a Conjurer's Closest in play. At the end of the turn Player B decided to use the Conjurer's Closet on the Sliver Overlord, with the idea that after it was 'blinked', it would permanently be under her control.
But then we remembered that Player A can choose to have their Commander return to the Command Zone when it would be exiled or go to the graveyard, so that trick wouldn't work. (Player B ended up using it anyway, as Player A couldn't recast his general at that point.)
Did we play this out correctly?

You got it wrong, but this interaction is tricky. Sliver Overlord can be put in the command zone, but the ability of Conjurer's Closet will return it to the battlefield anyway.
We follow the instructions in the triggered ability:
1) "exile target creature you control": instead of putting it in the exile zone, we put it in the command zone. We don't first exile it, then put it in the command zone. The commander is directly put in the command zone.
2) "return that card to the battlefield under your control": notice how this doesn't say "the exiled card". It says "that card". So we return the card from the command zone to the battlefield under player B control (because "your control" refers to player b, as he is the one who controls the triggered ability).
The rule that allows this to happen is the same one that allows to return the card from exile in the first place:

400.7g A resolving spell or activated ability can perform actions on an object that moved from one zone to another while that spell was
  being cast or that ability was being activated, if that object moved
  to a public zone.

Here is a link to a similar ruling in Wizard's forum, about a commander and Cloudshift. Post 12 in that thread is from an official Net Rep, therefore that ruling is official.

Lol. If you look at my edits, you'd see that I was vacillating between yes and no. Looks like I stuck with the wrong one in the end.

@Pablo Just to clarify, the Sliver Overlord will return to the battlefield under the control of Player B, correct?

@Discord yes, player B controls the triggered ability of Conjurer's Closet, therefore he is the player who "your control" refers to. I'll edit my answer to add this.

Note:
Per ire_and_curses suggestion in meta, I've opted to leave this open to show the potential error in reading the rules. Ultimately, the reason the below answer is incorrect is because the Command Zone is also public. As Pablo points out in the accepted answer, the act of moving the Commander to the Command Zone instead of the Exile Zone does not cause Conjurer's Closet to lose track of "the card" because it is still moving to a public zone.

Yes, you did play this correctly. The Magic Comprehensive Rules explain what happens when a Commander is exiled:

903.12. If a commander would be put into the exile zone from anywhere, its owner may put it into the
  command zone instead.
903.13. If a card is put into the exile zone face down from anywhere, and a player is allowed to look at
  that card in exile, the player must immediately do so. If it’s a commander owned by another player,
  the player that looked at it turns it face up and puts it into the command zone.

The Exile Zone is shared by all players:

400.1. A zone is a place where objects can be during a game. There are normally seven zones: library,
  hand, battlefield, graveyard, stack, exile, and command. Some older cards also use the ante zone.
  Each player has his or her own library, hand, and graveyard. The other zones are shared by all
  players.

Since the exile zone is public, the owner of the commander (Player A) can choose to put it into his Command Zone instead of the Exile Zone.

This is not correct, see my answer for the long explanation.

@SocioMatt, sorry to take the answer from you, but I felt like I should switch it to the correct one.

@Discord That's the whole point of the site. Thanks for switching it to where it's supposed to be.


text:
Is Master of Arms pointless under new blocking rules?

Master of Arms

2W, Summon Soldier 2/2, Weatherlight Uncommon

First strike

1W: Tap target creature blocking Master of Arms.

I used to use this in my deck as powerful creature which could attack, tap a couple of defenders to prevent them from dealing combat damage and kill off the remaining untapped one with first strike.
Now under the new rules tapping a blocking creature doesn't actually do anything, and since it will untap in its next turn is rather pointless. Since Master of Arms used to prevent combat damage, should it be re-worded to:
1W: Tap target creature blocking Master of Arms, that creature deals no combat damage
this turn.

which would then make the card function in the same way it used to?
Otherwise the ability is worthless outside of a Royal Assassin / Master of Arms combo.
Is there an errata on what do with old cards which are rendered useless by the news rules, or should they just no longer be used?

You are correct, that Master of Arms ability is basically useless now, and functions differently now than it used to under pre-6th Edition rules.
If there was errata for Master of Arms', it would show up in the Oracle wording. The Gatherer page for that card lists the Oracle text, along with errata changes and dates. The Oracle is the official wording on Magic cards. The card used to work the way that you described, but in May 2011, the errata that supported the cards original functionality was removed so that the card now works as written.

Master of Arms - Just like Winter Orb, Master of Arms had a mystifying Oracle wording intended to replicate original functionality. The rule that changed this time was the one saying that tapped blockers didn't deal combat damage. ...

My general philosophy is that I'm okay with rules changing out from underneath cards and changing their functionality. Heck, just look at the Magic 2010 rules changes.

This recent change to Master of Arms is part of an ongoing rules philosophy change that began years ago. Several different articles point to the reason for these changes. In Power-Level-Errata-B-Gone, you learn of the architect behind the rules changes, Mark Gottlieb the lead rules manager. The reason for the change is that without an online reference, it is difficult to verify how a card is supposed to work. For that reason, power-level errata is being removed from cards as well as errata to make cards work as originally designed.

Why Did We Make This Latest Batch of Changes? - Over the years, the sheer number of rules revisions and changes of rules managers the game has undergone—as well as unintended consequences that arise when new mechanics and card abilities are unleashed each set—has led to cards slipping through the cracks. As the evil genius currently in charge of maintaining Oracle, Magic rules manager and former cult-leading columnist Mark Gottlieb is a strong, strong believer that cards should have functionality that matches their printed intent as often as possible.

Ben Bleisweiss talks specifically about tapped creatures and combat damage under fifth edition rules (as well as other interesting changes). The rule was essentially removed, because it wasn't intuitive to new players. Someone who was unfamiliar with the rules probably wouldn't understand why tapped attacking creatures deal damage, and defending creatures don't.

TAPPED CREATURES DEAL NO DAMAGE - Change: Under Fifth Edition rules, tapped blocking creatures dealt no damage in combat. Under Sixth Edition rules, they do.

Why: Much like the old "tapped artifacts shut off" rule, the rule about tapped creatures dealing no damage wasn't something a player would intuitively know just by looking at a card.

Mark Rosewater even lists Master of Arms' as a famous example of cards being useless under new rules changes.

In fact, our Oracle database encounters this problem every day because it has to modernize cards and mechanics that were created in a different time. Often what was done then doesn't even work now. I don't know how many times I've heard Mark Gottlieb gripe because some card that was made to do something that made sense in the past simply doesn't make any sense in modern day.

A famous recent example would be the card Master of Arms. The card was designed at a time when tapping a blocking creature kept it from dealing damage. Then Sixth Edition rules came along and removed the rule and all of a sudden Master of Arms's mechanic made a lot less sense.

All that being said, Master of Arms isn't really a tournament level card, which means that you are probably playing this deck in a casual setting. Most likely, if you told your opponents, "Hey, I have this fun deck I play that got completely hosed by sixth edition rules, would it be ok with you if Master of Arms said '1W: Tap target creature blocking Master of Arms, that creature deals no combat damage this turn.' for the purposes of this game?" I don't think anyone would object.

For the record, R&D's Secret Lair wouldn't work - after all, the card's current Oracle wording is how it's written!  The side effects of how it works are different now than they were then, but that doesn't change the fact that the card itself does the exact same thing.

@StevenStadnicki, Doh. That card is usually my go to answer for this sort of thing. I should have known better, I actually looked at the physical card text image in the Gatherer. I will remove the suggestion.

If there was errata, it would be in the card's Oracle text (as seen on Gatherer). For a time, cards like Master of Arms did have functional errata to preserve their old functionality. However, this was deemed annoying on two levels:

The card's functionality didn't match the printed text.
In the case of abilities untapping blockers, the card's functionality didn't match the way it used to work, either: a player could use another ability to untap the blocker and its damage would still be prevented.

You can read about why it was changed in the rules manager's May 2011 Update Bulletin. It boils down to this:

My general philosophy is that I'm okay with rules changing out from
  underneath cards and changing their functionality. Heck, just look at
  the Magic 2010 rules changes. It wouldn't be reasonable to try and
  make all previous cards work exactly the same way they did before
  those rules changes.

I agree. It's most important for a card to actually do what's printed on the card than to match how it worked some years ago. This depowers Master of Arms, but honestly it was never that good to begin with.

Yes, for its intended purpose Master of Arms' ability is pretty much pointless now.
If you ever have a question about a specific card such as Master of Arms, you should go to Gatherer, the official errata reference for M:tG. It is the final authority for all card wordings, and often has additional rulings that could be of interest for the respective card under current rules.
In your case, it mentions that being tapped does not prevent a blocking creature from dealing damage.
On a more general note, rules changes often make some cards more useful, and others less useful. Another example besides the "tapped blocker combat damage" rule would be the removal of "mana burn", which made cards like Mana Drain or Braid of Fire much stronger, while it weakened cards like Power Surge or Citadel of Pain.
It's really just the course of the game, and in such a complex game with a huge card pool such as M:tG, it's pretty much unavoidable that even minor rules changes affect a lot of cards and combos, positively or negatively. Also note that as a Trading Card Game, M:tG was the first of its kind, so they had no predecessor to build upon. They had to make and later iron out all the mistakes one could make; and they started off with rules that today's rules lawyers can only turn their faces away from in horror, I imagine.
As to what you should do with your Master of Arms or really any other card that gets the rules change shaft: Holding on to it and speculating for a revert of the change is probably the most sensible thing to do, since its value has already been diminished and you couldn't get rid of it for its old value.