text:
The Scarab god and commanders
If I use The Scarab gods activated ability on a commander (regardless of whose commander it is), if the owner of the legendary creature in question sends their commander back to the command zone will I still get the token copy?
The activated ability says

{2}{U}{B}: Exile target creature card from a graveyard. Create a token that's a copy of it, except it's a 4/4 black Zombie.

Pretty sure I do in this case since the replacement effect occurs AFTER I exile with the scarab god.

The commander would have to be in a graveyard first, but if it's your own you can make that happen.

Re "Pretty sure I do in this case since the replacement effect occurs AFTER I exile with the scarab god.", No. The replacement effect replaces exiling the Commander, so it can't possibly occur after exiling the Commander.

Well, if I'm going to be honest under the technicality I'm incorrect, but I am right in saying that the replacement effect happened because of the scarab god. I think it would be easier to say and understand that the replacement effect A: doesn't use the stack. and B: it happens any time the commander would change zones.

Yes, you get the copy.
400.7h (if moved to public zone) or 608.2g (if moved to hidden zone) allows the The Scarab Gods (TSG) to obtain characteristics to copy because it's still TSG that moves the card when the replacement effect is applied.

Let's start at looking at what happens without the replacement effect.
There are two instructions (verbs) to follow. First, The Scarab Gods (TSG) exiles the creature card. Then, the copy is made. TSG must be able to find the creature card in order to copy it, or else it wouldn't know what characteristics to give the copy. It's pretty obvious that it can (or the card would never work), but let's find out why.
A fundamental rule of MTG dictates that an object moving from one zone (e.g. the graveyard) to another (e.g. exile) doesn't truly move. What actually happens is that the original object ceases to exist in old zone, and a new object is created in the new zone.

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:

But TSG can find the creature card in exile. How? Well, it's because of one of the aforementioned exceptions.

400.7h If an effect causes an object to move to a public zone, other parts of that effect can find that object. [...]

So, because TSG is the one that placed the creature card in exile, it can find it there, and thus, can make a copy of the card (as it appears in exile).

Now let's look at what happens with the replacement effect.
Again, there are two instructions (verbs) to follow. First, The Scarab Gods (TSG) moves the Commander to the Command Zone (instead of exiling it). Then, the copy is made.
The key is that the replacement effect doesn't cause the Commander to move to the Command Zone; it causes TSG to move it there instead of exiling it. So, even though the Command Zone is not mentioned anywhere on TSG, 400.7h still applies, and the copy of the card (as it appears in the Command Zone) can be made.

But what if a replacement effect similar to the one that allows Commanders to be placed in the Command Zone instead of exile allowed the card to be placed in a hidden zone (e.g. a library) instead of exile. Would the copy fail then?
Well, The Scarab Gods (TSG) would not be able to find the card after it moved, so TSG wouldn't know its characteristics, and TSG wouldn't be able to make a copy of it, except for the following rule:

608.2g If an effect requires information from the game (such as the number of creatures on the battlefield), the answer is determined only once, when the effect is applied. If the effect requires information from a specific object, including the source of the ability itself, the effect uses the current information of that object if it’s in the public zone it was expected to be in; if it’s no longer in that zone, or if the effect has moved it from a public zone to a hidden zone, the effect uses the object’s last known information. See rule 112.7a. If an ability states that an object does something, it’s the object as it exists—or as it most recently existed—that does it, not the ability.

So even then, TSG would still be able to create a copy of the card (as it appeared in graveyard).

Let me know if anything needs clarifying

so in summation, TSG ability has to be a public zone (unless otherwise specified by the exiled card) in order for me to gain a token copy?

No, revisit the last section. If it's not in a public zone, Last Known Information is used. So you get your copy no matter what (as per the summary at the top of my answer).

Hmm, I see, I jumped the gun yet again.. Thanks, I was confused as the command zone reveals what the commander is, unless its a scheme or planar deck. So clarifying what the command zone is (as it was implied it was public) confused me a bit.

Because what I gathered (before reading the last bit) implied it had to be a "public zone" for me to gain a token. (for context)

According to the comprehensive rules, as part of an effect resolving:

608.2c. The controller of the spell or ability follows its instructions in the order written. However, replacement effects may modify these actions.

So you do what the ability says, one step at a time. First exile the card, modified by the commander rule to be "exile or put in the command zone, as chosen by its owner". Then create the token. That's it.
As to what happens if one step (the exiling) doesn't happen as prescribed, I couldn't find a rule with direct application, but there is

609.3. If an effect attempts to do something impossible, it does only as much as possible.

While it doesn't directly apply in this case (it's not "impossible" to exile the card), it does reflect quite well the  MTG rules philosophy when it comes to effects with multiple components: they are as independent as they can be.
Since the token creation doesn't say anything about "if that card was expired this way", it will continue regardless of what actually happens to the targeted card as the ability resolves. Even if some effect like "cards can't leave graveyards" were in effect, you would get your token.

If anyone finds a rules quote that applies more directly, that would be cool.

The simplest rule that applies here is 608.2c: "The controller of the spell or ability follows its instructions in the order written. However, replacement effects may modify these actions..." There's nothing unusual about the situation described. You simply follow the instructions in order, and one of those instructions is modified by a replacement effect.

What do you mean "that rule doesn't apply"? That's the rule that describes how to resolve literally any spell or ability. The fact that the sentence I specifically didn't quote isn't relevant to this particular situation doesn't mean that the rule as a whole doesn't apply.

@murgatroid99 You're right. I tunnel visioned on the caveat.

I don't understand why you omitted the second sentence of that rule and then said that you couldn't find a rule that applied to the instruction getting modified.

@murgatroid99 But modifying the exiling isn't what this question is about, as I see it; the OP seems to already be aware of the fact that the commander can go to the command zone rather than exile, which is what the second sentence of 608.2c applies to. Instead, it's about the effect on the second part of modifying the first. And that's what I can't find a direct quote on: that the second part happens even though the first one doesn't do what it's supposed to do.


text:
Stonecoil Serpent with X = 0 + The Great Henge
If I cast Stonecoil Serpent with X = 0, but I have The Great Henge in battlefield, does the Serpent die, or get the +1/+1 counter and stills alive?
And also, if it dies, I still draw a card, or not?

The Serpent dies and you draw a card.
The timing is as follows:

The Serpent enters the battlefield with 0 counters. The Henge triggers.
State-based actions are checked and performed. The Serpent dies because it has zero toughness
The ability from the Henge (and anything else that triggered during point 1 and 2) is put on the stack.
You gain priority and can play instants and activate abilities. Then your opponent gains priority.
Eventually, the triggered ability from the Henge gets to resolve. It tries to put a +1/+1 counter on the serpent, but fails. It then instructs you to draw a card.

The first points can be deduced from rule 116.5:

116.5. Each time a player would get priority, the game first performs all applicable state-based actions
as a single event (see rule 704, “State-Based Actions”), then repeats this process until no state-based
actions are performed. Then triggered abilities are put on the stack (see rule 603, “Handling
Triggered Abilities”). These steps repeat in order until no further state-based actions are performed
and no abilities trigger. Then the player who would have received priority does so.

For point 5, consider the Gatherer ruling on the Henge:

Once The Great Henge’s last ability has triggered, you’ll draw a card even if you can’t put a +1/+1 counter on the creature for some reason (most likely because it has left the battlefield).

This originates from rule 609.3:

609.3. If an effect attempts to do something impossible, it does only as much as possible.

The Henge's ability tries to put a counter and the serpent and making you draw a card. It can't do this. It therefore does as much of it as they can, which is just making you draw a card.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Instants in response to your own abilities
If an ability I control is on top of the stack, can I cast an instant before it resolves?
For example, I have Sarkhan the Masterless and a dragon on the board.
An opponent attacks, triggering 1 damage from the dragon to the attacker.
Can I cast Alchemist's Gift to give my dragon deathtouch before that damage resolves, or would I have to have given it deathtouch before the opponent declared attackers?

Yes this works the way you're hoping.
If Alchemist's Gift resolves and then the dragon is killed, the ability on the stack will also retain the deathtouch due to the "last known information" rule (113.7a in the MtG Comprehensive Rules as of February 2021):

Once activated or triggered, an ability exists on the stack independently of its source. Destruction or removal of the source after that time won’t affect the ability. Note that some abilities cause a source to do something (for example, “Prodigal Pyromancer deals 1 damage to any target”) rather than the ability doing anything directly. In these cases, any activated or triggered ability that references information about the source for use while announcing an activated ability or putting a triggered ability on the stack checks that information when the ability is put onto the stack. Otherwise, it will check that information when it resolves. In both instances, if the source is no longer in the zone it’s expected to be in at that time, its last known information is used. The source can still perform the action even though it no longer exists.

Notably, since some people tend to wait if something happens: OP would have to annouce the trigger and then keep priority and cast the spell immediately.

@Erik Which is to say, after declaring the trigger (and putting it on the stack), they do not have the opportunity to ask their opponent whether they want to play anything (hoping they might waste a card or some mana boosting the attacking creature). If the opponent passes, it is too late to play the Gift as the triggered ability will resolve.

I don't think you need to hold priority in OP's example since as the NAP the attacker will have to pass priority to you before the trigger resolves, during which period you can cast Alchemist's Gift.

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


text:
How slippery are the Fantasy Flight Sleeves?
I want to protect my Arkham Horror game cards with sleeves, but I have had bad experiences with sleeves which are too slippery. With tall decks, the sleeves produce decks that are not stable enough.
How slippery are the Fantasy Flight Sleeves?

Fantasy Flight sleeves are quite thick, durable and good quality. They're quite comparable to Ultra Pro sleeves for Magic: The Gathering.
Straight out of the packet, they are very slippery when you first sleeve your decks. Over time, or with some extended shuffling, they will become much less slippery.
The decks in Arkham aren't that tall, so I haven't found the slipperiness to be a problem in practice. Personally, I quite like sleeving in general as it makes the decks easier to shuffle. But if you really don't like slippery decks, and don't have the patience to break them in, then you might want to skip the sleeving.
A few other points to consider.

Buying sleeves for all your cards is fairly expensive, especially if you have lots of expansions.
Storage in the Arkham boxes is already quite tight. Sleeving the cards makes the decks significantly thicker, so that may be an issue.
Consider how much wear the decks receive in practice. If cards aren't shuffled often or aren't being held in-hand for extended periods of time, then sleeving may not be worthwhile.

If you do decide to get them, you'll need the "Mini American" (colour-coded yellow) for the small decks (items, etc.), and "Standard American" (colour-coded green) for the full size decks (e.g. Mythos cards). FFG's sleeving guide will also tell you how many of each pack you'll need, per Arkham expansion.

Usually, the next question after sleeving, is ... boxing?

Note that the sleeving guide tells you pack numbers per expansion standalone and doesn't account for sleeving multiple expansions at the same time. You'll end up with extra sleeve packs if you just go and buy what the guide tells you.

They are longer–lasting than UltraPro sleeves, but I find they retain a lot of air (even when compressed) that results in piles of cards being liable to slide out— especially smaller game cards like those for most board games.
Overtime, this effect will reduce, and with proper shuffling they will last you for a while, but just like any other sleeve, they will eventually begin to come apart. Unless you are playing a competitive game that requires/encourages sleeved cards or want to sleeve a filler game that you'd probably be playing on a table full of drinks and snacks, I would not bother, especially with games made with cards more in the style of playing cards, like Race for the Galaxy.
Cheap game cards are better suited for sleeving than nice ones; if I had it to do over again, I might have sleeved Glory to Rome. But probably not.

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


text:
Is it required to reconnect a path that has been disrupted by a rock-fall before adding onto the end of the path in Saboteur?
Does the gap created by a rock-fall have to be replaced to make a continuous path before additional cards can be added on to the disconnected portion of a path? Or can you continue to extend the disconnected path in the hopes of filling in the missing link on a later turn or allowing one of your teammates to potentially fill in the gap?

All new tunnels must connect to the ladder.  This was answered by the Designer on Boardgamegeek.

when you play a path card it must be able to trace a path back to the start card.

See Pat Ludwig's answer - you can't play cards on a disconnected path.
However, my group has always played that you can still continue the "disconnected" portion of the tunnel.  Of course, you can't win until it's reconnected to the start.
We've always justified this by explaining that some dwarves were trapped in the disconnected portion of the tunnel after the fall :)

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


text:
Where can I find protective sleeves for my Dixit cards?
I'm afraid my Dixit cards will get worn or marked over time. I want players to be able to manipulate them without being afraid of ruining them.
Where can I find protective sleeves for my Dixit cards?

Mayday Games has 80 x 120 mm in stock which is what you need.
I'm told that 3 x 5 recipe card covers will work as well.  You can find them on Amazon if you can't find them locally.

Board Game Geek has a listing of the card's size and the various types of sleeves that will fit them
http://boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/102880/item/1981056#item1981056

Number of Cards: 84
Mayday Sleeve Size: Magnum Gold 80 x 120 mm
Swan Panasia Sleeve Size: SWN-045 (Dixit) 80 x 120 mm


text:
How does Death-blow work in Warhammer Quest?
I m not sure if this belongs here or in RPG, as I feel Warhammer Quest kind of straddles the line between the two. I am also unable to create a tag for Warhammer Quest, so it's tagged Warhammer Fantasy.
Since Warhammer Quest went out of print back in 1998, I think no rule has inspired more argument than Death-blow.
There seem to be two main camps for this rule.

A monster must be on full wounds and be slain outright with a single attack in order to activate the Death-blow.
Any melee attack which inflicts enough damage to kill the monster will activate this rule, regardless of how injured the monster was.

The rulebook says the following:

DEATH-BLOW
  (Killing a Monster with a Single Blow)
Sometimes a Warrior will hit a Monster so hard that he kills it with a single blow. If this happens he can carry on his attack to the next Monster, getting a chance to kill him too. This follow-on attack represents the mighty swing of the Warrior's blade hacking down his foes in one monstrous blow.
If there is another Monster standing in an adjacent square to the Warrior's initial target, and that is still within the range of his
  attack, the swing of his blade may catch it too. Roll to hit and wound
  the Monster as normal. If this Monster is also killed with a single
  blow, the blow carries on round in the same direction to the next
  Monster, and so on.
This mighty blow, which we call a death-blow, stops when the Warrior fails to kill a Monster with a single blow, or his blade meets
  an obstacle such as a wall or another Warrior.
Note that if you kill a Monster with a single blow from an arrow or other missile weapon you do not get to carry on to the next
  Monster, as you cannot hit more than one target with a single arrow.
Only Warriors may make a death-blow, not Monsters.
Warhammer Quest Rulebook, pg 24

So, how do people feel this rule should work RAW?
What do people think are the RAI?
Are there any official sources/FAQs for this question?

Rules as Written
The use of the phrase "kills it with a single blow" does suggest option 1, that the monster must go from starting wounds to zero wounds as a result of the attack. This is reinforced by needing to kill each following enemy with "a single blow" or the Death-blow stops.
Though I have seen suggestions that the rule should be interpreted as "if the blow would kill it in a single blow", meaning a wounded monster may trigger a Death-blow if the attack inflcited more than it's starting wounds regardless of current wounds. This would allow you to trigger a Death-blow off wounded monsters, but still require the blow to be able to kill them even if they were unwounded.
Rules as Intended
A user on bwarhammerquest.runboard.com claimed to have corresponded with one of the GW game designers about this exact question.
http://bwarhammerquest.runboard.com/p561722,from=rss

I wrote to Gav Thorpe recently and asked about the Death-blow rule in
  Warhammer Quest (posted below). With his hundreds, if not thousands,
  of hours of playtesting behind him, here was his reply on January 11,
  2013:
Q: Gav, you have to tell us, after 17 years of uncertainty in
  Warhammer Quest, does a Monster have to be on full Wounds when you
  strike it in order to cause a Death-blow? We beg you, please end the
  controversy once and for all!
A: From what I can remember (and it was a long time ago) there was no
  restriction on deathblows other than to kill the enemy in one hit. If
  previously wounded, that just makes it easier.

Gav Thorpe's response suggests option 2, if a wounded enemy is easier to Death-blow, than you must only need to inflict it's current wounds to trigger a Death-blow, making it akin to the D&D feat Cleave. This seems to contradict the RAW however.
I have also been advised that in the recent iOS remake of Warhamer Quest, Death-blow also works as described in option 2 (not owning an iOS device I am unable to confirm this).
Official FAQ
To my knowledge the only official Wahammer Quest FAQ was in Deathblow Magazine issue 3, and they did not mention this rule.
There is an unofficial FAQ, this contains many questions marked as clarified by Games Workshop UK, but it also does not mention this rule.
http://wquest.free.fr/faq/wq_faq_index.html
Summary
I think it really comes down to how hard you want the game to be, and how much you would rather RAW as opposed to RAI.
By straight RAW (option 1) the game becomes harder, as if you must inflict their starting wounds in a single blow you will not be able to Death-blow very much at all past the first few levels. This will make it slower to clear monsters and cause the party to take more damage.
The RAI version (option 2) that any killing blow will trigger a Death-blow will make the game easier, as you will get "more attacks", allowing you to kill monsters faster. This also means even high level characters will continue to make regular Death-blows.
Update - Option 3?
Interestingly, the new Warhammer Quest video game provides a 3rd interpretation of the rule, which is kind of a combination of the two. In this game you make a deathblow any time you slay an enemy with the first attack that hits it that turn.

Quest is hard enough when using option 2, if you look at the in game world; stating wounds is irrelevant, as you kill a foe you feel inspired and move on to the next, who cares if the elf coward put an arrow in him first? Your Troll Slayer Axe must taste blood


text:
What's the best way to determine which cards will be banned or not reprinted?
I enjoy playing Standard and would like to compete on a more competitive level but I am apprehensive of paying, as an extreme example, $25/card for 4 Mutavaults or Sphinx's Revelations, only to have them either not be reprinted in the next block or banned altogether. I was told that WotC has become a lot more judicious in the last several years so that they rarely need to ban a card anymore due to brokenness/overpower. This does not completely alleviate my concern so I would like to know if there is any kind of resource that is known to fairly accurately predict which cards will stay around in the next block and which cards won't?

I keep up with Gathering Magic on YouTube, and Star City Games Premium articles. Both made predictions about the last two bannings. Both were 50/50. The one thing that both had in common, at least for the latest banning, is that if they didn't bring it up, it wasn't banned. Both only mentioned about 4 cards each time, so it is relatively accurate as far as predictions go.

You can virtually guarantee that Sphinx's Revelation will not be reprinted in the next block, and probably not for some time if ever.  The only cards that tend to see reprint are 'staple' effects, and that's a card that's both thematic to its block and a complicated card, the sort that's very fungible.

You have very little to worry about for standard in terms of banning cards. Standard is a very carefully designed format with a card pool small enough for wizards to have a very good grasp of the format in their internal testing phases. Every time they have banned a card they have learned from it, and the bans in standard are very few and far between.
The 2 specific cards you mentioned will not be banned in standard. This is because there is not another opportunity to ban them before they leave the format, which brings me to the more important part of my answer
Rotation
Players worried about the cost of cards in standard should worry far more about Rotation than banning, because rotation is a much more likely thing for standard staples (heavily played, format defining cards) than banning. Both Mutavault and Sphinx's Revelation are in sets which leave the format in the Autumn/Fall of this year (2014) and as such, particularly given how big an impact they have had on the format, are very likely to rotate, and not be reprinted back into standard.
Wizards tend to avoid having high power cards which people play with/against a lot over a rotation period reprinted. There have been times where they have regretted reprinting staples, such as the Titans cycle of magic 2011/magic 2012 (the poster boy of which was Primeval Titan).
The vast majority of the time, when it comes to rotation, you should assume that every card of value is rotating. This is because that is almost always the case. Each set or block has a specific theme with a different mix of mechanics, and while some cards (mostly in the core sets) are reprinted, most of the time there is no guarantee that a card from Return to Ravnica block or Magic 2014 will be around this time next year. The cards that DO get reprinted, tend to be very low value, as they have usually been reprinted many times before. Take Doom Blade as an example for this. Even cards like that take a few seasons off, as Doom Blade did in Magic 2013.
Standard is a format that Wizards try to fundamentally change once a year, and they do that by removing a lot of cards and replacing them with totally new ones which do very different things (or the same things in different ways). If you are interested in playing standard at any sort of competitive level, then you will need to make yourself quite aware of what cards are rotating when, and either:

Accept that those cards will be worth much less than you paid for them when they rotate
Try to mitigate your losses by selling/trading them before rotation.

Eternal formats
One thing to note which does have some impact on the above, is that while most staples will rotate out of standard, they will not become worthless. Older formats like Modern or Legacy often have a significant impact on the cost of cards. Mutavault is an example of a reprint of a staple in older formats, which is part of why it's price was so high so early, it has a proven track record. Similarly, some cards will not lose much (if any) value on rotation. Deathrite Shaman is a perfect example for this, Deathrite has a significant presence in Modern (or did, until he was banned) and Legacy decks - where his abilities are much more easily leveraged - but sees very little play in standard. The majority of his price is based on these formats, and as such will change little on rotation. Similarly, many of the strongest cards in Standard will go on to see play in Modern and Legacy, and as such lose much less value on rotation, or rebound from the dip very quickly.
Overall, bans are much less frequent, particularly in standard, than rotations. Additionally, the wide reaching nature of rotations makes them much more important to consider than bans when looking at the investment you are willing to make.

Thank you for the response. You have given me several valuable insights. Foremost of which is to stop wasting $ on standard and focus more on Modern/Legacy.

@xXGrizZ Standard is still the most lucrative format. A 1 dollar card might jump to 15 dollars tomorrow. A 15 dollar card will usually never be 1 dollar tomorrow. If you trade away cards that are hot, and you have a vision for cards that will be hot tomorrow, then you can build a collection pretty quickly. When you invest in modern or legacy, you are basically in the "surely but slowly rising" market. It's definitely more stable, but it has less potential.

@Rusher has some good points, and much of your investment in modern can include standard staples (mutavault is  a very good card in modern and sees play in some tribal legacy decks). Realising the money available in standard is not easy though, far from it. The jumps happen because a card most people thought was bad turned out to be very good. Inherently, it is very difficult to capitalize on. Most people will lose money playing standard. for a long time Legacy staples, although expensive, have maintained a constant upward trend. its a choice of Safe vs Volatile, with modern bridging the 2.

Deathrite Shaman is banned in Modern now...which proves the point, because he's good enough in Legacy to keep quite a bit of value. In fact it's worth noting that literally every Standard-banned card since Urza's block has been legacy playable (affinity cards, Stoneforge Mystic, and Jace the Mind Sculptor) with the exception of Skullclamp, which has never been Legal in Legacy.

@ChadMiller forgot deathrite is banned in modern - updated to mention that!

@xXGrizZ Be aware of the counterbalance to this; the investment required to play at top-level competitive in Modern is high, and at Legacy is very high. While the cards maintain their value better, you're far more vulnerable to theft, damage, shuffling wear and tear etc. There's also an availability issue if you want to play competitively; Standard is overwhelmingly the most supported and demanded format.

As Patters says, you should not worry about cards in Standard getting banned. From 1996 to 2014 (18 years), there have been a grand total of 27 cards banned from Standard/Type 2:

January 1996
Mind Twist
December 1996 (note: all cards banned here were restricted prior to this date; after this date, Standard has no restricted cards)
Black Vise
Hymn to Tourach
Land Tax
Strip Mine
June 1997
Zuran Orb
December 1998
Tolarian Academy
Windfall
March 1999
Dream Halls
Earthcraft
Fluctuator
Lotus Petal
Memory Jar (note: retroactively added mid-March)
Recurring Nightmare
Time Spiral
June 1999
Mind Over Matter
June 2004
Skullclamp (note: Skullclamp in its final form was not properly tested)
March 2005 (note: five of the lands here are identical save for type of mana produced)
Ancient Den
Arcbound Ravager
Disciple of the Vault
Darksteel Citadel
Great Furnace
Seat of the Synod
Tree of Tales
Vault of Whispers
June 2011
Jace, the Mind Sculptor
Stoneforge Mystic (exception: the "War of Attrition" precon contained two SFMs, and was legal for play if the decklist was unchanged)

As far as reprints go, there is no perfectly accurate way to predict what will be reprinted and what won't. In general:

If it's been reprinted before, the chances that it will be reprinted again are higher. (Serra Angel, Cancel, Doom Blade, Shock, Birds of Paradise)
If it's a popular card and it can fit in a future set, the chances that it will be reprinted are higher. (The Titan cycle from M11 was popular, and although some were extremely powerful, they were reprinted in M12.) This is especially true if the card resonates with the plane represented by the block.
"Future set," however, may be a number of years down the road (such as the shockland cycle, printed in Ravnica block in 2005, and then again in Return to Ravnica block in 2012).
If the card is an "answer" to a mechanic or theme present in a future set, the answer card is more likely to be reprinted, especially if it can fit into the set's theme. (Ancient Grudge is a good example from Time Spiral and Innistrad.)
However, it's also likely that a functional reprint will be made instead. (Compare Unravel the Aether to its predecessor Deglamer, or compare Transguild Promenade to its predecessor Rupture Spire.)
If the card is a core mechanic for part of the color wheel, there's a good chance that it will see the light of day again. White is probably going to have life gain and weenies. Blue is probably going to have card draw and counterspells. Black is probably going to have creature removal and reanimation. Red is probably going to have burn and artifact removal. Green is probably going to have beatsticks and artifact/enchantment removal. The more "pure" the card is to such effects, the better chances it has; something like Concentrate has better chances at a reprint than Rhystic Scrying, for example.
Along a similar vein, a mono-colored card has better chances than a multicolored card. Outside multicolor-focused blocks like Return to Ravnica, multicolor cards are generally special in some way, such as the gods in Theros block, not reprints.

Mutavault and Sphinx's Revelation are unlikely to be reprinted in M15 or "Huey"/"Dewey"/"Louie" (the code names for the next three expansion sets). Unless we return to Lorwyn or have a tribal-heavy block (which we just recently had with Innistrad), I would even say a Mutavault reprint is unlikely in "Blood"/"Sweat"/"Tears" or "Lock"/"Stock"/"Barrel". Sphinx's Revelation is a fairly unique combination of effects (there are only 7 cards that I find removtely similar, and several of those aren't W/U) as well as being tied in with sphinxes, which aren't super common across the multiverse (while one of the Ravnican guilds is lead by a powerful sphinx). I would not expect a reprint of Sphinx's Revelation in Standard until and unless we have a Ravnica 3: The Movie the Book the Show. (It's possible we may see it in a set or precon not in Standard, such as the Commander decks or in Conspiracy.)
If we do ever return to Ravnica again, it will not be until after "Barrel"; Mark Rosewater said that revisiting the plane for a third time was not in the five-year plan.


text:
Are lands colorless?
My opponent plays a vampire deck and has Vampire Nocturnus out. It says

Play with the top card of your library revealed. As long as the top
card of your library is black, Vampire Nocturnus and other Vampire
creatures you control get +2/+1 and have flying.

The top card of their library is a swamp. Does the swamp count as a black card (giving their vampires +2/+1 and flying), or is it colorless (meaning the vampires remain unbuffed)?

The color of a card is determine by its mana cost and by its color indicator.
As you can see from this search of the complete database of Magic cards, no land has a mana cost, and only one land has a color indicator, so all lands are colorless except for that one land, Dryad Arbor.

202.2. An object is the color or colors of the mana symbols in its mana cost, regardless of the color of its frame.
202.1. A card’s mana cost is indicated by mana symbols near the top of the card. [...]

202.1b Some objects have no mana cost. This normally includes all land cards [...]

202.2e An object may have a color indicator printed to the left of the type line. That object is each color denoted by that color indicator. (See rule 204.)

Note that Commander has the separate concept of a card's color identity, which is not to be confused with a card's color (despite the names). Color identity counts all mana symbols appearing anywhere on the card. This concept is exclusive to commander, though, and while a swamp has a color identity of black, Swamps are still colorless.

Were these rules renumbered? I swear this was asked before but I can't find the question.


text:
Eclipse 4 player FFA Convergent Strategy
I can't see how a 4 player game cannot go but one way, every time, if the following (rational) rule applies:
You attack whoever is weaker than you but poses a threat.
So you have four players. All roughly equal strength (normal distribution, variance proportional to time). The following sequence occurs:

Player A becomes stronger than another (B)
Player A attacks B because they are likely to win.
Player B is defeated (-10 strength), but player A is also weaker due to attacking and unable to defend simultaneously (-5).
Player C is now stronger than A, so they attack.
Player A is defeated (-10 strength), but player C is also weaker due to attacking, but less so because player A was already weakened, so -3 strength for player C.
Player D is now strongest, and attacks the next strongest player, C.
Player C (likely) loses, player D is now most likely to be victorious.

Basically, whoever attacks first starts a cascade of attacks, A->B, C->A, D->C, where the greatest advantage is to whoever attacks later, or latest, after everyone else is done weakening each other. And whoever attacks first is most disadvantaged overall.
Unless some massive swing of luck where someone can beat the odds stacked against them, or some alliance mechanics are introduced, how can the game possibly deviate from this pattern, if only for exceptional cases?
Other than relying on people making irrational decisions (attacking someone stronger, or someone not a threat to their victory)
I believe this is a more general 4 way zero-sum game problem, but Eclipse is the example I'm thinking of.
Edit: I think this bit of game theory, about 3 way duels, basically proves there's only one optimal way to play Eclipse FFA. Don't play.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truel

As much as I like Eclipse, I have had the complaint that often you are rewarded for attacking a player in a weaker position, whereas most Eurogames encourage you to attack the player in the lead.

There are so, SO many variables. Perhaps Player A can defensively position tiles so Player C and/or D cannot get to him when he attacks B. Perhaps C and/or D see that they can get many more points by taking a couple hexes with discovery tiles, and also securing good resource Hex's. Perhaps C is the green race and wants nothing to do with it? The scenario above is quite unlikely and seems to have "the players will act like lemmings" parameters. But if they do, then yes, the above will probably happen.

In the pattern you propose, players A, B, and C all come out losing, and given what you propose, they should have known they would come out losing. Thus, they didn't make the best choice for them.
It is true that Eclipse, unlike most Eurogames I've played, rewards attacking weaker players, as opposed to encouraging you to go after the person in the lead to prevent him from winning. However, there are a few things that players could have done differently in your scenario:

Build up more. A shouldn't have attacked B when he did. If he knew that this would leave him weaker than C and thus be attacked by C, then he shouldn't have done it. Instead, he could have continued to build up, to a point where attacking B wouldn't weaken him when he does.
One way to do this is to rely on missiles instead of cannons. This tends to be very strong in the base game anyway. But when you win with missiles, you walk away as strong as you were when you went into the battle; rather than both sides taking casualties.
In games I've played, often attacking doesn't happen until the last several rounds. The beginning of the game is all about building up, and attacking only ancient ships that you are pretty sure you can beat without losses.
Teaming up. In the Rise of the Ancients expansion, you can officially team up, but even without that you can make alliances. If A was the strongest, then B, C, and D could have worked together to go after him. While you can't actually team up in a given battle, each player could attack a different one of A's territories, leaving him unable to defend them all.
Take chances. It doesn't require a "massive swing of luck" to defeat an opponent that has better odds than you do. Sometimes a better opponent may just have a 60% chance of winning. Even though you wouldn't generally attack someone in that position, there are times when taking that 40% chance of victory is your best hope at winning the game.
Similarly, on the other side, don't automatically attack someone just because the odds are in your favor. Even if you have a 75% chance of winning, often the penalty for losing will be enough that it's not worth the risk.
Rock-Paper-Scissors. This isn't a strategy to follow, but just a fact about the game. It is not always the case that just because A is stronger than B, and B is stronger than C, that A is stronger than C. A may be strong against things that B has, but weak against things that C has. This is especially true of things like missiles vs extra hulls. Consider this situation:
Player A has missiles and no extra hulls or cannons.
Player B has lots of cannons and a few extra hulls.
Player C has many hulls and a single cannon.
Here, A will usually defeat B. B will usually defeat C. And C will usually defeat A.
This shows that you can's simply order players in order of strongest to weakest.

Thanks for the reply.
In response to 1, I'm not sure how this helps but to delay the inevitable and shift whoever is the player A in the scenario listed?

I believe this to be a fix for the problem, unfortunately my gaming group are firmly against the idea, so can't count on that mechanic.

Odds are sometimes 60%, but chances of someone with 60% odds winning 3 battles is 21.6%, for the 40% person it is just 6.4%. So odds over time will converge on the favourable side.

This is true, but I'd consider this the exception rather than the rule. Most people tend to do balanced upgrading


text:
House Rules for divine intervention
Last several games of munchkin were won via "divine intervention". All agree that the win is less satisfying than normal.
Does any have good house rules to make the card less onerous?

I'd say that random wins out of the blue are definitely part of the nature of Munchkin.

obviously the solution to that is to play a cleric.

There are a couple of approaches that I can think of if it happens:

Don't worry about it - Shuffle up and play again. Random victories are part of the Munchkin experience. Or, if you'd rather play a deeper less swingy game, try out another game. Munchkin's fun, but maybe it's not perfect for you and your group. (I added this as a comment on the question, but thought it justified being part of an answer too.)
Remove it from the game - Pretty self-explanatory. If you consider it to be too powerful, just play without it.
Prevent wins with it - Modify it slightly. Allow clerics to gain a level, but say that it cannot be the winning level.

Hopefully one of these solutions will suit you.

Another possibility is to just create house rules that will go along these lines:

Remove the card from the deck before play, and explain new players why.
Extend the amount of levels needed to win ie. 15-20 (this will only delay, but may help prevent surprise wins.)

Personally, I'd keep it! Although it sucks to lose to it, just deal with it and maybe luck will sway in your favor next game.
I've lost to it before, but because of Munchkin's randomness, I've come back from level 5 to win while 4 other players at level 9 were fighting each other and preventing each other from killing the winning monster.


text:
Where to buy bicycle quality custom playing cards
I have the ideas (and graphics) for two decks of cards. Googling I only found two options for creating custom playing cards in the bicycle quality/style that seemed legit.
One: custom decks from the official bicycle website. Looks good to begin with, but I called the number for more info, and discovered that bicycle can not make only 1 or 2 decks.
Two: Zazzle makes playing cards! Again looks good to begin with, but after starting the process it quickly became apparent that zazzle only allows customization of the back. I need more than that.
The first deck will need custom backs, jokers, royals, and tuck case. The second will need custom backs, all faces, and tuck case.
So, anyone know of another legit company?
Note: I am a amateur magician, and for the cards to be of use they must have the feel of bicycle cards.

Not a direct answer, but: on Kickstarter there are literally dozens of projects for custom decks many of them use Bicycle cards (Here a random one: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/619318741/e8-garden-deck-bicycle-playing-cards?ref=live). You could try contacting the creators and ask where they have them made.

You could also check out Customized Playing Cards I had them make me a custom card game that came out amazingly. The paper quality they used was 310 GSM which is what bicycle playing cards uses. Honestly the customer service alone will make me be a repeat customer. There was a small hiccup in the very beginning but it was quickly resolved.

There are several that do small print runs. (I am sure there are many more.)But, for Bicycle quality cards, you would likely need to use Bicycle as your source.

ArtsCow
Printstudio
theGameCrafter
QPC

Have you seen the product of these sites yourself? I need the deck to have the quality and feel of a bicycle deck, unlike the cheap decks promotional and games often use.

+1 for Artscow. Though I can't vouch for the quality personally, I understand they're pretty good. May be worth a try at least.

I cannot vouch for the quality of any of these companies.


text:
Dimir Doppelganger becoming Lazav, Dimir Mastermind
I have a few clarification questions regarding what happens after I use the activated ability of Dimir Doppelganger to target a Lazav, Dimir Mastermind that's sitting in a graveyard. For simplicity, I assume that the only card in play before the ability resolves is the Dimir Doppelganger, which has never used it's ability before.
Firstly, am I correct in saying that the card I have on the battlefield after resolution, in effect, has the name Lazav, Dimir Mastermind, is of the type Legendary Creature - Shapeshifter, and has card text which reads:

Hexproof
Whenever a creature card is put into an opponent's graveyard from anywhere, you may have Lazav, Dimir Mastermind become a copy of that card except its name is still Lazav, Dimir Mastermind, it's legendary in addition to its other types, and it gains hexproof and this ability.
1{U}{B}: Exile target creature card from a graveyard. Lazav, Dimir Mastermind becomes a copy of that card and gains this ability.

Assuming this is correct, and I use the activated ability again to target another creature in a graveyard -- let's say Grizzly Bears -- then the card I have in play is now named Grizzly Bears, of type Creature - Bear and has only the activated ability of the original doppelganger (losing hexproof and the triggered ability of Lazav.)
And finally, if I instead choose to use the triggered ability my doppel-Lazav in response to a creature entering an opponent's graveyard -- we can assume it's Grizzly Bears again -- then my card now named Lazav, Dimir Mastermind, of type Legendary Creature - Bear and reads:

Hexproof
Whenever a creature card is put into an opponent's graveyard from anywhere, you may have Lazav, Dimir Mastermind become a copy of that card except its name is still Lazav, Dimir Mastermind, it's legendary in addition to its other types, and it gains hexproof and this ability.

Assuming your grizzly bear scenarios are either/or (and you're not doing one after another)...
You are correct. The card will come back as either a Lazav copy or a Doppleganger copy and it depends entirely on which card's copy ability you use.
It's the ability itself (of either lazav or the doppleganger) that causes the copy to retain the previous abilities, because it uses the wording: "gains this ability."

Thanks for the clarification on 2: response was probably the wrong word in that last paragraph. I simply meant that that if I chose to use the triggered ability on the stack and let Lazav become a copy of Grizzly Bears after the bears die.

@cljacobs I've been editing my answer because I believe I misred the question the first time.  The answer I had before assumed that the first scenario was using the Lazahv ability and the last one was using the doppleganger ability


text:
Can you remove a 'Personal Workshop' 'Power Counter' during an encounter with ICE?
Personal Workshop

When your turn begins, remove 1 power counter from a hosted card.
  When there are no power counters left on a hosted card, install it, ignoring all costs.
[Click]: Host a program or a piece of hardware from your grip on Personal Workshop and place power counters on it equal to its install cost.
1 [credit]: Remove 1 power counter from a hosted card.

I am the Runner.
I have nothing but Personal Workshop installed.
I have 20 [credits].
I have 1 of each icebreaker hosted on Personal Workshop with a variable amount of power counters on them.
I start a run.
The Corp rezzes an ICE of type X.
I pay Y [credits] to remove all the remaining Y [power counters] from icebreaker Z.
Icebreaker Z is now installed per the last listed ability on Personal Workshop.

1 [credit] : Remove 1 [power counter] from a hosted card.

I can continue my run, but now with the icebreaker I need installed.

Is this correct?

This is actually a way that Personal Workshop was used a lot. People would Stimhack for the 9 credits and spend at least part of them on workshop installs, particularly in Haley, to get her from hand install off mid run (a lot of Egrets installed that way), though these installs in Haley were also done on corp turn. This is no longer viable though, due to Personal Workshop rotating.

Yes, Personal Workshop allows you to install programs/hardware during a run. You have already paid the click to host them though, so all its really doing is allowing you to defer payment until they are needed.
This does allow you to install a Femme Fatale after the corp rezzes and Ice, targeting that Ice for the special bypass, and then bypass the Ice as you encounter it that turn. Or to install a parasite on an Ice after its rezzed, and then immediately lower its Strength to 0 so it gets trashed using Wyrm/Datasuckers when you encounter it.


text:
How to play Ring of Valkas?
My understanding is that artifacts and equipment are permanents. When playing the Ring of Valkas, it states that at the beginning of every upkeep you can add a +1/+1 counter to equipped creature. My confusion is the ability to equip the creature says to "Equip only as a sorcery".
My Understanding is sorcery only lasts until the end of the turn. With that said, how would the creature be equipped at the start of your upkeep to receive the +1/+1 counter? Also would the creature lose the +1/+1 counter at the end of your turn?
EDIT:
Actually I think I may have read the sorcery definition incorrectly which is what is confusing my understanding.

You can only equip the Ring of Valkas as a sorcery (so, only during one of your main phases) but once it is equipped, the Ring stays on the equipped creature until it is moved or the creature dies. So, you put it on your creature this turn and it starts getting counters on it during your next upkeep, assuming it's still alive.
Edit: Looks like I missed part of the question. Any +1/+1 counters remain on the creature, even if you move the Ring to a different creature, or the ring is destroyed.

Would the ring stay on the battlefield if the creature dies? Are you also saying I can move the equipment to another creature? If I move the Ring, would the creature lose all the accumulated +1/+1 counter it received?

Yes. If the creature dies, the Equipment stays on the battlefield and can be equipped to another creature you control by paying the Equip cost again.

@Damainman remember also that the creature does not need to die to move the equipment to a different creature. You can pay the equip cost and move the equipment as many times as you want, providing you can pay the cost and you have a valid target

My Understanding is sorcery only lasts until the end of the turn.

That is not correct. If something is a sorcery, or is annotated with the text "Play/Activate [this] as a sorcery" or something similar, that simply means that you can only do it during your main phase (either one), when the stack is empty. It doesn't imply anything about how long the effect lasts.
Anything that lasts only until the end of turn will say so specifically. That goes for counters as well: they stay on the permanent for the rest of the game unless something specifically removes them (or the permanent leaves the battlefield).

Normally, when you get priority, you are given permission to do a number of things, including:

You may cast an instant spell.
You may cast an non-instant spell if it's your main phase and the stack is empty.
You may activate an ability.

That instruction overrides the above permission. To activate an ability only as a sorcery means you are subject to the same restrictions as a sorcery (or any non-instant spell, for that matter):

You may use Equip if it's your main phase and the stack is empty.

No, the counter isn't removed at the end of the turn or if the equipment is detached. You could end up with many counters.


text:
Sacrificing to regenerate from Supreme Verdict
I have Varolz, the Scar-Striped out along with a few minor creatures. My opponent on his turn casts Supreme Verdict. Before the Verdict resolves can I use Varolz's regenerate ability by sacrificing one of my lesser creatures? Will my Troll survive the Verdict?

Please accept answers to your questions (by checking the mark next to the answer) to provide closure. Or if no answer is acceptable, please state why.

Sure you can.
With Supreme Verdict on the stack, you respond by activating Varolz's regenerate ability.  This resolves.
Supreme Verdict now resolves, destroying all creatures. Varolz's regeneration shield protects him, and he becomes tapped and survives the Verdict.
Obligatory comp rules citation:

614.8. Regeneration is a destruction-replacement effect. The word "instead" doesn't appear on the card but is implicit in the definition
  of regeneration. "Regenerate [permanent]" means "The next time
  [permanent] would be destroyed this turn, instead remove all damage
  marked on it and tap it. If it's an attacking or blocking creature,
  remove it from combat." Abilities that trigger from damage being dealt
  still trigger even if the permanent regenerates. See rule 701.12.

This is all pretty basic stuff of course.  Perhaps some confusion arises from the fact that Supreme Verdict "can't be countered".  This just means that it counterspells etc won't work on it, not that there is no possible means of escaping the Verdict's destructive effect.

Not only can you, but it's to your advantage. If instead of using supreme verdict, they used Righteous Fury, he wouldn't gain the life for your troll, and also wouldn't gain that life for the sucker you sac'd either.

thank you very much for the answers. While I'v been playing magic for about 3 years my circle of friends and I have never used regeneration abilities till very recently. Good stuff to know.


text:
Bridge video lessons
Are there any good introductory bridge video lessons/courses?

This appears to be off-topic because it is not a question. It is a recommendation in disguise and has no answer per say.

Still a recommendation question. I am sorry but unless you have a question about a specific rule in bridge that is answerable with citation, it is not the kind of question that fits this particular Q&A format. Perhaps you would have better luck in a forum somewhere where suggestions and discussions can take place.

@Pow-Ian What about this question? I presume that according to such logic - it is not right kind of question also, is it?

I would agree; that question is also off topic. Being as it is two years old I don't know why it was not flagged.

Please reffer to the help pages for what is on topic

@Pow-Ian Maybe question structure/format is not appropriate, but it is certainly on topic (Bridge is explicitly mentioned at that link).

Not a video, but worth the time: http://www.acbl.org/learn/ltpb.html

@Aryabhata Thanks, I already used it - it is really good one. I am looking for video, because I want to show it to other peoples, in order to spark initial interest.

"Join us for Bridge with Shaw Taylor": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9GQGfdlNYyM
3 hours in length. Starts from very beginning, assumes no prior Bridge knowledge, and finishes with "Blackwood" small slam game.

"Learn How to Play "Contract Bridge" the Card Game": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yzS_26fICk
Series of videos, starts from very beginning.

"Learn Bridge" by Andrew Robson: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGw5trRnIj8

"Introduction to Bridge": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0w6ZKwgErQ

Australian Bridge Federation brings you an introduction to the game of Bridge presented by one of Australia's premier Bridge teachers Joan Butts.


text:
Storage for Eldritch Horror
Is there an optimal strategy for storing Eldritch Horror cards and tokens so that game play is facilitated.
I am not looking for answers that including "zip bags" and other things to keep the game element safer while is storage. Although, a strategy that works well for both cases will clearly be superior to one that only works for game play.
I am not limiting this to commercial solutions. I am quiet happy to build your custom made solution if you release the specification/plans of course!  Although, it it requires a 3D printer, more power to you.

Have you looked into foam core?
There

are

a lot

of solutions

available

on BGG

This isn't what you want to hear, but I actually built a wooden box for this because there was nothing on the market I could find that would do the job.
It wasn't massively complex - create partitions that could hold decks of cards on their sides, and squarer partitions for counters, dice and the like. There's an elastic strap in the lid for the board.
That way you can open the box, set out the board and everything you need is accessible right away.
The only commercial thing I can think of that might help is a brochure storage rack, the sort you see in shops and libraries. But the compartments are probably too large to be ideal. Here's a selection grabbed at random from Google:
http://www.staples.com/Literature-Holders-Desktop/cat_CL142157
A part of me thinks FFG is deliberately putting out games with baked-in storage problems just so they can sell us custom boxes further down the line. X-Wing, I'm looking at you.

+1, who said anything about me not building my own thanks to your super plans!!! ^_~  Question edited.

Cheaper solution? Plano tacklebox with adjustable partitions. It isn't hard to find the right size to fit all the components.

@generalcrispy I've never found one with the right sized slots for small card decks that you can draw right out of the box. If you can tell me where I can get them, I'm all ears.

Walmart has plenty of them, and a good selection in the sporting good section. I'd recommend the Pro-latch 1715 or models like it.

@generalcrispy Being in the UK, I lack access to a Walmart. But hopefully your comment will point others in the right direction. Curse your transatlantic access to a wider range of hardware storage products! ;)

I'll say. You might be able to find them on Amazon.

authors: Pråvèéñ Dâñgî


text:
"Well" building special function clarification
Well card text:

During the producer phase, if the owner of a well produces at least 2
  goods, he draws an additional card from the card supply, adding it to
  his hand. It matters not whether he is the producer or not.

Let's say i have two production buildings.
The first is busy (one card face down on it), second one is empty.
Producer phase starts, i'm not the producer, so i produce an additional good on
my second building.
So I produced one good at this specific phase and I'm currently producing two goods in total as I have 2 busy production buildings at the end of the phase.
Question: should I draw an additonal card in this case?

Edit:
Another way to formulate the question would be:
Which one of this rewritten rule corresponds to the rule? :

During the producer phase, if the owner of a well produces at least 2 new goods, he draws an additional card from the card supply, adding it to his hand.
During the producer phase, if the total number of goods lying on production buildings is at least 2, he draws an additional card from the card supply, adding it to his hand.

No, you do not draw an extra card.
The rules say the following under the Producer role:

If a player has no empty production buildings, he produces no goods in this round.

Consequently it's established that the production of a good is dependent on the availability of a building to do so. If you only have one production building free then you can only produce at most one good, and so you do not qualify for the Well bonus.

In answer to the edited part of the question:
The correct interpretation of the rule is rule 1 - i.e. the goods must be new.
I think your misunderstanding is shown by the following statement "I'm currently producing two goods in total". This is not correct - you have produced one good already, and in the current phase you are producing one new good.
Note that to produce two goods in a single Producer phase you must either be the Producer, or have an Aquaduct built.

I do think too that you do not draw an extra card but I am not completely convinced by the explanation.
Maybe it's just my english because "during" + "produce" suggest that the 2 products have to be produced at that specific phase (and not spread on multiple phases), is that right?

@kraymer Yes, you're right - "During the producer phase" implies that the following events have to happen within a single producer phase (i.e. the production of at least two goods). The goods have to be new, cards already on top of production buildings have already been produced (i.e. they represent goods, not the production of goods).

Thanks, I mistakenly played with rule 2 yesterday and the Well was a hell of a card :D


text:
Clarifying combat damage to player with abilities like Bloodthirst and Cipher
For cards like Vampire Outcasts or Shadow Slice, does Bloodthirst/Cipher only activate when combat damage is dealt directly to a player? For example, if an opponent blocks my attacking creature then the combat damage is dealt to the creature and not the "player", correct?
Should I be thinking in terms of since the player and the creature are separate then any combat damage dealt to a creature is not the same as a combat damage dealt to the player?

A player and his or her creatures are separate things. Dealing combat damage to a creature does not count as dealing combat damage to that creature's controller, and vice versa. Also, regarding your last sentence, a player never deals damage to anything, only sources controlled by that player, such as spells and creatures.

Thank you for the clarification. I have been playing Bloodthirst incorrectly and activating it when combat damage was dealt to a creature belonging to an opponent. Wasn't sure if it had to be dealt directly to the player.


text:
Do cards that say "Each player..." still affect players with Shroud?
I have a True Believer out which gives me shroud. My opponent has an enchantment that says that each player must sacrifice whenever he sacrifices a card. Does the enchantment target me, thus allowing me to avoid the effect, or does the enchantment still have its effect despite me having shroud?

"Shroud" means "This permanent or player can't be the target of spells or abilities."
Unless the ability specifically uses the word target, it is not affected by shroud.
I'm not sure which enchantment you are talking about, but if it says each player, like Grave Pact, then it is not affected by shroud. If it says target opponent or target player, then it is affected by shroud.
Note that there is a subtype of Enchantment, Curse, which have the line Enchant Player. These Enchantment Aura spells do target a player when they are on the stack, so they are affected by shroud.

If a True Believer is cast subsequently to a player being enchanted by a Curse, that wouldn't cause the Curse to fall off, am I right? Or am I confused?

@thesunneversets Auras target something only when the spell is on the stack. If a Zur the Enchanter, for example, puts the Curse on the battlefield, it will not be affected by Shroud. see CR 303.4a and 303.4f

Good, that's what I thought.  I saw some potential for confusion in "...and are attached to player, so they are affected by Shroud".  Being attached to a player doesn't actually interact very much with Shroud at all, except insofar as usually things become attached via targeting (?)

@thesunneversets That's a good point and I shall reword my answer.

@thesunneversets yes, as per CR303.4a things are attached via targeting.

I would further clairify it with, "when these Enchantment Auras are spells"

or "when the enchantments are being cast" or something. In any case I think it would be a useful clarification.

I thought at first the word "spells" would be enough, but I added the caveat "when they are on the stack" so hopefully that's clear enough.

If you have True Believer out, you have shroud. You cannot be the target of spells or abilities.
If a spell like Grave Pact comes along, you still must sacrifice, because you are not a target. As an analogy, Mist Leopard still dies to Day of Judgment.
If a spell like Curse of Bloodletting comes along, you're safe because the Aura targets you by definition (CR303.4a), but you are an illegal target. You're also safe from Lightning Bolt and its ilk.


text:
When Governor and Alchemy cards are in same game, how does gaining a card for trashed card work?
In Alchemy, the rules for what kinds of cards can replace a trashed card are governed by the following, somewhat ambiguous wording:

Adding coins to a cost doesn't affect [potion] being in the cost or
  not. If [potion] was in the cost, it still is; if it wasn't, it still
  isn't.

The rules then present an example with Remodel card. However, the Remodel card says:

Gain a card costing up to two more . . .

The Governor card wording is:

Gain a card costing exactly one (or two [if you're the player playing
  the card]) more.

So, for the player who played the Governor card, it is clear from the remodel example that a card costing exactly 2 coins must be replaced by a card costing exactly 4 coins with no potion.
However, what about a card costing exactly 2 coins and a potion? If trashed, must it be replaced with a card costing exactly 4 coins and a potion? Or could it also be replaced by a card costing exactly 4 coins (but with no potion)?

@JHaasie77's answer is spot on, I just want to add another way to think about it that grew too long for a comment.
Costs with potions are like complex numbers, with the potion cost corresponding to the imaginary part. The now-defunct Isotropic online Dominion server handled this quite nicely using p to designate potions. If you played 3 Coppers and 2 Potions, Isotropic would report the amount of money you have to spend as 3+2p (or something like that).
Using this analogy, University costs 2+p, and Governoring a University calls for adding exactly 1 (or 2 if you're the player playing the card) to the cost. Thus the card you gain from trashing a University to a Governor must be exactly 2+p+1 = 3+p (or if you played the Governor, 2+p+2 = 4+p).
The analogy isn't perfect for cards like Remodel specifying "costing up to x more", but it's workable. The "up to" applies to both coin part and to potion part. Remodeling a University lets you gain a card costing up to 2+p+2 = 4+p, so up to 4 in coin cost, and up to 1 in potion cost.

I thought "up to" still doesn't affect the Potion cost. The example from the rules cited in the question even points this out. "Up to 2 (coins) more than 2+p" means up to 4 coins, also (still) exactly 1 potion. Am I reading the example wrong?

@scenia My answer is correct. The OP's question quotes both Remodel ("up to") and Governor ("exactly") cards. The Dominion Alchemy Rules at the top of page 4 walk through a Remodel example: (continued...)

(...continued) from rulebook: "If a player uses Remodel to trash a card costing 2p, he could gain a card costing 4p or 4 as those are both 'up to' 4p."

Should have looked up the entire example after all... i guess my memory is just bad. Thanks for clearing it up :)

It must have a potion. The rule states that any time any cost is increased, the potion quantifier stays. Since the card you are trashing has one potion in the cost, the card you pick up also has to have one potion in its cost. For more strategy with this card (albeit not help with this particular question!) check this out.

'Up to' means you can exchange a card with potion in the cost into a card that does or does not not have a potion in the cost, but you can not remodel a card with no potion in the cost into one that does.  Remodel says "up to".  You may Remodel a Golem into a Gold, or Remodel an Apothecary into a Golem.
If the card says "exactly" like Governor, the card to be gained has to have the same number of potions in the cost, and the specified cost in coins.  If you play Governor, you can trash University, and the only possible card you can get in exchange is Golem, as it's the only card that costs exactly 2 more than University.

Every card has two costs - its cost in coins, and its cost in potions. The total cost is the combination of the two. So cards like Governor that tell you to trash a card for a card costing "exactly 2 more" want the cost in coins to go up by two, and the cost in potions to be the same. Cards that talk about "up to" a certain cost may or may not include potions - Gold ($6) and Golem ($4+P) both cost less than Possession ($6+P), but neither costs more or less than the other. And if you trash a potion-cost card to something like Salvager or Forge, which explicitly mention "cost in coins", the potion effectively disappears.
So in your case, if you Governor a Scrying Pool ($2+P) you can get a Golem, but not a Scout ($4), but if you Remodeled it you could.


text:
Can the Herald put itself on top of your draw deck?
Herald from Dominion Guilds says that you can over pay for it and if you do, you may put X Action cards from your discard on top of your deck, where X is the amount you overpaid.
Can you place Herald on top of your deck if you overpay?
(Note: This question comes down to a matter of timing. Does the "when you buy this" clause occur before or after you place Hearld in the discard pile)

No, Herald cannot put itself on top of the deck by overpaying.
From the designer, Donald X. Vaccarino on BGG.

Q: OK, so when the "when buy" effect kicks in, is the herald you just bought in the discard pile yet? Or would it have to be a "when gain" like Inn to do that? i.e., can you pay 5 to buy a herald and put it on top?
A: When-buy, which includes overpay, triggers before gaining, so you can't buy a Herald and use its overpay to put that very Herald on top of your deck.


text:
What are all the promo cards available for Dominion?
What are all the promo cards available for Dominion? I found Black Market, Envoy, Walled Village, Governor, and Stash on the Board Game Geek Store.  Are there more?
Some of the promo cards are out of stock. Are they limited edition cards?  Or do they come in and out of stock periodically?  Are they available anywhere else?

They actually added another promo card: Prince (June 2014).  The wiki contains a list of all of the promo cards.

Does this answer your question? How many Dominion sets are there?

According to "Hans im Glück", which is the publisher of Dominion in Germany, there are only those five promo cards available. At the moment they sell the german version of the stash (Geldversteck) and the Governor (Gouverneur) in their online store http://www.cundco.de.
They also say that as soon as they are out of stock, they wont sell any new cards.
There is a german Dominion big box available at amazon.de which contains all promo cards. The description of the Dominion big box at amazon.com, however, says

Additionally it contains promo card sets which may vary

So this box will most propably not contain all of the promo cards.

A new promotional card was released at Origins 2014 and it is now available in the Board Game Geek Store.  It is the Prince card.
This is in addition to the other promo cards that have already been mentioned: Black Market, Envoy, Governor, Stash, and Walled Village.

In addition Summon was released in 2015: https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgameexpansion/182822/dominion-summon-promo-card

Those are all of the promos, and some of them were available when you bought whichever expansion was coming out at the time, or at events - apparently some of the TableTop Day store promotional packs included a few Dominion promos - but generally the BGG store is the place to get them all.


text:
Can Band of Misfits be played as a reaction card?
Band of Misfits is an imitation action card from Dark Ages expansion:

Suppose there are also reaction cards in the Supply, such as Moat or Beggar:

For simplicity, I will refer to the player who has Band of Misfits in their hand as myself.

Can I play Band of Misfits as a reaction card when I am being attacked? The card says, "Play ...", which seems to mean that it can only be activated on my turn.
If I can play it as a reaction card, does it mean that it is still a Moat when my turn really comes?

No, you can't play it as a reaction card. Only cards labeled "Reaction" on the bottom can be played as reactions. Band of Misfits just says Action, so it may only be played during your turn.
When you do play it during your turn, if Moat is in the supply, you can certainly play it as a Moat, to get +2 Cards. But it doesn't copy another card until you actually play it, and you can't play it except as an action during your own turn, so you can't use it to get the protection from attack that Moat offers. When someone else plays an attack card, you have no opportunity to play an action card, so you can't play Band of Misfits then.

Band of Misfits only "becomes" another card once it is played. When it's in your hand, it only has the Action type and not the Reaction type, since it hasn't been played yet, so it can't be used to react to something.
Once it's in play, it is a copy of the card you choose until it leaves play, so you could, for example, play it as an Urchin, then play another Attack card and trash the BoM to gain a Mercenary. Or if there were some magical way to make Goons cost less than BoM (no official card does), then you could play BoM as Goons and then gain 1 VP token each time you bought a card.


text:
When to discard with Oasis
When do you discard? Immediately after drawing, and before playing more actions? Or can you start/continue a chain of actions, which might include drawing more cards, and then discard after? I understand that all unused cards get discarded, so doing so at the end of the turn would negate Oasis's penalty, but the card is curiously vague about when this discard occurs.
Oasis:

I'm guessing that by "before starting your action phase" you meant "before playing another action card." Note that "+1 Action" means "add one to the number of remaining actions you have for the turn". It does NOT mean "play another action."

@GendoIkari Yes, sorry, that's what I meant. Will edit

You do everything on the card in the order it says:

Draw one card.
Add one to the number of remaining actions you have for the turn.
Add one coin to the amount you have to spend this turn.
Discard a card.

And then you can move on to other Actions or your Buy phase. So you'll discard a card before you play any other actions. (But it's during your Action phase, of course - it has to be since you played Oasis!)

Do note that cards may have effects that don't happen when you play the card, but rather when you do something else (i.e. a Reaction's reveal effect, a card's on-gain effect, or a card's on-trash effect).

You start your turn with a "bank" of 1 Action, 1 Buy and 0 Coins. During your Action phase, you may spend 1 Action to play one Action card from your hand. If you do, then you do everything that the card says on it, in order, to the best of your ability.
If the card says "+(n) Card(s)", then you immediately draw that many cards from your draw pile. If you need to draw a card, and your draw pile is empty, then you shuffle your discards to form a new draw pile and continue drawing. If your discards are also empty, then you don't get to draw any more cards.
If the card says "+(n) Action(s)", "+(n) Buy(s)", or "+(n) Coin(s)", you add that many Actions, Buys or Coins to your "bank".
Anything else the card says, you apply that effect immediately. In the case of Oasis, that means that after drawing a card and adding one to each of your Action and Coin banks, you discard a card (if you have any cards left in hand). You may then play another Action card from your hand, if you have one.
This becomes very important when you're resolving cards via something like Throne Room. For example:

Spend an Action to play a Throne Room
Select Oasis to play twice

(First play of Oasis) Draw a card
(First play of Oasis) Add one Action to your bank
(First play of Oasis) Add one Coin to your bank
(First play of Oasis) Discard a card
(Second play of Oasis) Draw a card
(Second play of Oasis) Add one Action to your bank
(Second play of Oasis) Add one Coin to your bank
(Second play of Oasis) Discard a card

At this point, you now have at least two Actions left (almost as though you'd played a Village), plus two extra coins to spend in your Buy phase, and you've cycled two cards in your hand. If you have another Action card in your hand, you may spend one of your Actions to play it.


text:
Dominion Herald's card is not an action, then what?
After you look at the top card to see if it's an action, and seeing that it is NOT an action, do you discard it or put it back? Surprisingly this is never clarified in the Guilds rule book or on the card!

The card is put back on top.
From the original rule book:

“Reveal” – when a player reveals a card, he shows a card to all players and
  then returns it to wherever it came from (unless instructed specifically to
  put it elsewhere). If the player is required to reveal cards from the top of
  his Deck, and he does not have enough cards, he shuffles in order to
  reveal the required number of cards.

Thanks for pointing that out! I knew it had to be somewhere!


text:
How are Swindler's effects resolved in a multiplayer game?
I play Swindler in a 3-player game.  Does each player reveal, trash, and gain in turn order, or all reveal, then trash and gain in turn order?
I was thinking that it would matter in the following situation: the player to my left reveals and trashes a Province, so I give him another Province.  This triggers the Fool's Gold in the hand of the next player in turn order.  At this point, would he have already revealed the top card for Swindler, or, since he comes after the player who revealed the Province, is he able to use his Fool's Gold to put a gold on top in time for Swindler to hit it?

Good question, awful username.

Thanks...?  I assume you understand my username and still think it's awful, but I'll have you know many think my username is at least "okay."

I like both the question and your username. :)

@C0D3BR34K3R, I'm just ribbing you.  Usernames don't really matter anyhow, and what I think of your username doesn't matter either.

Yes.  If order matters, then resolve in turn order.
From Intrigue Rulebook:

Swindler - A player with no cards left in his Deck shuffles first; a
  player who still has no cards does not trash a card or gain a card. If
  the order matters (such as when piles are running low), resolve
  Swindler in turn order starting with the player to your left. Gained
  cards go to discard piles. If a player trashes a 0-cost card such as
  Copper, you may choose to give him Curse (if there are any left). You
  can give a player another copy of the same card he trashed. The gained
  cards have to be ones from the Supply, and you have to pick a card
  that's left if you can (you cannot pick an empty pile). If there are
  no cards in the Supply with the same cost as a given player's trashed
  card, no card is gained by that player. A player who Moats this does
  not reveal a card from his deck, and so neither trashes a card nor
  gains a card.

If in doubt or unable to determine if turn order matters, I'd suggest using turn order.

Since the question is of the form 'does X happen or does Y happen', maybe you could be a little more explicit about which of the answers applies in the specific scenario given?  'Yes' seems kind of vague here, and while I think I understand what you mean I'm still not 100% sure...

This is an interesting Q&A, but a problem comes up when you don't know "if the order matters," until you reveal everyone's top card. Would you still believe that the proper handling of this situation is to have the Fool's Gold player put a Gold on the top of their Deck (to be Swindlec) if the player to their right revealed a Province (1x left on the supply) and they revealed a Duchy (or other VP card). Does the added information change your answer?

Each player reveals, trashes, and gains in turn order. The relevant text of Swindler is:

Each other player trashes the top card of his deck and gains a card with the same cost that you choose.

In Dominion, you do each instruction in order. The convention is that each instruction is one sentence. For Swindler, the instruction is "trash and gain." Having multiple parts of a single instruction is common in Dominion. For instance, the Bureaucrat uses the same construction. In resolving Bureaucrat, the first player must reveal a Victory card and put it on top of their deck, then the second player does both of those things, then the third.
If Swindler wanted everyone to trash, and then everyone to gain, it would have to be written as two separate sentences, and it would be a really messy wording to make sure that the cost of the gained card matches the cost of the card trashed from that player's deck.

The Fool's Gold reveal is optional, but yes, the order is:
Play Swindler.  Resolve any cards that trigger on playing an attack. (Go in order around the table, each player revealing and resolving eligible cards until they are done)
For each player, reveal and trash that card.  Resolve anything that triggers from that trashing (gaining a gold from Tunnel, returning Fortress to hand, discarding Market Square, etc), and resolve anything that triggers from that (like revealing a Watchtower to put that Tunnel Gold on top)  Then choose the card to gain.  Then anything that triggers off of that gain is resolved, (like gaining another card from Border Village).
Then, go onto the next player.
I'm not quite sure who gets to use their Fool's Gold first, if there are not enough Golds.  I think you would start with the player who played the Swindler, and then go around, starting with them.
But in your question; if one has not yet been swindled, trashing the Fool's Gold will result in the gained Gold being swindled.


text:
Where can I find the offical rules to the Dominion promo cards
I have the Black Market, Envoy, Walled Village, Governor, and Stash promotional cards for Dominion. They didn't come with any rules. Where can I get the official rules from Rio Grande Games?

http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Promo. This page links to all promo cards, each page quotes the official FAQs. Note that there are no special "rules" associated with the promo cards, in general what you need to know to play them is on the card text. But there are official FAQs/clarifications, like there are for every card. They should have come on a sheet with the cards themselves.


text:
How does infect step of epidemic interact with mutation?
As the current player pulled an epidemic card, we do the following steps: increase, infect, and intensify.

Infect: Draw the bottom card from the deck and put three cubes in that city.  Discard that card.

In this case however the bottom card that was drawn was a mutation card.

If the purple disease is not eradicated, draw a card from the bottom of the deck. Place 1 purple disease cube (only) on this city.

How do you proceed in this situation?  Does the effect of the epidemic make it so you place three purple cubes in the location drawn for the mutation location?  Does the phrase "1 purple disease cube (only)..." supercede the effect of the epidemic?  Or is there some other interpretation?

I don't see how this would happen.  Did you correctly put the mutation cards into the discard pile when doing the initial game setup?

@bwarner You are absolutely correct.  That must be what happened.  There is a line in the rulebook that reads "Setup: ... Put the 2 mutation cards in the Infection Discard Pile (do not shuffle them into the Infection Deck)."  If you would kindly add that as an answer I will be happy to accept it to give credit where credit is due.  It stands to reason that as the mutation cards originate from the discard, they are never able to be on the bottom of the deck as they will constantly be returned only to the top of the deck (along with the rest of the discard) after epidemics.

This situation should never occur.  The mutation cards are put into the Infection Discard Pile at the beginning of the game.  So they aren't even in the deck until after the first Epidemic, and at that time they will be put on the top of the deck with the rest of the discard pile.  The only way for them to be on the bottom is to draw the entire Infection deck without hitting an Epidemic, which shouldn't be possible (at least without fan-based rules.

Feel free to cannibalize my post below.  Otherwise, I'll leave it there as it is for future SE members to see the screengrab of the rules.

--putting this here as a potential template for bwarner's answer to reduce required effort on his part.  I encourage bwarner to simply copy/paste my answer or reuse the image file/transcription so I may accept his answer instead.--
According to the Pandemic: On The Brink rulebook, page 4

Setup
Put the 12 purple disease cubes near the other cubes as a supply.  Put the purple Discovered Cure Indicator and curemarker on the board.  Put the 2 Mutation cards in the Infection Discard Pile (do not shuffle them into the Infection Deck).

With the mutation cards starting in the discard pile, it follows that they do not start on the bottom of the deck.  Since those cards in the discard pile only ever get placed back on the top of the deck, it is thus impossible for the bottom card of the deck to ever be a mutation card (barring some house-rule variant allowing either mutation cards to start mixed in the deck, be mixed in later, or allowing the entire deck to be used inbetween epidemics).
As a result, the question of what to do when faced with the original question of how to proceed in the situation of drawing a mutation card during the infect step of an epidemic is moot as it is an impossible scenario.

"barring... the entire deck to be used inbetween epidemics" - I started doing some calculations around whether this was possible or not, but it got quite involved!  There are complications from the mutation event cards which draw from the bottom of the infection deck, as well as the Resilient Population card.  I think if you're playing with the virulent
strain card "Rate Effect" then it could happen.


text:
dominion adventures, using tokens on duration piles
If a token from Dominion Adventures is placed on a duration pile, is the token applied only when you initially play (lay down) the duration card or both when you lay it down AND when you play the duration effects at the start of the next turn? The directions say "when a player... plays a card".  For duration cards, is the second use "playing" it again?
Makes a difference on whether I'd ever put a token on Hireling or not!

You only "play" the Duration once, on the turn when you, well, play it. The next turn it will just have an effect without you needing to play it.
So this means Durations don't work especially well with the +1 Card etc tokens. They'll still work okay, especially if your deck is reasonably big (so you don't often have Durations enduring over the reshuffle).

Thanks.  I thought that might be the case, but it was worth an ask.

Note that this is also why Durations in play from the previous turn don't count towards Conspirator's checking how many actions have been played. But they DO count towards Peddler checking how many cards are "in play."


text:
Can I choose difference house card without discard two power tokens?
I have an issues with my play group that When I use this card, Can I choose difference house card without discard two power tokens or discard only one if I have only one power token or dont discard any power token ?
There 's one player in my group understand that he can either choose to discard two power tokens or not and take "choose difference house card" effect. Is he right ?

I think the correct way to read this would be:

Discard 2 power tokens immediately
Discard Aeron Damphair
If able, choose a different house card from your hand.

Please note that step 2 can't be completed without step 1. Similarly step 3 can't be executed without steps 1 and 2.
This would mean that your friend is wrong as you have to discard 2 power tokens to even make it to step 3.
You must play a new house card if you have one in your hand and you've discarded your 2 power tokens and Aeron Damphair. The only time you shouldn't play a new house card is if there isn't one in your hand.
The 2 power tokens that need to be discarded also seem non-negotiable to me. If they don't have 2 power tokens to discard, they can't activate this card (unless another card says otherwise, but that's a little off topic).

I agree that the power tokens are a cost to using the optional ability. You either discard 2 power tokens to use the ability, or you don't. However, once you choose to use the ability, it's not optional to play out another House Card from your hand (as long as you're able to do so).

That seems logical enough to me. I'll edit my answer accordingly.

Thank you everyone so much. We have an issue with this because we don't use English as major language lol

@3ORZ You must discard 2 tokens to use this card. You must discard Aeron Damphair. You must play a new House Card if you have one in your hand.


text:
How can I use chess piece value to balance my homemade TCG?
I want to make use of the chess piece value to make 2 decks equally strong and Powerful. I have read the full article on Wikipedia but it didn't helped at all. Can one of you suggest a way to use it to balance a deck?

How does your TCG relate to chess? Why do you think that the piece values might be relevant?

https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/43744/how-can-i-determine-whether-two-decks-are-equally-strong/43745#43745. I asked this question

It probably would have helped to mention that in the question.

When Glorfindel linked you to the Chess piece relative value article, he was providing an example of how you can compare relative strengths in very simple situations.
In the case of your game, you would need to:

Pick a card which is fairly simple, and whose value is preferably quite small.
Give that card a value of 1.
Compare every other card to that card, and give them values based on their relative strength.
Use those values to calculate the total value of each deck, and compare those to each other.

For example, if you have a card that says "Do 1 damage", then you might decide that it's your value 1 card. Then a card that says "Do 2 damage" has a value of 2. A card that says "Flip a coin. If it's heads, do 2 damage" might have a value of 1, because on average it does a point of damage.
However, here's the nasty part - if steps 3 and 4 are easy to do, and can be done consistently, then your game will not be very fun. So such value calculations can only ever be approximate, and you will want to use them to get starting points to create what you think might be balanced decks, and then playtest those decks to see how accurate you are. Because, for example:

Players usually prefer safe bets to risky ones, so the "flip a coin" card will not be considered of equal value to the "do 1 damage" one, even though on average they're the same. But, if you need to deal 2 points of damage to your opponent to win otherwise they will win on their turn, then the "flip a coin" card has a 50% chance of letting you win while the "do 1 damage" card has 0%.
A creature with 1 strength is probably better, most of the time, than a card that does a single damage. But how much better? Does it matter how long the creature is likely to stay in play?
How do you value a rock-paper-scissors set of cards? The value of one is dependent on whether your opponent has the one it beats, or the one that beats it.
The valuation completely ignores things like card combos. Two cards can be completely useless on their own but game changing together, so how to value that?

Hence - do something quick and simple that you can then verify with actual playtesting. Anything else is too much effort for too little reward.


text:
Dominion: ghost plus pixie
Ghost card says to play an action twice. The pixie is an action that allows you to trash it when you play it. What happens if I ghost a pixie? If I trash pixie the first time, do I still play it the second time?

Welcome. I haven't played Dominion - is this description of the sequence adequate for a casual player to understand the context of your question? Also, please put your question in the title for so that searches work properly.

Related but different.. In the linked question, the result is different because Feast gaining a card is not dependent upon it being trashed.

The golden rule in Dominion is follow the card instructions as much as possible. You can play Pixie a second time, even if it has been moved, e.g., moved to the trash. However, you may not be able to execute some conditional effects, e.g., trash the card. So here is how a Throne Room/Pixie or Ghost/Pixie plays:

Play Throne Room; choose an action card.
Play Pixie once.

+1 Card, +1 Action
Discard top boon (Boon1).
Trash Pixie; receive Boon1 twice.

Play Pixie a second time. Note that Pixie is now in the trash.

+1 Card, +1 Action
Discard top boon (Boon2)
Pixie cannot be trashed, so you cannot receive Boon2, neither once nor twice.

Same goes with Ghost and any similar card (e.g., King's Court from Dominion: Prosperity, Royal Carriage from Dominion: Adventures, etc). No matter now many times you play Pixie, you can only trash the card once. But you always get the +1 Card +1 Action.


text:
What happens when you procession an encampment without having a gold/plunder in your hand?
What happens when you play Procession
on a Encampment with out having a gold or plunder in your hand?
Does procession lose track of Encampment therefore it not able to trash it and it ends up back in the supple?  Do you still gain a card and if so what value of card you gain?

The Procession plays Encampment for the first time. You don't reveal a Plunder or Gold, so you set Encampment aside. This does not prevent Procession from playing it a second time, but both Encampment's attempt to set itself aside again, and Procession's attempt to trash it, will fail because it's not currently in play. You gain an Action card costing $3 ($1 more than Encampment), then at the end of your turn you return Encampment to its pile.
Reasons for what happens:

Procession needs to wait for Encampment to finish being played twice before it can do the trashing. It can't find Encampment if it's set aside (because it has "lost track"), so it can't trash it.
Procession's "gain an Action card" effect does not depend on successfully trashing the played card (as noted in the FAQ).
"Lose track" effects only happen when an effect tries to move a card, but the card is in an unexpected location. So Procession "thinks" the Encampment is in play and tries to move it to the trash, but since it's not in the "in-play area" it can't trash it. But being set aside doesn't change Encampment's text or cost so it still does the same thing when it gets played again, and it can still be used to calculate the cost of the card gained by Possession.

And 3) “lose track” only prevents a card from being moved; it doesn’t prevent it from being played or from getting information such as the cost. (These seem to be common misconceptions about the lose track rule).

Yes, that. I had it in mind, but didn't explicitly state it. I will add it to my answer.

I assume you don't get to keep the Encampment if you draw a gold off the second time it is played since it has already been put to the side and has been lost track of?

That's right - once it's set aside, it will definitely be going back to the supply even if it's played again and you draw a Gold.


text:
Is more than one deck of cards ever used in Phase 10?
When 4-6 players are playing Phase 10 is it possible that the deck can be exhausted before anyone completes a phase?

It's been many years since I played, but yes, we have had an instance where we made it through the draw pile without anyone going out.  (There were 5 of us).  We used to play a lot, so I think it's rare.  We just took the discard pile (except the top card) and shuffled it to make a new draw pile.

@AdamKlump Write this as an answer.

Okay.  I felt since this was not in the rules, I just assumed how we handled it in house, would be seen as a house rule and not an answer.  But I'll move it.

Yes, we have had an instance where we made it through the draw pile without anyone going out. (There were 5 of us). We used to play a lot, so I think it's rare. We just took the discard pile (except the top card) and shuffled it to make a new draw pile.  I didn't see this situation in the rules though, so it's unofficial.


text:
How many cards do you trash when you play a Chapel after having bought a Sewers?
Chapel reads

Trash up to 4 cards from your hand.

Sewers reads

When you trash a card other than from this, you may trash a card from your hand.

Because the cards Chapel trashes are all at once, do you get to trash up to 4 more cards, or 1?

Thanks, @Conman, I wanted to make a dominion-renaissance tag myself but I lacked the reputation for it.

According to this Dominion Wiki you may

trash an additional card for each card trashed.

It specifically gives example with Chapel.