text:
What to do with an early $8 hand?
What should I do with an $8 hand that appears in Turns 3 through 6, in a game that only goes up to Provinces? Consider 4-player games primarily, but if games with other numbers of players significantly change this decision, please mention it.
(This might happen a few different ways: Coppersmith and a lucky draw will get you this in T3/T4, but even a simple Big Money strategy can pick this up on T5/T6.)
I realize the answer here is most likely "it depends," but what does it depend on? Does the availability of $7 cards make an early Province buy less tempting? If the other worthwhile cards cost only $5 (or even $4), does it change the answer?
I ask because I've been playing a fair amount of 4-player Androdominion, and early $8 hands crop up occasionally. I usually buy the Province, simply because victory usually occurs somewhere around 5 provinces, and I prefer the bird in the hand rather than trusting what the future might bring.

In a 4p game, you should be more eager to take an early Province than in 3p or 2p. There are two reasons for this. First, in 4p each Province is a larger share of the available points, and you have on average a smaller number of turns. Second, in 4p you are more likely to see the game end on three piles before all the Provinces are gone. As a rule of thumb, I would grab the early province in 4p, but not in 3p or 2p.
That said, what are some of the Kingdom cards that would indicate that you should hurry or not hurry?
Tournament, as swbarnes2's answer indicates, is a very powerful card, and its presence means that Provinces in your deck are very important. In Tournament games, never pass up the opportunity to get a Province.
Explorer is another card that keys off of Province, but it's a fairly weak card, and you can't be sure of connecting it with a Province when you need to. I don't consider its presence a reason to hurry.
Cards that give you something else very strong to do with your money should make you think twice. Overbuy cards like a Masterpiece or Stonemason (with a good target) give you more than the usual opportunity to improve your deck quickly, and are likely a better choice than Province on turn 5. Goons, King's Court, and to a lesser extent Expand are other important cards can be very attractive for an early turn. Depending on what the other players are doing, other powerful $5 cards like Wharf, Cultist, or Rebuild might need to take priority.
By contrast, what would suggest that you need the Province right away? First and foremost, look for piles that might empty out. For instance, if Ironworks is available with attractive targets like Great Hall, Fishing Village, Ironmonger, Gardens, etc., those piles are likely to deplete very rapidly in a 4p game, and you should grab the points while you can!
By contrast again, look for cards that will slow the game down--an absence of buys, and delaying attacks like Militia or Ghost Ship. If those attacks are flying, you're going to have a lot of trouble buying a second Province without a good deck, so you're likely to want Gold. (Sometimes in a 4p game you don't need to bother with attacks yourself if everyone else is playing them for you!)

I think seeing the game end on three piles rather than on all Provinces gone is VERY MUCH dependent on the available cards. The earlier Dominion sets like the basic or Intrigue usually play until all Provinces are gone. The later sets do indeed end with three empty piles more often.

In the base set, Curse/Duchy/Estate in a Witch game isn't too odd, and anyone going for a Workshop/Gardens rush is likely to deplete the piles. In Intrigue, Ironworks is also a threat, especially since they're an attractive upgrade to Workshop for novices, as well as Pawn and Great Hall. But yes, I agree that later sets  have more opportunities to pile out; Hamlet, Lighthouse, Hermit, Peddler, Tournament, Silk Road, and Tunnel are a few prime suspects.

Personally, I'd buy a Province too, if there were cards like Tournament, or Explorer, which benefit from Provinces.  Maybe Bishop...sure, you lose a VP when you Bishop a Province, but it's still 5 VP not cluttering your deck.  If you have something that lets you drill down past your Victory cards, like Farming Village, or Vagrant, or if you are going to be eating a lot of Curses or Ruins (so the Province is one cluttering card among many)...those are all situations where the hurt of an early dead card is somewhat mitigated.  There are probably more.
Otherwise, I'd get two gold first, then buy Provinces.  The early province is likely to slow you down more than it's worth when your deck is small.


text:
What happens when you lose an invention that has a one-shot benefit?
In Robinson Crusoe, the players are a collection of castaways on some remote island. There are 6 different scenarios, so the goals and perils of the game will change a bit.
During the game, you can "invent" items around camp, and various events can destroy those items. The trouble is that some items give one-shot benefits, while others give continual bonuses. For instance, the Shovel invention's benefit is "you have a shovel," which is useful because inventing the Cellar requires a shovel. On the other hand, the Spear (the Soldier's item) has a one-shot effect: +3 weapons.
What happens when an event destroys an item with a one-shot benefit? For instance, you build a Spear, get +3 weapons, use some of those weapons, and then you lose your Spear in an event when you only have 1 weapon in camp? Can you rebuild the spear again for another +3 weapons? Do you have to lose any of your existing weapons when you lose the Spear?

On page 16, of the Portal Edition rulebook it states that when flipping a item card over, that "If the Item had an additional effect, you should cancel it
if possible."
So if you lost, say, the Spear, you should reduce your weapon level by 3, if possible.
Earlier on the same page, it mentions the phrase "if possible", and clarifies that if you cannot pay that cost, nothing happens, and the Rule of Unfilled Demand does not apply.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
How much do the Heroes and Traitor need to reveal while using their haunt-specific rules?
In Betrayal At House On The Hill, the explorers will eventually reveal one too many Omens, causing some (random) explorer to become the Traitor and try to do something terrible to the remaining players (who are then called Heroes). There are 50 different scenarios that might happen, and each scenario has special rules for the Traitor, and different special rules for the Heroes. (Among other things, these rules say how each side can win.) The rules for each side are not to be revealed to the other side; instead, each side has a small paragraph in their rules about "What the other team knows".
During play, those special rules come up repeatedly: how the Traitor is permitted to move the Zombies, the deterministic rules on how the Banshee moves, special attacks, special defenses, special items required, etc.
How much of the special rules is each side required to reveal when using them? For example, several scenarios require that the Heroes perform a ritual/exorcism/silly dance with particular items and/or in particular locations, using a skill check. How much should the Heroes reveal while doing this? Should a Hero say "I'm searching for voodoo supplies here in the bedroom, which requires me to roll at least a 4 on Sanity" or simply "I'm making a skill check" (or even say nothing and just roll the dice)?  When Heroes have a special way of defeating monsters, do they have to describe the action ("I'm throwing a torch at the monster"), or simply roll an attack ("I'm attacking you with Speed.")?
In play, I've usually described only things that would be obvious: "Roll a Sanity check. Okay, you failed (I don't mention the target number); the Zombie won't act for the rest of the game" or "I throw a torch, it's a Speed attack." In the first case, the reason the Zombie shut down is only known to the Zombie itself, and it isn't communicating anymore. In the second case, it's obvious to the monster that I'm throwing a torch at it. Am I doing it right?

For a more concrete and official answer, this is from the Wizards of the Coast errata page for the game:

How much do you have to reveal about what you are doing to the other side?
   You should announce the purpose of any action you are taking to the other side -- for instance, "I am making an exorcism roll now," or "This roll is to see whether the house blows up." You don't need to reveal what number you need to roll.

There is no real rules-based example of just how much or how little you have to reveal, so really it comes down to common sense, fairness and keeping to the theme of the game.
Basically you don't want to give away exactly what you are trying to do, but you also don't want the opposing side to feel that you are purposefully withholding information that brings theme and connectedness to the scenario (and thus fun to the game).
The way my group plays it is that you don't reveal anything about what is happening unless it specifically alters or affects what the other side is doing, or contradicts something you know about them or something they say. If it falls outside of that range and they can see you do it, give them a very basic description of it, otherwise if they can't see you they have no idea what you did.
In the example of performing a ritual in a room or searching for something, if they can directly see your character tell them you are casting a spell or rummaging around for something, but no more than that. If they can't see your character, then they don't need to know anything more than that you have rolled a dice and/or placed a token on a card/drawn a card/whatever other action you need to perform.
Obviously if you successfully performed the ritual and it did something like reducing the Traitor's statistics, you would need to tell them that.
Using scenario 10, Family Gathering as another example (since you mentioned it) the Traitor's Tome gives them enough information to know that their zombies can be trapped, but not how. It is up to the Heroes to tell the Traitor what is required of them when a zombie has the potential to be trapped, and it is also acceptable to tell them why a zombie is trapped.
As a last point, it is also up to you and your fellow players just how plain or colourful your descriptions are. In some groups "I succeeded at my ritual, so you lose 2 Knowledge" works, while in others "you feel your mind begin to slip away as my chanting rises to a crescendo, lose 2 Knowledge". They both say the exact same thing, but one is quick and to the point, the other is thematic and dramatic. You just need to make sure that if you take the dramatic route that you don't give away more information than is necessary in your attempt at adding colour.

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


text:
What happens if you get lost while rescuing Jenny?
In scenario 3 of Robinson Crusoe, your task is to build a raft to rescue Jenny, and then build a lifeboat to escape your deserted island before a hurricane arrives. (Let us not consider the wisdom of "sailing through a hurricane in a cobbled-together lifeboat" too much.) Until you rescue Jenny, she takes some damage every round; after you rescue her, she does nothing but rest and eat your food.
As a result of Jenny's terrible post-rescue utility, my last game involved abandoning Jenny for quite some time before getting around to constructing a raft. As it happened, she had exactly one wound remaining when we rescued her, and we rolled the dice and got a random event when we did. The random event was "you're lost and will be outside the camp tonight."
Does this mean Jenny is outside the camp, or could she plausibly have returned to the camp while you remain lost? (In this case, being outside the camp would cause 3 wounds: 1 from lack of shelter, and 2 from lack of food.)
(The first explanation is the most obvious, but I argued for the second on the theory that Jenny is, in every important way, a separate character, and that the event happened to the character who explored, rather than to Jenny.)

I would say that there is room for interpretation. Clearly, once Jenny is in the camp she is affected from cards effects, weather, having no shelter etc. However, I would say that Jenny is not in the camp in your situation, but neither on the rock. Remember that if a character has to spend the night outside of the camp, then all the resources he got in his action are not available for the whole group, but only for the character himself. So in this case I would say that Jenny is kind of a gathered resource.
It happens often in the game that you run in situations like this. As a rule of thumb, take the action that does the most harm.

The response from Jonas Svedas is actually correct. The "raft" item has ? = wound on it, indicating that if you are rolling to try to rescue her and get a question mark, you take a wound instead of drawing a card.

When you roll the dice for the exploration action, the question mark result equates to a life lost- this is explained on the scenario card.
So you cannot get lost and spend the night outside while rescuing her.


text:
In the new Tyranid Codex (6th Edition) is the Close Combat Weapons bonus included in Unit profiles?
There have been some changes to the way Close combat weapons work for Tyranids.  The rule used to be, that Scything talons were the only CC weapon that would give a +1 Attack bonus.  Now it applies to all Tyranid CC weapons, but only when 2 pairs are used (basically a shift of where +1 attack bonuses will be in the Tyranid army for the CC Monstrous Creatures, and medium sized models with 4 arms)
Previously, the attacks were already reflected in Tyranid profiles.  I am wondering, with a new rule change, if this is still true.
If it is NOT reflected, then that would mean the Death Leaper is actually 5 attacks, and the Carnifex is actually 4 attacks using their basic set of weapons.

It used to be that this was reflected by the use of parentheses, e.g. 3(4)
This forum post talks about this(although not in relation to the models you mentioned). The consensus seems to be that if it is not explicitly stated that it is factored into the profile, then it's in addition to the profile.

This seemed to be the best answer.  GW could have make it a little more intuitive, but otherwise, I think this answer seems best.  Most of the basic CC weapon configurations in the new Codex would add an additional attack to the Tyranid profiles.

Think it's clearly stated in the Tyranid codex:

Designer's Note: Tyranid Melee weapons come as pairs. For game
  purposes, each pair is treated as a single Melee weapon. This means
  that Tyranid models must fight with two pairs of any Tyranid Melee
  weapons to gain a bonus Attack in close combat for fighting with two
  weapons. - Page 111 (Interactive codex)


text:
What is the ruling for Warhammer base size when GW has not produced an official model?
I understand this ruling, which is pretty normal for Tournaments:
•Models must be played on the bases provided with them.
In my specific case, there are quite a number of Tyranid Special Characters that have never had a model created for them.  For some of these monsters, it seems fairly straightforward:  The Doom of Malantai would have a Zoanthrope Base, the Tyranid Prime would have a Warrior Base.
There are also some existing models that used to be released with smalled bases:  The old Hive Tyrants (Square base, and warrior size base) would up-size to the the current Hive Tyrant large base.
For models like the Harpy, Parasite of Mortrex; I'm not sure about.  The flavour for the harpy says it's a lighter Monstrous creature, that is related to the Trygon.  Would it use a Trygon base?  or a Hive Tyrant base?    Is the Parasite of Mortrex a Gargoyle base?  or a Warrior sized base?
I've never seen any official ruling on this.  Since these models are all custom conversions, it seems somewhat open to interpretation.
What size base should I be using for models where the base size is not clearly defined?

There's no hard and fast rule for it.  I would suggest using a base size most appropriate for the size of the model.  So if the model is Terminator sized, use a 40mm, if Dreadnought sized, use a 60mm.  So convert your model and use what makes sense.
This requires a bit of good judgement and common sense.  If you made a reasonable selection most people will be OK with it in a friendly game.  Though you should always check with your opponent before using something non-standard.  If you plan on using your converted models in a tournament, contact the tournament organizer before hand to get a ruling.
As for units that used to be released with different base sizes, you are still free to use the base they came with, but I would recommend re-basing with the most up-to-date sizes.  This will keep things consistent if you ever need to mix and match new and old models.


text:
What is the exact size of all the Warhammer 40k bases?
I'm looking for a list of the dimensions of all the bases in Warhammer 40k.
I know there is a 60mm base, for large models, and there is one that is 120mm x 55mm for really large models.
I don't know the sizes for the smaller models, or for the flying models.
I feel like a list of all the sizes would be very handy, but I can't find all of them in one place.  A list of all the square bases from Warhammer Fantasy would be useful too.  I don't own many of those models, so I have nothing to measure.

These are the supported base sizes in 40K

Standard Infantry - 25mm round
Large Infantry - 40mm round
Monsters - 60mm round
Flyer - 90x120mm oval
Bike Bases - 25x70mm oval
Clear flight stands small - 30mm round
Clear flight stands large - 60mm round

For Fantasy:

Standard Infantry - 20mm square
Large Infantry - 25mm square
Monsters - 40mm square
Cavalry - 25x50mm rectangle

Perfect!  That is super helpful!

Note that this is now very out of date. 40K now widely uses the 32mm bases, the bike base has changed, and fantasy has gone to round bases entirely.

Amusingly, the comment saying this is out of date is now out of date with the rerelease of Fantasy as The Old World... I wait for another comment in 6 years when my comment is out of date because we've gone to hexagonal bases or something.

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


text:
Do conquered locations still help the Resistance?
In Conquest of Planet Earth, the foolish Humans are resisting the implacable might of several alien overlords, who go about conquering various Locations until the Humans finally give up their doomed efforts. Several Locations give bonuses to the Human Resistance, such as the Train Station, which gives +1 Resistance to adjacent Locations.
Does this bonus still apply after the Train Station has been conquered by the ravening alien hordes? Are the Aliens dumb enough to keep the trains running on time, even if the trains are chock-full of weapons, ammunition, recruits, intrepid reporters, Meals Rejected By Ethiopians, teddy bears, and other material that the Resistance needs? Similarly, does the text of other Locations still apply after they've been conquered?
Also, do Demolished locations keep their text? (It should be obvious, but I couldn't find anything explicit in the rulebook about this.)

Conquered Locations text is still in effect after being conquered. Demolished Locations text is not in effect after being demolished.
The rules don't make any mention of conquered locations losing their rules text. The demolish markers replace the text of the locations they are in, so naturally the locations rules are no longer in effect. This in confirmed by the lead designer and president of Flying Frog Games, Jason C. Hill in this BBG thread

Location Text remains in effect, even after that Location is conquered. The only time a Location's text is canceled is if it has a Demolished marker on it (which has its own text that replaces the text of the Location).
Location text DOES apply as soon as it is placed, so yes, Aliens do have to roll to see if they stumble into the powerlines with the Electric Power Plant as soon as the Location is revealed in their space.


text:
Must you decide to activate shields before entering a nebula or asteroid field?
Xia is full of opportunities for hotshot stunt pilots: there are plenty of nebulas and asteroid belts to whiz about in, but it's a risky maneuver. You roll a d20, and if the result is from 1 to 10, you take that much damage (or, in a nebula, lose that much Energy). The rules call out that shields can protect you from these hazards, but it's unclear when you must place arming tokens on your shields in order to do this.
If you must place the arming tokens before entering the field, then there's a 50% chance that you wasted both energy and actions. This is a very steep cost, considering that the most common use of shields, defending against enemy fire, doesn't cost you an arming token and has a guaranteed benefit. (Or rather, you don't need to save an arming token from last turn, and you're allowed to re-arm immediately after the attack; it costs energy, but not actions.)
So do you need to activate shields before rolling for the result of entering hazardous spaces, or can you do it afterward?

You roll the shields after you roll the damage from a nebula or asteroid field
Source: Rule book, page 7, Shields
http://www.faroffgames.com/images/games/xia-legends-of-a-drift-system/Xia_Rulebook.pdf


text:
Can you place two Buddha statues on the same turn?
In Ghost Stories, players are Buddhist monks trying to stave off invading ghosts before yielding to their (nigh-inevitable) deaths. Each monk chooses one of two similar special abilities at the beginning of the game. The Blue Monk has the potential to make the same action twice in one turn - using a villager twice, or exorcizing ghosts twice.
The Buddhist Shrine, when you use it, lets you pick up a Buddha statue, which you can place on a future turn to instantly kill a ghost that arrives there. The rules seem to assume that you will only have one Buddha statue at a time, and only place one at a time, but the Blue Monk can easily pick up two statues in one turn.
Can a Blue Monk carrying two statues place both of them on the same turn, in different ghost locations, if they're standing at a corner of the village?

Yes, you can do this, even if you're not the blue monk (if, for example, you picked up the statues on different turns). From the rulebook, pages 6-7:

It may be possible to place two Buddha’s in the same turn, when the Taoist stands on a corner tile and the two corresponding ghost spaces are free.

authors: Максим Пахомов


text:
Is there a complete database of Pokémon data?
I'm looking for a database (in whatever format) that contains all official Pokémon data (~PokéDex). A good example is the data serebii.net has, but the owner of the site doesn't seem to be eager to hand his data over.
Thanks!

You could certainly write a small script (or find someone who can) to extract the data from online resources automatically. The advantage there is that you can update your data yourself whenever new cards are released.

This Python project on GitHub contains a lot of up-to-date Pokémon information (including evolutions and moves etc) from the video games, which may be useful to you in some way.

Why? Pokemon TCG lke MtG is a card game.

I agree with @user1873. If this question is allowed here, then asking for Pokémon data should be allowed as well.

Sorry had a brain-fart and forgot about the TCG. (I read it as a question about the video games, since no mention is made of the TCG in the question.) I think the data I linked to may still be useful in a broad sense, but I'll edit my answer to remove the comment about it being off-topic.

Thanks, a csv database with everything was in fact something I was looking for!

Can't vouch for its completeness, but http://www.pokemon.com/us/pokemon-trading-card-game/database/ seems to be a similar resource to the Magic TCG's "Gatherer".
Certainly when I made a request for cards with the name "Pikachu" I got 27 card results, so it seems like it could keep a deckbuilder busy for quite a while...

I was looking for one that I could download and use myself, but thanks for the time :)

authors: Дмитрий Трофимов


text:
What is the purpose of having randomizer cards for the non-kingdom cards?
I understand having randomizers for the kingdom cards because that's how you randomly choose them, but I find it odd that there is a randomizer for every card including the basic Curses, Coins and Victory cards. Why are they there?

This question is a not quite duplicate of http://boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/1992/dominion-randomizer-deck-confusion

@PatLudwig Cool, I was going to mention that.  To be honest I don't really see how they're not duplicates...? Though this question has a better and more descriptive title!

@thesunneversets - hmm, late last night it seemed there was a difference.  Rereading them, I'm less sure of that!

They are there to mark each pile.  The game ends when 3 piles are empty.  Once you see 3 randomizer cards showing, the game is over.
This is on page 5 of the rules:

Players may also use the Randomizer cards as Placeholders to mark the card piles so empty piles are easily seen

The way my group lays out the Kingdom cards is organized by cost, so it is not always obvious that there is a pile missing.  The kingdom cards help remind us.
I agree with your comment that the Randomizer cards are a bit too similar to the normal cards, one solution is to put them into different colored sleeves than your regular cards.  Or perhaps, just sleeve the randomizer cards.

Thanks. It kind of makes sense, but it bugs me that the randomizers look the exact same as the normal cards when face up. Might as well use blank cards.

Alternatively, put the randomizers up side down.

Alternatively tap the randomizers (place sideways).


text:
Is there a way to block MTG sorcery spells that view my hand?
Sorry if this is an obvious question but I didn't see it asked before and I'm very new to Magic The Gathering.
Is there a way to block sorcery spells in MTG that threaten to view my hand?  For example Thoughtseize from "Theros".  For some reason I don't seem to have a good defense against that.  Can I counter it with a standard "non-creature" counter spell or is something different required?

If you cast One With Nothing, your opponent will not be able to discard any of your cards. #TechniallyRightIsTheBestKindOfRight

You can interact with Thoughtseize just like any other card. In particular:

Yes, you can counter it. Use Negate, Dissolve, et cetera.
Note that this doesn't really help that much against the first-turn Thoughtseize unless you've got access to a counterspell that doesn't cost any mana, like Mental Misstep or Force of Will. The closest thing you've got in Born of the Gods Standard is Swan Song when you're on the play.
In my experience, the best answer to a first-turn Thoughtseize is to choose initial hands that won't be crippled by it. And, yeah, that's a rather big imposition. That's what makes the card so powerful.

You can invalidate its target.
Thoughtseize says "Target player reveals his or her hand." If it can't target you, it can't be cast on you. The gold standard for effects like this is Leyline of Sanctity, which is actually faster than Thoughtseize if you get it in your opening hand.
There are no such cards currently in Born of the Gods Standard. :(

You can take your best cards out of your hand.
This happens quite a lot in Legacy:

"Thoughtseize you."
"In response, Brainstorm."

Then you put the cards you need most on top of your library, so they're hidden from Thoughtseize but you can draw them next turn.
There are no such cards currently in Born of the Gods Standard. :(

Thoughtseize is a powerful card (basically the best of its kind) and it's seldom easy to deal with. For higher-level strategy tips, I recommend starting with Reid Duke's excellent Thoughtseize guide — this'll help you understand what your opponent's going to be trying to do.

Thanks but I'm confused... Can you elaborate a bit on why "this doesn't really help that much against the first-turn Thoughtseize"?  Do you mean that if I respond with an instant to Thoughtseize and it's the other player's turn, the effect of his/her card always happens first?

@MikeB No, I mean the first turn of the game. Like this: We start our match. I play a Swamp and Thoughtseize you. You look at your hand: ooh, a Negate! You look at your board: 0 lands to cast it with. Well, dang. And then the Thoughtseize takes your Elspeth because you can't counter it without mana.

It's worth noting that Thoughtseize is most powerful (and some might argue only powerful enough to be worth the time and mana) on turn 1.

Indeed you can stop it with spells that can counter spells like Counterspell or Negate.


text:
Is there an easy way I can tell if a MTG card is "rare" just by looking at it?
I don't always have an internet connection to research the rarity of a MTG card.  Is there an obvious indication of rarity on MTG cards themselves (other than foil)?  Some sort of insignia? Or a class of creatures that is almost always rare?

Note that the foil system is separate from the rarity system.  While there are fewer foil Giant Growths than regular ones, it's still considered to have a common rarity.

Yes, cards have a rarity indicator (at least in recent years). Each Magic card has an icon below and to the right of the picture called the expansion symbol, which indicates the expansion set that the card is from. The icon's color indicates the rarity of the card, with the following key:

Black: Common
Silver: Uncommon
Gold: Rare
Red: Mythic Rare

To get an idea of the relative rarity of these cards, we can look at a booster pack. Recent booster packs each contain about 11 commons, 3 uncommons, and 1 rare, with about a 1 in 8 chance of the rare being replaced with a mythic rare.
A couple of things to remember: very old cards, like from Alpha and Beta, don't have expansion symbols at all. Other old (but not as old) cards have expansion symbols, but they're all black. And some cards have been printed in different sets, and have different rarities in those sets, so the icon on the card may not match the rarity in the most current set.

Note that old cards (pre-Exodus, so earlier than June 1998) all have black rarity symbols.

On top of that, some cards have changed rarities across different printings, so it's possible that the symbol on the physical card doesn't accurately show the current oracle rarity of that card.

Of course, if you're off line, you can't do much better than the printed rarity.

Alpha through Homelands didn't actually have a Rare sheet. While we call card from those sets "rare" if it was printed only once on the Uncommon sheet, they aren't rares in the same sense that we use the term today. Alliances was the first set with a Rare sheet, although some of the cards on the sheet were printed six times, and are effectively Uncommon, even though they appear in the pack's Rare slot. (There were also Uncommons that were effectively Common.)

@GendoIkari There's really no such thing as an 'oracle rarity'.  Rarity is a property of a printing of a card, not an innate property of the card itself.  A couple of formats (e.g. Pauper) may care if a card has ever been printed at common, but AFAIK that's not an "Oracle property" of the card; it's in no way, shape or form part of card text.

@Brian that is only partially correct, there were some sets like that(Arabian Nights, Antiquities, Fallen Empires, and Homelands), most sets, including Alpha/Beta/Unlimited etc had a separate sheet for Rares, and like modern packs the rare was always in a certain position in the pack(that place varied by set), for instance Alpha starters had the 2 rates at the front.

Also realize that they use the same marking on commander products which has all cards printed at the same rate within a deck

It's worth noting that since M15, rare and mythic cards have a small holofoil stamp positioned in the centre at the bottom

If you think about except for basics all commander precons card are equally rare as each precon only has one copy and all commander precons are the same. The rarity symbol is not auctually all that accurate indication of rarity.

In newer sets there is a letter in the bottom left corner.

C - common
U - uncommon
R - Rare
M - Mythic
L - Land
P - Promo


text:
What's the name of the board game about sailing between islands?
I recently played a board game but forgot the name of it.  Can someone please tell me the title?

You compete with other players to travel to other islands.
During your turn, you can place boats in beach spots.
When all the available beach slots are filled, you and the other players on that specific beach travel in a direction out from that beach.
If there's nothing immediately adjacent to your beach, you flip a mystery tile to determine if it's another island or sea.
If it's sea, there's a point cost system for the route you're on requiring a minimum number of different player colors.
You collect points at the end of the game based on how many islands you're on (each island has a different point).
I think the game title starts with a "T".

Tongiaki, perhaps?  Description and image à la BoardGameGeek:

This game uses a unique tile design never seen in any other game (hexes with wavy edges), and is easy to explain and easy to enjoy. Players all begin on the island of Tonga, and immediate overcrowding forces players to search out other islands to populate. For each expedition that leaves, a new tile is placed, revealing either an island, or a "water path" that may or may not have a number from 2-4, indicating that many different players (not number of boats) must make up that expedition for it to survive the voyage (draw and place an additional tile). In this way, the game encourages both cooperative and competitive play at the same time.


text:
What's the name of the type of expansion set "packs" that MTG players can buy at release events?
I've heard that MTG vendors can have release events for expansion sets.  During these events, players can spend a relatively small amount (say, $20 bucks) and get a collection of cards from that set (enough to build a deck or two).
What is the name for these value sets?  It seems like they're somewhere between a booster pack and a booster box in size. Can they only be purchased at release events?

The format of the pre-release and release party events is a tournament type called 'sealed deck' where you get 6 packs of cards to make a 40 card deck out of.
For recent sets wizards has been printing special "event packs" where one or two of the six boosters you get is custom tailored to a specific colour, colour combo, or deck archetype.  This is to make it easier for new players to build a half-decent deck, since looking at 6 totally random packs and figuring out which two or three colors are best takes some practiced skill!
It comes in a little box with a spindown d20 life counter also.  I think this is probably the product you're talking about.  Some event hosts will sell leftovers after the tournament.  As far as I know this doesn't violate any of their distribution agreements with WOTC.
This is a description of the most recent one:
Link

Theros Block sets had one color-seeded pack, Dragon's Maze had two seeded packs that were the colors of allied guilds, and M14 didn't have a seeded pack at all. Maro from Wizards said that M14 would be the last prerelease without some sort of extra gimmick. Also, store owners can definitely sell leftovers, and they can order more and even run another event using them (after the actual release of course).


text:
Can special cards with "discard" label in King of Tokyo be saved until later?
In King of Tokyo, when I buy a special card with a "discard" label, do I have to use that card at the time of purchase? Can I save it to use later?
I infer from the rule book that I can save it... But the official text doesn't exactly state.

The rules explicitly state that Discard cards are immediately used and discarded.
It's in a text box right above "3. Buying cards".

Thanks. The instructions I have say "monsters immediately resolve these then discard them". But I wasn't sure if that was immediately after purchase.


text:
Will Journey to Eternity come back if the enchanted creature comes back as a land?
I have a Golden Guardian on the battlefield and enchant it with a Journey to Eternity. I am also able to use the Guardian's activated ability to fight a 6/6 I control, killing the Guardian. When the Guardian dies, I want to return it flipped as a Gold-Forge Garrison. In this case, the creature that was enchanted isn't returning the battlefield as the first part of Journey to Eternity's triggered ability specifies. Does Journey to Eternity also return the battlefield and become Atzal, Cave of Eternity?

Yes, you can get both cards to return transformed:
Both Golden Guardian's and Journey to Eternity's abilities are triggered abilities. When the enchanted Guardian dies, both abilities trigger simultaneously, and the player who controls the abilities gets to choose which one will be put on the stack first.

603.3b If multiple abilities have triggered since the last time a player received priority, each player, in APNAP order, puts triggered abilities he or she controls on the stack in any order he or she chooses. See rule 101.4.) Then the game once again checks for and resolves state-based actions until none are performed, then abilities that triggered during this process go on the stack. This process repeats until no new state-based actions are performed and no abilities trigger. Then the appropriate player gets priority.

Then, after choosing what will be on the the stack in what order, you start resolving those abilities. If the enchantment's ability resolves first, it'll return the Guardian, not transformed, to the battlefield, and the Guardian's ability will be removed from the stack since it can't return the object to the battlefield, as it's already there.
If you let the Guardian's ability resolve first, it will be returned transformed to the battlefield, and then the enchantment's ability will resolve. Since the enchantment's ability is not conditional to the enchanted creature being returned from the graveyard, it'll just not bring anything back, and the effect will keep resolving normally, and it will return to the battlefield transformed.

603.6. Trigger events that involve objects changing zones are called “zone-change triggers.” Many abilities with zone-change triggers attempt to do something to that object after it changes zones. During resolution, these abilities look for the object in the zone that it moved to. If the object is unable to be found in the zone it went to, the part of the ability attempting to do something to the object will fail to do anything.

Yes, because returning the enchanted creature to the battlefield is part of the effect not of the trigger. See also the recent question: How do Moldgraf Monstrosity and Feldon of the Third Path interact?
When the Guardian dies two abilities trigger. You control both, so you can place them on the stack in any order and thus control in what order they resolve.
If the Guardian ability resolves first, you return the Guardian to the battlefield transformed, then when the Journey ability resolves it does as much as it can - that is returns the Journey to the battlefield transformed.


text:
Do Combat Celebrant and Helm of the Host give me infinite combat phases?
I have a Combat Celebrant equipped with a Helm of the Host. At the start of combat on my turn, Helm of the Host creates a token copy of my Combat Celebrant. I attack with the copy, exerting to gain another combat phase. After damage, I move to another combat phase.
Here's where the wording on the Helm has me questioning the next steps. I assume another token will be created, and I can repeat the exert and the additional combat phases. But the Helm specifies that the token is created at "the beginning of combat on your turn...." Do each of these additional combat phases create another beginning of combat trigger?

Yes, you will have as many combat phases as you want.
When Combat Celebrant's ability resolves, you get an additional combat phase.
Rule 506.1 defines what steps the combat phase contains:

506.1. The combat phase has five steps, which proceed in order: beginning of combat, declare attackers, declare blockers, combat damage, and end of combat. [...]

As you can see, I've emphasized that the combat phase begins with a "beginning of combat" step, during which cards such as Helm of the Host will trigger. Since you'll be getting another Combat Celebrant from the trigger, which will in turn be exerted to give you another combat phase, you'll get an arbitrary number of combat phases as long as nothing disrupts the sequence "Helm trigger resolves > Combat Celebrant is exerted > new combat phase".

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


text:
In Tzolk'in, can you be at negative points?
On the second turn of the game, I angered the Gods when I needed to beg for food. I wasn't up on any of the temple tracks, so moving backwards is supposed to give me negative points. At this point, I was still at zero victory points. Can my total VP drop below zero?

Yes.  This is explicitly stated on page 13 of the rules.

"On each temple, you score the number of victory points indicated by your current step only. Note that if you are on the bottom step, you will lose vic- tory points. Victory points can go negative."

However it appears from your question you are scoring the -1 when you move onto that space.  This is incorrect as you only score points on the temples during the mid game and endgame food days.

We realized we were doing the VP on the temple tracks incorrectly when we got to the halfway point. This still didn't prevent me from going negative though. Thanks for your quick response.

Negative scores are more common with the prophecies expansion. Plus, if you couldn't go negative, there'd be no reason to gather food for the first food day, and possibly the second, especially if you're gathering resources for a late-game building spree.


text:
What is Doppelganger's attack when in the HQ?
While playing the scheme Invade the Daily Bugle News HQ, I ended up having a single villain in the city: Doppelganger from Maximum Carnage. I drew a Scheme Twist card, which triggers the following event:

KO a Hero from the HQ. Put the highest [attack] Villain from the city into the HQ space.

This required me to put Doppelganger in the HQ. Doppelganger's card reads:

Doppelganger's [attack] is equal to the [cost] of the Hero in the HQ space under him.

Now that Doppelganger is in the HQ, what is his attack?

Doppelganger's attack would then be 0.
The rules insert for Paint the Town Red explicitly covers this case under the Card Clarification for the Invade the Daily Bugle HQ scheme:

If there is a Villain in the HQ space under Doppelganger, or if Doppelganger is in the HQ, then Doppelganger's [attack] is 0.


text:
If Thanos has an attack of 0, do I still need a hero with the attack symbol to fight him?
This seems unusual, but I encountered this last night. I was playing solo with Thanos as the mastermind and Steal the Weaponized Plutonium as the scheme. This scheme adds a villain group to the villain deck, bringing the deck total to 29: 16 villains, 8 scheme twists, 3 henchmen, 1 master strike, and 1 bystander.
When playing solo, the rules note that Thanos gets -2 attack for every villain in your victory pile. The way I was drawing cards off the villain deck caused me to be able to build up my victory pile very quickly, and I was at 12 villains in my victory pile about halfway through the game. This brought Thanos' attack to 0.
In order to fight Thanos in this situation, do I still need to play a hero with any attack value? The alternative seems to be me taking free shots at him for the rest of the game regardless of what I play on my turn, which seems sort of odd. Is there something else that I'm missing about this situation that would lead to a clearer ruling?

The specific text for the Solo Mode Thanos variant reads:

When fighting Thanos in Solo Mode and using a Villain Group besides Infinity Gems, Thanos gets -2 (attack symbol) for each Villain in your Victory Pile from that Group.

Firstly, if you are using the Infinity Gems Villain Group, this rule does not take effect, and his attack is only reduced by Infinity Gems.
Secondly, note that it does not state "every Villain in your Victory Pile", it specifically says "each Villain in your Victory Pile from that Group".
This indicates that you have to pick one Villain Group in the Villain Deck to replace Infinity Gems as his weakness.
Thus only one Villain Group in the deck would count against him, and since there are only 8 cards in any given Villain Group, the most that this could reduce his attack by is 16.

As further evidence for winterblood's answer:
In the Legendary: Villains rule book (BGG account needed for link), the following section on page 20 addresses this:

Commander Abilities Linked to Specific Adversary Groups
Some Commanders/Masterminds like Odin, Mole Man, and Apocalypse have special abilities linked to the specific Adversaries that they usually “Always Lead.” In Advanced Solo Mode, if you don’t use the Group that this Commander “Always Leads,” then apply that ability to the corresponding Adversary Group or Backup Group that you are using. Use this rule for other Legendary sets as well. For example, in Advanced Solo Mode:
• Odin’s abilities apply to whichever Backup Group you are using, as if they were Asgardian Warriors.
• Mole Man’s abilities apply to whichever Adversary Group you are using, as if they were Subterranea.
• Apocalypse gives +2  to whichever Adversary  Group you are using, as if they were Four   Horsemen. If one of each of the different Adversaries in the Adversary Group overruns, Apocalypse instantly wins.

These rules imply that one villain/adversary group is assigned to the Mastermind/Commander ability.


text:
During the untap step, can I copy a vehicle with Felhide Spiritbinder's Inspired trigger?
I'm looking at an interaction with the Inspired mechanic and vehicles and wanted to make sure I had this correct.
On my previous turn, I've used a Felhide Spiritbinder to crew a Ballista Charger. During my untap step, Felhide Spiritbinder untaps, adding its Inspired trigger to the stack. With the Inspired trigger on the stack, can I crew the Ballista using the Spiritbinder, pay the Inspired ability's cost, and then create a copy of the animated Ballista?

I though you could [mtg:Reroute] the ability, but unfortunately this won't work either.

@tsuma534 Willbender would work though

No, this does not work because you choose targets for an ability when it is put on the stack, and when the Spiritbinder's ability is put on the stack the Charger is not a creature.
Also, the Spiritbinder triggers during the untap step, but the trigger isn't put on the stack until the beginning of the upkeep step since nobody gets priority during the untap step.

603.3. Once an ability has triggered, its controller puts it on the stack as an object that’s not a card the next time a player would receive priority. See rule 116, “Timing and Priority.” The ability becomes the topmost object on the stack. It has the text of the ability that created it, and no other characteristics. It remains on the stack until it’s countered, it resolves, a rule causes it to be removed from the stack, or an effect moves it elsewhere.
603.3d The remainder of the process for putting a triggered ability on the stack is identical to the process for casting a spell listed in rules 601.2c–d. If a choice is required when the triggered ability goes on the stack but no legal choices can be made for it, or if a rule or a continuous effect otherwise makes the ability illegal, the ability is simply removed from the stack.
601.2c The player announces his or her choice of an appropriate player, object, or zone for each target the spell requires. [...]

Unfortunately, you can't.  The first time you would get priority is after Spiritbinder's ability is on the stack.  You don't have to pay for the ability until resolution, but you do have to have a target creature to put the ability on the stack.

114.1. Some spells and abilities require their controller to choose one or more targets for them. The targets are object(s), player(s), and/or zone(s) the spell or ability will affect. These targets are declared as part of the process of putting the spell or ability on the stack. The targets can’t be changed except by another spell or ability that explicitly says it can do so.

Also see this question


text:
What happens when an Animate Dead reanimates a dormant god?
Under the Gatherer rulings for Animate Dead, one point reads (emphasis mine):

If the creature put onto the battlefield has protection from black—or if the creature can’t legally be enchanted by Animate Dead for another reason—Animate Dead won’t be able to attach to it. It will be put into the graveyard as a state-based action, causing its delayed triggered ability to trigger. When the trigger resolves, if the creature’s still on the battlefield, its controller will sacrifice it.

If I use an Animate Dead to reanimate a Karametra, God of Harvests and don't have the appropriate devotion to make it a creature, what happens? The Gatherer ruling seems to imply that it would be sacrificed because the Animate Dead can't be attached to it, but it's also specific in that you sacrifice the creature, which Karametra wouldn't be.

Yes, you do still sacrifice Karametra. Magic cards frequently use words like "the creature" to refer to a previously defined object, but it doesn't actually have to meet the criteria of those words. CR 608.2i spells this out explicitly:

If an ability’s effect refers to a specific untargeted object that has been previously referred to by that ability’s cost or trigger condition, it still affects that object even if the object has changed characteristics.
Example: Wall of Tears says “Whenever Wall of Tears blocks a creature, return that creature to its owner’s hand at end of combat.” If Wall of Tears blocks a creature, then that creature ceases to be a creature before the triggered ability resolves, the permanent will still be returned to its owner’s hand.

Does it matter that this is in Gatherer rulings instead of printed on Animate Dead? It would seem to me that the Gatherer ruling would be more specific in its wording.

@SocioMatt Generally Gatherer rulings don't deal with corner cases (unless the ruling is about that corner case). Also Gatherer rulings aren't actually rules, they just clarify how rules work in some circumstances, the actual rules always trump Gatherer rulings.


text:
Why doesn't WotC use established keywords on all new cards?
In War of the Spark, we have the returning mechanic of proliferate. But we also have additional returning mechanics that don't use the associated keywords, namely Evolution Sage with landfall. This seems to happen a few times per set, where instead of printing the keyword they decide to explain the full mechanic on new cards. Is there a reason that WotC doesn't use established keywords with cards that use the associated mechanic?

Landfall isn't an established keyword since it's not a keyword; it doesn't have its own article in the Comprehensive Rules, rule 702. Rather, it is an ability word which does nothing more than link a group of cards with a common theme/mechanic together.

207.2c An ability word appears in italics at the beginning of some abilities. Ability words are similar to keywords in that they tie together cards that have similar functionality, but they have no special rules meaning and no individual entries in the Comprehensive Rules. The ability words are addendum, battalion, bloodrush, channel, chroma, cohort, constellation, converge, council's dilemma, delirium, domain, eminence, enrage, fateful hour, ferocious, formidable, grandeur, hellbent, heroic, imprint, inspired, join forces, kinship, landfall, lieutenant, metalcraft, morbid, parley, radiance, raid, rally, revolt, spell mastery, strive, sweep, tempting offer, threshold, undergrowth, and will of the council.

(the list might be updated when a new set comes out)
Having said that, it looks like Evolution Sage is the only card in that set with  landfall a landfall-like ability. Having only one card with that mechanic is (apparently) not enough to return a key- or ability word from a previous block; they generally only do so for evergreen keywords like lifelink, vigilance or shroud.

I think a good way of putting it is that the point of the ability words is to group similar abilities together, and with only 1 such card in the set, there's nothing to group.

Another thing to consider is: pretend this is the first set someone has ever seen.  Do you really want to have to explain landfall or affinity for artifacts or constellation or any set specific keyword/ability just for one card?

@Becuzz Didn't they do that with affinity on the Tezzeret buy-box-promo? Affinity is a keyword however (I assume) since it isn't listed in the ability word list. But they were willing to print affinity on a single card in this set.

@SocioMatt Apparently they did (was not aware).  Though I remember seeing some cards in another set that had something that was entirely equivalent to affinity on it, but it didn't use the keyword.  As I recall, that card was a common or uncommon (I think).  Tezzeret is a rare.  I know WotC tries to keep more common cards simpler.  Plus I don't think there would be room on Tezzeret to spell it out.  (I'd also guess the design team figured if you are buying a box or playing with a rare planeswalker like that, you probably might know what affinity was or could look it up and understand it.)

Keywords (and ability words) exist to telegraph the themes of the set
The primary purpose of keywords are to telegraph to players the mechanical themes of the set, and to tie those mechanics to the flavor identity of the set.
Looking at War of the Spark:
Amass is a build-around mechanic for blue, black, and red, and provides a flavorful tie to Bolas's Eternal Army.
Proliferate tells players that they can mechanically build around +1/+1 counters and planeswalkers, and thematically represents the teamwork of the Ravnicans (and planeswalkers) who are teaming up to fight Bolas.
Giving Evolution Sage the Landfall ability word would tell players that they should mechanically care about the lands they are playing.  Which... isn't true?  The only other cards that really care about lands are Nissa and Awaken Vitu-Ghazi, both of which are rare, and not at all the theme of the set.
Thematically, Landfall was used in Zendikar to represent exploring new lands and discovering new mysteries.  Neither of which applies in WAR.  Ravnica is thoroughly explored already, and if anything it's being destroyed.  A mechanic tied to land destruction might be thematic (if a mechanical nightmare balance-wise), but landfall is a poor fit for the set.
Labeling Evolution Sage with landfall would make comprehension slightly easier (it's easier to remember the ability when you can categorize it as "Landfall - proliferate" rather than remembering the entire thing wholesale), but this effect would be primarily seen amongst experienced players (because they have to already know what landfall is to take advantage of the label), who a) don't need the extra help because they're experienced, and b) will categorize it as "landfall-proliferate" anyways, because c) the ability is extremely simple and doesn't require any memory aids.

Because they don't want to confuse new players. I don't have a link right on hand, but WotC (or maybe one of its representatives like Mark Rosewater) has stated that it limits the number of keywords and ability words in a set to limit complexity, since it can confuse new players.

Isn't that a justification for not including an ability at all, rather than a justification for spelling out a keyword?  Do you have an example of a ability that's spelled out rather than using a keyword (where the ability existed at the time the card first appeared).

Off of the top of my head, IIRC there's been cards since Prowess was retired as an evergreen keyword that get +1/+1 until EoT whenever you cast an Instant or Sorcery that don't have it keyworded as Prowess.

@ikegami I don't see how. Even the newest player can understand the words "whenever a land enters the battlefield under your control". A new player would not know what "landfall" means, and have to go looking for the rules on that.


text:
For Sister Grimm's Super Power, where does the plot twist go if you can't play it?
The Sister Grimm supporting character's Super Power reads:

{C} Any Combat {Y}: Search your deck for an {C} Combat plot twist with a different name from each plot twist in your KO pile and play it if able.

What happens if you can't play it? I assume that if I search for a card and can't play it, it stays in my deck. Part of the problem here is that I'm used to MtG, where the card would explicitly tell you what to do in the alternative case.

It does tell you, it says play it if able. You are not able so you can't use it, it stays in your K.O pile not your deck.

This doesn't really jive with the wording. It can't "stay" in your KO pile because it was never there; the card you're searching for is in your deck.


text:
Do I own a token that I create under somebody else's control?
I was reading somewhere a few days ago that when a player creates a token using a spell like Rapid Hybridization they own the token, even though they never had control of it. I can't seem to find the discussion or the relevant rule.
When I create a token that comes into play under another players control, do I own the token?

No, that token is owned by the other player.  From the current Comprehensive Rules:

110.5a A token is both owned and controlled by the player under whose control it entered the battlefield.

Tokens used to be owned by the controller of the effect that created them, but this was changed in the Magic 2010 rules revision to line up better with people's intuitions about ownership of permanents.

Thanks Alex.  I found the link and was about to make the same edit, but you beat me to it!

You beat me to posting the rules quote. Tit for tat. ;)

Looks like the way I always thought it worked has only been true since July of 2009. Thanks for posting all the rule changes for M10.

There used to be a bunch of decks that abused the old rules with Hunted creatures (e.g. Hunted Dragon, Hunted Phantasm) and Brand.  A neat idea, but not really in the true spirit of the cards :)

@thesunneversets I was making an EDH deck using Zedruu the Greathearted. This would have mattered quite a bit, but I wasn't going to make it abusive. I didn't even consider the amount of random things that could be done that would abuse that rule.

Lots of people who never read the M10 rules update very carefully tried to build that Zedruu deck when she was printed and were very disappointed :)


text:
How do you determine which Dominion sets to play with?
I'm well aware of the randomizers available for Dominion, but how do you determine which sets to include in a randomizer?
For example, I own Base, Intrigue, Seaside, Prosperity & Dark Ages. Lately, I've been using a randomizer between all the sets but I feel like I'm losing out on the built in interactions. How do you do it? Do you choose a handful of sets? If so, how do you determine which ones and how many?
Thanks

http://i.qkme.me/3scttn.jpg

There is no general way to pick the sets besides picking ones that you like.
I generally restrict myself to 2-4 sets of cards because I like to play with at least 2-3 cards from each set I am playing with (this is especially true if playing with alchemy).
In my opinion, the only 2 sets that I have found to clash, and its not even that bad when they do, are dark ages and hinterlands.
You might also consider reading this question: Does mixing Dominion expansions lessen the power of card combinations in random kingdom setups?

Which sets are your favorites to combine?

One interesting houserule we have successfully experimented with is this:

The first four cards are chosen randomly from all your randomizers. After that, every further randomizer is discarded unless it matches a set from one of the first four, until you have ten cards total.

This method usually gives cards from 3 sets; sometimes 4 and rarely 2 (and very rarely 1, but I've never seen it!). You could of course tweak the number to your taste.


text:
Flashcards to learn Blackjack strategy table?
I want to remember this basic Blackjack strategy table.
Is there a flashcards deck to learn them? (by spaced repetition)
Preferably in Anki format, but other formats are fine too.

Yes, there are flash cards in the excellent book by Ken Uston titled "Million Dollar Blackjack"  This is a great book with interesting stories and strategies for different house rules.  Applies to counters and non-counters; single, double, and multiple deck games.  Vegas, Reno, AC rules explained as well.  I think you can find it for less than $20.
Good luck at the tables!

Are you sure this is something you want/need?
Many casinos do not care if you play with the strategy card on the table in front of you. Some casinos also provide them if requested.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110602191708AAVZtUx
http://www.blackjackinfo.com/bb/showthread.php?t=520

I did not know that, thanks! Even if referring to the table is allowed, memorizing it (which is a matter of only 10 minutes, thanks to SRS) would make the game less clumsy, more enjoyable, and allow to start thinking about better strategies in realtime.


text:
Is there any reason to buy the Ascension base game?
Since Ascension: Storm of Souls is both a standalone and expansion to Ascension: Chronicle of the Godslayer, is there any reason to buy COTG? SOS adds new mechanics and seems to have better artwork.

I own all of the Ascension blocks and personally play CotG the most since the minimal mechanics allow it to be more accessible to my wife.  I find it as a good introduction into the world of Ascension and then once she becomes more comfortable with it, I'll pull out the other blocks :-)

Not to be Captain Obvious, but you would buy CotG if you want the cards.
I quickly glanced at the card list and a few "must-haves" stuck out:
Enlightened: Master Dhartha, Twofold Askara, and Tablet of Time's Dawn (though you might NOT want the possibility of infinitely many turns...)
Mechana: all the constructs in this set are valuable, Burrower Mark II maybe not as much.

Burrower Mark II is at least one 'free' card, often several over the course of the game, virtually never dead in your hand, and 3 veeps for 3 cost.  It's a rock-solid card.

All the Mechana constructs are 1:1 (cost:VP), though, aren't they? Maybe it's just a preference. I've gotten to the point where I own 40+ constructs, with infinite turns. In this context, the BMII is barely on the radar :)

Hmm, I find the artwork in SoS vs. CotG to be the same difference.  Then again, my taste in art is typically less sophisticated when compared to many other board gamers.  However, the fact that this is so subjective means it could be a good reason or not to the next person.
Speaking of art, SoS has new art for the starter deck and "always on" deck (Mystics, Apprentices, HI, Militia, Cultist).  Aesthetics aside, the layout colors, and patterns of one set here may be more pleasing and distinguishable compared to another.
Key (x/y faction/noun)
x is the cost, or power of monster.  Y is the honor it gives
faction is enlightened, void, etc.  Noun is hero, construct, or monster
As for the cards and the games themselves, in some ways, SoS is a superset of CotG.  OTOH, there are some cards that round out SoS nicely.  It's a hassle to deal with twice as many cards, but it can be worth it.  For example,
-The Pen/Umbral Edges (6/3 v/c) can be a bit overpowered with just SoS due to higher odds of getting both of them.  Adding another set keeps it more diluted and less of a power creep
-The base game m/c were rather OP-ed... you go for them, and it's a solid path to winning.  Dilution helps with that.
-Two-Fold Askara (4/2 e/h) lets you copy the effect of any here, and is always fun to have around.
-Arha Templar (4/3 e/h) pairs nicely with Rise Of The Cult event since they can go after Fanatics that now have their power/hp at 4.
-some interactions between the Events and base game cards
-SoS's Events and Trophy Monster system makes going power a more viable path, but adding base game brings back the "classic cards"


text:
Elusive cards rule clarification
We've just started out playing the WoWTCG that I bought recently, and I'm having trouble with one of the rules regarding a keyword.
The keyword in question is 'Elusive' and we are just not sure under what conditions this card is actually able to be damaged.
The rules (and card) state that it can't be attacked, which leads us to believe that it can't be proposed as a defender but can be targeted using abilities.
Is this correct?

Yes. The WoW TCG wiki says:

Elusive - A keyword power that cards can have. It means, "This card can't be proposed as a defender."


text:
If a weak creature with death touch attacks a tougher creature, does my own creature die as well?
If a weak creature with death touch attacks a tougher creature, does my own creature die as well?
If I have a 2/2 with death touch that attacks a 4/4, the 4/4 will die but what will happen to my 2/2?

Yes it does.
The damage to them both happen simultaneously (footnote 1), so the big one receives 2 deathtouch damage, and the little one receives four regular damage. Both of these are lethal damage (footnote 2, 3) to the respective receivers, and they are sent to the graveyard.
This can be avoided by giving the little guy first strike (consider Glissa, the Traitor or double strike, which will cause the little guy's damage to be dealt first (unless the big guy somehow also gains it.) Other things like protection can mitigate the damage too.
I should point out that creatures can't attack other creatures in normal combat. You can only declare them as attackers to a player or planeswalker. The defending player (in this case, the player owning the 4/4) can choose to block or not block.
You can cause them to deal damage to each other with the "fights" mechanic (like Prey Upon, or with spells and abilities (Livewire Lash comes to mind.) If a creature deals damage to another creature, and the damage-dealing creature has deathtouch, then the receiving creature has lethal damage (causing it to be destroyed).
Footnote 1

510.2. Second, all combat damage that's been assigned is dealt simultaneously. This turn-based action doesn't use the stack. No player has the chance to cast spells or activate abilities between the time combat damage is assigned and the time it's dealt.

Footnote 2

704.5h If a creature has toughness greater than 0, and it's been dealt damage by a source with deathtouch since the last time state-based actions were checked, that creature is destroyed. Regeneration can replace this event.

Footnote 3

119.6. Damage marked on a creature remains until the cleanup step, even if that permanent stops being a creature. If the total damage marked on a creature is greater than or equal to its toughness, that creature has been dealt lethal damage and is destroyed as a state-based action

704.5g If a creature has toughness greater than 0, and the total damage marked on it is greater than or equal to its toughness, that creature has been dealt lethal damage and is destroyed. Regeneration can replace this event.

It dies. There's no is difference between dying from lots of damage and dying from damage from a source with deathtouch. If a 20/2 and a 4/4 would mutually kill each other, so would a 2/2 with deathtouch and a 4/4.
This is because all combat damage is dealt simultaneously [CR 510.2], and because the State-Based Actions that cause both kinds of deaths [CR 704.5g & h] happen simultaneously [CR 704.3].


text:
What is the procedure for recapturing rescued men?
In Little Wars, captured men can be rescued by killing one or more of their captors. What is the procedure for recapturing the men who were just rescued?
For example, 14 men of team A attack 12 isolated men of team B. This results in 4 men of team A with 2 prisoners from team B. Now, suppose team B kills 1 of the captors from team A with cannon fire. How (if at all) could team A recapture those 2 men from team B?
They couldn't melee because the men from team B are disarmed. Would team A just have to move their men within six inches of the ex-prisoners to automatically recapture them? Would the procedure be different if there were armed men from team B nearby?


text:
After the initial meld, can I do multiple moves in the same turn?
I have to code a program that suggests what to do depending on the situation of a Rummikub game. More about Rummikub: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rummikub
In Wikipedia's explanation, I quote:

Once a player has made his initial meld, he can, on each turn, play one or more tiles from his rack, making or adding to groups and/or runs.

I have never actually played Rummikub (and I seriously don't want to try the online multiplayer game), so here's my question: after the initial meld, if I can do multiple things (say, put a Run and also a Group), can I do them both in the same turn? Or am I limited to one "move" per turn?

You can do as much legal "moves" as you like in the same turn. After making the initial meld, rest of this player's turn is treated just like any other turn.
Things you can do in your turn (multiple times):

add tile to existing group/run
put set of tiles creating new group/run
break existing set (group/run) into separate tiles, as long as all of them will be left on the table at the end of your turn, and each one will be part of some legal set.
obtain Joker, by putting the tile it's replacing in the Joker's place on the table. Remember that you can't take any tiles from the table, so the Joker has to be used in some way before you finish your turn!

I know you said you're not interested in playing the game online, but this seems like the easiest way to grasp this. I feel that explanation like this is much more confusing.
If you want, please take a look at official rules.

Not me, Manipulations did ;). Glad I could help.


text:
Are weighted games in Goko Dominion adventures winnable by sheer strategy?
I'm playing through the adventure mode in Goko's online Dominion game, and I've reached the point (in the Intrigue adventure) where the game starts being weighted very heavily against me. For example, my current particular position is Act I, Level 14, and my opponent's starting deck includes 3 silver and 2 duchies replacing some of the standard copper and estates. (Not only that, the 2 duchies are taken from the supply, leaving only 6 at game start - on a board with Duke...)
I could easily even the odds using the game's "zaps," but that's not my question. What I want to know is, are Adventure levels "fair" as strategical challenges, with a viable strategy for victory? Or is it just "here's an impossible level, use zaps or die"?

I'm aware this question might be out of place here - it's about the specific goko implementation and design, rather than about the game proper. I think it's still on-topic, but I could see it being moved to Arqade.

I had exactly the same thought when I saw the escalating handicaps. Seems like it would quickly go from "challenging" to "clearly imbalanced and unfun".

There's some amount of luck in Dominion, so presumably with a hypothetical optimal strategy there's still some chance you'll win, and then the combination of sheer strategy and playing N games would suffice. So... what exactly do you mean by "fair" and "viable strategy"?

I think this site is a better place for this question than Arqade. I'm sure we have more Dominion experts (at least per capita).

@Jefromi: I'd say that a strategy with a 30% chance of winning despite the handicap would be "viable." Anything lower than that, and you (at best) playing the computer and waiting for an unlikely foul-up. At worst, the game can be literally unwinnable - or close enough to make no difference.

There have been numerous threads discussing this topic on the Dominion Strategy Forum, including this one. But, to boil it down, it seems like the answer to your question is "no, some levels are essentially unwinnable without using zaps". I think that all of them are beatable if you just use enough zaps to bring yourself back to even starting decks with your opponent, but many aren't beatable without using zaps.
One money quote:

I would not try those levels with no zaps. You get free zaps though, usually five. Just click on cards to zap them. It's a decision as to what to zap - although using three on Provinces is mostly automatic. At first I was upset by it, but I mean, in the end it's a variant and there's nothing especially wrong with it.
  -- Donald X.

In addition, there appear to be ongoing efforts to modify/improve the adventure campaigns for better balance, and to create additional adventures. Current status of these efforts may vary. This being said, some reliance on zaps in most adventures is probably going to remain.


text:
Advice on acquiring / constructing Dice Towers
A dice tower is a useful tool for keeping your dice from ruining your game (physically, that is).
Can anyone point to:
- Good dice towers, and possibly places to acquire them.
or
- Resources of information on how to build one yourself.

The primary goals of a dice tower being

Keeping the dice on the table
Improving the randomization by reducing the ability to manipulate the dice.

There are several good designs, however, the basic principle to check for: it should have at least 3 slanted faces, and all the slanted faces should be covered in felt or corduroy. Friction is your friend, here.
The shape is almost always an L. Let's compare it to a cowboy boot...

The toe is opened up so that you can see the landing zone. It needs about a 3/4" to 1" high rim.
The heel has a slanting plate, angled to kick the dice out to the toe.
The shaft of the boot: deflectors.

Plates: The shaft has anywhere from 0 to 5 angled plates within, usually about 30° to 45° downward, angled to toss the dice about in the tower. I don't use ones without at least 2 additional plates. Most have a top plate, angling down to the front, and a second plate below angled down to the back. The plates should cover about half to 2/3 the cross section. Better designs may have left and right angled plates, or even a narrow center triangle, to toss the dice side to side.
Dowels: if plates are too much trouble, dowels can be used instead. The dowels should be about 3/8" to 1/2" hardwood, and are placed in levels. Top is usually a front to back and a side to side cross, centered. 1.5"-2" down, 2 off center parallel; a crossing set another 1.5" to 2" down. Taller ones may have additional crosses, or even run dowels corner to corner.

Plastic, Foamcore, Bare Wood, Felt, or Corduroy? What do I cover the thing with?

only the inside of the tower and the tops of the deflectors need covering if you opt to do so, and dowel deflectors can have slipcovers rather than glued down ones.
Bare wood is noisy, and some dice will slide flat along it. It's acceptable, but not preferred.
Felt: cheap, easy, reduces noise, no nap, so it produces less hang potential than corduroy.
Corduroy: has a clear nap. This will help catch and tumble the dice. The nap, however, should be arranged to put the lines at a downward angle of 20°-40°, so that the dice also get some sideways motion and better tumble. Probably the quietest of the mentioned materials.
Bare plastic: extremely noisy, very slick. Least tumble.
Foamcore: as slick as plastic, but not as noisy, but often puts more bounce on the dice. A foamcore sole of the boot can easily result in dice bouncing OUT of a low toe. (personal experience.) Also, damaged by water, unless sealed with paint or glue.

There is another design for a dice tower I've seen used: spiral staircase. Each stair was angled 30° down, and it went clockwise with 1/4" drops off each stair. Being bare wood, it was rather noisy, but it also was very random.
Plans & howto's
The plans at http://www.instructables.com/id/Making-a-Formboard-Dice-Tower/ are decent enough; it's a short 2 deflector boot-style.
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/filepage/13307/dicebox-pdf
Plans for a 2 deflector tower. Annotated.
http://www.io.com/~beckerdo/games/articles/HirstDiceTower/HirstDiceTower.html
Building with plaster molded "stones".
http://webspace.webring.com/people/xc/crosstowngames/crosstowngamesdicetowerplans.pdf
Another set of plans for a square boot.
http://www.io.com/~beckerdo/games/articles/DiceTower.html
A square castle design, using 3 deflectors.
http://www.geeknews.net/2008/01/02/very-cool-diy-dice-tower
Spiral path in square tower; wood core with polycarbonate sides.
commercially made towers
http://www.chessex.com/dice%20accessories/Dice_Accessories.htm I have one of these! It's noisy as a monkey house. But it's good and random, tho' it lacks side-to-side deflectors. the toe plate is a little short, however. Also, it's friction fit, so it can be taken down and stored flat. This is great for the GM on the go... unless you space where you shelved it!
http://boardgamegeek.com/image/625539/gruumsh
the same clear boot after adding some felt to the deflectors...
http://www.bluepantherllc.com/BP3_DT.htm
Kits to construct both small and large dice towers... just need "... glue, rubber bands and about 10 minutes..." The mini is a "land in drawer" mode, and the larger ones are a variation on the boot.
http://www.uniquedicetowers.com
Assembled dice towers started on Kickstarter.
Alternatives to the tower
The dice tray: a dice tray of some kind (we've often used the box lid) controls the dice, but doesn't add much to the randomization unless requiring a bounce off the back wall.
Dice Cups: all the material issues for towers apply to dice cups. Plus, as dice stacking displays show, it's possible for the skilled to manipulate them pretty well, tho' it's still MUCH harder than in a tray or tower. It does, however, take some practice to shake-flip-slam so that the dice don't roll across the table. Again, good ones are felt or corduroy lined (my good one is). An inepensive one can be made by taking a soup can (not a poptop, tho), carefully filing the edge smooth (steal your sister's emery boards!). Then line with felt or corduroy, gluing it to the inside. Use some more, or some inexpensive leather, to cover the outside. This gets you a lunch and a dice cup for under $15...

Could you extend your answer with the commercial dice tower links from Lance's answer? I think that your contribution, combined with those links, makes a pretty comprehensive answer. Thanks.

Could, but won't, as I've no experience with them, and so adding them would violate the basic SE guidelines on how to answer.

I have one of the Chessex portable boots. I can't speak to the felt on the deflectors, but you really want some sort of softer surface on the bottom to prevent dice bouncing out the end (I usually use a pad of paper)

I wanted to mention that there are papercraft versions available as well. I use two, both from Fat Dragon Games: http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product/95533/Ultimate-Dice-Tower

Building one is probably your best bet, as they're pretty easy to make.
The design is basically a tower with a hole out front that spills dice into a little pan. The tower has projections on the inside to scramble dice around so that you get random rolls. I would do this using an arrangement of parallel pins that cross the inside of the tower semi-randomly. The tower also needs a slanted bottom so that dice roll into the pan after falling down.
If you're feeling ambitious and you have a saw hanging around then you can make one out of wood. Balsa wood is probably best because it is both light and easy to cut, albeit expensive.
If you want an less involved project then get some card stock and print a dice tower design on it (example), or cut your own with an X-acto knife. Fold, add a little bit of glue, and voila!
If you want to save money and you've got some Lego sitting around there's a great post showing off some dice towers here.

You're missing the key components... namely the randomization deflectors inside.

@aramis - I allegedly forgot to mention how important it is for the dice to scramble on the way down. I've updated my answer, thanks for pointing that out.

Dice Towers are great devices, and used to be hard to come by.  There are now a lot of sellers online that you can buy one from.  I'll list some here.

VixenTor Games
No Name 1
Noble Knight Games
Blue Panther
kevinscabins
MiniDiceTowers.com
Litko

Do you have any personal experience with any of these?

@Pat, No, I own a few but I've had them a while, though I have the need to get another tower, just haven't got around to it yet.

I requested Aramis to include your list in the final answer. I upvoted your answer as compensation.

I've used several dice towers over the years, but now I use a dice tray:

It has the main advantages of a tower

Keeping the dice in a confined area
Protecting your game surface/table from damage

While avoiding many problems that I have with Dice Towers

Excessive noise
Occasional Jamming
The tower blocks line of sight to the dice
The tray can handle larger dice than towers

Plus, I just love rolling the dice from my own hands!

Self-loading dice tower :D

@Sadly Not - LOL, apart from the noise it generates.

It also lacks the randomizing features of a well done dice tower... it's much easier to cheat the dice with a tray than a tower.

@Rogier - Yeaaaaaahhhh ... but it's so awesome!

There is a nice instructable about making one from foamcore:
http://www.instructables.com/id/Making-a-Formboard-Dice-Tower/
And here's a papercraft GM screen with 2 dice towers:
http://www.fatdragongames.com/fdg0070.html

Have you used these?

@Pad Ludwig - no, but I've looked at the instructable and it seems like it would make a perfectly serviceable tower. The papercraft model looks like it's beyond my skills. Beautiful, though.

I made the Fat Dragon one and love it.  It's a great DM screen,as long as you have room on the table.

Plan for DIY:
http://www.io.com/~beckerdo/games/articles/DiceTower.html
Link was broken, here's an archived version:
https://web.archive.org/web/20110605140833/http://www.io.com/~beckerdo/games/articles/DiceTower.html

Any personal experience with this?

Well, I have not personally built this one, but I got this link from a friend at the FLGS that built a bunch.

There's a good - if slightly tentacle-heavy - dice tower available in papercraft print-and-fold PDF from Worldworks Games


text:
What are these number cards for?
I recently bought the Civil War expansion for Marvel Legendary. In addition to the advertised contents, it also contained a number of cards with the standard Legendary back whose front was identical to the back except with the addition of a number at the lower right. There are ten with the number 1, four with the number 2, and sixteen with the number 3.
I didn't see any mention of these in the rulebook. What are they for? Do I need them?

Those cards are just filler in the printing process, and serve no actual game purpose.
It is up to you what you do with them. Whether you throw them away, keep them in the box, or maybe even try to come up with a custom scenario that utilises them somehow.
For a bit more explanation see this thread on boardgamegeek.

I wondered if it might be something like that. Thanks for confirming it!


text:
Do cards acquired with The Amazing Spider-Man count as extra draws?
The card The Amazing Spider-Man includes the following effect:

Reveal the top three cards of your deck. Put any that cost 2 or less into your hand. Put the rest back in any order.

Meanwhile, the card Berserker Rage (for Wolverine) includes this effect:

You get +1 attack for each extra card you've drawn this turn.

Does putting a card in your hand with The Amazing Spider-Man count as drawing an extra card for the purposes of Berserker Rage and similar effects?

Unfortunately no, putting cards in your hand is distinctly different to drawing cards. Wolverine's Berserker Rage only counts for cards gained through an ability that says to "draw a card", or "draw that card", or "draw X cards" etc.
Devin Low (designer of the game) clarified this point in this question on boardgamegeek.

So if it uses the word "draw" it's an extra draw, and if it doesn't then it isn't? I wasn't sure, since some keywords (Phasing from Civil War, for example) explicitly say that the cards they put in your hand do not count as extra draws, but I didn't see anything like that for Spider-Man's (and Symbiote Spider-Man's) ability.

Yeah, it was never specified back when Paint the Town Red came out. I think the designers just assumed that the different wording was enough, but now knowing better they are clarifying it where it is needed. I know I played it incorrectly for quite a while until I found that answer on BGG.

You can tell the difference by the key words "reveal" vs. "draw". Draw means put it into your hand. Reveal just means to look at it and (potentially) put it back where you found it.


text:
Can you use the green Mosque tile more than once per turn?
I have a question about the green Mosque tile:

The rules say:

When using one of the three Warehouses 2 3 4, you may pay 2 Lira to gain 1 additional good of any type.

On your turn, may you use this ability more than once?
The rules for the yellow tile include "Once on your turn", and the rules for the red tile say "(1x)", so one would guess that the rules for the green tile would include a restriction like that if it would be limited. However, the "1" (in "1 additional good") is printed in bold, while the "2" (in "2 Lira") is not. Is this a hint that you can only ever get one good per turn?

According to a thread on boardgamegeek.com about the same question:
You can use this ability only once per turn.
Grzegorz Kobiela (who is credited as English translator of Istanbul’s rules) and André Bronswijk (who works for Istanbul’s publisher Pegasus Spiele) both confirmed this.
The reasoning is: You can use this ability when using a Warehouse, and you only use a Warehouse once per turn.
It’s probably an oversight that a clarifying "1x" is missing in the rules for the green tile (or that it was added to the rules for the red tile, which follows the same logic).
(For reference, another thread about it.)


text:
May you choose *not* to use the free construction chain?
If you could build a structure for free (thanks to the chain noted on the card), may you choose not to and use resources (whether your own or bought from your neighbours) to build it instead?
This is relevant for cases where you would earn money when "buying" from your neighbours, or where you would have to pay taxes when using the chain (Babel tile 13).

As correctly stated by @unor, you may opt not to use the chain building, but normally pay for resources (English Rules, p. 4):

If the player has built the structure named there during a previous Age, that player can build the structure for free, meaning without having to fulfill the resource cost.

Both French and German rules confirm the above. The German rules are even more elaborate, as they state (German Rules, p. 4):

Wenn der Spieler, der das Gebäude errichten möchte, auch das auf der Karte erwähnte andere Gebäude aus dem vorangegangenen Zeitalter in seiner Stadt besitzt, muss er die Kosten nicht bezahlen, sondern kann das Gebäude kostenfrei bauen.
(English) When the player, who wants to construct a building, has also other buildings from a previous Age mentioned on the card that already exist in his city, he does not have to pay the cost, since he may construct the building free of charge.

If it was obligatory, the German rules would state darf er die Kosten nicht bezahlen, i.e., must not pay the cost.

It should be noted, however, that when you're playing the "Free City" 2-player variant, the Free City has to use chain building, if the chosen card benefits from one (English Rules, p. 7).

If the card chosen for the Free city can benefit from a free construction (chain), this free construction MUST be performed.

The existence of this rule in the 2-player variant merely confirms that during the normal game (3-8 players) you may either choose the chain or build normally.
Also note that, if you're playing a Team game, you are not allowed to purchase resources from your teammate, if you can build a structure through chain (English "City" Rules, p. 10).

It is forbidden for the teammates to :

share coins,
trade cards,
not pay for commerce between them,
buy resources from each other while they can build a structure through a chain.

Note that you are not able to buy resources that you can already produce, but only the resources you're missing (English Rules, p. 4).

Often, a player will want to build a structure requiring resources he or
  she does not produce. If these resources are produced by a neighboring city – players sitting directly to the left or right of that player – the player will be able to purchase the missing resource(s) through commerce.

This is also confirmed by the "City" expansion rules (English "City" Rules, p. 10).

A player must use their own resource before buying one from their neighbors.

Great, thanks! -- Regarding your last section: I had created this question before your answer, May you choose not to use your own resources and buy them instead?. So maybe you want to give an answer there. However, the quoted rule from Cities is for the team play, so it’s not necessary also the case for the normal game, right?

@unor The last section mentions "from your neighbors", not just "from your teammates", so it's more general. In any case, the base game rules are clear, I think: "the resources you're missing". I had seen your question during googling, so I'll add the related response there, as well.

According to a user on BoardGameGeek, the game designer Antoine Bauza has said: "You have to build for free if you can." … which confuses me.

(I’m not sure about this interpretation and welcome insight/corrections.)
The rules say about "Free Construction (Chains)" (English PDF, page 4):

Some structures in Age II and Age III have, to the right of their resource
  cost, the name of a structure of a previous age.
  If the player has built the structure named there during a previous Age,
  that player can build the structure for free, meaning without having to
  fulfill the resource cost.

It says "can build" (instead of "has to" or "must"), so I guess you are free not to use the chain.

That is correct, however you have to use the chain if you're controlling the "Free City" player in a 2-player game. Otherwise, you can indeed choose not to use the chain.

@Adama: Ah, that’s a good note! Do you want to add this as an answer, or should I incorporate this in my answer?

I've posted an answer, since I've found more relevant info.

According to a user on BoardGameGeek, the game designer Antoine Bauza has said: "You have to build for free if you can." … which confuses me.

I can't evaluate information from a second-hand post; if it was the actual designer himself, it would be fine. In any case, as the rules are currently worded, it's not mandatory to use the chain; for this reason it's "can build" in the normal rules and "must build" in the 2-player rules. Of course, if it makes sense for you (it does, for me) to enforce chain buildings, you could house-rule it.


text:
Does the card color matter for untapping it?
If a card is tapped (from the effect "on vacation"¹), its activation number has to be rolled to untap it.
Does the card’s color matter here? Does my green/purple card get untapped if my opponent rolls its number? Does my red card get untapped if I roll its number?

¹ I don’t know the English translation. In German it’s called "im Urlaub".

I don't have the English rules of Machi Koro Sharp either but the French version makes it clear (in a long paragraph just under the game components) that you need to roll the numbers needed to activate the building to untap it.

Un établissement peut rouvrir lorsqu'il est à nouveau activé par le résultat des dés. [...] Donc les établissements bleus peuvent rouvrir pendant le tour de n'importe quel joueur, les établissements rouges uniquement pendant le tour des autres joueurs, tandis que les érablissements violets et verts peuvent rouvrir uniquement pendant votre tour.

which would translate by

A building can re-open when it is activated by the result of a dice roll. [...] So blue buildings can re-open during any turn, red buildings can only re-open during the turn of an opponent and green or purple buildings can only re-open during the active player's turn.

Ah great, thank you. The German rules don’t state this (they only have the first sentence of your translation).

In fact,  he first sentence is enough I would say... The second one is only insisting on when you activate a building... Anyway, glad I could help, thanks for accepting the answer ;-)

Ah yes, for your translation that’s true, but the German one isn’t equivalent: It doesn’t say "activated", but more like: 'If the building’s number is rolled …'.

OK... That's not the same game this way ;-)


text:
Do you lose your nomad tile if you move all your settlements away?
Kingdom Builder with Nomads expansion
If you are the first who builds adjacent to a nomads space, you get the (only) nomads tile.
Do you lose it when you move all your settlements away from the nomad space?

No, according to the game designer Donald X. Vaccarino:

I do not see this in the rulebook, but the intention was that you do not lose the tile, even if you immediately move away.


text:
What are the important differences for games with 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 players?
In 7 Wonders you add cards to the game depending on the number of players. So (for example) a 3 player game probably plays somewhat differently than a 5 player game.
What are the most important "facts" for a game with 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 players? And how could I remember them?

Which building types (military, civilian, scientific, raw materials, manufactured goods, commercial, guilds) are rare, which are common?

When is a science strategy easy/hard?
When are there enough military structures for everyone, when not?
…

Which resources are rare/common?

When is it viable to try to bury certain resource cards?
…

This article on BGG is probably the definitive guide on differences with different player counts. To summarize some of its points here:

4p features the most basic (brown) resources per player of any player count. You can wait to draft what you need. By contrast, 3p and 7p have the least resources per player, and in those games you should draft the resource-granting cards you need immediately.
4p features the fewest advanced (gray) goods per player; 3p and 6p features the most; 5p has an average number, but they are concentrated in Age 2.
There are the most science (green) cards per player in 3p, followed by 4p. There are the fewest at 6p.
In 3p and 7p, the three science symbols are evenly distributed. In 5p, the symbols are evenly distributed, but there are fewer gears early and more later on. In 4p, there are 6 total tablet cards, 5 compasses, and only 4 gears!
In 3p and 4p, there is exactly one military (red) card per player per Age. In 5p, there is one extra in Age 3. In 6p and 7p, there is one red card "missing" in Age 1, but extras in Ages 2 and 3, and overall more shields total.
There is only one of the powerful Caravansery cards (the yellow wild basic resource card) in 3-4p. One is added in 5p and 6p.
There is only one Forum card (the yellow wild advanced goods card) in 3-5p. One is added in 6p and 7p.
Blue cards are always good and you can never have too many.

Fascinating facts, thanks for summarising.  I never really considered that different strategies might be more viable at different player counts!  (Though I guess draft games are always self-balancing to an extent..)


text:
7 Wonders scoring question (Olympia B, copying a guild) on BSW
On BrettspielWelt, I played Olympia (B) and built the 3rd wonder stage (copy a guild). The end score confused me, and I think BSW might have implemented the scoring wrong.
We were 3 players. Everyone had one guild.
Red had the science guild:

Blue:

Green (me):

As you can see, Red got no guild points. So I assume these are included in the score for science cards (didn't screenshot his science cards, unfortunately).
Blue got 5 guild points, which is correct (Red had 3 yellow cards, Green had 2).
Now, I (Green) got 10 guild points. How comes that? My own guild card gave me 6 points (2 browns + 3 greys + 1 purple). Now I get a guild card copy:

If I'd copy Blue's guild, I'd get 4 points (Red's 3 yellow cards + Blue's 1 yellow card). Ha. That would be 10 points.
But if I'd copy Red's guild, I'd have completed two science sets. So with this guild, I should have got 31 science points (instead of my 21).

Am I missing something or is this a bug on BrettspielWelt? Why did the system copy Blue's guild for me, instead of Red's guild (which would have made me the winner)?

Sounds like a design bug that it chooses the copy-card for you. It should have you choose it.

@Timwi: I think it's fine that the system chooses the card itself and not the player. Otherwise the player will do sums, which costs time. Of course the system should select the highest pointing card, though.

I agree with your assessment of how the scoring should've played out, so I would guess it is a bug, likely because copying that guild gives you 0 purple points so it thought that Blue's guild was better (failing to recognize that it gave you more science points).

I agree, it should have copied Red's guild card for you. I can't think of any reason it shouldn't. I've never used BSW, but I'm assuming it makes this choice automatically. It sounds like a bug to me.
I hope their logic isn't looking at the value of the guild card, as scored by the owner, in order to determine which one is best for Olympia. As that would be incorrect for all guild cards (I think).

Yes, the system makes this choice automatically.