text:
What is a good 'Baker's Dozen' solitaire strategy?
I am wondering what a good strategy is to win the 'Baker's Dozen' solitaire variant?  So far, I have tried to keep the cards descending in the same suit, wherever possible, but when the Kings are at the top of the tableau pile, it makes it very difficult.

OK, so I finally figured it out and for the record, here is what I found works well.
If you can stack cards descending by suit, do that but if it isn't possible and you have to stack on a different suit, make sure that there aren't any cards of the same suit that are of a LOWER value beneath them.  That way you can ensure you aren't locking up that suit in that tableau pile.  That worked for me!  Also, don't forget that you can put an Ace on top of a 2 if you need to pull a King from another tableau pile.

I play this game all the time and it's often winnable but sometimes it takes a lot of undos to get there (my winning percentage is about 47% over 300+ games).  I find that if I can empty a stack early, my chances are better.  Also, because you stack cards onto the same suit, there's no harm in having one suit get way "ahead" of the others.  In fact, it may help to focus on one suit at a time.  Of course, you have to be prepared to switch focus to a different suit if the opportunity comes up.

baker's dozen has a number of variants.  the one i play most has all cards face up and kings placed at top of stack.  this variant can be won almost all the time (99.5 to 99.9%).
the strategy i use is to:
1) put all the aces and deuces up on their appropriate pile, and some of the higher cards if not needed later;
2) try to find the best king(s) to uncover and look for queens that trap a card in between to start the build;
3) when building a stack the primary task is to bring a card that can potentially trap cards above it, and only secondarily to match suits.  this means that sometimes a lot of rearranging will happen later in the game to get the suits matched.
4) when reducing a stack it's best to uncover the higher valued top cards and not to build on the suit piles;
5)when building a stack, look for potential blocks to remove.


text:
Crushinator and Bom Boy Factory
Does Bom Boy Factory allow Crushinators effect come into play or was I forced to discard Bom Boy Factory and therefore not allowing Crushinators effect come into play? Take into effect Bottomless Pit and Recycling Center wordings also.

Hi Justin, welcome to board games stack exchange. Check out our [tour] to see how we work here. I've edited your question to fix the formatting, and to focus on just one question — you should ask about the bottomless pit in a new separate question. You can always access previous revisions of your question (and the text I removed) by clicking the edited X time ago link at the bottom middle.

Short answer: No, you can't activate Crushinator when you are forced to destroy the factory.
The Crushinator has an ability that you can activate. That activation has a cost (destroying a room). When a hero enters a room, you can choose to activate any spells or abilities you have. After that, you apply damage to the hero and resolve any effects that might trigger, but you can't activate more abilities until the hero enters the next room.
So when the hero enters the factory, you could choose to destroy it at that time, but then the factory would not deal damage to the hero. If you wait for it to deal damage, it will then be destroyed by its own text and you will not get a chance to activate the Crushinator's ability and pay for it by destroying the factory.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Dixit: what to do if two players cross the finish at the same time?
What do you do if two players cross the finish at the same time?
Does anyone have any rules on this? I can't see anything in the instructions.

If two players cross the finish line at the same time, then the player with the most points wins. If they both have the most points the rules don't indicate any tiebreaker, but my suggestion is to just play another round, as it's a casual game and it will allow you to get in another round of fun.

This might cause problems if a third player overtakes the two 'winners' in de tie-breaker round.

@JarkoDubbeldam in that case, the third player wins.

According to these rules,

The game ends when one of the players has reached 30 points or when a player draws the last card. The player with the most points at the end of the game wins.

The player with the most points is the winner.
In the event of a tie, it's often the preferred resolution in a casual setting to declare that all the players tied for first are winners.
However, if you want a single winner, there's nothing appropriate to use as a tie-breaker, so just play more rounds until there's a clear winner.

I agree that having multiple winners is the most sensible judgement by the written rules, and should be the go-to for games that don't specify tie-breakers (as opposed to adjusting the game to force a single winner).

The game doesn't end when a player crosses the finish line (as uninuitive as it may seem)
From the rules on the publisher's website (also available in other languages):

Game end
The game ends when the last card from the pack has been drawn. The player who’s the furthest on the scoring track is the winner.

Thus if you go past 30 points, you just take another lap.
There are no tiebreakers for if there is a tie when the last card has been drawn. Given the casual nature of the game, I'm going to guess that they are co-winners.
If having co-winners doesn't work for you, the only real option is to play additional rounds until someone comes out ahead.

These rules say the game ends when one of the players has reached 30 points or when a player draws the last card. The player with the most points at the end of the game wins.

@ikegami Huh, the rules I've found were on the official website and have different text.

Sounds like i found a newer version. It makes no sense to keep going until there are no cards. There are thousands of cards out now.

You follow the circle of turns in choosing which bunny moves first. Yoy dont move them all at once because that is not in the rules. Logic dictates that the person next to the person’s card being guessed will move first. If the moves to be taken are enough to reach 30, then that person wins, otherwise, the next person in turn will move and have the same opportunity to reach 30. There is obviously a reason why the game ends at 30, and counting which person has more points more than is definitely not what the intention of the rule is. Otherwise, this  would have been easily pointed out in the rules.

This is not said nor implied by the rulebook. It simply states “each player moves their game piece on the scoreboard as many spaces as points earned.” No reason to think there is any order for this at all. Also, “when a player reaches 30 points” is not the same as “when a player moves their marker to the 30 point space.”  You have points immediately the moment you earn them; it then takes time in real world games to actually move your marker. Moving your marker doesn’t give you any points, you get the points as soon as votes are revealed and scored.

Finally, the rules state “the player with the most points at the end wins”; and this would be strange wording if it were not possible for more than one player to reach 30.

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

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


text:
Is the Native discarded when moving onto a Base Camp?
In The Quest for El Dorado, do you discard the Native card --

The Native knows the lay of the land and always lets you move one
  space when played. Ignore that space’s requirements and just place
  your piece on it. The Native can also tear down blockades, but you
  can’t use it to move to an occupied space or onto a mountain space.

-- when moving onto a Base Camp, or does the Native card also ignore the Base Camp requirement?

Cards you play to move onto a base camp space aren’t discarded.
  Instead, they are completely removed from the game. They won’t be used
  again this game.

BGG Answers: (Majority View)
The native Card is NOT discarded. It ignores the Base Camp requirement like any other hex.

If the native should not ignore base camps it should’ve been stated explicitely in the rules. It isn’t. Therefore the native may move onto base camps (without trashing/removing any card) like onto any other hex (except mountains and occupied ones).

-

... If the native should not ignore ...

"Ignore that space’s requirements and just place your piece on it" overrides the need to have such rule. This is how rulebooks work, from my 10 years of gaming experience.

-

The Native does indeed ignore any and all symbols or requirements.
  It lets you move onto an adjacent hex if that move is legal (i.e. no mountain and no occupied hex, unless you have the cave tile that specifically allows that).

If it is a base camp you don't trash cards
if it is rubble you don't discard cards
if it is terrain you don't need the shown strength.

It seems that the card indeed can fully ignore the Base Camp requirement. The other answer already referred to a number of interpretations of the base rule from which this follows.
The official rule book also gives an example which seems to confirm this (IMHO). On page 6:

Next, she plays the Native and moves her piece onto the rubble space. The Native allows her to ignore a space’s requirements, which means she doesn’t have to play 3 cards from her hand.

In this example, a rubble space was used as the target, but it seems logical to assume the same applies to a base camp as well. Both hex spaces have a requirement regarding cards, and here it is explicitly confirmed that the Native may ignore such a requirement.


text:
What happens if, after battle, board is still full?
What happens, if the board is full and after battle (resulting from the full board) it stays that way?
Moreover, what happens if - in such situation - opponent has the possibility to perform action despite full board? For example sniper, small bomb, large bomb, ability to replace opponent or self units with new ones etc.

Did it happen to you or is this purely theoretical question?

It did :) I was playing Steel Police and managed to get rid of most of opponent's units, leaving only two (including the base), which were netted, but not attacked. As an effect, after the battle, opponent's base received damage, my didn't and no units or modules were damaged or destroyed.

Theoretically one might run battle one after another and either pronounce victory of one of players or a draw (if they have same number of HPs for bases and either no damage is being dealt during battle or damage to both bases is equal). However, situation is getting more interesting when armies, which are battling, can put their new units in place of their or opponent's ones already placed on the board. Also, tere are small and big bombs and snipers.

Yeah, I'd go with that. If board is still full after one battle, I'd immediately run another, and so on, untill one player wins/situation changes. Or if board state stays the same, then it's a draw. I don't know official rulings on this occasion though.

You have another Battle immediately.
On page 5 of the game rules:

If at any time during the game the board is filled up and no single space is left to place a tile on, a Battle commences (see BATTLES section below).

Even if the Battle results in a stalemate, the game will eventually end. As soon as the Battle ends, so does the active player's turn:

The player who starts a Battle (by playing Battle tile or filling up the board) finishes his turn, regardless of the number of tiles he has left. As soon as the Battle commences, no other tiles can be used or even discarded.

As such, the next player takes their turn, drawing and discarding. Because the board is full, a battle happens immediately (before they can play tiles or use other abilities). Eventually, a player will draw their last tile. An automatic battle happens on that turn due to the board being full, then again on the opponent's turn, and then the final battle happens.
If both HQs have the same points left, each player takes an extra turn (a.k.a. two more battles), and then there's an additional final battle. If there's still no winner, it's a draw.

"Immediately" implies nothing happens in between, but you're saying the turn passes and the next player draws  and discards. Perhaps "Play passes to the next player, resulting in another Battle" would be a more accurate summary?

Also, while I find your answer compelling, it seems to me like it would be better from a design perspective to allow Instant Action tiles to be used if drawn in the scenario, and I'd be interested to hear if the game dev wanted to clarify. :)

@AndrewVandever, yes, I interpreted it as the draw structure of a turn is forced because the rule for immediate battling was contained in the section for playing tiles. It could be argued that it happens infinitely, but I thought this made more sense as it forces the game end, and there's no other distinction between the two ways. Instant speed actions might be reasonable to allow.


text:
Can you sacrifice a creature you block with to fulfill Annihilator?
Lets say someone is blocking an Eldrazi with annihilator. Can they sacrifice a creature they blocked with to count as one of the things sacrifice with annihilator?

I rolled back the edit made by the author because it totally changed the question being asked. Clarification is good, but editing to ask a different question is usually not. If you have a new question, use the Ask Question button. Unfortunately, the rollback also means that the duplicate closure no longer makes any sense. The question is still a duplicate of Can you claim a Double Sacrifice Bonus (in my opinion). I flagged for moderator attention so that hopefully this can be sorted out.

Also, this is a good question (even though it's been asked before). I hope you don't delete it again!

Nominated for reopening. I don't think it's a duplicate of double sacrifice bonus either, because there's question about blocking with the creature and then sacrificing it to annihilator, which as the answer points out isn't possible.

I removed the second question because we only want one question per question, and the second question is already answered here: http://boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/4168/if-a-blocking-creature-leaves-the-battlefield-is-the-attacker-still-blocked-or?noredirect=1&lq=1

@diego As I re-read the second question, I'm not convinced it's the same as what you linked.

@corsiKa 5 other people closed it as a dupe of that one, and regardless it should be asked on its own, not as a part of this one.

@diego Sorry, they were mistaken, and so are you. It is not a "second question" but rather an attempt to rephrase the first question. It doesn't make sense to people who understand the rules because both phrasings of the question are asked on a faulty premise. This is why it looks like a different question. But it isn't a different question.

Annihilator happens before blocks.  When the attacking player declares attackers, the Annihilator trigger goes on the stack.  The defending player has to resolve it first.  Then the phase can move to the Declare Blockers step.  If you still have a creature at that point, you can block.

okay, let me rewrite the question then.

@ShadowZ. If you want to ask a different question (including if that different question is what you originally intended), we invite you to ask a new question instead in this case.


text:
Spell with no chosen targets
Bit of a strange one - sorry. My question is: is the following correct?
Sacred Excavation is a sorcery which says:

Return up to two target cards with cycling from your graveyard to your hand.

If I cast it choosing no targets, to return no target cards to my hand, then Rule 608.2b states:

… The spell or ability is countered if all its targets, for every instance of the word "target," are now illegal.

It's vacuously true that every target of my spell is illegal: there are no targets, so every target is the King of France, and every target is legal, and every target is illegal. So Sacred Excavation is countered.
The effect is the same as if it had resolved, except in some very niche edge cases - "when something is countered" effects would trigger, and anything spliced onto that spell would not happen, for instance.

Vacuous truth does in fact work as described in the question. In set theory, for any predicate P, the statement "All elements of the empty set satisfy P" is always true. The question of the truth of vacuous statements doesn't come up as often in plain English, but I think it is still considered to be the correct convention.

@ikegami Sure it can. Bouncing a permanent in response to a spell targeting it creates a situation where a target is illegal precisely because it doesn't exist. Though that's not quite the situation we have here; here we're saying that every target of a spell with no targets is illegal. If you want to claim otherwise, I challenge you (rhetorically) to prove it: show me a target of that spell which is not illegal.

@ikegami (2 comments up) Read again. Of course we're not. Anyway I think we should take this to [chat] if you care to continue the exchange. (I won't continue it here, so as not to distract from the answer.)

@ikegami "Vacuous" and "all" have a well defined meanings in set theory. Vacuous isn't an ad hominem like "mindless" or "blabbering". Read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuous_truth

It does not work like that. The spell will not be countered. It will resolve and it will do nothing.
This is explicitly stated in Oracle rulings on cards where the difference matters more: spells that affect "up to [some number] of target..." and also have another effect. Adverse Conditions, for example, has the following ruling:

You can cast Adverse Conditions with no targets. When it resolves, you’ll get an Eldrazi Scion. However, if you cast Adverse Conditions with any targets and all of those targets are illegal as it tries to resolve, it will be countered and none of its effects will happen. You won’t get the Eldrazi Scion in that case.

Note that the beginning of the rule quoted in the question, 608.2b, says

If the spell or ability specifies targets, it checks whether the targets are still legal...

and rule 114.5 says

Spells and abilities that can have zero or more targets are targeted only if one or more targets have been chosen for them.

I think that saying that a spell "specifies targets" is the same as saying that it "is targeted", and I would conclude that the procedure in rule 608.2b is intended to be performed only on spells for which one or more targets have been chosen.

Are you replying to a now-deleted comment? It's not clear whether you're replying to a deleted comment, or if you changed your mind about your answer and you think it's wrong now.

I was replying to a now-deleted comment. I've deleted my own to avoid confusion.

Sorry - I'm used to the norms on math.SE, where one very promptly deletes comments that turn out to be wrong.


text:
Mainland production numbers go to new islands (Settlers of Catan app)
When a player reaches an island by ship, the hex they "land on" gets a production number. However, if the computer has run out of new production numbers to assign, the production number for the newly-reached island hex is taken from a hex in the mainland (i.e now a hex in the mainland has no production number).
When this happens, the computer lets you pick which number from the mainland you want to take to the island. I would like to know how the game decides which choices to give you. It doesn't always let you pick from all of the hexes you currently occupy on the mainland.

The rules are given at Catan Maps (and I believe somewhere in app, but I don't have it installed at the moment):

After setting up the board as shown, set aside the following four number tokens, shuffled in a face-down pile:  3, 5, 8, 9, 10
[...]
As soon as a player’s ship reaches the intersection of a terrain hex belonging to one of the small islands, a number token is assigned to this hex. The first 5 number tokens are taken randomly from the face down supply.
Once the supply is used up, the player whose turn it is must remove a number token from the main island. At first, only number tokens are available that obey the following 3 rules:

The number token must belong to a terrain hex adjacent to which the active player owns a settlement or city.
Each settlement or city on the main island must keep at least one terrain hex with a number token.
On a small island, the numbers 6 and 8 must not be next to each other.

If it is not possible to comply with all three rules, you may break the rules in consecutive order from 1 to 3.

The page at Catan Maps also notes that this scenario was included in the first edition of Seafarers, but was removed because it requires so many different sets.


text:
Breaking ICE - exactly how should strength be treated?
Sorry if this is quite a basic question, but I've reviewed the rule book a few times and haven't been able to answer it myself (although I appreciate that doesn't mean the answer isn't there, but I've just not been able to find it!).
When a Runner encounters a rezzed piece of ICE, that ICE has a numeric strength and perhaps a number of subroutines (as well as encounter events/abilities, but those are not relevant to my question). I think I understand that when it comes to the subroutines, as long as they are either broken or do not include "End the run" as an effect, the Runner is not prevented from proceeding past the piece of ICE, but I'm not 100% clear on how the strength of the ICE factors into this.
I know that the Runner must have an installed Icebreaker with at least the same strength as the ICE being encountered in order to be able to interact with the ICE (and therefore break the subroutines). But my question is: Does the type of the Icebreaker need to match that of the ICE being encountered to be able to use the strength to gain access to interact?
So for example, if the Runner has an installed Mimic icebreaker, which has a strength of 3 and the ability to break Sentry subroutines, can it be used to gain access to a non-Sentry piece of rezzed ICE which equal or lower strength, with a different icebreaker (with a strength lower than that of the encountered ICE) then used to break some/all of the subroutines (or not, if the Runner is happy to let the subroutines run)?

I'm not completely sure what you're asking, but to be clear: you don't need an icebreaker in order to encounter a piece of ice and have its subroutines fire. Essentially if you don't have an icebreaker installed, or don't have one that can break the specific type of ice subroutines you are dealing with, then the strength doesn't matter. The strength is the number an icebreaker must be at in order to break its subroutines, but has nothing to do with whether you can run and encounter it.

I see, so the only relevance the strength of the ICE plays is to determine how strong an icebreaker must be in order to be able to break any subroutines on that piece of ICE?

That is correct

Unless otherwise stated, strength simply determines which icebreakers can interact with (typically meaning break subroutines on) a piece of ice. From page 16 of the rulebook:

An icebreaker can only interact with ice that
  has equal or lower strength than the icebreaker.

Notice that the individual icebreaker whose breaking ability you want to use needs to have high enough strength, the strength of your other icebreakers isn't a factor. It's also worth noting:

Many icebreakers allow the Runner to temporarily increase the
  icebreaker’s strength by spending credits...This strength increase
  lasts only while the current piece of ice is being encountered, unless
  otherwise noted by card abilities. After an encounter with a piece of
  ice, the icebreaker’s strength returns to the value shown on its card.

Just to be clear, it's certainly possible that at some point in the future an ice will be designed for which the strength factors into some other effect (e.g. "do X meat damage. X is the strength of this ice"), but I don't believe there's anything like that in the card pool today.

Mimic cannot break non sentry ice. Nor does the strength of Mimic matter when trying to break ice of a different type with a different icebreaker, each icebreaker is totally independent of others, with the exception of a few like  Baba Yaga, which hosts other breakers to get their abilities and Crowbar, Spike and Shiv which set strength based on number if installed breakers.


text:
Can I advance an agenda over it's scoring cost?
Say, can I put 3 advancement tokens on Hostile Takeover?

Yes, you can. From the rulebook, p. 14

Agendas can always be advanced while installed. Cards other than
  agendas can only be advanced if their text box allows it. There is no
  limit to the number of times a card can be advanced.

and

Scoring Agendas– When the number of advancement tokens on an agenda is
  equal to or higher than its advancement requirement, the agenda is
  fully advanced and the Corporation can score it

Absolutely. The rules state that "There is no limit to the number of times a card can be advanced." and you can score an agenda if "the number of advancement tokens on an agenda is equal to or higher than its advancement requirement." In fact this is actually intended for some of the agendas.
Take a look at Project Beale, which is the most notable example. Advancing past the point you need to on Beale gives more points. Braintrust works the same way, but lowers the rez cost of ice rather than being worth more points. Project Ares makes the runner trash cards when it is scored, one installed card for each advancement over it's requirement.
Project Atlas, Project Kusanagi and Project Vitruvius all also gain agenda counters for each advancement over the required when you score them, but these unlike Beale and Braintrust are spent to activate an effect. Overadvancing more gives you more uses of searching R&D for a card, adding subroutines to ice, or returning cards from archives to HQ.
Another example group are the public agendas - Underway Renovation, Oaktown Renovation, Hollywood Renovation and New Construction. Each of these agendas are installed face up, and give a bonus when you advance them (milling the runner, gaining credits, advancing other cards and installing cards) these bonuses get better once the agenda can be scored but is still being advanced (more cards, more credits, more counters, rez the card free)

Atlas, Vitruvius and Kusanagi gain counters 1-for-1 for "extra" advancement tokens

@Deo Corrected, I play them, but as a 2 for 3, not for their over advance, and just so used to beale and braintrust for over advances.


text:
What happens in Desert Island if no fate tokens are in play at the end of the round?
In Desert Island, the rules state

FATE  –  the  event  that  appears  the  most  happens  to  the  character(s)  with  the  most  fate  tokens

and

Each week something bad happens to somebody. (Boar!, Illness, Monkeys,
  Rats, Tsunami).The character (or characters if 2 or more are tied)
  with the most total fate tokens on them and their location will be the
  target.

If no players or locations with living players have any fate tokens at the end of the round, is no fate applied? Or does a the prevalent fate apply to all living characters?
EDIT
Having tried both approaches extensively, we now play with no fate tokens => no fate event.
If fate applies to a lone player every round, they die pretty fast. Players are more likely to sneakily sabotage each other if they think there's some hope of lighting the fire on their own... and sabotage is what makes this game fun!

In case of a tie, it happens to the characters with the most tokens. And if no character have tokens, they all have the most (even if it is none).

Well... mathematically this is true, but if the way it's written implies that some tokens exist. For example: the most total fate tokens on them and their location implies a non-zero quantity of tokens.

It's also important for the dynamic of the game, because if you play fate every round with only one person alive, they will die very quickly. If you play fate only when they have 1 or more fate tokens, they have a reasonable chance of lighting the fire alone.

As the rules you quoted say, all characters with the highest number of tokens (in your case, zero) will get a bad event. "The highest number" is mathematically defined as "no number is higher than this". If the highest number is zero, then that's it.

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


text:
Double strike blocked by a double strike?
I was recently playing magic the gathering with my brother and it so happened that at a point in a game we each controlled a 4/4 creature with double strike. We were wondering what would happen if one said creature were to block the other. Would they simply both die? I mean, they both, by definition, deal damage first.

Normally, when one creature blocks another, each one simultaneously deals damage equal to its power to the other. Then, after that is done, the game checks each one to see whether it has taken enough damage to be destroyed. The abilities First Strike and Double Strike each add an additional step to combat where damage dealt by creatures with First Strike or Double Strike is dealt simultaneously, but before regular combat damage is dealt.
In other words, it plays out like this (for illustrative purposes, I'm going to say that the creatures are 4/5 instead of 4/4):

Declare Attackers Step:

The active player declares their 4/5 creature with Double Strike as an attacker.

Declare Blockers Step:

The defending player declares their 4/5 creature with Double Strike as a blocker blocking the first creature.

First Strike Combat Damage Step:

Each creature deals 4 damage to the other.
Creatures that have lethal damage die at this point and are moved to the graveyard, and wouldn't participate in the next combat step. In the original scenario, this means both creatures would die at this point because they have taken damage greater than or equal to their toughness. In this modified scenario, they each survive with 4 damage marked.

Regular Combat Damage Step:

Each creature deals 4 damage to the other again.
Now both creatures have taken 8 damage with only 5 toughness, so they both die.

Wow thank you! I get it now! Thanks for the detailed explaination!


text:
Devoured while lost in time and space
One of our investigators I1 was lost in time and space. Then, another investigator I2 got a dark pact triggered, and the effect was "Another investigator of your choice is devoured".
1) Can I1 be targeted by I2's dark pact effect?
2) If 1), would I2 actually be devoured? The text says that an investigator lost in time and space cannot be affected by anything.
We reason two things:
a) the wording means that I2 could be targeted but not affected by the devouring
b) given the general theme and the unspoken rule that "if there are various interpretations of a rule in a cooperative game, choose the least helpful", it feels like a loophole that breaks the rules. Therefore, we chose another investigator to be devoured
We chose b). Did we choose "right"?

I1 cannot be devoured. I can bet my pants that they also cannot be chosen, but this is isn't official. I can answer when I get a clarification.

I think that it will read the same as "cannot be targeted or affected" but I'm not sure and haven't found any concise answer as of yet which explains it

I think that you are right because of the unspoken rule of cooperative games. I could not find anything in the erratas apart from a reference to "move".

You are unaffected by other game effects […]

This does imply that the investigator cannot have any effects at all. So they cannot be a target for anything at all: spells, Dark Pacts, etc…
This is again implied by the errata, although it refers to "moves" and not other specific effects.

Q. Can an investigator with a Lost in Time and Space Condition
  be moved by another investigator using the Plumb the Void Spell?
A. No. If an effect states that an investigator cannot move,
  such as a Lost in Time and Space Condition or a Detained
  Condition, that investigator cannot move on his own nor can
  he be moved by any effect.

As you said, the unspoken rule of cooperative games should in principle mean we did it right. Neverhtless, what you mention in your answer is that the investigator cannot be affected, but there is no reference to wheter he could be targeted. For example, if you have the pocket watch you can be targeted by a delayed condition but not affected.

Indeed,  I could not find an official ruling on this.

The investigator lost in time and space cannot be targeted by the dark pact's effect,
simply because he is not available for targeting.
He is lost in time and space,
inaccessible to anyone.
If I'm an ancient one, and let you choose another investigator to be devoured,
and you try to get clever on me and choose an investigator who is inaccessible,
I would just devour you out of spite.
So I think that's just how this should work.
Nice try, but no loopholes and wishful thinking.


text:
What are some basic strategies for Labyrinth?
My comp sci class currently is on the topic of AIs and we're tasked to write an AI for Labyrinth (the Ravensburger game) and have them play each other to see who wrote the best AI. As someone who's never heard of the game or even touched before I can only think of a limited amount of strategy for the game. Can anyone who has played Labyrinth bestow some common and advanced strategies upon me? Thanks in advance.

Have you gotten to the point of always finding a way to reach the target in one move if one exists?

I didn't quite want to add my algorithm because a) my classmates are gonna probs find this when they google and b) it'd turn my post into a stackoverflow post :P
Ill post it if you insist though
oh and c) my teacher's philosophy is that when you don't know how to solve a problem with code, ask a random stranger how they'd solve this problem
P.S. I am not sure what you're asking, is it in terms of code or thinking?

I'm trying to clarify what level of strategy you're looking for. It's unclear from your question what you actually know. A huge part of Labyrinth is being able to just get there in one move if possible, because you often can. If you can do that already, you need more advanced strategy. If you can't, then this is more of a "how do I write an algorithm" question and not so much a board games one.

Oh ok Ill edit my current thought into the main post

A few tips:

Static tiles are more stable (duh!), so going there is a bit more predictable. If you have goals on those, they have lower priority.
Static tiles are more stable (again), so staying on a static tile at the end of your turn will assure you you are at the same place when you begin the next one.
Manhattan distance (dx + dy) may be important because being close to a goal makes it easier to reach if you are not sure of what the board will look like on your next turn.
Don't forget to use the "shortcut": if you stand at the edge of the board and you are pushed out, you teleport to the other side.
Having a large reachable zone at the beginning of your turn allows you to adapt easily: if you can go to a lot of places, you can change your mind when trouble arrive.
Play the anti-game. Even though I would never recommend that to any living player, as your goal here is clearly to win and not at all to have fun while doing it, crush your opponents completely without mercy! Sometimes, reaching your goal is more complicated that putting your opponent(s) in a tricky situation. Keep in mind who is about to win and don't be nice with him (or should I say "it"?) Everything that I said higher can be applied negatively to the others.


text:
Player insurance on natural player blackjack
Assuming that the dealer has a ACE as their up-card.
Then normally, the player is asked to take insurance.
If the player has natural blackjack, can he still take insurance?
If the bet value is $1 and if the player takes insurance and dealer has blackjack, what is the player win?
Is it EVEN MONEY + BET/2 (insurance pay) = $2, after paying $1(initial bet) + $0.50(insurance)

Having a face-card up is mutually exclusive with having an ace up. Please fix your terminology to make sense.

@Nij Actually for the matter of the insurance bet, it only happens when the dealer has an Ace as the face up card.  You don't see the dealer's second card until the players have finished playing their hands.

I think I know how blackjack works, it was my job for years. Aces are not face-cards, so it is impossible to have both a face-card and an ace exposed.

Assuming the Player Has Blackjack
If you take the insurance:
If the dealer has Blackjack you will earn $1.00 on the hand.
If the dealer does not have Blackjack you will earn $1.00. ($1.50 - $0.50)
If you don't take the insurance:
If the dealer has Blackjack you will earn $0.00.
If the dealer does not have Blackjack you will earn $1.50.
Ultimately you won't lose money taking the insurance bet, but you will lessen your earnings.  It will all depend on the odds of the dealer having Blackjack.
The odds of the dealer having Blackjack where this choice has the same expected value is 1/3.  If there's less than 1/3 chance of dealer having Blackjack, you should not take Insurance.  If there is greater than 1/3 chance then you should take insurance.
On an initial deck/shoe/whatever, there is about a 30% chance of dealer having Blackjack.
Assuming the Player Does Not Have Blackjack
If the dealer has Blackjack then the player will break even.  ($1.00 win from Insurance - $1.00 original bet)
If the dealer does not have Blackjack then the earnings will be the earnings from the hand less the insurance bet.  (Earn $0.50 if the hand wins, Lose $1.50 if the hand loses)

You are assuming that the natural blackjack pays bet*3 (payout is 2:1), correct?

Math is hard sometimes... Blackjack is usually 3:2.  I will correct.

Yes, blackjack is usually 3:2, so the win is bet*2.5.

@NVG No the win is still only $1.50, but you don't lose your bet.

Win is not the same thing with profit.
Win is what the game pays at the end.
If I bet 1$ and I have blackjack, the win is 2.5$, while the profit is 1.5$.
If I bet 1$ and I have no blackjack and I take insurance, then I pay a total of 1.5$ (bet+insurance_bet). Then if the dealer has blackjack, I win 1.5$ or 1$? This is my dilema.

@NVG My apologies.  The way I read the question was assuming that the player had Blackjack.  I have updated my answer.

If the player has a natural 21 (a "blackjack"), the insurance offer is instead called "taking even money." The dealer will offer to pay the hand at 1:1 before revealing the hole card. If the player accepts this offer, they get paid immediately. If the player refuses "even money," the dealer then checks: a player win is paid at 3:2; a player push — both parties have 21 — means no money is won or lost.
Mathematically, this is equivalent to taking insurance because it the half-bet that would normally be staked as insurance is the same half-bet that is forfeited with the 1:1 payout.


text:
Search for card and put it into play. What if the card is already in hand?
Let us assume I use
Behemoth's Herald's ability to search for a card named Godsire. If Godsire can be found in the library the situation is clear. But what if no Godsire is in the library and I have Godsire in my Hand? Can I still use Behemoth's Herald's ability to put Godsire onto the battlefield at no mana cost?
The official rules on searching (Comprehensive Rules, Section 701.17, Aether Revolt, January 20 2017) do not seem to answer this question. But I guess it is also relevant that the words "and" and "it" appear in the card's ruletext.

I feel like all the other answers, while correct, are missing part of what the question was asking.
The rule here is dependent upon what the word "it" refers to. The card could be (mis) read as 2 separate instructions:
1) Search your library for a card named Godsire
2) Put a card named Godsire onto the battlefield
However, in the context of the card, the word "it" actually refers to "the card that you found when you searched for a card named Godsire"; it does not refer to "a card named Godsire".
I do not know of a comprehensive rule that clarifies this meaning of the word "it"; but it is the most specific use of "it", and it makes sense to interpret it as specifically as you can.

This is the best answer. Like it or not, the OP didn't really need help with rules. They needed help correctly identifying the antecedent for the pronoun "it".

Good point. Which makes me curious: What if Behemoth's Herald's rule text said "Godsire" instead of "it" in the second part? (I hope it is okay to ask a small follow-up question here).

@joern Interesting question... I think that it would just be bad/unclear wording, because an instruction to put a card onto the battlefield would need to say where it comes from. (In your hand, in your graveyard, etc).

@joern: If the card were meant to do what you were asking about, it would be phrased something like "Search your library for a card named Godsire and put it in your hand. Then shuffle your library. You may put a card named Godsire from your hand onto the battlefield.". If it were indeed badly phrased as you said, it would likely get Errata text in the Oracle database to fix that problem.

When instructed to search your library, you can only search your library. If the card you're looking for isn't in your library, you can't find it. You can't search zones other than your library for the card.
Rule 701.17a says

To search for a card in a zone, look at all cards in that zone (even if it’s a hidden zone) and find a card that matches the given description.

The relevant part of Behemoth's Herald's ability says

Search your library for a card named Godsire and put it onto the battlefield.

"Your library" is the zone that you are instructed to search, so you can look at cards in your library. And "card named Godsire" is the description of the card you are trying to find, so you can only find cards named "Godsire" in your library.

To be perhaps excessively thorough, also: "400.1. A zone is a place where objects can be during a game. There are normally seven zones: library, hand, battlefield, graveyard, stack, exile, and command. [...]" - unsurprisingly, library and hand are separate zones.

This was not the focus of the question. The focus of the question was about playing a card which was in my hand. Sorry if that was not clear enough.

@joern: The way I read it, this answer very much answers the question you asked, just maybe phrases it in a different manner than you would expect. The reason you can't put a card from your hand on the battlefield here is because the ability is exclusively instructing you to search your library - as far as that effect is concerned, your hand doesn't even exist, and this answer elaborates on why. If this wasn't what you wanted to know, please consider editing your question.

From the Comprehensive Rules:

101.3. Any part of an instruction that’s impossible to perform is ignored.

If you search for a card in a specific zone and can't find it there, anything you're supposed to do next with that card is impossible and thus ignored. The impossible action does not get replaced by any other action, even if that action appears to you to be quite similar (like taking the action with a card of the same name from a different zone).

Re "If you search for a card in a specific zone and can't find it there", Or if you choose not to find it (a perfectly legal option).

True - if you are searching a hidden zone for cards with a stated quality, such as OP's search of a library for a card with a specific name, you aren't required to find them (rule 701.17b). In any other kind of search - in other words, any search where the opponent can check your work - you have to find the card if it's there.

Behemoth's Herald says, "Search your Library."  Your hand is not part of your library.

Cards do what they say they do. In this case that is "Search your library for a card named Godsire and put it onto the battlefield.", you are not instructed to search anywhere else, therefore you cannot search anywhere else to find Godsire.
In order to be allowed to search your hand the card would have to say that like Surgical Extraction does "Search its owner's graveyard, hand, and library [...]"


text:
What GSM of paper should I use for reprinting cards to use in deck sleeves
UPDATE: Not knowing how the forum worked, I asked a question and, in retrospect, I should have provided more detail on work I had already done / was doing when it occurred to me to ask the question!  With very kind intention, my post was edited to ask what people assumed would be easier.  However, I've already spent ages scanning the old card fronts and purchased the card sleeves for how I'm resizing the cards, it really wouldn't be easier (or definitely not cheaper) to do anything other than to press ahead at this stage.

An old favourite game (the Judge Dredd Board Game if anyone remembers or cares) has gotten to the stage when all of us can recognise half the cards from the back by the staining and marks on the cards.  This is the second time I've bought the game as it happened before as well.
I had considered re-buying again and getting deck sleeves but (perhaps erroneously considering answers given) I didn't believe that I could get the right size of cards.  So I have scanned all the different sets of cards (this afternoon since posting), redesigned the card backs (less solid black) and have resized the cards slightly to perfectly fit the card sleeves that I have already ordered.
I only really want to know if this world work with a lightweight card (say 150GSM) or whether something like 270GSM would work better.

If you own some cards which fit into common sleeves, it would be a cost-effective solution to put those cards into sleeves as a stabilizer and place a piece of paper in front of it, indicating which Judge Dredd Board Game card it is supposed to represent. It can even be a xerox'd version of the original.

@Thunderforge I did a quick look over at BGG and it looks like the cards for this game aren't a standard size, so there currently aren't sleeves that fit them well. My understanding of this question is they are looking for a way to print the cards so that they are a standard size so they can get sleeves that will work for them.

@Thunderforge https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/1084950/sleeving-cards

Looking at FFG's offerings the Mini European look the closest, but the discussion I linked to says they are too wide

Thanks Thunderforge - as I didn't think the right size existed for either (and it costs a good £50) I pressed on with the other.  I recognise that you're almost certainly right and it is a complex way I've chosen but sometimes it's nice to do things properly for yourself.  It'll really feel like my game now.

Thanks for clarifying your question; like I said, I encouraged you to edit your question if I misunderstood what it was. I've deleted my answer since it's no longer relevant to the question.

Paper is a bit more complex than just the GSM as you can get different thickness, stiffness and other properties.
The general "best" GSM for cards will be around 300GSM, but you'll want to feel the sheet of paper first for thickness and stiffness as well. It'll be no good to have a lovely printed card that flops about in your hand or flexes too much to shuffle easily.
This thread on BGG suggests using paper stock that's designed for business card usage as it's widely available.
This custom card printer uses 300, 310 or 270GSM for their playing cards depending on paper type and required quality.
You will find a lot of home printers won't be able to print on high GSM paper - check your specifications for your printer if you want to print at home.
If you're getting it professionally printed at a print shop, ask for some paper samples, and have a test page to print on each paper so you can see the differences.
I had some success in printing at home some card dividers on 180GSM matte photo paper and laminating the entire page in high quality 125 micron before cutting out using a paper guillotine. This produced a very stiff card that was slightly glossy, despite the stock being not that stiff to begin with. As you're planning on sleeving, I'd go the higher GSM paper straight away and skip laminating.


text:
Can monsters with no speed cross barrier rooms?
We encountered this in Haunt 23: Tentacled Horror. After the heroes discovered the location of the head (a monster), they placed it on one side of the chasm. The head has no speed. On the head's monster turn, can it move across the chasm? I see three reasons this is true:

"monsters can ignore any harmful text on a room tile" (Rulebook, p19)
"[m]onsters always ignore barriers" (ibid, p7)
"[c]rossing the barrier [of a barrier room] doesn't count as moving a space." (ibid, p7)

Clarification question, why would it matter which side of the barrier the head is on? As far as I know the barrier only matters for the question of moving to an adjacent room. If the head can't move into the next room, then I don't think it would really have a concept of which side it is on,

The head is susceptible to attack, so being able to move across the chasm away from an attacking hero would presumably force the hero to speed roll to cross the chasm and attack the monster. That said, the rules are somewhat ambiguous if the hero actually needs to cross the chasm to even attack the monster: "Explorers can't fight or interact in any way with an explorer in the same room but on the opposite side of the barrier." Since the monster is not an explorer, perhaps heros have no need to even cross the chasm to attack.

No where is it specified that the head can't move; it merely doesn't have a speed. The dog, for example, also has no speed, but can move. ("Companion omens don't have physical or mental traits.", p12)

A monster must have speed to move, companions are different as you quoted above

Yes.
From the rules, under Special Rooms, page 6:

Crossing the barrier doesn’t count as moving a space.

and

Monsters always ignore barriers.

The fact that a monster's movement is defined by speed is relevant to discussing how many rooms the monster can move between.

At the start of the monster turn, roll a number of dice equal to each monster’s Speed. That’s the number of spaces that monster can move that turn

This means that a monster than doesn't have speed can move 0 spaces each turn. But your question is not related to how many space a monster can move. Your question is about which side of the barrier room the monster is considered to be on. And monsters can choose to be on whichever side of the barrier they want to be on. Going from one side of the barrier to the other isn't "moving" as the game generally describes moving.
It is worth noting that many rules in Betrayal are either unclear or lacking; and this is a case where the rules as written are not fully in line with the thematic answer. That is to say, it makes sense thematically that a monster that "cannot move" couldn't ever get from one side of the tower to the other. Because of this, it makes perfect sense for your playgroup to decide to play the game with the thematic answer rather than the strictly rules-based answer.

I appreciate the distinction between a "thematic" and "rules-based" answer, although I'm still dubious of the notion that zero speed means the monster "cannot move".

I think this answer is spot on. Thematically it's pretty clear that Speed 0 means it cannot move under its own volition. It's correct to note that in a strict reading of the rules crossing the barrier isn't moving, but thematically that's silly: there's no reasonable creature that can navigate catacombs and jump over chasms but can't no matter how much time you give it get itself from the entrance hall to the foyer. And this is one of the few games where I'd favor the thematic ruling.

If you look at the rules (emphasis mine)

Monsters move differently.
At the start of the monster turn, roll a number of dice equal to each
  monster’s Speed. That’s the number of spaces that monster can move that turn. For groups of the same type of monster (Bats or Zombies, for instance), just
  roll once for the whole group. Each monster of that type can then move that many spaces that turn.

If there is no speed, no dice are roled and no movement. So this implies the head does not move.

To me, this just means the monster can move zero spaces; as quoted above, crossing a barrier counts for zero spaces. So, this doesn't seem incompatible with moving the head.

No.
Movement is defined in terms of Speed.

At the start of the monster turn, roll a number of dice equal to each monster’s Speed. That’s the number of spaces that monster can move that turn

Without speed (or rules-overriding text such as the Dog's), nothing gives it the ability to move.
You list ways in which the movement of monsters wouldn't be hampered by the house. But since the head can't move, that list is irrelevant here.

"Since the head can't move..." Again, it doesn't have speed. No where is it specified the head can't move. Furthermore, the rules suggest the head might not need the ability to move, since crossing the barrier counts for zero movement.

That's irrelevant.  As I explained, nothing specifies the head can move -- the rules only permit monsters with speed to move. Since you can only take game actions permitted by the game, the head can't move.

That's irrelevant. As I explained, nothing specifies the head can move -- the rules only permit monsters with speed to move. Since you can only take game actions permitted by the game, the head can't move.

I agree, nothing specifies the head can move either. But the rules are quite clear that crossing a barrier room consumes zero movement. And the game explicitly permits monster to ignore harmful text, specifically barrier rooms. So a monster does not need to move to cross a barrier room. The question of speed then seem less relevant and perhaps barrier crossing is simply another action independent of movement allowed to monsters.

Re "But the rules are quite clear that crossing a barrier room consumes zero movement", Of course, but that presupposes there is movement to be consumed. There isn't in the case of the head. Again, the fact that the house doesn't hamper the movement of monsters doesn't matter if they have no moment to hamper!

Would a monster with speed 2, but making a speed roll of 0 be able to cross the barrier room on that turn?


text:
Can Yahenni become indestructible after taking lethal damage, and does it die then?
I cast Cruel Entertainment targetting both me and an opponent, who controls Yahenni, Undying Partisan and some other creatures. My own turn ends, and I take control of their turn, in which I attack with Yahenni only. It is blocked by a creature which deals lethal damage to Yahenni.
Now, can the activated ability of Yahenni ("Sacrifice another creature: Yahenni gains indestructible until end of turn.") still be activated after taking lethal damage, so that I can wipe the whole board of the opponent?
If so, does the fact that Yahenni then becomes indestructible negate the fact that it has taken lethal damage in that combat phase (in which the opponent will still have Yahenni on the board)?

You normally either get to sacrifice all other creatures, or can have Yahenni die due to combat damage.
Activated abilities can be activated by a player at any point they have priority. In the scenario you describe, the last opportuinity you have to sacrifice all other creatures that player controls is in the Declare Blockers step, after blockers are declared, as the next step is the Combat Damage step, in which all creatures deal damage and will die due to state-based actions if they have lethal damage marked on them (unless they are Indestructible).
The activated ability itself will be put on the stack as soon as you activate it, meaning whenever you sacrifice a creature, the next thing happening (assuming nothing else is cast or activated in response) is Yahenni gaining Indestructible. Since it's state-based actions that destroy creatures wil lethal damage, and state-based actions don't use the stack, you don't get priority to activate the ability in response.

Depending on the exact abilities of the other creatures your opponent controls, it's possible to make this work - for example, if your opponent controls a Elesh Norn, Grand Cenobite and Yahenni is a 4/4 because of it, having it dealt 2 damage in the Combat Damage step, then sacrificing all your other creatures, and finally Elesh Norn, will get rid of all creatures, because Yahenni will briefly be a 2/2 again, with 2 damage marked on it, and be destroyed by state-based actions before the ability to grant it Indestructible resolves.

There is no way to both use Yahenni to sacrifice all other creatures, and also have Yahenni die due to lethal damage.
Once the creature has actually taken lethal damage, you cannot give it indestructible and save it. It would die the next time state-based actions are checked; and state-based actions are always checked before a player received priority.
However, you can give it indestructible after blockers have been assigned, but before damage is dealt. You would do this in the assign blockers step of the combat phase, which happens before damage assignment. But if you do this, Yahenni will survive. Even if you could use Yahenni's ability after it has received lethal damage, it wouldn't matter, because Indestructible causes lethal damage to have no effect on a creature.
As per  monoRed's comment, to get the result you desire, you would need to have a way to kill Yahenni outside of combat. If you (or your opponent) have any direct damage or destruction spells that are instants or abilities, you could activate Yahenni's ability repeatedly to remove all other creatures, and then while those activations are still on the stack, before they have resolved, use the other spell/ability to kill it.
You can see the details of the combat phase steps here: Where can I find a chart or diagram explaining Magic's turn structure?.

Mind that I am controlling my opponent: The more creatures which die, the better. So "Can I give it indestructible and not save it?" is essentially my question.

@SimonKlaver Your question didn't make it so clear that this is what you wanted. I could answer but I'll just leave my response here and let Gendolkari edit at his discretion: if you have an instant-speed way to kill Yahenni, you can activate the indestructiblity ability by sacrificing a bunch of creatures, then with the ability(s) on the stack kill Yahenni to effectively board wipe the opponent. If you only have sorcery-speed kills, or combat damage to use, you're out of luck.


text:
Does a buff remain in combat when the buffing creature dies to first strike damage?
I've had a predicament recently: my good friend was playing an Ixalan vampire deck and he played a Legion Lieutenant, a 2/2 that gives your other vampires +1/+1. The following turn, he attacks with the Legion Lieutenant and a Forerunner of the Legion, a 2/2 vampire. It has +1/+1 thanks to the Legion Lieutenant, making it a 3/3.
I block the Legion Lieutenant with a 2/2 with first strike, so my creature will deal damage first, and when the normal damage is dealt the Forerunner of the Legion no longer has the buff and is now a 2/2 again. I would therefore only take 2 damage.
However, he believes that the buff lasts until the end of the combat phase. Am I in the wrong?

The buff goes away as soon as Legion Lieutenant dies because the buff comes form an ability on Legion Lieutenant.  Since Legion Lieutenant dies during the first strike combat damage step, its buff will not be applied during the regular combat step.
The relevant rules are the following:

611.3. A continuous effect may be generated by the static ability of an object.
611.3b The effect applies at all times that the permanent generating it is on the battlefield or the object generating it is in the appropriate zone.

Creatures can generate effects that will continue to apply if the creature dies, but to do so, the creature must have an activated or triggered ability that generates the effect (as opposed to the effect coming from a static ability on the creature).  Here are some examples of creatures with abilities that can continue to apply even if the originating creature dies: Kamahl, Fist of Krosa, Agrus Kos, Wojek Veteran, and Stigma Lasher.

Thanks guys! I showed it to him and he understands it!

No, you're right.

510.4. If at least one attacking or blocking creature has first strike (see rule 702.7) or double strike (see rule 702.4) as the combat damage step begins, the only creatures that assign combat damage in that step are those with first strike or double strike.

After damage has been dealt, the active player gets priority (510.3) and state-based actions are checked; the Legion Lieutenant dies and its effect will stop (this is different from effects which say something like 'target creature will get +1/+1 until end of turn'). The Forerunner of the Legion is a 2/2 again.
Only then, a second combat damage step will be started, and damage done by the Forerunner of the Legion is calculated, which will only be 2 damage.

Also relevant: 611.3b [A continuous effect generated by a static ability] applies at all times that the permanent generating it is on the battlefield or the object generating it is in the appropriate zone. And only then.

I think that to be complete, this answer should include that SBAs are checked before the second damage step.


text:
Can a joker be played on its own?
I was down to a single tile, a joker, and I wanted to place it next to any set already on the table. However, my opponent said a wild tile must always be played with two other tiles from your hand.
Could I have played the joker in this case?

Your opponent is confused. As you can see in the rules:

The Joker:There are two jokers in the game. They can be used for any
  tile in a set. A joker used in theopening set scores the value of the
  tiles it represents. A joker can be retrieved from a set on thetable
  by a player who can replace it during his turn with a tile of the same
  numerical value andcolor it represents. The tile used to replace the
  Joker must come from a player's rack and notfrom the table. In the
  case of a group of 3, the joker can be replaced by the tile of either
  of the missing colors. A joker that has been replaced must be used in
  the player's same turn with 2 or more tiles from his rack to make a
  new set. Players cannot retrieve a joker before they have laid their
  initial set(s). A set containing a joker can have tiles added to it
  and can be split apart or have tiles removed from it. The joker has a
  penalty value of 30 points if it remains on a player'srack at the end
  of a game.

You can play a single joker from your hand. But, if you replace a joker with another tile, you have to play it with two tiles of your hand.
So you can play the joker.


text:
Am I able to use rolled hearts when attacking a monster in Tokyo?
When attacking a monster in Tokyo, do I get to keep any of the hearts that I rolled if that monster leaves, or are they forfeit?

You heal because movement into Tokyo only happens after the dice have finished resolving.

There are five phases to a turn.

Roll Dice
Resolve Dice
Enter Tokyo
Buy Power Cards
End of Turn

Monsters yield Tokyo when resolving dice in the second phase.

If you are outside of Tokyo and you roll {Claw}, all  Monsters  who  are  in  Tokyo  lose {Heart} (Tokyo City and Tokyo Bay). These Monsters can then decide to Yield and leave Tokyo or stay. Monsters who Yield Tokyo still lose {Heart}.

But the active player only enters in the third phase.

If no one is in Tokyo, you must enter and place your Monster in Tokyo City.

Even if attacking somehow forced you to enter Tokyo, you could still Heal by applying the effect of the hearts before applying the effect of the claws.

You can resolve your dice in any order, but you must resolve all of them.

Due to the turn order, all dice affects are resolved before the Move phase, which would move you in if they left.

Attack (monster may, if they choose, leave after this)
Heal (with any hearts, before or after the attack)
Any other dice (or do any of the above in a different order if you want)
Move phase, if Tokyo is empty, move in

So, in other words, yes, you still heal either way (on this turn). Not necessarily because of the order you apply the dice effects in, but because you don't move in immediately after they leave—you move in during your Move phase which is later in the turn.
However, if there are any special card effects that would damage you during the attack as retaliation, it might be a good idea to apply those hearts first so you don't die. (Or after if you were at full health and want to heal up any damage you took during the attack.) But that's a rare case.


text:
Does an activated ability that creates a permanent get affected by Damping Engine?
Damping Engine is in play. If a person has more permanents in play than the player with the lowest amount, but does not have the most permanents themselves, pays to activate an ability which creates a creature token, would this be prevented by the effect of Damping Engine?

Damping Engine deals only with the ability to cast things, not the creation of things.
So firstly, Damping Engine does not stop you from using any abilities that produce permanents (e.g. Krenko, Mob Boss) even if you have the most permanents.
Secondly, the ability only applies while you have the most and it only applies to playing lands and casting artifacts, creatures, or enchantments. Spells that make tokens (e.g. Entreat the Angels) are completely unaffected by the ability. If you're tied with another player for most permanents, you'll still be able to cast a creature/artifact/enchantment because you do not have more than everyone else.
Finally, and this is an odd one. The ability to sac creatures to end the effect is only usable by the player with the most permanents and can only be used once per turn.
From the gatherer:

A player can only sacrifice a permanent to end this effect if they have more permanents than any other player, and they haven't already sacrificed a permanent to end the effect this turn. The ability to sacrifice a creature is granted by the same effect that is being ended.


text:
Does a dashed creature return to my hand at the end of the turn after an opponent takes control of it?
If I dash a creature (e.g. Goblin Heelcutter) and my opponent activates the ability of Captivating Vampire on my dashed creature, will the creature still go back to my hand at the end of the end step?

Yes, it will return to your hand.
The dashed creature does not change zones at any time, so it's still the same object as it was when it entered the battlefield with dash. It doesn't matter who controls the creature, or if it's even a creature at all - as long as the object is still the same, dash will "find" it and return it to its owner's hand.

109.1. An object is an ability on the stack, a card, a copy of a card, a token, a spell, a permanent, or an emblem.

This is in contrast to when the creature is in a different zone when dash resolves, e.g. when it has died during that turn. It also doesn't return if it is on the battlefield but has been in another zone for any length of time, for example when someone Flickers a dashed creature, or if it dies from Dread Slaver. In those cases, your dash creature will be on the battlefield at the end of your turn, but it's a new object that will not be returned to your hand.

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


text:
How to break a stalemate in Hive?
My wife and I are playing it first game of Hive, and we're a little confused on how to win.  We're playing without the mosquitoes and ladybugs as the directions suggested. Given the game below, couldn't white's grasshoppers just surround the queen bee indefinitely? What would force them to move?

From the rules, p11 (see also p1):

The game ends as soon as one Queen Bee is completely surrounded by pieces of any color.

So the situation you depict is not a stalemate - it's an immediate victory for Black.

Oh wow, well that changes things. That makes so much more sense. Thanks for the clarification!


text:
How will Backup interact with Mutate?
Conclave Sledge-Captain has backup, which says simply "the following abilities". How will this interact with Mutate? (The mutating spell might need flash.)

I'm struggling to see the interaction here - Mutate is a static ability that functions while a spell is on the stack, Backup itself seems to be a triggered ability that functions when the Sledge-Captain ETBs and it adds a couple of abilities that are well understood. Could you give an example of an interaction that you think is non-obvious with this combination?

Most of the time, unless you know that there is an official statement from Wizards, we won't be able to answer questions about unusual rules interactions until the actual rules are released. In this case, we don't know what the exact definition of Backup is, so we don't know exactly how it will work.

@PhilipKendall If I understand right, the interaction here is flashing in a mutate spell targeting this card in response to the Backup trigger. And the question is whether the Backup triggers "see" the abilities added by the mutating creature.

@murgatroid99 Either I'm not getting it or that Mutate interaction would need a very unnatural meaning for "following abilities" for Backup to see the additional abilities. But agree entirely we need at least the CRs to answer this.

I don't have the reference, but Maro has said on his blog that backup specifically only interacts with abilities printed on the card itself to avoid mutate or copy shenanigans

@murgatroid99 there used to be that old mtg related forum that had a policy of only allowing rules questions of released cards. Specifically requiring a sets FAQ to have been released before allowing rules questions. It may be worth a meta post as to whether a similar policy should be adopted on this SE.

This is answered by Mark Rosewater in the March of the Machine Learning, Part 2 article:

Backup was created (by Ari Nieh) as another means to show the inhabitants of the various planes working together. The final version kept the essence of the mechanic but had several mechanical hoops to jump through. First up, the original version of the mechanic granted any abilities on the creature to any other creature it targeted with backup. This meant that by granting abilities or through cloning, you could spread abilities that weren't naturally on the backup creatures. To fix this, the mechanic was changed such that it only granted text specifically called out by the card.

(my emphasis)

Wait, does this meant that with multiple instances of backup, the first confers the second 2, and the second confers the third? Not that the ability would do anything on a permanent.

Never mind I see from the full rules definition that it only confers non-backup abilities.

What happens if you give a creature backup, somehow?

This card is now on gatherer, with the following ruling:

Backup confers only abilities that are actually printed below it. Any
abilities that are gained by the permanent are ignored, including
abilities gained due to a resolving spell or ability or copy effects.


text:
How do I Make this Backgammon-Spinoff more Level and Fair?
I call it March-Fall Gammon, or M-F Gammon for short.  Played with regular backgammon board, chips, and dice.  Game consists of 2 parts: The March and The Fall.  Start with a clean board, roll, and then use your 2 die rolls to either put chips into your home quadrant, or to move chips across the board into the opponent's home quadrant.  Once all your chips are in the opponent's home quadrant, you can start bearing off.  Once you fully bear off, your Fall begins, where you do the same thing, starting from the Opponent's home quadrant, and working your way back to your own home quadrant to bear off there.  First one to do that wins.
There's a case where, if you start your Fall before your opponent starts theirs, you can place a single chip on the board and move it down as fast as possible and start hitting the opponent while or even before they are bearing off on their March.
If you hit them, they have to start that chip all the way back in their home quadrant.  If they hit you, you also have to start back in their home quadrant.
Basically, if one person is on their March while the other is on their Fall, they share the same restart quadrant, and are moving in the same direction.  Meaning, the penalty of being hit for the person on their March is far greater than the penalty for the person who has already started the Fall. And even if they do hit you back, you guys will be getting back out in the same place, so you have a potential to roll and hit them again just by the act of getting off the bar, and further, you can 'chase' them all the way back to your own home quadrant where they are still trying to bear off.
If there is too much of a buffer between the beginning of your Fall and theirs, it becomes super easy to destroy all their progress, while making considerable progress of your own.  At that point, it actually becomes a good strategy to leave your own chips open, if it means having a greater chance of hitting ANY of your opponent's chips, even if they are all the way at the other end of the board, because if they hit you back, you just break even, and if they don't, its all profit.
How could I change the rules, so that this pole-reversal doesn't supremely benefit the person currently in the lead?
Things I DON'T want to do:

Limit the movement of players on their Fall
End the game at the end of the March
Bear into your home quadrant and bear-off in the opponent's home quadrant each time, or vice-versa (I like that you move one way, then move back, sort of like a real war or crusade.)

The easiest rule change would be to disallow hits made in a home board. Extending a nuance from this rule, would be to disallow hits made in a home board

unless they come from a point on the outer board or
only if the piece is entering the opponent's home board or
unless the roll is a double, then one piece may be entered on the point and make the hit

This rule and nuances create a catch up mechanism whereby the player on their march is not trapped by the opponent's fall, and the fall itself is also slowed by the points on the home board being clogged by singles.
Taking any or all of those extra details will have varying effect on this stage of the game. Given the proportion of games that would arrive at this situation, a significant amount of simulation or playtesting would be needed to determine which nuance(s) most accurately transfer the advantage held before this situation to the equivalent advantage held after it.


text:
Are there any chess sets with more than 32 pieces?
In every single chess set which I have purchased in my city (I'm from Moldova), there are exactly 32 pieces (16 white and 16 black). No more, no less. By pieces I mean kings, queens, rooks, bishops, knights and pawns.
However, it can be troublesome in practice. As you should probably know, there are pawn promotions in chess. And, according to the rules, the choice is not limited to pieces captured by your opponent. So you can have 9 queens, or 10 rooks etc. I know that in casual chess play an extra queen can be represented by upside-down rook. But I consider it pretty ugly, and it does not solve the problem if both rooks of the same color are still on the board.
I know that to satisfy every single possible game, a chess set must have 96 pieces, 48 white and 48 black.
My question is as follows. In practice, are there chess sets with more than 32 pieces, be it 96 pieces or 34? Do they have any practic use, e. g. in tournaments, and does an ordinary chess player have the possibility of buying such chess set? Thanks a lot for help.

I was going to post this as an answer, but after re-reading your question, it's obvious it's not the answer you're looking for - so I'll add it here simply for information purposes for those of curiosity :)   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dragonchess     Dragonchess has 84 pieces .. 42 per player. But those are all "in-game" pieces, and this is obviously a non-standard variation of chess .. :)  Still, quite a fun game though ... :)

In a tournament, there will likely be many other chess sets available.

The thing I know exists is a set with an extra queen each, so 34 pieces:
https://www.chessbazaar.com/tournament-series-staunton-chess-pieces-with-german-knight-in-sheesham-box-wood-3-7-king.html
This should cover like 99.9% of all games.
If you want more (actually an extra Knight/Rook/Bishop might be needed in very rare situations), you can look for single replacement pieces. Those can be easily found on google for popular chess designs:
https://www.chesshouse.com/collections/wooden-chess-pieces/products/single-standard-wood-chess-pieces

Of course, the simple way to deal with this (unless you're a snob) is just to buy another set of pieces.  Then you have replacements in case the cat pushes one under the refrigerator, as well as a good assortment for pawn promotions.

There are also very rare cases where rook or bishop is the correct play, such as when a queen would stalemate your opponent but a rook or bishop still permits checkmate.

Yes, you are right, I edited that.

The 32 pieces represent a "standard" set for a "standard" game. Exceptions like the one you describe do occur, but they're pretty rare, because most of the time, the "first" queens have been traded. The situation is unusual enough that "few" chess sets will have extra pieces.
If there is a situation where you have two queens (or three of another kind) because of a pawn promotion, you can take a coin or token and designate it as the "extra" queen or piece. In some cases, you may wish to borrow a piece from another set, as another poster pointed out.


text:
In Scrabble, can a normal play be scoreless?
Scrabble rules say thay after at least six consecutive scoreless turns the game ends.

Under North American tournament rules, the game ends when... at
  least six successive scoreless turns have occurred...

It is also pretty clear for me that in absolute majority of cases a scoreless turn arises from either: 1) passing; 2) exchanging tiles; 3) losing a challenge.
But can a normal turn be scoreless? Imagine that a player laid something on the board, so he/she definitely played but scored nothing. Maybe it's extremely rare, but it is a possible event, isn't it?

There are two blank tiles which score zero. So if you played a two letter word using a second blank tile connecting to a blank tile, then your turn would score zero even though you played a word.
Also,  as Nathan has pointed out in the comments, you could play a two letter word with two blank tiles on the first turn.

Is it legal to play a single blank tile on the first turn?

@anomaly: No. Words must be 2 or more letters.

You could start off with the two blank tiles on the first turn :P


text:
When a face-down permanent dies, do other cards responding to its death see its face-up side?
Say if I have Scrap Trawler on the battlefield, which watches for when artifacts die. I have a manifested Colossus of Akros that dies while still just a manifested 2/2 creature. Per the rules, I turn it face up and put it in the graveyard face-up.
Does it trigger Scrap Trawler's ability (and get considered an artifact that leaves the battlefield and enters the graveyard) or not?
Does Colossus leave the battlefield as an artifact?

It was a face-down creature when it left the battlefield, so it wasn't an artifact (creature) to trigger Trawler's ability.
As for why that's the case:

603.10. Normally, objects that exist immediately after an event are checked to see if the event matched any trigger conditions, and continuous effects that exist at that time are used to determine what the trigger conditions are and what the objects involved in the event look like. However, some triggered abilities are exceptions to this rule; the game “looks back in time” to determine if those abilities trigger, using the existence of those abilities and the appearance of objects immediately prior to the event. The list of exceptions is as follows:

603.10a Some zone-change triggers look back in time. These are leaves-the-battlefield abilities, abilities that trigger when a card leaves a graveyard, and abilities that trigger when an object that all players can see is put into a hand or library.

A face-down permanent is just a 2/2 creature. Period. It has no abilities, no type other than "Creature" (in particular it's not an artifact), no subtype, no abilities, no color, no mana cost, not even a name. Whatever is printed on the other side of the card is completely irrelevant, as long as the permanent is face down.
What I'm saying is that your face-down Colossus of Akros isn't a Colossus of Akros at all, as far as the game is concerned. It's just a nameless vanilla 2/2. And as JonTheMon said, a nameless vanilla 2/2 isn't an artifact and doesn't trigger Scrap Trawler's ability.
The rule that says so, albeit in more complex language, is this one:

707.2. Face-down spells and face-down permanents have no characteristics other than those listed by the ability or rules that allowed the spell or permanent to be face down. Any listed characteristics are the copiable values of that object's characteristics. (See rule 613, "Interaction of Continuous Effects," and rule 706, "Copying Objects.")
707.2a. If a face-up permanent is turned face down by a spell or ability, it becomes a 2/2 face-down creature with no text, no name, no subtypes, and no mana cost. A permanent that enters the battlefield face down that wasn't cast as a face-down spell also has these characteristics. These values are the copiable values of that object's characteristics.

Of course, all that changes when you flip the card face up. Then it switches to being whatever is printed on the front of the card (in your case, a Colossus of Akros). Same when it leaves the battlefield.

Isn't 603.10(a) also relevant in establishing which set of statistics counts for the trigger?

It does play a role in determining how this plays out in the game, but I don't think it's particularly relevant in resolving what I believe to be the asker's confusion.

It leaves the battlefield as a 2/2 creature with no abilities; however, it enters the graveyard face up. For example, if your opponent controls Compost, which cares about black cards going into graveyards, a face-down Abzan Guide will trigger it, and a manifested land being killed will trigger Countryside Crusher.


text:
Is there a "good" ratio of card types to have in an MTG deck?
In practice do competitively viable decks have approximately similar ratios of card types? There are CCGs in which this is empirically observed, such as Pokémon (2-3 trainers: 1 Pokémon: 1 energy) and Yu-Gi-Oh (2 monsters: 1 spell: 1 trap).
Note: "type" in this context is not intended as the MTG technical term, unless that interpretation would give an affirmative answer. Essentially the question is whether any pie-chart generalisation for structure is applicable in practice.

Other related questions: How many creatures should be in a draft deck?, Land ratio vs mana curve, How should I determine how many lands of each different color to put in my deck?. All of these questions are basically asking for a subset of what this question asks.

Deck construction varies greatly from format to format, and even counting in formats that are more commonly played competitively with constructed decks (Modern, Standard, maybe Legacy) or limited formats (Sealed, Draft), you will find a great difference in deck lists.
Limited formats
Limited formats have the unique feature that you have to work with which cards you open or pick, meaning that while you might get lucky and draw some mana fixing, it will very likely not be enough to alter your mana base significantly because of it.
This will also largely depend on the edition you're playing with - while for most editions you're not too bad off playing 17 or 18 lands, Kaladesh is an edition where you will be suggested playing only 16 lands, due to the overall lower mana curve and speed of the format, and as far as I've noticed it, this is what highly competitive players actually opted for.
Due to the relatively low chance of building combo decks (due to not all editions featuring combo-enabling cards, as well as you not always drawing them), most Limited decks will have a great number of creatures compared to other nonland cards, as those are able to threaten damage over multiple turns, as compared to an Instant or Sorcery.
Constructed formats
Constructed is any entirely different animal. Not only do you get many different decks due to the different win conditions - you also can substitute card types you would normally use with others.
The consensus of comments and the first answer seems to be that lands, other than other card types, do have a recognizeable, repeating amount among decks. I would dispute that, due to the fact that MtG provides many different ways to come by the same resource.
To name an example, while you would normally produce red mana with a Mountain or other land card, you might opt for a Simian Spirit Guide (Creature) or Lotus Petal (Artifact), while other decks may still play the basic land, even for one and the same deck concept.
Another factor is how much mana your cards actually require to cast, and how long you intend to play before you win. Modern Affinity is notorious for dropping large portions of the starting hand into play on the first turn for having many cards that cost no mana to cast, resulting in a land base of 16 or even less lands (such as 12 back in 2011). Whichever conclusions you draw from that, and whichever average number you include it in, you will end up with a number that has nothing to do with reality, as the right number is not the average between 24 and 16 - it's 24 for one deck, and 16 for another.
As for other types, you're just completely entering random number territories. Decks will play their combo pieces, which can be any random card type - they are included because they're a part of a combo and do their job, not because the deck needs an arbitrary amount of a certain card type.
To again name an example, if you look at Splinter Twin deck lists, you will commonly find 4 copies of Splinter Twin, which is an Enchantment/Aura card. It's the key card for this very deck, but even considering adding a set number of Auras to a deck because it works for a single deck is ridiculous, as they make you weak to get "2-for-1-ed", meaning that you lose two cards to a single removal spell, for example. Not just including this card in a deck, but deciding to build entirely around it is what makes the deck strong and playable, but all of this is entirely independent of the card type - what matters is the card function.
Conclusion
I don't think you can create an accurate and purposeful diagram over the entire span of MtG competitive formats or decks. What you can attempt to create such a statistic for an individual format, but that will likely give you an average number with no practical purpose, since after all, you're likely not looking for a diagram with decorative qualities, but one to look at it and say "I should probably play n of that type to be successful", and I do believe such a diagram cannot exist for the entirety of the MtG universe.
Since you mentioned other TCGs in your question, let me also mention that MtG has a lot more formats that any other card game I'm aware of, making the issue of a general analysis even more of a complex dilemma, and the lack of this diversity in other formats may well be the reason that such a simple breakdown is possible for those games, but not MtG.
In this answer, the mentioned formats from my introductionary paragraph are the only ones I even considered - there are other formats played competitively, but not to an extend that makes their mention particularily worthwhile or representitive. Whichever numbers you might come up, once you enter Vintage Two-Headed Giant Commander (a format entirely covered by the official rules, mind you, yet not particularily tournament-viable), you will realize they won't work out even by a long shot.

There generally is a standard ratio when it comes to the Land type, but not with other types. Most newer players will start out with a recommended 24 out of 60 cards being Lands (40%).
However, this ratio is far from fixed. As you get better with deck building, you learn that different decks have different needs, and it's common for decks to have less, or sometimes more, than 24 lands. Some decks even have no land at all!
Also, competitive decks are even less likely to follow this than beginner/casual play. This is because there are so many different types of competitively viable decks, as well as the fact that there are many different formats for competitive play, with different cards and sets being legal. So there is no one right type of deck, or even one right type of format, for competitive play.
There are several other types of cards, and those types don't have any sort of standard of how many there should be. Some decks might be creature heavy, others might have little to no creatures, for example.
There are several other questions dealing with the specifics of how many lands to have, here's a few examples:
How many lands should I have in my sealed or draft decks?
How should I determine how many lands of each different color to put in my deck?
Land ratio vs mana curve
(Thanks Rainbolt for finding those links).

I believe that given what we have to work with as a question, this is about as useful as you can get to an answer. However, you seem to generalize it, while the one thing the question is clear about is that it's asking about competitive decks, which you probably want to address.

@TheThirdMan I edited to add what I could, but I'm guessing others will know a lot more than I do about specifically competitive play. If someone wants to edit in more info, or answer separately, go for it.

In limited formats, you tend to want about 17 lands, 14-15 creatures, and 8-9 other cards.
In constructed formats, because you have a wider selection of cards and minimal limitations, you are not as limited by what kind of win conditions you can use.  You don't necessarily need to depend on creatures to reliably kill the opponent.  You can make a wider range of strategies work.  There are decks like Lands that play nearly all lands.  Most of the spells in Enchantress are enchantments.  There are burn decks, control decks, and storm combo decks that all play nearly only instants and sorceries.  There are manaless dredge decks that play no lands.
The only common pattern that you need to know about in constructed is that your mana curve should be a reflection of the amount of mana sources you play.  If your strategy necessitates large mana requirements (e.g. if the average mana cost of the non-land cards you want to play is 2.9), then you need to play more mana sources (e.g. 26 lands instead of 24/25 lands), and then your mana curve should be adjusted to be an ideal fit for a 26-land deck (e.g. 4x 1-mana cards, 11x 2-mana cards, 7x 3-mana cards, 5.5x 4-mana cards, 3x 5-mana cards, 1.5x 6+-mana cards, 1.7x X-cost cards, some mana dumps).


text:
Another Scenario: Can monster be targeted?
Inspired by this question, I was curious if removing one vertical column of tiles would change the result. Id est for the following configuration:
H░█░
░█░M

is the Monster (M) a valid target for a ranged Hero (H) attack through the Obstacles (█)?
My thoughts are that M is a valid target for H because a line can traced from the top right corner of H to the bottom left corner of M that merely passes through the corner (specifically not along the edge) of both obstacles.

TL;DR Yes
Please have a look at the below given sketch. The line through the upper right corner A = (1,2) of the ranged Hero and the bottom left corner B = (3,0) of the monster is described by the equation y = -x+3. This line doesn't intersect any of both given obstacles since for any x < 2 the corresponding value of y is greater than 1 and for any x > 2 is smaller than 1. Hence, the solely common point is C = (2,1). Since the line (quoting "Line of Sight" (page 12) from the Rules of Play)

only touches the corner of a blocked space (without passing through the space itself ), the target space is in line of sight.


text:
Do enchantments attached to Bruna, Light of Alabaster trigger on the same attack/block instance?
Question 1:

I have Bruna on the field, and I attack, triggering her effect.
I attach Ordeal of Thassa using her effect.

I am inclined to conclude that Ordeal's effect doesn't trigger during this combat phase, because the attack has already taken place before it was on the battlefield. Is this correct?
Question 2:

I have Bruna on the field, and I block one of multiple attacking creatures, triggering her effect.
I attach Iona's Blessing using her effect.

I am also tempted to conclude that Iona's effect doesn't allow me to block an additional creature during this combat phase, because the block has already taken place before Iona's Blessing was on the battlefield. Is this correct?
Thank you.

You are correct on both accounts. Of course, if you have multiple combat phases, you could leverage it in the same turn but the "hey I just attacked" trigger only happens once, regardless of what the incoming card is capable of doing.

https://mtg.gamepedia.com/Declare_attackers_step

508.1. First, the active player declares attackers.508.1m Any abilities that trigger on attackers being declared trigger.

You declare Bruna as an attacker in 508.1, which causes the "Whenever Bruna, Light of Alabaster attacks or blocks, you may attach to it any number of Auras ..." ability to trigger in 508.1m. Ordeal of Thassa isn't attached until after all the attackers are declared, and "When this creature attacks" triggers activate only when an attacker is declared, not from a creature already being an attacker.


text:
Crazy 8s rules question
I was recently playing a game of crazy. We had a dispute over the rules I said:

A 2 means that you have to pick up two more cards
A Jack means that you skip town

My friends disagree. So I was wondering if I was correct it was or not.

I recommend changing the title to something more specific, maybe "Canonical rules for crazy 8s?". An alternative would be to split this into two questions: "Does a 2 force you to draw 2 cards?" and "Does a Jack make you skip town?" or something like that.

I have found some rules. They agree on the 2, but disagree on the Jack.
The problem with these games, is that there are a lot of house rules. So there is a high probability that there are some differences in the rules.
The best way to avoid problems is to discuss and fix the rules before play. So you can focus on the fun part.