text:
In magic, if a attacker attacks with a 2/1 and I defend with a 1/2 who dies
In magic if a attacker attacks with 2/1 and I defend with 1/2 who dies.

Both creatures will die.
When one creature blocks one creature, each will simultaneously deal combat damage equal to its power to the other. Thus the 1/2 will receive 2 damage from the 2/1, and the 2/1 will receive 1 damage from the 1/2. Whenever a creature has total damage on it greater than or equal to its toughness, it dies immediately (technically, it dies when "state-based actions" are checked, which basically happens right before each time that any player is allowed to do anything).
There are many effects and abilities that could change this result, including:

If exactly one of the creatures has First Strike or Double Strike, it will deal damage before the one that does not, so it will survive while the other will die.
Since players can cast instants and activate abilities between the time blockers are declared and the time combat damage is dealt, either player could make their creature survive by e.g. pumping up their creature with a Giant Growth.

They will both die, unless one of them has first strike. If both has first strike, both will die.

What if double strike?

Same thing - both die.  See comprehensive rules 702.4. Double Strike.  Paraphrase: First Strike and Double Strike creatures do damage to one another first and if lethal damage is done, the damaged creature(s) are removed; then proceed to "normal combat".


text:
Long Neck card in evolutuon
Does the Long Neck card mean that you get 3 extra food every time before feeding?  Meaning you get 4 food each time?   Or... Does it mean each population gets just one food and any population over 3 still get 1 food.

Thank you for the edit, and yes, now I see the "edit" button.  Do you happen to know the answer to the question?

Are you talking about Evolution: The Beginning?  That version gets you 3 free food before feeding.

@sirjonsnow, Added an answer for Evolution: The Beginning.

Warning: This answer is about Evolution (with or without the Flight and Climate Change expansions) as you specified. It is possible you are actually asking about the related-but-different Evolution: The Beginning. See this answer for the answer about Evolution: The Beginning.
Read on if your Long Neck card reads:

Long Neck: When the Food Cards are revealed, take 1 Plant Food from the Food Bank.

The species gets one extra food before anyone else. Population doesn't enter into this (except that you can't place more food on your species than its population).

Before anyone starts feeding, species with a Long Neck will be fed one food (from the Food Bank, not the Watering Hole).
This doesn't matter much if there's enough food to feed every species of every player[1]. But it helps if there's a food shortage.
For example, let's say there are four players, and each player only has a single species with a population of two and no traits. There are only 5 food in the Watering Hole.

Player 1 takes a food from the Watering Hole.
Player 2 takes a food from the Watering Hole.
Player 3 takes a food from the Watering Hole.
Player 4 takes a food from the Watering Hole.
Player 1 takes a food from the Watering Hole.

Result:

Player 1's species is satiated.
Player 2's species's population reduces to 1.
Player 3's species's population reduces to 1.
Player 4's species's population reduces to 1.

But what if Player 3's species had a Long Neck?

Player 3 takes a food from the Food Bank.
Player 1 takes a food from the Watering Hole.
Player 2 takes a food from the Watering Hole.
Player 3 takes a food from the Watering Hole.
Player 4 takes a food from the Watering Hole.
Player 1 takes a food from the Watering Hole.

Result:

Player 1's species is satiated.
Player 2's species's population reduces to 1.
Player 3's species is satiated.
Player 4's species's population reduces to 1.

It could matter if the species is a burrowing species. It also gives the species a chance to eat before any carnivore can reduce its population.

If OP is actually referring to Evolution: The Beginning, then turns are one player at a time and Long Neck gets you 3 free food before feeding.

@sirjonsnow, Added a warning.

Warning: You appear to be asking about Evolution: The Beginning even though you simply specified "Evolution", the name of a related-but-different game. This answer is about Evolution: The Beginning. See this answer for the answer about Evolution (with or without the Flight and Climate Change expansions).
Read on if your Long Neck card reads:

Long Neck: Before feeding this species, it eats 3 food from the Excess Food pile.

Each long-necked species only get (up to) three free food each turn.

Each species only feeds once per turn, either at the watering hole (if herbivore) or via multiple attacks (if carnivore).
When feeding a long-necked herbivore, take as much food from the Excess Food pile as the species has population, up to a maximum of 3. Distribute that food among the population of your species. If it's still hungry, feed as much as possible of the remainder of the species's population from the Watering Hole.
When feeding a long-necked carnivore[1], take as much food from the Excess Food pile as the species has population, up to a maximum of 3. Distribute that food among the population of your species. As long as it's still hungry and able to attack[2], feed on other species as detailed in the rules.

Yes, that's possible in Evolution: The Beginning.
Ref 1.
Ref 2.
Remember, if your carnivore is hungry, it must attack even if the only species is can attack has horns or is your own.

source: Stack Exchange

license: 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/

sort: votes


text:
Is there an Eldritch Horror variant for playing against two ancients at once?
Has anyone tried modifying the rules of Eldritch Horror so you can play against two ancients at the same time? How was your experience?
Mysteries

Do I solve alternating or in parallel?

Mythos

Do I take a sum or average of myths cards? (Mythos Deck Composition)
Do I buy one or two Mythos Cards?

Doom Token

Greater, average or lower to start?

Handicap combos

Extra Action?
Bonus for tests?
Acquire bonus?

At Arkham Nights 2016 there was a game held with two ancient Ones and 16 players.

No playtesting yet, but I was thinking about such variant.
Some initial thoughts:

I would sum up the doom of both AOs. If this total drops to 0, both AO's awaken.
The two respective mythos decks are shuffled: First stage of 1st AO with 1st stage of 2nd AO, and so on.
Each AO has one active mystery. "Advance the mystery" effects allow you to advance the either of these, but not both at the same time.
When having a Research encounter, you may choose from which AO's deck you'll draw.

The biggest dilemma for me is how to treat Cultists.

Treat cultists based on the omen - blue is for one and the red/green for the other

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


text:
Zombicide Black Plague Spawning Question
If the setup requires you to have certain zombies in locked rooms from the start, when you open the door to that room do you still draw a card to add even more zombies to that room on top of what setup told you to put in it? (Example being the tutorial quest 0 where it has a fatty in a locked room alone, when you open the door to him do you spawn more?)


text:
In War, what if one player runs out of cards mid-war?
In war, if two people play the same card they go to war and have to stake multiple cards on the next play. If another person and I go to war, but the opponent only has one card left (can't stake enough cards) then how is the game supposed to proceed? Should the opponent place down their last card? And should I still put down three cards?

Answers vary. From pagat.com:

Most descriptions of War are not clear about what happens if a player runs out of cards during a war. There are at least two possibilities:

If you don't have enough cards to complete the war, you lose. If neither player has enough cards, the one who runs out first loses. If both run out simultaneously, it's a draw. Example: Players A and B both play sevens, so there is a war. Each player plays a card face down, but this is player B's last card. Player A wins, since player B does not have enough cards to fight the war.

If you run out of cards during a war, your last card is turned face up and is used for all battles in that war. If this happens to both players in a war and their last cards are equal, the game is a draw. Example: Players A and B both play sevens, so there is a war. Player A plays a card face down, but player B has only one card, so it must be played face up. It is a queen. Player A plays a card face up and it is also a queen, so the war must continue. Player B's queen stays (B's last card) while player A plays a card face down and one face up, which is a nine. Player B wins the war and takes all these seven cards (the five cards that A played and the two cards that B played) and the game continues normally.

The way I always played was that the player who had enough cards had to supply the stakes for the player who had run out. Further increasing the never-endingness of the game.

Actually the right way to play is that if someone doesn’t have enough cards to fulfill the war, the other person should match the player with fewer cards. If there is only one card left for one person, both players flip over just one card to be equal.

Your answer could be improved with additional supporting information. Please [edit] to add further details, such as citations or documentation, so that others can confirm that your answer is correct. You can find more information on how to write good answers in the help center.


text:
Does Silent Gravestone stop eternalize
I have Silent Gravestone in play, does that stop creatures from using embalm or eternalize?

No. (Mostly)
Silent Gravestone's abilities read

Cards in graveyards can't be the targets of spells or abilities.
{4}, {T}: Exile Silent Gravestone and all cards from all graveyards. Draw a card.

The first ability prevents targeting in much the same way Hexproof and Shroud do.  So do embalm and eternalize target?
Embalm is defined as follows:

702.127a [...] “Embalm [cost]” means “[Cost], Exile this card from your graveyard: Create a token that’s a copy of this card, except it’s white, it has no mana cost, and it’s a Zombie in addition to its other types. Activate this ability only any time you could cast a sorcery.”

Eternalize is defined as follows:

702.128a [...] “Eternalize [cost]” means “[Cost], Exile this card from your graveyard: Create a token that’s a copy of this card, except it’s black, it’s 4/4, it has no mana cost, and it’s a Zombie in addition to its other types. Activate this ability only any time you could cast a sorcery.”

There is no mention of targeting in embalm and eternalize, therefore Silent Gravestone's ability won't affect them.
Generally speaking, an ability that only affects the card it is on doesn't target, while abilities that affect other cards do (unless it's affecting all cards of a specific type, like Silent Gravestone)
That said, Silent Gravestone's second ability will prevent players from embalming or eternalizing any of the creatures it exiles.

I take it also doesn't stop something like Ghastly Conscription that's not worded as "targeting" any card?

@Acccumulation: Correct.  Ghastly Conscription targets a player, not the cards in their graveyard.  To protect yourself from Ghastly Conscription you would need Ivory Mask or something similar, and your opponent would still be free to target themselves.


text:
In multiplayer, can a player concede abusively?
Arnold, Beth, and Chuck are playing a multiplayer game (e.g. Commander or Free-for-All).
Arnold has Maralen of the Mornsong:

Players can't draw cards. At the beginning of each player's draw step, that player loses 3 life, searches his or her library for a card, puts it into his or her hand, then shuffles his or her library.

Beth has Dictate of Kruphix:

At the beginning of each player's draw step, that player draws an additional card.

Currently, it's Chuck's turn. He begins his draw step, and chooses that Dictate of Kruphix's ability go on the stack, and Maralen's ability go on top of that. Because Maralen is on the board, Dictate's ability is essentially useless (Maralen prevents players from drawing cards).
Using Maralen's ability, Chuck tutors up a card. Suppose Arnold really hates Beth. After Maralen's ability resolves, Arnold concedes. Because Arnold has conceded, Maralen is no longer on the field.

800.4a When a player leaves the game, all objects (see rule 109) owned by that player leave the game and any effects which give that player
  control of any objects or players end. Then, if that player controlled
  any objects on the stack not represented by cards, those objects cease
  to exist. Then, if there are any objects still controlled by that
  player, those objects are exiled. This is not a state-based action. It
  happens as soon as the player leaves the game. If the player who left
  the game had priority at the time he or she left, priority passes to
  the next player in turn order who’s still in the game.

Chuck now proceeds to draw 2 cards (1 from the draw phase and 1 from Dictate of Kruphix).
Obviously, this isn't an ethical thing for Arnold to do. But is it within the rules of the game? Or am I mistaken? Would something else happen instead?
A separate question: would this result in Arnold being banned from future tournaments?

I really thought there was a better duplicate around somewhere, but all I've found is http://boardgames.stackexchange.com/q/25600/409

Related: http://boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/14750/unsporting-trades-in-the-end-game-of-settlers-of-catan

And: http://boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/7487/is-kingmaking-in-multiplayer-games-a-problem-that-can-be-fixed

Multiplayer concessions are always problematic, as even if the most set-back player concedes, they will alter the outcome of a game because it's one less player that needs to be defeated. There's also aggressive conceding in Emperor games, where one of your generals concedes in order for you to be able to one-shot the opposing Emperor. It's not pretty, and has very little to do with winning Magic with skill, but don't ever try to monkey-patch it by house-ruling against concessions - they're there for a reason!

@TheThirdManI think it has a lot to do with skill. Not with card playing skill, but multiplayer games also require other skills. A strategic concede by your teammate is pretty clever in my opinion. And it's not spite, kingmaking or whatever. You're helping your emperor to win. That's the general's job, isn't it?

One nitpick. It's not Chuck who chooses the order of the abilities on stack. 603.3b, right?

@tsuma534: Emperor isn't a tournament format, so it's mostly a question on how your group likes to play. In casual play, I wouldn't say it's an illegal move, but I also wouldn't say it's proof of skill, as it's completely circumventing the Emperor mechanic and the game rules. Keep in mind that concessions aren't a game mechanic, especially not to influence the game in your favor - it's a way to handle the event of a player leaving the table within the game rules. It may be sly, but it's not inherently "fair".

@MichałPolitowski: Correct, Dictate of Kruphix would always be put on the stack last and resolve first, assuming the turn order is Arnold > Beth > Chuck.

This is why Monopoly and multiplayer Magic both suck: politics.

@MichałPolitowski My bad. Assume Maralen goes on after Dictate. :P

Another nitpick; by the time you have stacked the triggers in the draw step, 'chuck' has already skipped his normal draw step draw, and would only get 1 card from the kruphix trigger; all steps have the same formula something happens, i.e. draw a card, declare attackers, declare blockers, etc., then both players get priority. some phases like main, upkeep, and, end-step, don't have an event, players simply get priority.

In a situation like this, I think the threat of concession is a political tool that Arnold could use to influence Beth. I'm okay with it ethically as long as Arnold's using it to try to win. e.g. "if you counterspell my best chance at getting back into the game, I'll concede at the worst time for you." Whether you follow up on this depends on the value of having credible threats compared to the much lower chance of winning from that position.

The rules say you can concede whenever you want to:

104.3a A player can concede the game at any time. A player who concedes leaves the game immediately. He or she loses the game.

This is kind of unavoidable, because people have to be able to pick up their cards and leave. And it's certainly possible to use this spitefully, whether via your scenario or another. (It doesn't even have to be something fancy - just dropping out a turn before your inevitable death can swing things.)
Many people adopt house rules in order to curtail that sort of behavior. It's hard to define clearly what is and isn't acceptable, especially since you can be plenty spiteful even without ever conceding, but if you play with people you get along well enough with, you may be able to get away with "don't be a jerk". More broadly, if you do things that make you miserable to play with, you might quickly find yourself not having anyone to play with.
As for tournaments, well, there aren't really serious multiplayer tournaments, and so the Magic Tournament Rules don't have anything explicit about multiplayer. There is potentially commander at Friday Night Magic, and if they're abiding by the rules, they'll have to allow you to concede at any time. But while I don't think the store could actually kick someone out for making a spiteful concession, the same about being pleasant to play with probably applies there: it's a local store, with many of the same people coming repeatedly.

The tournament rules say that players may not concede in exchange for any reward or incentive, which potentially applies here (it could, for example, if Arnold states "I'm condeding, so that you have a disadvantage!"). That is for a judge to decide, and in the event of the judge following the above logic, should result in a DQ, and may lead to an exclusion from future events on the TO's disgression. This is an example why multiplayer, non-2HG tournaments don't work well with the rules...

@TheThirdMan Arnold gains no reward or incentive by giving another player a disadvantage, so that rule does not apply. In fact, the TR does not apply to events run at Regular REL at all. Arnold cannot be disqualified for this behavior, but you are correct that he can be banned from the venue at the TO's discretion.

@Rainbolt: An incentive doesn't have to be physical, and harming another player by denying them a victory for points or personal satisfaction seems to fit the definition perfectly in my opinion. Furthermore, the JAR reflects that serious problems are an issue at Regular REL just like at any other REL, and the TR irself differentiates Regular REL, and states in the introduction that it applies to all sanctioned events. What makes you think otherwise?

Quite a bit of misinformation here. The MTR does state that you can't concede in exchange for a reward or incentive, but that is very much referring to bribery situations. The MTR absolutely does apply at Regular REL. This is one of those situations where the behaviour is Not Sporting, but not Unsporting - not considered an actionable infraction from a judging perspective, but may be something that a TO or playgroup considers unacceptable.

@mfcrocker: I agree that in the overwhelming majority of cases, actual bribery is what it applies to, but taking that as a reason to say it doesn't apply outside of that context seems a little farfetched - do you have any sources? I think the intention is to prevent games being decided by any outside factors in general to protect Beth (in this case) from being at a disadvantage because someone uses a tournament mechanic for unintended purposes or personal gain - whether that gain might be packs or personal satisfaction doesn't matter to Beth, so I don't see why the same rules wouldn't apply.

@TheThirdMan You can't seriously be implying that a judge might disqualify a player who conceded for personal satisfaction. Is that a possible interpretation? Sure. Is is a reasonable interpretation? Not really.

@mfrocker You are right. The Tournament Rules do apply to Regular REL. I don't know where I got the idea that they didn't, and I'm sorry for spreading misinformation.

For what it's worth, even if the literal rules of the game don't address this, I think it'd be totally reasonable for a judge or store owner at a store to at least gently encourage people to be good to each other. They already have an incentive and maybe even a responsibility to make sure it's fun for everyone; this is just another way people can make things un-fun. So sure, maybe they won't say "you are banished from commander at FNM!"  but they might say "hey, you know, people may not want to play with you if you keep this up."

@Rainbolt: I'm saying that a sensible interpretation of the rules is that there may be other reasons for a concession than collusion and bribery, and that's only if you don't interpret C conceding with the intention to help A (in order to to harm B) as collusion. I'm also saying that that's the point where a judge may start looking (not necessarily that it should lead to a DQ whenever a player concedes) in the attempt to answer the question whether it's within the rules of the game, and whether there's a possibility the player may be excluded from a tournament.

@TheThirdMan Collusion is not against the rules

@TheThirdMan Regarding a source, none of the documents around the MTR (MTR or Annotated MTR which deals with philosophy) mention concessions to benefit a player still in the game. The name of the section your original quote is from is Bribery; it regards Bribery and nothing else.

@TheThirdMan I think ultimately the problem with trying to define collusion that way and interpret that rule that way is because it’s clearly conceivable to have a third person in a position where their choice of moment at which to concede will always advantage somebody. Losing players being forced into a “kingmaker” position even if they don’t want it is far from unusual in free-for-all games (of any kind, not just Magic). And there are a whole host of reasons why players must be allowed to concede.

This is NOT a rules based answer.
I have not played Magic for some time, but when I did play there was a simple house rule (for multiplayer).
If you conceded, you could not play the next "game" either. The general idea is that concessions were not supposed to be tactical things in multiplayer, but to fill the need of "I gotta go"
Kind of the same way with being dealt out in poker.  If you miss the blinds then you have to wait for them to come back around.
That said, there was no rule that said you could not concede. So some people did, just to get their friends a boost. Those people usually had a hard time finding others to play with though.

This is allowed under the rules:

104.3a A player can concede the game at any time. A player who concedes leaves the game immediately. He or she loses the game.

The most powerful example I have seen of tactical concession in multiplayer comes from control changing effects.  If Player A has a giant creature (say Blightsteel Colossus), Player B has stolen control of that creature from Player A and is swinging at Player C with it, Player A can concede to exile the creature (since Player A is that creature's owner).  A concession in this situation can immediately change the winner of the game.
Another fairly common way that a player can concede spitefully is to prevent you from dealing damage to them if you dealing damage gives you some benefit (such as gaining life).  For example, if you are attacking them for lethal damage with a creature with lifelink or are dealing them lethal damage with Death Grasp, they can concede to prevent you from gaining the life.
Using specifically timed concessions is absolutely legal in multiplayer.  The important thing to consider is that it is only one of the may tools a player has to play spitefully.  In a multiplayer game, you could attack only one player.  You could use removal spells or counter spells in obviously sub-optimal ways to harm a particular player.  You could play the most spiteful card in the game: Kaervek's Spite.  At the end of the day, the ability for a player to concede at any time is important for reasons beyond the game (if someone needs to leave immediately, they should not have to wait for someone else to finish an exceedingly long retention of priority).  While it can be used to obnoxious ends, it can also be used to punish players who are being obnoxious or winning in obnoxious ways.
Multi-player in any game involving player elimination (of which Magic is one) is very likely to have problems of kingmaking (Is kingmaking in multiplayer games a problem that can be fixed?).  This is one of the big reasons there aren't many serious multi-player Magic tournaments.  But this is also a thing you have to play around to win at multi-player.  You must not only win against your opponents' decks; you must also win against your opponents and their personalities.
As far as how this impacts deck-building, try to make sure you are winning with your own cards rather than with Confiscated permanents.

I'd just like to point out that this scenario doesn't work the way you think it does. Maralen's draw cancellation is separate from her second ability. During the draw step, the first thing that occurs is the state-based draw, which wouldn't occur due to Maralen's first static ability. Then the two abilities would trigger.  So in this specific scenario, the initial draw is skipped, the player would tutor, then Maralen's controller concedes with Kruphix's trigger on the stack. Then Kruphix's ability resolves, resulting in the player drawing a card, but only one, because the draw for turn action has already occurred and was blocked by Maralen.
Now, back on topic... In multi-player casual, it's douchebaggery to do something like this. Giving another player an advantage by leaving the game intentionally is just messed up. Im not sure there are multi-player tourneys, but the rules state a player may concede at any time. So there's no rules infraction, just a major dick move.

I will go against the grain here.
There is no problem whatsoever with conceding when you feel like for whatever reason you feel like.
Sabotaging someone else by conceding is no different from sabotaging them by throwing a lightning bolt at an unfortunate creature, and sabotaging other players is one of the core premises behind multiplayer.
Being able to concede for any reason at any time is a fundamental rule that stops abuse. Forcing players to remain in games when they need to leave or it is no longer relevant for them to play is abusive. You cannot concede abusively. It is not abuse to destroy another players gameplan in magic. It is to force them to remain in a social interaction when they would rather not.

looks to me that the question was if it's allowed by the rules, not if it's ok to do so in some moral context


text:
Is there a penalty in Uno for incorrectly accusing a player of failing to call "uno"?
I was playing Uno with my family when I had two cards left in my hand. My sister yelled out "one card", thinking I have one card left and have failed to call "uno".
Does she now need to take two cards (which is the penalty for getting caught when failing to call "uno")?

Did you try looking in the rules?

I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it is beyond trivial, and a fundamental part of the game.

@Nij As far as I know down-voting is the way to go with questions that don't show any research effort. Although trivial, this question appears to be on-topic. And we don't have any policy for closing questions that can be answered by simply reading a rulebook. Not that I wouldn't be happy with one.

I'm okay with questions that can be answered by a rulebook when they require a modicum of interpretation or meta-knowledge or otherwise additional effort. But this is literally reading the text of the rule, monkey-see-monkey-do stuff. Stack Exchange is meant to be the place of enthusiasts and professionals, not a sentient replacement for Google. @tsuma534

The negative comments seem to be on the wrong track. The original question certainly needed some cleaning up, but in it's present form as far as I can tell it is actually a very good question about something which is not covered at all in the rules - see my answer.

I assume that yelling out "one card" is the way your group has decided to implement this rule:

If [the player with one card is] caught not saying “Uno” by another player before any card has been played by other players, the player must draw two new cards.

That rule does not establish a penalty for incorrectly "catching" another player not saying Uno. You could add a house rule to this effect, especially if people abuse the rule by yelling "one card" incorrectly very often. However the house rule would itself be open to abuse since it would encourage people to mask how many cards they have, so I would only add it if people are being really annoying with the incorrect calls (and in that case why are you playing with really annoying people anyway?)

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


text:
Crypt incursion on servos
Will Crypt Incursion work on artifact creatures such as snakes that have been destroyed?
I tried it on my friend who made 22 snake artifact creatures and almost all of them died so they went to his graveyard, and I used it, but he said it did not count.

It sounds as though you are talking about artifact creature tokens, not just artifact creatures. If this is the case, then your friend is correct. You know it is a token because some effect created them, rather than them existing as actual cards in the game.

110.5. Some effects put tokens onto the battlefield. A token is a marker used to represent any permanent that isn’t represented by a card.

Note that it is common to use things that look like cards as the markers to represent these tokens, but those things are not "cards" in the sense that a Mountain is a card; they don't go in your deck, etc.
Tokens work differently than cards when they die. While they do enter the graveyard, they immediately cease to exist before you have a chance to do anything such as casting Crypt Incursion. Therefore you cannot exile them from the graveyard.

110.5f A token that’s in a zone other than the battlefield ceases to exist. This is a state-based action; see rule 704.

Also note that even if the tokens did stay in the graveyard, it wouldn't matter, because Crypt Incursion specifically says "creature cards"; and as mentioned earlier, tokens are not cards.

Also, tokens aren't cards, and Crypt Incursion specifically affects cards.

The text of Crypt Incursion is:

Exile all creature cards from target player's graveyard. You gain 3
  life for each card exiled this way.

What you're trying to do doesn't work for two reasons:
First, tokens aren't cards, and Crypt Incursion specifically asks for cards, so this doesn't work.
Second, creature tokens cease to exist when they die. They trigger effects that trigger when a creature goes to the graveyard, but they don't stay in the graveyard like cards, they just cease to exist, so you can't exile them as they are not in the graveyard.


text:
Magic the Gathering simple damage question
I was taught by someone who changed the rules so he would always win. I've played with others but I keep getting different answers and the examples always have a creature with the same defense and block.
Based on the picture below would my 6/4 Craw Wurm with enchantment live or die against a 5/3 vampire? Please please please with cherries on top explain!!!!

Wurm is blocking vampire

Craw Wurm is printed as a 6/4. Is there some effect making it a 6/7, or did you mean to say that it is a 6/4?

Pro tip - if someone changes the rules to win, don't play with them.

6/4 sorry about the error

Picking nits here: How did the Vampire get to 5/3?

He is part of a vampire deck and is on the field with a Rakish Heir

If you have a 6/4 Craw Wurm blocking a 5/3 Bloodrage Vampire, then both creatures will die after combat damage is dealt.
In combat, after attacks and blocks have been declared, combat damage is evaluated all at once (except when dealing with First Strike or Double Strike, but that's not relevant here). In a situation like the one you have here, with one creature blocking a single attacking creature, each creature deals damage equal to its power to the other simultaneously. Then, after the damage has been dealt (or at any other time), if any creature has taken damage greater than or equal to its toughness, it dies.
In this particular situation, the Craw Wurm deals 6 damage to the Bloodrage Vampire, and the Bloodrage Vampire deals 5 damage to the Craw Wurm. After this, the Craw Wurm has 4 toughness and has taken 5 damage, so it dies. And the Bloodrage Vampire has 3 toughness and has taken 6 damage, so it dies.

Of course this changes significantly if the Wurm is 6/4, as it normally would be, so I'd say it's quite important to get clarification from the OP about whether that is the case.

Yeah. I decided to answer the question as asked, but I'll edit my answer if the facts of the question change. The general procedure outlined in the answer still applies either way.

It's a 6/4 sorry about that. I'm picking the game back up and I'd like to play with other players and I'd like to not make a fool of myself


text:
Phase 10 how to play on after completing 5 and 3
3 people are playing and I lay down the set of 5 and set of 3 but still have cards in my hand.  Someone completes the 5 and 2 and goes out.  So we need to play another round.  What do I play?  I already lay down the 5 and 3.  Should I start over?

TLDR

Based on the wording of the rules you won...

So the rules say that a player is the winner if:

THE WINNER: The first player to complete Phase 10 at the end
  of a hand is the winner. If two or more players complete Phase 10 in the same hand, then the player with the fewest total points is the winner. In the event of a tie, the players that tied replay Phase number 10. The first one to go out is the winner.

Looking at this specifically according to the wording it reads that once a hand has ended the first player to have completed phase ten has won. It does not say the winner finished the hand or that the winner finished without cards. It simply says that at the end of a hand the first to have completed the final phase is the winner.
In addition, consider this statement:

If two or more players complete Phase 10 in the same hand, then the player with the fewest total points is the winner.

This would mean that a hand has ended and two or more players have finished the final phase. One may have cards left and the other may have gone out. Or both players finished with cards and someone else has gone out to end the hand. Either way they both finished in the same hand on phase 10.
According to the rules, the game has ended for all players that did not finish the last phase and the last players now must determine who won. First, the player with the lowest number of points is the winner. If that is not possible then the tying players play the final phase again and the first to go out is the winner.
Since the hand ended and you were the only player to  have completed the final phase, you win by default.


text:
Can multiple activated abilities be resolved after each other while something is on the stack
This came up during a commander game this evening. Someone targeted Ghave, Guru of Spores with a damage spell doing just enough to kill him. Can I use his first activated ability to take a counter off another creature and create a Saproling, then after that resolves sacrifice that Saproling to put a counter on Ghave, all before the spell on the stack resolves? It was decided this didn't work, but I'm not sure.

Yes, you can do this.
After Ghave has been targeted with a damage spell, the damage spell goes on the stack.  You then respond to that spell by using Ghave's first activated ability, which also goes on the stack.
At this point (as long as nobody else plays in response), each player has passed priority, triggering rule 608:

608.1. Each time all players pass in succession, the spell or ability on top of the stack resolves.

Ghave's activated ability resolves, and a Saproling enters the battlefied.  Rule 116 then comes into play:

116.3b The active player receives priority after a spell or ability (other than a mana ability) resolves.

Priority returns to the active player (which could be you or your opponent) before going around to each of the players again.  No other spells or abilities on the stack will resolve until each player has passed priority.
When you get priority again, you can use Ghave's second ability to sacrifice the Saproling and place a counter on Ghave to save him.


text:
Revealing cards sorcery
The Pieces of the Puzzle MTG card states:

Reveal the top five cards of your library. Put up to two instant and/or sorcery cards from among them into your hand and the rest into your graveyard.

My question is: does it mean a player should show which cards he revealed from the library or not? Should the player show which cards he puts into his hand or not? If not how to check that player plays honestly?

The terminology you are thinking of is "look at" instead of "reveal". See Ancient Stirrings for an example. It has you look at the top 5 cards of your library, so only you get to see them.

Yes, you not only need to show all five cards, you need to show which of those you picked.
No action is taken in secret; all players are to be made aware of all actions taken and what they effect. And since the cards are revealed when you pick them, they get to know not just what card you picked, but it's name as well.

701.14a To reveal a card, show that card to all players for a brief time. If an effect causes a card to be revealed, it remains revealed for as long as necessary to complete the parts of the effect that card is relevant to. If the cost to cast a spell or activate an ability includes revealing a card, the card remains revealed from the time the spell or ability is announced until the time it leaves the stack.

(Emphasis mine)

Okay, so the term "reveal" means, that this card should be shown to all players?

Yes, that's what reveal means. "701.14a To reveal a card, show that card to all players for a brief time. [...]"

Yes, "revealing" cards means to show it to all players.
The library is a so-called "hidden zone", meaning the cards in it are not visible to everyone.

400.2. Public zones are zones in which all players can see the cards’ faces, except for those cards that some rule or effect specifically allow to be face down. Graveyard, battlefield, stack, exile, ante, and command are public zones. Hidden zones are zones in which not all players can be expected to see the cards’ faces. Library and hand are hidden zones, even if all the cards in one such zone happen to be revealed.

It requires a special effect to look at some or all of the cards in a hidden zone. As the first sentence states, you have to reveal the top 5 cards before you choose some of them to put in your hand. You have to show all the players which cards you chose to put in your hand.
Rules for revealing a card:

701.14a To reveal a card, show that card to all players for a brief time. If an effect causes a card to be revealed, it remains revealed for as long as necessary to complete the parts of the effect that card is relevant to. If the cost to cast a spell or activate an ability includes revealing a card, the card remains revealed from the time the spell or ability is announced until the time it leaves the stack.

"You have to show all the players which cards you chose to put in your hand."


text:
Dragons servant and Shivan dragon
Dragonlord's Servant reduces the cost to cast dragon spells by 1 and for 1 you can put a +1+0 on Shivan Dragon. Dose this make Shivan Dragon's power infinite???? (Also the spell for Shivan Dragon does not cause it to tap)

Shivan Dragon itself is a spell (while it's on the stack, anyway), but the text on it that allows it to get more powerful is not a spell - it's an "activated ability". Any effect that makes spells cost less will not make the ability cost less.
Also, even if Dragonlord's Servant did make abilities cost 1 less to cast, it only reduces costs by 1 generic mana, so any cost (like that of Shivan Dragon's ability) that includes only specific types of mana would not be reduced at all.
Finally, if you do ever find a sequence of actions you can execute over and over indefinitely (such as a free activated ability), the rules do require you to stop after some finite number of times. For example, you could say "I activate the dragon's ability one billion times," but you can not say "I activate the ability an infinite number of times."

@Mtgfan You're welcome. Btw, if you haven't read the latest version, you might be interested in the bits I added about generic mana and infinity. I also edited your question to include card links - you can check out how that's done by clicking the edit button, for use in any future questions you may have.


text:
Do the rules in the "Open the first time a faction is eliminated" packet apply retroactively?
Contains spoilers for the packet in question:

 In Risk Legacy, a faction was eliminated and I opened the appropriate envelope, inside which were blue comeback power stickers. My question is: does that very first eliminated faction get one of the stickers, or will it have to wait until next time since these new rules only came into existence after it was eliminated?

The card included in the packet covers what to do:

 The card in question reads
 "The player controlling the eliminated faction chooses a comeback power and places it on to the blue slot on his faction card. From now on, whenever a faction with an empty blue slot is knocked out or eliminated, the controlling player chooses a comeback power and places it on to the blue slot on his faction card." These two statements are independent of each other, so the first faction to be eliminated does add a comeback power to their card.


text:
What does The Saharan Republic's power mean?
One of the starting powers for The Saharan Republic says

You can make your maneuver at any point during your turn.

Does this mean they can attack, maneuver, and then continue to attack?

Do you have a different interpretation for this power? It has to give you some advantage - what else could it mean?

Yes, that is exactly what it means.

Based on these rules, a turn consists of the following:

Start of Turn
Join the War or Recruit Troops
Expand & Attack (optional)
Maneuver Troops (optional)
End of Turn

The Saharan Republic special ability allows you to ignore the timing of step 4. It doesn't allow you to carry out any extra maneuvers, nor change what a maneuver does.
The main use of the ability is to move troops to an aggressive position before or between attacks. It can also be used during the "End of Turn" phase, to

 maneuver the extra troop generated by a mercenary scar to a defensive position, which would normally be created after the maneuver,

or to

 maneuver troops to react to an event card drawn during the end of turn.


text:
Hellcarver Demon and Second Sunrise
When Hellcarver Demon's ability triggers and I sac all my permanents and discard my hand then cast Second Sunrise do I have to keep track of the discarded cards? because second sunrise say s return to play all artifact, creature, enchantment and land cards that were put into the graveyard from play this turn. Since my hand was discarded I don't think it satisfies the second sunrise condition. I think I just answered my own question but I'll ask anyway to make sure I'm right.

As a general rule, gatherer has the most up to date wording on a card, and the text there should be looked at when you are unsure about the wording on your printed copy of the card.

That's correct, the cards in your hand were not "in play", which is the old name for the battlefield. The current official text of Second Sunrise follows the modern wording:

Each player returns to the battlefield all artifact, creature, enchantment, and land cards in his or her graveyard that were put there from the battlefield this turn.

The cards from your hand were not put into the graveyard from the battlefield.


text:
Bile Blight on Chronozoa
If I Bile Blight a Chronozoa which had no counters on it, thus sending it to the graveyard, triggering the second ability and creating two tokens that are copies of it, do the copies which come into play also get -3/-3 because they're copies and Bile Blight says "until end of turn"?
A friend and I were discussing this and he seemed to think that it wouldn't since the token copies which came into play wouldn't haven been there when Bile Blight resolved, But I'm almost certain they would die since the card says "until end of turn", Bile Blight doesn't specify the creature as having been in control, and the ruling that "The name of a creature token is the same as its creature types, unless the token is a copy of another creature or the effect that created the token specifically gives it a different name."
But you never know, I could be wrong. Anyone have a certain answer?

The answer can be found in that question, though not in the accepted answer. The answer for this situation is described best in the answer by ikegami.

Your friend is right, the new copies aren't affected by Bile Blight.
The set of affected permanents / entities is determined at the resolution of the spell.
Of course it would have been a different story if this had been an enchantment along the lines of Engineered Plague
@tengfred already guided you towards an answer that has the exact ruling in his comment, but I've pasted it here for convenience as well.

611.2c If a continuous effect generated by the resolution of a spell or ability modifies the characteristics or changes the controller of
  any objects, the set of objects it affects is determined when that
  continuous effect begins. After that point, the set won’t change.
  (Note that this works differently than a continuous effect from a
  static ability.) A continuous effect generated by the resolution of a
  spell or ability that doesn’t modify the characteristics or change the
  controller of any objects modifies the rules of the game, so it can
  affect objects that weren’t affected when that continuous effect
  began.


text:
Hadana's Climb / Winged Temple of Orazca - how to apply The Layer System?
A friend and I were trying to work out how to apply the Winged Temple of Orazca's ability: "Target creature you control gains flying and gets +X/+X until end of turn, where X is its power."
We're both quite new to MTG, so were wondering whether "where X is its power" meant:

Power value printed on the creature card (aka Base Power); or,
Power based on all combined effects currently applied to the creature.

We settled on Power based on all combined effects. But since then, I found out about the Layer System aka Interaction of continuous effects. If I'm reading this correctly, it says that +1/+1 Counters are applied after the +X/+X ability of Winged Temple of Orazca (because the ability would come under "Effects that modify power and/or toughness" in Layer 7c, whereas Counters are Layer 7d)...
Here's an example, listed by time of casting:

Creature      Thrashing Brontodon           3 /  4
Aura          Oakenform                    +3 / +3
Equipment     Short Sword                  +1 / +1
Counters      from Hadana's Climb     3 x (+1 / +1)
Ability       Winged Temple of Orazca      +X / +X where X is power

So, if we assumed +X/+X is applied based on all combined effects, the Brontodon would be 10/11 at the point the Ability takes effect. So X would equal 10 and the Brontodon becomes 20/21.
But, if the Counters aren't applied until Layer 7d - and the Aura, Equipment and Ability are all in Layer 7c - then the Brontodon is 7/8 at the point the Ability takes effect. X equals 7 and the Brontodon becomes 14/15. Then the three +1/+1 Counters are applied and the Brontodon ends up as 17/18.
Is that a correct interpretation of the Layer System?

Your Thrashing Brontodon will get +10/+10 and be a 20/21.

611.2d If a resolving spell or ability that creates a continuous effect contains a variable such as X, the value of that variable is determined only once, on resolution. See rule 608.2g.
608.2g If an effect requires information from the game (such as the number of creatures on the battlefield), the answer is determined only once, when the effect is applied. If the effect requires information from a specific object, including the source of the ability itself, the effect uses the current information of that object if it’s in the public zone it was expected to be in; if it’s no longer in that zone, or if the effect has moved it from a public zone to a hidden zone, the effect uses the object’s last known information. See rule 112.7a. If an ability states that an object does something, it’s the object as it exists—or as it most recently existed—that does it, not the ability.

The affect of the Winged Temple of Orozca is calculated when you use its ability, and it does so looking at the power of the target creature after all existing affects are applied to it.
Once the static affect is created, it will be applied in the layers exactly as you say.  But by that point the size of the bonus is fixed.
Even if one of the other bonuses is removed (for example, a Naturalize on Oakenform), the +10/+10 from Orozca will remain.

This also means it stays +10/+10 even if the Aura, Equipment and/or counters go away.

@ikegami I found the rules that we needed by looking for the existing questions on whether continuous affects from spells affect creatures that were played later.  The rules that dictate how that works are very similar (and exist for basically the same reasons), so I figured that they would be close together in the rulebook.  Humorously, the answer I ended up using was one of your own.

As additional reference, see the Gatherer rulings of other cars with the same effect, like Nantuko Mentor

And don't forget 107.3c.


text:
Discarding after picking up discard pile in Canasta
Today we had a situation.   Player legally picked up discard pile. All he had left in hand were dead cards and wild cards.  Is there a rule about which should be discarded first?

There is no rule specifying what type of cards you discard so it is up to the player to decide if they want to discard a dead card or a wild card.
Canasta Rules

When a player has melded his cards, he ends his turn by discarding a card. At that point, his melded cards are checked to see if they conform to the canasta rules. Discarding a card is not necessary if the player can go out by melding all of his cards.


text:
Phase 10 - Do I have to lay down as soon as I have the cards?
MUST you lay down your phase as soon as you draw the cards to play the phase?  If you know someone picked up cards from the discard that will be able to play on your phase and go out do the rules allow you to hang onto the cards until you can lay down and potentially go out all in the same hand?  Of course the risk being that the ofher player goes out anyways and you are stuck with all of your cards and don’t move forward.
Judging by the context and language used in the rules there are many places that say a player MUST do something but in this instance it says a player “may” which leads me to believe holding onto the cards is allowable.

As to the question of if you can wait, yes.  To the question of if you should, probably not.  In my experience there is more often than not only one player who finishes the 10th phase and it rarely comes down to points.

No you are not need to go down if you have your phase in your hand.
Taken from the rules:
MAKING A PHASE: If, during your turn, you are able to make a Phase with the cards in
your hand, lay the Phase down, face-up on the table before discarding. For example,
you are trying to make Phase 1. You have 3 “5s” and 2 “7s” and you draw another “7.”
You now have 2 sets of 3, and you may lay them down. In the next hand, you will be
working on Phase 2.
They say that you may lay them down so I would say you can wait as long as you want to laid down your phase.
Link to the rules: http://www.tactic.net/site/rules/FIN/03140.pdf


text:
Lazav, Dimir mastermind, copying Growth-Chamber Guardian, and wearing spy kit
Question: So, a Lazav, Dimir Mastermind watches a Growth-Chamber Guardian die and decides to copy it.  Then a Spy Kit is equipped to him.  When a +1/+1 counter is placed on lazav, does it change both names in the text? I know copy effects with self referential names use the new cardname, but does it let me tutor for any creature too?

No, the "Search for a card named Growth-Chamber Guardian" is not self-referential, you are not searching for the card itself, but that ability is naming the legal targets for your search. Just because the targets have the same name as the original card does not make it self-referential, in fact if it were you would only be able to find the copy of Lazav already in play.


text:
Helm of the Host on Rakdos the Showstoper
I'm wondering if you put Helm of the Host on Rakdos, the Showstopper would his coin flip trigger when the copy enters the battlefield?

Yes, a copy retains all abilities of the original card except any modifications specifically noted on the source that created the copy.  In the case of the Helm, the copy is not Legendary if the original is.  When the creature token "enters the battlefield" it's ability will trigger.
Rule:

706.5. An object that enters the battlefield “as a copy” or “that’s a copy” of another object becomes a copy as it enters the battlefield. It doesn’t enter the battlefield, and then become a copy of that permanent. If the text that’s being copied includes any abilities that replace the enters-the-battlefield event (such as “enters the battlefield with” or “as [this] enters the battlefield” abilities), those abilities will take effect. Also, any enters-the-battlefield triggered abilities of the copy will have a chance to trigger.

The way your question is worded, the answer is "no". When the copy of Rakdos, the Showstopper enters the battlefield, that copy would have a coin flip ETB, and that ETB would trigger. The ETB of the original Rakdos, the Showstopper would not trigger; there would be a new object with a new ETB. In this particular case, it amounts to the same thing, but if there were wording along the lines of "do [blah] for every time this has triggered", this would be considered to have triggered only once.

I think this is just an ambiguous pronoun. It makes more sense if "his" meant "the copy's".


text:
Churchill Solitaire scoring
In theory, one scores 5 points for each card moved from the "devil's 6" and 1 point for each of the other cards. So a win should score 98 + 30 = 128 (ignoring any bonus for winning in a short time). Yet my score for a win is sometimes less than 128 and sometimes more.  What am I overlooking?

Churchill solitaire also awards points for cards moved by the game when cleaning up — the more it cleans up for you, the larger the bonus.

As it’s currently written, your answer is unclear. Please [edit] to add additional details that will help others understand how this addresses the question asked. You can find more information on how to write good answers in the help center.


text:
Order of the stack with conspire?
The ability "Conspire" found on some instants/sorceries, reads

As you cast this spell, you may tap two untapped creatures you control that share a color with it. When you do, copy it and you may choose new targets for the copy.

What is the order of spells being placed on the stack when a spell is conspired? Normally, when copying a spell, it's when it is already on the stack, with cards like Twincast. However, looking at the text of Conspire, it seems to indicate that you copy the spell as it is being cast, which insinuates that it is not yet on the stack. Am I correct in this? To specify a situation in which this may be relevant, if I have Wort, the Raidmother out, and I cast Reverberate, and choose to conspire it, can the copy target the original? In what order are targets chosen? Is the original Reverberate on the stack yet?

Casting a spell is a process which begins with putting the spell on the stack and ends when the cost is paid. So anything that takes effect as you are casting the spell will see the spell on the stack already.
For Conspire, this is backed up by the full text of the Conspire rule which says in part:

Conspire is a keyword that represents two abilities. The first is a static ability that functions while the spell with conspire is on the stack. The second is a triggered ability that functions while the spell with conspire is on the stack. “Conspire” means “As an additional cost to cast this spell, you may tap two untapped creatures you control that each share a color with it” and “When you cast this spell, if its conspire cost was paid, copy it. If the spell has any targets, you may choose new targets for the copy.”

That's 702.77a of the Comprehensive Rules; the full list of steps in casting a spell is 601.2.
So for your example, the second Reverberate would be created after the first is finished being cast, so the second will go on the stack on top of the first and can see it as a valid target.

So, to clarify, the copy of Reverberate made by conspire would be able to target the original, correct?

Yes; now edited that in.

@CollinB However, it would have to be a very specific game state where you would want to target the original reverberate with the conspire copy, rather than whatever you want to reverberate in the first place. All it does is turn the conspired copy of reverberate into a reverberated copy.

@Arthur infinite copy triggers for Kalamax, the Stormsire

@CollinB Yeah, that would do it.


text:
In Phase 10, what happens when a skip card is played by the only person who hasn't been skipped yet?
In Phase 10, each player can only be skipped once per round. What happens if a player discards a skip card, but they are the only player who hasn't been skipped yet that round? Do they have to skip themselves since there is no one else to skip, or is the skip voided and considered just a normal discard?

It is not possible to have all the other players under pending skips when you take your turn. Someone may have been skipped (and are no longer under a pending skip) and can therefore be skipped again, though. There's always a valid target.
For example: the player to your right is a valid target. Even if they had just lost their turn to a skip, having lost their turn, they're no longer under a pending skip, so you can play a skip and select them to lose their next turn. They still will only lose one turn that round, as well. That is: no one else can play another skip on them until they pass their turn in the play order.
Wiki confirms this reading:

A player cannot be skipped twice in the same round; they must lose turn in the round before being skipped again. (They can be skipped twice in a row but not until they miss their turn.)

As do the rules on the designer's page

If a player uses a “Skip” card against another player,
no other player can use another “Skip” card against that player until that player’s turn has
been skipped.

This doesn't line up with the way I read the rules... it says that a person can only be chosen for a skip once per round; not that a person can only be chosen for a skip if they don't already have a "pending" skip. The rules don't seem to make any distinction between a "pending skip" and a "skip that has happened this round". So in a 5 player game, if A takes his turn and skips B, then B should be safe from being chosen until A's next turn.

Yeah, I see that by your answer. But it is the way the rules read. Wiki agrees: "A player cannot be skipped twice in the same round; they must lose turn in the round before being skipped again. (They can be skipped twice in a row but not until they miss their turn.)"

Interesting... I'm reading the rules from here... I don't know if Wiki is going off of a different version of the rules; or just a different interpretation of "one per round".

That reads (or can be read) the same. "Only one “Skip” card against each player per “round” may be used."  Meaning two players can't skip player X between player X's turn in the rotation (a round). And it is the most common form of the rule ("Can't skip a player waiting to be skipped") across all games that I know.

So the Phase 10 Wiki actually agrees with my interpretation; even using the same example I just did. But a couple other sites, including unorules.com, don't even mention the once per round restriction.

I checked a bit more and found that the designer, Ken Johnson, has a PDF of the rules on his page that are explicit in the reading as well.

Are you talking about this page? It looks like the same wording as the other PDF from tactic.net.

Let us continue this discussion in chat.

You may be misunderstanding the once per round restriction. From the rules:

When someone is skipped, a “round” is once around the table.

So a “round” is not a hand; which ends when a player goes out. It is simply one turn for each player. So if it is your turn, there must be at least one other player who has not been skipped since your last turn.


text:
Can I move from a tunnel to any tunnel?
About mine movement: can I move from a mine where I am to any other mine in the map? or only to the closest one?

The title of the question is misleading, since the real question is about mines. Maybe it should be reformulated.

There are two different things in Scythe which are related here, Mines and Tunnels.
Mines are buildings you can build, they look like this:

And here's how they work, from the rulebook:

The Mine acts as a
tunnel that only you can use.
You may move units to and
from your Mine as if it is a
tunnel (even if an opponent
controls the territory the
Mine is on). Unlike the other
structures, this is an ongoing
ability associated with all
unit movement.

And then there are Tunnels, they look like this on the map:

And here's what the rulebook says about them:

For the purposes of the Move action for any unit, all
territories with the tunnel icon are considered to be
adjacent to each other.

So, in short, you can move:

From a tunnel to any tunnel
From a tunnel to your mine
From your mine to any tunnel

You cannot use mines built by your opponents for your movement in any way.


text:
Can you activate the abilities of a creature once its been destroyed?
My question is about Zacama, Primal Calamity or any creatures with abilities that are activated using mana. If such a creature is destroyed, can you activate its abilities as an instant after it's been destroyed.

Welcome to the site! I edited your question to fit the style of this site by removing parts that are not needed; you can add them back down here as a comment if you want. I also replaced "mana abilities" by "abilities that are activated using mana" since "mana abilities" has a specific in-game meaning which is different from what you meant.

No, you cannot activate an ability once a creature has been destroyed; when a creature is destroyed, it is moved to the graveyard immediately without players getting priority, so there is no chance to activate any abilities, and Comprehensive Rule 113.6 makes it clear that abilities function only on the battlefield (unless some specific exceptions apply):

Abilities of an instant or sorcery spell usually function only while that object is on the stack. Abilities of all other objects usually function only while that object is on the battlefield.

What is possible (and common) is to activate the ability in response to the spell or trigger which would destroy the creature going onto the stack, but before it resolves.

Minor correction; a destroyed creature is not moved to the graveyard as a state based action. Rather, the way you carry out the instructions to destroy a creature is to put it into the graveyard.

As a complement to what Gendolkari said, when a creature is dealt lethal damage, the way it actually dies from that damage is that a state-based action destroys it. So very often, when a player wishes to destroy a creature, they make it happen through a state-based action. But using a spell or ability with the word "destroy" just destroys a creature immediately, workout any SBA.

While Philip's answer is basically correct (barring some what might as well be invisible differences to your typical player) I fear there is a misconception here that should be addressed, and is indeed touched on at the end of his answer.
Say for a moment Bob has his Zacama on the battlefield and Alice casts Murder targeting the Zacama. A novice player may throw up their hands and say "Welp, I don't have a counter spell so bye bye Zacama!" when in reality they can choose to activate any activated ability (unless it specifically says it's only at sorcery timing) or cast any instant from their hand.
Imagine you have a stack of notecards with your actions for the game. It starts empty - no notecards. Alice puts her notecard on the stack "Alice casts Murder targeting Zacama". She can actually put as many notecards on the stack with all her different actions. She can choose to activate abilities of her own creatures, tap lands, play instants. When she's satisfied with her actions, the next player (which in a typical game is just the opponent, in this case, Bob) gets to do the same. Bob can activate abilities of his own, again putting his notecard on the stack "Bob activate's Zacama's first ability targeting Alice's Grizzly Bear with 3 damage". When he's done, it goes to the next player, which here is simply Alice again.
This process can repeat many times and, in some multiplayer games (or even high level two-player games) can get quite complicated as players are responding to each other's spells. Normally, it doesn't get too out of hand because most of your abilities have a cost, either a tap or mana, and eventually people run out of those resources and can no longer respond.
When no one chooses to respond to the most recent action by putting their own response action on top, the game takes the top notecard and follows the instructions. Then the process of "do you want to take an action" goes around the table again (starting with the player whose turn it is.) If someone does, great, the process repeats. If it doesn't, the top notecard comes off and is followed by the game.
This concept of little notecards on a stack is actually a fundamental part of how the game works - they even call it "the stack" in the rules. In fact, "Any time you could cast a sorcery" is defined as "any time that stack of notecards is empty and it's your turn".
In case that was all too confusing, the very important thing here is that just because Alice has cast her Murder spell does not mean the creature is destroyed. All players (including Alice) have a chance to respond to Alice casting the Murder spell before it is "resolved".
So while you're asking if the abilities can be activated right after it dies, the answer is no, no it cannot. But the real question is can you activate the abilities right after someone tries to kill it, and the answer is yes, yes you can - as soon as they are done activating their instants you can respond.
(And, I'll add that it is almost, almost always only one spell or ability going on the stack. Very very few times to people respond to their own spells or abilities, because if you're going to do something to screw up their plans they would prefer to not waste their resources on two parts of their combo before you do - they'd rather give you a chance to respond and if you're going to foil their plans you do and then they proceed to the second part of their plan.)


text:
Does stonecoil serpent count as entering battlefield when paying X=0?
Currently building a Purphoros, God of the forge deck and I'm wondering if his ability is triggered when I pay x=0 for Stonecoil Serpent or does it go straight to the graveyard without entering the battlefield?

Stonecoil Serpent does enter the battlefield as a 0/0 (causing Purphoros's ability to trigger), then dies immediately.
The exact events in order in case you want them:

Stonecoil Serpent enters the battlefield. Purphoros's ability triggers but is not put on the stack yet (603.2).
After Serpent resolves, you would normally get priority. Since a player is about to get priority, state-based actions are checked (704.3).
Serpent dies by state-based actions (704.5f).
State-based actions are checked again; none are relevant so now the ability is actually put on the stack (704.3).
State-based actions are checked one more time and then you get priority and the game proceeds normally.

The relevant parts of the rules cited above:

603.2. Whenever a game event or game state matches a triggered ability’s trigger event, that ability automatically triggers. The ability doesn’t do anything at this point.

603.3. Once an ability has triggered, its controller puts it on the stack as an object that’s not a card the next time a player would receive priority.

704.3. Whenever a player would get priority (see rule 117, “Timing and Priority”), the game checks for any of the listed conditions for state-based actions, then performs all applicable state-based actions simultaneously as a single event. If any state-based actions are performed as a result of a check, the check is repeated; otherwise all triggered abilities that are waiting to be put on the stack are put on the stack, then the check is repeated.

704.5f If a creature has toughness 0 or less, it’s put into its owner’s graveyard.

One nitpick, the rule that would cause the serpent to die is 704.5f (If a creature has toughness 0 or less, it’s put into its owner’s graveyard. Regeneration can’t replace this event.), 704.5g only applies "If a creature has toughness greater than 0"


text:
Bouncing and moving in Diplomacy
Specifically, if an invading fleet wanted to move from Naples to Rome, but the move was blocked by another fleet trying to move into Rome from the Tyrrhenian Sea, could a third player with a fleet in the Ionian Sea move into Naples, driving the invading fleet trying to move from Naples to Rome into the sea?
Or is that just wishful thinking?

Welcome to the site! I've removed a sentence from your question that I think would be better omitted or as a comment underneath (like this one). I've also removed similar content from the title - you don't need to apologize or justify not knowing the answers already; that's why we have a Q&A site :)

All the moves will fail; everything will end up where it started. From the rules, p9:

One unit not moving can stop a unit or series of units
   from moving. If a unit is ordered to hold, or is prevented
   from moving, and other units are ordered into its province,
   those other units can’t move. (It’s like a traffic backup!)

It could be added that if the fleet from Ionian sea had support into Naples then that move would suceed and the fleet in Naples would have to retreat.  (I can not remember if it would be allowed to retreat to Rome)


text:
What is the highest possible score in Ticket To Ride: Europe?
During lockdown, my partner and I have gotten quite good at Ticket To Ride: Europe (TTRE). We have have been wondering what the theoretical maximum score possible in TTRE is? Assuming perfect draws and opponents not being relevant (basically single player)

Perfect draws aren't at all relevant, are they? Because you can just draw the entire train card deck as you want/need.

Perfect draws of destination cards matter.

In the Europe version you should be able to increase the score by having the second player build a few routes and use you station to pull in a few extra tickets.

@GendoIkari "perfect draws" surely referring to destination cards.

I had the same question, but having scored 189 in a game a couple of weeks ago, I couldn't believe 195 is the max score.
Edinburgh - Athína gets 21 points with 20 carriages, so I decided to explore possibilities from that route.
I set up the board and checked for the best routes to add.
I came up with this setup:
Points for the routes

Edinburgh - Athína ----------> 21 points
Edinburgh - Paris ---------------> 7 points
Paris - Zágráb ------------------> 7 points
Paris - Wien ---------------------> 8 points
London - Wien ----------------> 10 points
London - Berlin -----------------> 7 points
Berlin - Bucuresti --------------> 8 points
Berlin - Moskva ---------------> 12 points
Berlin - Roma -------------------> 9 points
Roma - Smyrna ----------------> 8 points
Zágráb - Brindisi ---------------> 6 points
Zürich - Brindisi ----------------> 6 points
Zürich - Budapest -------------> 6 points
Amsterdam - Wilno ----------> 12 points
Athína - Wilno ----------------> 11 points
Essen - Kyïv ------------------> 10 points
Venezia - Constantinople ---> 10 points
Frankfurt - Smolensk --------> 13 points

This makes a total of 150 for the shorter routes and 21 for the long one (=171)
European Express
Track length 43+2 (10 points for longest route/European Express)
Points for the carriages:

Edinburgh - London_____________________4 carriages_____7 points
London - Amsterdam____________________2 carriages_____2 points
Amsterdam - Essen_____________________3 carriages_____4 points
Essen - Berlin_________________________2 carriages_____2 points
Berlin - Wien__________________________3 carriages_____4 points
Wien - Budapest_______________________1 carriage______1 point
Budapest - Zágráb______________________2 carriages_____2 points
Zágráb - Venezia_______________________2 carriages_____2 points
Venezia - Zürich________________________2 carriages_____2 points
Venezia - Roma________________________2 carriages_____2 points
Roma - Brindisi________________________2 carriages_____2 points
Brindisi - Athína________________________4 carriages_____7 points
Athína - Smyrna_______________________2 carriages_____2 points
Smyrna - Constantinople________________2 carriages_____2 points
Constantinople - Bucuresti_______________3 carriages_____4 points
Bucuresti - Kyïv________________________4 carriages_____7 points
Kyïv - Smolensk________________________3 carriages_____4 points
Smolensk - Moskva_____________________2 carriages_____2 points

Points for the carriages is 58 in total (this score is not that high, so there might still be room for a few dozen points of improvement.)
Stations:

Wilno (from Kyïv or Smolensk)
Frankfurt (from Amsterdam, Essen or Berlin)
Paris (from Zürich or Frankfurt)

171+10+58=239 points.

Replacing a 4-carriage-route with a station and two stations with the freed carriages, means you free up a station, but probably lose the longest route. The spare station can be used for a new destination (Angora (5) / København (5) / Petrograd (6) / Warszawa (6) / Pamplona (7) / Palermo (8) / Brest (8) / Marseille (8) / Sofia (5+5) / Riga (10) ) or saved for 4 points. This makes the new total: 239 - 7 + 2 +2 + 10 = 246 if you have the longest route with 34 carriages. If you don't have the longest route, you'll have 236 points.

If you can swap some routes to free enough carriages to get Barcelona - Munchen, Barcelona - Bruxelles and Bruxelles - Danzic       or       Brest - Venezia, Brest - Marseille and Marseille - Essen, you might improve your score.

What about the destination cards? You should assume that you get longest route: this is largest possible score, and it's possible to get longest route.

Acccumulation, I don't understand your question. Can you explain it a bit?

Maybe I just missed them, but I didn't see where you included points for destination cards.

At "Points for the routes" are the points for the destination cards.

So myself and my daughter had a go at this and if you don't use stations i.e.
you get 12 points for them, we got to 172 points going from Roma to Palermo and along the longest routes through Bucaresti,  Budapest and Kyiv, then Petrograd to Stockholm. This gave a route of 44 carriages,  so assumes longest route.
It completes one long route and six short ones.
Using stations opens up a bit of a can of worms and it would be an unknown as to whether there'd be two adjacent routes to use. However,  assuming only one attached route off your own and using all three stations, three other double figure routes are possible. So lose 12 for stations but gain 35. Total score 195.
Routes completed along the long route were:

Palermo to Moscow
Kyiv to Petrograd
Stockholm to Wien
Roma to Smyrna
Budapest to Sofia
Palermo to Constantinople
Sofia to Smyrna

Additional routes using stations all scored ten or more.

I’m confused as to why it matters if there are multiple routes claimed next to a station.   The station can only use one of these routes anyway.  A station can’t use one route for one ticket and then use a different route for another.

I believe that the poster is talking about only using a station to bridge a 'gap' of one route. Its kinda hard to explain, but I'll try: Imagine they had a route that ended with Wien to Warsawa, the poster would consider routes using 1 station to get from Warsawa to Wilno, but not a second station to use two routes to get to Petrograd.

@NeilTarrant absolutely.  I think it maximises points to use one station per route, but happy to be proven wrong if there are some smarter moves.

Link to the picture of the route I thought of:
https://i.sstatic.net/zaLzd.png

45 trains + 3 trainstations
Points for traincarriage:  52x
Mountain routes: 4x
Locomotives needed: 4x
21 tickets but no bonus for European Express
Green cirkels on the map are the trainstations*

*** 1: Palermo-Moskva (20)
2: Frankfurt-Smolensk (13)
3: Amsterdam-Wilno (12)
4: Berlin-Moskva (12)
5: Athina-Wilno (11)
6: Essen-Kyiv (10)
7: Venizia-Constantinople (10)
8: London-Wien (10)
9: Berlin-Roma (9)
10: Roma-Smyrna (8)
11: Marseille-Essen (8)
*** 12: Palermo-Constantinople (8)
13: Paris-Wien (8)
14: Brest-Venezia (8)
15: Berlin-Bucuresti (8)
16: Brest-Marseille (7)
17: Paris-Zagreb (7)
18: London-Berlin (7)
19: Zurich-Budapest (6)
20: Sofia-Smyrna (5)
21: Budapest-Sofia (5)
---------------------------------- +
192 points + 52 points = 244 points
Alternative longest routes
*** Palermo-Moskva (20)     Palermo-Constantinople (8)  = 28 points
*** Edinburgh-Athina (21)       Edinburgh-Paris (7)     = 28 points
*** Brest-Petrograd (20)        Kyiv-Petrograd (6)      = 26 points

I found 2 more points if you swap out Sofia - Bucaresti for Roma - Brindisi. The two Sofia tickets are worth 5 points each. The two Brindisi tickets are worth 6 points each.

I tried this myself and came out with a very similar solution to Etiën Alssema's answer. It eeks out a few extra points. It scores 248 without counting the longest track.

There is a continuous track 33 pieces long from Brest to Sofia.
Train stations borrow red's tracks:

Budapest - Kyïv - Smolensk
Palermo - Roma

Total
248

Built tracks
52

Remaining train stations
0

Palermo - Moskva
20

Frankfurt - Smolensk
13

Amsterdam - Wilno
12

Berlin - Moskva
12

Athína - Wilno
11

Essen - Kyïv
10

London - Wien
10

Venezia - Constantinople
10

Berlin - Roma
9

Brest - Venezia
8

Marseille - Essen
8

Palermo - Constantinople
8

Paris - Wien
8

Roma - Smyrna
8

Brest - Marseille
7

London - Berlin
7

Paris - Zágráb
7

Zágráb - Brindisi
6

Zürich - Brindisi
6

Zürich - Budapest
6

Budapest - Sofia
5

Sofia - Smyrna
5

I am playing the pc version. I just scored a whopping 347 to AI 94.  Need to connect Angora to Madrid via Athens, Rome, and Marseille; Marseille to London via Paris and Dieppe; and Rome to Wien any path through the Alps.  From Wein, spurs to Bucurest, Berlin, and Frankfurt.  Use Stations where possible to ride on opponent's train.  I played early routes that blocked and confused AI.  Once I completed the first three main routes between Ankara, Madrid, and London, I just kept drawing more ticket, automatically completing 2 to 3 each draw for a total of 28 completed tickets and no incompletes.  AI completed only 2 tickets.

It looks like the PC version has more routes than the physical board game. None of the tickets you mention are in the boardgame, although they seem perfectly valid. It certainly adds replayability, though!

@Hand-E-Food maybe it is from the 1912 expansion?

Not the theoretical max, but I've got 264 points. (Really inefficient)
Though I might've misinterpreted the rules. I'm assuming that for each separate mission I can take a different path with my stations. (Still just one per station don't worry.)
Train chains (NOT MISSION RELATED)
BREST-PARIS-FRANKFURT-BERLIN-ESSEN
     4 +   4 +       4 +    2 =   14
LONDON-AMSTERDAM-BRUXELLES
      2 +       1             =   3
PETROGRAD-WILNO-KYIV-WARZAWA
         7 +   2 +  7         =   16
ANGORA-SMYRNA-ATHINA-SOFIA-BUCURESTI
     4 +    2  +   4 +   2    =   12
ZURICH-VENEZIA-ROMA
       2  +   2               =   4
VENEZIA-ZAGREB-BUDAPEST-WIEN
      2  +   2 +       1.     =   5
                                  54

Stations: PARIS, KYIV, BERLIN
Main mission:
BREST - PETROGRAD   20
BERLIN - ROMA  9
ROMA - SMYRNA 8
37
ZURICH - BUDAPEST 6
SOFIA - SMYRNA 5
LONDON - WIEN 10
21
ATHINA - ANGORA 5
ATHINA - WILNO 11
BREST - VENEZIA 8
24
PARIS - ZAGREB 7
BREST - MARSEILLE 7
ESSEN - KYIV 10
24
BERLIN - BUCHAREST 8
MARSEILLE - ESSEN 8
BERLIN - MOSKVA 12
28
BRUXELLES - DANZIG 9
FRANKFURT - SMOLENSK 13
BUDAPEST - SOFIA 5
27
LONDON - BERLIN 7
AMSTERDAM - WILNO 12
PARIS - WIEN 8
27
KYIV -PETROGRAD 6
WARZAWA - SMOLENSK 6
12
200

LONGEST TRAIN 10
264.
I believe in 300+.

I'm not quite sure what you're saying but I believe this means you are playing incorrectly "I'm assuming that for each separate mission I can take a different path with my stations."; quoting from the official rules "If a player uses the same Station to help connect cities on several different Tickets, he must use the same route into the city with the Station for all of those Tickets."


text:
Negative power & Chandra's Pyreling
Scenario:
I control Cavalcade of Calamity, three Tin Street Dodgers and Chandra's Pyreling enchanted with So Tiny. I have two cards in my graveyard. So now, my Chandra's Pyreling is -1/3. If I get it right, when I attack with all these creatures, Cavalcade's ability triggers four times, and in the result of that Chandra's Pyreling becomes 3/3 creature with double strike until the end of turn. Am I right?

I believe you mean "negative power," not "negative toughness."

Yeah that is what I meant :)

You are correct. From the complete rules:

107.1b Most of the time, the Magic game uses only positive numbers and zero. You can’t choose a negative number, deal negative damage, gain negative life, and so on. However, it’s possible for a game value, such as a creature’s power, to be less than zero. If a calculation or comparison needs to use a negative value, it does so. If a calculation that would determine the result of an effect yields a negative number, zero is used instead, unless that effect doubles or sets to a specific value a player’s life total or a creature’s power and/or toughness.
Example: If a 3/4 creature gets -5/-0, it’s a -2/4 creature. It doesn’t assign damage in combat. Its total power and toughness is 2. Giving it +3/+0 would raise its power to 1.

So a negative power value is NOT treated as zero unless it's going to have a direct effect on the game like dealing damage. All other times (including your example), normal math is used, so 1 (initial power) minus 2 (so tiny) plus 4 ones (triggers) is 3.


text:
Lifelink and multiple triggers
I control Vito, Thorn of the Dusk Rose and two 1/1 creatures with lifelink. I attack with these two creatures, my opponent doesn't block them and they deal combat damage to him. My question is if Vito's trigger ability triggers once or twice? I know that damage is dealt simultaneously, so maybe I gain 2 life as "one piece"? Or maybe it's separated? It doesn't make any difference, because in both scenarios my opponent loses two life, but I am curios what will happen here.

The ability triggers twice. Here's the relevant rule from the comprehensive rules, which also includes an example where it does matter whether it's once or twice:

702.15e If multiple sources with lifelink deal damage at the same time, they cause separate life gain events (see rules 119.9–10).
Example: A player controls Ajani’s Pridemate, which reads “Whenever you gain life, put a +1/+1 counter on Ajani’s Pridemate,” and two creatures with lifelink. The creatures with lifelink deal combat damage simultaneously. Ajani’s Pridemate’s ability triggers twice.

The Gatherer pages of at least some of the cards where it matters also include this in their Rulings section, e.g. under Vito, Thorn of the Dusk Rose it says

Each creature with lifelink dealing combat damage causes a separate life-gaining event. For example, if two creatures you control with lifelink deal combat damage at the same time, Vito’s first ability will trigger twice and you may choose a different opponent for each trigger. However, if a single creature you control with lifelink deals combat damage to multiple creatures, players, and/or planeswalkers at the same time (perhaps because it has trample or was blocked by more than one creature), the ability will trigger only once.

As indicated in that ruling, this issue can matter even for Vito if you have multiple opponents; another way it could matter is if your opponent wanted to cast Disallow to counter Vito's ability.


text:
Cloning Skullbriar
Will a creature that is a copy of Skullbriar, the Walking Grave retain it's counters as it moves to another zone? For instance, if a Clone enters the battlefield as a copy of Skullbriar, later gains counters, is sent to the graveyard, and then enters the battlefield from the graveyard as a different creature, will it still have its counters? (Is this answer different if the Clone, upon re-entering the battlefield, becomes a copy of Skullbriar again?)
Similar but different question: if Lazav, Dimir Mastermind becomes a copy of Skullbriar, gains counters, and then is sent to the command zone, will it retain the counters? If Lazav is cast as a commander again, will it retain those counters as it enters the battlefield the second time?

The Clone will lose the counters, since it stops being a Skullbriar as soon as it hits the graveyard. See the rulings below the card in Gatherer:

If a card becomes a copy of Skullbriar, counters will remain on that card when it leaves the battlefield (unless it goes to your hand or library). Once it does so, it stops being a copy of Skullbriar, so those counters will cease to exist when that card next changes zones.

The same holds for Lazav; it stops being a Skullbriar as soon as it leaves the battlefield.

D'oh, the very first ruling, I can't believe I missed that. Thanks. Although the wording of 'counters will remain on that card when it leaves the battlefield'  and 'those counters will cease to exist when that card next changes zones' seems to imply the counters remain on the clone while in the graveyard, but don't stay on if that card leaves the graveyard.


text:
What happens if a player enchanted by cruel reality has Tamiyo, Collector of Tales on the board?
A player has Tamiyo, Collector of Tales on the battlefield, and is also the target of opponent's Cruel Reality.
The player with Tamiyo can not sacrifice her, but does he lose 5 life when Cruel Reality triggers?

Sigarda, Host of Herons and Tajuru Preserver also prevent sacrificing permanents, and will have the same result (lose 5 life)

The player will lose 5 life.
As Tamiyo states, effects controlled by an opponent (such as Cruel Reality) cannot make you sacrifice permanents. Cruel Reality also specifies what happens if a player can't sacrifice a permanent when the ability resolves. It doesn't matter for what reason the player can't sacrifice a permanent, whether they have no permanent left to sacrifice, or another effect prevents the sacrifice.
With different wordings of Cruel Reality, the Tamiyo player could get around both the sacrifice and the life loss. Cruel reality could read:

At the beginning of enchanted player's upkeep, that player chooses one:

Sacrifice a permanent

lose 5 life.

The player could choose to sacrifice a permanent, but can't because of Tamiyo.
It could also read:

At the beginning of enchanted player's upkeep, if that player controls a permanent, that player sacrifices a permanent. Otherwise that player loses 5 life.

In that case, Cruel Reality would also try to make the Tamiyo player sacrifice a permanent and not cause 5 life loss.

There is a ruling for Cruel Reality that states "The enchanted player can’t choose to lose 5 life if they have a creature or planeswalker that can be sacrificed.". So this ruling is not applicable because no creatures or planeswalkers cab be sacrificed in this case?

It means more generally that there is no choice involved in Cruel Reality's effect. If you can sacrifice something, you have to.

Can you choose to sacrifice something in this situation or are you forced to lose the 5 life?

@Styxsksu As my answer states, you will lose 5 life. Generally, you are not allowed to choose anything in any situation unless a rule or effect tells you to. Tamiyo's effect straight up prevents sacrifices caused by your opponent, rather than allowing you to choose whether or not to sacrifice, so you can't choose.

Considered revising this too include Doom Foretold?


text:
Does Keep score points when another Keep is completed?
In Carcassonne Bridges, Castles, and Bazaars expansion you may build a keep on a completed 2-tile city and it will score points once other features are completed in its vicinity. What if the other feature is also a keep? Does it score as a 2-point city, or does it not count?

If a Keep is built next to another Keep, neither are completed as a city. The next feature that's scored next to either of them, though, will trigger both. First the Keep that's next to the feature, and then the other Keep that's adjacent to the now-finished Keep.


text:
How do we assign Game of Thrones houses?
In Game of Thrones the assignment of each player to a house has a drastic impact on the way the game plays out.
What are the different ways to assign houses to players, and what are their advantages or effects?

@Zombie_Gamer No. Why do that? They are three distinct answers.

I don't fully remember how it plays, but does seating position actually matter? I thought turns/actions were taken based on one of the priority tracks rather than position around a table. Or did you just mean assigning Houses at the start?

@Samthere I mean to assign who plays which house.

Should this be tagged house-rules, since you seem to be looking for alternatives to the method explicitly listed in the rulebook?

Where a player sits around the table has little influence on the turn order of the game. Straight out of the rule book, on page 7 (emphasis mine):

Your house position on the Iron Throne influence track abstractly represents the strength of your claim to be king as seen among the minor nobles, knights, and people of Westeros. In the game, the Iron Throne Influence track determines the Order of Play, and the highest bidder also gains control of the Iron Throne token after all the bidding is resolved.

The turn order is determined by the Iron Throne track, so it changes over the course of the game, and the player that starts at position one of the Iron Throne track is determined by your starting House. If the concern is House picking, that is also covered by the rules on page 3 (emphasis mine):

6) Each player now randomly draws a House Start Card to determine which house he will control for the rest of the game.

House draw is supposed to be random, so following the rules here should prevent any shadiness among players. Randomization shouldn't favor any one player, so this should solve any problems with assignment.
As such, feel free to sit anywhere around the table you want, as it won't impact the flow of the game too much. Although sitting closer to your starting location on the board is always a good idea so you don't have to reach across the table for everything you do.

Positions are assigned naturally, according to where people happened to be sitting when the game starts.

In the setup phase of the game, people will have sat at the table to chat, help set up etc, or arrive later and sit without regard to the board game dynamics.
Announce the start of the game and tell people that's who they're playing.
Effect

Is an interesting twist on random.
People may be unhappy about the position they get.
If people are aware of the seating process they can influence their position.


text:
In the Epic card game, when is event damage resolved during the attack?
In the Epic card game I understand that damage taken and received as part of an attack is resolved simultaneously at the end of the battle.
However, if I attack with two creatures and both receive enough damage via events to kill (break) them, before the defender selects blockers, are the creatures killed instantly, or do they still need to decide whether to defend or take the damage from the attack?

If someone could with sufficient rights could add a new tag for the Epic card game and remove reference that would be great. :)

From the Complete Rules:

5.16.3 If a champion has taken damage equal to or exceeding its defense in a single turn, it is immediately broken.

Thus the defending player will take no damage from the attack. It looks like technically there is still a "Choose Blockers" step even if all attackers are dead, but you can just block with nothing. (Description of Battle Phase: Rulebook p12, or Complete Rules 4.4)