text:
Must a player take a jump in checkers?
Is a player in checkers required to take a jump if one is available?  What about a double or triple jump if that is available?

In short -- for tournaments, yes.
I never played with forced jumps as a kid, but my father-in-law always plays with forced jumps.  So I did a little digging around, and this is what I found:
The American Checker Federation seems to be the only sanctioned checkers organization I could find.  According to the American Checker Federation, rule #1.20 says

1.20  All capturing moves are compulsory, whether offered actively or passively...

if you have more than one jump available, however, you are not required to take any in preference over another.

I think you only found one organisation because the rest of the world calls the game something else ;-) Here's a list of others: http://fmjd.org/?p=all

@tttppp - first football, then Clue, now this??  Seriously, though, thanks for pointing that out!

There are many variants of checkers/draughts, and for all of them (including the Checkers variant played predominantly in the English-speaking world), not only is jumping compulsory, it is also compulsory to keep jumping until all the jumps are completed. Quote from the American Checkers Federation's official rulebook:

1.19  If a jump creates an immediate further capturing opportunity, then the capturing move of the piece (man or king) is continued until
  all the jumps are completed. The only exception is that if a man
  reaches the king-row by means of a capturing move it then becomes a
  king but may not make any further jumps until their opponent has
  moved.  At the end of the capturing sequence, all captured pieces are
  removed from the board.
1.20  All capturing moves are compulsory, whether offered actively or passively. If there are two or more ways to jump, a player may select
  any one that they wish, not necessarily that which gains the most
  pieces. Once started, a multiple jump must be carried through to
  completion. A man can only be jumped once during a multiple jumping
  sequence.

However, the rules for selecting among multiple ways to jump differs from variant to variant. E.g. for International draughts, the sequence with the most jumped pieces has to be selected, and for Italian draughts there are even further tie-breaker rules depending on the number of kings that are being captured.

There are many different Checkers variants, but I believe most of them use a forced capture rule.

In fact, every checkers variant uses not only the forced capture rule, but also the forced capture continuation rule. Where these variants can differ is the capture precedence rule. In Checkers as played predominantly in the English-speaking world, a player can play any capture sequence as long as it finishes that sequence. In other variants, capture precedence is given to the longest capture sequence.

I've always had the same rules that this article does (Rule 9), if you can jump, you have to jump at least once, but you don't have to jump any more than that.

I think you're mis-reading rule 9.  If after the jump you choose there's still another jump available, you do have to take that additional jump - but you don't have to choose the multi-jump move in the first place in preference to some move that only offers a single jump.

I down-voted this answer as bad, reasons why are explained by the comment above.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/


text:
Betrayal at House on the Hill - Scenario 50 - Do the Clue Tokens drop when a character dies?
During this haunt, the adventures collect clue tokens.  According to the haunts special rules, the clues can be

Traded, like any other item
Stolen, like any other item

Do they 'drop' in an item pile when the character dies, like other items?  The rules seem silent on this issue.

Its been soo long since I've played this game...  It might help if you dug up links to (or posted excerpts of) the relevant rules.

I tried to research this by looking at the online rules, but I don't see the scenario you're referring to. Are you maybe playing with the first edition? http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=ah/faqs/hoth

Looking at the release dates, I think maybe the online rules you're linking are the first edition, and I'm using the second edition.  The document you linked is 2005;  the release date for the new edition (which I just purchased) is 2010.

Whoops, I didn't even notice that. I guess they haven't updated for the new release yet. Didn't even occur to me since they link to that from the page about the new release. Go figure.

Page 12 of the rule book says:

Many haunts put one or more item tokens in the house, which have special rules for their use. Unless the haunt says otherwise, item tokens can be traded, dropped, or stolen just like item and omen cards.

I'm not sure why they felt it necessary to mention that they can be stolen or traded in the haunt, since that would already be the case according the above rule. However, it does not say they cannot be dropped, therefore they can. If they can be dropped, then I would assume they are also dropped when a character dies.

Sweet! Thanks for the page reference, especially :)

source: Stack Exchange

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/

sort: votes


text:
Khet opening set-ups
What are the different merits of the Khet opening set-ups - Classic, Imhotep & Dynasty?

While I wouldn't call myself an expert, I have played a lot, and here are some of my thoughts on the matter.
Classic is the most simple of the three, and does not lend itself to defence, both players are rather open. For this reason, classic games tend to be short when the players know what they are doing.
Dynasty is my personal favorite. The defences of this setup are very tight. Players normally will have to attack from both the front and side. This results in long games, while players march up the side and get into position.
Lastly, Imhotep! Imhotep opens a lot of options; the defences are good, but not too tight, and many types of pieces are scattered across the board. The end game is often a dance of hiding the opening in your defences long enough to close in on the enemy.
I developed a fourth one a while back, mainly for use with the beam splitter, but still good without it, if I can find it somewhere around here, I will post it if you like.
So there you go, there you have it.

Hello Timothy.  Welcome to the site and thanks for jumping in with such a long-unanswered question; this one's been bugging me for over a year.

Thank you! I'm glad to share the little knowledge I have.

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


text:
What happens to the House card in Monopoly Deal if I lose my complete set?
In Monopoly Deal, if I'm forced to sell off one of my properties, and that property is part of a complete set with a House on it, what happens to the House?
I would think it should be discarded, but this came up today and I wasn't sure what the proper ruling was.

The house moves to the owner's bank.
http://monopoly.wikia.com/wiki/Monopoly_Deal

If a property set has a House/Hotel on
it and the property set is broken up,
the House/Hotel is moved to the
owner's bank, per Hasbro.

http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/375594/rules-clarification

Hasbro wrote:
If you break up a full
set that has houses and hotels, those
houses and hotels have to go into your
bank.

During your turn, the House can be moved to any other set.
If you don't have one, or it isn't your turn then just leave the House on the table in play for you until you are able to attach it to a set again.

That makes perfect sense; once the card has been played, there's no point in penalizing the player just because the card is not relevant for a little while (especially in a simple game like Monopoly Deal).

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


text:
Can colorless mana be generated from things that say "Add one mana of any color to your mana pool"?
Can colorless mana be generated from things that say "Add one mana of any color to your mana pool"?
One example card would be Coalition Relic.
Reasons:

For example for sunburst spells, when the caster wants less of the sunburst effect, for whatever reason.
You need to win the game with Scrapyard Salvo this turn, but you're one artifact in your graveyard short - casting a Sunburst creature as a 0/0 could be your only out

In what circumstance are you envisaging that it would matter for your mana to be specifically colourless, out of interest?

@thesunneversets For example for sunburst spells, when the caster wants less of the sunburst effect, for whatever reason

If you can get Sunburst at all, can't you just use your "add one mana of any colour" ability to add a colour you've already used?  Genuinely curious and not dissing the original question - Magic is the sort of game where there must be a corner case where it'd be better for your mana to be colourless, I just couldn't think of one off the top of my head.

You can create sunburst 0 (don't ask me why anyone would want to do that) with only colorless mana, so if you need the "any color" mana to cast the spell at all, you would need to be able to pick colorless. After half an hour of brain torturing and gatherer fiddling, that's the only thing I can come up with.

Let's suppose you need to win the game with Scrapyard Salvo this turn, but you're one artifact in your graveyard short - casting a Sunburst creature as a 0/0 could be your only out.  Tortuous!  But possible.

@thesunneversets - In this case, I am specifically thinking about a colorless EDH deck. There are a relatively limited number of 0 cost colorless-identity cards that produce mana, but a much higher number if the cards in this question could be used.

@cdeszaq - If that is the case, you can still use cards like this.  In EDH (Commander) any color mana added to you mana pool that is outside your commander's color identity will be converted to colorless.

@OrigamiRobot - I just posted a question to answer exactly that :) Go add this comment as an answer

@thesunneversets, However, this question is still relevant to non-EDH decks as well.

No, it cannot.

105.4. If a player is asked to choose a color, he or she must choose one of the five colors. "Multicolored" is not a color. Neither is "colorless."

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


text:
Unusual Chinese Checkers jump that moves three spaces?
I recently found out about a rule where if one marble is 2 spaces away from another, and the next 3 spaces after it are unoccupied, you can jump 3 spaces? So if your marble is in one on the board, and there's another marble, and there are 2 spaces in between, you can jump past it, so there are now 2 in between you, but you are on the other side of the jumped marble? Could anybody point me to an official source of rules to validate this?
Before the move:

After both players have performed the three jump move:

In your screenshots, some of these spaces have a little dot in them. What does that represent?

@doppelgreener, Could be a cursor?

@doppelgreener that's where the marbles were before the turn was executed.

This appears to be the fast-paced or Super Chinese checkers variant described in Wikipedia.

While the standard rules allow hopping over only a single adjacent occupied position at a time (as in checkers), this version of the game allows pieces to catapult over multiple adjacent occupied positions in a line when hopping.
In the fast-paced or Super Chinese checkers variant popular in France, a piece may hop over a non-adjacent piece. A hop consists of jumping over a distant piece (friendly or enemy) to a symmetrical position on the opposite side, in the same line of direction. (For example, if there are two empty positions between the jumping piece and the piece being jumped, the jumping piece lands leaving exactly two empty positions immediately beyond the jumped piece.) As in the standard rules, a jumping move may consist of any number of a chain of hops. (When making a chain of hops, a piece is usually allowed to enter an empty corner, as long as it hops out again before the move is completed.)
Jumping over two or more pieces in a hop is not allowed. Therefore, in this variant even more than in the standard version, it is sometimes strategically important to keep one's pieces bunched in order to prevent a long opposing hop.
An alternative variant allows hops over any symmetrical arrangement, including pairs of pieces, pieces separated by empty positions, and so on.

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


text:
What is the difference between lands and mana?
What is the relationship between lands and mana in Magic and what do each of them do?  A good answer should especially include how a new player should think about them.

Note:
This is an attempt to create a canonical question about the relationship between lands and mana in Magic.
Beginners are often confused about this given the same symbols are used to mean different things across basic lands, non-basic lands, and mana costs.  This can lead to confusion about lands being mana, about non-basic lands putting basic lands into play, or even about what mana is.

See relevant meta: https://boardgames.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1790/2133

Quick Summary
Lands don't pay for spells directly.  Instead, lands on the battlefield (both basic and non-basic) tap to produce mana, and that mana is what is used to pay for mana costs of spells and abilities.

Lands vs Mana vs Mana Cost
Lands are a type of permanent that can exist on the battlefield.  They are reusable, and you are usually allowed to play one land to the battlefield under your control on each of your turns.  Most lands1 have an ability that lets you tap them to produce mana.  Lands then untap at the beginning of your turn during the untap step.
Mana is an abstract resource that exists in a player's mana pool.  Mana costs are the mana symbols that appear in either the top right corner of a card or before a colon in an ability on a card.
Here is a rough sequence of using Lands and Mana to pay for a cost:

You tap any number of your lands to produce mana.1, 2
Mana is added to your Mana Pool.
You spend mana from your Mana Pool to pay for costs (such as spells and abilities).

For example, when a player taps a Mountain to cast Lightning Bolt, what's actually happening is that the Mountain is being used to add red mana (written as ) to that player's mana pool, and then the  in the mana pool is being used to pay the  in Lightning Bolt's mana cost.
The reason for the mana pool is that it allows a player to hold mana that they are not spending right away.  This matters for many reasons, including using the mana from Rofellos, Llanowar Emissary to pay for multiple things, or use a series of mana generating abilities to get the mana they need for a spell.  Examples of cards that need a mana pool to work include: Dark Ritual, Selesnya Signet, and Doubling Cube.
Normally, your mana pool empties at the end of every step and phase of the turn, so any combination of abilities you want to use to generate mana need to be done in the same step/phase.3
  (See Where can I find a chart or diagram explaining Magic's turn structure? for more detail on steps and phases.)
1. Some non-basic lands (such as Maze of Ith) do not have mana producing abilities, although due to the confusion these cause, Wizards hasn't printed one since 2010 aside from lands that fetch other lands from your library (such as Evolving Wilds).
2. Lands also aren't the only thing that generate mana.  See the section below.
3. If Upwelling (or a similar effect) is on the battlefield, you can hold mana in your mana pool indefinitely.

Nonbasic Lands
Non-basic lands actually work pretty similarly to basic lands.  The giant white mana symbol on a plains is just shorthand for ": Add ." The older versions of these lands actually said that explicitly.  So, the only difference between a Plains and say Coastal Tower is that Coastal Tower lets you add  or  to your mana pool when you tap it (your choice) whereas a Plains just lets you add  when you tap it.
Note that: "Add " is the modern rules text for the older "Add  to your mana pool".

Things Besides Lands can Generate Mana
You can get mana from any type of card or permanent, not just lands.  There is no difference between the  mana generated by Llanowar Elves and that generated by a Forest 4.  Any of the main card types can generate mana, as can tokens.  Here are some examples:

Land: Forest
Creature: Llanowar Elves
Artifact: Moss Diamond
Enchantment: Frontier Siege
Planeswalker: Chandra, Torch of Defiance
Instant: Dark Ritual
Sorcery: Geosurge
Token: Eldrazi Spawn generated by Skittering Invasion

4. The only mana that is different is mana with a condition on how it can be spent, such as that from the second ability on Corrupted Crossroads.

Basic Land Types
The basic land types of "Plains", "Mountains", "Island", "Swamp", and "Forest" give a land the ability to tap for mana of a particular color.  For example, Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth adds the "Swamp" type to all lands; this actually allows any land to be tapped to add  because the ability ": add " is a property of the Swamp land type.
Thus, basic lands have the ability to tap for mana of their color by merit of being one of the basic land types5.  The giant mana symbol on them is actually reminder text, not rules text.  Some lands (such as Canopy Vista or Steam Vents) have multiple basic land types and can tap for different varieties of mana.  Likewise, they have reminder text emphasizing that the basic land types grant their mana abilities.
5. The exception being Wastes.  Wastes has no basic land type, and as a result has to have rules text allowing it to tap for mana.  In the case of Wastes, the giant colorless mana symbol is actually a standin for the rules text: " add "

The statement "Lands produce mana" may be slightly misleading, because not all lands produce mana. Examples of lands that don't directly produce mana are The Tabernacle at Pendrell Vale, Scalding Tarn, Eye of Ugin and Maze of Ith.

I can't make an edit right now, but Coastal Tower lets you add {W} or {U}, not {W} or {B}

This looks like it will end up being a rather extensively revised answer.  Would it be more convenient to make this CW for easier editing?

CW should almost never be used, and it should not be used here. People can edit this post just fine without it.

It's tangentially mentioned in the section about the mana pool, but perhaps worth noting explicitly that there are other ways to generate mana besides lands, including instants, sorceries, and activated/triggered abilities of non-land permanents (which are notable in that they don't use the stack).

You may want to mention that all mana abilities, including but not limited to tapping a basic land, immediately take effect and do not use the stack.

Can we add a TL;DR to the top like so:#TL;DR **Most Lands tap to produce an invisible quantity of mana. Adding mana from a land or other ability does not put land onto the battlefield from the hand or anywhere else**

Myr Superion is a good example of the difference between mana produced by llanowar elves and a forest

@Kevin also not all abilities that generate mana are mana abilities IE deathrite shaman or dark ritual, and these do use the stack.Saying it without the caveat will lead to confusion.

Because you are using images in place of textual content in your answer, please add alt text to the images with the corresponding text. For example, "{W}" would be a good alt text for the white mana symbol image. Alt text can be added in the part of each image link that you are currently leaving blank.

Not a fan of huge canonical Q&As. People who have such a basic level of rules knowledge are better off reading the basic rule book instead.

wastes are also basic lands, you may want to add a para about snow-covered lands also being basic just for completion's sake.

Whenever you cast a spell or activate an ability in Magic: the Gathering you must pay a cost. The cost can be any number of esoteric things or even nothing at all. However, since this is a question about lands and mana, we will focus just on the following costs:

Tapping. This is usually denoted by a  symbol. This cost is generally only used to activate abilities of a card that is already out on the battlefield (aka. a permanent). To pay this cost take that card and turn it sideways. If the card is already sideways (tapped) you cannot tap it again until it becomes untapped. The most common way to untap your cards is at the very beginning of your turn (during what is called the Untap Step). As such, usually once a card gets tapped you have to wait until your next turn to tap it again.
Mana. This is usually denoted by some combination of ... symbols. To pay this cost you have to take the appropriate amount of mana (an imaginary resource) out of your mana pool (an imaginary place your mana is stored). In general your mana pool is going to be empty unless you add mana to it. You can add mana to your mana pool by casting spells or activating abilities that generate mana (more on this later). If you add some mana to your mana pool and don't end up using it, it will generally disappear when the game transitions to the next step or phase.

You will usually see costs printed either at the top right corner of the card in case of casting cost, or as [cost]: [description of ability] in case of activated ability cost. So  in the top right corner is the cost to cast Serra Angel from your hand, and , together are the cost to activate the ability of Grandmother Sengir once it's on the battlefield and no longer Summoning Sick.
Lands
A land is any card that has "Land" in its card type. In general you can play up to one land from your hand per turn. Lands are a bit weird because they do not have any cost to play from your hand. In fact, they do not even count as spells! Other than that, a land is no different that any other card on the battlefield.
All lands have some sort of effect or ability. Otherwise there would be no point in playing them. Usually lands have an ability to add mana to your mana pool, but that is not always the case. If we look at cards like Maze of Ith or Evolving Wilds we see that they have some ability that can be used to affect the game, but neither of them have an ability that directly produces mana. Now if we look at a Basic Plains from a recent set we also don't see any ability that produces mana. In fact it doesn't seem to have any abilities or effects at all! This is the thing that trips up new players. One of the many rules of Magic: the Gathering you have to remember is (paraphrased):

Any land with Plains in its card type implicitly has the ability ": Add  to your mana pool"
Any land with Island in its card type implicitly has the ability ": Add  to your mana pool"
Any land with Swamp in its card type implicitly has the ability ": Add  to your mana pool"
Any land with Mountain in its card type implicitly has the ability ": Add  to your mana pool"
Any land with Forest in its card type implicitly has the ability ": Add  to your mana pool"

Most commonly these rules matter with Basic Lands like Plains, but they can also matter with non-basic lands like Hallowed Fountain (which helpfully has reminder text to tell you that it adds white or blue mana) or effects of cards like Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth and Blood Moon that change the card types of lands on the battlefield.
Non-Lands that Produce Mana
Production of mana isn't something that is exclusive to Lands. Even though Lands are the most common mana producers there is nothing preventing other types of cards from producing mana. In fact you can find cards of each type (except Tribal) that produce mana! You can find some examples below.

Artifact: Sol Ring, Fire Diamond, Black Lotus
Creature: Llanowar Elves, Ramos, Dragon Engine, Neheb, the Eternal (although for some of these you have to remember that Creatures are special and generally can't pay the  cost or attack on the first turn they come into play because of Summoning Sickness)
Enchantment: Braid of Fire, Eladamri's Vineyard, Black Market
Instant: Dark Ritual, Mana Drain, Desperate Ritual
Planeswalker: Chandra, Torch of Defiance, Xenagos, the Reveler, Sarkhan Unbroken
Sorcery: Channel, Liturgy of Blood, Mana Geyser (okay, Channel adds mana in a roundabout way, but I still think it's a cute example)

Mana Production Cheat-Sheet
You will see these in the text of a mana producing spell or ability.

: Produce one white mana.
: Produce one blue mana.
: Produce one black mana.
: Produce one red mana.
: Produce one green mana.
: Produce one colorless mana.
: Produce one colorless mana. Using this symbol instead of the one above is common on older cards, and is often a source of confusion.
: Produce two colorless mana.
: Produce three colorless mana. You probably get the idea.

Mana Cost Cheat-Sheet
You will see these in the cost of a spell or ability. These are a bit more complicated than mana production, but use the same symbols. Confusingly, these symbols are sometimes used to mean different things.

: Pay one white mana.
: Pay one blue mana.
: Pay one black mana.
: Pay one red mana.
: Pay one green mana.
: Pay one colorless mana. You cannot use white, blue, black, red, or green mana for this.
: Pay no mana (hurray, it's free!).
: Pay one generic mana. Generic mana can be mana of any color, or colorless mana. Be careful! If a spell or ability produces mana and uses this symbol, it will produce colorless mana, not generic mana!.
: Pay two generic mana.
: Pay three generic mana. You probably get the idea.
: Pay any amount of generic mana (you can even pay 0). Usually the card will have some extra effect based on how much mana you pay for X.
[amount of] mana of any color: Pay that amount of mana in any combination or white, blue, black, red, or green. Colorless mana cannot be used for this.
Examples of unusual and set-specific mana costs:

: Pay one white mana or 2 life. This is called Phyrexian Mana.
: Pay one white mana or one blue mana. This is called Hybrid Mana.
: Pay one generic mana, but that mana must come from a source that has the Snow card supertype. This is called Snow Mana.

Nice job figuring out how to get inline images for mana symbols

Because you are using images in place of textual content in your answer, please add alt text to the images with the corresponding text. For example, "{W}" would be a good alt text for the white mana symbol image. Alt text can be added in the part of each image link that you are currently leaving blank.

@murgatroid99 added the alt-text to the images

The text representation of white phyrexian mana is {W/P}, as specified in rule 107.4f. I fixed the corresponding alt text in the answer.

@murgatroid99 oh thanks, yeah i wasnt sure what to put for that one

I would recommend changing the first paragraph. The fact that you can use mana to pay costs is secondary to the question; mana is a thing you have and accumulate and spend; you can have and accumulate mana independently of paying any costs for abilities or spells. Plus that doesn't seem to be related to any source of confusion I've seen from new players; it's always about thinking that the green mana symbol is synonymous with "Forest".

@GendoIkari I agree that the first paragraph doesnt really have anything to do with the question, but it tries to lead into teaching the new player that lands have abilities that produce mana. The main point of this answer being that I think basic lands not having their implicit mana abilities printed on them is the main cause of confusion for new players.

Lands are the most common permanent that taps for mana, but in reality, all the permanent types can add mana. You have enchantments like Braid of Fire that adds mana, you have many artifacts that supply mana like Sol Ring, you have many mana dorks that also produce mana and you very much have instants and sorceries that also add mana, like all the rituals we have had over the years, like dark ritual for instance. You even have planeswalkers like Koth of the Hammer that add mana to your mana pool
Mana is the in-game resource system of magic the gathering, you can consider it the money of the game, many cards add to this resource. It has been a hallmark that the most busted cards ever either cost far less mana that they should or operated in metas that had too much easy/fast mana.
The interaction with how much mana cards cost and its effect/power is essential as to how the power of MTG cards are determined.


text:
For master rule 4, why can't I occupy two extra monster zone?
I am a beginner at the Yugioh card game. I use sky strikers. Based on the link monster, I can summon the monster from the extra deck to the place where the monster point. Here is a figure:

However, I cannot do this in my practice. Am I  missing something?

For balance reasons, Konami introduced a special rule for the second extra monster zone.
It is possible to occupy both, but only under certain circumstances. Just having a link monster point there is insufficient.
To occupy the second extra zone you need what is called an extra link. This means having monsters co-linked from one extra monster zone all the way to the other.
You can find this illustrated here:
https://yugioh.fandom.com/wiki/Extra_Link

Theoretically it is possible with a minimum of 3 monsters, but Konami has been very careful not to print any cards with double forward diagonal arrows with which this can happen.


text:
Why does a blocking 1/1 creature with double strike kill a 3/2 creature?
I was playing MTG Arena and had a 3/2 creature get blocked by a 1/1 creature with double strike.
What I thought would happen:

First strike: Attacker down to 3/1 (but still alive)
Normal combat: Blocker down to 1/0 (lethal damage)
No double strike damage is dealt by the blocker since they're dead, the attacker remains alive

What actually happened: Both creatures died
What went down here and why?

Arena doesn't show a creatures toughness. It shows a combination (toughness - damage marked)

Hi, great second question. MTG Arena can take some confusing shortcuts. Have you seen the [tour]? It might be useful (but you seem to be doing well enough)

@Caleth I'm not sure how it could be done better, but the DotP and MtGA practice of showing combined damage and toughness has lead so many new players to fundamentally misunderstand how toughness and damage work...

Basic rules question, what happens if a 1/1 blocks a 1/1, when neither have any combat-specific abilities?

@ilkkachu both die after the damage is dealt? Not sure where you're going with this?

@Andrew, exactly. That was meant for the OP.

Just to confirm, do you (OP) think damage are dealt in three turns; first strike, normal and double strike, rather than just first strike and normal?

Just a stupid brainfart. I forgot that the second strike of a double striker is actually its regular combat damage, in other words that the first strike is an extra strike and combat then proceeds as normal.

@Pieter when I first started playing I thought there were 3 phases: first, normal, and double. I thought this because it made it first strike more unique. Of course, as I now know, this is not the case haha.

Another way to phrase it is Arena shows "remaining health" of a creature (even though it does not have health, one can think of health as the difference between toughness and damage marked.) I can say this is very convenient and probably the best way to put it on the screen, but it does require one to understand the intricacies of the rules of this incredibly complex game (even when simplified!)

Of course, there's always the Last Strike ability.

About Arena..., doesn't it at least show the "toughness" of a damaged critter with a different color? So it's not like it would conflate the two issues completely. (Damage and actually reduced toughness, that is). In any case, if you want to kill a creature, isn't the the toughness minus damage just what you need in most cases anyway.

@ilkkachu Yes, it does - it changes from black to blue if memory serves me well.

Here's how the combat actually goes:

First strike damage: Attacker marks one damage (they are still 3/2, but with 1 damage marked), Blocker is at 1/1 with no damage marked.
Normal strike damage: The two creatures exchange damage simultaneously. The attacker marks another damage (still at 3/2 but with two damage), and the Blocker is a 1/1, but with 3 damage marked.
State-based actions are checked. Both attacker and blocker have at least as much damage marked than they have toughness, so both die.

(Technically state-based actions are checked after first strike damage, because they are checked when player priority changes, but there are no actions to check.)
Really, the only difference is that the damage doesn't take effect immediately, so read up on state-based actions to learn more.

Even if damage did take effect "immediately", they'd still be both dead in the end since they deal damage at the same time in the normal damage step. If that wasn't the case here, what would determine the order? What would determine the order in any other combat scenario for that matter...

@ikkachu, when I say immediately, I mean that state based actions must first be checked. I think OP assumed when one damages the other that took effect before damage was dealt back

It looks like you misunderstand how double strike works, thinking the second hit happens after normal damage. The best way to think of double strike is a creature that does both first strike damage (damage at the same time as creatures with first strike) and normal damage (damage at the same time as creatures that don't have first strike) There are a few parts of the Comprehensive Rules that come in to play here:

510.1 First, the active player announces how each attacking creature assigns its combat damage, then the defending player announces how each blocking creature assigns its combat damage. This turn-based action doesn’t use the stack. A player assigns a creature’s combat damage according to the following rules:

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

510.4 If at least one attacking or blocking creature has first strike (see rule 702.7) or double strike (see rule 702.4) as the combat damage step begins, the only creatures that assign combat damage in that step are those with first strike or double strike. After that step, instead of proceeding to the end of combat step, the phase gets a second combat damage step. The only creatures that assign combat damage in that step are the remaining attackers and blockers that had neither first strike nor double strike as the first combat damage step began, as well as the remaining attackers and blockers that currently have double strike. After that step, the phase proceeds to the end of combat step.

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

So this is what happens.

There is a creature with first strike or double strike in combat, so the game goes into the first of two damage steps. (510.4)
Creatures with first strike or double strike assign their full damage to the blocking/blocked creature(s) or defending player/planeswalker. In this case just the 1/1 double strike blocker which assigns 1 damage to the 3/2 attacker.
The assigned damage is all done at the same time. In this case that is the 1/1 creature doing 1 damage to the 3/2 it is blocking.
No creatures have lethal damage on them, so nothing dies at this point. (players do have the ability to cast spells or use abilities, assuming none do)
The game goes to the second combat damage step, for creatures with double strike or without either first strike or double strike to do damage
Creatures without first strike or with double strike assign their full damage. In this case that is the 3/2 assigning 3 damage to the 1/1 blocking it and the 1/1 double striker assigning 1 damage to the 3/2 it is blocking.
This damage is done all at once (510.2), with both creatures doing damage to each other at the same time. This leaves the 3/2 attacker with 2 damage marked on it and the 1/1 blocker with 3 damage marked on it. Nothing happens immediately.
The game checks state based actions and both creatures meet the conditions for the SBA in rule 704.5g. The SBAs all happen all at once, and both creatures are sent to their owner's graveyards.


text:
Betrayal at House on the Hill scenario where a hero dies after using a haunt-related item
If I have successfully used the ring to perform an exorcism (one of multiple required) and later that hero dies, does the exorcism still count? Or, does the successful attempt die with character who was holding the ring when he died?

In general, the heroes work toward a communal goal with a communal pool of successes.
I can't comment on the specific haunt you were playing, because I am not familiar with it, but as a general rule the successes that a hero achieves are shared, and the death of a hero does not invalidate the progress they made.

...unless specifically mentioned. There are a few but I don't think this is one.


text:
Catan: Hiding Development Cards
When me and my friends normally play Catan, no one reveals the number of resource cards  they are holding in their hands (which is legal according to the rulebook).
Is it also legal to hide Development Cards after you get them in order to not let others count them? Say in your pocket? Or, should all the cards be kept in the hand or on the table, visible to everyone ?

some one would put and damage cards in there pocket to get an advantage?  wow!  Personally if a game doesn't come with a screen the its all public.

You have to disclose resource card count when the robber comes around

You can NOT hide the number of resource cards that are in your hand, so the premise in your question is incorrect.
From the rules, page 8, under Knight Cards:

However, you can always ask players about the number of cards they hold.

And from the Official FAQ:

Resource Cards - Am I obligated to tell my opponents the number of Resource Cards in my hand?

Yes.

This combined with the rule

Keep your development cards hidden (in your hand)

suggests that the number of development cards is also public.
While the rulebook and FAQ are not completely clear on this point, it seems to be the logical conclusion based on those other rules. Whenever I have played, players generally keep unplayed development cards face down in front of them, as keeping them in your hand would cause problems when cards are being stolen, or when counting how many resource cards you have, etc. Knowing which players have how many unplayed development cards is usually an important part of the strategy.

Sorry, I meant that folks don't show the resource cards 'fanned out' in their hands but they answer how many resource cards they have if asked.

@gpat I'm not seeing a relevant difference there. The point is that the number you have is open information. Whether that information is made public verbally or visually is not a matter of rules really.

It's an important distinction if you are playing with forgetful friends, especially the difference between having 0 and having 1 development card. If you have 1 development card and you put it in your pocket, it appears to others as if you have zero, unless they remember to ask you how many you have.

@MorganG I see a big difference between intentionally hiding a card away from view, and simply holding them in a way that doesn't make it trivial to count the exact number unless the person asks. If something is public information in a game, then I would consider it cheating to make any attempts at hiding that information. But the specific way you hold your cards is generally up to the player.

Exactly my point. I believe that is what the asker was getting at.

Hiding cards in cards games is generally bad form. For friendly, "kitchen table" games it probably doesn't matter. However, if a player is playing cards from their pocket can you be sure that they have put the card that they put in their pocket was the card that they drew out again?
It would be a big shame for a friendly game to be marred by accusations (whether true or not) of cheating.

"friendly game"? Catan?


text:
Is this a legal play in Scrabble?
My friend played the 'A' and the 'X' tiles underneath the word REARMICE and I was confused as I didn't believe it was legal to play words alongside other words.
He also stated that he received points for “Ax” twice, and “Ea” once, and since the 'X' tile was on a triple letter square he tripled its points, and then tripled it again because he used it for two words, is this legal?
I assumed that when he put down the 'X' tile to make “Ax” using the 'A' tile from REARMICE his turn was over, but instead he placed another letter.

Whilst not quite a duplicate question you will find your answer here https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/7319/double-movement-in-scrabble?rq=1
"All tiles played in any one turn must be placed in one row only across, or one column only down the board."

Thank you for the response. we are playing scrabble, and i did see that post but i couldnt understand what it meant by reading it, i suppose i need an explanation.

if that's a valid play or not depends entirely on if "ea" is considered a valid word. At least https://scrabble.hasbro.com/en-us/tools#dictionary doesn't recognize it. Though Wiktionary does include it, so I guess I'll try to remember to use it the next time I play, though I'm slightly afraid I'll just be shot as a cheater.

@ilkkachu You wouldn't get away with it in my house.

"tripled it again" doesn't read correctly.  X counts as 24, twice, but not as 72.  Hopefully that's what you mean.  ("Ax" counts as 25, "Ax" counts as 25, and "EA" counts as 2, for a total of 52.)

@ilkkachu Why is it only valid if ea is a valid word? Those letters were already down as part of an existing word, right?

@KevinWorkman the "EA" running downwards, not the "EA" that's part of the previously existing word.

@ilkkachu The players are supposed to agree on a particular dictionary to use before the game begins. So whether "ea" is a legal play will depend on the dictionary chosen.

@KefSchecter, sure, sure. Mostly I've played in groups where the agreed-upon dictionary is "whatever the other players allow after some argumentation".

@ilkkachu So "kwyjibo" counts so long as you can convince the other players it's a real thing?  (I can point to it in some unofficial dictionaries, but that doesn't necessarily make it cromulent.)

It is not cheating or illegal to play an invalid word. You can play any word that you think your opponents won't challenge. Challenges are made and resolved after the word(s) are played, with the loser losing their turn. A true illegal move (say, placing tiles that aren't adjacent to any existing tiles) is simply not permitted: the player's turn does not end until they make a legal move.

@chepner, you should probably post that as an actual answer.

Does this answer your question? Are double movement in Scrabble allowed?

This is a perfectly legal move covered by the third point in the rules excerpt below.
https://scrabble.hasbro.com/en-us/rules

New words may be formed by:

Adding one or more letters to a word or letters already on the board.

Placing a word at right angles to a word already on the board. The new word must use one of the letters already on the board or must add a letter to it. (See Turns 2, 3 and 4 below.)

Placing a complete word parallel to a word already played so that adjacent letters also form complete words. (See Turn 5 in the Scoring Examples section below.)

Placing AX, the ones circled in blue.  This move creates three words.  The X is on a triple letter score.

All three words are scored separately with premium values counting for all words.
EA (Red): 1 + 1 = 2
AX (Purple): 1 + 8x3 = 25
AX (Blue): 1 + 8x3 = 25
This gives a total move score of 52.

"so that adjacent letters also form complete words"
--> "EA" is not a word, thus it is NOT a valid move.
Also: you didn't really touch on the scoring part of the question.

@Opifex The question revolves around the legality of playing a word parallel to a word already played, rather than perpendicular, is allowed.  Once that is determined legal, the rest of the question is trivial.  If the word is not valid then the only should be rejected on that basis, not on the type of play and is therefore outside the scope of the question.

Not true, because it could be argued that the word should only be valid in one direction.
Also: the scoring was part of the question and is not trivial.

@Opifex It has not been established that "ea" is not a legal word in this particular game. Many dictionaries don't have this word, but it is a real word (a dialectical word for "river") and will appear in a large enough dictionary.

The question is whether or not this was a legal play. The entire play. Which means that you are responsible for answering the entire question, which is whether the play as a whole is legal. You don’t get to pick and choose which parts of a question are interesting and answer only those parts. Since that’s what you’ve done, this is an incomplete answer and should rightfully be deleted.

Nowhere does the OP challenge the notion of EA being a word, only the idea of playing a word parallel to, rather than perpendicular to, an existing word. Scrabble itself does not mandate any particular dictionary, only that all players agree to a dictionary or wordlist before the game begins.

Also, the move is legal, but the words involved are challengeable.

This answer is entirely complete; the move is legal. Whether the word(s) formed by the move will survive a challenge under Rule #8 of the linked rules is an entirely separate matter.

EA is a word in the sense that it is a continuous, unbroken sequence of letters reading from top to bottom or left to right. Whether it is an acceptable word under the agreed-upon dictionary is subject to a player challenge, but that doesn't make it illegal.

The official description of this rule, as three separate cases, has always seemed unnecessarily complicated to me.  It can be seen as a single rule: You must place your tiles so that one of the new words formed contains all the new tiles placed (and all new words formed must be valid words).

@PLL That definition omits the requirement that at least one tile be adjacent (horizontally or vertically) to a tile already on the board.

@Opifex You are allowed to play invalid words in Scrabble, but you risk losing your turn if an opponent challenges it.

This is really just an expansion on LeppyR64's answer, which is correct: the move is legal.
Whether any word formed by a legal move is valid under the agreed-upon dictionary is a separate matter. It is perfectly legal to make up a word. It's the responsibility of an opponent to challenge a play under Rule #8 of the official rules if they believe a word formed by the play to be invalid.
If any word so formed is found to be invalid, all letters in played in that turn are removed and the player loses their turn. (Compare to an illegal move, which is treated as if it weren't made and the player must make a legal move.)
If all words so formed are found to be valid, the words are scored and the challenger loses their next turn.
If a play is unchallenged, all words (whether valid or no) are scored.

No, this is just playing pedantry with Scrabble rules. The rules do not actually ever use the word 'legal'. You're arguing that the topology of the play shown is consistent with the rules, regardless of the fact that the word ('EA') is unacceptable. Whether that is 'legal' or not is quibbling different definitions of 'legal'. Most of us us would say it isn't.

If you allow players to challenge a word with no consequences if they are wrong, you aren't playing by the rules. Nothing in the rules say you can't play a word not in the dictionary; the rules explicitly provide a procedure for challenging a word that someone plays.

if a player repeatedly and intentionally plays illegal words, they're an annoying or nuisance player. You keep dancing around the undefined word 'legal'; you don't get to redefine it. You're making me wonder what the world record for failed challenges in a Scrabble game was.

I'm not redefining it, and it's doesn't need to be redefined. "Legal" means "according to the rules", and there is no rule against playing a word not in the agreed dictionary. There is a prescribed penalty for doing so and losing a subsequent challenge, nothing more.

If a player repeatedly and intentionally plays illegal words, you challenge them, they lose their turns, and they quickly lose.

No not necessarily. A player could intentionally play borderline legal words, or words previously illegal, or only known in some countries, in order to bait their opponent into making challenges and forfeiting a turn. We could even construct an AI player that dances around this. It would certainly be vexatious. (Example word: 'LIBLAB')

That's your opponent using their knowledge of the agreed-upon dictionary (and your presumed ignorance) to their advantage, which again has nothing to do with the legality of the play.

Wrong, it often happens in non-tournament play that people from different countries play what they understand to be words. So, you can have players using British, American, Indian, other European etc. versions of English. Trying to call that 'ignorant' is itself ignorance. And that'e before we get to proper nouns.

I'm not sure what you think I mean by "igorant"; I'm not using it in any pejorative sense, only that the player doesn't know if a word is in the list or not. Maybe the player placing an invalid word isn't aware it's invalid, rather than intentionally betting their opponent doesn't know it's invalid. The point is, part of doing well at Scrabble is knowing the word list better than your opponent(s), which means identifying invalid words is part of the game play, rather than something you eliminate via the rules.

No. *
As explained in the other answers, the general pattern is fine. I frequently make 50+ point plays this way (6 x 8 + a few extra - (With X there is EX, AX, XI, XU, with J there is JO), even more occasionally with QI or ZA (6 x 10 + a few extra).
However, according to the online official dictionary, EA is not a valid word. Some other dictionaries may include it. AE is a word, but not EA.
* As noted in a comment, SOWPODS includes EA. So if the game is outside US/Canada, or inside US/Canada but chooses to include SOWPODS words, then this is a valid 52 point play.

It depends on the dictionary you're playing by. EA is valid in SOWPODS/CSW/WESPA (international English) play, but not in NASPA (US/North American English).

Why is it only valid if ea is a valid word? Those letters were already down as part of an existing word, right?

@KevinWorkman there's "EA" inside the existing word running West to East, but there's also a new "EA" on it's own running North to South as part of the play.

The move is legal. It's up to an opponent to challenge whether EA is a word after the move is complete. An illegal move simply cannot be made; the game does not procede until a legal move is made in its place.

I don't feel that a direct statement of no followed by an asterisk stating it would be legal if the word EA is valid. As we don't know what dictionary they are using we can't give an answer based on that but should instead focus on the play being legal if all the newly created words are valid.

@JoeW Whether or not the words formed are valid is irrelevant. There is a rule for challenging invalid words as part of the play; it is not illegal to play them in the first place.

@chepner That was my point the play was a legal play with a caveat that the word could be challenged as a legal word. This answer seems to be stating that it is not a legal because "EA" is not a valid word.

Correct: the answer is wrong, asterisk or no.

@chepner I disagree, obviously. The word "legal" is not in the official rules. I posit that a challenge is a way of determining that a move was not valid in the first place - i.e., illegal. You posit that there is "legal in terms of placement location" and separately valid/invalid words based on dictionary/challenges.

@manassehkatz-Moving2Codidact No, it's not. The challenge provides consequences for one of the two players involved: either the play is withdrawn and the player loses their turn, or the play stands and the challenger loses their turn. That is quite different from an attempted play like placing tiles that aren't in contact with existing tiles: there is no challenge involved; it's simply a non-action and the game does not proceed unit the player corrects it.

(If you are playing a timed game, then a truly illegal move wastes time, but there's no specific penalty like "lose 5 seconds in addition to the time it takes to correct the move.)


text:
What is this game similar to Quoridor?
A friend of mine spoke about a game with rules a little bit similar to Quoridor but different.
The rules are the following:

you have a board constituted of squares
each player has a pawn which he has to move until the opposite side
each player has several walls consisting of two square pieces
each move a player can either:

move his pawn of one square
place a wall to a position on the board but always let an escape route for the opponent: unlike Quoridor the walls are placed on the square rather than between them.

the game is won when the pawn reaches the opposite side

I'm curious if you know the name of this game.
edit :
It was actually qoridor but the rules was wrongly explained you can close the question as incorrect.

@XavierCombelle that sounds like someone mis-remembering, or mis-playing, quoridor, then.

You can delete the question yourself.

I know this is like 4 years late but I think you're looking for a game called Got'em!
I haven't played either. But you can find it on boardgamegeek.

the game you are looking for is called zigzag

This one? http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/22266/zig-zag


text:
Solid openings for Blitz Chess
Is there an accepted repertoire of openings that are solid in Blitz (3-5min per side) Chess? I guess the primary factors should be:

reasonably solid
simple structures
minimal number of tactical traps to fall into
maximal number of tactical traps for the opponent to fall into
quickly reach positions that make your opponent think

And possibly secondary factors:

surprise openings?
modifications based relative strength versus opponent
mouse movement!? (i.e., if the moves require less physical movement, they will a) be faster to execute, and b) be less prone to mouse errors - probably more a factor in Bullet games (1m per side)

Generally, the standard accepted openings in regular chess are the same that apply to blitz chess.
Gambit openings are more risky in blitz, as they generally involve long-term gain resulting from short-term disadvantages.  Unless you are very comfortable in a gambit opening that returns significant results fairly early, I would generally avoid them.
Some openings that have fallen into disfavor in standard chess may be more valid in blitz chess, as blitz is far more forgiving of slight flaws in strategy (at least at the casual level).
The most important factor for determining what openings to use in blitz, though, are how familiar you are with the opening.  The more you play the opening, the more familiar you will be with the good responses from your opponent, and the less time you will have to take to think about your response.  The best is if you play non-blitz for a while (quick chess with 10 minute clocks, for example) and really familiarize yourself with the opening lines you are interested in.  This will give you a depth of familiarity that will make your blitz game play a lot more solid, and will also result in you being able to play faster with fewer errors.
Surprise openings suffer from the same problem in blitz chess that they do in other forms of chess: if an opponent is decent enough to not be caught off guard by the opening, they are very likely to punish you by exploiting the weaknesses of the opening (i.e. most "fast mate" openings rely upon premature queen development, and hoping that the opponent doesn't notice the danger; good players will immediately become wary upon early queen development, and respond by putting heavy pressure on your queen, taking the initiative from you).

I don't agree with your analysis of gambits. I actually prefer playing gambits in blitz, because they give me exciting, dynamic positions immediately that can put strong pressure on my opponent. If I screw up, then the material advantage in the endgame is going to be a problem, but when I don't, then the often very strong attack in the middle-game can be particularly tough to deal with under blitz conditions.

@ire_and_curses I also tend to offer gambits in blitz, but only the ones I am most familiar with. The whole "if I screw up" is the key point; you are more likely to screw up a gambit that you haven't played frequently, and therefore it is more likely to be a problem. Really, my point on gambits ties in with my point on overall familiarity with the opening. However, between a gambit and non-gambit opening that you aren't very experienced with, the standard opening is a safer bet in blitz. I don't say gambits are bad. Just riskier.

Actually I think @ire_and_curses may have a point. Often the gambit requires careful refutation (unless it's accepted), which may cause the opponent to think. I've added "quickly reach positions that make your opponent think" to the list of primary factors in the question

Also I'd quite like to compile a specific list of openings that fall under the criteria (if that's possible) - it would give some focus to which ones to learn. Also, if anyone knows of a Blitz database (GM or otherwise) it might be an interesting place to look

@tdc I'm having trouble of thinking of popular gambits that aren't very easy to decline. Usually it is simply a matter of developing instead of capturing immediately.

@tdc I don't know if a list is possible. Some of your criteria seem difficult, if not impossible, to quantify. "Tactical traps" are difficult to associate with specific openings, simply because the variations are so numerous, and tactical traps are typically something associated with mid-game (earlier they are usually called "blunders"). Making your opponent think depends largely upon how well they know that particular opening line.

@Beoffett Ok maybe tactical traps is a difficult one. If there were a database of blitz games that could be analysed then one could chose a set of rare openings, but I guess also that openings tend to be rare for a reason!

The part about gambits is incorrect.  Gambits tend to be more popular in blitz because they trade a static imbalance (like material) for a dynamic imbalance (like initiative).  This usually puts your opponent on the defensive, and as we all know, mistakes are much less forgiving for the defense than the offense.  Mistakes are much more common in blitz, which is why gambits are too.

Highly aggressive openings and gambits in which a pawn is given up for the initiative or piece activity can be very effective in blitz.  This is because, in general (and especially at lower levels), attacking and creating threats is easier than defending, and defending with limited time on the clock is even more difficult. You will often see grandmasters play very risky or aggressive openings in blitz that they would never play at classical time controls, because in blitz the opponent doesn't generally have time to find the refutation, and setting the opponent difficult or unusual problems to solve is a good way to get a time advantage.
Gambits are also effective in blitz because the advantages are short term and the disadvantages often don't become an issue until much later.  The early burst of activity is worth much more than the pawn you give up, which will usually only be a factor in an endgame.  By the time the endgame comes round, both players are usually low on time and liable to make all kinds of mistakes anyway.
As well as gambits, openings that sacrifice static advantages such as pawn structure or the Bishop pair, in favour of dynamic advantages such as space, time, and activity are also good in blitz.  One example would be the Saemisch variation in the Nimzo-Indian (1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.a3), which I think is an effective blitz weapon but somewhat risky to use in classical time controls.

against 1. e4, i prefer 1. ...e5 and after the standard 2. Nf3, there is 2. ...f5. Respectively, a lower ranked player had beaten Capablanca with this.
The thing is that a player on the white side's reflex is to play for either 3. eXf5 and then bewildered by 3. ...e4, or 3. NXe5 fXe4 4. Qh5+ g6 5. NXg6 Nf6 and the shelf crumbles.
Unnecessarily speaking, this won't work against a strong player. At least, I bet gambits for blitz play.

The question is asking for an overview of openings, rather than a list of individual openings people like. (The latter would be the wrong kind of answer for this site, because our format encourages getting the single best answer for each question, rather than a theoretically endless list of equally good answers, or discussion.)


text:
Creating small flat bottom holes in plastic models for magnets
I want to insert and glue 1/16" diameter rare earth magnets into holes I create in my plastic models. The purpose of the magnets is to make it easy to swap weapons/options on my Warhammer 40K models.
Regular twist drill bits leave a wide concave hole in the plastic, making it difficult to glue a magnet flush to the bottom of the hole.
Forstner drill bits create a flat bottomed hole (with a small concave hole in the center), but only down to 1/4" diameter holes.
Brad point drill bits create a flat bottomed hole (with a small concave hole hole in the center and a depressed ring around the hole) down to 1/16", but it seems brad point bits below 1/8" are not a "true" (?) brad point bit.
I have two cascaded questions:
1) does a 1/16" non-true brad point drill bit provide a good-enough flat bottomed hole for 1/16" diameter rare earth magnets?
2) if not, what is a workable method to create 1/16" diameter flat bottomed holes in plastic?
Update 2 Oct 2012: The root problem I am trying to solve is magnets being pulled out of their holes after gluing. I originally thought I had a tool problem (concave hole causing lack of contact surface area between magnet/glue), but CaulynDarr and Affe's comments point to a likely process problem. Experimentation and tenacity on my part will solve that. Thank you for your comments!

just put a dab of greenstuff in the hole with the glue

Oh also, protip, for vehicles and other places where it's possible, I put the magnet on the inside (sometimes still drilling a bit so the palstic is thinner and it holds better) so that when a weapon is on the magnets are pulling each other into the glue joint instead of trying to rip each other out of it.

@Affe Thanks! I like your protip, it makes good sense.

I can't answer the specific question on drill bit types.  I've don plenty of magnatizing, but haven't analyzed the tools I've used in that great of depth.
I've used Dremel's precision drill bit set in my 7.2 Volt rotary tool.  I've never had too big a problem with the convex bottom of the hole they create.  If you match the drill bit size close enough to the magnet diameter, the sides of the hole should provide enough surface area to hold the magnet in place with a little super glue.
A little super glue, epoxy glue, or an epoxy resin like Green Stuff or Milliput could be used to fill in the hole to an even surface.

Thanks! I'm beginning to think I may have a process problem with my drilling, rather than a hole/tool problem. I'll keep experimenting.

Yes this is right. You have to drill a hole, which has the Same diameter as the Magnet or even a bit smaller. Mosten on large diameters i drill a smaller hole.


text:
Does the elephant get bigger when I bring in the ballista?
Fairgrounds Trumpeter:

At the beginning of each end step, if a +1/+1 counter was placed on a permanent under your control this turn, put a +1/+1 counter on Fairgrounds Trumpeter.

Walking Ballista:

Walking Ballista enters the battlefield with X +1/+1 counters on it.

If I bring in a new Walking Ballista - then it enters the game with the +1/+1 counters already on it. Technically you could interpret that as meaning that the +1/+1 counters were not placed on it that turn - they were already there as it entered the battlefield.
So does the trumpeter trumpet louder and the crowd cheer more when they see the ballista walk onto the field?
(Obviously if a new counter is added after the Ballista is on the field then it would, this is specifically about the replacement ability on entering the battlefield).

"Does the elephant get bigger when I bring in the ballista?" - this title would look nice at r/nocontext

I have an amusing image in my head of somebody holding their card horizontally in the air, balancing a die on it and then carefully lowering it to the table, so as to ensure that it literally enters the battlefield with counters. Future "Un-" expansion material, maybe.

@tsuma534 My alternative working title was "Does the elephant grow when the ballista walks in?"

Does Panharmonicon also triggers on undying or when Walking Ballista come into play?

@sinsedrix Panharmonicon would not trigger since this isn't an "enter the battlefield" trigger, it enters with the counters already on.

@TimB Why Fairgrounds Trumpeter would trigger and not Panharmonicon? The approved answer says it should be considered the same to place a counter or have them already placed on it.

@sinsedrix Panharmonicon looks for triggered abilities, which Ballista does not have. Fairgrounds Trumpeter looks for counters being placed, which Ballista does have.

Yes, you get the counter on Trumpeter.
When an ability is looking out for counters being placed on an object, the game also counts cards that enter the battlefield with counters as having had those "placed" on it: it will trigger abilities like Trumpeter's, Hardened Scales would give the Ballista another +1/+1 counter, etc.

121.6. Some spells and abilities refer to counters being “placed” on an object. This refers to putting counters on that object while it’s on the battlefield and also to an object that’s given counters as it enters the battlefield.

Would
Winding Constrictor work and would it cumulate with Hardened Scales effect?


text:
Will Irencrag Pyromancer's ability trigger when it's killed by Ob Nixilis, the Hate-Twisted?
An opponent kills my Irencrag Pyromancer with Ob Nixilis, the Hate-Twisted's minus ability ("Destroy target creature. It's controller draws 2 cards.") on their turn. Would I get a trigger on Irencrag Pyromancer for drawing my second card this turn before it is destroyed, or is it destroyed first, and only then I would draw my two cards?

You perform instructions in an ability in the order in which they are written. So, in this scenario, the creature is destroyed then you draw the cards. Creatures that are destroyed die immediately, so the Pyromancer is already dead by the time you draw the cards and its triggered ability will not trigger.

Rules section 608 describes how to resolve spells and abilities, and rule 608.2c says

The controller of the spell or ability follows its instructions in the order written. However, replacement effects may modify these actions. In some cases, later text on the card may modify the meaning of earlier text (for example, “Destroy target creature. It can’t be regenerated” or “Counter target spell. If that spell is countered this way, put it on top of its owner’s library instead of into its owner’s graveyard.”) Don’t just apply effects step by step without thinking in these cases—read the whole text and apply the rules of English to the text.

It might be worth mentioning that "destroy" removes the creature from the battlefield immediately rather than waiting for state-based effects to be checked.  After all, if Ob Nixilis instead read "deal 4 damage to a creature, its controller draws 2 cards", the pyromancer would trigger.


text:
Can I use Secret Invasion to transfer a trap card in front of me to another player?
In a game of Munchkin: Marvel Edition, a trap is played on me that says I get -5 in my next combat, an additional -5 at night and an additional -5 if it’s raining for a whooping -15 to my next combat. The card explicitly states to "keep this card in front of you as a reminder."
I have in my hand the Secret Invasion trap card that says "immediately exchange all cards in front of you with the person on your right." Can I play Secret Invasion on the person on my left and give them the trap?

Hi, Austin Murray, and welcome to Board & Card Games Stack Exchange. I've tried to copyedit your question a little, but I'm not 100% sure that I got it right, so could you please check that I didn't introduce any mistakes by accident? (In particular, I don't own Munchkin: Marvel Edition myself, so I had to guess which trap you meant.) If I did, or if you feel there's something else to improve, please feel free to [edit] your question yourself and fix it (or even revert it all back to the way it was before, if you feel that's best). Thanks, and I hope you'll get an answer to your question.

No, you can't.
The trap is being kept in front of you as a reminder.  The effect has already been applied.
Arguably you could say that the reminder card moves, the the minus effect won't move with it.
Notice that the trap has no rules about discarding itself.  As currently worded, if it was applying the effect it would stay in front of you forever, giving you -15 until you found a way to discard it with a different card.  This doesn't happen because the card isn't officially in play - it's just a memory tool that you can discard freely once it's done with its purpose.


text:
Do I need to get a noble in order to win Splendor?
Is it necessary to win a noble in order to win the game of Splendor?
I have heard two different sets of rules, one is to reach 15 points, the other is to reach 15 points and possess at least one noble.
Which one is the correct rule?

No. From the rulebook, hosted on the creator's website, no mention of nobles as part of the win condition:

END OF THE GAME
When a player reaches 15 prestige points, complete the
  current round so that each player has played the same number
  of turns.
  The player who then has the highest number of prestige points
  is declared the winner (don’t forget to count your nobles).
  In case of a tie, the player who has purchased the fewest
  development cards wins.

As per the rules quoted by steenbergh, you do not need a noble in order to win. However, in some discussions I've seen it raised as a house rule (particularly in situations where people believe that going for nobles is a weaker strategy than avoiding them, so the house rule tries to encourage competition for them).
Additionally, in the expansions Cities of Splendor, the Cities module replaces nobles with City tiles that you must claim one of in order to win.

One thing to remember the difficultly in obtaining a noble is entirely up to the luck of the draw for which ones you get and what cards are available for purchase so there are games where they can all get easily purchased and others where they are impossible.

"going for nobles is a weaker strategy than avoiding them."  I find that the nobles strategy is a prisoner's dilemma.  When nobody is after the good nobles (the ones with overlapping colors), then they are a good bet, but when everyone is after the nobles, they are a bad bet.  So, starting out in the "nobody after nobles" state, each individual is incentivized to go after nobles.  The game devolves toward the "everyone after nobles state", which is actually the suboptimal strategy.


text:
Munchkin "Shrieking Geek" Bad Stuff
If you lose to the Shrieking Geek and fail to run away, the Bad Stuff that happens is described as:

Bad Stuff: You become a normal boring Human. Discard any Race or Class cards in play.

If I have both a race and a class, do I lose both or only one?

Definitely both.

Hmmm... it says any cards in play, not any cards you have in play. So one could try to rule-lawyer that all players have to discard their race and class cards, not just the one bad stuff happens to.

I would say both.
There is some room for interpretation here, due to ambiguities in the English language, but I would certainly interpret "any Race or Class cards in play" as equivalent to "all Race and Class cards in play."  (Note that you can have several of each, using cards like Half-Breed or Super Munchkin.)  This also matches the first part of the text, which says that you "become a normal boring Human"; if you didn't discard your Race cards, you would not become Human, and, at least arguably, if you did not discard your Classes, you would not become normal and boring.
If you were supposed to choose, it would most likely say something like "at least one Race or Class card of your choice," or maybe "either all Race or all Class cards in play."  But neither of those would really match the "become a normal boring Human" part.

There is no room for interpretation. You must discard them both (or all if you have half-breed, super-munchkin or equivalents).
"Any race or class card in play" would mean you get to pick one to discard, and discard that one.
"Any race or class cards in play" means you have to discard all cards in play that meet the criteria.


text:
Swap Plays For Draws and Play X with fewer than X cards on hand
Lets say the rules are Draw 1 / Play 4, and the Swap Plays For Draws promotional rule card is in play:

My turn begins and I have zero cards in my hand.
So I draw one card.
If I now want to make use of the Swap Plays For Draws rule, how many cards should I draw?
The rules say "Play 4", but I can only play one card, because I only have one card in my hand. So should I draw 4 cards or one card?
Also, if I first play my only card, can I after that use the Swap Plays For Draws rule and exchange my remaining 3 plays for 3 draws (even though I don't actually have 3 more cards to play)?

This is answered in the Fluxx FAQ:
http://faq.looneylabs.com/question/272

if you have 3 plays left, you get to draw 3 cards, even if you only have 1 card left in your hand. Of course, now you’ve used up your plays, so you can’t play any of those cards on the current turn.

Oddly, the FAQ now says exactly the opposite of what you quote here.

This is a good question, and the answer basically depends on how one should interpret the phrase "as many cards as you have remaining to play" in the card text.

One interpretation is that this refers strictly to the number of cards the rules tell you to play (with the following parenthetical remark making a special exception for "Play All", which one might otherwise interpret as allowing you to draw the whole deck!).  Under this interpretation, you would indeed have the option of drawing 4 cards (or 3 cards after playing one — unless your read the FAQ literally, in which case you might not be able to do anything after playing your last card!), regardless of how many cards you actually have in hand.
The other interpretation is that this phrase refers to the number of cards you could actually play at this point (assuming that none of the effects of those cards granted you extra plays or altered the rules!).  Under this interpretation, the parenthetical remark about "Play All" merely serves to clarify the "general principle" that you cannot play (and Swap Plays For Draws therefore will not let you draw) more cards than you have in your hand.  Thus, with only one card in hand, you would only be able to use Swap Plays For Draws to draw one extra card (or no cards at all, if you already played your one card).

Alas, both of those interpretations seem plausible on the face of it, and the Fluxx Rules don't seem to provide any explicit guidance on the matter. The only even marginally relevant bits in the rules that I could find are the following FAQ entries:

Q: What if the Rules require me to Play 4 but I only have 2 cards?
A: Play as many as you can. Your turn ends when you have no cards left in your hand, even if you are supposed to play more.

and possibly:

Q: How do I interpret the Play All card? If, by playing my cards, I receive more cards in my hand, do those new cards have to be played as well, so that I will always end up with zero cards in my hand at the end of my turn as long as Play All is on the table?
A: Yes.

A strictly literal reading of the former entry ("Your turn ends when you have no cards left in your hand") suggests that, regardless of the interpretation chosen, you cannot actually activate Swap Plays For Draws after playing the last card in your hand, since your turn will already have ended!
On the other hand, it doesn't specifically say that the number of cards you "have remaining to play" is limited by the number of cards you have left in your hand — it just says that your turn ends when your hand runs out, even if, by the current rules, you're supposed to play more cards.  Thus, while this reading is arguably more consistent with interpretation #2 above, it doesn't actually contradict either of them.  And it's IMO not even clear whether this FAQ entry is really meant to be read that literally.
The only reason I have for quoting the second FAQ entry is to emphasize that the special rule that Swap Plays For Draws has, when combined with Play All, is, while sensible enough (at least when compared to the alternative of drawing the whole deck), not actually an accurate match for how Play All normally works.
Normally, under Play All, you'd be able to (and would have to) keep playing until you literally cannot play any more cards, and literally combining this with the basic Swap Plays For Draws rule, without the special exception, would effectively have you draw the whole deck (and the discards too!) until there are no more cards to draw.  Instead, the special rule for Swap Plays For Draws + Play All in the parentheses just has you count your cards to determine the draw/play amount — which is exactly how the FAQ entry says Play All does not normally work.  Thus, whereas the first FAQ entry above might be taken as an argument in favor of the second interpretation, by similar logic this one would seem to be an argument against it.
Thus, pending a clarification from the designers, I'd have to say that this is something your table may simply have to make a ruling on, and stick to it.  FWIW, I don't think either choice will actually break the game, although they do each offer a different set of strategic options.

In your first scenario, you've drawn one card, played one card, and the rules are now: Draw 4 Play 1.  So, to make up the difference you draw 3 and since you've already played one, your turn is over.
If you start with 1 card, you draw a card, play a card, then play the Swap Rule. At that point, you've drawn 1 card, played 2 cards. The rules are now: Draw 4 Play 1. So, to make up the difference you draw 3 and since you've already played two, your turn is over.

This does not seem to match how the actual Swap Plays For Draws rule works. It does not unconditionally exchange the play and draw numbers, as you seem to assume, but rather lets players convert remaining plays into draws.


text:
What is the full collector number of the MTG card "Aesthetic Consultation" from Unhinged Foil-only Booster card
What is the full collector number of the MTG card "Aesthetic Consultation" from Unhinged Foil-only Booster card?
It reads something like '48/140 Disrobing'. I am particularly curious about the last word.
https://scryfall.com/card/unh/48%E2%98%85/aesthetic-consultation
As well as Farewell to Arms. Is it '56/140 Squizzie'?
https://cards.scryfall.io/large/front/4/7/47b61c3a-5e76-4529-9878-603e49c82743.jpg?1562488372

Your title and first link are about "Aesthetic Consultation", but your first paragraph asks about "Richard Garfield, Ph.D."  Which card are you interested in?

Fixed the body of the question.

The collector number of that card is just 48/140. The word "Disrobing" is part of a hidden piece of text in the set with one word on each card. The text can be read by putting the cards in reverse alphabetical order by name, starting with Zzzyxas's Abyss. The text starts with "Here are some more cards that didn't make it." Aesthetic Consultation's name is near the beginning of the alphabet, so its word is near the end of that text. Along with "Ach! Hans, Run!" and _____, it says "Disrobing Scepter (again!)". Similarly, Farewell to Arms, along with Face to Face says "Squizzle Nabizzle".


text:
How does Pashalik Mons deal damage when it dies?
The card Pashalik Mons states that when it (or another Goblin you control) dies, it deals damage. (It being Pashalik Mons.)
The question has arisen in our group: if Pashalik Mons is dead, how is it dealing damage? Is it a creature source of damage? As far as we are aware, if a creature dies with its ability on the stack, the ability usually fizzles.
How does this work?

The existence of Mogg Fanatic kind of hints this is supposed to work

The main rules that allow this are 113.7 and 113.7a:

113.7 The source of an ability is the object that generated it. The source of an activated ability on the stack is the object whose ability was activated. The source of a triggered ability (other than a delayed triggered ability) on the stack, or one that has triggered and is waiting to be put on the stack, is the object whose ability triggered. To determine the source of a delayed triggered ability, see rules 603.7d-f.

113.7a. Once activated or triggered, an ability exists on the stack independently of its source. Destruction or removal of the source after that time won't affect the ability. Note that some abilities cause a source to do something (for example, "Prodigal Pyromancer deals 1 damage to any target") rather than the ability doing anything directly. In these cases, any activated or triggered ability that references information about the source for use while announcing an activated ability or putting a triggered ability on the stack checks that information when the ability is put onto the stack. Otherwise, it will check that information when it resolves. In both instances, if the source is no longer in the zone it's expected to be in at that time, its last known information is used. The source can still perform the action even though it no longer exists.

"Last known information", as defined in the glossary, is

Information about an object that's no longer in the zone it's expected to be in, or information about a player who's no longer in the game. This information captures that object's last existence in that zone or that player's last existence in the game. See rules 113.7a, 608.2b, 608.2h, and 800.4h.

In short, when Pashalik Mons dies and its triggered ability resolves, the damage is dealt by the creature Palashik Mons was right before it died.

In addition, you said

This seems extra strange as, at least to our knowledge, if a creature dies with its ability on the stack, the ability usually fizzles.

but as you can see, rule 113.7a says the opposite. Removing a creature with its ability on the generally does not fizzle the ability, though of course abilities that only affect their source have nothing to do if the source is no longer there.

Absolutely fantastic, thank you! I suspected we had that wrong.

One caveat to the final sentence: If the ability on the stack in some way requires the creature to still be on the battlefield (most commonly if it’s doing something to the creature itself, such as putting counters on it), then it will in fact fizzle if you remove the creature from the battlefield before it can resolve, though it only does so when it tries to resolve. This case may be what confused the OP, since in my experience it’s much more common in some play groups than the type of situation the question was asking about.

In the situation you're describing, the ability doesn't actually fizzle, in the sense that it isn't removed from the stack; it does resolve completely and it just doesn't do whatever it would do to to creature that is no longer there. That does make a difference if the ability also does something else. For example, if you activate Sphinx of Magosi's ability and it dies before the ability resolves, nothing gets a counter but you still draw a card.

But if it's a targeting ability/spell that loses all of its targets... Though I don't think there are abilities on permanents that target the permanent itself (and how would that even be phrased?)

Yes, that is what causes an ability to fizzle. But the purpose of "target" in a spell or ability is to be able to choose from potentially multiple options. An ability that is predefined to target one specific object is the opposite of that, so it just wouldn't make sense.

@ilkkachu not specifically, but there are a lot of examples of abilities on creatures that can target a creature and don't exclude itself by saying 'another' though granted most of these aren't useful for the creature that has them, often tapping creatures or being power and toughness related with a tap cost.


text:
How do instant speed effects work after blockers have been declared?
I attack with my Goblin Balloon Brigade and opponent blocks it with Savannah Lions. In response I pay one red mana to make my goblins flying. What happens?

So does my balloon brigade die?

Both creatures die; you needed to give it flying before blockers were declared.

This is the same logic as https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/21067/.

If you want your attacking creature to evade blockers you must grant it flying before the declare blockers step. The phases are:

Beginning phase

untap
upkeep
draw

1st main phase
Combat phase

enter combat
declare attackers
declare blockers
combat damage
end combat

2nd main phase
Ending phase

so if you granted flying in 1st main phase or entering combat your opponent would have been unable to block with Savannah Lions (unless of course he/she had something to grant it reach/flying)

TLDR: Only granting flying before blockers are declared stops non-fliers from blocking a creature.

In general, once blockers have been declared, there are only two things that can make an attacking creature no longer be blocked:

Some effect explicitly causes the attacking creature to not be blocked any longer. In this case, the attacker would do damage normally as if not blocked. I’m not aware of any cards that can actually achieve this.
Some effect causes the attacking creature to be removed from combat before damage would be dealt. In this case, the attacker deals no damage at all unless they somehow got some in before they were removed from combat (say, some attack trigger caused them to deal damage). A number of things can cause this to happen, most commonly somebody using a kill spell on the attacking creature when priority passes at the end of the declare blockers step.

Almost all cases are covered by rules 509.1g and 509.1h:

509.1g Each chosen creature still controlled by the defending player becomes a blocking creature. Each one is blocking the attacking creatures chosen for it. It remains a blocking creature until it’s removed from combat or the combat phase ends, whichever comes first. See rule 506.4.

509.1h An attacking creature with one or more creatures declared as blockers for it becomes a blocked creature; one with no creatures declared as blockers for it becomes an unblocked creature. This remains unchanged until the creature is removed from combat, an effect says that it becomes blocked or unblocked, or the combat phase ends, whichever comes first. A creature remains blocked even if all the creatures blocking it are removed from combat.

Your described case may seem at first to be a bit special, because the legality of a set of creatures blocking is technically checked before you get to that point in the declare blockers step. Because of this, we also have the following in rule 509.1b:

509.1b: The defending player checks each creature they control to see whether it’s affected by any restrictions (effects that say a creature can’t block, or that it can’t block unless some condition is met). If any restrictions are being disobeyed, the declaration of blockers is illegal.
A restriction may be created by an evasion ability (a static ability an attacking creature has that restricts what can block it). If an attacking creature gains or loses an evasion ability after a legal block has been declared, it doesn’t affect that block. Different evasion abilities are cumulative.

This means that gaining or losing flying, or shadow, or skulk, or some other similar ability does not affect whether the creature is blocking or not, even if this happens before 509.1g and 509.1h ‘lock in’ what creatures are blocking and what creatures are blocked.
However, that bit of 509.1b doesn’t actually matter in 99% of cases. In almost all cases, the earliest that you could grant an evasion ability is after all blockers are declared, all costs for blocking are paid, and all damage assignment orders are declared. Only then do triggered abilities that trigger on blocking happen, and only once those are on the stack does anybody get priority (thus making this the earliest anything could actually happen at instant-speed, including usage of activated abilities such as the one that allows Goblin Balloon Brigade to give itself flying).
The only exceptions to that are if you have some effect causing you to grant a creature an evasion ability as a cost for blocking (AFAIK no such effect exists in the game currently) or you have an effect imposing some other cost on blocking, and that cost triggers an ability that grants an evasion ability (I think this might be possible, but I’m not certain).


text:
Removing the Luck from Stone Age
Stone Age is one of my personal favourite games. The game dynamics are excellent and requires plenty of skill and strategy to win, with the only exception of the dice roll when determining resource.
Has anyone modified the rules to make the game less dependant on the luck of the dice? I find it a shame to lose a game due to luck, rather than skill.

Sure, visit the Tool Hut.  Tools are explicitly there to negate the luck factor.
Another option is to get more people.  There will still be luck in the rolls, but if you put two people on a space instead of one, you'll produce more each time.

I think this thing of skill in games tends to be a little of too much pride and taking the game a bit more serious than it should.
In general I think it's best just to take a high risk once in a while if you think that 'luck' is not going your way; if you loose laugh about it and enjoy the game :)
Onto the house rules to modify results:

Die result for resources tend not to surprise much because you roll plenty of them; you may have a crazy roll once but if you complete the game it may have not decided it
The die results that have HUGE variance are the card rolls, where you roll N dice with N being the number of players. That's because you don't roll many of this (4 sets per game?)

For instance if you are 4 players one of you may buy this kind of cards two times in a row and roll 6,1,2,3 then 5,1,2,2.
Or better consider 6,5,1,2 and then 6,5,2,2
That seriously affects the game because one or two players get two tools or agriculture level in a row while the other players get one resource. In particular the second player in the later case gets an edge over the other two players for free! (the first player is the one who buys the card)
To lower the variance we have sometimes agreed that in 4 players game the person who buys the card rerolls if two pairs of the result have a difference  of 3 or more:
If you roll 6,6,3,3 = reroll because = > 6 - 3 = 3 , 6 -3 = 3.
If you roll 6,6,3,4 = don't reroll because => 6 -3 = 3 , 6 -4 = 2.
6,5,1,2 = reroll => 6 - 2 = 4 , 5 -1 = 4.
That way the card MAY STILL be decisive, but with less likeliness.
But I have to say that for our games it's still a minor thing

The accepted answer, while correct, is overly brief. Luck can be reduced in several ways in Stone Age, especially when you think in terms of reducing wasted pips (a pip is 1 dot on a die):
When you have no tools, try to concentrate your workers on a single resource each turn. For example, on forest you'll waste 0, 1, or 2 pips on each roll. Your waste per die rolled is 1/7 as much with 7 workers on forest as it is with just 1 worker there. If you spread out your workers with no tools available, you will on average waste more pips.
Once you get to 2 tools, the tactics for minimizing waste change. With 2 tools, you can now split your workers between forest and hunting and never waste more than 1 pip. For example, you can have 1 worker on forest and 1 on hunt. If you roll a 1 or 4 for wood, you use 2 tools. If you roll a 2 or 5 you use 1 tool. If you roll a 3 or 6 you use no tools. So on wood you don't waste a single pip. On the roll for the hunt, you will either waste 1 or 0 pip, as you use the rest of your tools. This logic extends to more expensive resources as you acquire more tools, though you lose tool flexibility once you get past 5 tools because you'll no longer have the option to use just a single pip worth of tool.
In addition to the above, you can acquire temporary tools from civ cards, which also reduce luck for the same reason as tools do.
Combining the above, it is possible to pursue a "tools strategy" where you never increase your population beyond the initial 5. This is the most predictable strategy in Stone Age because you are not relying on more die rolls from population growth, but rather more automatic acquisition of resources from an ever increasing number of tools.
Note that alternative strategies that rely on high population or concentration of civilization card multipliers can rack up very big scores in long games that will easily beat the tools player. So it's important for a player concentrating on tools to try to force the game to be relatively short by drilling down one of the huts before an alternate strategy gets an unstoppably large economic engine.

As I was playing it many times with two players only, I wanted to remove as much luck as possible. The tools hut may help, but it hardly does in the first few turns, which might be the most important ones.
I could eliminate most of randomness using this rule:

For resource production use one die only. For each two workers simply count 7 pips without rolling. So for five workers, you get 2*7 pips plus one roll.

I really love this alternative, but it makes the game take longer, since there's a lot of planning involved. But the planning is fun (if you're like me) and using the dice much more rarely saves some time.
I also made two other modifications described on BGG.

Are you comfortable with quoting those two other modifications in your answer? Link-only content is not reliable in the long term, as that link becomes useless if the link breaks for whatever reason.

@doppelgreener I'm not sure, if it's a good idea as the other two modifications are unrelated to luck. I added the link as an additional information, that's all. But feel free to quote it if feel like this.

The first modification described on that BGG link is somebody trying to "fix" the fact that they read the rules wrong.

@bwarner No, it's just that at the time of posting I didn't recall the rule. And yes, it's no fix. It's just an alternative I really like as it gives you more possibilities while the decisions are still hard. That said, the other two modifications are simpler and more important.