text:
What are the rules regarding play of a singleton?
A player waited 3 minutes to play a singleton.  We were playing 3 NT and an opponent paused 3 minutes on the second trick leaving 2 minutes to play 11 tricks.  What are the rules regarding this unethical play?

In what context?  Was this a tournament with a director?  Why is there a total time limit for the hand?

I removed irrelevant tags.  You're clearly asking about time limits; is this in a particular tournament setting?  ACBL for example?  Online/in person?

Slow Play is subject to penalty. https://www.acbl.org/conduct-and-ethics/active-ethics/#slow

If this was on-line, then many a distraction could explain this. But, then you also have remedies. Occasionally I, unwittingly (it never became a reflex, and now I'm too old to learn it), may hesitate with, say Queen third in a suit where declared just tried to finess the queen from partners hand. The way my brain is wired I am already thinking about the continuation. On BBO, when I see what happened, I will send the opps a chat message "Sorry about the delay, no problem in this trick", and play the queen. This has never caused a scene.

A friend and a highly qualified TD told me that on-line you really cannot read anything into hesitations because there may be a connection problem. And should not be quick to blame. If I unwittingly hesitate with a singleton in an on-line game, I think it is proper to alert the opps (but not my partner) what happened.

Let's look at the relevant Bridge Laws.
Law 16B1 says:

Any extraneous information from partner that might suggest a call or play is unauthorized.This includes remarks, questions, replies to questions, unexpected alerts or failures to alert, unmistakable hesitation, unwonted speed, special emphasis, tone, gesture, movement or mannerism.

(a) A player may not choose a call or play that is demonstrably suggested over another by unauthorized information if the other call or play is a logical alternative.

Law 73D1 says:

It is desirable, though not always required, for players to maintain steady tempo and
unvarying manner. However, players should be particularly careful when variations may
work to the benefit of their side.

Law 73D2 says:

A player may not attempt to mislead an opponent by means of a question, remark
or gesture; by the haste or hesitancy of a call or play (as in hesitating before playing a singleton); by the manner in which a call or play is made; or by any purposeful deviation from correct procedure (see also Law 73E2).

Law 73E2 says:

If the Director determines that an innocent player has drawn a false inference from a question, remark, manner, tempo or the like, of an opponent who has no demonstrable bridge reason for the action, and who could have been aware, at the time of the action, that it could work to his benefit, the Director shall award an adjusted score

Law 74A2 says:

A player should carefully avoid any remark or extraneous action that might cause annoyance or embarrassment to another player or might interfere with the enjoyment of the game

Law 74C prohibits "violations of procedure" including 74C7:

varying the normal tempo of bidding or play for the purpose of disconcerting an opponent

The above are all from the most recent (2017) Laws of Duplicate Bridge. All boldface is my addition. The laws for contract bridge are very similar except for mentions of a director.
All club and tournament games have time limits for each round. So do all online games that I know of.  A three minute hesitation in play, especially when holding a singleton of the suit led (not at trick 1, when there might be a need to plan the play) is very much longer than usual, and would usually be considered quite improper. A director or club management would have discretion whether to take action. It would be normal to ask, after the hand is over, what reason there was for the delay. If there was not a good reason, the player might be warned, or even removed from the game or barred from the club or event. A warning would be usual for a first offense. If damage seems to have been done, an adjusted score would be awarded.
Note, however, that such action is only "unethical" if it is done with intent to secure an advantage or disconcert or annoy opponents. If the player was belatedly trying to plan the defense, that is not unethical, although 3 minutes is excessive.
Online and tournament timing is usually 7-8 minutes per hand, including the auction, with the time limit applied only at the end of the round, often 2 or 3 hands, although it may be as few as one or as many as 5 or more hands long. Club play time varies widely, but many clubs use a rough figure of 7 1/2 minutes per hand. Online "speedball" events are typically 15 minutes for three hands.

There are two issues with this pause:

it's too long just in general, with a timing issue (but I would caution people that my "I thought for 15 seconds" is the opponents' "it was 2 minutes" was probably actually closer to 35-40 seconds)
"hesitation with a singleton" is frequently a problem especially not at trick 1 (as Tom says, declarer is expected to pause 15-30 seconds before playing from dummy at trick 1, and third hand should take that time (whether or not dummy is played quickly) to work out the defence.).

David points out the law issues with "players should be particularly careful when variations may work to the benefit of their side."  Sometimes it happens (at least twice this week I've "tanked" with a singleton, because I was reviewing their card after making the opening lead, and then reviewing trick 1 after T2 was played.  IRL, it's obvious, because I'll request the cards stay up until I'm ready.  Online, not so much.)  It causes problems, that one should try to ameliorate (I PM'ed declarer to explain.)
If this happens in a sanctioned game, call the director and have them sort it out.  If you're concerned just about running out of time (rather than the "with a singleton" part), call the director and make her aware of who was taking the time.  The ACBL has this to say in their online regulations (other sponsoring organizations will have their own rules for this situation):

Unfinished hands: A hand that is partially completed when time expires is adjudicated as equitably as possible to both sides. Any doubtful point will be resolved against the partnership that is considered most responsible for not finishing in time.

In a non-sanctioned game, or where time is not a factor, commenting on it, marking the person in your notes, and knowing better next time (or maybe not playing with them next time) is your only resort.
But remember that you not being able to see a problem (looking at your 26 cards) doesn't mean that the opponent doesn't have a problem (or doesn't think he has a problem).  It might even be a problem that you (or I) can't see exists, because this player is so much better (or so much worse) that we are.  That's why the Laws are written the way they are, and why it's the director's job to determine "discernable bridge reason" "unauthorized information" (and potential use thereof by partner), "improper deception" (deliberate or otherwise), and so on, not yours (or theirs, or mine, when I'm a player).
Finally, I'll emphasize what David said about ethics.  A very high ranking TD in the English Bridge Union said this about proprieties and ethics, and I have always felt it is a perfect way to see the world:

Doing something proscribed by the Proprieties (Laws 72-76, they used to be a separate section) is improper.
Doing something improper deliberately is unethical.
Doing something unethical, knowing it's unethical, in order to gain an advantage is the c-word.

You don't know that this was done deliberately - what if the opponent had a phone call come up, or a kid trip down the stairs just then, or a "false disconnect", or just lost their mind and thought it was partner's play?  Sure, they should probably let the table know that, but how do you know?  Also, how do you know that they didn't have a bridge problem clearing up trick 1 (granted, with a singleton is a problem, 3 minutes is a problem...)?  You can point out the time issues (once), call the director and explain the issue, and then when it turns out to be a (non-obvious) singleton, you can point that out to the director if you misplayed as a result - but that's the end.  The TD worries about the ethics, you worry about your bridge and your partner and not the opponents.  Remember,

A player should carefully avoid any remark or extraneous action that might cause annoyance or embarrassment to another player or might interfere with the enjoyment of the game. - Law 74A2.

Public accusations of behaviour being unethical violate this Law and are themselves imProper.

On the opening trick, a "pause" is justified, even when a player has no problems because of the forced play of a singleton. That's because everyone ought to be spending time to study the dummy. Thus should not take place at the second trick, although an inexperienced player may be excused for doing on the second trick what should have been done on the first.
But that pause should be more like 30 seconds; three minutes is too long for most tournaments, and probably many "home" games as well. One way to demonstrate that the pause is for studying the board is for the person to pull the singleton from hand, turn it face down, study the board, and then turn in face up at the end of the 30 seconds.


text:
Survival of Live Groups in the game of Go

In go, does a live group with 2 eyes survive being surrounded by the other players stones or are the stones in that live group dead?

If I invade my opponent's surrounded territory with just 1 stone, does my opponent have to play 3 stones to remove me? If I am not removed he is no longer surrounding the territory because my 1 stone means the territory is not surrounded entirely by my opponent's stones.

This is related to your question about scoring surrounded groups; in my answer to it I touch on how to understand “surrounding” in Go.

This is two separate questions, which duplicate https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/54980/ and https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/53606 respectively.

A group with two true eyes (not "false eyes") is and remains alive even if surrounded by the other player, and cannot be captured by an sequence of moves by the other player. That is what being a "living group" means.

An invading stone that is not able to be included in a living group will be considered dead at the end of the game, and its stone will be treated as having been captured. If black invades a white group and white must answer each move to prevent black from creating a living group, then the net score will be unchanged. If white can safely leave black's plays unanswered without black being able to form a living group, black will lose a point for each such move. But if white is in error and black can make a living group, or cut off a white group and connect to a living group, black will make significant profit.

If the players do not agree on whether a group is alive or not, play is not over; if the disagreement is only discovered while scoring, play is resumed to settle the status of the group(s) in question.

Any string or group with two eyes are impossible to capture. For example:
$$Bc
$$ --------------------
$$ - . . X . . X . . X . .-
$$ - . . X . . X . . X . .-
$$ - . . X X X X X X X . .-
$$ - . . . . . . . . . . .-
$$ --------------------

Why?
If we try to capture this, we first need to surround the group:
$$Bc
$$ -----------------------
$$ - .O X . . X . . X O .-
$$ - .O X . . X . . X O .-
$$ - .O X X X X X X X O .-
$$ - .O O O O O O O O O .-
$$ -----------------------

However, this group has a hole inside, so we need to fill the space inside both of the holes.
$$Bc
$$ -----------------------
$$ - .O X O O X O O X O .-
$$ - .O X O P X O P X O .-
$$ - .O X X X X X X X O .-
$$ - .O O O O O O O O O .-
$$ -----------------------

Wait, a minute, we can't play E10, because that's suicidal unless we fill in the rest of the group, so let's do that. Except, we can't, because playing H10 is suicidal, unless we fill in E10, which we already know can't be filled, and thus, any group with two eyes cannot be filled.

As for your second question, the stone is dead, unless you figure out a way to make a string and take over the corner by capturing the opponents pieces.
For example, this white stone is dead, as it contains no territory:
$$ Dead stone
$$-------------------
$$- . . . . . . . . -
$$- . . . P . . . . -
$$- . . . . . . . . -
$$-------------------

However, when invading a corner, make sure the corner can be invaded. Several positions are useless to invade, and hurt you, as you most likely will get captured. If you somehow get into a position like this, then try to end it as quickly as possible, as the opponent will gain points for every stone he captures, and you can limit the amount of stones he captures by placing less stones. For example, this position is considered safe from a 3-3 invasion:
$$ White is safe from a 3-3 invasion
$$ -........
$$ -........
$$ -..a..X..
$$ -...X....
$$ -........
$$ -..X.....
$$ -........

More info on this can be found here

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
What is forcing after opening a minor and partner bids a major, and I jump to 2NT?
I open 1D, partner bids 1S, I bid 2NT, opponents have remained silent - partner bids 3D?  Is that forcing?

This is very system dependent. See this article for example for a long discussion of various options.
Standard, everything other than pass or a game jump is forcing. Remember you have 19 and partner has 5-6 at least usually, so you’re probably in a game.  I would at least play Gerber here (so 4C is not natural) but 3 level bids are forcing and usually natural, other than 3NT of course which is to play.
The most common conventions I see here are to play various puppet options - basically every bid by responder transfers to the next higher suit at the 3 level (3c-3D-3h transfer to 3D-3h-3s), and either that is the weakest option (responder passes the transfer) or the stronger (if responder bids on).  Jump to game is middle. But it really depends on your tolerance for various systems -  it can get very complex, as is appropriate for a circumstance where you could have anywhere from a part score to slam, and one partner knows which.
The question is why you’d want 3D to be nonforcing.  Responder is totally 100% in charge in the auction at that point, so it’s not a question of forcing or not - it’s responder either tells you to bid again or tells you to pass.  You could make 3 level bids sign off, but that takes up a lot of space; you’d rather not if you can avoid it.  That’s why you use puppet bids there - it lets responder double dip and have both signoff and exploration bids both available for the same bidding space.

Agreeing with Joe here; standard is "everything is game forcing except pass."  He gives the reason why non-game forcing calls are of limited value.  Specifically in your case, the hands that are "5-6 points, 5 spades and 4 diamonds (or 4=4, or 4=5), 3D is clearly better than 2NT" are very few.  Also, it's very rare that the weak hand knows that NT isn't good.
The other half of the story, why you would want "everything is game forcing", is that decent 10 counts (or better) with a good suit or suits are interested in slam, and want the space below 3NT (and below 4S) to work out if it's safe to go past.  How do you get to 6D if 3D is passable?
The other hand of interest is the "checkback stayman" hand that bids "the unbid minor" - 5 spades and 4 hearts.  Joe's puppet scheme would be a useful equivalent, but still has to be game-forcing, as you would be bidding 1D-1S; 2NT-3D(hearts); 3H-3S(5=4) and if partner has 4 hearts, she has to bid game.  Hands with 5 spades without 4 hearts also go through checkback, and pretty much have to be game-forcing in case partner is 2=4=4=3 or the like.
So, it's a matter of what hands you want to cater for; and "wisdom" is that the hands that want to stop in 3 of a suit (rather than 2NT) are very small, and the cost of not catering to them is also small; the hands that need to investigate (slam, or two suits) are larger, and the cost of not being able to cater to them (or requiring "all slams go through Gerber") is high.
I've played a system in the past that had a good 16-bad 19 2NT rebid; we "sacrificed" 3C as a "minimum range" signoff signal.  There were lots of rules about how to accomplish the signoff, and 3C-then-3NT was the "strong 3C bid", and it worked.  However, it was rare even with the "could be a good 16" worry, and whether the complication was worth the little edge we got is arguable.  Over a standard 18-19 rebid, it's even more arguable.

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


text:
Can a commander sent to the graveyard be brought back by a sorcery or instant card or ability without costing mana?
Can a commander sent to the graveyard be brought back by a sorcery or instant card or ability without costing mana?
I know I can put it in the command-zone. But does that mean I can get it back out of the "graveyard" with an ability?

At the moment, this is too vague for us to answer. Could you please add references to exactly which spells and/or abilities you are referring to?

The command zone and graveyard are different zones of the game. A spell or ability which targets a card in a graveyard can't target your Commander if your commander is in the command zone.
If you commander dies, you as its owner may choose whether to send it to the command zone or leave it in the graveyard:

903.9a If a commander is in a graveyard or in exile and that object was put into that zone since the last time state-based actions were checked, its owner may put it into the command zone. This is a state-based action. See rule 704.

If you choose to leave it in the graveyard, it would be a legal target for a spell such as Reanimate. You wouldn't need to pay the 'commander tax' in addition, as you're not casting your commander from the command zone.


text:
What counts as "sacrifice" in Magic: the Gathering?
Do sacrifices still take effect if the cause of death is from something else like from opponent's creatures/spells, or can only I trigger it?

This kind of question is generally much easier to answer if you include the specific cards/interactions you are interested in. I've written a general answer, but you may find it easier to understand if it refers to the things you're already playing.

A permanent is sacrificed only when a spell, ability or other rule explicitly calls for it to be sacrificed. Anything else which causes the permanent to be destroyed, including having damage marked on it greater than its toughness, does not count as having been sacrificed.
Consider the situation in which you control a Mayhem Devil. Then:

A 1/1 creature you control is blocked in combat by a 2/2 creature and the game proceeds to the combat damage step. Your creature has 2 damage marked on it and is then destroyed the next time state-based actions are checked. Mayhem Devil's effect is not triggered because the creature was not sacrificed.
An opponent casts Murder on your 1/1 creature. Mayhem Devil's effect is not triggered because the creature was destroyed, not sacrificed.
You cast Murder on your 1/1 creature (possibly an odd thing to do, but a valid game action).  Mayhem Devil's effect is not triggered because the creature was destroyed, not sacrificed.
You cast Neoform and as part of the casting cost choose to sacrifice your 1/1 creature. Mayhem Devil's effect is triggered because Neoform says to sacrifice the creature.
An opponent casts Cruel Edict targeting you, and you choose to sacrifice your 1/1 creature. Mayhem Devil's effect is triggered because Cruel Edict says to sacrifice the creature.

For completeness' sake: Saga cards are sacrificed after the final chapter as a state based action - which is neither a spell nor an ability


text:
Phase 10 not enough cards after skip card
2 players, phase 6 (1 run of 9) :
Cards player 1: skip, skip, skip, 2, 4, 5, 7, 0, 5, 3
Player 1 decides to lay down a skip card.
Player 2 has to skip the turn.
Player 1 decides to lay down a skip card.
Player 2 has to skip the turn.
Player 1 lays the last skip card.
Player 2 has to skip again.
Player 1 now can never win because they don't have enough cards (7) to make a phase?

If you need to make a run of 9; you need 9 cards, not 7.

You seem to be under the incorrect assumption that you don’t draw a card on turns that you play a skip card. It doesn’t work that way; you start every turn by drawing a card.
So in your example, before each time that Player 1 plays a skip card; they would first draw a card. So the total number of cards in your hand never changes until you make your phase; it will always be 10, or 11 while in the middle of your turn.
Rules:

PLAY: The player to the left of the dealer plays first. Play continues in a clockwise direction. On your turn, draw one card, either the top card from the draw pile or the top card from the discard pile, and add it to your hand. End your turn by discarding any one of your cards onto the top of the discard pile.


text:
Carrom edge bounciness
Bit of background.. I'm not sure if it will help..
I'm planning to build a Carrom board (or Carrom-like board) for my kids. We play a variation on Carrom, but with pool cues instead of using your finger(and a few variations on the rules). The playing surface is also much larger and we use a rubber strip to cause the striker/carrom men to bounce off the edges. We use strictly acrylic Carrom men/disks.
The playing surface will be 108cm x 108cm and is to be 3.2mm Hardboard ("Masonite" as some refer to it), with cut corners- a few millimeters larger than the striker to allow the striker to fit into it. (We have a penalizing mechanic similar to pool when the striker is shot accidentally into the hole.)
The 4 sides is to be constructed from Pine and the whole board will get 3 coats of Polyutherane.
My problem is... I don't want to use the rubber strip around the edges to achieve the bounciness, since I've seen traditional Carrom boards with a heck of a lot of bounce!
How do you achieve this bounciness? Is this purely an effect of the Carrom men, or the type of wood (hardwood vs softwood/a specific specie of wood etc) being used?
Thank you

It's been more than fifty years since I've played this game, but the board we had (a standard one that came from Sears back when they sold everything) had hardwood edge strips, hard plastic (phenolic?) rings, and the krokinole posts (on the other surface) were the same material attached to the board surface with heavy screws.
There was plenty of bounce, in my experience, whether we used fingers or the sticks (roughly a meter long and 15 mm diameter) supplied with the game set.  Friction with the playing surface made more difference, but a quick application of Pledge furniture polish spray and a wipe down with a soft cloth made the (hardwood ply?) board surface slick enough that the rings could be made to bounce from two or even three opposing edge boards.


text:
Does a card played with a cascade ability count for "casting" a spell?
I recently added Fires of Invention and Maelstrom Nexus to one of my decks.
Fires of Invention:
Enchantment. You can cast spells only during your turn and you can cast no more than two spells each turn. You may cast spells with mana value less than or equal to the number of lands you control without paying their mana costs.
Maelstrom Nexus:
Enchantment. The first spell you cast each turn has cascade. (When you cast your first spell, exile cards from the top of your library until you exile a nonland card that costs less. You may cast it without paying its mana cost. Put the exiled cards on the bottom of your library in a random order.)
So, if I cast my first card for the turn with Fires of Invention and then play a spell with the Maelstrom Nexus cascade effect, will that count for my second spell cast this turn?

"You may cast it without paying its mana cost."

Yes. Cast has a very specific meaning in the comprehensive rules:

Cast
To take a card from where it is (usually the hand), put it on the stack, and pay its costs, so that it will eventually resolve and have its effect. See rule 601, “Casting Spells.”

and both cards refer to that specific definition. The trigger (you deliberately choosing a card from your hand, semi-automatic casting from an ability like cascade, etc.) does not matter.
If you didn't cast another spell this turn, the card cast with Fires of Invention itself counts as the first one, and the one cast with Maelstrom Nexus' ability counts as the second one (which is fine - Fires of Invention allows two spells per turn). That means you cannot cast another spell this turn. If you did already cast another spell this turn, Fires of Invention would prevent you from casting a revealed card with Maelstrom Nexus' ability, because that would be the third one (but the revealed cards are still put on the bottom of your library).
Conclusion: Fires of Invention and Maelstrom Nexus are not an ideal combination. Of course, if you find both cards fun to play, we won't stop you from playing them together ...

I think this answer addresses the question in a confusing way. The question asks "if I cast my first card for the turn with Fires of Invention and then play a spell with the Maelstrom Nexus cascade effect, will that count for my second spell cast this turn?" and you said "Fires of Invention prevents you from casting a revealed card with Maelstrom Nexus' ability", but that's not true if you have only cast one spell so far, which is the situation the question is specifically asking about.

@murgatroid99 yeah, you're right, but then I don't understand why the author is confused. We may assume they know how to count to two :)

The question is "Does a card played with a cascade ability count for 'casting' a spell?". They're not asking if one and one is two, they're asking if the spell you cast off of Cascade is one of the things you count when determining whether you have cast two spells. Your edit addresses that now.

One of the things the question asker appears to be confused about, is the exact mechanics of cascade.  It might be worth pointing them to the WIKI, which gives a comprehensive definition:  https://mtg.fandom.com/wiki/Cascade

Yes.

When you have a question that concerns a keyword ability, it's best to lookup the definition of that keyword.

702.85a Cascade is a triggered ability that functions only while the spell with cascade is on the stack. “Cascade” means “When you cast this spell, exile cards from the top of your library until you exile a nonland card whose mana value is less than this spell’s mana value. You may cast that card without paying its mana cost if the resulting spell’s mana value is less than this spell’s mana value. Then put all cards exiled this way that weren’t cast on the bottom of your library in a random order.”

The part that's relevant is You may cast that card without paying its mana cost. Note that it permits you to take the cast action. This has a few implications because of Fires of Invention:

You can't choose to cast it if it's not your turn.[CR 101.2][CR 608.2d]
You can't choose to cast it if you've already cast two spells that turn.[CR 101.2][CR 608.2d]
It would indeed count as a spell you cast it you choose to cast it. Fires of Invention counts the spells you cast, no matter how they were cast.

I'm trying to understand the confusion since both Fires of Invention and the reminder text for Cascade clearly say cast.
Perhaps it's because you didn't use the alternative cost provided by Fires of Invention to cast the card found using Cascade. That's not relevant.
Perhaps it's because it's an effect that allows you to cast the spell rather than the priority rules. That's not relevant.
Fires of Invention counts the spells you cast, no matter how they were cast.

101.2. When a rule or effect allows or directs something to happen, and another effect states that it can’t happen, the “can’t” effect takes precedence.Example: If one effect reads “You may play an additional land this turn” and another reads “You can’t play lands this turn,” the effect that precludes you from playing lands wins.

608.2d [...] The player can’t choose an option that’s illegal or impossible, with the exception that having a library with no cards in it doesn’t make drawing a card an impossible action (see rule 121.3). [...]

Yes. The rules and reminder text for cascade clearly say "cast". There are ways of using a card that don't count as "casting", but those ways will not use the term "cast". Examples are playing a land, creating a copy of a spell (which is why an Epic spell can both tell you that you can't cast spells, and instruct you to copy itself), and putting a card onto the battlefield (for instance, using Protean Hulk's triggered ability does not count as casting a spell, even though you're putting creature(s) onto the battlefield). Once you cast a spell, it counts as casting a spell even if it's countered.

This sentence may be confusing for some readers: "There are ways of using a card that don't count as 'casting, but those ways will not use the term 'cast'." People may interpret as meaning that if a card does not use the term "cast", it doesn't count as casting, but if a card instructs you to "play" a nonland card, you do actually cast that card.


text:
Call first round of play
I was playing free poker online with 4 other players that were bots.  This is beginners level.  The first round, the 1st player put in small blind ($1), 2nd player big blind ($2). The 3rd player (me) checked and put in $2, the 4th player checked and put in $1.  Shouldn't the 4th player have to put in $2 like the player before him?  Thank you for your help with this question.

How can you have both checked and put in money, when you are not in a blind position?

Are you 100% of the number of players, and that there were no other actions? The $1 sounds like the small blind (1st player) called to make its bet match the current bet. The two other players may have folded, which you might have missed (on the website, it could be less visible than other actions). Otherwise, it is indeed not a valid play.

The other possible option I see is that the 4th player had only $1 remaining.  Calling with $1 put them all in.


text:
Revisiting Events in Dune House Secrets?
In Dune: House Secrets we chose to move on to another event without paying the cost to flip the card over to the other side. At the end of the chapter we had plenty of xp left for the chapter, so we wanted to know if we could revisit cards we had previously visited and try the risk so that we don't waste it?


text:
Is it possible to have an Aura that's also a land?
As part of asking this question, I tried to prove the first of the two scenarios was possible by inventing a combination of cards that could turn a land into an Aura. To my surprise, I was unable to do so.
This convoluted scenario was the closest I could come:
You control a Havengul Lich. Activate its ability twice and cast Dominating Licid and The Reality Chip from your graveyard. Now cast, in the following order:

Mycosynth Lattice (everything is an artifact)
Bludgeon Brawl (everything is an Equipment)
March of the Machines (everything is a creature)
Ashaya, Soul of the Wild (everything is a Forest land)

Then activate the ability Havengul Lich gained from Dominating Licid to turn it into an Aura and attach it to a creature. Per rule 702.151b:

Attaching an Equipment with reconfigure to another creature causes the Equipment to stop being a creature until it becomes unattached from that creature.

But this almost certainly doesn't work, because either the continuous effects still apply and turn Havengul Lich into a creature (which will cause it to be unattached and put into its owner's graveyard), or the reconfigure rule will overwrite Ashaya's effect so that it isn't a land.
Anyway, is there a different combination of cards that can create an Aura land?

In your example/attempt, The Reality Chip and Bludgeon Brawl are redundant with Dominating Licid, because the Licid's ability already removes other types.

Also, that part doesn't even work, because Bludgeon Brawl only applies to non-creatures, and Havengul Lich is a creature. And it wouldn't work with a different card, because Bludgeon Brawl's effect has a dependency on March of the Machines' effect, so with that combination of cards, nothing would be an equipment.

@murgatroid99 Like I said, it almost certainly doesn't work.

Yes it is!
Thanks to @murgatroid99 for mentioning Cloudform in a now-deleted answer.
I control Vedalken Orrery. I cast a Cloudform and it resolves. With its ETB ability on the stack, I first cast Song of the Dryads targeting it and allow Song to resolve, holding priority. Then I cast Enchanted Evening and let it resolve. The result is that Cloudform is an "Enchantment Land — Forest". Then its ETB ability resolves, and it becomes an "Enchantment Land — Forest Aura". We manifest the top card of our library and attach Cloudform to it.

So, lands don't have the "can't be attached" rules that creatures have?

Why is Enchanted Evening required for this?

@John Aura is an Enchantment subtype, and Song of the Dryads removes the original Enchantment card type on Cloudform, meaning it needs to regain the Enchantment card type before it becomes an Aura (see rule 205.3d)

@John You are correct; that rule is 704.5p: "If a battle or creature is attached to an object or player, it becomes unattached and remains on the battlefield. Similarly, if any nonbattle, noncreature permanent that’s neither an Aura, an Equipment, nor a Fortification is attached to an object or player, it becomes unattached and remains on the battlefield."

Another method:
Start with Invasion of Zendikar and defeat it to obtain Awakened Skyclave, which has "As long as Awakened Skyclave is on the battlefield, it’s a land in addition to its other types."
Use Agatha's Soul Cauldron to give it the activated ability of Gliding Licid (or another of that cycle), which is "{U}, {T}: [This permanent] loses this ability and becomes an Aura enchantment with enchant creature. Attach it to target creature. You may pay {U} to end this effect.".
Activate that ability. It becomes an Aura enchantment, which does override its previous card types – but then it gets attached to a creature, which gives it a new timestamp, and now its ability adds 'land' to its card types after they are set to 'enchantment'.

You can make an Aura Land very briefly (it's about as stable as Moscovium).
Have the following cards on the battlefield:

Mycosynth Lattice
March of the Machines
Ashaya, Soul of the Wild

Then cast any aura.  It will be an Enchantment Artifact Creature Land - Aura.  It will then be put in the graveyard the next time state-based actions are checked because creature's can't be attached to other objects and auras must be attached to some other object (unless it's an aura you cast with "bestow", in which case it will stop being an aura).

"It will then be put in the graveyard the next time state-based actions are checked because creature's can't be attached to other objects and auras must be attached to some other object." Unless it's one of the Bestow creatures from the Theros blocks.

@nick012000 good point


text:
How many cards do you have to have in your hand to finish a meld that has 6 cards in Hand and Foot canasta?
If there is 6 Jack's in a meld, how many Jack's do you have to have in your hand?

Could you clarify your question? Are you asking about adding to that six-card set of Jacks with cards from your hand? A meld cannot hold more than seven cards. So to "finish" a six-card meld, you only need one card.

A meld cannot hold more than seven cards. So to "finish" a six-card Jack meld, you only need one more Jack.
From the rules on Pagat:

A meld is a set of from three to seven cards of equal rank placed face up on the table. A meld cannot have fewer than three cards or more than seven.

and

A meld cannot contain more than seven cards, and a partnership is not allowed to have two incomplete melds of the same rank, but if you complete a pile, you can then start another meld of the same rank.

If you're trying to pick up from the discard pile to complete the meld, the rules go on to handle this case explicitly:

Therefore if you have an incomplete meld of five or six cards on the table, you will not be able to pick up a card of that rank from the discard pile unless you have enough cards of that rank to finish the first seven card pile and make a new three card meld of the same rank. These cards must all come from your holding and the top card of the pile - again you are not allowed to make use of other cards you are about to pick up from the discard pile to satisfy the requirement.


text:
What blue and/or black options exist for moving +1/+1 counters?
I am making a Szadek, Lord of Secrets deck, and I am looking for cards that can move +1/+1 (or similar) counters from one of my creatures to him. For instance, if I have a bunch of +1/+1 counters on Brineborn Cutthroat, I would want to move the counters over to Szadek. I know of Fate Transfer; are there any other cards that do the same thing in blue and/or black mana?

I couldn't find anything that exists, but OP might be looking for an ability like "If you would put one or more counters on a creature, you may put those counters on another target creature instead." The closest thing I found is The Ozolith.

I've made an executive decision and made this question unambiguously about moving counters which already exist. Ethan - if you meant something else by "redirect abilities", please edit your question to explain precisely what you meant because "moving counters" is not and has never been redirecting an ability.

Not within the scope of the question, but this scryfall query finds UB cards that put counters on arbitrary creatures.

The always wonderful Scryfall reveals a number of possibilities; of these your best option is almost certainly The Ozolith which will pick up any counters from creatures which leave the battlefield and then at start of combat you can then move those counters onto any creature.
Other than that, things that can move counters from arbitrary creatures:

Leech Bonder can move one counter at a cost of {2}{Q}.
The land Nesting Ground can move one counter at a cost of {1}{T}.
Simic Fluxmage can move one +1/+1 counter at a cost of {1}{U}{T} (and comes with Evolve so can generate its own +1/+1 counters)

Steel Dromedary and Weapon Rack come into play with a small supply of +1/+1 counters and can move those counters onto arbitrary creatures.
The other option you may want to consider is some way to make Szadek an artifact creature (e.g. Liquimetal Coating, many other options exist) and then use Modular creatures to get +1/+1 counters onto Szadek.
But the long and short of it is that there aren't many good options - which isn't surprising, +1/+1 counters are primary in green and white.


text:
Intentionally Not Announcing Triggered Abilities Until Just Before They Would Be Considered Missed
In Magic the Gathering, the Infraction Procedure Guide details what it means for the announcement of a player's triggered ability to be missed, as a function of what category of effect the triggered ability has.  Are players expected to try to announce triggered abilities they control at the time they are put onto the stack (or failing that, to announce them as soon as they remember to do so), even while they would not yet be considered missed?
For example, if the active player attacks with Bear Cub while controlling Cathedral of War, is it permissible for them to intentionally neglect to mention that Cathedral of War has been put onto the stack and resolved, in hopes that the non-active player will block the Bear Cub with a 2/3 in an attempt to destroy it, or would this warrant a UC-Cheating investigation for the active player if their intentions were known?  Suppose that the players have been articulating phases and steps carefully, so that we need not complicate the question with considerations of out-of-order sequencing/take backs/etc.  Does the analysis of when a triggered ability is missed define only when the controlling player is to be excused for unintentionally neglecting to announce it without penalty, or does it also allow the controlling player to intentionally neglect to announce the triggered ability until that time for strategic purposes?
Finally, does it make a difference if the rule "a player who makes a play that may or may not be legal depending on whether an uncommunicated opponent’s trigger has been remembered has not committed an infraction; their play either succeeds, confirming that the trigger has been missed, or is rewound" enters the picture?  For example, in a similar scenario where the active player controls a triggered ability, are they allowed to strategically neglect to announce it if their strategy involves the non-active player performing an action that the active player knows to be illegal (but the non-active player could not know to be illegal without knowing that the trigger had been resolved already)?

@Allure According to the current answer, apparently you do not have to; you can just say, "Attack with Bear Cub."  I have a Yu-Gi-Oh! background, from which I would have expected what you said to be correct, but Magic the Gathering has a tendency to tailor policy to players' de facto communication habits instead of the game's actual logic, even when doing so yields bizarre consequences.

This would not qualify as cheating.
In the example, Tower of War's Exalted trigger creates a continuous effect that modifies Bear Cub's power and toughness. These are not visible changes, so they are covered by the following part of the Missed Trigger section of the IPG:

A triggered ability that affects the game state in non-visible ways: The controller must make the change known by the first time the change has an effect on the visible game state.

Visible game state includes creatures moving between zones and life totals changing, so in most cases the player must announce it if it affects the result of combat. However, if for example the creature is blocked by a 1/1, or a 4/4, the outcome of combat does not depend on the exalted trigger, so the player would never need to announce it.
The "Philosophy" part of the Missed Triggers section says this

Triggered abilities are assumed to be remembered until otherwise indicated, and the impact on the game state may not be immediately apparent.

In general, each player is responsible for being aware of the full game state, and they can ask questions or examine individual cards to make sure of it. If one player fails to account for another player's trigger, that is their own responsibility.
The part about illegal actions doesn't change anything here because that section already indicates that a player that commits an illegal action in this way should not be penalized.

One important assumption in this answer is that the board state is clear, and both players have easy access to the information about the triggered ability. If a player obfuscates the board state, such as by keeping a Cathedral of War together with other lands so that the opponent doesn't notice that it has another ability, then that would be a Communication Policy Violation. In that case intentionally not announcing the trigger could make the obfuscation look deliberate, which could result in an increased penalty.


text:
27,000 cards, there are uncommon and common, should i sell it for 250$? should i make the price go lower or higher? i want them out of the house
I have 27,000 MTG cards, they are random, with some being new and some being old, but overall they are in good condition. Would it be worth it to sell them all for about 250$?
They are all in well condition. There are some cards that are good like Vraska, Regal Gorgon, and like 2 other planeswalkers. A couple thousand have been in sleeves for a while. So do I need to lower or higher the price. I just want them out of the house.

(click to enlarge images)

That works out to under a $0.01 a card which sounds like a bad deal but that also depends on what cards you have and the condition they are in.

"So do I need to lower or higher the price." You don't need to do anything.  You can set the price to whatever you want - it just means you'll get more/less money for them.

Probably not
A quick Google result indicated to me that people are selling 1000 bulk commons/uncommon for $15-30 dollars.
You'd be selling 27x the amount for 10x the price.  That's a significant margin, but it might be worth it to you to get the cards out of your house.  Also, I don't know how shipping factors into those prices - if you're selling local then avoiding shipping might be worth a lot to you.
But that's commons/uncommon.  If your collection has rares and mythic mixed in, it could be significantly more valuable. Most rares go for <$1, but there are many that go for $20-50.
There are also some few commons and uncommon worth notable money, mostly from older sets


text:
Can I shuffle discards into the draw deck?
(Kid-friendly Exploding Kittens for ages 7+)
When the draw pile begins to dwindle down to say 5 or less cards, are we able to combine those few with the large play/discard pile of cards next to it? In other words, let's say there are only 5 cards left face down, and 2 of the 5 are exploding kittens. I'd like to better my odds by combining those 5 remaining cards with the remaining deck and shuffle all of them. Is this allowed?

Related: https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/58368/swap-top-and-bottom-card-in-exploding-kittens

No, you cannot shuffle the discard pile back into the deck.
The entire point of Exploding Kittens is that the game eventually draws to a dramatic conclusion where almost all the leftover cards are exploding kittens.
This is supposed to be a short game that you can play multiple rounds of, otherwise a player that is out early in the game would be quite bored.


text:
Does High Ground let creatures that are not able to block, like Skrelv, Defector Mite, block?
I am thinking of including High Ground in my mono-white deck. The deck has a lot of creatures and tokens that cannot block, like Skrelv, Defector Mite and the tokens created by White Sun's Twilight.
Because of the way these cards are worded:
Skrelv, Defector Mite:

Skrelv, Defector Mite cannot block

White Sun's Twilight:

Create X 1/1 colorless Phyrexian Mite artifact creature tokens with toxic 1 and "This creature can't block."

I would assume that this means that High Ground will allow the creatures to block a second creature, but since Skrelv and the tokens cannot block, they still could not block any creatures. Is this correct?
Second, are there any white or colorless cards that can grant the ability to block to cards like Skrelv and these tokens?

I don't quite understand the second part of the question, did you mean to ask about cards that allow Skrelv and those tokens to block, or things that allow you to block them? Because they can be blocked like any other creature.

I was wondering if there are any cards that allow Skrelv to block other creatures.

I would assume that this means that High Ground will allow the creatures to block a second creature, but since Skrelv and the tokens cannot block, they still could not block any creatures. Is this correct?

Yes:

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.

Skrelv says "Skrelv, Defector Mite cannot block", not "Skrelv, Defector Mite can block only 0 creatures." so it's definitely a restriction.

Second, are there any White or Colorless cards that can grant the ability to block to cards like Skrelv and these tokens?

Humility - the property that creatures can't block is an ability (cf. rule 113.2a), but that card has some serious side effects ...

Humility would definitely let it block, lol. Are there any that allow it to keep its abilities and block, or is that out of the question (in white at least)?

Not that I know of; it reminds me of can't beats can, but the card pool I know is rather old and small ...

The card pool I know is rather new and small, so I'm in a similar boat lol.

Not white, but Aetherplasm's ability allows you to have a creature blocking that would otherwise be illegal.

Whenever Aetherplasm blocks a creature, you may return Aetherplasm to its owner’s hand. If you do, you may put a creature card from your hand onto the battlefield blocking that creature.

Unfortunately, I don't think a similar effect exists in white.

No, creatures that cannot block still cannot block with High Ground.

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.

This is unrelated to the question of how many creatures a creature can block. If instead of "can't block", Skrelv, Defector Mite said something like "Skrelv, Defector Mite can block one fewer creature", then such a thing would theoretically work, but that's not an ability that exists on any cards, and relies on the standard English reading of the ability rather than any particular rule.


text:
How does a double tile in muggins count?
In a game of muggins, do you count a  double 5 as 10 or just 5? Since some people have been saying that a double 5 you only count one side. From my knowledge you count both sides of the domino; for example double 5 = 10, double 3 = 6.

"Count" for what purposes? And also what specific game are you playing? "Dominoes" by itself is not a game, it's like saying "cards". There are lots of different games you can play with a set of Dominoes.

Need more information on which game you are playing with your Dominoes.

For example muggins and the game is blocked and no one can play anymore. The player with the least amount of pipes on their cards wins. Now do you count a card like double 5 as 10. Some people say that it only counts as 5

Feel like the title can be improved but without more information not sure how.  But I came in not knowing what was asked by the title and I am leaving not knowing what is asked by the title :P

All pips count, so a double five, having ten pips, counts for 10.
Wiki:

The player who goes out wins additional points based on the value of dominoes still in other players' hands, which is scored by counting all the pips on those dominoes.


text:
How to play Line Command in Command and Color: Ancients?
The Line Command card in C&C ancients states:

Order a group of foot units. The group must be in adjacent linked hexes (which may span two or three sections). Each unit may move no more than one hex and then engage in Ranged Fire or Close Combat if eligible.

Units may Momentum Advance after successful Close Combat and may be eligible for bonus Close Combat. If you do not have any foot units, order 1 unit of your choice.

My question is what counts as adjacent linked hexes for the purpose of the card?
Does it allow to order units adjacent to the first unit ordered? Eg like in the picture below:

Or does it allow to order all foot units across the whole battlefield as long as they are all connected by hex? Eg like this

The group of foot units ordered by Line Command can be any size as long as each unit is adjacent to another foot unit included in the group.
This means both of your examples are valid selections for Line Command.
To quote C&C ancients' rules editor Kevin Duke on boardgamegeek:

... Line command card means what it says entirely literally.
If every block in your army is adjacent some other block in your army,
they ALL can be activated.

And this makes Line Command a very powerful order if you manage to keep all of your foot units adjacent to each other, which was a common tactic during ancients battles. Specially if you reserve it until you are going to clash with the enemy line.
This game design decision does not force you to keep your army like the ancients did, but if you do you will maximise the output of the playing cards.


text:
Melek, Izzet Paragon - how does the copy ability work?
I would like to understand better how Melek, Izzet Paragon works in Magic the Gathering, I am building a blue/red deck, so the first question is about this effect:

Play with the top card of your library revealed.
You may cast the top card of your library if it's an instant or sorcery card.

Just to confirm, since it says "cast the top card" it means I need to pay for it's mana cost rather than casting it for free, right?
Second one:

Whenever you cast an instant or sorcery spell from your library, copy it. You may choose new targets for the copy

Let's say in the battlefield, I have Viashino Pyromancer as my creature, and the top card in my library revealed is Lightning Strike, since LS is an instant, I will cast it, now for You may choose new targets for the copy, how does that work exactly?
Does the target needs to be in the battlefield? If so, should I chose Viashino Pyromancer to be copied as Lighting Strike? if that is correct, what happens if I don't have mana to use for my clone Lighting Strike, it stays in the battlefield like an unused instant?
Or the copy effect means I need to choose a card from my hand, if so, let's say one of my cards is Nivix Cyclops, and I decided to replace Nivix to be Lightning Strike, would this be correct?
Or the copy effect means I can choose any create my opponent might have in the battlefield? it doesn't specify what targets I can choose
Also, it says you may choose, so the copy effect is not mandatory, right?

A single question post should focus on a single topic. In this case, questions about how Melek's abilities work are related enough, but the thing about legendary creatures and deck building restrictions is really a separate question, so I have edited it out of this question. If you would still like to ask it, you should make a separate post.

Melek's second ability allows you to cast instant and sorcery cards from the top of the library. It does not make any further modifications to the spell casting process, so you still have to pay the mana cost and do everything else that you normally do to cast a spell.
Melek's third ability copies the spell that you cast. The copy is another instance of the same spell. It is not represented by another card, it is just an object that you remember is there. The part that says "You may choose new targets for the copy" means that if the spell is targeted, then you can change what target the copy has, or you can choose not to change it.
For example, Lightning Strike deals 3 damage to any target. So, while casting the original spell, you choose a creature, player, or planeswalker to deal the 3 damage to. Then if Melek's ability makes a copy of it, by default the copy targets the same creature, player, or planeswalker as the original. You can change the copy's target, or leave it the same.

So as long as Melek remains in the battlefield, and every time I play an instant or sorcery from the top of my library, is like casting twice that top card right? If so, that is so powerful!, could you confirm this? Also, for the copy card, in order to use it, I should also pay for it's mana cost? In this case, 2 mana for Lighting Strike, and another 2 for my copy Lighthing Stirke, am I correct?

Yes, that is what it does. It is fairly powerful, which is why it costs 6 mana and still requires you to pay for the spells you cast from the library. You do not pay any mana for the copies because you are not casting them. The triggered ability just creates them.

@Andres2142 Just a minor clarification, you said "is like casting twice that top card", indeed it is "like" that, but it's not exactly that, because the copy does not count as "being cast", it just appears on the stack. This difference is important because if you have any effect that says "whenever you cast a spell...", such effect will not trigger again with the copy (because the copy does not count as being cast).

Yep, I like to keep in mind that copying a spell happens after casting the spell, so when you copy a spell, you're copying an already-cast object. You don't have to (or get to) cast it again. That also explains why you don't pay the cost of the spell again, because paying the cost is part of casting it.

@Andres2142 Regarding ‘casting twice’, it’s not quite that. Some cards actually do this (for example, Arcane Bombardment, which copies cards and then lets you cast those copies), but unless the card says you cast the copy, it just creates the spell on the stack without casting it (the distinction is important in a number of cases). Regarding the cost, there is no cost for creating the copy in this case, though again some cards do have a cost (see for example Chandra's Regulator).

@Andres2142 "If so, that is so powerful!" It really should be, for a 6 mana 2/4


text:
The Akroan War plus Glorious Protector?
So, I had cast The Akroan War and stole an opponent's Etali, Primal Storm. A few turns later, I swung, used Etali to steal an opponents Glorious Protector, I exile all my tapped creatures (because the final chapter was imminent) including Etali. Next turn, The Akroan War got its final lore counter, after which I had to sacrifice it. This leads me to my two questions:

Does Etali stay exiled with GP?
If so, under whose control does it return to if GP goes away?

Does Etali stay exiled with GP?

Yes. Actually, once Etali is exiled, The Akroan War's effect ends; "control" only affects permanents or things on the stack:

108.4. A card doesn’t have a controller unless that card represents a permanent or spell; in those cases, its controller is determined by the rules for permanents or spells. See rules 110.2 and 112.2.

This also point to an answer to

under whose control does it return to if GP goes away?

which is "your opponent":

110.2. A permanent’s owner is the same as the owner of the card that represents it (unless it’s a token; see rule 111.2). A permanent’s controller is, by default, the player under whose control it entered the battlefield. Every permanent has a controller.


text:
How to name Checkers moves
How to name Checkers moves?
In Chess there is this article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algebraic_notation_(chess) that describes moves names and the disambiguation (when to pieces of the same type can move to the same square), how this happens in Checkers?
For example, in the beginning of the game a3 and c3 can move to b4, if we want to move a3 the move name would be ab4, like in Chess?

As only 32 possible play squares are available in Checkers the standard form of notation simply assigns each square a number, then records the start and end place for the move.
By convention the numbering starts at the leftmost square of the top row from the perspective of the White player:

A move is shown by listing the "from" and "to" square with a dash between them. For instance, 11-15 is the most popular Black starting move; Black moves the stone on square 11 to square 15. 22-18 in reply forms the "Single Corner" opening; with White moving the stone on square 22 to square 18.
Or to translate from your example a3 is square 12, and b4 is 16, so that move would be 12-16.
Due to the nature of Checkers in most cases no more information is needed than the start and endpoints of the stone, but sometimes if a capture is performed an x is used as the linking character, so following on from the above opening two moves 15x22 indicates Black takes the White stone.
The same space numbering is also used for annotation of an in-progress game, with the initial letter indicating who's to play, followed by stone locations with the first letter of the section indicating the colour, and "K"s to indicate a king.
For example the setup "W:WK4,K14,18,23,K27:BK5,16,K22,K32"
conveys the following board:


text:
When do I pay the cost in Ulalek's triggered ability?
I’m looking at the ability of one of the upcoming Eldrazi releases, and was wondering when payment happens and when the ability goes on the stack.
Ulalek, Fused Atrocity has the ability

Whenever you cast an Eldrazi spell, you may pay {C}{C}. If you do, copy all spells you control, then copy all other activated and triggered abilities you control. You may choose new targets for the copies. (Mana abilities can’t be copied.)

When I cast an Eldrazi, does the trigger go on the stack and then I pay, and if I do does it create a new trigger without the payment part saying to copy, or do I pay before it goes on the stack at all?
Part of the confusion is with the period after the payment, I know having a period or not can change things and this is why I’m asking.

This is a single triggered ability. A triggered ability is indicated by the word "when", "whenever", or "at". This ability only has one of those, once, so there's no part that creates another triggered ability.
You follow all of the instructions in the ability as the ability resolves. First, you decide whether to pay the cost, and you can activate mana abilities to do so. Then, if you do pay it, you follow the rest of the instructions, otherwise nothing happens.

I know having a period or not can change things

This is not the case. It generally doesn't matter whether an ability is one sentence or multiple sentences.

So the ability would go to stack, the resolve all at once?

Yes, that is always how all activated and triggered abilities work. The only exception is if the ability creates another triggered ability during its resolution. That only happens if it uses the specific wording for a triggered ability in the middle of the ability, and this one does not do that.

@Littleinhuman To be clear, when Ulalek's triggered ability resolves (if you paid 2 colorless), it will put a copy of all your other spells, activated and triggered abilities on the stack. When you put them on the stack, you make any choices about targets, etc., but then the stack will unwind as normal, with each player getting priority before each subsequent item resolves.

So if you cast two Eldrazi, you have the option of paying CCCCCC to put three copies of everything onto the stack?

Actually, if you cast a second Eldrazi spell in response to this triggered ability, you can pay CC any number of times to copy everything else on the stack that many times. This works because each time you copy everything, that includes the first instance of this ability, which you can then use to copy everything again.

@murgatroid99 "This works because each time you copy everything, that includes the first instance of this ability" — No, the ability only copies other abilities, not itself.

I wasn't just talking about the general behavior, I was responding to Acccumulation's comment, and specifically addressing the scenario of casting a second Eldrazi spell while one instance of this ability is already on the stack. If you do that, then the ability will trigger again in response to the second Eldrazi spell. When the second ability resolves, it will copy everything else on the stack, including the first instance of the ability. Then when that copy of the first instance of the ability resolves, it will again copy that instance, which can repeat indefinitely.


text:
In Monopoly, when I buy a hotel, can I buy the houses back from the bank straight away and use them on my other property?
I want to buy a hotel after having 4 houses on a property. Can I buy the houses back straight away and use them on another of my properties?

Yes, you can do this. After you have bought your hotel, there's nothing different or special about the situation compared to just wanting to buy houses normally.
Note that if another player also wishes to purchase houses at the same time as you, then the limited available houses will be auctioned, you don't get priority just because it is your turn.If there are a limited number of houses and hotels available and two or more players wish to buy more than the Bank has, the houses or hotels must be sold at auction to the highest bidder.

If there are a limited number of houses and hotels available and two or more players wish to buy more than the Bank has, the houses or hotels must be sold at auction to the highest bidder.

Thank you that’s so helpful and insightful . I thought as much but wanted to check.

You're welcome. Best way to thank someone on this site is to use the check mark to mark the answer as "accepted".


text:
In munchkin, can a combatant wait for all modifiers and then make a choice?
A combatant would currently lose a fight, asks the party if anyone is playing anything, they all say no.
Now if he plays a card to win the fight, can players now play monster modifiers?

From the rules

But note: someone may play a hostile  card on you, or use a special
power, just as you think you have won. When you  kill a monster, you
must wait a reasonable time, defined as about 2.6 seconds,  for anyone
else to speak up. After that, you have really killed the monster, and
you really get the level(s) and Treasures, though they can still whine
and argue.

That means, yes - they are still allowed to play a card, they can decide to play a card even after you cleared the monster and celebrated your victory. Always make sure to double tap so dead things stay dead.

I assume I can play in response to that as well?

Yes and you can take your time. For the active player the 2.6sec rule does not count. Since if you can't beat the monster, you still need to run away. As long as you didn't start running away, you can buff yourself. Or search for someone to help you.


text:
In munchkin, can a player re-negotiate helping after a curse is played?
Suppose a player is in combat, and another one agrees to help.
A different player plays a curse to make them lose the combat; can the helper leave combat? And the player change who is helping them (via bribe)?
Aside, can they now choose to flee instead of fighting it?

You always have to flee if you can't win the combat. Your helper can't decide to not help you once he has committed to help you. And your helper has to run away as well with all the mandatory dice roll on their own.

. . . or if somebody tries to help, and your fellow  party members
interfere so the two of you still cannot win . . . you must Run  Away.

If two players are cooperating and still can’t defeat the monster(s),
they must both Run Away. They roll separately for each monster, in whatever order they like. (If they can’t decide, roll the die; the high roller decides who  Runs Away first.) The monster(s) CAN catch them both.


text:
Can proliferate give my creatures that have a +1/+1 by another creature's ability that leaves once said creature leaves?
Let’s say I have a bunch of Saprolings with +1/+1 due to Verdeloth the Ancient’s ability. Can proliferate add another counter to those Saprolings if that is the only counter they have?

No, you are confusing counters with power/toughness changes in general. Verdeloth the Ancient does not give creatures +1/+1 counters, or any type of counter. A counter is a physical thing that you put on a creature that has some sort of game effect. Verdeloth the Ancient simply has an ability that causes other creatures to have increased power and toughness as long as you control it.
Proliferate only interacts with counters. It will not do anything to a creature just because that creature currently has its power and toughness increased by another effect.

122.1. A counter is a marker placed on an object or player that modifies its characteristics and/or interacts with a rule, ability, or effect.

Compare the wording on Verdeloth to something like Ajani's Pridemate.

Whenever you gain life, put a +1/+1 counter on Ajani's Pridemate.

Note that Verdeloth does not say to put a counter on your creatures.


text:
What happens with multiple Blood Moons and Magical Hack?
There are 2 Blood Moon in play and I cast Magical Hack changing the wording of one of them from mountains to swamps.
What happens to my Tundra?

Did you target the Blood Moon which entered play first or second?

What difference those it make?

Whether they are mountains or swamps.

Your non-basic lands will be turned into Mountains or Swamps, depending on which Blood Moon you hacked.
The Blood Moons generate type-changing effects in layer 4 of the effect layer system.

613.1. The values of an object’s characteristics are determined by starting with the actual object. For a card, that means the values of the characteristics printed on that card. For a token or a copy of a spell or card, that means the values of the characteristics defined by the effect that created it. Then all applicable continuous effects are applied in a series of layers in the following order:

613.1d Layer 4: Type-changing effects are applied. These include effects that change an object’s card type, subtype, and/or supertype.

Magical Hack happens in layer 3, so it can't interfere with the outcome.
When two effects in the same layer compete to do something, the latest of these effects wins.

613.3. Within layers 2–6, apply effects from characteristic-defining abilities first (see rule 604.3), then all other effects in timestamp order (see rule 613.7). Note that dependency may alter the order in which effects are applied within a layer. (See rule 613.8.)

613.7. Within a layer or sublayer, determining which order effects are applied in is usually done using a timestamp system. An effect with an earlier timestamp is applied before an effect with a later timestamp.

So if you hacked the first Blood Moon that entered the battlefield, then non-basic lands will be Mountains. If you hacked the second one, Swamps.

I think it's worth mentioning that the effect from Magical Hack itself is a Layer 3 effect, to confirm that it does affect what happens with Blood Moon's effect.

My instant analysis was backwards from yours: if you hack the first Blood Moon, that changes all non-basic lands to Swamps. The second Blood Moon then looks at the board and says "I see a bunch of Swamps, nothing for me to do here". What am I missing?

@PhilipKendall Per the final Gatherer ruling on the card "This effect [...] won't turn any land into a basic land.". Having a basic land type doesn't make a land basic.

@PhilipKendall it changes them into swamps by adding the type swamp, but it does not add the basic supertype. That means the second blood moon will see a bunch of "land - swamp" as non-basic lands and change them again. The only card that changes non-basic lands into basic lands is Rootpath Purifier.

And Underground Sea is both an island and a swamp, but not a basic land.


text:
What happens when two creatures are giving lifelink to my spells?
I play Firesong and Sunspeaker

Red instant and sorcery spells you control have lifelink.

and use Helm of the Host to make a copy of it. If I then use a spell like Lightning Bolt, will that trigger two separate instances of lifegain, meaning I gain 6 life rather than 3?

It may be worth noting for future readers that the life gained from lifelink does not trigger - that is, it's not a triggered ability which goes on the stack and can be responded to. If you want to edit, perhaps using a different word like "cause" instead of "trigger" would remove that potential confusion.

@DavidZ "It may be worth noting for future readers that the life gained from lifelink does not trigger" Some of the older cards with the ability explicitly written out rather than keyworded do, however.

@nick012000 That's not lifelink

The Comprehensive rules state that

702.15f Multiple instances of lifelink on the same object are redundant.

so, no: you'll gain only three life.


text:
Backgammon like game - for which I can't find the English name
The game is very similar to backgammon, here we call it mahbusa (هو سجين, jail in Arabic).
The game is the same but

you start with all the stones out (in the jail/on the bar)
when captured, pieces are not thrown into jail, but stay "under" and can't move until the capturing piece moves

I guess this is very close to Plakoto (the difference is the first condition), but not 100% the same.
Does anyone know this game under a different name than mahbusa (هو سجين)?

Mahbusa is the name of this Backgammon variant, and best known under this name.
Not widely used are the terms "Six-Point Backgammon" or "Short Backgammon", but I would not rely on these terms as exclusively used for Mahbusa.
Sometimes the general name Tables is used for a whole class of backgammon-like games.
For a list of backgammon variations, also see

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tables_game
https://www.bkgm.com/variants/
https://gambiter.com/backgammon/Tables_game.html

A personal note: I think the name of Mahbusa sounds very nice, and does not need another name.


text:
How to simulate random events without repetition (no cards)
I'm writing a game manual where there are a lot of random tables with events. A good game session should make them unique, instead of repeatable (i.e., occurs only once).
If I had cards, the solution would be to shuffle the cards and deal the first X cards. Problem solved. But I have just the printed tables (in the book) and the dice.
I thought about two solutions (assuming 36 different values in the table):

Throw the dice X times. Remove duplicates. You should have a list of the events sorted: "21 - 14 - 35 - 03 - 16 - 39". The player would follow this order.

Throw the dice each time you need an event. Write it out in a separate sheet the number (e.g., "21"). If you throw the dice and get a marked number, throw it again.

I prefer the first solution, but both needs extra notekeeping that I would like to avoid. Any further solutions?

I would disagree on a good game session needing unique events instead of having the ability to repeat them. Also need to consider the ability to manipulate the mechanic used such as being able to get certain results with dice.

Do you need a memory aid? Normally, if the events are important and distinctive enough to be worth weeding out duplicates, I'd expect most players to remember whether or not a given one has come up before.

Why the need to throw a die, when there is a list of events in the book to follow? Each time you play the game, you use the next set of tables.

Is X known? Or at least the range of values X can take.

@JackAidley, yes, suppose I have an island area that the player(s) deal(s) with 7 events. Every time the game is played, a random table with 36 events is presented for this island, and so each time the player(s) would get 7 events, probably different ones.

To choose 7 discrete events from a table of 36:

Roll two dice to choose the first event. The first dice chooses a cluster of six events, the second chooses the event from within those 6.
Each time you want a new event, roll a dice and add it to the event number to choose the next event. You could obfuscate this by having each event list six possible next events if you wish.

There are two potential issues with this. Firstly, it technically doesn't quite guarantee uniqueness: there is 1 in 46656 chance of duplicating the first event, personally I'd just live with that YMMV. Secondly, although you can start in any position in the table and thus any event can happen before any other event, events within the sequence can only occur in certain orders and whilst the chance of any event occurring in a game is uniform the chances of particular events occurring together is not.

"whilst the chance of any event occurring in a game is uniform the chances of particular events occurring together is not." - worse than that; once the first event is chosen, the chances for each subsequent individual event are not at all uniform.

@KarlKnechtel: That's another way of saying the same thing. Whether that matters or not is up to the asker.


text:
Betrayal at Baldur's Gate: Clarification on Meenlock Omen
In Betrayal at Baldur's Gate the Meenlock Omen card says:

When you take physical damage, you must apply it as mental damage instead

But, I find it interesting that it raises your Speed rather than a mental trait, where you will now be taking all of your damage. At our table we have discussed this card a lot. It seems like it makes the game unbalanced for the player that finds it, and will make them die a quick death. Do they have to take all physical damage as mental up to death? Or only until it would kill them to right above the skull?

Seems pretty clear to me, and does exactly what it says. Not sure why you think it's a problem to raise the Speed but then only take Mental damage, just don't get damaged... by using your extra speed to run away...

Do they have to take all physical damage as mental up to death?

Yes. The card would have mentioned any exceptions otherwise.

It seems like it makes the game unbalanced for the player that finds it, and will make them die a quick death.

Betrayal at Baldur's Gate isn't really designed as a finely-tuned, perfectly-balanced game. There is a lot of emphasis on storytelling, setting, and flavor.
Even so, this omen doesn't seem unbalanced to me. Speed is a stat that helps avoid physical damage (for example running from pursuers and dodging explosions), so it's not like you're going to take that much more mental damage than normal. Also, preserving your high Speed when you would have taken physical damage could be argued to be an upside since you will roll with great physical stats right until you die. You'd be more effective with physical stats, even if you die slightly quicker.


text:
Help identifying a card game with 8 or more decks
I remember playing this game as a child (3 decades back) with my grandparents. This was played with 4 or more players (usually even number of players). These two teams are then supposed to race to 10,000 points on a scale.
Each player starts with 16 cards (can be 20 or more as well if there are less number of players). The objective of the game is to play a hand, the team that wins the hand can then disclose different combination of cards to score the points. If the stack of cards finishes, then you gather all the cards and start over until on team reaches 10,000 points. The interesting part is that every repeat combination during the same round nets you higher points. Some of the combinations are as follows -

Club Queen + Diamond Jack (1st pair - 40, 2nd pair - 500, 3rd pair - 750, 1000, 1250, etc)
Spade Queen + Heart Jack (1st pair - 40, 2nd pair - 500, 3rd pair - 750, 1000, 1250, etc)
A+K+Q+J+10 of the selected suit (250,1000,1250,2000, etc)
K+Q of any color - 20 (this doesn't scale with repeat combinations)
K+Q of the selected suit - 40 (this doesn't scale either)

In our house we used to call this game "Basic". However when I search for this game online, I do not find any useful link. Has anyone heard of this game, can you point me to any reference?

That sounds a lot like Pinochle. Maybe it's a variant?
https://bicyclecards.com/how-to-play/pinochle-2

If you explain which aspects of pinochle match (and which don't), your answer would be better.


text:
Duress at instant speed in response to Counterspell
So when playing MTG I had down Vedalken Orrery, and I was playing a creature and my opponent counters my creature. In response I play Duress, as Vedalken allows you to cast spells as if they have flash, which is basically instant speed. Can I Duress his Counterspell?

No. Once a spell has been cast, it's no longer in hand but on the stack, so you can't make your opponent discard it any more.
As part of the spellcasting process, the card moves from the hand to the stack; the stack is a zone like the hand, battlefield, etc.. Once a spell has been successfully cast, it's no longer in hand and cannot be discarded any more, since the definition of "discard" requires the card to be in hand. You would have to play Duress before your opponent plays the Counterspell.

400.1. A zone is a place where objects can be during a game. There are normally seven zones: library, hand, battlefield, graveyard, stack, exile, and command.

601.2. To cast a spell is to take it from where it is (usually the hand), put it on the stack, and pay its costs, so that it will eventually resolve and have its effect.  [..]

701.8a To discard a card, move it from its owner’s hand to that player’s graveyard.
“Discard.”

To Duress the Counterspell, would it not be "You would have to play & resolve Duress before your opponent plays the Counterspell"? If you just play Duress then the opponent can play Counterspell in response while Duress is still unresolved on the stack.

@MT0 If you're trying to Duress a Counterspell, and your opponent uses that Counterspell on your Duress ... problem solved (although you wouldn't get to see their hand).

@NotThatGuy Yes, it solves the XY-problem of getting rid of the Counterspell from the opponent's hand but doesn't solve the question the OP asked of "Can I duress his Counterspell?"; for that you need to play & resolve the Duress while the Counterspell is still in their hand.

The core of the question is whether or not Flash Duress is an improvised Counterspell, whether you can hold out on Duress until you know you need it to discard a Counterspell so you don't potentially waste it for lack of valid cards to discard. Because I believe OP understands how casting and resolving works otherwise, I left out that clarification about resolving. And yes, as mentioned, the implication of "play Duress before your opponent plays Counterspell" is "play Duress before your opponent has a valuable target to play Counterspell against".

What's interesting is that it's almost a sure thing that the correct response to opponent casting Duress while you have Counterspell in hand is to play Counterspell. If Counterspell is the best card in your hand, you're losing it either way, but you stop your opponent from seeing your hand. If Counterspell is not the best card in your hand, then you protect the best card.

@Allure Right, I forgot to account for the fact that playing Counterspell means using up mana.


text:
Freecell seed that solve itself
As a follow-up to this question: Is there any configuration of Free Cell that cannot be solved?, is there a FreeCell seed that solves itself? (with the auto card-stack built-in in the game)
I know this is possible because the configuration below permits such a thing:
K-K-K-K Q-Q-Q-Q
J-J-J-J T-T-T-T
9-9-9-9 8-8-8-8
7-7-7-7 6-6-6-6
5-5-5-5 4-4-4-4
3-3-3-3 2-2-2-2
A-A-A-A

For which version of Free Cell? The original version has only 2^15 different games. The chance that a self solving one is in that small range is rather unlikely.


text:
Please help me identify a board game!
I bought the pictured board game with no instructions and can't even find what it is. Does anybody know?

One half of the board looks like the one mentioned here: https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/38283/
The other half could maybe be for tracking score?


text:
What are the physical dimensions of the other Dominion cards (e.g. Landscape, Boon etc.)?
There is a fair number of answers all over the web about the dimensions of the regular playing cards in Dominion (91x59 mm). However there are a large number of other cards in the expansions etc. I'm trying to design a box to hold everything but I do not own all the expansions (yet).
Does anybody have the dimensions (HxWxT) of all the other cards and a count of how many of each card there are currently?
I'm talking about things like (but not limited to) the Landscape, Boon cards etc. but also would appreciate dimensions of other things that you would deem necessary to store in a single box.

Landscape-style cards in Dominion have the same exact size as regular Dominion cards; they're printed on the same card base. They are designed to be shuffled in along with the randomizer deck for the regular cards in order to randomize which cards + non-cards are used in each game.
There are several types of these landscape cards. Here is a list, along with the number that exist for each:

Ally (23)
Artifact (5)
Boon (12)
Event (69)
Hex (12)
Landmark (21)
Project (20)
State (13)
Trait (15)
Way (20)

Grand total of 210 of these cards as of the the Plunder expansion.
Aside from these, there are also several playing mats in the game, which a storage solution would ideally also have room for:

Island, Pirate Ship, and Native Village mats (6 each): 82×126mm
Trade Route mat (1): 80×80mm
Victory token player mat (8): 80×80mm
Tavern player mat (6): 125×82mm
Trash mat (1): 190×102mm
Coffers player mat (6): 126×84mm
Coffers / Villagers player mat (6): 84×128mm
Exile player mat (6): 128x84mm
Favors player mat (6): 127x84mm

All information from http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Card_types and http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Mat#Player_mats.

This is awesome - thanks!!


text:
Playing Leyline of the Void followed by Helm of Obedience: what happens?
Say in classic game, I play Leyline of the Void or any card with a similar effect.
Say I then play Helm of Obedience, and my opponent has no cards with a relevant effect.
My opponent will then proceed to exile their entire library, but once their library is empty, Helm of Obedience does not stop resolving and in fact will never stop according to the card text.
I argue that an infinite loop with only mandatory actions is created, and the game ends in a draw according to rule 421.4:

421.4. If the loop contains only mandatory actions, the game ends in a draw. (See rule 102.4b.)

Some people on the internet argue that instead, the effect of Helm of Obedience ends when there are no cards left to put in the graveyard because the effect cannot resolve, but rulings on HoO say

10/1/2008     If an effect like that of Leyline of the Void prevents cards from being put into your opponent's graveyard, the process described in the first sentence of Helm of Obedience's effect will never stop. Your opponent's entire library will be exiled, even if X is 1.

The phrasing "never stops" should indicate that the effect is, in fact, infinite, but the ruling does not actually cover the case when there are no cards to exile left, simply that this interaction is as described in this post, so which is it?

Related: https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/52817/blightsteel-colossus-helm-of-obedience-and-rest-in-peace-can-my-opponent-force#:~:text=Once%20your%20opponent's%20library%20is,is%20just%20a%20special%20case.

Indeed the wording on the ruling is poorly phrased; it really should be "never stop until the opponent's library is empty".

Perhaps worth noting here that Leyline+Helm is a reasonably viable Legacy wincon.

No, the game would not end in a draw. This is due to the wording on Helm of Obedience:

Target opponent mills a card, then repeats this process until a creature card or X cards have been put into their graveyard this way, whichever comes first.

and 609.3:

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

Once the opponent's deck is empty, Helm of Obedience will attempt to make them mill a card, but they can't because their library is empty, so the text following (the 'then' portion), doesn't happen either. This means it does not repeat any further and stops.
A similar situation where you simply use Helm of Obedience with X = 2 on an opponent with 1 land card in their library would have the same effect. They would put the land card into the graveyard, but because they then have no cards in their library, the 'repeat' portion would fail at the 'mill a card' and stop.

I'd suggest adding "704.5b If a player attempted to draw a card from a library with no cards in it since the last time state-based actions were checked, that player loses the game." The game is definitely won, not drawn. For contrast, you might suggest that mandatory actions that cannot fail, such as an infinite sliver token combo, is what 421.4 is designed to prevent... Unless I'm wrong. I could totally be wrong.

Milling isn't drawing and does not trigger 704.5b

And even if it were drawing instead, it wouldn't help address the question, because 704.5b only comes into play when state-based actions are being checked; which would never happen if the answer were the other option being asked about, if Helm of Obedience never stopped.

Perhaps it would be better to say "noncreature card" rather than "land card" in the example, since Dryad Arbor exists.

"so the text following (the 'then' portion), doesn't happen either". Is there a rule that backs that up? If a card would say "Target opponent mills two cards, then draw a card." then surely you still draw a card even when your opponent had an empty library. It effectively became then "Do nothing, then draw a card." With Helm of Obedience it effectively becomes "Do nothing, then repeat this process ...", which should still be an infinite loop

@Ivo: effects worded as ", then" are generally ruled to come as a consequence of the previous effect. for example, if a card with the text "[card] deals one damage to target opponent, then draw a card" is played, but the something prevents that damage, it is generally ruled (and magic arena also rules like this) that you will not draw a card. I'm however unaware of official rulings on this.


text:
Sorry! 7 Card splitting between two pawns
My husband seems to think on a 7 (where you can split between two pawns) you can split the number between someone else’s pawns as well as yours. He thinks that just because it says “any” pawn.

No, you can only move your own pawns. The rules don’t specify this under the description of the 7 card, but they actually don’t specify that for any number. The “3”, for example, simply says “move one pawn forward 3 spaces”. The “1” says “either start a pawn out OR move one pawn forward one space”. The rulebook as a whole always just assumes that you only ever move your own pieces without ever stating it. “Move a pawn” and “move any pawn” are grammatically the same meaning.

And see https://gamerules.com/rules/sorry-board-game/ for another version of the rules that specifies "split the move between two of your pawns".


text:
When can you flip items face-up?
I just picked up Boss Monster and I'm a little confused about items.
The rules say:

If you kill a Hero with an attached item, you may place the face-up item in your score-keeping area. However, you may only have one face-up item at a time. (You may choose which item to keep face-up)

The All About Item Cards guide also says:

Before you claim the new Item, you have a choice: A) immediately use your existing Item, B) turn your existing Item face-down, or C) leave the existing Item face-up and turn the new Item face-down.
To show that an Item is used, flip it face-down. There are also some other effects in Tools of Hero-Kind that can flip an Item face-down, but these do not trigger the ability

From what I can tell, the only cards in the Tools of Hero-Kind expansion that can flip cards face-up are Excavation and Burial Mound. Which only amounts to three cards.
Am I missing something? Does this mean that if you don't control one of those three cards that you can never flip up a face-down item?

Seems to me that you answered your own question... only three cards can  put an item card face-up. If you think about it, this seems kind of balanced; without a more common way to turn up items that have already been used, you prevent overuse.

You are not missing something.  Acquiring a second item if you have a faceup one is generally only helpful if the second item is better than the first, or you can use the first immediately.  But at least you're keeping it away from your opponents!

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


text:
Resolving Geier Reach Sanitarium with Notion Thief in Play
In a game of commander, if I have both Geier Reach Sanitarium and Notion Thief in play then activate Geier Reach's ability, my assumption is that the simplified explanation of the outcome would be: "I draw 4 cards, discard 1, and each of my opponents discard a card", but I want to understand the order of actions better.
The key thing I want to understand is, can I draw all 4 cards and then discard a card, or do I need to draw a card discard a card, then draw the additional three cards.
I know that as a replacement affect, Notion Thief's ability does not use the stack, but what is the order in which Geier Reach's ability resolves? If it requires priority order, I assume that if I am the active player I would have to draw 1, discard 1, then draw 3, but if I wait until the turn of the opponent who immediately follows me in turn order, can I draw 4 then discard 1? Or does the fact that I am activating the ability mean priority order always starts with me?

You draw all 4 cards and then discard 1.
Look at the following card-specific ruling on Geier Reach Sanitarium:

When you activate Geier Reach Sanitarium's last ability, first each player draws a card. Then the player whose turn it is selects a card from their hand and sets it aside without revealing it; proceeding in turn order, each other player does the same. Then the cards that were set aside are discarded at once.

This is then modified by Notion Thief's replacement effect to mean, effectively: first, you draw all the cards.  Then, you discard, followed by each player in turn order.

Makes sense. For some reason I checked the rulings for Notion Thief but I should have checked Geier Reach's as well


text:
If I use Reroute to change the target of an equip ability for an equipment my opponent controls, can I make the target one of my creatures?
If my opponent uses the equip ability of a Lightening Greaves they control, and I target that ability with Reroute, whose creatures are legal targets for the equip ability?
The Equip keyword explicitly says "Attach this permanent to target [quality] creature you control.", so my question is basically, does "you" in that ability in this instance mean the controller of Lightning Greaves, the Controller of the Equip ability as its on the stack (which is still my opponent) or does it mean the chooser of the target (me)? My hunch is that "you" refers to the controller of the equip ability on the stack, and because I am only modifying that ability I have to choose one of my opponents creatures, but that's not especially clear to me
And yes I know that my opponent could just use the equip ability again, as they retain control of the equipment, so in this example its kind of a moot point. But there are other cases where it could be relevant, such as if the equipment in question was Colossus Hammer they might not have the mana to reuse the equip ability again during the same turn

The Controller of the Equip ability as its on the stack (which is still your opponent)
The legal targets of the equip ability do not change, you can only reroute to one of the creatures that could have been originally targeted by the ability.
You when part of a spell or ability text means the controller of that spell or ability. The effect of reroute does not change the the controller of the equip ability of lightning Greaves, it just lets you change the target, because of that the you in the targeting restrictions still refers to the person who activated it. You is defined in rule 109.5 from the Comprehensive Rules (Emphasis mine):

109.5 The words “you” and “your” on an object refer to the object’s controller, its would-be controller (if a player is attempting to play, cast, or activate it), or its owner (if it has no controller). For a static ability, this is the current controller of the object it’s on. For an activated ability, this is the player who activated the ability. For a triggered ability, this is the controller of the object when the ability triggered, unless it’s a delayed triggered ability. To determine the controller of a delayed triggered ability, see rules 603.7d–f.

Awesome. Its great to know specifically where this is defined