text:
Why can't I play a card for its alternative cost after searching for it with Bring to Light?
According to the card rulings on Gatherer, I can't, say, fetch Reveillark from my deck with Bring to Light, and then cast it for its Evoke cost instead (which is what I was hoping to do). While this is applicable to all alternative costs, what rules prevent BtL from allowing this, when, according to the card text, all it seems to care about is whether or not the CMC is less than or equal to the number of colors used to play it?
I'm not trying to bring this ruling into question, as disappointing as it may be, I just want to understand the logic involved.

There must be a duplicate around somewhere - if you poke around in the results for this query you might find it. (I skimmed a bit, but the ones I looked at were a little too different.) There's value in asking the question so directly like this, though.

Aren't there just 5 diferent colours? I'm curious anyway how you expect to go for an evoke that costs 6, where you could just accumulate 5?!

@Zaibis Because, Bring to Light only looks at the converted mana cost, not the cost of anything within the card's rules text. My rationale was that you could search for it, as its CMC is only five, and since you could then play it without paying its mana cost, perhaps that would include being able to play it for a free alternative cost, as BtL's rules text didn't specify otherwise (not overtly, anyway). It sounded suspect to begin with, so I read the rulings for BtL on Gatherer, which specifically mentioned not being able to pay alternative costs. At that point, I simply wanted to know why.

@Magnanimancer: out of curiousity: Didn't feel it selfexplanatory? I mean you pick a card by explicite refering to that cards cost but then want to trigger an effect tied to diferent costs?

@Zaibis As I've suggested, I figured at the start that something about my initial thought process was flawed, which is why I didn't just start trying to play with both of those under the assumption I was correct. The logic I had initially used was that BtL provides a card that you are able to play without paying for it, and if there are multiple ways that you would normally be able to pay for it, e.g. Evoke, BtL has made it free, regardless. It's not a trigger, I knew evoke was an alternate cost. I didn't know that playing it for free was also an alternate cost.

It is because Bring to Light and Evoke are both alternate costs, and you can only choose one alternate cost when casting a spell. Since Bring to Light is what is giving you permission to cast the Revilark in the first place you have to use its alternative cost, you can't Evoke it (by paying mana) off of Bring to Light. Compare this to Omniscience which also gives your Revilark an alternate cost, in this case you could choose to cast it without paying its mana cost or pay its Evoke cost but not not both (paying no mana for its Evoke cost).

117.9. Some spells have alternative costs. An alternative cost is a cost listed in a spell’s text, or applied to it from another effect, that its controller may pay rather than paying the spell’s mana cost. Alternative costs are usually phrased, “You may [action] rather than pay [this object’s] mana cost,” or “You may cast [this object] without paying its mana cost.” Note that some alternative costs are listed in keywords; see rule 702.

117.9a Only one alternative cost can be applied to any one spell as it’s being cast. The controller of the spell announces his or her intentions to pay that cost as described in rule 601.2b.

702.73a Evoke represents two abilities: a static ability that functions in any zone from which the card with evoke can be cast and a triggered ability that functions on the battlefield. “Evoke [cost]” means “You may cast this card by paying [cost] rather than paying its mana cost” and “When this permanent enters the battlefield, if its evoke cost was paid, its controller sacrifices it.” Paying a card’s evoke cost follows the rules for paying alternative costs in rules 601.2b and 601.2f–h.

Thank you for taking the time to answer, this is just what I needed in order to understand!

The other subtle bit here is that the "you may cast..." sentence on Bring to Light is also what's giving you permission to cast the spell at all. It's not in your hand, so you can't cast it outside of that one case. That's why you can't use the other alternative cost instead of the "free" one. You'd only be using one alternative cost, which in general is okay, but you're not actually allowed to cast the spell in that case.

@Jefromi: surely this point in your comment is the fundamental reason — that it’s exiled, and so it can’t be played for its normal or evoke cost unless something explicitly said it could be?  Why not put that in your answer?

@PLL It is in my answer. But you do need both parts: you can't use both costs, and you can't use just the evoke one.

Casting a spell without paying its mana cost is an alternative cost (as is Evoke), and you can only use one alternative cost. Bring to Light only allows you to cast it with that one specific alternate cost (i.e. "free"), so you can't use a different one, even if you wanted to use the Evoke cost instead of the free cost - you don't have permission to cast the spell that way.

117.9. Some spells have alternative costs. An alternative cost is a cost listed in a spell’s text, or applied to it from another effect, that its controller may pay rather than paying the spell’s mana cost. Alternative costs are usually phrased, “You may [action] rather than pay [this object’s] mana cost,” or “You may cast [this object] without paying its mana cost.” Note that some alternative costs are listed in keywords; see rule 702.

(emphasis mine)

117.9a Only one alternative cost can be applied to any one spell as it’s being cast. The controller of the spell announces his or her intentions to pay that cost as described in rule 601.2b.

Okay, that completely makes sense, I hadn't considered Bring to Light's ability to be an alternative cost itself! Thank you for the swift answer! I'm likely going to choose @diego's answer, simply because it has information specific to Evoke as well, but I really appreciate your help! :D


text:
What happens when a fortified land stops being a land?
Darksteel Garrison is like an equipment but for land - it can fortify a land, giving it an extra ability. The Westvale Abbey is a land but once it transforms, it's no longer a land.
What happens when a land such as Westvale Abbey equipped with a Darksteel Garrison transforms?

When the fortified land stops being a land, the fortification unattaches.
From Magic Comprehensive Rules (emphases mine):

301.5c An Equipment that’s also a creature can’t equip a creature. An Equipment that loses the subtype “Equipment” can’t equip a creature. An Equipment can’t equip itself. An Equipment that equips an illegal or nonexistent permanent becomes unattached from that permanent but remains on the battlefield. (This is a state-based action. See rule 704.) An Equipment can’t equip more than one creature. If a spell or ability would cause an Equipment to equip more than one creature, the Equipment’s controller chooses which creature it equips.
301.6. Some artifacts have the subtype “Fortification.” A Fortification can be attached to a land. It can’t legally be attached to an object that isn’t a land. Fortification’s analog to the equip keyword ability is the fortify keyword ability. Rules 301.5a–e apply to Fortifications in relation to lands just as they apply to Equipment in relation to creatures, with one clarification relating to rule 301.5c: a Fortification that’s also a creature (not a land) can’t fortify a land. (See rule 702.66, “Fortify.”)

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Is there a limit to the number of locomotives used to build a route?
When playing Ticket-to-Ride USA, is there a limit to the number of locomotives used to build a route? It seems unfair to create a 3-space-route with one Train Car card and two Locomotive Cards.

No, there is no limit. You could even complete a route using only locomotives. Remember that even though Locomotives are Wild and can be used freely like that, it is harder to collect them. Rather than being able to pick up TWO cards on your turn (i.e. two yellows), when picking up a Locomotive, you can only pick that ONE card. The only way you can collect TWO Locomotives on your turn is if you draw both randomly in succession...steep odds.
Now, in Advanced sets, some Routes REQUIRE one or more Locomotives as part of the total number.
In the original rules, the relevant statement is

Locomotives are Multi-colored and act as a wild card that can be part of any set of cards when claiming a route.

"Any set of cards" means that it may contain more locomotives. Note that it does not mean that it may contain any further combination of colours, as

To claim a route, a player must play a set of cards equal to the number of spaces in the
  route. A set of cards must be of the same type.

In the rules of Ticket To Ride: Europe this is explained better:

Locomotives can always act as a stand-in for any given color.

and (as an example):

To claim a Blue route that is three spaces long, a player may play any of the following card combinations: three Blue cards; two Blue cards and a Locomotive; one Blue card and two Locomotives; or three Locomotives.

Great answer, could be made better with a link to/quote from the rulebook.

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

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


text:
How many actions can you take per turn?
In Settlers of Catan can you conduct multiple transactions on your turn?
You roll, collect your resource cards, and then:
Can you build a road and a settlement?
Can you build a road and do a trade with another opponent?
Can you do a trade and buy a resource card?
We have been playing one transaction per turn but not sure what the rules are pertaining to this.

Yes, from the turn overview of the game rules:

You may build as long as your resource supply allows for it.

Also, the Combined Trade/Build Phase section of the Almanac states that

After rolling for resource production, you can trade and build in any order. Naturally, you can trade, build, trade again and build again.

You are restricted to playing only one Development Card, however, and you cannot play a Development Card that you bought on your current turn.

Is there any rule in the newer edition rules that states whether or not a player can build a settlement on a port, then use that port to trade for some more resources. This technically would be building and trading, and if there wasn't anymore order to the two there shouldn't be a problem. Or is there a rule much like the Development Cards that prevents immediate usage?

@JaysonSmith Yes, you can. The Combined Trade/Build Phase section of the Almanac (linked in my answer) also says "You can even use a harbor on the same turn as you build a settlement there."

That combined trade/build is a suggestion.  The rules as stated, and as usually enforced in tournaments, strictly require trading before building.

You CAN conduct multiple actions or transactions. If you have enough cards and the right conditions, you could buy several different settlements, roads and so forth. What you are limited on is the following:

Actions HAVE to be done in sequences. The stages of your turn is broken into three general phases---Roll the dice/Collect Resources, Trade (both from a port, the bank (4:1), or with other players), and Buy/Build. As long as you perform those actions like that, you could take as many as you'd like. (Note: Playing a Development Card is not considered a phase, as it can be played during any part of your turn...even before you roll the dice.)
You can only play ONE development card per turn. Also, the Development Card you are playing can not be purchase during that same turn you 'play' the card. So you would have to wait one turn to play it. This also means if you bought 3 cards in one turn, you would have to use your next 3 turns to play them (if you chose to play them as fast as possible). The only exception to the 'wait a turn' rule, is with a Development Card that gave you a Victory Point (e.g. Governor's House). Yet, even the Victory Point cards seem to have to comply to the 'no more than one card can be played per turn'.
You are limited on buyings/building more than the alloted number of pieces. For instance, if you already have 5 Settlements built you could not build another one, until one is upgraded to a City, because the pieces intentionally limit this (though my set came with 10 Red Settlements as an error, so make sure you start the game with the right numbers: 5 Settlements, 4 Cities, and 15 Roads for the basic set).

I think more recent editions allow build and trade in any order.


text:
Can I activate an ability after part of a spell has resolved? (please read example)
I made a Phelddagrif group hug deck with Windfall as my win condition (obviously I would only use it in an emergency) and Elixir of Immortality.
So, I cast Windfall with, say, 40 cards in my hand, the text says "Each player discards their hand, then draws an amount of cards equal to the greatest number of cards a player discarded this way". So, could I use Elixir of Immortality after I discarded my hand, but before I drew 40 more cards? I know this sounds silly as I'd think that it wouldn't work, but if it does then I can do a lot more with my deck. Thanks!

possible duplicate of Can I cast a spell while another spell or ability is resolving?

I would advise not mentioning cards, formats, and mechanics that are not relevant to the question. For example, the Phelddagrif card and the Commander format are irrelevant. Context is good when it directly supports the question, but Windfall and Elixir of Immortality could be played in Legacy, without Phelddagrif.

I realize "phelddagrif group hug deck" is not relative to the question, but what is a phelddagrif group hug deck?

It's basically a deck in EDH that is based around helping everyone so that you're not a target. Thanks for the quick reply, I'll format my questions better in the future

@PoorPinkus I wouldn't worry about it; sometimes it's hard to know whether the context is important or not, and it's better to provide too much than too little. (As long as it's not a ton to read through, which it definitely wasn't.) It didn't really help your question, but it also didn't really harm it.

As you guessed, this little trick doesn't work. There are only two ways to activate an ability or cast a spell while another spell or ability is resolving, and your combo doesn't fall into either one:

If the spell/ability that's resolving lets a player pay mana, that player can activate mana abilities.
If the spell/ability currently resolving explicitly tells you to cast a spell or allows you to cast a spell, you can cast that spell. Even in this case, the newly cast spell waits on the stack until the current spell/ability finishes resolving.

CR 608.2f If an effect gives a player the option to pay mana, he or she may activate mana abilities before taking that action. If an effect specifically instructs or allows a player to cast a spell during resolution, he or she does so by putting that spell on top of the stack, then continuing to cast it by following the steps in rules 601.2a–h, except no player receives priority after it's cast. The currently resolving spell or ability then continues to resolve, which may include casting other spells this way. No other spells can normally be cast and no other abilities can normally be activated during resolution.


text:
Does an equipped creature become an artifact creature?
Does a creature become an artifact creature when an artifact is equipped onto it or just a creature with an artifact on it?

No, an artifact creature is specifically a creature that has "artifact" written in its type line. See Platinum Emperion for an example; it specifically says "artifact creature". A creature could also become an artifact creature through an effect that says it changes the type, such as Mycosynth Lattice. But attaching an equipment to a creature will not affect the creature's types unless that equipment specifically says something like "equipped creature is an artifact in addition to its other types" such as Silverskin Armor.

e.g. Silverskin Armor


text:
Snakeform and buff ineractions
This came up in a game.  I controlled Prossh who has an ability that gives him +1/+0 whenever I sacrifice a creature.  After I sacrified 6 creatures to Prossh's ability (+6/+0), my opponent cast Snakeform which turns it into a 1/1 with no abilities for the turn.  My question is, what is Prossh now?  Would it have been different if I used Prossh's ability in response to the Snakeform cast?

Your Prossh will be a 7/1 green snake creature. The different effects are applied in the layer system order. First layer 7b is applied:

Any Power/Toughness setting effects

Then layer 7c is applied:

This covers all effects that modify Power/Toughness so long as they don’t set P/T to a specific value

So first the effect changing your Prossh into a 1/1 is applied, then the +6/+0 is applied. Because the effects take place in 2 separate layers (even though they are both sublayers of layer 7), timestamp order is irrelevant.
Note that if you used Prossh's ability in response to Snakeform (while Snakeform is on the stack), then this is no different at all than the other way; in either case Prossh's ability has resolved before Snakeform has resolved. And you cannot use Prossh's ability after Snakeform resolves, because at that point Prossh no longer has any abilities.
More details on the layer system can be found here.
The comprehensive rules detailing this:

613.3b Layer 7b: Effects that set power and/or toughness to a specific number or value are applied. Effects that refer to the base power and/or toughness of a creature apply in this layer.
613.3c Layer 7c: Effects that modify power and/or toughness (but don't set power and/or toughness to a specific number or value) are applied.


text:
Interaction with "with power 2 or less"
The Pathmaker Initiate ability can target creatures with power 2 or less. Can this creature then have its power grow beyond 2 through other means, while still keeping the benefits from the Pathmaker Initiate?
For instance can I target the Graceful Cat and then turn it into an unblockable 3/3 this turn?

The target's power is checked when you activate the ability, and again when it resolves. Afterwards, the effect might as well read "[The object] can't be blocked this turn."

Yes. The restriction "with power 2 or less" is something that restricts the valid targets of the ability. As long as the creature has power 2 or less when you activate the ability, and also when the ability resolves, then the ability happens, and the creature cannot be blocked this turn. It doesn't matter what happens to the creature's power after that.
To have the sort of restriction you are thinking of, the ability would need to be something along the lines of "target creature cannot be blocked this turn as long as its power is 2 or less".
Here is the Gatherer ruling on Pathmaker Initiate:

If the creature’s power is greater than 2 as the activated ability tries to resolve, the ability will be countered and none of its effects will happen. However, if instead the creature’s power is raised above 2 after the ability resolves, it still can’t be blocked that turn.


text:
Is "Fighting" considered "attacking"?
When it comes to creatures under the influence of "Target creature you control fights target creature you don't control", are they, or the initiating creature, considered "attacking"?
In my specific scenario, I played a Savage Punch, targeting my Summit Prowler and my opponent's Longshot Squad. She then played the instant Kill Shot, which reads "Destroy target attacking creature.", targeting my Prowler and therefore the stack resolves making my Savage Punch null.
So I guess all in all, does the keyword 'attacking' change this at all or was this a correct resolution?

The answer to your question is actually irrelevant. Even if fighting caused attacking, you still wouldn't be able to target the creature with Kill Shot because fighting is instantaneous. There's no time when the creature is fighting that you can cast a spell, just like you can't cast a spell in middle of drawing a card.

@ikegami Fighting is not "instantaneous".  (I don't know what that term means in Magic)  Savage Punch is put on the stack, as such it occurs at "instant speed."  Because "Kill Shot" is an instant, it can be put on the stack.  The timing of the scenario as described is just fine.  The issue is Kill Shot fizzles because of the invalid target.

@John, It doesn't have an M:TG meaning. I'm using the English meaning: having no duration. No, you cannot add Kill Shot to the stack (or do anything else) when creatures are fighting.

@ikegami I see now what you mean.  The fight "attribute" (I suspect there's a better word for this) is not applied to Summit Prowler until Savage Punch resolves.  At this point, it's too late to try and put anything on the stack, we're in spell resolution.

@John, (I'd go with "state" to avoid confusion.) Yup, exactly. Mind you, there are cards that checked if a creature attacked. The question would be of consequence then. (Having fought would not qualify the creature as having attacked.)

No, attacking has nothing to do with "fighting"; the only similarity between the 2 is that they both involve creatures dealing damage. A creature is only considered an "attacking" creature if it is declared as an attacker during the combat phase.

508.1j Each chosen creature still controlled by the active player becomes an attacking creature. It remains an attacking creature until it's removed from combat or the combat phase ends, whichever comes first.

Therefore, your opponent was not allowed to do this.
Note also that neither creature in this situation is "initiating" anything. You as the player who cast Savage Punch initiated the "fight", but there's no difference between your creature and your opponent's creature in terms of one of them being the "attacker" and one the "defender". They are simply both creatures that were targeted for the fight.
Also note that even though a fight causes creatures to deal damage to each other, this damage is not "combat damage":

701.10d The damage dealt when a creature fights isn’t combat damage.

Ref your last paragraph and rule link - Does that mean that if the fight occurs pre-combat then any surviving creatures are treated as 'Fresh' during the combat phase? ie. Without any loss of Toughness

@LuckySevens, replying to this very old comment because I just saw it. First off, creatures do not lose toughness when they take damage, losing they just have some amount of damage. And second, "refresh" (have all damage removed from them) only at the end of each turn.

Fighting is a different thing than attacking.  So, the short answer is, "No, fighting is not considered attacking."
Specifically, Fight is a special keyword, that means, "This creatures deals damage equal to its power to target creature. That creature deals damage equal to its power to this creature."  In particular, this "fight" occurs outside of the normal combat mechanics of the game.
To answer the second part of your question, no, you did not resolve things correctly.  Here is what should have happened:

During your main phase, prior to combat you play a Savage Punch, targeting your Summit Prowler and your opponent's Longshot Squad.  [I'm assuming Longshot Squad has no +1/+1 counters on it.]
Now, Savage Punch is on the stack.  Your opponent then attempts to cast Kill Shot.  Because there is no valid target for Kill Shot, this is an invalid play.  You can follow the official rules for how you handle invalid actions, or house rules.
Your Savage Punch resolves, and LongShot squad dies, and your Summit Prowler is 6/5 until end of turn with 3 points of damage on it.

Note: This question has been asked before here:  Does 'fight' involve combat?


text:
Does the 2nd ability of Teysa, Orzhov Scion trigger with mass destruction?
Let's say Teysa, Orzhov Scion and my ten other black creatures are wiped out with "Wrath of God". Do then 10 white 1/1 Spirits appear on the battlefield even though Teysa has just been destroyed?
Sounds pretty strong to me.
Am I right?
Thanks a lot.

Note that you can link to a card by wrapping the card name in [mtg:card name].

Yes, if Teysa, Orzhov Scion and 10 other black creatures all die at the same time, you get 10 Spirit tokens. Rule 603 covers how triggered abilities work:

603.6c. Leaves-the-battlefield abilities trigger when a permanent moves from the battlefield to another zone, or when a phased-in permanent leaves the game because its owner leaves the game. These are written as, but aren't limited to, "When [this object] leaves the battlefield, ..." or "Whenever [something] is put into a graveyard from the battlefield, ..." An ability that attempts to do something to the card that left the battlefield checks for it only in the first zone that it went to. An ability that triggers when a card is put into a certain zone "from anywhere" is never treated as a leaves-the-battlefield ability, even if an object is put into that zone from the battlefield.
603.6d. Normally, objects that exist immediately after an event are checked to see if the event matched any trigger conditions. Continuous effects that exist at that time are used to determine what the trigger conditions are and what the objects involved in the event look like. However, some triggered abilities must be treated specially. Leaves-the-battlefield abilities, abilities that trigger when a permanent phases out, abilities that trigger when an object that all players can see is put into a hand or library, abilities that trigger specifically when an object becomes unattached, abilities that trigger when a player loses control of an object, and abilities that trigger when a player planeswalks away from a plane will trigger based on their existence, and the appearance of objects, prior to the event rather than afterward. The game has to "look back in time" to determine if these abilities trigger.

The ability is a leaves-the-battlefield ability and it existed before the creatures were destroyed, so the ability triggers.

Yes, you will get the 10 tokens. This is because of the same reason given in the answer to this question.

603.6d Normally, objects that exist immediately after an event are checked to see if the event matched any trigger conditions. Continuous effects that exist at that time are used to determine what the trigger conditions are and what the objects involved in the event look like. However, some triggered abilities must be treated specially. Leaves-the-battlefield abilities, abilities that trigger when a permanent phases out, abilities that trigger when an object that all players can see is put into a hand or library, abilities that trigger specifically when an object becomes unattached, abilities that trigger when a player loses control of an object, and abilities that trigger when a player planeswalks away from a plane will trigger based on their existence, and the appearance of objects, prior to the event rather than afterward. The game has to "look back in time" to determine if these abilities trigger.

Basically, all that says that whenever a creature enters the graveyard from the battlefield, the game checks to see what things looked like the moment before the creatures left the battlefield to determine if there's any triggers that need to happen. The game sees that the way things were at that moment included Teysa, Orzhov Scion being on the battlefield, so its trigger happens.
Also, once the triggered ability is on the stack, it no longer matters if Teysa is still around or not:

112.7a Once activated or triggered, an ability exists on the stack independently of its source. Destruction or removal of the source after that time won't affect the ability.

Is "this question" at the end of the second sentence supposed to be a link?


text:
Double Hardened Scales
I'm having issues understanding how a possible turn would go which I'll try to explain best I can.
Say I currently had two Battlewise Hoplites currently on the board. One of them currently has Hardened Scales but the other does not. This would mean that the first which has the enchantment would have two +1/+1 counters currently. The first for its Heroic ability and another due to Hardened Scales.
Now say that I decide that I want to play an additional Hardened Scales to the other Battlewise that isn't enchanted and is still a 2/2? I'm unclear how two Hardened scales on the board at the same time would resolve?
I'm still pretty new to magic so excuse me if I'm using wrong terminology!
Thanks!

Hardened Scales is not an aura - it is a generic enchantment that stays on the battlefield and has a "global" effect.

So to clarify what @HaoYe said, in the situation you described neither Hoplite should have had any counters at all.

Not all enchantments attach to a creature (or any kind of permanent). In general, enchantments just sit on the battlefield like artifacts. Auras are special types of enchantments that do attach to things. They have a type line that says "Enchantment - Aura" and an ability in the text box that says "Enchant [object]," which means that it attaches to objects with the given description.
Hardened Scales doesn't target, and it doesn't just affect just one creature. As long as it's on the battlefield, any time you would put any number of +1/+1 counters on any creature you control, you also put an extra +1/+1 counter on that creature.
If you had two copies of Hardened Scales, every time you put +1/+1 counters on one of your creatures, each of the abilities modifies what happens and you add two extra counters.

Thanks for the detailed explanation! This works out better than I was even hoping!

One important thing to note here is that playing your Hardened Scales doesn't cause any creature to get +1/+1 counters because it doesn't target them.

Just so I'm clear: If I were to have Hardened Scales and a Battlewise Hoplite on the board then played a creature enchantment onto the hoplite, it would get +2/+2 due to its +1/+1 it normally gets and the Hardened Scales adding an additional counter. Correct?

Yes, it would get a single +1/+1 counter due to it's ability, and Hardened scales would add another counter, for a total of 2 +1/+1 counters.


text:
Are (un)tapped permanents still legal targets for "(un)tap target permanent" effects?
So I noticed that many cards with tap-effects ship with a clause specifying that they can only be used on untapped permanents, such as Earthcraft and Crackleburr.
So here's my question:
Doesn't that imply that, given the right situation, one can legally tap an already tapped permanent?
I'll give an example of the kinda scenarios this is relevant for: Can Tamiyo, the Moon Sage activate her first ability when no untapped cards are around? Or, thinking untap-effects, could I bounce a forest with Scryb Ranger even when there isn't a tapped creature available?
Notice that, unlike the previous batch of examples, the wording on these lacks the clause restricting their use to un/tapped permanents - does that mean that they aren't?
Any kind of clarification would be greatly appreciated here.

Related question: Can an untapped creature “become untapped?”

If it's a permanent, it's a valid target for "target permanent". Period[1].

You cannot untap a permanent that's not tapped.

701.17b To untap a permanent, rotate it back to the upright position from a sideways position. Only tapped permanents can be untapped.

This has consequences[2], but not for Tamiyo.

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

The confusion stems from the fact that players intuitively know they cannot choose to do something impossible. This is indeed a rule.

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 [...]

However, while you are forbidden from choosing to do something impossible, there's nothing impossible about activating Tamiyo's ability. It's of no consequence that the ability involves actions that cannot be performed if the ability were to resolve immediately after being activated.

As usual, cards can override the rules. For example, abilities such as Shroud, Hexproof and Protection can prevent a permanent from being targeted.
You are required to pay a cost completely[CR 117.3], so a cost that requires you to untap something that isn't tapped can't be payed.
For example, the untap symbol means "Untap this permanent". Because you can't untap a permanent that isn't tapped, you can't pay the cost of Puresight Merrow's ability when Puresight Merrow isn't tapped.
For example, If you want to untap a tapped permanent so it can attack, and you use an instant that reads "Tap or untap target permanent.", and someone untaps it in response, you would be force to tap it when your ability resolves (because you can't chose to do something impossible.) That's why that type of ability is phrased "You may tap or untap target permanent."
For example, If you have an ability whose effect reads "You may untap an opponent's land. If you do, do X.", you can't do X if the opponent has no tapped lands.

You cannot untap an untapped permanent to pay an "untap" cost, exactly like how you cannot tap a tapped permanent to pay a "tap" cost.

107.6. The untap symbol is {Q}. The untap symbol in an activation cost means "Untap this permanent." A permanent that's already untapped can't be untapped again to pay the cost.

However, Tamiyo CAN use her first ability even without any untapped creatures around. This is because it says "target creature", not "target untapped creature". So you can target a tapped creature as a legal target. When the ability resolves, it will first attempt to tap the already tapped creature (which will do nothing), and then the "it doesn't untap..." will still take effect.
In the same way, you can use Scryb Ranger's ability even without any untapped creatures, because you can target a tapped creature. But again, when the ability resolves, it will attempt to tap the already tapped creature, which will simply do nothing.
The key here is that you can never tap a creature that's already tapped, or untap a creature that's already untapped. Attempting to do so to pay a cost is like attempting to pay 1 mana when you have no mana in your mana pool; you can't do it. However, nothing stops you from using a spell or ability that, as part of its resolution, attempts to tap a tapped creature.

Thanks for the immediate response, but I'm not entirely sure if that covers the question - as stated above, all effects that use (un)tapping as a cost beyond the respective symbols already specify that only un/tapped permanents are eligible. My question was whether not there is any rule preventing me from, for example, targetting an already tapped permanent with a targetted tap-effect. EDIT: Ah alright, thanks for the clarification.

You cannot untap an untapped permanent PERIOD [CR 701.17b].

@Gendolkari, So you are saying that I can use Frost Titan on a permanent that is already tapped? Because it says "target permanent" not "target untapped permanent". And as such, I can target his tapped permanent and it doesn't untap during his next untap step right? And if we now instead use Sleep, they don't' untap in the next step even if they were previously tapped before Sleep is played right?

@Parcerier That's correct. A ruling on Sleep on Gatherer mentions it.

You are looking at two different things here: costs and effects. Earthcraft and Crackleburr both require you to tap untapped permanents (or untap tapped permanents) to activate their abilities. If Earthcraft allowed you to tap a tapped creature to untap your a land, then with just one creature you could untap all of your land forever.
For the other two, the tapping or untapping is the effect of the ability. In Tamiyo's case, you pay the cost by adding one loyalty counter and you choose a target. Then, when the ability resolves, the targeted permanent becomes tapped. Similarly, in Scryb Ranger's case, putting the land in your hand is the cost of activating the ability. Even if the creature dies before the ability resolves, the land is already in your hand.

Sorry for any ambiguity, but I don't think cost/resolving plays a role in this. The scenario at hand isn't one where the effect fizzles for losing its target before it can resolve; the question is wether not an already tapped/untapped card is an eligible target for an effect that taps/untaps its target as part of the resolving-process to begin with (as stated above, could one use Tamiyo's effect on a tapped card, or Scryb Ranger on an untapped one just for the sake of paying their respective costs?)

In that case, the solution is the extremely simple "do what the card says." Earthcraft says that you have to tap an untapped creature, so you do that. Scryb Ranger says to target a creature, so you target a creature.

@Chairforce the reason "cost/resolving" plays a role in this is that in the question, you gave two examples of costs that require tapping a permanent, and used them to formulate a hypothesis about effects that entail tapping a permanent, which suggests there's something pretty significant that you don't understand about the difference between cost and effect. It actually doesn't matter for the question you want to ask, but explaining that it doesn't matter is part of answering your question as asked.

Cards like Earthcraft say "tap an untapped creature" for clarity. If Earthcraft's cost were "tap a creature" it would work the same, there would just be a lot of rules confusion surrounding it.


text:
Can I place settlements on harbors in set-up?
In Settlers of Catan, when you place your initial settlements, are you allowed to place them on harbors, or can you only place them on interior spots that have 3 land hexes adjacent?

From the rules:

The starting player places a settlement on an open intersection of his
  choice. [From the setup instructions]
Intersections are the points where 3 hexes meet.
In order to control a harbor, you must build a settlement on a coastal intersection which borders the harbor.

Water hexes are hexes, so the points at which two land tiles and two water tile and the points at which of one land tile and two water tiles meet are intersections.
During the initial placement, you are allowed to place a settlement on any open intersection (as constrained by the proximity restrictions), so you are allowed to place on coastal intersections, so placing on a harbour is a legitimate placement for a settlement during setup.
This is supported by the official FAQ:

Q: Settlements and Cities - May I build a settlement at a harbor during the set-up phase?
A: Yes. This is not contradicted by the rules.

The upside of placing on a harbour is obtaining the harbour.
The downside of placing on a harbour is that you touch at least one fewer resources than you could by placing elsewhere. This means your potential for gaining resources will be lower, the variety of resources you can obtain will likely be lower, and you'll start with fewer resources (if the harbour was your second placement).

Water hexes aren't actually physical hexagons, in some versions of the game anyway, they're just borders. Probably explains some of the confusion reading the rules passage you quoted.

@Jefromi, If that's their logic, it doesn't make much sense. Either you think it's an intersection, in which case you can build a settlement on them, or you think they're not, and you can never build a settlement on them.


text:
How does Chains of Mephistopheles interact with Dredge
If Chains of Mephistopheles is on the battlefield, and I would use my a draw other than my first for the turn to trigger a dredge effect like Dakmor Salvage. What happens?

First, let's look at a flowchart explaining how Chains of Mephistopheles works.
Now, when you go to draw a card (other than the one that is a turn based action during your draw step) you have 2 replacement effects trying to replace that draw, the Chains and Dredge. You get to choose which one to apply first (616.1).

If you choose to apply Dredge first you can no longer apply the Chains since you are no longer drawing a card (614.6).
If you choose to apply the Chains effect first you can still Dredge as long as you would draw a card after discarding, if you mill (because you had no cards to discard) you cannot apply Dredge.

616.1. If two or more replacement and/or prevention effects are attempting to modify the way an event affects an object or player, the affected object’s controller (or its owner if it has no controller) or the affected player chooses one to apply, following the steps listed below. If two or more players have to make these choices at the same time, choices are made in APNAP order.
614.6. If an event is replaced, it never happens. A modified event occurs instead, which may in turn trigger abilities. Note that the modified event may contain instructions that can’t be carried out, in which case the impossible instruction is simply ignored.

exactly what I was hoping, thanks. If I use a combination of dredge and madness I should be able to get around chains downside.

"First, let's look at a flowchart explaining how Chains of Mephistopheles works." — +1 because this is both useful, and comedy gold.

I would have referenced 614.6. ("If an event is replaced, it never happens. A modified event occurs instead [...]") instead of 616.1e.

You choose which ones apply. If you use the Dredge effect, the Chains effect doesn't apply any more, so you'll just mill two cards and put the Dakmor Salvage into your hand. If you have at least one card in your hand, you can also choose to apply the Chains effect, then the Dredge effect, so you'd discard a card, then mill two cards and put the Dakmor Salvage into your hand. And if you don't have a card in your hand, then you can choose to just mill one card.

Both of those are replacement effects that modify a card draw. Chains of Mephistopheles' effect is complicated, but there's a ruling that explains it as simply as possible:

Here's what happens when Chains of Mephistopheles replaces a player's draw:

If that player has at least one card in his or her hand, he or she discards a card and then draws a card.
If that player's hand is empty, he or she puts the top card of his or her library into his or her graveyard. The player doesn't draw a card at all.

And Dredge's effect is fairly simple, as described in rule 702.51a:

Dredge is a static ability that functions only while the card with dredge is in a player’s graveyard. “Dredge N” means “As long as you have at least N cards in your library, if you would draw a card, you may instead put N cards from the top of your library into your graveyard and return this card from your graveyard to your hand.”

They are both replacement effects, so their interaction is governed by the interaction of replacement and/or prevention effects rules. Basically, the player affected applies applicable replacement effects at most once each until no more of them are applicable, then follows the resulting instructions.
So, you can choose to apply the Dredge replacement first. In that case, you are no longer drawing a card, so the Chains replacement doesn't apply any more.
You can also choose to apply the Chains replacement first. In that case, what you do depends on whether your hand is empty. If it is, then you are again no longer drawing a card, so the Dredge replacement doesn't apply any more. If your hand is not empty, then you are still drawing a card, so the Dredge effect still applies and you can apply it too.

You can choose the dredge replacement effect instead of Mephistopheles. What you also can do is when let the replacement make you discard the second card you draw for the turn and then draw a card.
Seeing as the Oracle text for Chains of Mephistopheles specifically mentions...

If a player would draw a card except the first one he or she draws in his or her draw step each turn, that player discards a card instead. If the player discards a card this way, he or she draws a card.

You will now have the chance to discard the card you draw and then also dredge. Seeing as this is a dredge deck and you want to dump as many cards into the graveyard as possible this may be better.

This answer is not entirely correct. You don't "discard the second card you draw". You discard instead of drawing. This mistake is made in two places in the answer.


text:
How does "it's still a land" affect a permanent that would not otherwise be lands?
The situation: I have a creature, and my opponent casts an Imprisoned in the Moon on it, which has this ability:

Enchanted permanent is a colorless land with "{T}: Add Colorless to your mana pool" and loses all other card types and abilities.

Then I cast a card with Awaken (perhaps Coastal Discovery) and choose to Awaken that land. The Awaken ability has this text:

If this spell’s awaken cost was paid, put N +1/+1 counters on target land you control. That land becomes a 0/0 Elemental creature with haste. It’s still a land.

After that, I remove the Imprisoned in the Moon. At this point, there is just one relevant continuous effect applied to the creature:

It is a 0/0 Elemental creature with haste. It's still a land.

So, is the creature also a land, or is it just a creature? In other words, does the "it's still a land" clause actually change the permanent's type, or does it just mean that it retains any existing types

Re "does it just mean that it retains any existing types", Yes. The rules literally use the word "retain".

I emphasized "just" because I was wondering if "it's still a land" meant only that the existing types would be retained, or if the sentence should also be taken at face value, and "it's still a land" would also imply "it's a land".

Re "or if the sentence should also be taken at face value", No. You should use the rule's definition the sentence instead. The "English" meaning is only used in the absence of a game definition.

@Rainbolt I asked around on Magic Judges ask a judge and ikegami's answer seems to be correct. It seems to be a common confusion that people have. It basically boils down to, it is not really intuitive whether the effect will add to a permanents types or reset them, so adding "is still a land" makes it clearer.

See the examples below rule 205.1b in the comprehensive rules for more confusion. As well as the differences between the printed version of Darksteel Mutation verses its oracle text for an example of where WOTC went back and had to clarify the differences.

@Malco, Re "so adding "is still a land" makes it clearer.", No, "is still a land" isn't there to make things clearer; it changes the default behaviour (which would result in the removal of the land type).

@Rainbolt, Re "I'd like to see an answer that either references a rule that resolves the contradiction printed on the card", There is only a contradiction if you incorrectly use the English meaning of "It's still a land" instead of the Rules meaning. Rules meaning override English meaning.

@Rainbolt, Like you said, the rules already conver what to do when instructed to do something impossible (retain the land type it doesn't have): You do as much as possible (nothing).

Why are you guys having so much problem with this!? It's super straightforward in the rules!

In the specific case of Darksteel Mutation, the text change is actually functional. Rule 205.1b says in part "Some effects state that an object becomes an “artifact creature”; these effects also allow the object to retain all of its prior card types and subtypes". So, with the old text it would retain all previous types.

@murgatroid99, 1) Darksteel Mutation doesn't say it becomes an artifact but an Insect artifact creature. That's definitely ambiguous, though. 2) I didn't know about that exception! I guess the Wizards forgot it too. Deleted my comment. (I mean, I must have read it when answering this question, but I probably ignored it as irrelevant to the question at hand.)

@Malco I've always thought that ikegami's answer was correct. I don't think that it is well supported, hence the bounty. Do you think that the Magic Judges question you asked (and got answered) would be useful here?

@Rainbolt I see, I'm just not sure what sources to add beyond the rules citations. There wasn't really anything official since it is kind of an obscure interaction of making something a land, animating it, and then removing the land supertype. So there aren't many cases where "it is still a land" is being applied to something that isn't a land. Maybe someone else will have more luck but all my searching just kept leading back to 205.1a and 205.1b.

@Rainbolt just saw your edit, I was trying to write an answer earlier but it was just too similar to ikegami's. The ask a judge I don't think would be useful since it was just the judge saying "it is no longer a land after imrpisoned is removed" and referring to 205.1b. It was on a IRC as well so the specific response is lost to the ether now anyways.

You have a non-land Elemental creature.
"It's still a land" does not give the land type. Instead, it prevents the land type (and any other type it might have) from being removed by Awaken because changing an object's type normally removes all of the object's other types.

205.1a Some effects set an object’s card type. In such cases, the new card type(s) replaces any existing card types. [...]
205.1b Some effects change an object’s card type, supertype, or subtype but specify that the object retains a prior card type, supertype, or subtype. In such cases, all the object’s prior card types, supertypes, and subtypes are retained. This rule applies to effects that use the phrase “in addition to its types” or that state that something is “still a [type, supertype, or subtype].” [...]

Even if the English definition of something implies one thing, it's only the rules definition that matters. "It's still a land" doesn't grand the land type; it purely activates 205.1b's modification to 205.1a.

TL;DR: Your creature is a 0/0 Elemental creature with X +1/+1 counters and Haste. No Land type, no tapping for mana-ability, no original creature type.
In the answer below, I've tried to look at the state of the creature through-out the whole process of Imprisonment, Awakening and breaking out of Imprisonment, to keep track of all the things happening to it, and all the rules applied. Not all of this information is relevant to the answer per sé, but in my opinion this does cover all bases - it makes clear why the effects happen as described.

So, we have a creature - let's call it Charlie - that becomes a land, then becomes a creature again with an effect stating "it's still a land".
Imprisoned in the Moon is a continuous type-changing effect, lasting for as long as the creature is enchanted. When looking at the card, the game considers it a land after layer 4 (613.1d) is processed:

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

Imprisoned in the Moon also grants Charlie the ability to tap for mana:

Enchanted permanent is a colorless land with "{T}: Add Colorless to your mana pool" and loses all other card types and abilities.

Then we play the Awaken spell. Charlie is a land that can tap for colorless mana, and after receiving the +1/+1 counters, also a 0/0 creature with X +1/+1 counters on it, and haste. Imprisoned in the Moon tries to strip all other abilities off of it, but since both Imprison and Awaken generate ability-altering effects they collide on layer 6 (613.1f)). The Awaken takes precedence because it has a later timestamp:

613.6. 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, Charlie is a creature again! Note that it can still tap for mana; Imprison is still on Charlie and the Awaken doesn't strip the mana-tap ability (in fact, it even confers this implicit ability from a regular forest onto an Elemental X/X, if we'd targeted a Forest with Awaken instead of dear Charles). Note that at this point, Charlie is equally vulnerable to Terror as to Rancid Earth.
Now the interesting bit: Imprisoned in the Moon is removed. Will it remove the Land type? Yes. Charlie doesn't have another effect granting him the Land type. Imprison made Charlie into a Land, but since Imprison is removed, its continuous type-changing effect stops as well:

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

Since Imprison is no longer on the battlefield, the type-changing effect stops. Awaken states Charlie 'is still a land', but that is not a source, merely a conduit:

205.1. The type line is printed directly below the illustration. It contains the card’s card type(s). It also contains the card’s subtype(s) and supertype(s), if applicable.
205.1a Some effects set an object’s card type. In such cases, the new card type(s) replaces any existing card types. Counters, effects, and damage marked on the object remain with it[...]
205.1b Some effects change an object’s card type, supertype, or subtype but specify that the object retains a prior card type, supertype, or subtype. In such cases, all the object’s prior card types, supertypes, and subtypes are retained. This rule applies to effects that use the phrase “in addition to its types” or that state that something is “still a [type, supertype, or subtype].”[...]

The other effects from Awaken still apply: Charlie is an Elemental and he retains his +1/+1 counters as shown by the emphasised bit of rule 205.1a above; his base P/T is 0/0 and Awaken still grants him Haste.

Sidenote: if by some other effect, Charlie would retain the Land type, he could no longer tap for (colorless) mana, because that ability too is only sourced by the Imprison.

I don't see how 208.3 is relevant. Power and toughness weren't really the subject of the question, and there are no Vehicles involved.

@murgatroid99 it's there to show what Awaken did with it's 'its still a land' modifier: The land now has P/T and therefor is now a Creature. It is also a Land, so it - if it was a Forest for instance - can tap for {G} and get wrecked by Land destruction etc. It doesn't grant the Land type, it perpetuates the Land type.

But the "it's still a land" part has no impact on the creature's power and toughness. The part where it makes it a creature is what makes the power and toughness meaningful.

"Imprisoned in the Moon tries to strip all other abilities off of it, but since they are both type-changing continuous effects the Awaken wins because it has a later timestamp [...]" The conclusion is correct, but the reasoning is off. Imprisoned and Awaken both have type changing effects in layer 4, and that has nothing to do with abilities. The ability adding effect of Awaken and the ability removing effect of Imprisoned happen in layer 6, not layer 4. So, there are two unrelated collisions in two different layers.

@Rainbolt thx, changed wording to address this.


text:
When is a creature's toughness calculated
At what point is a creature's toughness calculated? If I have Korozda Guildmage where I can sacrifice a creature and put X 1/1 token creatures onto the battlefield, where X is the sacrificed creature's toughness.
If I have a creature that is 4/4 and cast Giant Growth to give it +3/+3 then sacrifice it? Do I get 4 tokens or 7?
Also what if my 4/4 creature was dealt 2 combat damage before I sacrificed it? Do I get 2 or 4 creatures?
Finally, what about counters? If my 4/4 had a +1/+1 do I get 4 or 5 tokens?

Part of the confusion may arise from the fact that, if you've played Duels of the Planeswalkers on XBox (or whatever), a 4 toughness creature that's emerged from combat with a 2 power creature will now be displayed on screen as a 4/2.  This is a little bit naughty, since actually it's still a 4 toughness creature, just one that can now only take 2 more damage before it dies.  It's a convenient but ever so slightly misleading way of depicting the current game state...

At what point is a creature's toughness calculated?

It's continually calculated. The real question is when does Korozda Guildmage's ability check the creature's toughness.
Korozda Guildmage's ability checks the creature's toughess as it resolves because it's not needed before then [CR 107.3e]. Since the creature no longer exists at that point, last known information is used [CR 112.7a]. Effectively, that means the total toughness of the creature at the time it was sacrificed is used.

If I have a creature that is 4/4 and cast Giant Growth to give it +3/+3 then sacrifice it? Do I get 4 tokens or 7?

7. Giant Growth increases the toughness of a creature.

Also what if my 4/4 creature was dealt 2 combat damage before I sacrificed it? Do I get 2 or 4 creatures?

4. It's a 4/4 with 2 damage marked on it. Damage does not reduce toughness. (Well, damage from a source with wither or infect can reduce toughness, but only indirectly, by virtue of giving -1/-1 counters.)

Finally, what about counters?

+1/+1 counters, -1/-1 counters and any other similar counters affect toughness.

If my 4/4 had a +1/+1 do I get 4 or 5 tokens?

5. Effects that modify toughness (such as Giant Growth's or Glorious Anthem's) modify toughness.

Word for word rules given for the card Sworn Defender:
You apply power/toughness changing effects in a series of sublayers in the following order: (a) effects from characteristic-defining abilities; (b) effects that set power and/or toughness to a specific number or value; (c) effects that modify power and/or toughness but don't set power and/or toughness to a specific number or value; (d) changes from counters; (e) effects that switch a creature's power and toughness. This card's effect is always applied in (b), which means that effects applied in sublayer (c), (d), or (e) will not be overwritten; they will be applied to the new value.
This means that positive counters and Giant Growth will give you more tokens.  (I know that the question was answered, but I wanted to give the verbatim explanation for it).

Toughness is calculated whenever State-Based Actions are checked, just before a player receives priority, and whenever else a spell ability asks for it.

704.2. State-based actions are checked throughout the game and are not controlled by any player.

704.3. Whenever a player would get priority (see rule 116, "Timing and Priority"), the game checks for any of the listed conditions for state-based actions ... This process also occurs during the cleanup step.

208.2a The card may have a characteristic-defining ability that sets its power and/or toughness according to some stated condition. (See rule 604.3.) Such an ability is worded "[This creature's] [power or toughness] is equal to ..." or "[This creature's] power and toughness are each equal to ..." This ability functions everywhere, even outside the game. If the ability needs to use a number that can't be determined, including inside a calculation, use 0 instead of that number.

Korozda Guildmage sacrifices creatures, and puts a number of 1/1 tokens into play based upon the creatures toughness. When the effect resolves, it cannot use the creatures current toughness, because the creature is no longer on the battlefield (and creatures do not exist anywhere except the battlefield, everywhere else they are creature spells or creature cards). So, it uses that objects Last Known Information.

608.2g If an effect requires information from the game (such as the number of creatures on the battlefield), the answer is determined only once, when the effect is applied. If the effect requires information from a specific object, including the source of the ability itself or a target that’s become illegal, the effect uses the current information of that object if it’s in the public zone it was expected to be in; if it’s no longer in that zone, or if the effect has moved it from a public zone to a hidden zone, the effect uses the object’s last known information.

So, for your individual questions, the toughness is calculated when the effect of Korozda Guildmage resolves. At this point, it uses the Last Known Information about the creature. This includes any effects that modify toughness (like Giant Growth that adds +3/+3 to the Power/Toughness, or counters that add/subtract from the P/T). Damage does not modify toughness, it is only marked on the creature to track lethal damage. So your answers are 7 (Giant Growth adds toughness), 4 (damage does not affect toughness), 5 (+1/+1 counters add toughness).

302.4c To determine a creature's power and toughness, start with the numbers printed in its lower right corner, then apply any applicable continuous effects. (See rule 613, "Interaction of Continuous Effects.")

613.3c Layer 7c: Effects that modify power and/or toughness (but don't set power and/or toughness to a specific number or value) are applied.

121.1a A +X/+Y counter on a creature or on a creature card in a zone other than the battlefield, where X and Y are numbers, adds X to that object's power and Y to that object's toughness. Similarly, -X/-Y counters subtract from power and toughness. See rule 613.3.

302.7. Damage dealt to a creature by a source with neither wither nor infect is marked on that creature (see rule 119.3).

Toughness is continually updated as effects change it. +X/+Y effects like Giant Growth change the toughness from the moment the effect is applied (so, starting right during the spell's resolution). +1/+1 or -1/-1 counters change the toughness from the moment they are placed on the creature. Anything else, as far as I can think of, does not affect the toughness; in particular, damage does not reduce a creature's toughness.
For an effect like Korozda Guildmage, when it refers to the toughness of a creature, that is always the current toughness, or if the creature has left the battlefield, the last toughness it had before leaving. The number printed on the card has no special meaning for a permanent in play.

ah, looks like I forgot to finish writing before I submitted :-P


text:
When can the "build a wonder stage for free" tokens be used?
In the Seven Wonders - Babel Expansion, when can the reward tokens that allow a player "to construct a Stage of their Wonder for free" be used?  Can they be used immediately or do they just remove the cost (except coin costs, as noted) but still need to be played on a normal turn by discarding a card?
The question came up during a recent game when a player with Rhodes (B-side), who had participated in the successful project that awarded these tokens, wanted to immediately complete a stage, thereby giving them military dominance over a neighbor.  Without finding anything explicit in the rules, we denied the request, supposing that to build a stage the player must have a card in hand to discard and place under their board for that stage.  I'm hoping someone else has a ruling that can help.

You have to also use a card, as in the base game. In order to understand it better, look at the previous token, "construct a building for free".

The player takes from the reserve a corresponding token. They can return this token to the reserve to construct a Building for free.

In order to construct a building, you have to play it from your hand, right? So, next time you construct a building from your hand, you may throw in the token and declare "I am constructing it for free". You can't obviously construct immediately an additional building for free, as your hand would have less cards than the other players and thus break the game's mechanism. It works exactly like Olympia's A 2nd wonder bonus.
Same story for the wonder token:

The player takes from the reserve a corresponding token. They can return this token to the reserve, to construct a Stage of their Wonder for free. Note: if the cost of the Wonder stage contains 1 or more coins, these must still be paid.

In order to construct a wonder, you have to put a card below the corresponding wonder stage, to indicate that it has been built (and to remove a card from the game, as well). Thus, you keep the token and the next time you construct a wonder stage you may discard the token to ignore the resource cost. If you could immediately construct a wonder stage, how would you indicate that the wonder has been constructed? A basic principle of the game is that no memory is required; thus, you have to use a card. But you can't just take an extra card from your hand, as you'd leave your hand with less cards and break the game's mechanism.
TL;DR: you keep the wonder token and the next time you use a card to build a wonder stage, you may discard the token to ignore the resource cost of your wonder.

Adama’s answer is correct:
While it’s missing in the English Babel rules, it’s explicitly stated in the German Babel rules (German PDF, page 7, bold emphasis mine):

for the "construct a Building for free" token:

Der Spieler erhält den abgebildeten Marker aus dem Vorrat. Er kann diesen in einem der folgenden Zeitalter abgeben, um ein Gebäude ohne den Einsatz von Ressourcen oder Münzen zu errichten.

for the "construct a Stage of their Wonder for free" token:

Der Spieler erhält den abgebildeten Marker aus dem Vorrat. Er kann diesen in einem der folgenden Zeitalter abgeben, um einen Bauabschnitt seines Weltwunders ohne den Einsatz von Ressourcen zu vollenden.

The part "in einem der folgenden Zeitalter" translates to "in one of the following Ages".

This happens immediately. If, for any reason, you would want it to happen later, you could make up a house rule if you and other players see fit.


text:
Are there vector graphics available of the mana symbols of magic?
I'm looking for vector graphics of each of the mana symbols (normal, hybrid, phyrexian, 2-or-color). Where can I find them?

If you are trying to create custom cards, you might want to check out http://magicseteditor.sourceforge.net/ also there used to be an MTG symbols font floating around (which could be used to get the vectors) but it seems to have disappeared from the 'net. Still looking for a place to download it.

Slightly Magic has most of them.

This GitHub repository has them. Here is a direct link to the SVG file. The readme says that it uses the ones from the Slightly Magic forum thread that user1873 linked to in their answer, but it also has the colorless mana symbol. This post on the same forum thread has the energy symbol.
I don't see any copyright information, so be careful. They are also protected by trademark.

You can download a font of various magic symbols here. Most vector graphics programs should be able to convert from the font to vectors.

How do you get the colors in there?

Depends on how you're using the fonts, what application are you using?

Good ol' html. Might prove problematic ;-)

That shouldn't be too hard, just use something like this oG where .symbols defines the magic symbols font, and .green defines the color for green. Here's a site that has some info on what the appropriate RGB values should be. There are other resources on the net too, like on the mtgsalvation forums, but I'm having a hard time digging them up. I think they're somewhat transient and might potentially be targeted by WOTC for takedowns.


text:
Which tiles came with which Rallyman GT expansion?
I managed to get the tiles from the base game and the different expansions mixed together before noting which tile came from which expansion. Is someone able to provide the range of tile numbers that came with each expansion?

Base game (32)

101 x1
102 x1
103 x3
104 x3
105 x2
106 x2
107 x2
108 x1
109 x1
110 x1
111 x2
112 x2
113 x1
114 x1
115 x2
116 x2
117 x2
118 x1
119 x1
120 x1

Championship Pack (12)

121 x2
122 x1
123 x1
124 x1
125 x1
126 x1
127 x2
128 x1
129 x1
130 x1

World Tour (12)

131 x1
132 x1
133 x1
134 x1
135 x1
136 x1
137 x1
138 x2
122 x1
124 x1
125 x1

Team Challenge (12)

139 x1
140 x1
141 x1
142 x1
143 x1
144 x1
145 x1
146 x1
147 x1
148 x1
149 x1
150 x1

KS exclusive (5)

151 x1
152 x1
153 (bridge) x1
154 (bridge) x1
Unnumbered track-less tile

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


text:
Can big miniatures share their square in Arcadia Quest?
Normally, at most two miniatures can occupy a square. Some miniatures are larger than others. Do the larger miniatures such as the minotaur fill a square by themselves, or can they share the square with another miniature?

@beewee, It's not common practice, but I added the requested text (though at the end). Tags are taken into account in searches. A search for minotaur returns 15 matches, while a search for [arcadia-quest] minotaur returns only one.

OK thanks... Still trying to figure out the ins and outs ;-) What I meant is that if you search for "Arcadia Quest" you only get one of the 3 questions related to this game...

In the rulesbook on page 15 (Full or blocked spaces) it's said:

Each Space can contain a maximum of two Characters at a time. A Space with up to one character in it is still considered to be free, since other characters, enemy or allied, can still enter it and shoot through it normally.

There's no mention of monster size here. Moreover in the same chapter, the example pictures a space with a lone troll (which is a big miniature) in it as free.

nice touch with the screenshot... I was on my phone earlier... Not sure I could add a picture from the app (quite new here I'm afraid) ;-)

The huge monster rule was introduced in Beyond the Grave. some monsters take up a whole space, and when they move they shove other characters out of the space.
there were no huge monsters in the core game (despite their miniature being big)
monsters considered huge are:

Dread King (beyond the grave)
Ignos (Wholed Lot of Lava Expansion)
Dragons (various dragon expansion boxes)
Any mounted hero or enemy (Riders)

and I'm not 100% on these guys, but they look like they should be considered Huge:

The Underlord (Inferno)
Malkhor (Riders)


text:
Are Power Crystals a finite resource in Clank in Space?
Are Power Crystals a finite resource in Clank in Space? There are only 5 physical tokens included in the game. When these are in the hands of users, does that mean that no one else is able to obtain one (until one is somehow returned to the supply)?

Added [tag:clank] tag. There's precedent for including the base game tag in questions even for questions specific to an expansion.

not really an expansion, it's a stand alone re-implementation. Clank and Clank in Space have there own expansions that can not be combined with the other versions.

@Jungkook Re-implementations are also called "standalone expansions". And the distinction you bring up is irrelevant here. Take for example [tag:ticket-to-ride] and [tag:ticket-to-ride-europe]. The point is that someone following or searching for the base game is highly likely to be interested in the Q&A related to expansions too.

Ticket to ride is a bit different compared to clank. The non-standalone expansions of ticket to ride are compatible with ttr and ttre. The expansions for 'normal' clank can not be played with clank in space (or clank legacy) and visa versa.

@Jungkook Re "Ticket to ride is a bit different compared to clank", Not at all. Europe has its own board, its own cards and its own rule variations. This is exactly the same situation as Space.  //  Re "The non-standalone expansions of ticket to ride are compatible with ttr and ttre", Yes, so it makes no sense to bring them up. // These off-topic, incorrect, pointless  comments are becoming annoying...

Yes, power crystals are a limited component and there are also other ones that are limited in the game. A quick review of the rules states that the only unlimited component in the game is credits and in the list of limited components it calls out power crystals.
https://cdn.1j1ju.com/medias/4e/e4/76-clank-in-space-rulebook.pdf

Limited Components — Most components in the game are limited and can
run out if the players acquire enough of them. Most notably, this includes
Power Crystals, Market items, and the cards in the Reserve (FAZR, Boldly Go,
and Memory Core). The only unlimited components are the Credits. If you
should run out of those, make any suitable substitution.

Power Crystal — Some reward spaces on the board give you a Power Crystal.
The Power Crystals are a limited component. Some of your cards may provide
bonuses that work much like a faction bonus: if you have a Power Crystal, you
may use those bonuses. You only get the bonus once, no matter how many
Power Crystals you have.

Yes.

There's a Major Secret that gives victory points for each Power Crystal one possesses. An unlimited supply of Power Crystals would provide a unlimited supply of points for the owner of that Secret. Anything that encourages a player to spend the entire game walking back and forth between two squares is a problem.
There's a cards whose effect is multiplied by the number of Power Crystal one possesses. An unlimited supply of Power Crystals would provide a unlimited benefits from those cards. Anything that encourages a player to spend most of the game walking back and forth between two squares is a problem.
There is precedent for limited quantities of resources, namely the items in the market.


text:
Cloning a card with Tribute
Forthcoming Nessian Demolok has the following abilities.

Tribute 3 (As this creature enters the battlefield, an opponent of your choice may place three +1/+1 counters on it.)

When Nessian Demolock enters the battlefield, if tribute wasn't paid, destroy target noncreature permanent.

Assuming the reminder text is complete and accurate, what happens if you cast Clone choosing a Nessian Demolok? Specifically, does your opponent get a chance to pay tribute?

By the letter of the rules, choices for "As this permanent enters the battlefield" occur before the permanent the battlefield[CR 614.12a], but doesn't Clone's replacement effect happens at the point it enters the battlefield?

Yes, your opponent gets a chance to pay the Tribute. From the Clone rulings:

Any enters-the-battlefield abilities of the copied creature will trigger when Clone enters the battlefield. Any "as [this creature] enters the battlefield" or "[this creature] enters the battlefield with" abilities of the chosen creature will also work.

This is the same behavior as when you Clone a Triskelion; the Clone will get 3 +1/+1 counters.

duh, should have checked the rulings! That's what I thought, but the rule wordings is flaky. (The choices supposedly happen before the permanent enters the field, but the replacement effect should only come into when it does...)

What happens if you clone a Marath? I assume it checks for the cost of the clone?


text:
Can a runner trash ICE or Operation cards after a run on the HQ?
A sneaky runner managed to make his way into my corporate HQ. I let him pick a card at random from my hand (I had no upgrades), and it just happened to be a piece of ICE or an Operation or maybe even an Agenda.
Does the runner have the option of trashing the card? There's no listed trashing cost, so if they are allowed to trash the card, what does it cost?

No, Runners do not have the option of trashing cards that have no trash costs. They may trash cards with trash costs. Special care should be taken when accessing multiple cards (see page 18). From page 18 of the rules, under Access Phase:

HQ: The Runner accesses one random card from HQ and any upgrades in its root. Any cards the Runner does not score or trash return to HQ.
Trashing Cards - If the Runner accesses a card with a trash cost, he may pay credits equal to its trash cost in order to trash it to Archives faceup.

Um, don't you mean 'no'?

@ire_and_curses, No, I mean yes. "Does the runner have the option of trashing the card? Yes, Runners have the option of trashing cards that have trash costs. So, yes they have the option, if it has a trash cost as I clarified. It would make less sense to say, no hey don't have the option of trashing a card.

Ok. I found your wording confusing, since in the case described by the OP, the card doesn't have trash costs, so they don't have the option. But since you meant to use your wording, that's fine.

Now that I think about it, I could word it the other way. It would mean the same thing. "No, Runners do not have the option of trashing cards that have no trash costs. They may trash cards with trash costs." Is that clearer?

Yes, I find that alternative wording clearer.

Of course, there are some cards that let the runner trash accessed cards "even if they wouldn't normally be able to" (paraphrased)...

I was just waiting for you to change the polarity of the first word :)

And now we have some Operations and Ice with trash costs. :P

A runner can trash any card with a trash cost when they access the card, so long as they pay the trash cost in credits. However most Ice and Operations have no trash cost, thus they cannot be trashed.
There have been cards printed in more recent sets like Boom! and Sapper that have trash costs. Bear in mind that encountering installed ice is not the same as accessing, you cannot trash installed ice this way.
In addition to these new cards, some older cards like Edward Kim or Imp would allow you an alternate method of trashing these cards without a trash cost.


text:
Do creatures with summoning sickness deal damage while blocking?
I know creatures with summoning sickness can not attack unless they have haste. My brother is using this to his defense as if you use a 3/3 creature with summoning sickness to block an attack from a 2/2 creature then the 2/2 creature would not die because you are only blocking and not attacking back.

From the rulebook:

Unlike other types of permanents, creatures enter the battlefield with “summoning sickness”: a creature can’t
  attack, or use an ability that has {tap} in its cost, until it has started your turn on the battlefield under your control.
  You can block with a creature or activate its other abilities no matter how long it’s been on the battlefield.

Blocking is not "attacking back". Blocking creatures deal damage normally, whether they have summoning sickness or not. Again, the rulebook:

After all blockers are chosen, combat damage is assigned.
  Each creature—both attackers and blockers—deals damage
  equal to its power.
• An attacking creature that isn’t blocked deals damage to the
  player or planeswalker it’s attacking.
• An attacking creature that is blocked deals damage to the
  blocking creatures. If one of your attacking creatures is
  blocked by multiple creatures, you decide how to divide
  its combat damage among them. You must assign at least
  enough damage to the first blocking creature in line to
  destroy it before you can assign damage to the next one in
  line, and so on.
• A blocking creature deals damage to the attacker it’s blocking.

Yes. All blockers deal damage.

510.1d A blocking creature assigns combat damage to the creatures it's blocking.

Summoning sickness only makes it so that you can not tap to activate abilities or attack with a creature the turn it comes into play.
Bonus points: You can tap a creature that comes into play the same turn if you are tapping it as a cost to activate some other ability not belonging to the creature.

Bonus to the bonus points: the key is whether the ability's cost includes the tap symbol, not whether the ability is on the creature itself. You can tap a creature to activate its own ability if the ability doesn't have the tap symbol in its cost. Example: Heritage Druid can be tapped to activate its own ability the turn it comes into play.


text:
Can Net Shield ability be triggered "in response"?
When runner has Net Shield installed, can they wait until they are about to receive net damage before they decide to trigger its ability?
If the answer is "yes" (or even "no") could you please also explain how it falls into the timing structure of Android: Netrunner?

In Android Netrunner anything with "prevent" or "avoid" is triggered outside the normal timing rules as the thing it wants to prevent or avoid is about to happen.
This means whenever you are about to take net damage for the first time in a turn, you can pay 1C to activate net shield and prevent 1 of that damage.
From the rulebook (PDF) page 21:

Prevent or Avoid
Some card abilities use the words “prevent” or
  “avoid.” Prevent or avoid effects are the only effects which can
  disrupt another effect. A prevent or avoid effect states what it is
  preventing or avoiding, and an effect that is prevented or avoided is
  not resolved. Prevent or avoid effects can be triggered whenever the
  effect they are preventing or avoiding is resolving.


text:
Identify this game piece
Found this on the floor, cannot figure out which board game it fell from, I have too many!!!
Please help!

The picture depicts reddish/brownish token with 8 corners and somewhat curved sides. At the top "4th" is printed in black. There is a pictogram of a white building under the text.


text:
Cribbage scoring rules explanation
There are a lot of web sites that give you cribbage rules. There are small variations here and there and even the "official" source reads ambiguously to me.
To narrow my question, let's talk about scoring rules after "the play / pegging", when the dealer and the pone score their respective hands and the crib.
Is there are precise summary of the scoring rules, that I can use as a reference? I would prefer the actual rules wording to examples. Examples are very useful for illustrating a rule, but they are not as good for defining rules.
Now, to the source of my confusion. In one source I read this:

Counting the Hands. When play ends, the three hands are counted <...> The basic scoring formations are as follows:
Combination Counts
Fifteen. Each combination of cards that totals 15 2
Pair. Each pair of cards of the same rank 2
Run. Each combination of three or more 1cards in sequence (for each card in the sequence)
Flush. Four cards of the same suit in hand 4
  (excluding the crib, and the starter)
Four cards in hand or crib of the same 5 suit as the starter
  (There is no count for four-flush in the crib that isnot of same suit as the starter)
His Nobs. Jack of the same suit as starter in hand or crib 1
Combinations. In the above table, the word combination is used in the strict technical sense. Each and every combination of two cards that make a pair, of two or more cards that make 15, or of three or more cards that make a run, count separately.

The emphasis in the last paragraph is mine.
The source goes ahead and gives the following example:

Example: A hand (including the starter) comprised of 8, 7, 7, 6, 2 scores 8 points for four combinations that total 15: the 8 with one 7, and the 8 with the other 7; the 6, 2 with each of the two 7s. The same hand also scores 2 for a pair, and 6 for two runs of three (8, 7, 6 using each of the two 7s). The total score is 16. An experienced player computes the hand thus: "Fifteen 2, fifteen 4, fifteen 6, fifteen 8, and 8 for double run is 16."

This example makes perfect sense to me. Now following the same logic, let's assume we have 2, 2, 3, 4, 5. According to the "strict technical sense", I can see the following scoring combinations:

2, 3, 4 x2
2, 3, 4, 5 x2
3, 4, 5
2, 2

Which gives us 6 + 8 + 3 + 2 = 19
But everyone knows that 19 is impossible, and in the same source a little bit further we read:

D. A run of four, with one card duplicated, counts 10.

Now, I understand why. That's because only the longest 4 cards sequence counts. The two 3 card sequences it contains do not. So it's just 8 + 2. 6 and 3 do not count.
What I cannot find is an authoritative source that properly words this rule. Because as per rules as written in the source, my calculation would be correct. The American Cribbage Congress rules do not address this ambiguity at all, it looks like they are assuming, that everyone knows this anyway.
So can some one either sum up the actual hand scoring  rules for me, or point me anywhere, where it's already done - clearly and unambiguously?

possible duplicate of Why does a run of 4 in Cribbage score only 4?

@bwarner I've actually read Adam Wuerl's detailed answer before posting my question, but I did not feel It answers it. It is an excellent and well-thought answer, but to a different question. There are just about 30 cribbage questions here and I think I went through all of them.

@bwarner that question was about why, I was after something that I could use as an authoritative source for our own games.

So I'v been googling like crazy last hour or so, and here is what I found. A person on BGG recommended pagat.com for comprehensive coverage of old public domain card games. Indeed there is an article there covering cribbage.
I'll cite the relevant part:

The Show
Players now retrieve the cards that they put down during the play and score for combinations of cards held in hand. First the non-dealer's hand is exposed, and scored. The start card also counts as part of the hand when scoring combinations. All valid scores from the following list are counted.
15:
  Any combination of cards adding up to 15 pips scores 2 points. For example king, jack, five, five would score 10 points altogether: 8 points for four fifteens, since the king and the jack can each be paired with either of the fives, plus 2 more points for the pair of fives. You would say "Fifteen two, fifteen four, fifteen six, fifteen eight and a pair makes ten".
Pair:
  A pair of cards of the same rank score 2 points. Three cards of the same rank contain 3 different pairs and thus score a total of 6 points for pair royal. Four of a kind contain 6 pairs and so score 12 points.
Run:
  Three cards of consecutive rank (irrespective of suit), such as ace-2-3, score 3 points for a run. A hand such as 6-7-7-8 contains two runs of 3 (as well as two fifteens and a pair) and so would score 12 altogether. A run of four cards, such as 9-10-J-Q scores 4 points (this is slightly illogical - you might expect it to score 6 because it contains two runs of 3, but it doesn't. The runs of 3 within it don't count - you just get 4), and a run of five cards scores 5.
Flush:
  If all four cards of the hand are the same suit, 4 points are scored for flush. If the start card is the same suit as well, the flush is worth 5 points. There is no score for having 3 hand cards and the start all the same suit. Note also that there is no score for flush during the play - it only counts in the show.
One For His Nob:
  If the hand contains the jack of the same suit as the start card, you peg One for his nob (sometimes known, especially in North America, as "one for his nobs" or "one for his nibs")..

While not entirely scientific, this is the most unambiguous description that I've come across so far, and it also acknowledges a feeling that I was getting that this particular rule is slightly illogical. Italic above is mine.


text:
What does hut wording mean?
Here are some relevant threads on BGG:

The hut
The Hut = Most Pointless Card in the Game?!
Hut – explanation needed

Here is the hut card wording from the rulebook:

In the trader phase, the owner of a hut draws one card from the supply if no good was sold by any player during this phase.

The last linked thread and this post in the first linked thread ask the question I'm going to ask, but I feel that no satisfactory answer was given.
Let's say Alice sold no goods in a trader phase. She is definitely a player, and thus falls under "any player" description. Which would mean that the hut rule should trigger. If the rules meant to say that it would trigger if no player sells any goods, they would probably have said just that.
Yet, most of the posters in the threads above, feel that the trigger is only when no selling occurs at all, not just by Alice, a player, but by all players.
I'm looking for a clarification referencing an authoritative source. I understand that it's likely that there is none, but I have been surprised before.

The English is clear as written. If Bob sold a good, then it is not true that "no good was sold by any player".

The hut owner only draws if none of the players sold a good.

So the rules say the following:

[The hut owner draws] if no good was sold by any player during this phase.

The check uses the passive voice.[1] Let's change it to use the active voice so it's in terms of players, not goods.
Unfortunately, the use of "no" complicates things. So let's work with the opposite check.

The hut owner draws unless any good was sold by any player during this phase.

This is easy to convert to the active voice

The hut owner draws unless any player sold any good during this phase.

So if a player sold a good, the owner of the hut doesn't get to draw.
In case that's not clear let's negate the check again to remove the "unless".

The hut owner draws if none of the players sold any good during this phase.

All of the above instructions are equivalent.

If they wanted to check to see if the hut owner had sold goods, they could have used the following:

if no good was sold by this player during this phase.

if this player sold no goods during this phase.

if this player didn't sell any goods during this phase.

("Them" and "they" could be used in lieu of "this player.")

"X was verbed by Y" means the same thing as "Y verbed X".
The former phrasing is called "the passive voice".
The "the passive voice" is what people call the former phrasing.
Using the passive voice is usually weaker than using the passive voice. Notice how I was able to hide who calls that phrasing the passive voice in the former? With the active voice, I was force to say who did calls it the active voice, and this reveals the fact that was hiding the authority, hiding that it's English grammaticians that call this the passive voice.
You might have noticed this if you used grammar checker while composing a document. They will frequently suggest replacing the use of the passive voice with the active voice.
However, using the passive voice focuses on the thing on which the action was performed (by placing it first in the sentence) rather than focusing on what performed the action, and that can be an advantage.

The French-language version of the rules address this problem.
In the French version, as of 2018, the card game is named Puerto Rico, like the board game
French version of the rule concerning the Hut
Hutte

Si aucune marchandise n’a été vendue par aucun joueur durant la phase
  du marchand, le propriétaire d’une Hutte peut piocher 1 carte.

The French version cannot be clearer.
It literally, and nearly word for word, translates to :

If no good was sold by any player whatsoever during the trader phase,
  the owner of a Hut may draw 1 card.

The words «aucun joueur» literally mean : «not a single player».
Source :
Rules for Puerto Rico - le jeu de cartes


text:
Grazing tile question
In Silk the primary way to get points is by grazing you silkworms.
The rules for the grazing action are;

Grazing
This action allows a player to earn Silk Points.
.
Depending on the number of silkworms and the tile on which they are feeding, the player will earn points and update the scoreboard accordingly.
.
A player can carry out the Grazing action on any tile where he has at least one silkworm. To do so he must follow these steps:
• Bump all the silkworms that are on that tile, distributing them (together or separately) to one or more adjacent tiles (following the normal movement rules). If it is not possible to bump all of the silkworms, this action cannot be performed on that tile. Remember: if the tile being grazed on is at the edge of the game area, the player can bump the silkworms out of the area, which means they are lost in the mountains (and returned to their owner’s reserve). Any silkworms bumped onto a tile occupied by the ookami are immediately captured and are placed in the
ookami’s den.
• Turn over the tile that was grazed, turning it into a barren tile (valued 0 silk points).
• The number of Silk Points the player receives is found by multiplying the number of silkworms he has on that tile by the value of the tile on which they are feeding. If there are also silkworms
of another color on the tile, their owners do not get any points. Note: It is possible to graze on a barren tile, but in that case the silkworms are just bumped around and no one obtains any points as a result of the action.

The tense in the last section of the rules is confusing me. It feels like the point should come from the turned over time where the silk worms were grazing when you stated the action. But the use of 'has' and 'are' instead of had and were could be read to mean the destination tiles of the bumped silkworms.

Without having played the game, the note in the end seems clear to me:

Note: It is possible to graze on a barren tile, but in that case the
silkworms are just bumped around and no one obtains any points as a
result of the action.

If you would collect the points from the destination tile, it should not matter what the state of the tile is where you performed the action. So the order is:
Do action (grazing) -> calculate points -> move worms -> turn tile

I was just coming back after finding a publisher explainer video... Anyway you're spot on.


text:
Can you build a road on the other side of another player's settlement?
Player A: Wants to expand to resource-rich area of board. They build two roads and plan to build a settlement and continue their road to the resource-rich area.
Player B: Also wants same location as player A for their next settlement. They build two roads, ending at same hex intersection as player A.  Player B builds their settlement first.
Player A: Still wants resources further away, so places another road on the other side of player B's settlement.
Player A has a road going into the hex intersection, and argues that they can build a connecting road going out of the intersection, regardless of whether another player has a settlement there.
Is this really a legal move?  If not, where in the rules does it specify that this it is not allowed?

From the official FAQ:

Can the roads I build “go through” other players’ settlements
  and cities?
Answer: No. If you build a new road, it must always connect to one of
  your own roads, settlements, or cities.

The inverse situation is also interesting:

Longest Road - How can I interrupt the Longest Road of a game partner?
Answer: By building a settlement on an intersection within the Longest
  Road. Of course, you have to observe all building rules when doing
  this.

Hmm, that's interesting. Wonder why; seems like an odd design choice to allow settlements to interrupt a road while disallowing "building through", which will end up with the same result on the board eventually.

@VolcanoLotus: allowing "building through" would diminish the competition for space (and diminish the need to be efficient in action in the game). That ultimately reduces the strategic choices in the game. On the other hand, allowing roads to be cut increases such choices, both for the road builder (place a settlement now, or keep building a longer road?) and for the would-be-interrupter.

So, although the end picture might be the same in either case, the impact on gameplay is not. And, both follow from the straightforward application of a simple rule based on when the pieces are played, not the eventual result.

@VolcanoLotus - What? Why is it odd? It's completely consistent! Both rules are based on a settlement stopping a road on one side of it being connected to the road (or road space if not yet filled) on the other side of it.

From the Settlers of Catan rulebook, page 4, section 3a:

A new road must always connect to 1 of your existing roads, settlements, or cities.

If your opponent builds a settlement at the end of your road, you are no longer connecting your road to your existing road, you are connecting it to an opponent’s settlement, which is not legal.

To be clear, connecting a road to an opponent's settlement is not illegal in itself.