text:
Settlers of Catan trade dynamics question
Is it ok though to offer trade never intending to do it, as a way to gauge what other player is willing to give out for a said card? And then backtrack after other player agrees to that trade?
Is it ok, if you don't have wheat at all, to start trading like "I would like to give out wheat in exchange for X, not having wheat at all in order to find out what other players are willing to give you for wheat? Is that allowed?

Sounds like you have had a poor experience with someone who likes to explore "creative uses of game mechanics".

I have often seen players do this as a way of finding out if other players are holding a specific resource, before playing Monopoly to steal it.

@GendoIkari That's silly, the amount of resources in the "bank" is public information. No need to engage shady hijinks to find out whether your monopoly would be profitable.

@aslum Yeah, if I remember right, I used to see people doing that, and then at some point of time I realized the strategy of simply looking at the remaining bank to determine it. Although I've also seen a similar thing done in order to then play a Soldier to steal from a player after they admitted they have a specific card.

This question has been asked before see link https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/29519/when-is-there-no-going-back-on-a-trade/29527

It's not a rules violation, but there are still consequences
I don't think that there are any rules against it (Catan doesn't have much to say about when trade agreements become binding), but I would consider it poor sportsmanship lie about your trading plans in order to gain information and mislead your opponents.  If you repeatedly act like this there's a reasonable chance your game group will sour on playing Catan with you.

Indeed it's frustrating and I was thinking whether I could say that's illegal. I've been refused a few times the moment when I held out my card/s to trade. With comment that they just wanted to know if I had that given resource in hands, in order to use their knight to take it or for other reason.

Is it just one player doing this, or the entire group? Are you the only one being targeted like this?

Usually just one player but then noticed others as they picked it up. No it was not personal :)

Discuss it with the group before a game, and try and get a house rule established that defines when an agreement becomes binding. Something along the lines of "If you propose a specific trade with a specific person (eg 1 sheep for 1 wheat with Bob), then you must accept that trade until the game state changes (you make a different trade, build, or play a card).  If that fails, you may just have to adapt to this play style.

I see and agree. It's just that that rule is hard to police. Consider a situation - I am a player who needs e.g. Wheat. On my turn I say - "Anyone has wheat to trade"? This player responds - What would you give for it? I say Lumber. Player - anything else? I say What about brick? Player - anything else? I say - Lumber and brick at most. Player - sorry, no. (never wanted to trade to begin with). He's completely legitimate and doesn't have to show his hand in order to show he held the card he was offering.

Refuse to answer until they commit to a specific trade.  "Does anybody have wheat?"  "Maybe.  I'm looking for Wood or Sheep.  Are you proposing a trade?"  "Yes.  Will you trade 1 wheat for 1 sheep?" -- at this point their offer becomes locked in and can't be reversed until you refuse it.  It's not perfect - trading necessarily requires both sides to provide information about what they have and what they are interested in.  But hopefully you can make the information transfer less one-sided.

@ArcanistLupus - but in the process of implementing (suggesting, teaching, even voting on) this rule, you risk stressing the same social fabric that the OP's behavior stresses.

While the rules don't explicitly outlaw offering of an illegal trade, the goal of behavior seems to be circumventing the spirit of the following rule:
Keep your development cards hidden (in your hand) until you use them, so your opponents can't anticipate your play.
I would highly suggest that groups consider such behavior illegal, since allowing such a phishing expedition could slow down the game.  Since the rules don't cover the situation, there is no official penalty.  If the group determines the need for a house rule to penalize this behavior, I would suggest the following:
If Player A accepts a trade offer from Player B but Player B does not have the resource available, Player A is entitled to make the trade the very next time Player B receives the resource(s) offered.


text:
Order of players actions in Mansion of Madness 2nd edition
When player begins his turn, can he pause after first action to allow doing something to other players? Example:

Player 1: open door
Player 2: walk into new room
Player 1: do some other action

Is it correct? Or "Player 1" have to make 2 actions before any other players can do something?

Player 1 has to take 2 actions before the other players can do something.
From the rules reference page 24:

During the investigator phase, the investigators each take one turn in the order of their choice. During an investigator’s turn, that investigator performs up to two actions.

This means that when each player takes a turn they do two actions and they must do all of their actions before another player can take their turn. You can select the order that each player takes their turns and change it each investigator phase.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
MTG: Can I use the ability of my Five-Alarm Fire before it getting destroyed? How does priority works here?
Say for instance my opponent uses Demystify against my Five-Alarm Fire ... can I use the counters on it to deal damage before it getting destroyed? Also can I use those counters to deal damage at anytime in any players turn?

Yes, and yes for the most part.
Unless an ability has a timing restriction (e.g. it says "use this only during your upkeep") or is on a summoning-sick creature, you can use it whenever you have priority. Side-note: Mana abilities, which are like Tap: Add G to pool, have slightly different rules but those aren't relevant to this.
So for part one, he'll go to demystify, which'll put it on the stack and can either put another action on the stack or pass priority. Assuming he passes, you can then respond with activating it and put that on the stack above the demystify. He'll have a chance to respond to that. If he passes, he gets shot, a priority wave happens, his demystifies resolves and your Five-Alarm blows up.

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


text:
Legion's Initiative vs Day of Judgment
Can I save my creatures from Day of Judgment with a Legion's Initiative ability of exile? Day of Judgment is on top of the stack for this example (I don't know if that will matter).

I have seen a few of your questions recently where you have had some confusion about the stack and priority. This related question might help shed some light: In plain English, how does casting spells and using creature abilities work with the stack and priority?

You sure can.
The stack will also matter for this because otherwise your creatures will go poof. Basically in response to them casting DoJ, you pop your Legion's Initiative to exile your guys. There's no timing restriction on Legion's Initiative so as long as you can pay for it, you can do it.
Or in listed steps:

Day of Judgement is cast and opponent passes priority (most likely onto an empty stack because it's a sorcery but there's ways to make it instant speed but that's irrelevant here.)
You get Priority and pop your LI, putting the ability on the stack
Priority Wave
LI Ability resolves, all your dudes go away until the next combat
Priority Wave
DoJ resolves, blowing up the remaining dudes on the battlefield.

The stack does matter then. Thats what I wanted to know. If DoJ was an instant and was cast after my LI rip all my creatures.

Correct, if it was instant, they could respond to you popping LI by casting it which would resolve first and blow up all your dudes. Any indestructible or regenerated guys would still be alive to be LI'd though so it's not entirely bad news.

I came to the conclusion that sometimes the top spell of the stack matters. And other times it doesn't matter. It all depends on the spells abilities. Is this correct? For instance [Shielded Passage] vs [lightning bolt]. Doesn't matter which one resolves first. At the end all damage would be prevented? Even If lightning bolt is on top of the stack targeting a creature with 1 toughness? It seems like the creature would die first if you compare it to my LI vs DOJ question. But I asked this before and I was told that the stack order doesn't matter here.

This is driving me crazy. WHEN does stack order matters.

@Chris Your example is a case of stack matters. If you try to Shield and they respond with the bolt, your creature would die. If they try to bolt and you respond with shield, your creature will live. Put another way, your opponent will put a  on the stack. You then get the chance to do something about it, which is what "Responding" means and is the driving force behind the priority wave business. This systems let you kill an opponent's creature before they buff it, or save your creature before your opponent can kill it.

@Chris, Re "The stack does matter then", The stack doesn't matter; the stack is used. When you cast or activate in response to something, it means you cast or activate when that something is on the stack. By so using the stack, you cause your spell or ability to resolve before the spell or ability to which you are responding.

@Chris Perhaps the best was to sum it all up is that "a card on the stack has no effect on the game until after that card resolves". This means that while Shielded Passage is on the stack, your creature does not have any protection, and it can be killed by a Lightning Bolt that is cast in response to it. While Lightning Bolt is on the stack, the creature has not taken any damage, and so can be given damage prevention by casting Shielded Passage in response. The spell cast second will resolve first, and that will often effect or nullify the first spell.

(There are exceptions for certain abilities that specifically function while on the stack, like Split Second, but normal things like Shielded Passage, Lightning Bolt, Day of Judgement, etc, will have no effect on the game while they are on the stack).

@Chris If you are thinking of the Detain question; in that particular case it doesn't matter which ability resolves first, because Detain doesn't stop the other ability from resolving, or affect that ability in any way. Kind of like if you cast a life gain spell, and then I cast my own life gain spell in response. The stack is still being used and still important there, but it simply doesn't happen to make a difference which of the 2 life gain spells takes effect first.

"Basically in response to them casting DoJ" Or you can cast DoJ, exile your creatures, wait for your opponents' creatures to go away, then bring yours back.

@GendoIkari "Perhaps the best was to sum it all up is that "a card on the stack has no effect on the game until after that card resolves". " Cards don't go on the stack, spells and abilities do.

@Acccumulation Fair point.

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


text:
MTG: Guardian of the Gateless
My opponent attacks me with 10 creatures. I block with Guardian of the Gateless . He can block any number of creatures and gets 1+/+1 counter for each creature blocked. Does he gets +10/+10 and blocks all the creatures simultaniously dealing +13+13 to all of them? Killing them in the process. Or he can block 1 creature at a time and gets damaged by each one. So the best way would be to start blocking the creature with less toughness until he dies?

First, Guardian of the Gateless doesn't get 10 +1/+1 counters, but rather a temporary boost until end of turn. Assuming Guardian blocks all 10 attacking creatures, he will get a temporary +10/+10, making him a 13/13 until end of turn.
Now then, during the declare blockers step, you'll order the attacking creatures into a block order and your opponent will order your blockers into an attacking order. This second part is only relevant when there's multiple blockers to an attacker. After this is done, the Guardian's ability will trigger, making him a 13/13.
Now that declaring blockers is done, you will move to the Combat Damage step where you can now assign damage to them. You must assign lethal damage[1] to an individual creature before assigning damage to the next. So for example, you could assign all 13 damage to the first creature and none to the rest, or 4 to first creature and 9 to the rest, any combo really as long as it totals your power of 13 and follows the above guideline.
Depending on what your goals are, you have a few options. From what I'm understanding Guardian will die anyway if the creatures attacking have a combined power of at least 13. Therefore you should assign lethal damage to the creatures you want to get rid of the most. Or if your opponent is attacking with a bunch of small creatures, it might make sense to instead destroy a bunch of little creatures. You need to look at the quality vs. quantity of attacking creatures and what needs to be eliminated for you to survive or win.
Finally, since all 13 attacking creatures have been be blocked, none of them will deal damage to the attacked player or planeswalker (unless they have trample), whether the Guardian deals damage to them or not.

A lethal amount of damage (usually shortened to "lethal damage") refers to an amount of damage that would be sufficient to destroy the creature being damaged, ignoring anything that would prevent the damage or its destruction (e.g. Indestructible). This is usually means an amount of damage equal to the toughness of the creature being damaged, but it could be less (if the creature to which damage is being dealt has previously received damage, or if the creature dealing the damage has deathtouch).

The way you have described damage assignment is potentially misleading. You say that you can assign it in any combination as long as it totals to 13, but that's not really accurate. Once you have chosen the order during the declare blockers step, you have to assign lethal damage to each creature in order before assigning any damage to the next creature.

Lethal damage is mandatory then before moving on to the next creature. I didn't know that. Eventually he will run out of power. Very troublesome to deal with if he gains indestructible.

@Chris Indestructible actually doesn't factor into it. All you have to do is assign enough damage to equal the creature's toughness to each creature before moving to the next. The game doesn't care that the creature won't die.

@Veskah I see. So the guardian can't keep blocking if he's done assigning all the damage? If I used the 13 counters, but since I'm indestructible I'll keep blocking the rest of the creatures with 0 power. They all will get blocked and my guardian will survive for the next round.

@Chris Oh, I misread. Everything that's blocked will still be blocked even if guardian doesn't have enough damage to mark everyone, he'll just assign 0 to them. He can do that regardless of if he'll survive but if he is indestructible, he'll be a real pain to deal with.

Heck, once you've declared the Guardian to be blocking creatures then those creatures remain blocked even if a spell or ability removes the Guardian from play entirely.

@chris Important to remember that all combat damage happens at the same time; the assignment order is not an order that they will receive damage in; it’s just an order of distributing your creature’s power. So there couldn’t be anything like “can’t keep blocking after running out of power”.


text:
Whenever you gain life put a counter. At the end of turn or by each time you gain life?
I control an Archangel of Thune and a Seraph of Dawn. My opponent attacks and I block with seraph of dawn. I gain life, do I put the counter right away on my archangel of thune so I can block the other creature as a 4/5 archangel of thune instead a 3/4. Or the life gain effect triggers at the end of the turn?

Archangel of Thune's trigger happens exactly when it says it does.. "whenever you gain life".
When Seraph of Dawn deals damage, you gain that much life due to Lifelink, and this triggers Archangel of Thune. However, all combat damage is dealt simultaneously, so the Seraph and the Archangel will deal their damage at the same time. This will actually cause 2 separate "whenever you gain life" triggers, so all your creatures will get 2 +1/+1 counters. But by the time you get your +1/+1 counters, your creatures will have already dealt combat damage, and it will be too late for them to benefit from the counter during that combat phase.
From the Basic Rulebook, page 16:

Once players decide how the creatures they
  control will deal their combat damage, the damage is
  all dealt at the same time.

And the comprehensive rules:

Combat Damage Step

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

As for the question of "or at the end of turn"... don't read more into a card than what it says. It says "whenever you gain life", so that's all there is to it. If the card gave you a +1/+1 counter at the end of turn, it would say "at the beginning of the next end step, if you gained life this turn, put a +1/+1 counter on each creature." Cards say what they mean.

If somehow you could give the Seraph first strike, the +1/+1 counter would exist on the Archangel during the normal damage step making it a 4/5. Then it would gain life when it deals damage to the creature it blocks making it a 5/6.


text:
MTG: Legion's initiative rulings?
Card: Legion's Initiative
What does "at the beggining of the next combat" means. I used LI in my turn, the creatures do they return for my combat or my opponents combat?
Also if my creatures are tapped because I attacked during my turn... and if my opponent attacks me in their turn, can I use LI to exile my creatures and return them to the battlefield to block?

A turn in Magic is divided into five distinct phases:  the Beginning phase, where you untap, to anything that triggers in the upkeep step, and then draw; a Main phase where you have the opportunity to play lands and Sorcery speed spells and abilities, the Combat phase, a second Main phase, and then the End phase where end of turn triggers happen and then clean up occurs.
Combat begins after all players have passed during the first Main phase while nothing is waiting to be resolved.  That is when Legion's Initiative returns creatures to the battlefield. This transition is before the attacker has declared whether or not any creatures (and which ones) are attacking.
If you use Legion's Initiative's ability before this point you will get the creatures back on the same turn. If you use it afterwards, you'll get them back on the next turn.
When a player finishes their first main phase, their opponent(s) can always respond before the Combat Phase starts.  But because responding there is uncommon, it's not unusual (particularly in casual or low level play) for players to announce who they're attacking with without first announcing the end of the main phase.  Feel free to remind your opponent to announce the end of the phase if they haven't been, particularly if you have a card out that has a desirable use at that point.

Skipping ahead in the turn is known as "offering a shortcut". The opponent can choose to accept the whole shortcut or interrupt it. Active player saying "I attack with my Grizzly Bears" after drawing does not make it combat yet. This is why players will say things like "Declare Attackers?" or "Beginning of Combat?", so as to not give away information on what they intend to do later.

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


text:
How is an Uno stalemate handled?
I had this scenario today where I played not to win but to just accumulate all the cards. The other player (just the two of us) was playing to win. You can argue this is unsportsmanlike however I was curious to see the outcome! I countered all their moves to the point there was no more cards left to pick up. The rules say to reshuffle the discard pile and use it as a new pickup pile. So we reshuffled and I continued to pick up cards without playing (except sporadically to force my opponent to pick up new cards or change the colour).
We repeated this until I held all the cards except two, which were held by my opponent. I deduced the colour they held (yellow and red), and the card on discard was blue (and I decided to pick up, so that final discard card became my pick up card). At that point there are no more cards to pick up.
There's nothing that I can see in the rules to specify what happens in this situation. So, how should it be handled? Is this a stalemate/tie? Is it decided by who has the fewest cards left? etc. Has anyone been so foolish to try this approach before?

That sounds like it is against the rules as there should be no possible way for every card to be in someone’s hand.  When drawing cards you should only be able to draw when you can’t play a card that matches either the current cards color or number.

According to the UNO rules, drawing without playing is a legal move:

RENEGING
  You may choose not to play a playable card from your hand. If so, you must draw a card from the DRAW pile. If playable, that card can be played, but you may not play a card from your hand after the draw.

However, the intent of this rule is more likely to allow a player to strategically hang on to a card (for instance saving a wild card for later) than for someone to hold onto all the cards.
Given that the goal of the game is to get rid of your cards, in the normal manner of play this is a scenario that should never happen, so the rules do not cover this case.
A few possible options for a house rule for when this happens:

If a player can't play and can't draw, their turn is skipped and the next player goes
The game is a draw
If you're including the scoring rule, the game ends, and you each score points for the cards in your opponents hands

Thanks, I think you are right, there needs to be a house rule for it.

I think you are missing something important or playing by a house rule variant. When you draw a card, either because you can't or don't want to play, you can only draw 1 card per turn. When you consider how many cards there are in a deck, 112, I would find it highly unlikely that you can prevent the other player from going out in the time it takes you to draw the entire deck.
Not sure how you can be countering all the moves when your action each turn will generally consist of drawing a card and not playing now.
Rules
Cards in deck

108 cards as follows:
  19 Blue Cards - 0 to 9
  19 Green Cards - 0 to 9
  19 Red Cards - 0 to 9
  19 Yellow Cards - 0 to 9
  8 Draw Two cards - 2 each in Blue, Green, Red and Yellow
  8 Reverse Cards - 2 each in Blue, Green, Red and Yellow
  8 Skip Cards - 2 each in Blue, Green, Red and Yellow
  4 Wild Cards
  4 Wild Draw 4 cards

When you can't play a card

If the player doesn't have anything to match, he must pick a card from the DRAW pile. If he can play what is drawn, great. Otherwise play moves to the next person.

When you don't want to play a card

A player may choose not to play a playable card from his hand. If so, the player must draw a card from the DRAW pile. If playable, that card can be played, but the player may not play a card from his hand after the draw.

I was drawing cards every turn unless the opponent had only 2-3 cards left, in which case I'd play a draw 2 or change colour (via matching the card on the discard pile)

Suppose you did deplete the deck before an opponent could play out. Now if no one can play, what happens? I'd argue that one of three situations occurs:
A) The game is drawn. Note that if you're losing, this is unlikely to be an effective strategy because your opponent will have a lot of time to play every card he/she has before you can acheive this goal, and there are only so many cards that can prevent this.
B) If one cannot play or must draw, they forfeit their turn instead of drawing. This is not an official rule, however most domino games use this idea to prolong games, and if implemented, could solve the issue completely, since someone will be able to play at any given time, and then there's another card in the deck to draw. If every player decided to not play cards and instead forfeit the turn, obviously the game would draw by agreement.
C) Maybe another deck could be brought into play, and continue with another set of cards added in. Again, not an official ruling, but it does indefinitely solve the problem. (If it somehow, against all odds, occurs with the two decks, bring in more)
So most likely, the game will be drawn. This would have to be a draw by agreement, or a forfeiture, since the rules don't address this situation.


text:
Biome/nature board game- collecting animal cards from different environments
My sisters and I have been trying to remember the name of a board game we used to play in the late 90s but have had no luck. Here are the details we remember:
1. Players had their own board themed for a biome/environment. I am really confident there was a rainforest board, and pretty confident that there was a savannah, grasslands, or prairie board.
2. Players had to collect the cards for their board. I think there were either 6 or 8 animals per board.
3. There was definitely a poison dart frog card (my sisters and I gave special weight to that card... we were weird kids haha).
I tried to Google the game but couldn't find it, probably because we remember so few details about it. I have already ruled out the game Explore.
Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated!

Do either of these look familiar: Wildlife Adventure, or Wild life?  They seem to lack poison dart frogs and collection groups aren't based on biomes so I'm not optimistic, but they seem similar enough that I bet there's a relation somewhere.

Reminded me of this question: https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/26869/safari-ecology-childs-board-game-collecting-animal-cards

Unrelated but there are more games with poison dart frogs. So they must be awesome: https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/1156069/mighty-poison-dart-frog

Would it perhaps be a variant of this Biomes Game? No poison dart frog; but it has some of the features you describe.
https://www.teacherspayteachers.com/Product/Biomes-Game-Full-Set-1888612


text:
Does Hallowed Burial search all libraries for creature cards and put them on the bottom too?
Looks like most things I've read just assume it's only from the battlefield but the wording says all creatures. Does "all creatures" always only refer to active creatures because they're not creatures until in play, just creature cards?

A brief sanity test: if the card doesn't mention shuffling, you don't search any libraries.

@ArcanistLupus While that's true; an even simpler sanity test is that if the card doesn't mention "search" and "library", you don't search any libraries. It is at least theoretical that they could make a card that allows you to search without then shuffling (even though they never would).

@gendolkari an excellent point.

“Creatures” (and “creature”) specifically means a creature permanent on the battlefield. So it will not affect creature cards anywhere else.

109.2. If a spell or ability uses a description of an object that includes a card type or subtype, but doesn’t include the word “card,” “spell,” “source,” or “scheme,” it means a permanent of that card type or subtype on the battlefield.

And

609.2. Effects apply only to permanents unless the instruction’s text states otherwise or they clearly can apply only to objects in one or more other zones.

In order to refer to objects in other zones; an effect would specifically use the word “card” and specify the zone. See Birthing Pod for an example.

You are exactly right, a creature card is a 'card.'
A creature card being played, after mana has been paid and any other costs is a spell being cast.
A creature spell on the stack, before it resolves, is not a creature yet.

A player who has priority may cast a creature card from his or her hand during a main phase of his or her turn when the stack is empty. Casting a creature as
  a spell uses the stack. (See rule 601, “Casting Spells.”) 302.2.

Once it resolves, it is a permanent. A 'creature' permanent.

110.4. There are five permanent types: artifact, creature, enchantment, land,
  and planeswalker. Instant and sorcery cards can’t enter the battlefield and
  thus can’t be permanents. Some tribal cards can enter the battlefield and some
  can’t, depending on their other card types. See section 3, “Card Types.”

Once the spell resolves, ie everyone passed priority and let it resolve, it is now a 'creature' on the battlefield. These are the 'Creatures' that Hallowed Burial refers to.

Other answers have touched on this, but I think it needs to be more explicit: cards with the word "creature" on them are creature cards. They are not creatures. When they are cast, they summon a creature to the battlefield. The creature card is then used to represent the creature.
Cards and rules are sometimes loose about referring to a card and the entity it represents interchangeably, but there are never any creatures in the graveyard, only creature cards. You can see this in the wording of cards that bring things out of the graveyard, e.g.
Agadeem Occultist "Put target creature card from an opponent's graveyard onto the battlefield under your control if its converted mana cost is less than or equal to the number of Allies you control" [emphasis added]


text:
Can I counter a creature casted last turn?
For example, My opponent cast a 10/10 creature and finish his turn (I have no cards), I draw a card and it is "Counterspell" I use it on his creature. Does his creature goes to the graveyard? or it happens nothing?

You cannot use Counterspell on a creature in play.
Creatures, artifacts, enchantments, and planeswalkers (and lands, but lands are not spells) are permanents.  That means that unlike instants and sorceries they stay on the battlefield once they are cast, rather than going directly to the graveyard. But once they are on the battlefield they are no longer considered spells, and can no longer be countered.
Speaking simply, a spell can only be countered immediately after it is cast.
Going into more detail, spellcasting uses the stack.  The stack is a special zone where spells and abilities exist in while players react to them.  When you cast a spell or use or trigger an ability, instead of having an effect immediately it instead goes on the stack.  Then every player gets a chance to respond by playing instants, cards with flash, or using abilities. If they do, that spell or ability will go on the stack above the previous effect, and players get a chance to respond to the new effect.  Repeat as necessary until no players wish to add things to the stack, at which point the most recently added effect resolves.  For permanents, the effect simply moves the card onto the battlefield. Then the game checks for any triggered abilities that need to be added to the stack, and gives players another chance to respond.  Repeat until the stack is entirely clear of spells and abilities.
Counterspells target spells that are on the stack.  The Counterspell is put on the stack after the spell you are targeting, so the counterspell resolves first, at which point it removes the spell it's targeting from the stack and puts it in the graveyard.

Thanks this is very helpful! My brother will no attempt to cheat any longer.


text:
Play all but one + hand limit zero + draw one = stalemate?
If the current rules include "Hand Limit 0", "Play all but 1", and "Draw 1", doesn't the game just kind of... stall?
This has never actually happened but thinking about it, we figured we'd probably have to count that as a case of "everyone loses" and just start over! :)

Interesting; hadn't heard of "play all but 1"; Fluxx keeps changing with new editions!

Future printings have been revised to:

Play all but 1 of your cards. If you started with no cards in your hand and only drew 1, draw an extra card.

https://faq.looneylabs.com/archives/faq-tags/play-all-but-1
That avoids this situation.


text:
In 2-3 player Citadels, can the unique district abilities be triggered twice?
Since having 2 turns in a 2-3 player, does the ability of a unique district trigger for each character turn?
For example, I have the Laboratory in play, can I trigger the ability to discard 1 card to gain 2 gold, for each character I play?

Yes you can use the unique ability twice.
The rules here state the following regarding 2-3 player games.

each player has two turns each
  round (one turn for each character).

So if a card says it can be used 'once per turn' then you will get to activate once during the turn of each character you took.
The rules make a distinction between 'round' (The process from character selection and calling each character in order) and 'turn' (when a character takes and action and/or builds a district and uses special abilities.


text:
Why do some people use fetchlands in mono-colored decks?
This is a list of a competitive deck that uses fetchlands in a mono-colored deck: Goblin 8 Whackers.
I don't see the reason someone might build something like this, aside from a slight bluffing that you might be using another color aside from your main one.
Is there an advantage to losing one life and fetching a mountain? Maybe to shuffle your deck?

One reason is that it thins your deck.
It is generally known that smaller decks work better than larger decks, which is why almost everyone uses the smallest legal size of 60 in constructed.
Cards that draw you cards when you play them (cantrips such as Gitaxian Probe) turn your 60 card deck into an effectively 59 card deck. Fetchlands do the same thing. After using a fetchland, you have removed a card from your library.
Note that unlike "draw a card", searching for a land specifically removes a land from your library. This means that you are more likely to draw a non-land card after you have used a Fetchland. So it effectively changes the land to non-land ratio of your deck slightly.
So the deck in the example has 19 lands. If they were all Mountains, then after you play your first mountain (pretending you had 0 cards in hand or anywhere else), you would have a 18 out of 59 chance that the top card of your library is another Mountain. If instead you play a Bloodstained Mire first, and use it, then after that you have a 17 out of 58 chance that the top card of your deck is a Mountain. More chance of drawing non-lands instead.
In that particular deck, the loss of life is not very relevant; that type of deck is hoping to win the game before the opponent can deal 16 or so damage to you. So having 20 life instead of 16 isn't going to save you. In a different type of deck, they might use Evolving Wilds or Terramorphic Expanse instead. They have the same deck-thinning effect, but instead of losing life, you would lose tempo because the fetched lands enter play tapped.

"Draw a card" would still be better for thinning out your deck. But using fetchlands to make your effective land count smaller does give an advantage, and is cheaper.

One can sum up some of this by saying that it front-loads your land drawing.

The advantage of deck thinning took people a long time to appreciate. Land Tax was completely broken from the day it was printed but saw little use at first.

Drawing a card happens, but pulling out lands means each 'draw a card' instance has a higher chance of getting spells, not lands, which is what most decks need...

@MarsJarsGuitars-n-Chars I believe my fourth and fifth paragraphs address that directly.

Right. I was addressing this to @Arthur  but didn't tag. 'Draw a card' does not thin.

@MarsJarsGuitars-n-Chars A card-draw does effectively give you a smaller deck. Sure, it doesn't thin out the deck in the sense that it doesn't (on average) change the ratios of the deck composition. I still say it's generally preferable. Thin out a land, then draw a card isn't as good as draw a card, then draw a card when it comes to the probability of getting a useful spell or creature. A land tax trigger isn't an ancestral recall. That is what I meant by my comment.

@Arthur That is true, but the point Gendo makes is the fetchland thinning is 'free' in the sense of using a card draw instance. You play the land, then get a land. It removes a land from the deck, thus thinning. A fast tempo deck needs to draw non-land cards.

@MarsJarsGuitars-cn-Chars An extra draw is still better, especially in a tempo deck. But land thinning is usually a lot cheaper and easier to come by,

"So it effectively changes the land to non-land ratio of your deck slightly." That by itself isn't useful (if you wanted fewer lands, you could have put in fewer lands to begin with). What your answer suggests but doesn't explicitly state is that you can put more lands in to begin with, and then if you get a hand with a lot of lands, you can use your fetchlands to increase the chance that the next card you get will be a non-land.

Deck thinning is by far the least relevant aspect of using fetchlands, it's strange that this answer is the accepted one over all of the other responses that are much more important.

A third reason, not mentioned by either of the other answers, is to have a way to shuffle your deck for a very low cost. This is most commonly seen in Legacy, where cards like Ponder and Brainstorm are powerful selection effects, but might leave undesirable cards on top of the deck; shuffling replaces those cards with (hopefully) better draws. Modern doesn't have either of those cards, but there are still occasional effects that allow a player to see the top of their deck such as Mishra's Bauble and Courser of Kruphix and the timing of fetchland use when those effects are available is certainly something to think about.
That said, this is probably not the case for an 8-whack deck, nor do I know of any particular mono-color modern deck that runs fetchlands specifically for that purpose. If there was one I would expect it to be mono-blue to take advantage of Jace, the Mind Sculptor's effective Brainstorm, though I haven't done an exhaustive search of all cards which would benefit from free shuffling.

Also not Modern, but Sylvan Library has seen use with fetchlands just for this effect.

In addition to the excellent answer already posted, there are times that a deck wants to have multiple lands enter the battlefield. This particular deck does not benefit from this, but there are others that do.
Any deck with the 'Landfall' mechanic will want to have the ability to drop lands, and instant speed is a big plus, for example to activate Lotus Cobra's ability. In a different Red Deck, a player might use Searing Blaze, which also benefits from Landfall.
Granted, Lotus Cobra is usually seen in multi-color decks, but the concept of Landfall is there.

A fourth reason is cards that benefit from having lands in the graveyard, such as Tarmogoyf, Barbarian Ring, Crucible of Worlds or Splendid Reclamation

Or to a lesser extent, just cards that benefit from having any cards in the graveyard, such as Threshold.

I love the Crucible of Worlds synergies with fetch lands, but I only use them in EDH. Very good deck thinning though, especially with cards that let you play more lands each turn.

The minimum deck size in Magic the Gathering is 60 cards for constructed formats, each fetch land you play effectively lowers that minimum deck size by 1 card, since you will be using that land to pull another land out of your deck right into play as if you had played it instead, at the cost of one life.
This means also that you have less land left in the deck, once you're at your right number of lands for a deck, drawing more lands means you haven't drawn anything to use the mana those lands make, slowing you down.
A third reason is in specific decks, though they are not usually mono colored, landfall. The landfall mechanic triggers whenever a land enters the battlefield under your control, using a fetch land means that effect will trigger twice, once when you play the fetch land and once when the land it fetched comes into play, allowing you to double up on some of the effects. Landfall decks used fetch lands to make more use out of cards like Lotus Cobra or Steppe Lynx in a single turn.

Not sure that this doesn't add anything to the question that isn't in the accepted answer.

JoeW & @GendoIkari : yet it does something useful - it mentions how to have Lotus Cobra "double up" speed.  One of the other answers mentions "instant speed is a big plus", but didn't explicitly mention the word "double" which specifies just how much extra speed is instantly available.  (That one word, along with "trigger twice" earlier, salvaged this answer for me.)

@TOOGAM One of the answers is all about the Landfall mechanic; and uses Lotus Cobra as an example of Landfall. That other answers say "multiple lands"; I'm not understanding why the word "double" makes it clearer or better than "multiple".


text:
Does setting a new type clear the rules text for non-lands?
In CR 305.7:

If an effect sets a land’s subtype to one or more of the basic land types, the land no longer has its old land type. It loses all abilities generated from its rules text, its old land types, and any copy effects affecting that land, and it gains the appropriate mana ability for each new basic land type. Note that this doesn’t remove any abilities that were granted to the land by other effects. Setting a land’s subtype doesn’t add or remove any card types (such as creature) or supertypes (such as basic, legendary, and snow) the land may have. If a land gains one or more land types in addition to its own, it keeps its land types and rules text, and it gains the new land types and mana abilities.

is the phrase "It loses all abilities generated from its rules text" unique for land changers like Blood Moon or Spreading Seas, or is it derived from another rule?
In other words: is there a rule about setting types, from which we could derive, that if a "All creatures are elves" card existed, then it would turn all creatures into vanilla elves?

That rule you quoted right there is the one that makes lands lose all other abilities in that situation. There is no more general rule that applies to subtypes of other types, so your not-so-hypothetical "All creatures are [specific creature type]" would not remove any abilities (see Conspiracy). You wouldn't have to search the whole Comprehensive Rulebook to be sure that such a rule does not exist. The rule you quote is in the Type section, Land subsection of the rules. Logically, if such a general rule existed, it would be in the General subsection of the Type section. That list is pretty short, and it's clear that that rule is not there.
In fact, it wouldn't even make sense for that rule to be derived from a more general rule like the one you propose. The rule you quote specifically applies to setting a land's subtype to a basic land type (Plains, Island, Swamp, Mountain, Forest), so setting a land's subtype to another land type like "Gate" or "Locus" or "Urza's" doesn't do anything to the abilities.
More broadly, rules in the Comprehensive Rulebook are generally not "derived" from other rules. You can find some duplication in there, with specific rules listed under multiple numbers, but other than that each rule is there for a reason and does something that none of the others do.
Functionally, the rule you quote acts as a dual to rule 305.6:

The basic land types are Plains, Island, Swamp, Mountain, and Forest. If an object uses the words “basic land type,” it’s referring to one of these subtypes. A land with a basic land type has the intrinsic ability “{T}: Add [mana symbol],” even if the text box doesn’t actually contain that text or the object has no text box. For Plains, [mana symbol] is {W}; for Islands, {U}; for Swamps, {B}; for Mountains, {R}; and for Forests, {G}. See rule 107.4a. See also rule 605, “Mana Abilities.”

With rule 305.6, adding the type "Mountain" to a land makes it act like the card Mountain in addition to whatever else it does. With rule 305.7, setting a land's subtype to "Mountain" makes it act like only the card Mountain.

Re "rules in the Comprehensive Rulebook are generally not "derived" from other rules.", This is true, but the number of derived rules is still quite large. I call them "reminder rules".

Can you point me at some examples?

The rule quoted is an exception.  Lands specifically have the rule that if they become a type then they lose their text, unless they become a type "in addition to its/their other types".  This is not true for any other card type.  So no, if a creature "became an Elf", even if not "in addition to its/their other types", then it would not lose its text.
301.5c states that Equipment that loses the type Equipment can't be attached to a creature (and 301.6 for Fortifications).  The text of the equipment does not change; it still has the Equip (or Fortify) ability, and you can still pay the cost and choose a target as normal; the ability will simply fail to do anything on resolution.

Such cards add creature types instead of setting them, e.g. Arcane Adaptation:

As Arcane Adaptation enters the battlefield, choose a creature type.
Creatures you control are the chosen type in addition to their other types. The same is true for creature spells you control and creature cards you own that aren't on the battlefield.

(emphasis mine)
A card that sets a creature's type is Omnibian ("Tap: Target creature becomes a Frog with base power and toughness 3/3 until end of turn."); note that the rulings below the card in Gatherer explicitly mention the fact that the target does not lose any abilities. A card like Amoeboid Changeling has the ability to make a target creature lose all creature types, without losing any abilities. The connection between a subtype and abilities is simply much stronger for lands than for creatures, so therefore there is no equivalent of rule 305.7 for creatures.
For things like equipments, the connection is stronger, and 301.5c says:

An Equipment that loses the subtype “Equipment” can’t equip a creature.

I think that's the closest and only equivalent of 305.7 (by 301.6 it also applies to fortifications w.r.t. lands); note that there's no similar rule for Auras.

The precedent for setting creatures types without adding them is the card Conspiracy, as I mentioned in my answer. Amoeboid Changeling isn't super relevant here, because if a land loses all of its subtypes it does not in general lose its abilities either.

There's also stuff like [mtg:
Omnibian]


text:
How do mutate and ownership rules interact?
Assume this state: I have Anax, Hardened in the Forge, which I own, on the battlefield. I've attacked with Robber of the Rich and exiled Chittering Harvester. Chittering Harvester has the "standard" mutate text on it:

If you cast this spell for its mutate cost, put it over or under target non-Human creature you own

To select a valid target I'm looking at the rules. Rule 109.5 says:

The words “you” and “your” on an object refer to the object’s controller, its would-be controller (if a player is attempting to play, cast, or activate it), or its owner (if it has no controller).

Rule 601.2a says:

To propose the casting of a spell, a player first moves that card (...) from where it is to the stack. It becomes the topmost object on the stack. (...), and that player becomes its controller.

According to these you on the Chittering Harvester should refer to me and I should be able to target Anax.
On the other hand rule 702.139a forbids this:

(...) targets a non-Human creature with the same owner as this spell

And based on 112.2, Chittering Harvester's owner is my opponent:

A spell’s owner is the same as the owner of the card that represents it.

According to the above two rules you on the Chittering Harvester should refer to my opponent and I can't target Anax.
So do rules 109.5 and 601.2a contradict rules 112.2 and 702.139a?

Consider the following rule (emphasis mine):

207.2. The text box may also contain italicized text that has no game function.

207.2a Reminder text is italicized text within parentheses that summarizes a rule that applies to that
    card. It usually appears on the same line as the ability it’s relevant to, but it may appear on its
    own line if it applies to an aspect of the card other than an ability.

Reminder text is not the official wording of an ability. It's a summary, and can't (and shouldn't) take into account all kinds of niche intricacies that may appear during play. The official wording of mutate is given in 702.139a. And, as you have correctly noted, it does not let you mutate creatures you own with a spell you have stolen.

This is why there can be reminder text like "the land continues to burn"

Reminder text is not rules text. The reminder text for mutate is shortened for readability, since owner and controller of a mutate spell are usually the same. Only the Comprehensive Rules are ultimately relevant.
On reminder text:

Reminder Text
Parenthetical text in italics in the text box of a card that summarizes a rule that applies to that card, but is not actually rules text and has no effect on play. See rule 207.2.

The rules for mutate say:

702.139a Mutate appears on some creature cards. It represents a static ability that functions while the spell with mutate is on the stack. “Mutate [cost]” means “You may pay [cost] rather than pay this spell’s mana cost. If you do, it becomes a mutating creature spell and targets a non-Human creature with the same owner as this spell.” Casting a spell using its mutate ability follows the rules for paying alternative costs (see 601.2b and 601.2f–h).

The reminder text on mutate cards is shortened from its actual rules text. This has been done to improve readability and to fit the lengthy text on the card. However, when it comes to special cases, it's important to remember that it has no relevance for the actual rules.


text:
What is the order of Waterfront Bouncer's ability + Basking Rootwalla + Intruder Alarm on the stack?
I have some confusion about the ordering of specific triggered abilities on the stack which can be summarized with this sequence:

Waterfront Bouncer (no summoning sickness) and Intruder Alarm are on the battlefield under my control.
Basking Rootwalla is in my hand.
I activate Waterfront Bouncer's ability, paying the cost by tapping an Island and Waterfront Bouncer, and discarding Basking Rootwalla.

What is the order on the stack, and does Waterfront Bouncer untap? Can I target Basking Rootwalla with Waterfront Bouncer's ability?

This is the order of events:

You announce that you wish to activate the Bouncer's ability. As part of activating the ability, you pay the costs and choose the target (which has to be on the battlefield). The Rootwalla goes from your hand into exile when you discard it, the Bouncer is tapped, and you put the ability on the stack
The madness ability triggers, and you put that on the stack on top of the Bouncer's ability
Each player gets the opportunity to play spells and activate abilities (a "priority wave" happens; I'll go ahead and assume that no additional spells and abilities are played, but I'll indicate where players have the opportunity)
The madness triggered ability resolves, during which you get to choose whether to play the Rootwalla or put it into your graveyard. I'll assume you choose to play it. This makes the Rootwalla a spell on the stack, on top of the Bouncer's ability
New priority wave
The Rootwalla resolves, and becomes a creature on your battlefield
The intruder alarm's triggered ability triggers, and is put on the stack on top of the Bouncer's ability
Priority wave
Intruder alarm resolves, untapping all creatures
Priority wave
The Bouncer's ability resolves, returning the originally targeted creature to its owner's hand

It might be helpful for you to explicitly state what cards are on the battle field. I believe the series of events you described means that everything ends up the same as the start except now one of David's islands are tapped.

@Erik A few other exceptions: The Rootwalla had moved from the hand to the battlefield, some other creature has been moved from the battlefield to its owner's hand, and all other creatures have been untapped. With a Birds of Paradise and another Rootwalla, you can keep it going indefinitely: always madnessing one Rootwalla to bounce the other, tapping the bird to pay and untapping all your creatures each time.

This will not work. Discarding a card is part of the cost to activate Waterfront Bouncer's ability. If you can discard Basking Rootwalla to pay for that ability, then that means that Basking Rootwalla is in your hand while you are activating the ability, so it is not available as a target on the battlefield.
More specifically, there are several several steps to activating an ability, detailed in rules 602.2a-b and rules 601.2b-i. Choosing targets is the third step of that process, and paying the cost is the eighth step.
In addition, Madness itself is a multi-step process. Basking Rootwalla does not simply enter the battlefield as you discard it. Instead, you discard Basking Rootwalla into exile and the madness ability triggers. When that ability resolves, you can choose to cast Basking Rootwalla. If you do, it also goes on the stack, and only when it resolves does it actually enter the battlefield.


text:
What are some examples of non-creature permanents?
We are new to the game, I have been skipping over tokens for a few weeks here trying to get to know the game a little at a time. But I have finally starting diving in to the token aspect. I understand the creature tokens and how they work. But I found a card that say something about destroy non-creature permanent. What is a non-creature permanent? I am assuming it is like a non-creature token. What would be some examples of that?

A permanent is anything on the battlefield (a.k.a. "in play"),CR 110 whether represented by a card or a token. A noncreature permanent is any permanent that is not a creature.
For example, Icy Manipulator, when on the battlefield, would be a noncreature permanent. A land like a Forest, when on the battlefield, would also be a noncreature permanent. Treasure tokens, if you've seen those, would also be noncreature permanents.
More precisely, permanents can have any of five types: land, creature, artifact, enchantment, and planeswalker.CR 110.4 A single permanent usually has one of these types, but it can have more than one (for example, Juggernaut), and some permanents can even gain or lose types due to things happening in the game (for example, vehicles like Fleetwheel Cruiser). The only thing that matters for deciding whether something is a "noncreature permanent" is, at the moment you need to make the decision, whether it is a permanent and whether it has the type "creature". If it has other types as well, that doesn't matter. If it became a creature in the past or is going to stop being a creature in the future, that doesn't matter for deciding whether it's a noncreature permanent right now.
Note that cards which represent permanents when they're on the battlefield do not represent permanents while they're in your hand, in the graveyard, in your library, or anywhere else other than the battlefield.CR 110.1 Anywhere else, they're just cards. (There's a rarely used term, "permanent card", which means a card that isn't on the battlefield but would be a permanent if it were.)

It might be worth mentioning (or it might just be a tangent that only causes confusion) things that temporarily become creatures.

@KRyan Hm, that is a good point but it's a relatively rare occurrence. It would probably disrupt the main flow of the answer but it could go in a "footnote".

Certainly more common than “permanent card” :P Artifacts are the usual suspects here; there’s a lot of effects like Ensoul Artifact, not to mention artifacts like Azorius Keyrune with the effect built in.

That's true. Let me edit.

There is also a combination of cards which can cause a permanent to have no types at all, but it's not something that would realistically come up and I don't actually remember it.

I suggest your first touchstone should be the Basic Rules, which is a PDF linked to from MTG's rules page in case you ever need to google it up. The PDF begins talking about permanents and types on page 5.
Permanents are cards on the battlefield. They may be lands, enchantments, artifacts, planeswalkers, or creatures. They may also be tokens representing one of those things, such as the gold tokens found in Ixalan, which are artifact tokens.
They're called "permanents" because they stick around, at least until they get removed by a spell like that — unlike instants and sorceries, which normally just do their thing then go to the graveyard.
A card's only a permanent whilst it's on the battlefield. This means a card in a library, hand, graveyard, or in exile isn't considered a permanent. Nor is a spell that's still being cast — it's just a spell card on the stack at that point, not a permanent.
A card that wants a "noncreature permanent" target can target a permanent that is any of those types, as long as the card is not also a creature. For example, For example, Gilded Sentinel is an Artifact Creature. "Noncreature" means the spell is looking for a permanent that does not have the quality of being a Creature, and since Gilded Sentinel is a Creature (among its other types) it cannot be a target of that spell.

Non-creature permanents are objects on the battlefield that aren't creatures, which given the existing card types means they're artifacts, enchantments, lands, and/or planeswalkers.
If a permanent has multiple types including creature, for example an artifact creature, it's not a non-creature permanent.
Tokens aren't related here. This is just about card types. A creature token isn't a non-creature permanent, and an artifact token is a non-creature permanent.


text:
Pandemic Legacy 2 - definition of "adjacent"
When an infection spreads, its say to all "adjacent" cities.   Does this apply to any city connected by land and sea, or just by land?

In the rules, page 6, it indicates (emphasis mine):

SUPPLY LINES
  Although there are no supply lines at the beginning
  of the game, cities will be connected to each other
  across land by supply lines. Cities directly connected by
  a supply line are adjacent.
SEA LANES & SEA ROUTES
  Locations are connected to each other in the ocean by
  sea lanes. Locations directly connected by a sea lane
  are adjacent. A series of connected sea lanes is called
  a sea route.

So cities connected by a (single) sea lane are adjacent, and the plague would spread to them as well.


text:
When a monster is tributed due to the effect of Soul Exchange, whose graveyard does it go to?
The text specifies that I tribute the target of soul exchange "as if [I] controlled it". When I tribute a monster, it normally goes to my graveyard. Is that because I control it?

To answer to the question in your title, all tributed cards go to their respective owner's graveyard. Now,

When I tribute a monster, it normally goes to my graveyard. Is that because I control it?

Yes, it goes to your graveyard, but it is because you own it.
Two key terms here:

Owner: The player who owns the card, regardless where that card may be.
Controller: The player who has a specific card under their control. In other words in which side of the field that card is.

When a card is going to be destroyed, tributed, sent, returned, etc., it goes back to it's owner's possession and to the respective destination the card was redirected (owner's GY, deck, hand, etc.)


text:
How do Butcher of Malakir and Extractor Demon interact with Barter in Blood?
Suppose my opponent has a Butcher of Malakir and an Extractor Demon on the field, and they have no other creatures, and I have a Nuisance Engine and let's say, oh, eight 0/1 colorless Pest artifact creature tokens on the field, and then I cast Barter in Blood, which says that "each player sacrifices two creatures".
Nuisance engine is tapped and has no passive abilities, so it's irrelevant here, except that it created the Pests.  Butcher of Malakir says that "Whenever Butcher of Malakir or another creature you control dies, each opponent sacrifices a creature," and Extractor Demon says "Whenever another creature leaves the battlefield, you may have target player put the top two cards of their library into their graveyard."  Extractor Demon also has an Unearth ability, but I think that's also irrelevant here.
Now, I've read the card texts, I've read the rulings, but there's a lot going on here, so I just wanted to make sure I got this right.  When I cast Barter in Blood, it is not countered and is allowed to resolve, I choose two of my Pests to sacrifice, and my opponent chooses to sacrifice Butcher of Malakir and Extractor Demon.  So then all the creatures are sacrificed, and Butcher of Malakir's ability goes on the stack twice, because Butcher and Extractor Demon died, and Extractor Demon's ability goes on the stack three times (with my opponent targeting my library), because Butcher and two of my Pests left the battlefield, and these all go on the stack simultaneously, so my opponent chooses to put both of the Butcher abilities on the stack first, then all of the Extractor Demon abilities.  The Extractor Demon abilities all resolve, one after another, and result in a total of six cards being milled from my library, and then Butcher's abilities resolve, and I have to sacrifice a Pest, twice.  And since Butcher of Malakir is no longer on the field, there are no more active effects, or passive abilities, or whatever they're called, and that's the end of that.
tl;dr: So if I got this right, my opponent sacrifices both of his creatures, I wind up sacrificing a total of four Pests over the course of this mess, and losing six cards off the top of my library, and have four Pests remaining, as well as my tapped Nuisance Engine.  Did I get this right?  This was a lot to process.

You are basically correct.
You are correct that you will have to sacrifice 4 total creatures and lose 6 cards from your library. However, you say "these all go on the stack simultaneously" which might be wrong depending on what you meant. 2 things cannot ever go on the stack "simultaneously", but there are 5 total triggered abilities that all need to be placed on the stack, and your opponent, who controls all 5, gets to chose the order.
In this case, it makes no difference what order your opponent chooses; they could put both Butcher of Malakir's abilities first, then the 3 Extractor Demon's abilities. Or 1 Extractor, then 2 Butchers, then the other 2 Extractors, etc.
This all works this way because when triggered abilities trigger, they don't immediately do anything, but they wait until the next time state based actions are checked, right before a player gets priority.

603.2. Whenever a game event or game state matches a triggered ability’s trigger event, that ability automatically triggers. The ability doesn’t do anything at this point.
603.3. Once an ability has triggered, its controller puts it on the stack as an object that’s not a card the next time a player would receive priority.

603.3b If multiple abilities have triggered since the last time a player received priority, each player, in APNAP order, puts triggered abilities they control on the stack in any order they choose.

So you will sacrifice 2 creatures at the same time when Barter in Blood resolves, then a third when Malakir's first trigger resolves, then a fourth when Malakir's second trigger resolves.

Re "2 things cannot ever go on the stack "simultaneously"", hmmm, I'm not sure that's true. If they weren't added simultaneously, you wouldn't get to choose the order in which they are placed. But it doesn't matter because nothing cares. ("Whenever one or more spell of abilities are added to the stack" would care, but that wording isn't currently in use.)

I mean, it comes down to how you define 'simultaneously'.  The triggers go on the stack one at a time, since they end up in an ordered stack.  But nothing can interfere with the placement, and they can be added in any order, so in that sense it all happens in a single moment, simultaneously.


text:
Did every booster of Unglued contain basic land?
So says wiki
On the other hand unglued basics are listed as "Common" (implying shared sheet with other commons) on Gatherer, official product information.
Gatherer shows them as silver-bordered, but they appear black-boredred on actual photos.
Anyone has a definite source one way or the other?
(Unhinged/Unstable black bordered lands which were definitely on a separate sheet)

As another data point, Gatherer is also rendering Unhinged basic lands with a silver border, and they are listed as having the "basic land" rarity.

I don't have a source, thus comment, but I have opened enough packs back in the day to say yes

Every pack of Unglued should contain a basic land, barring any collation issues.
After fourth edition all large sets used a separate sheet for basic lands, but small sets still had their lands printed on the common sheet (why use extra sheets when you have 110-121 slots to fill?).
While the sheet distribution for Unglued isn't known, at 94 cards it definitely falls into the small set category, and most likely only had two print sheets.


text:
betrayal at house on the hill attacking and lucky stone
A character attacks a monster.  The character rolls their attack roll first.  The monster rolls second, but the combat is simultaneous.  If the attacker loses the combat roll can he chose to reroll any number of the attackers dice after the combat is complete or does the attacker need to reroll immediately following his attack roll not knowing whether it is needed (as it depends on the simultaneous defense roll)?  Consider that the lucky stone is a one use item then discarded.
Counter argument of the defender is that the attacker roll happens first and cannot be rerolled after the defender rolls.
Only the defender with a lucky stone gets the benefit of the item?
Seems wrong to me as the item is a very powerful one use item.

The rulebook is not clear on if combat is simultaneous, or if the attacker rolls before the defender. The only thing is says is:

When you make an attack, roll a number of dice equal to your Might. Your opponent does the same.

Normally, it makes no difference, but with the Lucky Stone; you must decide if you want combat to be simultaneous or not. There are many little rules like this in Betrayal where your group needs to decide which way to play it. Either way, the Lucky Stone can be used, but your knowledge would be different in each case.
The Lucky Stone is used "after you attempt a roll of any kind". It is reasonable to assume this means "immediately after", or before anything else has happened. Therefore, there are 2 options:
If you play with simultaneous attacks, then the player with the Lucky Stone can choose if they want to use the Lucky Stone after the players have rolled their dice. The player will know how the defender rolled before making that choice.
If you play where the attacker rolls first, and then the defender rolls, then the attack should have to decide to use the Lucky Stone after rolling, before they can know what the defender will roll.
In the second case, the Lucky Stone is still useful, but using it might be a risk as the defender could end up rolling really poorly so that they didn't end up needing to have used it.


text:
Does Karn Liberated's Ultimate allow you to change your Commander
After reading the answers to this question, a thought popped into my mind: if Karn Liberated's ultimate restarts the game, and declaring one of the Legendary Creatures in your deck as a Commander is a part of the process of starting the restarted game, could you choose a different Legendary Creature from your deck as your Commander for the restarted game?
For instance, if you were originally playing a deck that used Maelstrom Wanderer as your Commander, and you had Intet the Dreamer as one of the cards in your deck, could you declare Intet as your new Commander after Karn restarts the game?
If you can, do you need to respect the color identity of all the cards in your deck when you do so, since it sounds like you don't check deck legality during Karn's restart process? For instance, if the Maelstrom Wanderer deck also included Tanazir Quandrix, could you declare them as your new Commander, even though you have Red cards in your deck?

No, you cannot change your commander when you restart the game.
As mentioned in the question, the Commander deck construction rules are defined in terms of the chosen commander. This means that choosing the commander is part of deck construction. A player may construct a deck that can be played with a choice of multiple commanders, but from a rules perspective they have really constructed multiple decks  that are composed of the same cards but have different commanders. So, changing commanders in this situation would be like switching to a different deck, which is also not allowed.
In addition, the companion and comander commander game start procedures in rules 103.2b and c are as follows:

103.2b If a player wishes to reveal a card with a companion ability that they own from outside the game, they may do so after setting aside their sideboard. A player may reveal no more than one card this way, and they may do so only if their deck fulfills the condition of that card’s companion ability. (See rule 702.139, “Companion.”)
103.2c In a Commander game, each player puts their commander from their deck face up into the command zone after having the opportunity to reveal a card with a companion ability and before shuffling. See rule 903.6.

The companion rule instructs the player to make a choice in this procedure: they can choose any card with the companion ability that they own from outside the game, and they can choose not to reveal a card at all. In contrast, the commander rule does not instruct players to make any choices. It simply moves the card that has already been designated as the commander into a different zone. This procedure should be followed when Karn's ability is activated, and each commander should be placed into the command zone unless it was exiled with Karn. This is also mentioned in Karn's rulings.

You may wish to additionally cite 903.1, which discusses the nomination of a commander as a property of the deck, and contrast the wording of 102.2b (choice of companion) to 102.2c + 903.6 (placement of the commander), to strengthen your case.

I'm not sure about citing 903.1. It's mainly a descriptive rule, and so it's hard to tell what kind of force its specific wording is supposed to have. That's a good point on quoting 103.2b and c, though.


text:
What happens if I lose a match due to time in a single-elimination game, but I have a Platinum Angel on the battlefield?
According to the Magic: the Gathering tournament rules, when time has been called on a game during single-elimination rounds:

In single-elimination rounds, matches may not end in a draw. If all players have equal game wins at the end of additional turns, the player with the highest life total wins the current game. In the event all players have equal life totals (or are between games and the game wins are tied), the game/match continues with an additional state-based action: if a player does not have the highest life total, they lose the game.

What happens if I have a Platinum Angel on the battlefield when this occurs?

https://www.reddit.com/r/magicTCG/comments/24lrp1/standoff_in_honolulu/

First a small disclaimer: I'm not a judge. This answer is combined from information I found from Platinum Angel's rulings, comments of MTG judges from the Internet and common sense. For example a head judge of a tournament can turn over this ruling. This IS NOT an official ruling.

You will lose the game. Platinum Angel only prevents you losing from game effects.
Rulings on Platinum Angel:

1.10.2009
No game effect can cause you to lose the game or cause any opponent to win the game while you control Platinum Angel. It doesn’t matter whether you have 0 or less life, you’re forced to draw a card while your library is empty, you have ten or more poison counters, you’re dealt combat damage by Phage the Untouchable, your opponent has Mortal Combat with twenty or more creature cards in their graveyard, or so on. You keep playing.

1.10.2009
Other circumstances can still cause you to lose the game, however. You will lose a game if you concede, if you’re penalized with a Game Loss or a Match Loss during a sanctioned tournament due to a DCI rules infraction, or if your Magic Online(R) game clock runs out of time.

Normally Platinum Angel would prevent you from losing to state-based actions, but it appears that the "sudden death" SBA is special.
Best explanation I could find to this is in this post: https://apps.magicjudges.org/forum/topic/32928/

In the single elimination portion of a tournament, what happens if a player would lose to the “sudden death” rule while controlling Exquisite Archangel?
My understanding is that they would still lose the game, because the sudden death rule is akin to a Game Loss in that it bypasses all the rules from the CR (in the same way that a Platinum Angel cannot protect you from sudden death), but I'd like confirmation.

Your understanding is correct. As with its predecessors, Exquisite Archangel cannot prevent a player from losing to sudden death rules in a timed single-elimination match.

It's not listed as being one of the ways you can still lose the game in the text you quoted, though, and it should stop a state-based action from losing you the game, right?

Normally, yes. In this case, no. Sudden death SBA is a special one. I'm unsure why is that. Maybe that is because it's only specified in MTR. Anyway, any "you can't lose the game" on a card cannot prevent this SBA from happening.

@AulisRonkainen It's not a SBA at all. It's not a rule enforced from within the game, it's a tournament rule that comes from outside the game. Platinum Angel means the game can't make you lose, but it doesn't stop outside factors. If you die of a heart attack at the table with Platinum Angel down, you still lose; if you assault a player and get disqualified and dragged off the property in disgrace, you still lose.

@doppelgreener Okay, you're probably right, but do you know why the MTR states that it is a SBA? Is it an error or is there some hidden meaning to that statement? Doesn't state-based action have the same meaning if it is in the MTR?

@AulisRonkainen Oops, I see it: there's multiple parts to the MTR game loss conditions and one of them is in fact an SBA, my apologies. Then, yeah, I'm on the same page as you now: it does seem special and unusual in that it's inserting a rule into the SBA list. (I think it's special because of pragmatic reasons: "dammit we have a tournament to play, you lose already.")

I suspect that they're using "an additional state-based action" as a shorthand for describing the timing of the sudden death check, and not literally saying that the rules of the game are modified. Phrasing it this way makes it very clear that casting a Lightning Bolt off of a City of Brass could make either player lose (depending on how the casting and CoB trigger are sequenced).

You will lose the game, as far as the tournament is concerned.
There's a difference between the game's rules and the tournament's rules.
101.1 refers to "these rules", the comprehensive rules. This rule allows cards to break the game's rules.
There is no tournament rule which allows cards to break tournament rules.
Hypothetically, you could receive a tournament loss in your scenario, but you and your opponent decide to keep playing and you may end up winning the game.


text:
Spy or secret identity game
I don't have as much information about the game as I wish.  I played it back in the 80's so it is at least that old.  It was a board game typical size and had squares around the edge of the board that you moved around with real life pictures of people.  I believe each person was assigned one of the people and they had a role and you tried to either figure out who the spy was or who everyone was.  I loved playing at my Aunt's as a kid but last time I went there and thought about it I couldn't find it.  Any help would be appreciated.

The MSN homepage had a link to an article of the top game that game out the year you were born so I looked through it and in 1976 Parker Brothers released WHOSIT?, which is the game I wanted to identify and discovered by luck.

This sounds like Top Secret Spies, also known as Heimlich and co.
link to bgg
This game came out in 1984.  Players are all allocated a secret character and they move around the edge of the board so it fits your description.  Players could move any piece but when a piece landed on the safe all characters scored points depending on position on the board.

For a game with the name "Heimlich", I love to see the choking hazard message for the small parts...


text:
Early to mid 70's 2-player maze race game - What was the name?
It's not Pathfinder.
This one came with a vertical red plastic board that had pegs on half of each side with which you would build a maze using several dozen white "T"-shaped blocks placed between 2 pegs. When your maze was complete, you would close the clear plastic door, covering the whole playing field, to lock the pegs in place. Your opponent did the same thing on their side.  The other half of your board was the back of the other player's maze and you had a magnetic tool that you used to pick up a steel ball from the bottom of the playing area and blindly navigate their maze until you hit a block and the ball fell. Then it was the other person't turn.  Your maze had to have a navigable path to a hole in the board, near the top, that, if you successfully solved the maze, you would retrieve the ball bearing through. First one to do so, won the game.

You can hit the check mark next to his answer.

It sounds like you're talking about Mind Maze.


text:
Do you announce when you have lost due to Insanity?
I was playing mansions of madness 2nd edition and I got the 'selfish motives' insanity card. The next turn I became wounded, meaning I lost.
When this happens, do you announce that you have lost? Do you keep playing? It just seems odd playing as normal now that my character has lost

Your insanity condition is secret, and you are forced to keep it secret.  The rules state it cannot be revealed to the other players for any reason, unless some other event tells you to.
So even if you have been put into situation where it is impossible for you to fulfill your personal Insane win condition, your investigator hasn't been eliminated and the game hasn't ended.  Your insanity, and your win-lose status, remains secret, and the other players will continue to eyeball you and wonder what you're really going to be up to.  This may or may not affect how quickly they can complete the investigation, so it is still important.

My set is put away at the moment, so I don't have the text of Selfish Motives, or know if there's any possible card that can remove a Wound.  The game rules are pretty clear though - only player elimination forces the last round of the game, and insanity is kept secret unless something specific happens.  I'll see if I can check card texts later and clarify anything else.


text:
Regarding chains with trigger effects when summoning
My friend uses Aether, the Evil Empowering Dragon, whose monster effect reads as follows: "When this card is Normal or Special Summoned: You can target 1 monster on the field; banish it."
The question is: is my opponent forced to be chain link 1? so that I can chain torrential to his Aether's effect? That way, when the chain resolves, my monsters are already gone by the time Aether tries to banish one of them.
Or can he wait until I activate torrential in response to his summon so that he can be chain link 2? How does it work?
Thanks

Trigger effects cannot chain off of other cards
This is fundamentally a Spell Speed question. Aether, the Evil Empowering Dragon, has a optional trigger effect,1 with the trigger of "When this card is Normal or Special Summoned". As such, it is Spell Speed 1 (the same applies to trigger-like effects, which are the equivalent for spell and trap cards). Spell Speed 1 effects cannot chain off of any other effect (including other Spell Speed 1 effects).
For reference, most Trap cards are Spell Speed 2, with the exception of Counter Trap cards which are classified as Spell Speed 3 (and are the only cards so far with that classification). Therefore, if Aether's effect were to be used, it would activate before your trap card would and resolve after your trap card does (if possible - Torrential Tribute, if not negated, would cause all possible targets of Aether's effect to not be on the field anymore, resulting in it doing nothing regardless of what monster was targeted)
Note that because Aether's effect is an optional trigger effect, it may not necessarily be chain link 1. This would only happen if the summoning player has any other trigger[-like] effects (optional or mandatory) that trigger from a monster being summoned in the same manner that Aether was or if the other player had a mandatory trigger[-like] effect with similar timing.
In those cases (as well as if you have optional trigger[-like] effects with appropriate timings), they all enter the chain simultaneously, Simultaneous Effects Go On Chain (SEGOC) dictates the chain link order for all of those trigger[-like] effects, and then fast effects (spell speed 2 and 3) can be added to the chain as usual. In the context of this question, though, this is mostly irrelevant unless any of those effects have a cost that would prevent the activation of your trap card (including sending it to the graveyard).
1 - These shouldn't be confused with Quick Effects, which can chain off of Spell Speed 2 cards. These have a timing of "during either player's [turn/XXX phase/XXX Step]" and are generally indicated as Quick Effects in the effect text.

Thank you very much. I hadn't read trigger effects were spell speed 1 but the way you explained it made it very clear.


text:
Dark Magical Circle vs Masked HERO Blast
My friend and I were playing Dark Magician vs HERO. I had Masked HERO Blast on the field and he activated Dark Magical Circle (DMC). I chained Blast's effect to return the Dark Magical Circle to my opponent's hand. I thought that since DMC has to remain face up on the field for its effect to resolve, he wouldn't get to look the top 3 cards of his deck. Since DMC states that a player may only "USE" each of its effects once per turn, even if my friend had played the circle again, he wouldn't have been able to use the first effect to look up the top cards of the deck because he had already used it once (and it resolved without effect).
The question is, was this interaction ok? Or would he had been able to look up the top 3 cards anyway (by activating circle immediately after being returned to the hand). Thanks!

Since "Dark Magical Circle" stated:

You can only use each effect of "Dark Magical Circle" once per turn.

No, he cannot use "Dark Magical Circle" to look at the top deck again at the same turn.
However, they are allowed to activate it again as a Continuous Spell, and use the effect to banish your card if "Dark Magician" is Summoned.


text:
Does paradox engine activate its own ability
keeping in mind Paradox engine ruling does it activate its own ability as its played if not explain please. The obvious answer is no but I've been thinking about it and maybe I'm wrong

Btw I've seen some posts on this but not a full on explanation /discussion

Hats off to Veskah for the answer really appreciate it

Not a duplicate, I don’t think, but the answer to this question gives the rule explaining it: https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/42240/can-you-use-an-ability-as-you-put-the-card-on-the-stack/42241#42241

Paradox engine does not activate it's own trigger. The artifact has to be in play already before it gets to activate off other spells being cast. Casting a second paradox engine would, however, trigger the ability of a copy you already control.

It does not. Paradox Engine has already been cast and resolved. Its ability, like the majority of abilities1, only has effect while it is on the battlefield which means it cannot see itself being cast and trigger.
The ruling that you're referring to:

Paradox Engine's triggered ability resolves before the spell that caused it to trigger. The ability will resolve even if that spell is countered.

is just clarifying that its ability triggers on another spell being cast which means the stack will look like this immediately after a player has cast any spell:

Paradox Engine's trigger on top
The Spell being cast

which allows players to respond to either the spell or Engine before either of them resolves.
1:There are some abilities (such as Dredge, Cycling, or Bloodrush; or Bridge From Below to see a non-keyword graveyard Triggered ability) that require the card being in a specific zone to use, e.g. in your hand or in the grave.

Ah that sucks for me but at least you made sense of it for me thanks

@KCkingcollin De nada, amigo


text:
"Helicopter lift" card
Just a small clarification regarding the use of the aformentioned card. I know that you can use it during others players' round. What confuses me is its use.
Let's say I'm the one holding this card. Can I use it to move another player's pawn and not mine, even if he's not on the same tile as my pawn?

This thread on BoardGameGeek asks the same question.  According to this post, the game developer provided this ruling:

The user of the card does not need to be on the same tile as the pawns being moved.


text:
Killing a Fatespinner during my turn - do I still have to skip chosen phases?
My opponent is playing a Fatespinner.

At the beginning of each opponent's upkeep, that player chooses draw step, main phase, or combat phase. The player skips each instance of the chosen step or phase this turn.

It's my turn, so I pick to skip my main phases. I get straight to my combat phase, cast - say - a Shock and kill the Fatespinner.
Do I get my second main phase after the combat one? Or should I keep skipping it anyway for this turn?

Yes, you still have to skip the chosen phase or step this turn.
Fatespinner has a triggered ability ("At the beginning of each opponent's upkeep [..]") that creates a continuous replacement effect with a certain duration ("The player skips [..] this turn"). Once that trigger has happened and the ability is on the stack, the ability exists independently of the Fatespinner, as will the continuous effect that is created.

603.1. Triggered abilities have a trigger condition and an effect. They are written as “[When/Whenever/At] [trigger condition or event], [effect]. [Instructions (if any).]”
611.1. A continuous effect modifies characteristics of objects, modifies control of objects, or affects players or the rules of the game, for a fixed or indefinite period.
611.2. A continuous effect may be generated by the resolution of a spell or ability.
614.10. An effect that causes a player to skip an event, step, phase, or turn is a replacement effect.
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. [..]

It is, in principle, possible to word Fatespinner so that its removal also ends its effect. It would have to be worded according to this rule:

611.2b Some continuous effects generated by the resolution of a spell or ability have durations worded “for as long as . . . .” If the “for as long as” duration never starts, or it ends before the moment the effect would first be applied, the effect does nothing. [..]

For example, it could be worded thus.

At the beginning of each opponent's upkeep, that player chooses draw step, main phase, or combat phase. The player skips each instance of the chosen step or phase this turn as long as Fatespinner is on the battlefield.

What if it were "At the beginning of each opponent's upkeep, that player chooses draw step, main phase, or combat phase. When a player reaches a step they have chosen, that step is skipped." ?

@Accumulation They would need to be separate paragraphs, so that the skipping is not mentioned in the triggered ability. But apart from that, I think it would be best if the wording on the fatespinner is kept more or less unchanged. Specifically, the skipping itself must be a replacement, not a trigger.


text:
Where can I download the latest version of the Yu-Gi-Oh pc game (if available)?
It has been many years since the official Yu-Gi-Oh! Power of Chaos pc games were released. Did they release an update or a newer version which I am missing? If yes, where can I download (or purchase) it?

You seek Power of Chaos specifically, or the latest pc game for yugioh? Also, I think that maybe this isn't the best place to ask about this, as you are not asking about a Card Game per se but instead about a videogame of the franchise... perhaps this is better material for Arcade.SE? (I recall there is a meta post regarding the on-topicness of these sort of situations, will check it and update you)

Well... seems that this answer suggests that digital versions of card games are on topic :)

@DarkCygnus I am just seeking for any Yu-Gi-Oh! PC game, not necessarily Power of Chaos.

Well, that is a different question than what you are asking. The current phrasing is fine IMO so perhaps consider leaving it that way (or asking other post), but surely asking that other question would be off-topic, as you are basically asking for a game recommendation, which happens to be off-topic.

@WaisKamal I play on dueling book

@WhatsThePoint oh, so they renamed it from Dueling Network huh? Good place to play, although sometimes you find rage-quitters as not everyone used to know the rules well... or are the rulings now automatized?

@DarkCygnus yeah it got renamed, everything is still manual though, but I kinda prefer it that way as it’s like playing a game irl, however judges can be called or clarification of things

According to the Wiki, Yu-Gi-Oh! Power of Chaos consisted on a series of three games, which were (in order of release):

Yugi the Destiny
Kaiba the Revenge
Joey the Passion

Seems that there are no further releases of the Power of Chaos series.
As for where to download or buy there are several options, so the best would be to Google the specific release of POC you seek and chose among the options (I also want to refrain from promoting a specific page or product)
A quick search revealed several sites that offer download, and I am sure that you could find it on places like Amazon or EBay


text:
Is abalone still a draw when played with more than 14 marbles per player?
After reading the Wikipedia page for abalone, I realized that the regular abalone is solved as a forced draw.
This led me to question, does there exist an arrangement with more marbles and/or a larger board in which the outcome of the game is a win for either side, given perfect play from both sides?


text:
Rules of Instants. MTG
If I were to attack with my creatures, 5 1/1's for say, and my opponent chooses not to block, could I then boost those creatures with an instant to make them more powerful?

Yes, you can do that.
The combat phase is divided into 5 separate steps:

1) Beginning of Combat
2) Declare Attackers
3) Declare Blockers
4) Damage Assignment
5) End of Combat

In the Declare Blockers step, after the defending player has decided how to block the attacking creatures, each player gets priority before moving on to Damage Assignment. When the attacking player has priority, they can cast an instant or activate an ability that would pump the attacking creatures.
From the Basic Rulebook:

Combat Phase

c. Declare blockers step

Your opponent decides which, if any, of his or her
      untapped creatures will block your attacking creatures,
      then they do so. If multiple creatures block a single
      attacker, you order the blockers to show which is fi rst
      in line for damage, which is second, and so on. Players
      can then cast instants and activate abilities.


text:
Can you play a wild card on an existing Canasta to go out?
Canasta. Can you play a wild card on an existing Canasta to go out?

It looks like you may have created 2 separate accounts. If this is the case, you can go here to merge them. You can always comment on your own questions if you need further clarification; or if you have a separate question just ask it as a new question.

Yes.
You can add to existing melds in general; whether going out or not. This includes adding a wild to an existing Canasta.

A player may add additional cards to a meld by his side, provided that the melds remain valid (having no more than three wild cards).

Note that if you add a wild to a natural Canasta, it will become a mixed Canasta.

Additional cards may be added to a canasta to score their point values, but these do not affect the bonus - except that a wild card added to a natural canasta reduces it to a mixed canasta (and a black card replaces the red card that was previously on top).


text:
Canasta Playing Wild Card on a Canasta
Can you play a wild card on an existing Canasta if it becomes the 4th wild card in the meld?

It depends on which rulebook you follow.
Most commonly, Canasta rules say that a legal meld cannot contain more than 3 wild cards:

A meld is valid if it contains at least two natural cards of the same rank - aces down to fours inclusive - and not more than three wild cards.

Melds must be valid at all times, whether during the initial meld, or when adding to an existing meld:

A player may add additional cards to a meld by his side, provided that the melds remain valid (having no more than three wild cards).

You can find these rules here and here.
However, some rules teach a variation on this rule, and say that rather than being limited to 3 wild cards, a meld cannot have more wilds than naturals:

It is possible to add a wildcard to a column of cards of any rank on the table. The wildcard is then seen as a card of that rank (but the value remains unchanged). However, there may never be more wildcards than natural cards within one meld.

Under this rule, a meld with 4 naturals and 4 wilds would be a valid meld.
Under most circumstances, these 2 rules function the same; they prevent a Canasta from being made with 3 naturals and 4 wilds; and prevent melds such as 1 natural and 2 wilds.
Note that if you need to meld an extra wild in order to go out, you can always just add it to any meld you already have; it seems like it would be a very rare situation that a Canasta is the only place you have to add it to.

This is somewhat accurate. Both Britannica and Hoyle also state that any meld (incl. canastas) may not have more than three wild cards. I think the equal-to-or-less-than-naturals is really only a glorified house rule, and the question can just be answered 'no'. That said, yes, 'it depends on the rule book' isn't wrong.