text:
Is it possible for an Othello / Reversi game to end without the board being filled?
Is there any case where an Othello (reversi) game would need to no more moves allowed?
This happen to one of the two players leading to the other to play again is a common thing. Has it ever happened simultaneously to both in the history of the game while leaving positions blank? I mean one cannot move, the other cannot move but there is still room on the board.
EDIT
I understand that when no moves are available the game is scored. What I am asking (as it has never occurred to me in the last 3-4 years I am playing the game is
Is there a possibility in which while the board is not yet full no more moves are available by neither of the two players?
How is this possible? Any examples of boards in which this is possible?

In reversi when this happens the game is not a stalemate.  It is instead scored and the player with the most peaces wins.  I am not sure if this is understood.  Would you want a situation where the board is full AND has an equal number of stones?

@Andrey edited my question so I could be more specific

You are still not making if clear if you need the game to end in a tie for the condition to be met

@Andrey It does not matter how the game ends, tie or not. What I am asking is if cases exist in which the board is not completely full, both players still have pieces (the board is not completely white or black) and no move is possible by neither of the players. Thus ending the game abruptly

Yes, it is possible for neither player to be able to make a move without the board being full. The Wikipedia article for Reversi has this example from a competition:

There are also simpler examples where all the pieces are turned to the same colour (YouTube video).

I was asking for cases where it was not the same colour only. Thanks

This is very simple. If one corner is empty, but black has both edges and the diagonal, then black can't go in the corner, and neither can white.

"wipeout" is an example of such an ending, too! It's not something that happens to serious players, but it certainly happens to casual players.

in my question I specifically state in cases where both have pieces left

@JohnDemetriou I don't see anywhere in your question that you say you are asking for cases where both sides have pieces left.

Othello‘s rule book states in the final sentence “it is possible for a game to end before all 64 squares are fillled”.  We just encountered such an edge case. White had the final move, and could not play. Game was called. Black won the game with 34 disks. White has 29.

This game ends with a draw, neither player able to play.

This does not appear to add anything new to the question

Although a valid answer, it was already answered and accepted. Maybe added as an edit to the accepted one?

This position is not reachable from the standard opening position: One of the four central squares is empty.

This should more than answer you question i destroyed my friend 29-0 with picture to proof

Well I would like to see the last step before this :)

The asker clarified that he was only asking about situations where both players have pieces on the board; this comes across as more showing off a good game you had than an answer to the question.

@GendoIkari While the OP mentioned in comments that they wanted a situation where both players have pieces on the board, they did not say so in the question. Comments are not the place to put clarifications of your question. If the OP wants examples with both colors, they should edit the question. As it stands, this is an answer to the question as asked.


text:
Name of empire building game with negotiated alliances?
Over the summer I played a board game in which players took on the role of 19th(?) century European powers, and accumulated score by owning 'control points' in various geographic regions around the world. It was an extremely fun game mechanically, though the primary scoring mechanic of oppressing/eradicating indigenous populations was questionable.
Here are the salient features I remember from my one day of playing:

Game is divided into three 'wars', each of which has 5-6 rounds of player turns
At the start of each war, players bid to decide which 'alliance' each player is part of
Players send their armies or population abroad to colonize such areas North America, India, The German Confederation, etc. Also to seize (partial) control of these areas from players in the opposing alliance.
Combat is resolved by rolling two dice and subtracting the high number from the low, plus some modifiers for army size/navy/technology

I can remember all sorts of details, but the name escapes me. I think 'empire' was in there somewhere, and possibly 'war', but these are probably the least helpful terms when looking for obscure board games. Could anyone help me figure out the name of this game?
EDIT:
Additional info about the board and game pieces.
The board itself contained a map and several spaces for book-keeping. The map was dominated by Europe in the upper-right-hand corner, with the Americas to the left (divided into North America in brown, the Caribbean in purple, and South America in green). Africa, India, and the East-indies in boxes along the bottom.
Player pieces were tiles color coded by empire, but otherwise mostly the same. Infantry armies were represented by two crossed rifles superimposed on an early 1800s infantry hat (tall with a brim and a feather), Forts by a start fort, and navies by tallships; all were square any ~2 cm on a side. There were also  circular tokens for the control points, which showed the heraldic device of the empire in question and were maybe 1 cm in diameter.
There were also a large number of tiles players could buy, such as Ally Tiles ('Gauchos', 'Saxony', 'Cossacks'), Technology Tiles ('Logistics', 'Press-ganging', 'War office' ), and Company Tiles ('East-India Company', 'Baltic Company', 'Sugar Company'), which conferred various benefits. These were larger and bore pictures representing the tile's benefit.

What do you remember about the appearance of the board?  What kind of pieces did it use?  Were there cards?  Did the artwork look like it was from a particular era?

I updated the original question with some more info.

The board described is that of Struggle of Empires.
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/image/1597401/struggle-empires

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Enchantment and other continuous effects priority
I have read a lot of questions about the priority in the stack and the triggered abilities.  However, I would like to validate my understanding of the continuous effects priority rule.

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

Here's a scenario:

Player A has a plain.

Player B cast a Phantasmal Terrain on it and change it to a swamp.
At this point, the plain will end up as a swamp

Player A use a Gaea Liege ability to turn it into a forest.
At this point, the plain will end up as a forest

Player B also cast a Phantasmal Terrain on it and change it to a island.
At this point, the plain will end up as an island

Once again, player A use his Gaea Liege ability to turn it into a forest.
At this point, the plain will end up as a forest

Is my logic ok?

You can use [mtg:Phantasmal Terrain] to link to cards.

This question is a subset of When two card texts confict, which takes priority?, which effectively makes it a one way duplicate.

Incidentally this whole question has nothing to do with the idea of "priority" which determines when each player is allowed to play spells and abilities.

Yes, that is entirely correct. Whenever a continuous effect comes into existence, it gets a timestamp, which represents when it came into existence relative to other effects. And, all of those effects you described affect Layer 4, so as you surmised, the order in which they are applied depends on when they were created.
It's important to note that at the end of this sequence, there are 4 continuous effects modifying the land's subtype. Whenever you want to figure out what the land's subtype is, you apply all of the effects in order. This is important because it means that when one of the effects stops applying, you just remove it from the list. For example, if Gaea's Liege leaves the battlefield, the land will be an island.

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


text:
End of Times Summoning Spells
My friend and I have played several games of End of Times now and I was re-reading the rules for summoning units. I am sure that you can only summon something from the undead legions list... however I can't find it in the rules!
Is it legal for a wizard using the Lore of Undeath to summon a unit/character/monster (depending on the spell) from an army other than the Undead Legions (with a few exceptions Vampires/Tomb Kings)?
If not where does it state restrictions on what can be summoned?

It says it in the spell description. On page 15 of the Nagash book each spell states what type can be summoned and can only be "selected from the Undead Legioins army list (page 20).
Hope that helps.


text:
Dealing Damage to Creature soulbonded to Deadeye Navigator
A scenario played out last night that at the time I felt was correct, but the more I think about it, the more I feel uncomfortable about it. I had on the field:

Goblin Bombardment

Furnace of Rath

Dictate of Twin Gods

~10 0/1 creature tokens

My opponent had:

Deadeye Navigator

Nevermaker

6 blue mana available

Here's what happened:

I sacrificed a creature token to Goblin Bombardment to deal 4 damage to the Nevermaker.
In response, my opponent paid 1U and exiled the Nevermaker.
As the Nevermaker leaves the battlefield it's ability triggers, it targets my goblin bombardment to place on top of my library.
Before the Nevermaker resolves, I sacrifice 2 tokens and deal 8 damage to the Deadeye Navigator.
My opponent pays 1U to exile the Deadeye Navigator.
Deadeye Navigator leaves the battlefield, and then returns, soulbonding to the Nevermaker.
I sacrifice two more tokens to deal 8 more damage to the Deadeye Navigator.
My opponent pays 1U to exile the Deadeye Navigator.
Deadeye Navigator leaves the battlefield, and then returns, soulbonding to the Nevermaker.
My third Goblin Bombardment fails to resolve as the Deadeye Navigator is a new instance of the creature and thereby a new object.
My second Goblin Bombardment fails to resolve as the Deadeye Navigator is a new instance of the creature and thereby a new object.
Nevermaker's use of Deadeye Navigator's ability resolves and it leaves the Battlefield.
Nevermaker's ability trigers and my Goblin Bombarment in placed on the top of my library.
Nevermaker returns to the battlefield and is re-soulbonded to Deadeye Navigator

I feel like somewhere in the 10-12 range is where it goes awry. None of my abilities resolve because her cards are new instances of themselves, but this does not seem to hamper her at all. Was this all resolved correctly. Is there I way that I could have destroyed either the Deadeye Navigator or the Nevermaker?

One way is that you sacrifice enough tokens to Bombard your opponent's life total down to zero, then Deadeye Navigator and Nevermaker both cease to exist by virtue of the fact that your opponent has lost the game. (Though they technically don't die.) But that kind of sidesteps the underlying rules question.

Is there I way that I could have destroyed either the Deadeye
  Navigator or the Nevermaker?

Yes.
Start out the same way, sending 4 damage to the Nevermaker. Your opponent activates its flicker ability. You let the flicker ability resolve, and the Nevermaker leaves and then enters the battlefield again.
This causes 2 triggers to be put on the stack, one is the Nevermaker's "leaves the battlefield" ability, the other is the "soulbond" ability on Deadeye Navigator (since your opponent controls both, he/she can arrange their order on the stack as desired). While both are on the stack, you can respond by activating Goblin Bombardment as you wish. Since neither Navigator or Nevermaker are soulbonded, they do not have the "flicker" ability anymore.

Ah, I had never thought to let the ability resolve before responding. Thanks!

Let's start by going through exactly what happens on the stack at each step.
You start by sacing a token to try and kill Nevermaker:
1. Goblin Bombardment targeting Nevermaker

They respond by trying to 'flicker' Nevermaker
1. Nevermaker's flicker ability
2. Goblin Bombardment targeting Nevermaker

Steps 3 and 4 get a little weird since you say Nevermakers leaves the battlefield ability triggers, but also before its ability resolves you sac more tokens to try and kill Deadeye Navigator. I'm going to assume that you sacrificed the tokens before the flicker trigger resolves.
1. Goblin Bombardment targeting Deadeye Navigator
2. Goblin Bombardment targeting Deadeye Navigator
3. Nevermaker's flicker ability
4. Goblin Bombardment targeting Nevermaker

They then activate Deadeye Navigator's flicker ability
1. Deadeye Navigator's flicker ability
2. Goblin Bombardment targeting Deadeye Navigator
3. Goblin Bombardment targeting Deadeye Navigator
4. Nevermaker's flicker ability
5. Goblin Bombardment targeting Nevermaker

You let the Navigator's ability resolve, and the Soulbond ability goes on the stack. This is when you should respond and kill it before it can bond with the Nevermaker again.
1. Deadeye Navigator's Soulbond trigger
2. Goblin Bombardment targeting Deadeye Navigator
3. Goblin Bombardment targeting Deadeye Navigator
4. Nevermaker's flicker ability
5. Goblin Bombardment targeting Nevermaker

You then let the Soulbond trigger resolve, and for making the stack slightly easier to understand I'll have the 2 Goblin Bombardment triggers that were targeting the Navigator resolve too. Both of those triggers will do nothing since the Navigator is a new object so they no longer have legal targets. That means we are back to the second step with:
1. Nevermaker's flicker ability
2. Goblin Bombardment targeting Nevermaker

Once you get to this point you can pretty much keep repeating sacing tokens and your opponent flickering the Navigator until you run out of tokens or they run out of mana.
The biggest things to remember here are that the ability to flicker the Navigator and Nevermaker go on the stack and you get to respond to them before they happen, so if you really wanted to kill the Nevermaker you could have kept targeting it instead of going after the Navigator and saved a few tokens. The other thing is that Soulbond is a triggered ability when a creature enters the battle field, so you have time to respond to the trigger before they get a chance to bond their creatures together.
If you want to make sure that Nevermaker's trigger never goes off you can respond to the activation of the flicker ability by sacing another token, this way you would only spend 4 tokens to kill it, you would keep your Bombardment, and the Navigator wouldn't be bonded to anything so you can kill it at your leisure.

diego you missed the fact that his opponent only had 6 blue mana available.  So, the OP will be able to kill the Navigator and Nevermaker with your approach.

@John I believe I said that he could kill them in my last paragraph (among other places), which part makes you think otherwise?


text:
Minimizing Agricola setup/clean up time
I enjoy playing Agricola, but the box the game comes in doesn't lend to keeping the pieces organized, and I generally spend a fair amount of time taking everything out, and even more time putting everything back so it's not a complete mess the next time I play.
Any good suggestions for alternative storage that minimizes the set up/tear down?

How about a foamcore insert?  I just finished my Agricola foamcore yesterday. I haven't benchmarked the setup and breakdown times (yet). There are no zip top bags to open, it should only take a minute.
I have friends who get a little tacklebox organizer for each game.  This takes more effort than that, but it's much more customizable.
For a crash course on how to make something like this, check out this video series: Using Foamcore by The Esoteric Order of Gamers.
Updated with a new version:
v1 v2

It really doesn't take long at all to open or close ten zip top bags; most of the setup or cleanup is just putting pieces where they need to go, or sorting them back out. I still think this is really cool, don't get me wrong, I just don't think it really saves that much time.

The trade-off is between setup time and maintenance (restocking at the beginning of each turn).  We've chosen to split the difference as follows:

Each set of player pieces goes into its own ziplock bag.  Hand each player a bag at the beginning of the game and let him manage it from there.
All the goods (wood, clay, reeds, stone, grain) go into a single large ziplock bag.  We just dump this out onto the table (or, if you prefer, into a shallow bowl).  Yes, you have to do a little digging when restocking the board, but it's spread out enough that you can generally just pick up three wood (etc).
All the livestock go into a single bag.  Treat like the goods.
All the food tokens and the "5x" chits go into a single bag.  Again, just dump it out somewhere; most of the time you're just grabbing food and the other chits are larger, so we haven't found it to be a problem.
Separate the cards into minor improvements, occupations, and everything else.  For "everything else", that's the major improvements (in order, so you can just deal them out), the 14 turn cards (we just shuffle them all together and then populate the board), the extra "board" cards for higher numbers of players (we just pick what we need there), begging cards (we ignore them unless needed), and the "cheat sheet" cards (deal out).  You could put a "cheat sheet" card in with each bag of player pieces if you prefer; we've never bothered.

This distribution of stuff allows easy parallel processing during game setup.  One person can deal out the board, turn, and major-improvement cards while somebody else (or multiple somebodies) dump out the three bags of tokens and somebody else (could be two somebodies) shuffles and deals occupation and minor-improvement cards.
We don't bother to sort out the occupations by number of players; after dealing, people check for invalid cards, return them, and get dealt replacements.  Iterate until done.
When we play we use all of the series together; if you want to play with, e.g., only the K-cards, I suggest the same approach as for occupations.
I haven't timed our setup, but it's never triggered the "ugh, this is taking too long" reaction.  I think our Agricola setup is comparable to our Puerto Rico setup, for what that's worth.

A "Plano box" did it for me. You'll find these for general organization across a lot of specific disciplines, primarily arts and crafts but also fishing and home improvement. Any big-box department store should have a respectable selection, as does Amazon.
I count 10 different resource types in the base game (including animals), but some are more plentiful than others, so either a box with movable dividers, or one with up to 16 fixed-size slots, should do the trick. It has to be relatively shallow in order to fit in the box without raising the lid, but it wasn't hard for me to find a box of this type that met that criteria. A box whose lid is designed to be easily removed is ideal.
The beauty is that the box can then be used in-game; yes, the back side of one of the player boards is supposed to be a "stockyard" for the varying resource types, but if you're playing with 5 players that's no longer an option, and why bother pouring out all the bits and stacking them in piles when you can just open up a lid ? Then, instead of bagging, simply drop the loose bits into their proper compartments, close the lid and the resource bits are packed. Bag the cards, the player-specific bits, the larger cardboard "chits" for tiles and larger resource counts (which I never use), and throw it all in the box on top of the player and main boards.

The box of Agricola I got came with about 10 bags which I've been able to use to seperate everything into.  What I do, is that I only take things out of the bags when they need to be used, and then start piles of "discarded items" to be re-used during game play.
We also try to keep all the like items near each other so that during clean up it's pretty quick to put the stuff back into their respective bags.  Some people get annoyed at me and ask for the bags to be dumped open so they don't have to try to take an item from the bag during game play (But hey that's more time to think!), but I find the easier setup and cleanup worth it.

As with most games, splitting the pieces into a decent number of small zip lock bags seems to make it work just fine.
I think my copy of Agricola actually came with plenty of bags, but they're really cheap if you need to buy some. (For example, searching for "small ziplock bags" on amazon I found packs of 100 or 1000 for under $10.) You can split it into a bag of animals, a bag of vegetables/grain, a bag for each player's pieces, and so on. The decks can be kept split up either rubber banded or in bags of their own.
If that's not fancy enough for you, you can certainly build yourself a divided box, or find something the right size (look at hobby/craft stores or at places like Target for jewelry storage and such), but I tend to think that's overkill. It takes some effort to make/find something exactly the right size without adding enough bulk that things don't fit as well in the box. (But it can be a fun project if you're into that sort of thing!)
As for fast setup/teardown, as long as everyone you're playing with is helpful, it goes pretty fast; I don't think you really need any special tricks as long as you haven't mixed all the pieces together.


text:
Black Market and game setup
In a game where Black Market is being used what happens to the setup phase of cards in the Black Market deck?
In particular if the Black Market deck contains a card such as Young Witch or Trade Route when is the setup for those cards performed?
The setup phase of Young Witch introduce an 11th kingdom card pile. Will this pile be available in every game with a Young With in the Black Market deck, even if the Young With has not yet been revealed?
Trade Route requires a coin on every victory supply pile and these being moved to the Trade Route mat as cards are being gained. Do these coin movements happen before the Trade Route is revealed from the Black Market deck?
I can imagine a few possible answers, but I haven't found any official answer:

Setup for every card in the Black Market deck is done at the start of the game.
Setup is done when the card is revealed from the Black Market deck.
Setup is done when the card is bought from the Black Market deck.
Setup is never done. (This would make Trade Route almost worthless and Young Witch a bit more powerful)

It is the first option; all setup things are done at the start of a game. A card being in the Black Market deck acts just like a card in the Supply for this purpose.
Strangely enough, this rule is not listed in the official Black Market FAQ. But it is listed in several other places.

From the Cornucopia rulebook:

If you are using the promotional card Black Market, and Young Witch is in the Black Market deck, put out a Bane pile for Young Witch.

From the Baker FAQ in the Guilds rulebook:

In games using this card, each player starts the game with a Coin token. This includes games using the promo card Black Market in which Baker is in the Black Market deck.

From the Alchemy rulebook:

Also add the Potion pile if you are using the promotional card Black Market, and the Black Market deck includes at least one card with [P] in the cost. If you do not have any cards with [P] in the cost in the Supply or in the Black Market deck, do not use the Potion pile in this game.

From the Trade Route FAQ in the Prosperity rulebook:

If you are using Black Market and Trade Route is in the
  Black Market deck, put tokens on Victory card piles at the start of the game.

Although the Nocturne rulebook does not mention using an Heirloom when the appropriate card is in the Black Market, Donald X confirmed that you do:

Everyone's favorite rules question: If these kingdom cards are in the Black Market deck, are the Heirlooms used?

I recommend not putting them in the Black Market deck, but yes, you do all setup for Black Market deck cards.

Similarly, the Dark Ages rulebook does not mention Black Market, but if there are any Looters in the Black Market deck, then you include Ruins in the Supply.
Note that if Young Witch is in the Black Market deck; Black Market itself cannot be the Bane card; because the Bane has to be a newly added 11th pile.

You are right. I verified the rules for Cornucopia (which is the only of the mentioned extensions that I own myself), and that sentence is in there but not in the section describing Young Witch, which is where I initially looked.

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


text:
What happens when more than one creature dies causing a trigger
Overseer of the Damned is a creature with the ability "Whenever a nontoken creature an opponent controls dies, put a 2/2 black Zombie creature token onto the battlefield tapped"
Now, lets say 3 of my opponent's creatures die simultaneously, either through combat, spells, or sacrificing. Could I put the triggered ability on the "stack" so to say in order to get 3 2/2 black zombies (one for each non token creature that died that my opponent controlled), or am I forced to put one and only one despite 3 creatures dying?

If an ability triggers each time a creature dies, then it triggers once for each creature that died, not just for each event where one or more creatures died.
Rule 700.1 says

Anything that happens in a game is an event. Multiple events may take place during the resolution of a spell or ability. The text of triggered abilities and replacement effects defines the event they’re looking for. One "happening" may be treated as a single event by one ability and as multiple events by another.

in addition, rule 603.2c says

An ability triggers only once each time its trigger event occurs. However, it can trigger repeatedly if one event contains multiple occurrences.

In this particular case, that means that even though the creatures died at the same time, they count as different events for the purpose of triggers that look for individual deaths.

Overseer of the Damned would trigger 3 times and you would create 3 2/2 zombies when those triggers resolved.
There are a few different ways that triggers are scoped in magic, I'll look at three of them here that all create 2/2 zombie tokens. I put the trigger in italics and what the trigger is watching for in bold. First we have the example here for Overseer of the Damned:

Whenever a nontoken creature an opponent controls dies, create a tapped 2/2 black Zombie creature token.

Second we have Curse of Shallow Graves (There are no death triggers with wording like this):

Whenever a player attacks enchanted player with one or more creatures, that attacking player may create a tapped 2/2 black Zombie creature token.

And third we have Doomed Dissenter:

When Doomed Dissenter dies, create a 2/2 black Zombie creature token.

The difference is what they watch for, how broad or narrow. Overseer of the Damned is the most broad, watching every creature (that fits criteria), so when any of those creatures die, it triggers for each creature, so you create 1 zombie per creature. The second example watches for "one or more" creatures. It doesn't care if it was 1 creature or 100 creatures, it will only trigger once and create 1 zombie. The third references the card by name, so it only watches itself, and will only create 1 zombie.

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


text:
Is there a way to play Twilight Imperium's "age of empire" variant with Shattered Empire's strategy cards?
The third edition of Twilight Imperium has become one of the most-played games as of late, and we have finally begun to incorporate the first expansion into the game. In the core TI3 rules is an excellent variant, called age of empire, that makes the entire public objective deck accessible by the fourth round. We have a lot more fun playing with this variant, but ran into difficulty when incorporating Shattered Empire's new strategy cards.
Shattered Empire's eighth strategy card, bureaucracy, primarily deals with revealing objective cards, which is pointless with age of empire's fully-revealed setup. We ran into this problem the first and only time we played, and could not figure out a solution—letting the bureaucracy card pile up with bonus counters until there were none left. It was a disappointing way to end my new favourite game. I otherwise found these new cards to be much more interesting, so it would be nice to use them.
Has anyone figured out a clever way to modify their rules so as to incorporate both ? I would very much like to keep in the spirit of the card(s), but every modification I have come up with is terribly boring.

As it says in the rules for Shattered Empire, if you're using the Age of Empire variant, you have to use the Imperial II strategy card rather than Bureaucracy.

^this guy gets it

We usually play with Age of empire option and variant strategy card, using this set of strategy cards:

initiative
diplomacy II
political
logistic
trade II
warfare
technology II
imperial II

It leads to very smooth matches, so it became our standard set up.

I know this thread is very old, but I've enjoyed using the "Red Tape Bureaucracy" Variant, that is popular with some community members.
The "Red Tape Bureaucracy" Strategy Card can be seen (and printed from) here: http://checkwolf.com/ti3/images/high%20resolution/jpeg/sc%20bureaucracy_front.jpg
The rules discussion and explanation is here: https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/757071/red-tape-bureaucracy
In short:
-Setup the Age of Empire Objective Deck as normal
-When dealing out the Objective Deck, place one "Red Tape" marker (of your choice) on each dealt Public Objective Card
-Objective Cards that have a Red Tape marker cannot be claimed
-Red Tape markers are removed via the "Red Tape Bureaucracy" Strategy Card
I hope this helps!


text:
Why do some players get starting trade goods in 7 player TI3?
In 7 player Twilight Imperium there are 3 starting positions that get trade goods at the beginning of the game.  The position that gets 6 trade goods is obviously worse than the others. The two that get 4 don't seem worse than their adjacent starting positions. What is different about them, that they require the bonus trade goods?

Position 3, which gets the 6 trade goods is, as you say, clearly the worst, all cramped up there.
The two which get 4 trade goods, positions 1 & 2, only have 3 tiles which are directly connected to their home world, whereas the remaining 4 positions are connected to the board with 4 tiles. This gives them more movement options and I guess this would be why the others are compensated :)


text:
Are there any MTG cards which test for first strike?
Are there any Magic cards which test for first strike? I’m thinking of something like “Destroy target creature with first strike” or “Creatures with first strike get +1/+1 until end of turn”.

I removed your last sentence ("I’d also be interested in analogous questions for other keyworded abilities.") to keep the scope to one question.  Feel free to post a separate question if you want to ask something else

Four cards specifically check for first strike:

Kwende, Pride of Femeref has "Creatures you control with first strike have double strike."
Tresserhorn Skyknight has "Prevent all damage that would be dealt to Tresserhorn Skyknight by creatures with first strike."
Path of Mettle has

When Path of Mettle enters the battlefield, it deals 1 damage to each creature that doesn’t have first strike, double strike, vigilance, or haste.
Whenever you attack with at least two creatures that have first strike, double strike, vigilance, and/or haste, transform Path of Mettle.

Momentum Rumbler has

Whenever Momentum Rumbler attacks, if it doesn’t have first strike, put a first strike counter on it.
Whenever Momentum Rumbler attacks, if it has first strike, it gains double strike until end of turn.

A several cards gain or grant a variety of keyword abilities based on the abilities other creatures or creature cards have, including first strike:

Akroma, Vision of Ixidor
Cairn Wanderer
Concerted Effort
Escaped Shapeshifter
Kathril, Aspect Warper
Majestic Myriarch
Odric, Lunarch Marshal
Thunderous Orator

Several cards exile or otherwise remove cards, and then gain a variety of keyword abilities that those cards have:

Animus of Predation
Death-Mask Duplicant
Eater of Virtue
Rayami, First of the Fallen
Soulflayer
Urborg Scavengers

I found these using the Scryfall searches o:/creature.*with.*first strike/, o:/that.*have.*first strike/, o:/if.*has.*first strike/, and o:/as long as.*has.*first strike/. You could replace "first strike" with other keyword abilities in those searches to find cards that care about those keyword abilities.

Thank you for including the searches; that’s very useful information!

Try this search: https://scryfall.com/search?q=o%3A%22with+first+strike%22
Here are two cards that meet your criteria:

Kwende, Pride of Femeref
Tresserhorn Skyknight


text:
What are some of the different interactions with empty remote servers in Android: Netrunner?
This is a multi-part question about empty remote servers. Each of these questions came up during gameplay and I'm hoping to get clarification on them since some of the interactions aren't completely clear.

What defines an empty remote server? If a remote server has ICE
protecting it but no agenda/asset/whatever installed behind the ICE,
is it still empty?
Is an empty remote server analogous to a new
remote server? For an example of context, let's say when playing
Mushin No Shin.
Consider a remote server with no ICE that has an asset installed with an
ability that has a cost of trashing the asset (say, like the remove from game ability on Jackson
Howard). The runner runs on
the server and in response the corp trashes the asset. Does the
server still exist or is it simply an empty remote server? Is the
run still successful?

Can you explain how the corp trashes the Jackson Howard in #3? I'm having trouble finding which rule allows that. http://netrunnerdb.com/en/rules

Since this paid ability doesn't require a click, it can be used just before the card is accessed, so long as it is rezzed. http://netrunnerdb.com/en/rules#rop107

A remote server requires at least one piece of ICE protecting it or at least one card installed in the server itself (i.e. agenda/asset/upgrade) to exist. The three central servers always exist. "Empty" would refer to a server with only ICE protecting it, and nothing in it.

Empty servers already exist so is different from a new server. Cards like Mushin No Shin, which specify a new server, must interact with a new server (i.e. that they create).

If a server ceases to exist during the run (e.g. as the result of a Jackson Howard removal that you describe), the run immediately ends, and is considered neither successful nor unsuccessful.
The same is true if the trashed card is an ICE. For instance, if an empty server is defended only by a Data Mine which triggers, the server ceases to exist.

Interesting. So for the third question, triggers that need a successful or unsuccessful run will not apply, correct?

Exactly.  So, if you Dirty Laundry a naked Jackson Howard and the Corp uses his ability, you don't get the credits since it isn't successful.

The reference in the rules for #3 is http://netrunnerdb.com/en/rules#faq12, BUT I'm having trouble finding any justification in the rules for the Jackson Howard example in particular. A better example might be an empty server protected only by Paper Wall?

@AndrewVandever: On page 33 of the official rules, a run on a naked server immediately goes to step 4. Technically, the runner can decide to jack out, but if they're looking for a successful run that is unlikely. Then in step 4.1, cards can be rezzed and paid abilities can be triggered. Jackson's trash ability is a paid ability. When Jackson is trashed, this then causes the interaction that you are citing in the FAQ since the server is now destroyed.

In hindsight @AndrewVandever, that would actually make for a decent BG@SE question since run timings can become confusing.

Also, looks like the timing of a run was updated in the FAQ. Step 4.1 in the core rules is now step 4.3 in the FAQ.

@Ellesedil aha yeah, I see your point now. Boy, that is annoying! :)


text:
Do rules revert to 4 player rules midgame if someone gets eliminated?
When playing a 5 or more player game of Twilight Imperium and someone is completely removed from the game, do you revert to picking two strategy cards each as per a 4 player game?

This is covered in the FAQ on Fantasy Flight's website

No, nothing changes. The TI3 FAQ puts it fairly straightforwardly on the left hand side of page 2:

Elimination
A player who controls no planets and has no units on the board
  is eliminated from the game. He cannot play Action Cards or
  choose Strategy Cards. After a player has been eliminated, the
  other players continue the game normally, with no changes
  to the number of Strategy Cards taken, etc. When a player is
  eliminated, all his Action Cards are discarded and all of his
  race's Trade Agreements are removed from the game.

Once a player's eliminated, everyone plays by the same rules as they have been the whole game. You don't revert to rules for the current lower number of players.

As far as I know, a player cannot be eliminated from the game. He can lose all of his plastic figures, but still after each round he participates in the strategy- and action card distribution, by which he can affect the gameplay.
Conclusion from this would be that if the house wants to enable dropping a player, then it's house-rules specific.

http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/529087/player-elimination

Players do get eliminated completely; it is in the rules.


text:
What tap effect has precedence?
Suppose I control Wellwisher:

{T}: You gain 1 life for each Elf on the battlefield.

And my friend controls Ballynock Trapper:

{T}: Tap target creature.

Whenever you cast a white spell, you may untap Ballynock Trapper.

My question is who has precedence? Is there any way I can get my effect off and not be interrupted by his effect?
If I also control Seedborn Muse...

Untap all permanents you control during each other player's untap step.

... Would that change who has precedence?
I get the feeling that at least on my turn I would be able to use my abilities before he can use his, am I wrong on this?

murgatroid99 referenced this, but it's worth pointing out explicitly: "priority" has a specific meaning in Magic, sort of related to how you used the word in your question, but not the same.

@ikegami It's not terribly important, but I did read "priority" as asking which effect happens first (where "effect" includes both a tapping effect and a tapping cost) - "can I get my effect off and not get interrupted". Priority doesn't actually enter into that. And even though he referred to players having priority, it's not clear he's talking about order of chances to put things on the stack.

Mini-answer: as a general rule, tap-as-cost will trump tap-as-effect. (I'm sure there's corner cases where that's not true)

The rule is actually more general than that. Paying costs always trumps effects. If have the opportunity to pay a cost and you can actually pay it, no effect can stop you from paying it at that time.

The short answer is that no matter what your opponent does with their Trapper, they cannot prevent you from activating your Wellwisher and gaining the life.
The long answer involves explaining some of the key systems in the Magic rules.
Magic resolves spells and abilities using a system called "the stack". When you cast a spell or ability, it goes on top of the stack, and then any player and put an instant or ability on the stack. Then once nobody puts anything else on the stack, the spells and abilities resolve from the top down. This allows player to respond to spells or abilities with other spells or abilities, and the response resolves first. More information can be found on the relevant wiki page.
Magic also has a particular meaning for the word "priority", which is different from how you used it in the question. Basically, only one player gets priority at a time, and each player gets priority before any spell or ability resolves, to give each player the opportunity to respond. You gain priority very frequently, including at the end of almost every step of each player's turn, whenever a spell or ability is put on the stack, and whenever a spell or ability resolves from the stack.
Whatever the situation is, either you have priority, or your opponent does. In the first case, the sequence of events looks like this:

You activate your Wellwisher's ability. This consists of the following steps (often condensed into one action):

You announce that your are activating the ability.
You tap Wellwisher to pay for the cost of the ability.

The ability is now activated and on the stack. You pass priority. Your opponent now has the opportunity to respond.
Your opponent activates their Trapper's ability. This has a similar sequence of actions:

They announce that they are activating the ability.
They choose Wellwisher as the target of the ability.
They tap their Trapper to pay for the cost of the ability.

Now the Wellwisher's ability is on the stack, and the Trapper's ability is on top of it on the stack. Both players pass priority (this is often assumed to be the case when neither player announces any responses).
The Trapper's ability resolves, and it taps Wellwisher. Wellwisher is already tapped, so this doesn't do anything.
Both players pass priority again, and the Wellwisher's ability resolves. You gain a bunch of life.

In the second case, where your opponent has priority, the sequence of events looks very similar:

Your opponent activates his Trapper's ability, targeting Wellwisher and tapping the Trapper to pay the cost.
The Trapper's ability is now on the stack and activated. Your opponent passes priority.
You activate your Wellwisher's ability, tapping Wellwisher to pay the cost.
Now the Trapper's ability is on the stack, and the Wellwisher's ability is on top of it on the stack. Both players pass priority.
The Wellwisher's ability resolves, and you gain a bunch of life.
Both player's pass priority again, and the Trapper's ability resolves, tapping Wellwisher. Wellwisher is already tapped, so this doesn't do anything.

As you can see, it doesn't matter who activates their ability first. Either way, you can gain the life from Wellwisher.

It's probably worth pointing out: tapping these creatures doesn't happen after resolution. It happens whilst casting, as part of paying the costs. The asker or their friend appears to be under the impression that there's some period of time in which Ballynock Trapper could possibly tap the Wellwisher and thus fizzle its ability, but that isn't the case.

I tried to say that with the second sentence of the third paragraph, but I guess it wasn't clear.

Oh hey, you did! And I even read through that. Maybe it's fine.

OK, how does that look?

That looks great.

I didn't introduce the concept. I was trying to answer the question in language the asker would understand.

@ikegami Is this better?

You would in fact be able to activate Wellwisher's ability successfully on either player's turn. The Wellwisher would be untapped during your untap step; no player obtains priority during the Untap step. The next opportunity to activate abilities is during your Upkeep step. Because the active player has first priority, you can activate the Wellwisher then, paying its cost (tapping Wellwisher); your opponent cannot respond until after this has already occurred, while Wellwisher's ability is on the stack. At this point, Wellwisher's ability (on the stack) is essentially a separate entity, and the Trapper tapping Wellwisher has no effect upon the ability's resolution.
On your opponent's turn, this is no different. Seedborn Muse would untap your Wellwisher as expected; however, your opponent would receive first priority during the Upkeep step, as it is their turn. If they activate Ballynock Trapper's ability targeting your Wellwisher, then both players must gain and pass priority before the ability resolves. When this occurs, you can activate your Wellwisher's ability, which as a cost will tap itself and place the ability on the stack. The Wellwisher's ability will (unless otherwise prevented, by Azorious Guildmage, etc.) resolve, and then the Trapper's ability will resolve, tapping the Wellwisher to no effect.
http://wizards.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/500
In either case, at some point, before anything can resolve which would destroy, tap, or otherwise affect your Wellwisher, you can activate the ability; after this, the ability on the stack is effectively independent of Wellwisher, and will not be prevented if Wellwisher is tapped or even destroyed.
There are some exceptions to the previously stated rule -- for example, if it's your opponent's turn a Sudden Death targeting Wellwisher during their Upkeep would prevent Wellwisher from being able to activate its ability while Sudden Death is on the stack, and Wellwisher would be destroyed when Sudden Death resolved. On your turn, however, you could immediately activate Wellwisher's ability (as you have priority); after you pass priority, your opponent could respond with Sudden Death, which would almost certainly successfully kill Wellwisher, but the Wellwisher's ability would still be on the stack and would resolve as expected.
(My apologies for including this as a separate answer; if I could currently comment, my two cents would take the form of constructive criticism addressed at the excellent, but not yet perfected, answer by murgatroid99.)


text:
Can the player choose a different player as a target?
In a Twilight Imperium (3rd edition) game, when the "Checks and balances (LAW)" card is in play, which states

When a player chooses a Strategy Card during the Strategy Phase, he must give the chosen card to another player (who does not currently have a Strategy Card).

And if somebody then uses the Action Card "Public Disgrace", which says

After a player has chosen a Strategy Card, play this card to force the player to return that Strategy Card and choose a different one.

The question is: can the player then use a different target for the new Strategy Card, or should the target stay the same and would he get the next card too?

I couldn't find any rules that back up this specific situation but this is my interpretation. The trigger for the LAW states:

When a player chooses a Strategy Card...

So if someone were to play an action card which forces that player to put their current strategy card back and choose a different strategy card, the LAW would trigger again allowing the player to choose the same person to give the strategy card to or a different person.


text:
How does Snare! work in Netrunner?
Snare! says ,"If accessed from R&D the runner must reveal it". It then allows the corp to pay 4 credits to give 3 net damage and add a tag. It also mentions to ignore this affect if Snare! is accessed from Archives.
This confuses me a little because I am not sure what to do if the card is accessed from a remote server or from HQ. Do you still get the option to give damage and a tag if it is accessed? Why then would it specifically mention R&D if there is no difference than HQ or a remote server?

Normally the Corp doesn't get to see what cards the runner accesses from R&D. This would mean the corp wouldn't know they could spend 4C to deal the damage! When accessed from HQ or a remote server, the Corp already knows what the card is, and so can pay 4C to deal the damage.
By making the runner reveal the card when accessed from R&D, the corp gets a chance to choose to use the ability on Snare!
The effect triggers when accessed from anywhere other than archives.

You could contrast this with "Shock", which was just printed in True Colours.  Shock has the same sort of text (if accessed from R&D the runner must reveal), but it doesn't have the caveat about archives... meaning: it still causes net damage even when accessed from the archives (in addition to when it is accessed from R&D, your hand, or a remote server)!  Throw 3 of them facedown in the archives (with a SEA Source and Scorched Earth in hand, or maybe a Punitive Counterstrike if there are actually agendas in there too). and you've just ruined a runner's day.


text:
In Civilization do players discard defeated army cards at the end of a battle?
In Civilization, at the end of a battle, do players discard defeated army cards or do the defeated army cards return to the players' hands?

According to the rules of the base game (p. 25), eliminated unit cards are discarded and put face up under the appropriate deck on the market board.  Any unit cards not eliminated during the battle return to their owners (this is true for both the winner and the loser of the battle).

So it's possibletaht at some point in the game a user looses all his cards. What happends then if someone engage another combat against him ?

In this case the player "fights" with his military bonus alone. It is even possible that this bonus is sufficient to win the battle, which is a scenario covered by FAQ 2.0, p. 4.


text:
Does Summary Dismissal Send a Transformed Card to the graveyard?
If the transform ability of a card has triggered and then the opponent plays Summary Dismissal, what happens to the card that would have been transformed? Does it un-transform or go the graveyard?

Summary Dismissal exiles spells and counters abilities, all things that only exist on the stack. Why would that do anything to a permanent on the battlefield? Are they casting Summary Dismissal in response to the ability that transforms the card?

Yes, they are casting Summary Dismissal in response to the ability that transforms that card.

If Summary Dismissal is cast in response to an ability that transforms a card that ability will be countered and thus removed from the stack. Since the ability to would transform the card no longer exists the card will not transform (it will not un-transform since it never transformed in the first place). If it was an activated ability that was countered it can still be activated again assuming the costs for it can be payed a second time. If it was a triggered ability it will trigger again the next time its condition is met.
If Summary Dismissal is cast after a card has transformed it will have no effect of the card at all since it only effects abilities that are currently on the stack, and can't do anything about ones that have already resolved.

Only activated and triggered abilities on the stack are countered. Static abilities of objects remain unaffected, and activated and triggered abilities of objects may be activated or may trigger again later in the turn. Spells and abilities that have already resolved aren’t affected.

Countering transform abilities should never cause a permanent to go to the graveyard, the closest thing I can find is cards like Accursed Witch that die and return to the battlefield transformed, in this case they would stay in the graveyard.


text:
MTG. Using goblin chirurgeon's ability only for sacrifice
I had a Goblin Sharpshooter, sixty-some goblin tokens, and a Goblin Chirurgeon on the field (all with haste). My opponent had an enchantment that kept me from directly attacking him (2 life or {W} for each attacker), so I wanted to use my Chirurgeon's ability ("Sacrifice a Goblin: Regenerate target creature") to kill a creature which will untap my Sharpshooter. Do I NEED a regenerate target to sacrifice a goblin?

Yes, you must choose a valid target when activating a targeting ability. The ability says "target creature", so you must target a creature. Any creature will do[1]. Fortunately, you have plenty of valid targets (i.e. creatures), including your Goblin Sharpshooter and Goblin Chirurgeon (or even the token you are sacrificing, although that won't save it).
The following describes what happens in detail:

Activate Goblin Sharpshooter activated ability targeting your opponent.
Goblin Sharpshooter activated ability resolves

Goblin Sharpshooter deals one damage to your opponent.

Activate Goblin Chirurgeon's ability targeting Goblin Sharpshooter, sacrificing a token.

Goblin Sharpshooter's triggered ability triggers.

Goblin Sharpshooter's triggered ability is placed on the stack.
Goblin Sharpshooter's triggered ability resolves.

Untap Goblin Sharpshooter.

Goblin Chirurgeon's ability resolves.

Goblin Sharpshooter gains a regeneration shield.

Repeat.

Regenerating a creature grants it a shield that replaces its destruction the next time it would be destroyed that turn, if any. There's no requirement that you think it will be needed.

Unless an ability prevents it (e.g. "Protection from Red").

Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.


text:
What happens if Matter Reshaper reveals a land?
When Matter Reshaper dies, it lets me reveal the top card of my deck. If it is a permanent with a converted mana cost of 3 or less, I put it onto the battlefield. If not, I put it into my hand. What happens if I reveal a land card? I assume it puts it onto the battlefield, but I just want to double check.

Lands have a converted mana cost of 0, since that is equal to or less than 3 you are able to put it onto the battlefield.

202.3a The converted mana cost of an object with no mana cost is 0, unless that object is the back face of a double-faced permanent or is a melded permanent.

As a note this land will not count as your land for the turn, since it was not 'Played' but instead put directly onto the battlefield.


text:
Rolling and passing dice in Inn-Fighting
We picked up the d&d dice game Inn-Fighting by Wizards of the Coast yesterday and gave it a whirl.
A few questions came up that the rules and available FAQs don't seem to clarify.

I have a wizard adventurer, who has a defense ability that has me roll all 6 dice and deal damage other characters. If Bob attacks me and I sucessfully use this ability and roll all 6 dice, what will get passed to the next player - whatever my ability's roll came up, or should I reset the dice back to what Bob rolled before his attack?
On a similar note, what if the defense die shows an ale or dice, and someone needs to roll it. Do they reset it back to what it showed before they rolled, or pass it as whatever it just came up as?

We ended up ruling whatever any dice last rolled gets passed, but I'd love to have a clarification on that.


text:
Phyrexian Unlife and Necropotence
So I have a 5 color deck and  I was wondering how Necropotence and Phyrexian Unlife interact in certain circumstances. I understand that once my life becomes 0 or less I cannot pay life to draw cards, but if I were to have 1 life left, would I only be able to pay one life or would I be able to pay  more than that and draw more cards dropping my life total into the negatives, like an attack when you have 1 life left for 5 damage would leave you with -4 life and 0 poison counters. The way I currently see it is I would only be able to pay 1 life exile a card then my life total is 0 and I can no longer exile anymore cards. Normally in this deck I'd be using Necropotence with Venser's Journal and Elixir of Immortality,but I was wondering if Necropotence might benefit from Phyrexian Unlife as well.
Also somewhat of an aside to this question but I also use Death's Shadow in this deck, am I correct in assuming that if my life total is -4 death's shadow would get +4/+4 making it a 17/17.

I you are at 1 life you can only activate Necropotence once, this is because paying the life is a cost and that happens when you activate the ability, before anyone gets priority again [601.2]. So by the time you have the ability to activate it a second time you are already at 0 life, and thus unable to pay more.
As for Death's Shadow it does indeed get +X/+X when you are at negative life totals. From the Gatherer rulings:

If your life total is less than 0 and an effect (such as the one from an opponent's Abyssal Persecutor) is keeping you from losing the game, Death's Shadow's ability will actually increase its power and toughness. For example, if your life total is -2, Death's Shadow gets +2/+2.

And even if the ability were "Pay X life: ...", thus sidestepping the "activate it once at a time" issue, you still wouldn't be able to pay more life than you have. (118.4. If a cost or effect allows a player to pay an amount of life greater than 0, the player may do so only if his or her life total is greater than or equal to the amount of the payment.)

This answer fell out of date with the release of Hour of Devastation. Death's Shadow no longer gets +X/+X when your life total is negative. Instead, X will just be zero. See rule 107.1b here.


text:
Can you crew a Vehicle that is already a creature?
Let's pretend I control a Mobile Garrison and a Veteran Motorist.
I crew the Garrison with my Motorists (sweet +1/+1 bonus).
I attack with the Garrison, and I untap the Motorists with the triggered ability.
At this point, can I tap the Motorists to crew the Garrison again and get another +1/+1?

If a vehicle is already a creature (perhaps because it's been crewed already, or you cast Ensoul Artifact on it or something), you can even crew it with itself, though I imagine that's a highly situational play.

You can activate a Crew ability multiple times. Normally doing so doesn't do anything (other than tapping the creature used to crew the vehicle), however since the Motorist has an triggered ability that triggers on crewing a vehicle the trigger will still occur.
From the Gatherer rulings on every vehicle:

You may activate a crew ability of a Vehicle even if it’s already an artifact creature. Doing so has no effect on the Vehicle. It doesn’t change its power and toughness.

Yes, you can Crew a Vehicle while it is a creature. Adding the Creature type does not remove the Crew ability, and there is no stipulation in the Crew ability that it can only be activated if the Vehicle is not a creature.


text:
Can a countered spell be targeted?
Let's assume that Alice and Bob are playing.
Alice casts Serra Avatar. Bob casts an Essence Backlash targeting the Avatar.
Alice, realizing that that would kill her, casts an Autumn's Veil.
Bob casts an overloaded Counterflux.
Can the Essence Backlash still target the Serra Avatar even if  it is already countered?

Autumn's Veil won't stop Essence Backlash damage, even if it doesn't counter the creature. Bob could just not cast Counterflux and win.

@Pablo You're right, Essence Backlash has a specific clarification: "Essence Backlash can target a creature spell that can't be countered. If Essence Backlash resolves, it won't counter the spell but it will still deal damage." While Serra Avatar can't be countered, it can still be targeted by abilities that counter spells. Here is a relevant rules tip article.

It will still be targeting the Avatar but since it is no longer a legal target, due to being in the graveyard and not on the stack, the Backlash will "fizzle" (be countered due to lacking a legal target). This means that it will not deal damage to the Avatar's controller.

701.5a To counter a spell or ability means to cancel it, removing it from the stack. It doesn’t resolve and none of its effects occur. A countered spell is put into its owner’s graveyard.
608.2b If the spell or ability specifies targets, it checks whether the targets are still legal. A target that's no longer in the zone it was in when it was targeted is illegal. ... The spell or ability is countered if all its targets, for every instance of the word "target," are now illegal.

Note that if the Counterflux hadn't been overloaded and just targeted the Veil the Avatar would still be on the stack to get countered and Alice would then lose.

Alice will not die because an overloaded Counterflux also counters Serra Avatar, and therefore Essence Backlash does not deal damage.
In the order that you described, Counterflux is the last spell to enter the stack, and therefore the first to resolve. It counters Autumn's Veil and Serra Avatar, removing both from the stack. Essence Backlash no longer has a valid target and when it comes to resolving it, it is instead removed from the stack and does not resolve, therefore dealing no damage.
If Bob had not overloaded the Counterflux and countered only Autumn's Veil, Alice would have died from Essence Backlash. If Bob had not played Counterflux at all, Alice would still have died because even though Autumn's Veil prevents the Serra Angel from being countered by Essence Backlash, it does not prevent the damage of Essence Backlash, because the damage is not conditional upon actually countering the creature spell.
Countered spells are removed from the stack:

601.2a The player announces that he or she is casting the spell. That card (or that copy of a card) moves from where it is to the stack. It becomes the topmost object on the stack. It has all the characteristics of the card (or the copy of a card) associated with it, and that player becomes its controller. The spell remains on the stack until it’s countered, it resolves, or an effect moves it elsewhere.

A spell for which all targets are illegal at the time of resolution does not resolve and is removed from the stack without causing any effect:

608.2b If the spell or ability specifies targets, it checks whether the targets are still legal.[..]  If all its targets, for every instance of the word “target,” are now illegal, the spell or ability doesn’t resolve. It’s removed from the stack and, if it’s a spell, put into its owner’s graveyard. [..]

So a countered spell is removed from the stack?

"Counter target spell" means "Move that spell from the stack to the graveyard. It doesn't resolve" (basically)


text:
Can a kinged piece jump another king?
Can a kinged piece jump another king piece?

If a kinged piece could not be jumped, how would the game end?

As was indicated by @JaysonSmith, a king can always be jumped by another king. This holds for any variant of draughts/checkers.
The privileges that a king obtains differ by variant, however.

backward movement: in all variants, kings can move backward, but men cannot.
backward capture: in all variants, kings can jump backward, but men cannot for American/English checkers/draughts, Italian, Spanish, Czech and Thai draughts.
long range movement and capture: a king can move and capture long ranged (like a bishop in chess) for International, Frisian, Russian, Spanish, Czech and Thai draughts, as well as for Pool checkers, whereas men are short ranged in all variants.
invulnerable being captured by men: a king cannot be jumped by men in Italian draughts.

Great answer, TemplateRex! You even covered the rules of Dominican Checkers that I used to play, called Taperos.

Yes, a kinged-piece can certainly jump another kinged-piece. In fact, having a kinged-piece does NOT make it invulnerable to being 'jump'. This means that even a NON-kinged-piece can jump a kinged-piece. The only advantage to kinging a piece is that it is able to move both Forward and Backward. A non-kinged-piece can be severely limited in jumping due to this rule. Thus, if a non-kinged piece were in position to jump three opponent's pieces in a row, but the second jump required the non-kinged piece to jump backwards, the non-kinged piece would have to resort to only jumping the first opponent's piece.


text:
Stuffy Doll blocking 11/11 trampler. Phyrexian Obliterator blocks 11/11 trampler
What my problem is when last night a Stuffy Doll blocked my 11/11 trampler, the result was me taking 11 damage and Stuffy Doll absorbing one of that damage from the defending player who took ten damage. We called mtg for a ruling and that was the one given. How is it that Stuffy Doll takes 11 damage, but at the same time ten of it gets through to opponent? I was expecting to take one damage from Stuffy Doll, seeing as how Stuffy Doll only really took one. I don't understand that in one case Stuffy Doll has taken one and in the other Stuffy Doll has taken 11. Sounds like a logical fallacy ie 1 = 11.
Second question is what if I block an 11/11 trampler with a Phyrexian Obliterator ? Will the opponent have to sacrifice 5 permanents or 11 permanents?  Would it be any different if the attacking creature didn't have trample?

You should have only taken 1 damage.  When damage happens, you choose how to assign your 11 damage. You must assign at least 1 to Stuffy Doll. Because your creature has trample, you can assign the other 10 to your opponent. Even though Stuffy Doll has indestructible, 1 damage is still considered lethal damage. So Stuffy Doll will take 1 damage, your opponent will take 10, and Stuffy Doll will deal you 1 damage.
Similar thing for your other question. Your opponent must assign at least 5 damage to your obliterator. He can assign as much as 11. So how many permanents he sacrifices depends on how much he chooses to assign. If his creature does not have trample, he must assign all 11 to the obliterator, and he will sacrifice 11 permanents.

100% correct. 702.19b The controller of an attacking creature with trample first assigns damage to the creature(s) blocking it. Once all those blocking creatures are assigned lethal damage, any remaining damage is assigned as its controller chooses among those blocking creatures and the player or planeswalker the creature is attacking.

Thank you so much Gendolkari and ikegami.  That makes sense and is exactly what I figured.  In the past I raised the question of 11 powered creature blocking an Obliterator and he said I would only have to sac 5 permanents because that is all the creature could take.  I figured he was wrong.  You guys are awesome for clearing this up for me.  You would think I know how to play this game with ten years of experience but there are some technical fine points that always need to be cleared up here and there in order to really get your fundamentals cemented in stone.  Thanks again.  Arthur.


text:
How much mana can I tap per turn?
So I am fairly new to Magic and I have read the entire rulebook multiple times and it never gave a clear answer," how many mana can I tap per turn", because to would just feel weird to be tapping all of the mana for example with my Arbor Colossus he requires 3 forest and 3 of any mana to attack, so if I get enough do I tap them all at once or do they stay tapped after each turn?

Arbor Colossus does not require any mana to attack.

The basic question here is good, but the example is poor. It would be sweet if you could reword it to take out the inaccurate bits. :)

There is no limit to the number of lands that you can tap per turn. For your other question, all of your tapped permanents will untap at the start of each of your turns, during the "untap" step.
You have a few different important basic terminology mixed up though. Mana and Land are 2 different things. Land is a type of card, one that most commonly produces mana (but some lands do not produce any mana). Thus, "Forest" is not a type of mana, "Green" is a type of mana, and Forests are cards that produce Green mana when tapped.
Also, you do not need to pay mana to attack with creatures, including Arbor Colossus. You need to pay mana to cast Arbor Colossus (to out him from your hand into the battlefield), and to activate his "Monstrosity" ability, which gives him 3 +1/+1 counters.

Given the OP's newness to the game, I would emphasize that casting Arbor Colossus and activating his Monstrous ability are two entirely separate actions. This is obvious to experienced players, but I could imagine a new player might be confused about that from your wording.

First, let me echo the point brought up by other answers that you do not tap mana, you tap lands (and sometimes, creatures or artifacts) to produce mana. That's important.
Now, the core question: why is there no limit on how many times you can do this per turn? I suspect you're missing one critical piece of information, which is that each land which is a Forest has the ability

{T}: Add {G} to your mana pool.

where {T} is the tap symbol and {G} is the green mana symbol. Somewhat confusingly, this ability is not printed on the card (except for very old Forests), but it is there nonetheless.[CR 305.6] So there is nothing special about how you produce mana from a land. It's just an ability that you can activate.
You can activate an ability at various times during the game, as long as you can pay the cost.[CR 602.2, 601.2a] After you activate an ability, you always get another chance to activate an ability.[CR 116] Nothing in the rules gives any limit on the number of times you can activate an ability per turn; as long as you can pay the cost, you're free to activate as many abilities as you want. (And there are decks that rely on being able to activate thousands of abilities in one turn.)

First of all, you cannot tap mana at all. Mana only exists in your mana pool, it is not a permanent of any kind that can be tapped. Lands, like Forest, can be tapped to produce mana. There are also creatures and artifacts that can be tapped for mana.
Secondly, you usually only want to tap lands (or creatures or artifacts) for mana when you have something to pay for that needs mana, you technically can pretty much whenever you want to but there isn't generally a reason to. In the case of Arbor Colossus that is casting it (which takes 2 generic mana and 3 green mana) and activating its Monstrous ability (which takes 3 generic mana and 3 green mana). It doesn't take any mana to make it attack, or block.
Finally, at the beginning of each of your turns you have an Untap Step where you untap all of your tapped permanents. Once they are untapped you are free to tap them again to pay for other things, but once you've used it to pay for something you can't use it again until it is untapped again.

Number 2 is wrong. You can activate an activated ability any time you have priority, including mana abilities. You don't need to wait until you have something to do with the mana. There's just not usually a reason to tap lands until you need the mana.

@Gendolkari you're right, in trying to simplify it I went a little too far


text:
Who determines the target creature or player when a card says "deals 1 damage to target creature or player"?
Vigilante Justice says "Whenever a Human enters the battlefield under your control, Vigilante Justice deals 1 damage to target creature or player." Do I decide if the damage goes to the creature or player or does my opponent?

Whoever controls Vigilante Justice chooses the targets. The ability is a triggered ability, and the rules for triggered abilities say

603.3a A triggered ability is controlled by the player who controlled its source at the time it triggered, unless it's a delayed triggered ability. To determine the controller of a delayed triggered ability, see rules 603.7d–f.
603.3d The remainder of the process for putting a triggered ability on the stack is identical to the process for casting a spell listed in rules 601.2c–d. If a choice is required when the triggered ability goes on the stack but no legal choices can be made for it, or if a rule or a continuous effect otherwise makes the ability illegal, the ability is simply removed from the stack.
601.2c The player [who controls the ability] announces his or her choice of an appropriate player, object, or zone for each target the spell requires.

The "source" of the ability is the object that has the ability, which in this case is Vigilante Justice, so Vigilante Justice's controller controls the ability. When the ability triggers, as part of the process of putting it on the stack, that player chooses the targets.

Whoever controls the Vigilante Justice and the Human chooses which creature or player it will target.
This is because whomever controls the Vigilante Justice controls its trigger [603.3a] and whoever controls the trigger chooses the targets [601.2c]

Whoever controls vigilante justice and the human entering play decides.

The fact that it only triggers when creatures enter the battlefield under your control has nothing to do with who controls the ability or chooses the targets. Without that last clause, the answer would be the same.

Silly me. Edited appropriately.


text:
How many counters for each turn for Abzan?
I've just started playing mtg like a week ago and the first deck I've bought was Abzan Siege. Problem is I'm a bit confused on one thing, how many counters can you put on a creature at each turn? Is it only one +1/+1 per turn or as many as I want as long as I have sufficient lands?

Your question is a little ambiguous, or you're asking two questions in one. One question is, "How many +1/+1 counters can I put on a creature per turn?", the answer to which is, "As many as your abilities/spells allow". The other is, "How many times can I use Outlast per turn?", the answer to which is, "As many times as you can pay the cost", which is probably once per creature per turn, assuming you don't have a way to untap between casts.

The deck Abzan Siege has several different ways of putting +1/+1 counters on creatures and how often you can do it depends on exactly which card is doing it.
For any of the cards with Outlast like Abzan Battle Priest you can normally only activate the ability once each turn since tapping the creature is part of the cost of the ability in addition to the mana you need to pay. If you can find a way to untap the creature on your turn you can activate it again, but since you can only activate Outlast as a sorcery your Ivorytusk Fortress will not help you get additional activations out of it.
For ones with a triggered ability like Armament Corps you get to distribute the counters only once when the creature enters the battlefield.
For ones with an activated ability that doesn't require tapping like High Sentinels of Arashin you can activate the ability as many times as you want as long as you have the mana to pay for it.

You can't put counters on creatures just for the fun of it. You can only do so when an effect tells you to.
But there is no separate rule giving a maximum number of counters that can be added in this way. So however many counters you are instructed to put on a creature by the effects of spells and abilities, that is the number of counters you can put on that creature each turn. If effects tell you to put a million +1/+1 counters on a creature, then you put a million +1/+1 counters on.

I assume that you are talking about the Outlast ability on cards like Longshot Squad. In that case you can only activate the ability once per turn in most cases. The rule for Outlast, 702.106a says

Outlast is an activated ability. "Outlast [cost]" means “[Cost], {T}: Put a +1/+1 counter on this creature. Activate this ability only any time you could cast a sorcery."

This is also clarified in the reminder text on that card, which says

Outlast {1}{G} ({1}{G}, {T}: Put a +1/+1 counter on this creature. Outlast only as a sorcery.)

Part of the cost of activating the ability is tapping the creature. So, once you activate it, you can't activate it again until you untap the creature again, which is usually your next untap step.


text:
Is Flesh Allergy combined with Grave Pact counterproductive?
I need a little help again.
Imagine the following situation: I have Grave Pact, Bloodthrone Vampire and 9 other creatures on the battlefield. The opponent has only one creature on the battlefield but can prevent all combat damage - no chance to deal damage at the moment.
Then I draw Flesh Allergy. Great since the opponent has 11 life left over! I want to cast Flesh Allergy, sacrifice 10 creatures (using Bloodthrone Vampire for the remaining 9 creatures, one is sacked through Flesh Allergy itself) and deal 11 damage to my opponent (my 10 creatures including his 1 equals 11 damage).
~ Question 1: Does my Grave Pact make it impossible to "destroy target creature" (Flesh Allergy) since my opponent would have sacrificed his creatures?
~ Question 2: What if I first cast Flesh Allergy and after the spell has resolved I (as an interrupt so to speak) sacrifice 10 creatures to deal maximum damage? Then the second ability would resolve?
An educated answer would be much appreciated.
Cheers!

Question 1: Does my Grave Pact make it impossible to "destroy target creature" (Flesh Allergy) since my opponent would have sacrificed his creatures?

You can cast the Flesh Allergy targeting their creature, but the spell will fizzle when it goes to resolve since the creature will have already been sacrificed due to Grave Pact's trigger.

Question 2: What if I first cast Flesh Allergy and after the spell has resolved I (as an interrupt so to speak) sacrifice 10 creatures to deal maximum damage? Then the second ability would resolve?

There is no opportunity to cast spells or activate abilities during a spell's resolution. Flesh Allergy checks to see how many creatures have died this turn when it goes to resolve, and creatures that die later in the turn will have no effect.

Thanks a lot for the quick answer.
So there goes my Flesh Allergy ... :-)


text:
Furyblade Vampire vs Blinding Mage
The Blinding Mage has an ability to tap a target creature. Furyblade Vampire has the ability to discard a card at the beginning of combat for +3/+0. I don't see who has to act first? Furyblade doesn't want to discard a card if it cannot attack, but the Blinding Mage might not want to spend the resources to tap if Furyblade isn't buffed? Who has the last say?
player1: discard card to buff Furyblade
(does player2 get the option to use abilities?)
player2: use Blinding Mage's ability to tap Furyblade

Furyblade Vampire has a triggered ability, and Blinding Mage has an activated ability. In this case, that means that the player with the Vampire has more restricted options, and basically has the worst expected outcomes with this interaction.
Here's how it plays out (let's say Amy controls the Furyblade Vampire, and Nat controls the Blinding Mage):

Amy's Beginning of Combat step starts. Furyblade Vampire's ability triggers and goes on the stack.
Both players have an opportunity to act. Nat can activate Blinding Mage's ability at this time, but he's probably better off waiting.
Furyblade Vampire's ability resolves. At this point, Amy chooses whether to discard a card.
Both players have another opportunity to act. At this point, Nat can choose whether to activate Blinding Mage, depending on whether Amy chose to discard a card.

The Blinding Mage will have the opportunity to tap the Furyblade Vampire after its controller has decided if they will discard a card or not.
In Magic who gets/has to act is based on a system called priority. The super short version of priority is a player needs to have priority in order to cast spells or activate abilities. Before any spell or ability resolves all players must pass priority without doing anything. If priority is passed by all players without anything being on the stack the game moves to the next step or phase.
The Combat Phase has several steps inside of it, the first two the Beginning of Combat Step and Declare Attackers Step are the ones that are relevant to this question.
The Vampire's ability triggers 'At the beginning of combat on your turn', this means that it triggers during the Beginning of Combat Step. After the ability resolves (and you have chosen either to discard a card or not) your opponent will receive priority (they technically also get priority before the ability resolves, but since they wouldn't want to use their Mage's ability then I'm skipping over it), which means they have the opportunity to cast spells or activate abilities like Blinding Mage's.
The Declare Attackers Step is when you would actually declare the Vampire as an attacker if it is not tapped. Note that you can't just try and do something like 'I discard a card to the Furyblade's trigger and attack with it.' to try and skip your opponents ability to tap it. If you try and do something like this they have every right to back the game up and tap your Vampire.

The sequence of events (and steps) is as follows:

Game moves to Beginning of Combat step.
Furyblade trigger goes on stack.
Both players gain priority (Active, then non-active)
Trigger resolves, controller may discard to buff.
Both players gain priority (Active, then non-active)
Game moves to Declare Attackers step.

At either steps 3 or 5 Blinding Mage can be activated.  Since both times are before Declare Attackers, if Furyblade is tapped it can't attack. Since step 5 is after the buff has been applied, tapping it there wastes the buff.


text:
Attaching equipment, when the equipment wasn't actually cast
Lets say, I use a Genesis Wave, and I reveal an equipment. Can that equipment enter the battlefield 'automatically' attached to a creature already in play? Or does it just enter the battlefield, and I have to attach it by paying its equip cost during a main phase?
(Secondary clarification, is it true I can't put auras/equips on creatures also revealed by genesis wave?)

Equipments never enter the battlefield attached to a creature unless an effect specifically says that it does, no matter whether you cast it or put it onto the battlefield with a card like Genesis Wave.
Aura Enchantments, on the other hand, always enter the battlefield attached to something. If you cast an Aura, it enters the battlefield attached to the object that was the target of the spell. If you put it directly onto the battlefield with a card like Genesis Wave, you choose at that time what object it attaches to. Just like casting an Aura, this choice is constrained by the "Enchant [something]" ability on the aura, so an aura with "Enchant Creature" can only be attached to a creature, whether or not it was cast.
One caveat you should keep in mind is that Genesis Wave puts all of the permanents onto the battlefield simultaneously, so you cannot attach an aura from among those permanents to another one of those permanents. This is different from a card like Warp World, which puts Enchantments onto the battlefield after other cards so that you can attach those Enchantments to other permanents that it puts onto the battlefield.

Technicality - Aura Enchantments always enter the battlefield enchanting something that they could legally enchant. An Aura with "Enchant land" will come in attached to a land, for example.

I added a bit to that paragraph to explain that.

I was thinking the same thing. I added a paragraph about that.

alright thanks!
now i know that if i keep one mana open, and i reveal a 'swiftfoot boots' i can at least haste mana producing creatures that genesis wave revealed that turn.
thanks again!

I'm glad I was able to help. You can click the checkmark next to the answer to "accept" it, which indicates that it answered your question/solved your problem.

A bit tangential so no need to add, but it's worth noting that when you cast an Aura you can't target permanents with Shroud (or Hexproof if your opponent controls them), but when the Aura enters due to Genesis Wave or for some other reason, those permanents are fair game.

"Equipments never enter the battlefield attached to a creature" Grifter's Blade does :)

I have never seen that card before. I added a caveat to that line.


text:
MTG - Cards that share names stack abilities?
Ability: When Aether Poisoner enters the battlefield you get {E}{E}.
Does this mean if I already have one aether poisoner on the field and I play a second that the ability will stack and I'll get {E}{E}{E}{E}?
If the answer to the previous question in yes, then consider the following:
{U}: Dukhara Peafowl gains flying until end of turn.
Does this mean that if I have 2 Dukhara peafowls I merely have to pay {U} once in order to give both flying?

No. This does not work that way, The first Creature has entered the battlefield and triggered the ability. It does not then enter the battlefield a second time if you play a second Aether Poisoner. In this situation the only thing the cards share is a name. The ability is exclusive to the card it is read on at the time unless it states otherwise.
In your second example Manna abilities are exclusive to each card so you would have to pay the cost twice - Once for each copy of the card in play. That's provided that you wanted to give both of them flying, you can pay the cost once and give one of them flying.


text:
Help identify: multi-player but single character role playing game
(This is a question which overlaps with role-playing games, you will see why when you read it; however this seemed to fit it slightly better.)
My friend mentioned he had a role-playing game which plays like the following: Every player controls one single, shared character. The players take turns to give the character commands on their turn, sometimes rolling dice to decide certain factors e.g. the existence of a certain facility in a town. Each player has a goal which they are attempting to make the character achieve while foiling the other players' goals - however no players are aware of the other players' goals. Each player is also provided with a number of "points" which are used similarly to gambling chips. The person who is prepared to pay the most points takes the next go, but loses the points they played.
My friend is cannot remember the name of the game, but has created a homemade rendition. He is not even sure if it ever existed outside of his mind. My question is, does this game exist, and if so, what is it called?

I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it should be migrated to Role-playing Games Stack Exchange.

Perhaps you're thinking of Everyone is John?

The main concept is that every player but one plays a voice in "John's" head. All of these voices are trying to get John to do something that they like.

Other similarities:

Shared character: Everyone is John, obviously.
Hidden goals: EiJ gives each "voice" three hidden goals of varying feasibility, worth points based on their difficulty.
Points: Voices bid to get control of John at various points in the game

If someone has a better source than 1d4chan I'd be ecstatic if you could add it in comment or edit, but as Everyone is John is a pretty small RPG mainly distributed online that was the source that I knew it from.

https://rpggeek.com/rpg/18124/everyone-john

Take this game, and play a session inspired by the book John Dies at the End.  I think that could be highly entertaining, and thematically appropriate on both counts.


text:
Selfless Spirit Vs Unsummon
My opponent plays Wrath of God. In response I use Chord of Calling to get Selfless Spirit, so I can sacrifice Selfless Spirit and have all of my creatures become indestructible. Then my opponent responds to that action with Unsummon.
Would the Selfless Spirit's ability still resolves before the Wrath of God (and would it be sacrificed) - or - will Selfless return to my hand (and its ability will not resolve)?

Possible duplicate of "Wrath of God" -VS- "Chord of Calling" + "Selfless Spirit" sacrificed in response

@tsuma534 It's not quite a duplicate - this question is building upon the previous one and asking whether a different effect would prevent Selfless Spirit's ability. It may have a relevant answer already in another question.

@tsuma534 looks like a duplicate on first look, but this new question arised as new gamming actions occurred. Previous one laid on the stack subject, this one laid on the sacrifice action.

Seems like it's not a duplicate because Unsummon is an instant. With Wrath of God, there's only one order possible: Wrath, then Chord, then sacrifice Selfless Spirit. With Unsummon, depending on priority, you could have Chord, Spirit (and no Unsummon), or Chord, Unsummon, Spirit.

Well, the question has an answer there, and the answer is: The stack.

Costs are paid when the ability is put on the stack.  Sacrificing Selfless Spirit happens as soon as you put the ability on the stack. The selfless spirit is no longer there to be the target of unsummon, even though the ability is still on the stack.

As a consequence of this, the opponent had no chance to cast the Unsummon at all (at least not targeting Selfless Spirit). I'd say that might be worth mentioning.

Well, they could cast it if it's their turn. The active player (the player whose turn it is) gets priority after a spell or ability resolves, so when Chord of Calling resolves, if it's the opponent's turn, they'll get priority and could cast Unsummon. It's mostly pointless, because the OP could then sacrifice Selfless Spirit in response, but I suppose they might do it if they wanted to force the decision about whether to sacrifice it.

I suppose that the same would happen if a lightning bolt for example would be casted in response to the sacrifice action. So, sacrificing a creature would instanteanously remove it of the battlefield. Thank you for all the answers! You have been very helpfull :)


text:
Does copying a clue count as investigating?
Question regarding investigation. If I create a copy of a clue token (e.g. with Saheeli Rai), does that count as investigating for Erdwal Illuminator?
701.34a "Investigate" means "Put a colorless Clue artifact token onto the battlefield. It has ‘2, Sacrifice this artifact: Draw a card.'"
So to turn it around: if I put a colorless clue artifact token on the battlefield have I not "investigated"?

To clarify the logic at the end: say I put a creature onto the battlefield. Can you assume that I cast it? Similarly, "Investigate" isn't a word to describe the event where someone creates Clue; it's an action that does so, but it doesn't exclude other actions from doing so.

No, you have not. Just because an effect might be the same as that of a keyword (or for investigate keyword action) that does not mean you have done that keyword (action).
One similar example I can think of is Darksteel Pendant. When it was printed Scry did not exist (it would come out in the next set), so its activated ability reads 'Look at the top card of your library. You may put that card on the bottom of your library.'. Now this text is exactly the same as Scry 1, however since it did not actually have Scry it didn't trigger abilities like Flamespeaker Adept's that look for 'Whenever you scry'.
Note that since Magic Origins scry has become an evergreen keyword action and Darksteel Pendant has been updated to have Scry 1, so it does trigger Flamespeaker Adept's ability now. However at the time of the Adept's printing the Pendant did not trigger the Adept.

Another example that's commonly and incorrectly used synonymously is putting a card in hand counting as drawing a card, which likely fits better than the example given in your answer, since it's not relying on terminology not existing at a certain point in time.

@TheThirdMan I considered that, but 'draw' is not a keyword action like 'investigate' and 'scry' are.

Darksteel Pendant's Oracle text actually says "Scry 1", so that's probably not the best example.

@murgatroid99 I specifically state that it no longer works that way. But it is the only thing I can think of for an example of a keyword action that was at one time actually spelled out on a card.

Doubtless One and Cairn Wanderer may be a better example.

@John Technically, "Whenever ~ deals damage, you gain that much life" isn't functionally equivalent to Lifelink. It's a triggered ability, so it goes on the stack, but life gain from Lifelink happens immediately.

@murgatroid99 I see.  Thanks for the clarification.

I think the example is fine, given the clarification in the last paragraph that the card has changed and thus the example.


text:
What happens if someone reneges on a loner hand in euchre?
Yesterday, I was observing a game of Euchre when something interesting occurred and I wasn't sure what to make of it. I'll call the two teams A and B. Team A went alone, and around the 4th trick someone on Team B ended up reneging on accident. We noticed it after the final trick had been played, and none of us were really sure how to rule it. We ended up calling it a renege, even though Team A took all 5 tricks. But is that correct? Should Team A have gotten the 4 points since they took all 5? Or does a renege trump (no pun intended) that?
To be clear, if someone on Team B reneges during Team A's loner hand, and Team A took all 5 tricks. Would it result in two points, because of the renege, or four points because they took all the tricks?
Side note: We determined that even if Team B had not reneged that all 5 tricks would have been won anyways. Making this dilemma even more confusing.

I have always interpreted the renege penalty as being generally 2 points because that's the maximum the opponents could have gained from the hand. In a loner hand, the maximum the makers can get is 4 points, so I would penalize a renege on with 4 points. Some sources:
On the Ohio Euchre page the renege rule says:

RENEGE: - There are no exceptions to the ruling for a Renege: The hand is over, the offending team loses their bid and the non-offending team scores two points. In the case of a renege during a Loner attempt, the non-offending team scores 4 points.

On the wikipedia page for euchre, it says almost the same, though leaves open the possibility that other variants might not do this:

In some variants reneging when a player or his opponent is going alone may result in a penalty of four points in order to equalize the potential values of a hand. The four point penalty for reneging should apply equally for the maker of trump and the opposing team.

A third source, Euchre Links says the same, though only specifically about the team that is attempting the loner:

If the guilty team is defending against a lone-attempt during the infraction, 4 points are awarded to the team that was attempting the loner.

So, the sources seem to be in agreement that the maker would get 4 points when one defender reneges, and two of the three using language that indicates ANY renege in a loner hand (maker or defender) awards 4 points to the non-offending team.

A good clean game is fun, reneges doesn't happen, sitting on the fence does but playing against friends why would you. Having a partner, who knows you play euchre often by sitting on the fence, is great but to renege no thats not a good game and ruins it for all.

Welcome to Board and Card games Q&A.
If possible, can you please expand your answer to make it more suitable.

not quite sure what you mean ...a good game cannot have people reneging as its something that is done deliberately when you play honestly. Learning your participants is being observant , learning their tells is also part of a good partnership and quite important to learn your opposition this way also. A keen player observes.


text:
What does "Return (card of the same name) from graveyard" mean?
I'm a beginner when it comes to TCGs and MtG, and I've wondered what it means when a card says to return the same card from graveyard.
For example, Haunted Dead (EMN) has:

{1}{B}, Discard two cards: Return Haunted Dead from your graveyard to the battlefield tapped.

Which got me thinking, "Wait, if Haunted Dead is in the graveyard, how can I use this ability, this ability of Haunted Dead?"
Does this mean that even if there is no Haunted Dead in play (on the battlefield), I can activate this ability by paying the costs, searching for a Haunted Dead in my graveyard, and return it to the battlefield?
Or does this mean that I can only use this ability with a Haunted Dead (which I control, on the battlefield) and return another Haunted Dead from the graveyard?
In other words, I suppose, can abilities like this be activated whenever, or only when the creature is on the battlefield? (If it's the latter, doesn't that mean there's no reason to have 1 Haunted Dead in a deck since you can't use the ability?)

Not quite a duplicate, but related: https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/12262/does-an-ability-that-refers-to-the-name-of-the-ability-s-card-have-to-refer-to-t

Also related: How do you play Scrapheap Scrounger's ability?

That ability can only be activated when Haunted Dead is in your graveyard, and will only return the specific Haunted Dead whose ability was activated to the batttlefield.
When a card refers to itself by name what it really means is 'this card', and not any other cards that may have the same name. If it effected other cards with the same name it would specifically say 'cards named X'.
Normally an ability only works on the battlefield, however there are a few exceptions. The one that is relevant here starts that if an effect would move a card out of one zone and into another it can only be activated while the card is in the first zone.

201.4. Text that refers to the object it’s on by name means just that particular object and not any other objects with that name, regardless of any name changes caused by game effects.
112.6. Abilities of an instant or sorcery spell usually function only while that object is on the stack. Abilities of all other objects usually function only while that object is on the battlefield. The exceptions are as follows:
112.6k An ability whose cost or effect specifies that it moves the object it’s on out of a particular zone functions only in that zone, unless that ability’s trigger condition, or a previous part of that ability’s cost or effect, specifies that the object is put into that zone. The same is true if the effect of that ability creates a delayed triggered ability whose effect moves the object out of a particular zone.

That text is referring to the specific card by name, meaning that it can only affect that specific instance of the card.

201.4. Text that refers to the object it’s on by name means just that particular object and not any other objects with that name, regardless
  of any name changes caused by game effects.

In the case of this particular card it is an activated ability that can only be played when the card is in the graveyard.