text:
Hierarchy of dying - Is this Venn Diagram accuarate/complete
UPDATE
Latest version of diagram, based on feedback in Answers below.

Original Question
Considering a creature card that is currently on the battlefield, is the following diagram accurate?

"Accurate" in the sense of determining triggers etc.:

Indestructible doesn't prevent Sacrificing, or dying from reducing toughness, but does prevent death from damage.
"Destroy Target Creature" doesn't require dealing damage.
Everything mentioned so far does count for a "when dies" trigger.
etc. etc.

Are there anything missing that would fit nicely into the diagram?
Are there other ways to leave the Battlefield?
Suggested Text representation for use in answers:
> Left the Battlefield
>> Exiled
>> Entered the Graveyard
>>> Died
>>>> Sacrificed
>>>> Toughness-Damage <= 0
>>>>> Dealt Lethal Damage [#1]
>>>>> Toughness = 0
>>>> Destroyed [Includes #1]

Am I the only one not understanding this diagram? I read over the answers and still can't figure out what this is supposed to be. I also really don't just want to close-vote in case I'm just missing something obvious, even though it appears to me as "unclear what you're asking".

First off, do you understand the concept of a Venn Diagram? If not, then this certainly won't make any sense, but it's a fairly common concept to I don't think it's an innappropriate assumption. If you do understand Venn diagrams, then could you expand on what you don't understand? It's a fairly straightforward diagram of concepts which are nested and my question is have I nested them correctly? Respectfully, given that we've already got 3 sensible answers with multiple comments, I think its likely to be you, and not the question.

It is unclear what criteria you are using to determine whether two categories are related (should overlap) or unrelated (should not overlap). I don't know what it means to be "accurate in the sense of determining triggers, etc." There should be some question such that "Yes" means overlap and "No" means no overlap. I also don't understand why this diagram would be useful to anyone, but that's a separate issue and not why I voted to close.

@Rainbolt As per my other comment, it seems clear enough to all the people who've already answered, and it seems strange to Vote Close on a question that already has 3 answers, and a rich discussion coming from them, including an updated "Final" answer?

@Rainbolt to directly answer your question, the Yes/No question is "If this state/event/trigger has occurred then has this other s/e/t also occurred". e.g. "If my creature has been Sacrificed has it also Died"? (Yes). "If my creature has been affected by the Legend rule, has it also been dealt Lethal Damage"? (No)

The new rules changed for innistrad. Dies and Enters the Graveyard are now very similar (A creature “dies” if it is put into a graveyard from the battlefield; rule 700.4.). Dies now means "is put into a graveyard from the battlefield.” So I'd start by putting "dies" and "is put into graveyard" together.
Toughness - Damage < = 0 makes little sense in that context (because it is completely arbitrary and has no in game analogue).
I'd just keep sacrificed, destroyed and 0 toughness as 3 entities inside "Died", with lethal damage inside destroyed, (and also add deathstrike inside destroyed).
Make the wording shorter too, it's obvious in context that lethal damage inside destroyed means it was destroyed by lethal damage. No need to say "dealt lethal damage".
Edited: Deathtouch as a subset of death touch. Legend Rule as another way to Die / put creature in graveyard.

Left Battlefield

Exiled
Died / Put into Graveyard

Sacrificed
Legend Rule (like Diego noted)
0 Toughness
Destroyed

Lethal Damage

Deathtouch (as Hackworth noted, Death Strike causes lethal damage)

Except that "is put into graveyard from library" is different from "is put into graveyard from battlefield", so that might need to be distinguished as a separate concept. (Unless we just clarify this diagram only applies to things on the battlefield to begin with.)

@doppelgreener OP did state that it's about creatures on the battlefield, so "died" = "put into graveyard" is correct.

@CyberClaw "Toughness - marked damage <= 0" is a correct representation of the state-based effect, only differently stated. The rules say that a creature dies if "marked damage >= toughness", which is mathematically equivalent to what OP wrote.

Yeah, I meant the step.toughness - damage thing can be applied to both lethal damage, and toughness = 0, but it's really nothing regarding MtG rules. It's just an arbitrary subset of way a creature can die.

Doh. Lol. Haven't played MtG in a few years, it shows xD

@corsiKa The question is specifically about creatures on the battlefield, so discard and mill aren't relevant.

Have posted updated Diagram, any further input?

What's interesting to me is that "Dealt lethal damage" is not the same as "Entered the graveyard" because they happen at different moments, they're not subsets.
The first is before an SBA check the second is after.
To me, a time-based activity diagram makes more sense, where:

Dealt Lethal Damage => Leaves Battlefield & Enters Graveyard/Dies

demonstrates the time-based aspect
This also allows you to demonstrate a difference between, for example, Dealt Lethal Damage (waits for a state based effect to enter graveyard) and Sacrificed (happens immediately on payment/effect, rather than waiting for an SBA check).

yeesh, adding time flow into the whole thing is going to be tough. I think that that would require 2 distinct diagrams to track?

I think it replaces the Venn diagram, tbh. Basically everything inside "Died" is highly time-sensitive, whereas everything outside isn't. And to be honest, the confusion with triggers is normally more timing than quality.

I could cite a long list of SE questions about how indestructible interacts with  that disagrees with "the confusion isn't about quality".

I agree that the timing can be confusing, but that's why I think the 2 things required 2 distinct diagrams.

@Brondahl Ah, right, that makes sense, but in that case I'm not sure the diagram helps.

I'd agree with Cyberclaw that there's not enough common behaviour between Toughness=0 and Lethal Damage to be worth having the supercategory.

The diagram is not correct.

"Left the battlefield" is indeed the outermost set. However, a creature permanent can move to almost any other zone with the right rule or effect, i.e. to the graveyard, exile, library, hand, ante, or command zone. There is currently no effect that would move a permanent from the battlefield to the stack. Therefore, "Exiled" and "Entered the graveyard" are not the only subsets of "left the battlefield".

As far as creature permanents on the battlefield are concerned, "died" is identical to "entered the graveyard":

700.4. The term dies means “is put into a graveyard from the battlefield.”

"Received lethal damage" is identical to "toughness - marked damage <= 0". Note that the rules state the rule a little differently, although mathematically equivalently:

119.6. Damage marked on a creature remains until the cleanup step, even if that permanent stops being a creature. If the total damage marked on a creature is greater than or equal to its toughness, that creature has been dealt lethal damage and is destroyed as a state-based action (see rule 704). [..]
704.5g If a creature has toughness greater than 0, and the total damage marked on it is greater than or equal to its toughness, that creature has been dealt lethal damage and is destroyed. Regeneration can replace this event.

While, strictly speaking, "Toughness = 0" is only a special case of "marked damage >= toughness", it is mentioned in the rules explicitly. For this diagram you can either leave it out, or keep it as you have it as a subset of "toughness - marked damage <= 0":

704.5f If a creature has toughness 0 or less, it’s put into its owner’s graveyard. Regeneration can’t replace this event.

Destruction of a creature can either be a stand-alone effect, or the result of lethal damage. Lethal damage is one or both of "damage >= toughness" and "deathtouch damage >= 1"

702.2b Any nonzero amount of combat damage assigned to a creature by a source with deathtouch is considered to be lethal damage, regardless of that creature’s toughness. See rules 510.1c–d.
702.2c A creature with toughness greater than 0 that’s been dealt damage by a source with deathtouch since the last time state-based actions were checked is destroyed as a state-based action. See rule 704.

The Legend Rule is also something that can move a creature from the battlefield to the graveyard.

["Received lethal damage" is identical to "toughness - marked damage <= 0"]  surely that's wrong - as per the rules that you cited after? Lethal Damage is a distinct and different subset from Toughness = 0, because the later case does NOT cause the creature to be destroyed by the game rules. (Unless I'm missing something?)

@Bronahl I'm confused why you're bringing up "toughness = 0" given the quote you're responding to never mentions it. The quote is saying that lethal damage is when you have damage that is at least toughness, which is what that equation expresses.

@doppelgreener "you have damage that is at least toughness" is NOT the same as the equation ... EXACTLY because of the "toughness = 0" case. Lethal Damage requires that you have some non-zero amount of damage. The Equation doesn't.

@Brondahl then why do you have that equation there as a group name when it isn't a specific phenomenon as far as the rules are concerned? Might want to remove that label

@doppelgreener I added it at the time, because that's how I thought about it (and how I would explain it to a new player). But yes, I'm reaching the conclusion (from this convo and similar ones on other answers) that it's actually an unhelpful grouping in the context of this question.

It's a little odd that you say first that lethal damage is identical to toughness-damage <= 0, but then later say that lethal damage is that (rearranged to damage >= toughness) OR deathtouch damage.

Have posted updated Diagram, any further input?

@Brondahl I would add "destruction effect" under "destruction" so that "lethal damage" is not the only subset. Looking good otherwise.


text:
Balance of Numbers on dice
Six-sided dice traditionally have opposite faces adding to a constant, and this tradition is carried over (unquestioningly, it seems) to other dice.  Is there a good reason for it?  Why wouldn't you instead seek to make opposite ‘hemispheres’ as equal as possible, ideally arranging that the center of gravity of the pips is the geometric center of the die?
Added four years later: I recently did some searches: There are no ideal arrangements for D4 (obviously), D6, D10, D12; three arrangements for D8; 876 arrangements for the rhombic dodecahedron; and somewhere between seven and gazillions (the search is a long one!) for D20.

Why would you try to do that? A fair die is equally likely to land on every side, so the specific orientation and relative position of the values is irrelevant to the likelihood of any specific face coning up.

To make the result more independent of how it's thrown.  Can you make a D6 so fair that one can't learn to throw it with a preference for {6,5,4} over {1,2,3}?

The questuion is still unclear. Are you sayingthat the pips have a measurable weight so as to affect the result, or that an unbiased (and unmarked?) die can be thrown so that one corner is more likely to be at the top?

MtG D20s actually have hemispheres, because they are used as health counters. Numbers are in order next to the face. So, 15 will be right next to 14 and 16, to make it easy to go up or down health. But without a reason to change the layout, why would game makers even bother?

@CyberClaw MTG spindown dice are also not legal for use in tournaments for the reason Anton is talking about; because a skilled player could learn to throw the dice so that it always lands in the higher range of numbers. A regular d20, on the other hand, is designed so that even if you could throw it so it would land in a general area, that general area would have both high and low numbers.

A fair die is a fair die. If how you throw it makes a difference, you're no longer talking about random chance, just a practised skill.

Surprised no-one championed this as off topic.  Seems an appropriate question for history, engineering or math SOs to name a few.  I guess games have dice so we get it here?

@joedragons, heh, well, I thought of taking it to Math but: isn't gaming the primary function of dice, and therefore the proper context for questions of their design?  I wonder whether any other exchange has a ‘dice’ tag!

To prevent skill from being a factor in rolling
Dice have an even distribution of the numbers around the faces to prevent (or at least reduce) the ability to modify your chances of a result by skillfully rolling the die. Dice are intended to be entirely luck based, and depending on how the numbers are distributed around the faces of the die, could lead to skilled rolling (generally considered cheating).
It is for this reason that Spindowns are generally not allowed to be rolled anywhere that a random result is required (IE Tournaments, Organized Play, etc). For the same reason, d10s shouldn't be rolled to get an Even/Odd result as you can very easily force the desired result.

That last part about the D10s is something I didn't realise. Since some games use only D10s (e.g. World of Darkness games), they are also often used as a D2 by rolling Odd/Even. I might have to see if there's another way to simulate a D2 on a D10 in our gaming sessions

High/Low for d2 works just fine with a d10. Just make sure you decide whether a 0 is high or low before you roll!

Seems to me, the conventional arrangement for D6 is the furthest possible from “even distribution”.  The most even would (I guess without checking) have 1 opposite 2, 3 opposite 4, 5 opposite 6.

Casino dice have the pips filled with a coloured material of the identical density as the matrix.; making OP's concern over weight irrelevant. (Often white pips in a red or green matrix.) Then the only concern is to minimize "skill" in the rolling action itself. Casinos manage this in games such as craps by requiring the dice to hit the floor of the table prior to hitting the wall, introducing an element of uncertainty near impossible for the player to exert control through.

source: Stack Exchange

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

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

sort: votes


text:
Identify game with 'Cataclysm cards and Sin cards' based on game end rules
A friend has found some rules to a game he printed off several years ago and had in a box that wasn't the game.  The pages also seem to be just a print off of 'Advanced rules'.  Unfortunately the game doesn't have the game title on it (to our knowledge at least).   I don't want to type all the rules out but there are references to Cataclysm cards and Sin cards.    The came rules also have references to an 'Unnamed player', Corrupted Hero, completing quest cards and manning buildings.
I'm hoping that typing game end rules will help identify it best.

The game ends when one of three things happens:
1) When the players collect all 7 pieces of armor, and one of them has at least 30 points of might.  That player is the winner.  If several players have more than 30 might point, the player with the most points in the winner.
2) When the last, 14th Cataclysm is played, the present turn is played until the end of the regrouping phase.  If non of the players acheived the connditions mentioned in 1), the game ends with the defeat of the players and a victory for the Unnames (and evil players if using advanced rules)
3) The players closed the last of the portals, The player who contributed most to the closing of portals (the board hold a majority of his tokens) is declared the winner.  In case of a tie, the winner is the player with the most might points.

Hopefully this enough for someone to recognise it without typing all the rules out!

I could google the game: Its called "7".
Googling the first sentence of the second paragraph, I found the rule book. It does, for some strange reason, not contain the game name written anywhere. (The pdf was called "7_Rulebook_english.pdf", but I did not get that hint ;) )
However, at the end of the rules, it states the game designer, and googling him led me to boardgamegeek.
So, here you go:
https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/53376/7
https://tesera.ru/images/items/69366/7_Rulebook_English.pdf
Edit: Okay, the rulebook starts with the logo of the game, that includes a 7. I just did not get that thats the game name :D

thanks for this.  We did try googling various terms from the game but didn't find anything and didn't try the specific line you did.  Thanks for help.

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


text:
How do you identify what series a Pokemon card is from?
Just from looking at the Pokemon card, is it possible to determine what series the card is from e.g. Hidden Fates, Steam Siege etc.? The copyright states the year but not which release quarter the card is from.

Each card contains a logo indicating which set it is from.  This image was taken from here.  A list of all the set logos is available here.   I know link only answers are discouraged but there are many of these and can easily be googled.

Perfect! Still need a table but that clears things up enormously

There is a link to table in answer.  I felt it was to many to paste here

In difference to @StartPlayer's answer all the cards I own have expansion icon in lower left corner as can be seen on the the card detail shown below.
Instead of having expansion list, you could use Pokémon TCG Card Dex official application:

Google Play
App Store

There you can search your card and see name of expansion on card detail:

You can also use this application as a list of expansions and just compare expansion icon.

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


text:
Are there any side effects if am supposed to draw a card but have no cards to draw?
I was playing Hero Realms this weekend with a friend. He ended having a combo that made him able to virtually draw endless cards.
He was able to draw his full deck within one turn, shuffle his discard pile drawing that one empty, too and he would have still been able to draw additional cards, but his whole deck was being played out in this one turn, until there were neither cards left in his deck, nor in his discard pile.
We agreed if there are no cards left, he can't draw any cards anymore.
Do the rules state any side effect about drawing cards, if there are no cards to draw left and the discard pile being empty as well?

Never played the game but i'm very familiar with Star Realms.
Your question was asked here on BGG.  No official source chipped in but its seems common sense that if you are unable to do something nothing happens.  Just do as much as you can on the cards.
When I play Star Realms on the app and I want to draw cards and the draw and discard are empty then there is just no effect.

In that BGG thread, note that Ian Taylor (IanWWG) is an official source. Ian Taylor is the Director of Organized Play for White Wizard Games.

I wasn't aware of that.  I thought WWG might indicate that but when I checked the name it didn't match that of the designers.  I didn't think to check publishers.  Thanks for correction.


text:
What does a move entail?
The Tiny Epic Zombies manual for the game states that a human turn consists of

Each Turn, you MUST move 3 times.
Each Move could potentially consist of the following actions:
A. Kill 1 zombie
B. Use Room's Ability AND/OR Interact with a Token
C. Collect items
Search Current Store

So far we have been playing the game as each human player can take 3 turns, moving once and performing three of the actions above.
Totalling 12 actions per human players turn. Is this correct?

1A: Kill 1 Zombie:

After moving into a Room, you may kill 1 Zombie. [...]

So 1A can be performed each time you enter a room.
1B: Use Room's Ability and/or Interact with a Token:

After moving into a Room (and killing a Zombie if necessary), [...] you may then use Room abilities and/or interact with Tokens. [...]

So 1B can clearly be done in addition to 1A. There's no reason to believe 1C is any different, so all of 1A to 1C can be done each time you enter a room.
Since you have three moves, you shall be entering three rooms, and thus go through 1A to 1C three times.
Then, you search your current store

After completing 3 Moves, the Human Player flips over the facedown
  Search Card in front of them and places this card face up next to the
  Store they are in. [...]

So, in the right conditions, you could perform 10 actions per turn (13 if you count "Use Room's Ability" and "Interact with a Token" separately). Keep in mind the some actions (1B and 1C) can only be taken if the store is devoid of zombies.

Move 1 Room

Kill 1 Zombie
Use Room's Ability and/or Interact with a Token
Collect Items

Move 1 Room

Kill 1 Zombie
Use Room's Ability and/or Interact with a Token
Collect Items

Move 1 Room

Kill 1 Zombie
Use Room's Ability and/or Interact with a Token
Collect Items

Search Current Store


text:
Cuba Libre: Is Cash Laundered by another player earmarked for a particular LimOp?
In Cuba Libre by GMT Games, Rule 2.3.6 (Launder) has the following clause that allows another player to Launder Cash in another's favor:

... Alternatively, a different Faction may remove its own Cash marker to enable the 1st or 2nd Eligible Faction to execute such a free Operation. ...

Suppose another player wants to Launder their Cash to give me a free LimOp for a particular purpose. Which of the following happens:
a) The other player spends the Cash, and I choose any LimOp I desire as if I had Laundered the Cash myself, allowing me to trick the other player into financing a different operation than they intended
or
b) I choose the operation, and the other players can choose whether or not to Launder for it, enforcing honesty?

It's not explicit in the rules, but the way Operations are payed for is that the Faction chooses an Operation, pays the cost in resources and the follows the Operation procedure. So the Faction has the right to do an Op by the sequence of play order and the paying of the Op is done during the Operation, after the Operation type has been declared.
On the other hand, to Launder a Limited Op, the Faction needs to Launder the cash to be granted the free Lim Op. If there is no Launder there is no free Op. So it seems that if another Faction wants to Launder cash they should first spend the stash and then the active Faction could get a free Op... which could be anything (except Construct 3.3.5).
Also, the rules for Negotiation 1.5.1 are clear in that there are no binding agreements in this game, so there is that.


text:
Should I read the instructions to Betrayal Legacy before the Prologue?
I'm starting a game of Betrayal Legacy next week.
Everyone playing has played Betrayal at House on the Hill and/or Baldur's Gate, though it's been some time (months - years). I've played a lot, but the last time was about a year ago.
I think it would be exciting to open the box together, but this should be second to having the game go smoothly.
Are the rules similar enough to the other Betrayal games, or short enough, that I don't have to read them ahead of time, or should I familiarize myself with them before we meet for the Prologue (and possibly Chapter 1, depending on time).

Could someone create a betrayal-legacy tag?

I've created tag.  couldn't use betrayal-at-house-on-the-hill-legacy as that exceeded character limits

"Betrayal Legacy" is the correct name of the game, so that was the right outcome in any case. :)

thats ok then :-)

Based on a review I read the other day (sorry, can't link it, hence why this is in comment), read the instructions before you do anything else.

The beginning of the rules also contains a "here's what is different from other Betrayal games" page. If you learn those things, and you've played Betrayal before, you will likely be good.

How is it possible that I never knew about Betrayal Legacy before now??

The gameplay is just different enough from the original game (example in spoilers below) to make reading the instructions necessary, but I think this can be done during unboxing with the other players. If you would prefer to read the instructions ahead of time but still open the box together, they're posted online at Avalon Hill's website: https://media.wizards.com/2018/downloads/rules/BLY-Rulebook.pdf
As noted by @bwarner "The beginning of the rules also contains a "here's what is different from other Betrayal games" page. If you learn those things, and you've played Betrayal before, you will likely be good."  This is page 3 of the rulebook linked above.
For the most part the Legacy deck will guide you through what's special about each chapter. Please note though that the rulebook itself will change during the course of the game, and should be reviewed during each session to re-familiarize yourselves with what's changed.
Gameplay spoilers (not anything plot related):

 Events / Item cards, similar to tiles, can now only be drawn in certain zones. e.g. There are "upstairs" items and "ground floor" items. This was hard to remember in our first game.

Rulebook comment (contains plot spoiler):

During the prologue you may encounter a rule in-game related to something in the rulebook that doesn't have a reference icon. Note: the item referenced already exists in the house tiles. If it's unclear, try to look up what the icon should be.


text:
Is this Texas Holdem hand a misdeal?
The dealer dealt all the cards to 10 players, 6 players are now in the hand, so he flopped 3 cards on the table and all 6 players checked. So as he was going to do the turn card he messed up the top 5 or 6 cards and he was not sure they went into the original order so he ruled the hand dead, Is this the right decision?

In a professional or tournament setting I can understand the concern, but in a home/friendly game, if no cards were revealed, it makes no difference if the order of the unseen cards changes.

@GendoIkari it never makes a difference the order of unseen cards, tournament (where this wouldn't happen really anyways) or friendly games. The whole point is that the deck is random, until the cards are seen, each card remaining unseen is equally likely to be at every position in the deck.

@Andrew Of course, but in a tournament or professional game; things like a dealer mixing around the top cards of the deck would lead to suspicion that the deck isn't truly randomized. This is why a card is burned before dealing each stage; it doesn't change the randomization, but makes cheating harder.

In other words "the concern" that I was talking about wasn't that you might no longer be getting the card you were supposed to get next; but that there might be the appearance of cheating.

@GendoIkari True, but if such a thing does happen the solution is to reshuffle the remainder of the deck and go from there, re-randomizing those top few cards back into the rest.

No, the hand is not dead.
Looking at Robert's Rules of poker here the following is included in rules for misdeals.

In button games, action is considered to occur when two players after the blinds have acted on their hands. Once action occurs, a misdeal can no longer be declared

As action has occurred (players calling pre flop) then this rules that the hand can not be declared dead.
I'm confused as to how the top few cards would get mixed up but as long as they haven't got mixed with the muck (previously folded cards, or discard pile to boardgamers!) then the cards coming off the deck will still be random and continuing is possible.

It is correct to rule the hand dead, but if all the players at the table agree, it can continue.  It must be unanimous, and the already folded players are taken into account. Individual tournaments or pre-agreed house rules may override this.

Can you cite a source stating it is correct to rule the hand dead?

Completely wrong answer, and would be resolved by reshuffling the stub, then continuing the hand, leaving muck and board and burn cards as laid.


text:
Can I discard a ticket if it can't be completed?
In Ticket To Ride, what happens if I have a ticket that can’t be completed because other players have already used that route?  Is there a way to trade it in or drop it? Or am I just stuck with it?

There is no way to get rid of a destination card once you already have it.
Destination cards count as negative points against your score if you do not complete them for a reason (think of it thematically - you are playing as a company who has taken on a contract to connect two specific cities by train, and if your company doesn't finish the contract there are penalties), and this is part of the consideration you have to make when drawing 3 and keeping 2 or 3 at the start of the game, or drawing 3 and keeping 1, 2 or 3 later in the game.
You have to strategically choose which one(s) you have drawn that you think are possible to complete, taking into account how likely it is for other player's actions to block you.
Sometimes you may be able to build around a more direct route that has been blocked by other players (especially in early- to mid-game, but less likely during the end of the game), and sometimes it is even worth your while to not take the most direct route, especially where 2 or more of your destination cards include nearby locations.

Once you have accepted a route card, you are stuck with it. This is a big part of why the game does not force you to keep every route you draw, you are able to discard some of those new ones as drawn that you do not think you will be able to complete.
Just because your opponents have blocked the route you intended to use to connect your destinations does not mean you can't complete the route. The game rewards longer routes anyways, and you can complete even the shorter route cards by going all he way around the country and back again.
This only works if there is enough of the game left to allow such connections to be made. One strategy I see played often is to try for a single, long route that has alternate options to get there and accept new route cards you can easily branch off your main route to complete.

You cannot get rid of destination cards once you have kept them.  Keeping 3 (instead of 2) at the start of the game is riskier because of this (more upside and more downside), as is drawing additional destination cards mid-game.
Note that almost all destinations have multiple routes to them.  If the route you were planning to use is taken, you can usually take a longer route to get there.
If there is a particular route that is critical to your strategy, claim it as soon as possible.  Collecting train cards for a while lets you claim better routes, but comes with the risk that other people will take those routes before you can; this is one of the big tradeoffs you have to make in the game.
Also, try not to give away what cities you are trying to connect (such as by building out from both of them and meeting in the middle) to make it harder for other players to intentionally block you.

I think you meant that you cannot get rid of destination cards after you've selected them/decided to keep them, not when they are drawn. At the time you draw cards you must keep at least 1, but you may discard 2 of them (or 2 & 1 respectively at the start)

@EricAnderson Good correction

In some versions of the game, some destinations only has a single route to them. E.g. in the Europe versions, the only route to Edinburgh goes from London.


text:
Do you move forwards or backwards on the King's Cross Chance card?

If you draw the "Take a trip to King's Cross Station" Chance card, do you move your piece forwards or backwards?  The logical answer might be forwards because most Monopoly Chance cards say "advance".  However, in the case of this card, it says "If you pass go"; you would always pass go when moving forwards from a Chance space to King's Cross, so what’s the use of the word "if"?
Note: This is London Edition Monopoly; this space and card are the equivalent of Reading Railroad and the "Take a ride on the Reading" Chance card in standard edition.

Most of the cards that move you to a specific property have this text.  The only exceptions are the Mayfair / Boardwalk card and the Go To Jail card, the latter of which explicitly states that you don't pass Go.

I don't think this is a duplicate.  One of the issues with this card is that it doesn't say "Advance", and there is the additional confusion of "if you pass go"

@Zags I agree. The other question is about how to define "nearest", this one is about which direction you move.

It still is a duplicate as you still will always move in one direction in the game and they have the pass go on there as a reminder to collect it when you pass go. and both answers state movement is only forward just like in the duplicate one

@JoeW The linked question wasn't asking at all about which direction you moved; both of the 2 options the asker listed involved moving forward. It was a question of which station was considered the closest. This question is about which direction you move.

Movement in Monopoly is always forwards (in the direction of the arrow on the Go space) unless otherwise specified (such as the "Go back three spaces card").  The only exception in regular monopoly is going to jail, which is usually written as "go directly to jail" to signify the difference.
Some older editions of monopoly had a much clearer version of this card (noting that Reading Railroad is the equivalent of King's Cross):

Take a ride on the Reading. Advance token and if you pass Go, collect $200.

It is impossible to get to King's Cross/Reading Railroad from a Chance space without passing Go.  It says "if you pass Go" because that's the way all the other Chance cards are worded.  This card would be clearer if it said "when you pass go, collect $200" or "collect $200 for passing go".

"Movement in Monopoly is always forwards": I remember owning a Monopoly with a card which said "Go back to Old Kent Road."

@Angew Good point.  there is also one card in modern monopoly that specifies backwards movement.  I've updated the answer

It is however possible to draw this chance card and not pass Go, by landing on the first community chest space and drawing "pay $10 or take a Chance"

@Caleth What version of Monopoly is that community chest card in?  It's not in classic.

The UK version (so it's £10)

Movement is forward in Monopoly, so you'll always pass Go (and collect 200). There is a Community Chest between Go and King's Cross Station, but this is a Chance card.
I think that it's printed this way to match the other 'Take a trip' cards, which all have this wording (except for the Mayfair card, when it's not possible to pass Go). Introducing a third variation like 'You pass Go, collect 200.' would increase the cognitive load.

Hasbro owns the copyright on Monopoly and have the final word on Monopoly rules. Concerning the movement of tokens following a Chance card instruction, the answer provided to me by Hasbro's customer service is the following:

Basically when you draw any card which tells you to go to a specific place just ignore the "if you pass Go, collect $200" and go to that place, moving forward,and if you pass Go, collect the $200.
This will make the instruction on the card less confusing.
Note that if the card is "Go back 3 spaces", or "Go back to Old Kent Road/Mediterranean Avenue", then you go back and since you do not pass Go, you do not collect $200.

It says "If you pass Go" because it does not know where your piece is on the board and is standard text included on all movement cards except jail in order to remind the player of this rule redundantly.
You are moving forwards when you move to the space because there is literally no indication or mention whatsoever that one might move backwards.

Can you quote from the rules to back up your second statement (“forwards” is meant)? Would it be appropriate to add “presumably” or “probably” to the first statement?

No, but the quote was provided by OP.


text:
Do reserved cards get returned when gold token is spent?
I am playing with my son and he reserves a card I wanted and gets a gold token. On his next turn he buys another card and uses the Gold token in his purchase.
What happens to the reserved card?  He now has no gold token, a card I want in reserve.
Does the reserved card get brought back in to the game?

From the rules here

The reserved cards are kept in hand and cannot be discarded.
  Players may not have more than three reserved cards in hand,
  and the only way to get rid of a card is to buy it (see below).

and

To purchase a card, a player must spend the number of
  tokens indicated on the card. A joker token can replace any
  color. The spent tokens (including any jokers) are returned to
  the middle of the table.
  A player may purchase one of the face-up development
  cards in the middle of the table or a card in his hand that was
  reserved on a previous turn.

It's entirely legitimate to reserve a card another player might want as long as they don't exceed the 3 card hand limit.
The rules do NOT say they gold token has to be used to purchase the reserved card.  The rules make it clear a reserved card can not be discarded.  The rules state nothing rules about it returning to the stacks at any point.

In fact, it's possible to reserve a card even if there is no gold left

@ikwgami, That is true yes.  I left that out to try and keep answer to bare minimum rules quoting but adding that could have helped back up the point that you don't have to use the gold on a reserved card as you might not have taken any.

The golden token is used to do two things. You use it to reserve a card (it might be one you or another player is saving up to get) and once you reserved a card in a future go you can use the token as any coloured token to buy a card.
The reserved card stays reserved until it is bought by the player.

The gold token isn't used to reserve the card. You can reserve a card even if they are no gold token left.


text:
Can you tell spymaster you know the word they gave a clue for?
In a game of Codenames, Team 1 field operative guesses a wrong choice for a word. During or before their next turn they say, "oh, I know which one you meant for last code".
Would that be against the rules?

Field Operatives are only allowed to discuss the clue after their Spymaster provides it, until their team's turn is over.
Rules, P.4
"MAKING CONTACT
When the spymaster gives a clue, his or her field operatives try to figure out what it means. They can debate it amongst themselves..."
Same page:
"Number of Guesses
...Any wrong guess ends the turn immediately..."
This is reiterated and summarized on page 5:
"GAME FLOW
Spymasters take turns giving clues. After
a spymaster gives a clue, his or her team starts
guessing. Their turn ends when they guess
wrong, when they decide to stop, or when they
have made the maximum number of guesses
for that clue. Then it is the other team's turn"
Any other discussion of a previous clue, during another team's turn or on an operative's own turn prior to the new clue being read, is therefore out of scope of the rules (i.e., it's not allowed).  This conveniently addresses any clue-related discussion among the operatives, but also any directed towards the spymaster (whether or not it is acknowledged by the spymaster).  This would apply equally to basically harmless and vague discussion like "Oh, I know what you meant now" or, taken to its logical conclusion, a field operative explicitly instructing their spymaster to add 1 to the number of guesses on their new clue (effectively providing +2 potential guesses).
So if you're a field operative, unless you want to talk about getting snacks for the table when it isn't your turn or before your team's clue is read, don't say anything!

No, that is not allowed.
Looking at rules here they say :-

If you are a field operative, you should focus on the table when you
  are making your guesses. Do not make eye contact with the spymaster
  while you are guessing. This will help you avoid nonverbal cues. When
  your information is strictly limited to what can be conveyed with one
  word and one number, you are playing in the spirit of the game.

Communication such as "oh, I know which one you meant for last code"  Is not in that spirit.  Doing so risks a reaction from the spymaster.  Just as the spymaster can not say "that one is right but its not what I meant".
Once they game is over then its fun to discuss what was meant/misinterpreted by the clues but this is can not be alluded to during the game its self.

That paragraph is focused on preventing additional information flow from the spymaster to the field operative.  I don't see how it has any bearing on the information flow from operative to spymaster.

The question is about what the field operatives can and can't say.  The quoted paragraph is about the what the field operative can and can't say in particular with regard to not saying things in 'the spirit of the game'    How does that not have a bearing on information from operative to spymaster?

@ArcanistLupus "That paragraph is focused on preventing additional information flow from the spymaster to the field operative." I disagree. In my opinion it's focused on emphasising the idea that the information flow at the game table should be strictly limited as per rules. I think this is the correct answer.

I disagree with that interpretation from that text, the communication flow is restricted from the Spymaster, and the indication to focus on the game table is in order to avoid picking up clues, not to avoid communicating things to your Spymaster. I agree that doing so to get a reaction is against the spirit, but doing so just to inform (without wanting/looking for a reaction or confirmation) is okay.

I would agree with Arcanist. However, I play an online version of the game, so there is no facial expressions/body language from the spymaster, so the field operative can ramble as much as they want about the clue and even say "I know what it is", and it (usually) does not cause the spymaster to respond back giving more hints. I agree with Cesar that you can just not look at the spymaster in real life.

Yes. The communication flow is limited from the Spymaster to the Field Operative, communication from the Field Operative to the Spymaster is not limited. The Spymaster, however, cannot react to it.
The quote from the other answer is part of "Keeping a Straight Face", directed to the Spymaster. The full quote is:

The spymaster is expected to keep a straight face. Do not reach for any card while your teammates are considering the words. When a teammate touches a word, consult the key card and cover the word with the card of the corresponding color. When a teammate chooses a word of the correct color, you should act as though it was exactly the word you meant, even if it wasn't.
If you are a field operative, you should focus on the table when you are making your guesses. Do not make eye contact with the spymaster while you are guessing. This will help you avoid nonverbal cues.
When your information is strictly limited to what can be conveyed with one word and one number, you are playing in the spirit of the game.

My highlights are to show that the intention is to avoid you picking up nonverbal cues from your Spymaster, not to avoid you communicating things to your Spymaster. You can say as much as you want, even talk your thought process out loud so the Spymaster can better give clues going forward (whatever you say can and will be used by your opponents to rule out words as not theirs too, so be careful).
See that the whole section is to avoid the Spymaster giving signs to the Field Operatives, not the other way around. Therefore, if a Field Operative says "oh, I know which one you meant for last code" the Spymaster cannot visibly/audibly react in any way, that would be against the spirit. But the Spymaster can know that so as to not give extra clues on that word.
See this part too:

When the spymaster gives a clue, his or her field operatives try to figure out what it means. They can debate it amongst themselves, but the spymaster must keep a straight face. The operatives indicate their official guess when one of them touches one of the codenames on the table.

The Field Operatives can and should communicate freely, even saying why they think a word is what and other things, their communication is explicitly not restricted. The Spymaster however should not react visibly/audibly to any of it.

"But the Spymaster can know that so as to not give extra clues on that word."   I disagree.  The only time you can tell the spymaster you know an answer to a clue is by touching it.  At any other time is against spirit of game as defined by the rules

It's a party game. This happens all the time and it's part of the emotions that make it fun. As long as the spymaster keeps the "straight face", no illegal information is given. The agents are allowed to openly discuss what they think so the spymaster already knows all this. Telling people off for getting excited about the game, does not make it more fun. We had some heated discussions about illegal clues and spymasters giving hints by reaching for a certain card while the agents are still debating, but saying "oh now I know" would not upset anyone.

Sure it's a party game but that doesn't mean the team giving information like that to the spymaster won't take fun out of the game.

Well as long as the spymaster keeps the straight face, I don't see why it should be discouraged. I'm repeating my first post, but the discussion and line of thinking of the agents is open for everyone anyway. Besides, somebody screaming "oh I know what you meant now" might still be wrong. I don't see it as spoiling the game or breaking any rules.

It is not about the spymaster keeping a straight face or not. The problem is giving the spymaster instructions about what clues they should be giving. The spymaster should be figuring out what the team is getting from the clues and not being told directly that information.

The spymaster IS getting told directly all that the whole time. The whole discussion between the agents is out in the open. Agents will say things like "if we had to guess picture and wall, he would have given us "hang" as a clue". The spymaster can think "ah yeah, I hadn't thought of that" and use that in the next turn.

There is a difference between discussing among themselves after a clue has been given and the spymaster overhearing and directly saying they know something when it is not their turn to be making guesses.


text:
What happens with mortgaged properties during bankruptcy?
A player lands on my property and has no cash. They owe me only $26. They have 1 property, a railroad which is mortgaged. The mortgaged value is $100.
Do I get the mortgaged property and have to pay $74 to this other player or is this player out of the game?

The player is bankrupt and out of the game and you get the mortgaged property with some conditions. You will have to pay the bank 10% of the mortgaged value when you get it and before you unmortgage it if it is not on the same turn.
Rules

If you have mortgaged property you also turn
  this property over to your creditor but the new owner must at once
  pay the Bank the amount of interest on the loan, which is 10% of the
  value of the property. The new owner who does this may then, at
  his/her option, pay the principal or hold the property until some later
  turn, then lift the mortgage. If he/she holds property in this way until
  a later turn, he/she must pay the interest again upon lifting the
  mortgage.

So conversely if this player - let’s say had 4 railroads and all of them are mortgaged - and he lands on my property (and now owes me 26$) and has no cash - do I get all the 4 mortgaged railroads??

When a player goes bankrupt you get all property they own


text:
Auction of mortgaged properties during bankruptcy
We have a house rule - No form of trade/deal is allowed between players. If someone wishes to sell anything - an auction has to be held always and the property goes to the highest bidder.
There are 3 players in the game. One player lands on my property and has to pay me rent but has no cash and all his properties have been mortgaged. Is he allowed to hold an auction for his mortgaged property to gather cash to avoid bankruptcy?
(officially I know under standard rules he could have made trades with the 3rd player to avoid bankruptcy but that is not possible)
I am inclined to think that since the bank bars us from collecting rent on the mortgaged properties an auction of mortgaged properties also doesn't make sense to me.
So to summarize - Can the player who is about to go bankrupt - legally put his mortgaged property card at the center of the board and hold an auction?

To be fair, you're asking about the game prefaced with your house rule and asking us how that house applies in a specific situation... that's not really something we can answer...

Your question.

Can the player who is about to go bankrupt - legally put his mortgaged
property card at the center of the board and hold an auction?

Short answer from Hasbro:
... it is illegal to auction off property when someone owes another player.
Long answer, from Hasbro's Global Consumer Care Representative
Note. Hasbro own the copyright on Monopoly and are therefore the ultimate authority on rules in the game.

Yes, it is illegal to auction off property when someone owes another
player.
Try to raise money. If you owe money and can't pay, try to raise money by selling buildings back to the Bank and/or mortgaging
properties.
Selling Buildings Sell Hotels to the Bank for half the cost price and exchange them immediately for 4 Houses. Sell Houses to the Bank
for half the cost price. Houses must be sold evenly across the colour
set.
Mortgaging Property To mortgage a property, you must first sell all buildings in its colour set to the Bank at half their cost price.
To mortgage, turn the Title Deed card face down and collect the
mortgage value on the back from the Bank.   To repay a mortgage, pay
the unmortgage cost to the Bank (mortgage value +10%); then, turn the
card face up.
If you're still in debt, you are bankrupt and out of the game!
Do you owe another player? Give them any Get Out of Jail Free cards you have, and all your mortgaged properties.   The new owner
must immediately either:

repay the mortgage (pay the Bank the unmortgage cost), or
keep the mortgage (just pay the Bank 10% of the mortgage value now).
Do you owe the Bank?

Return all your properties to the Bank.
Any mortgages are cancelled.
All your properties must immediately be putup for auction.
Return any Get Out of Jail Free cards to the bottom of the pile.
The remaining players keep playing until there is only one person left in
the game - the winner!
Again, I'd like to thank you for taking the time to reach out to us.
I hope you have a fun day!
Kind regards,
Rochonda Global Consumer Care Representative
Customer By CSS Web (Robert Miller) (08/26/2020 02:24 PM)
Hello,  Is it legal for a player who is facing bankruptcy to another
player, to auction off his properties in order to avoid bankruptcy?
Question Reference #200826-000598 •   Date Created: 08/26/2020 02:24 PM • Date Last Updated:
11/10/2020 06:13 PM • Status: Solved [---001:001949:01623---]

This might be correct, except the question is about how things function under the house rules Rishabh plays by, once house rules go into the game, the printed rules and the rulings on them at least partially go out the window. Your answer seems to ignore the premise of the question completely.

I kind of agree with Robert here. I just made 1 small house rule(control the way in which trades occur) - the printed rules "can't go out of the window" @Andrew. So if from Hasbro - "it is illegal to auction off property when someone owes another player" I think that clearly solves my question.

Since the "no trading/selling" rule is your own house rule, you're going to have to determine this yourself.
My own opinion is that you should probably allow the auctioning off of mortgaged property.
Why? Because the only thing the standard rules say you can't sell is improved properties (property with houses/hotels). It explicitly allows the selling/trading of mortgaged property, after which the "interest" on the mortgage comes due.
From the offical Hasbro rules book (pdf):

SELLING PROPERTY… Unimproved properties, railroads and utilities (but not buildings) may be sold to any player as a private transaction for any amount the owner can get; however, no property can be sold to another player if buildings are standing on any properties of that color-group.

and later under "Mortgages":

The player who mortgages property retains possession of it and no other player may secure it by lifting the mortgage from the Bank. However, the owner may sell this mortgaged property to another player at any agreed price. If you are the new owner, you may lift the mortgage at once if you wish by paying off the mortgage plus 10% interest to the Bank.  If the mortgage is not lifted at once, you must pay the Bank 10% interest when you buy the property and if you lift the mortgage later you must pay the Bank an additional 10% interest as
well as the amount of the mortgage.

So since your "bank auction" is your house-rule substitute for selling directly, it only makes sense to maintain the same conditions, and allow auctioning of mortgaged property.

I agree with this.. the house rule seems to pretty much just place a restriction on how a sale/trade is to be negotiated. It would be a separate though related house rule to also place a restriction on what items can be sold/traded.

Doesn’t allowing auction of mortgaged property during bankruptcy stretches the game to be extremely long.  When this bankrupt guy holds an auction -1. If I take part in the auction I end up either paying my own rent or more than my own rent. 2. If I don’t take part in the auction and if 3rd party gets the property for say 1$ it’s always a lose lose for me. So it’s kind of like my bad luck that the player lands on my property

@RishabhBaid That's not much different as under normal rules - he could make a quick side deal to sell a property to a different player to pay his debt, or he can make a deal with you to include property as part of the payment. Either way you get your money, and he's down a property. If you prevent him from auctioning a property to raise money in that moment is a fine house rule, but it is a pretty big change.

@BradC the key words I am stressing on are ‘mortgaged’ ‘auction’ and ‘bankrupt’. Like in real life I want to understand - I mortgaged my property - bank gave me loan - in the event of default - bank auctions my property- and generates revenue. Now when I have defaulted can I ask the bank give me sometime - “I will auction this property and after repaying you will keep the remaining profit”. I believe there is a conflict of interest between me and the bank if I officially hold an auction of mortgaged properties when I am bankrupt (I have nothing else except the mortgaged property)

@RishabhBaid ¯\(ツ)/¯ You're entitled to make your house rules whatever you want, I just don't think there is any inherent connection between your existing "we auction property instead of selling/trading directly" house rule and your (proposed in this question) "you also can't auction mortgaged property in the moment when you need it most" rule.


text:
Where can I share a Print and Play game?
I've been working on a hobby card game project for a while and I'm currently sharing it as a free Print & Play with a later option to support the project with buying the printed version.
Currently I had some success posting it on r/boardgames and got a very positive response from the Reddit community. In this reddit thread someone suggested pnpparadise as another place to share Print & Play games.
Could you suggest me some other places, to share a free Print & Play version of a game?
It's a great way to collect a ton o of feedback as an indie game designer.

Not sure if website recommendations are off topic same way game recommendations are but will see!
https://playtest-coop.com is a site specifically for play testing print and play games. I've tried a few things from there
Since the global lockdown began however online play testing groups are more prevalent.  I've done more play testing of my own design in the last few months than I have in the last year.  You can find a list here https://cardboardedison.com/playtest-groups
The 'Remote Playtesting Group' on Saturday seems to the busiest with about 40 designers/testers meeting on the Discord server.
The Cardboard Edison website is a very good resource for games design/play testing advice and lists play testing groups around the world for when lockdown is over.   There is an absolute ton of other play testing resources online as well.
Just remember the golden rule, if 4 people spend 1 hour playing your game you owe the play testing world 4 hours back testing their games!

Thank for your time StartPlayer. Will check them out!

Try the forums at Boardgamegeek https://boardgamegeek.com/forums/region/1/bgg (in thematicaly as well as regional appropriate subforum) and  another good possibility to show your game might be bringing it with you to a local boardgame meeting, hobby convention etc, maybe even a sponsored play at the local tabletop store (but ask the shopkeeper beforehand).


text:
Are you allowed to take three moves with a seven?
A player rolls a seven, moves one pawn five and then one pawn one. Are they allowed to moved the first pawn the remaining one after taking a slide?

No, when you split the 7, you aren't allowed to split it into a 5 and a 1; you have to split it in a way that adds to a total of 7. So if you moved one pawn 5 spaces, landing on a slide, then the other pawn must be moved 2, not 1.


text:
Player draws a card before the previous player discarded
A player drew a card before the previous player placed down their discard card.
Does that card get forcefully removed from the player and shuffled back into the draw deck? Do they keep it if they decide it works with them? Do they get another chance to decide on the discard card vs the random card?

This isn't going to be covered by the rules of any game.
In all games players make mistakes, this is not the same as cheating, its simple human error and everyone does it at some point.
In all games it's up to the players to decide how to resolve this in as fair a way as possible without the need for 'forceably' making players do things which sounds like the enjoyment comes from being a rules lawyer and not actually playing the game!
In my regular gaming group we agree player can more or less undo anything provided that it doesn't affect anything another player would have done, and it hasn't involve drawing cards or rolling dice.  As soon as a 'random` event happens you can't really say, 'oh I didn't mean to do that' when they don't like the result.
In your situation a player who drew a card before seeing a new card put themselves at a disadvantage as they denied themselves an option.
You can't really make a player put a card back and shuffle the deck as they now have information about a card that other players are not holding.  Personally I would just let them keep that card but not let them take the discard as they played too early which is 'punishment' enough for a simple human error.


text:
In TTR Europe, can you put a station in a city that's not connected to one of your claimed routes
In Ticket To Ride: Europe, does the placement of a station have to abut a route you control.
E.g. let's say you want to place a station in order use someone else's Edinburgh - London route during end game scoring.
You have an Ticket from Amsterdam to London, but someone else has put a station on London.
Can you put a station on Edinburgh to gain access to the Edinburgh-London route even though you do not control the route into Edinburgh?

No, you do not have to have a route of your own linking to a station you build.  From the rules here

Stations may be built on any unoccupied city, even if it currently has no claimed routes into it. Two players may never build a Station in the same city.

There is no requirement to link to your own route because there is no requirement for any route to be in that city when the route is built.
The purpose of building stations is to use other players routes, so claiming Edinburgh when London has a station and the London-Edinburgh route has been claimed then it makes total sense.

Thanks. I agree, in the context of the "no claimed routes" it would follow. Just seems it would be "harder" if you did have to have a direct link.  For example, you could start the game by placing a station in Paris which has a huge number of routes, knowing that someone else likely will build a route that you can use in the future. Seems like identifying "hubs" and placing stations -- with no pre-existing routes -- might be an interesting strategy. I'm going to give that a shot, but if anyone has explored that, give a shout.

I see you new to the site,  if your happy the answer given is correct please 'accept' the answer by selecting the tick next to the answer as this will show other users it has an answer.


text:
Can I move to mortgaged property when rolling 'Mr Monopoly' on Speed Die
If I roll Mr. Monopoly on the speed die, and all the properties have been bought, according to the rules I have to move to the next place that I have to pay rent.
What is the rule, if the next place I would have to pay rent happens to be mortgaged - and I do not therefore have to pay rent. Do I have to go to a non mortgaged property?

From the rules here
From mortgaged properties rules.

If the property is mortgaged, no rent can be collected.

From the speed dice rules -

If you roll a Mr. Monopoly after all of the properties are owned, make
  a normal move according to the white dice, then move ahead to the
  first property on which you need to pay rent. If all other players
  properties are mortgaged, stay where you are.

Together, these rules mean that the first property on which you need to pay rent cannot be a mortgaged property.  You must therefore move to the next non-mortgaged property owned by another player, in order to pay rent.  The rules also clarify that you don't move if all other players' owned properties are mortgaged, which is further evidence that you cannot move to a mortgaged property when you roll Mr. Monopoly.


text:
Game with many black and white pieces and 3 red
I played this game a while back and thoroughly enjoyed it but forgot the name. It consists of a board, 3 red pieces and a ton of black and white pieces. Each player can move a piece in any straight line in their turn, even onto opponent pieces, but cannot end on an empty space. Stacks are owned by the player with the colour on top of the stack, and each stack can only move the same number of spaces as pieces in the stack. If a piece is not directly connected to one of the red pieces (which I believe have the same name as the game), it is removed from the game. The winner is the player with the largest stack at the end of the game.

Is it DVONN? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVONN

Is it dvonn? That seems to fit the bill

DVONN is played on a board with 49 spaces. The board has a hexagonal layout 5 hexes wide. One player has 23 black pieces to play, the other player has 23 white pieces. There are also 3 neutral red pieces, called DVONN pieces.
The game starts with an empty board and proceeds in two phases. During the first phase, the players place their pieces on the board, starting with the three red DVONN pieces. Pieces can be placed on any unoccupied space. White starts, and the players alternate. So Black is the first to place a piece of his own color. The first phase ends when all pieces are placed on the board, filling it completely.
The second phase involves the building of stacks of pieces (a single piece is also considered a stack) by moving stacks onto other stacks. A stack is controlled by a player if his color is on top. A stack is immobile if it is surrounded by 6 neighboring stacks. The white player has the first move in this phase. Any mobile stack of height n (with n > 0) can be moved (in a straight line) in any one of the 6 directions by exactly n spaces by the player controlling it, if it lands on another stack. Jumping over empty spaces is allowed, as long as the tower does not land on an empty space. Single DVONN pieces cannot be moved, but they can be once they are part of a stack. After each move, all stacks that are not connected via a chain of neighboring stacks to any stack containing a DVONN piece are removed from the board.


text:
Churchill Solitaire
I can't get close to winning in Churchill Solitaire. I must be doing something wrong.

Do the Devils Six have to be taken in order to the eight piles to the right? Or from anywhere within the six?
In the vertical columns, if you have K Q J 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3, are you permitted to take from the middle of the column , say 10 through six,  and transfer to another column?

Your second question here you've asked previously here https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/51059/churchill-solitaire-moving-cards-on-playing-field which has a link to the rules which cover that.

Better to split into 2 separate questions and write a descriptive headline

(1) Yes, the Devil's six are moved in order from right to left. (2) Yes, you can move part of a stack, so if what you describe had, say, a 4 at the top of the column and you had a new column topped by K Q J, I would move it.


text:
If a player rolls 3 consecutive 6s and on second six landed on another player’s token can they take a turn?
After landing on another player’s token on second 6 when dice rolled third time (because previous turn was 6)
If a player rolls a 6 on third roll it cannot move further because of rolling three sixes. However, as they landed on another player's token on second six they gained an extra turn.
Does a player get another turn after third six?

tl;dr  On the the third roll of a 6 the players turn immediately ends.
As Ludo is a traditional game that is many 1000's years old its hard to find an official rules source.
The Wikipedia article here  says-

When a 6 is rolled, the player may choose to advance a token already
  in play, or may enter another staged token to its starting square.
  Rolling a 6 earns the player an additional or "bonus" roll in that
  turn. If the bonus roll results in a 6 again, the player earns an
  additional bonus roll. If the third roll is also a 6, the player may
  not move and the turn immediately passes to the next player.

Rolling the 3rd 6 means the players turn immediately ends. I couldn't find anything in any other rules to contradict that.
Wikipedia also talks about different variants-

To speed the game up, extra turns or bonus moves can be awarded for
  capturing a piece or getting a piece home; these may grant passage
  past a block.

As Ludo is such as old game it is not not surprising there are going to be many different variations including this rule which you used in your example. However the outcome is the same.
Here are two examples
1) Player rolls a 6.  They take an action. They roll again.
Player rolls a 6.  They take an action. They roll again.
Player rolls a 6.  There turn immediately ends.
2) Player rolls a 6.  They take an action. They roll again.
Player rolls any 6 and lands on an opponents piece.  They take an action. They roll again.
Player rolls a 6.  There turn immediately ends.

Thanks for the answer. I learned that Ludo is a heavily customised game right now with many variations.

@sanjay  I see your new to stack exchange.  If your happy with the answer then please 'accept' the answer my selecting the tick by it.  This helps show other users if a question has been answered or not.


text:
Is a land a colourless spell?
I know lands are colourless, but is a land a colourless spell? Would it activate Molten Nursery or any other card that is activated with a colourless spell?

By the way, lands aren't always colorless, they could be colored when stated. I believe Dryad Arbor is the only colored land from the top of my head though. And of course if you have something like Painter's Servant on the battlefield

Mycosynth Lattice??

@Nathan Taylor, That won't make a difference. 305.9. If an object is both a land and another card type, it can be played only as a land. It can’t be cast as a spell.

Lands are never spells, even if they have other types like Dryad Arbor.

305.1. A player who has priority may play a land card from his or her hand during a main phase of his or her turn when the stack is empty. Playing a land is a special action; it doesn’t use the stack (see rule 115). Rather, the player simply puts the land onto the battlefield. Since the land doesn’t go on the stack, it is never a spell, and players can’t respond to it with instants or activated abilities.

305.9. If an object is both a land and another card type, it can be played only as a land. It can’t be cast as a spell.

Lands are not spells. They have no mana cost and you do not cast them. Rule 305.1 describes how lands are played:

A player who has priority may play a land card from his or her hand during a main phase of his or her turn when the stack is empty. Playing a land is a special action; it doesn’t use the stack (see rule 115). Rather, the player simply puts the land onto the battlefield. Since the land doesn’t go on the stack, it is never a spell, and players can’t respond to it with instants or activated abilities.


text:
Can I attack a player directly if they still have a flying defender?
I have a 4/2 Spiked Baloth (with trample) and my opponent has an untapped 1/1 Bird with flying. He has only 2 lives and I want to finish him off. Can I attack directly even though my attacker doesn't have reach or flying (and his creature does)?

Actually, trample is very relevant here.

Yes, you can attack your opponent with your Spiked Baloth, and you will win if you do so. (Trample is relevant; it's the reason you win in this scenario.)
However, your question seems to indicate that you don't understand exactly how combat works. Combat goes in step:

In the Declare Attackers Step, you say what creatures are attacking which players. You can only attack players, and it doesn't matter what creatures they have to block. In your particular case, you would declare the Spiked Baloth as an attacker attacking your opponent.
In the Declare Blockers Step, your opponent says which of their creatures are blocking which of your creatures. This is where the flying becomes important. When they're blocking, the fact that the bird has flying just means that it can block your creature even if your creature has flying. In this particular situation, your opponent would declare that their bird is blocking your Baloth.
In the Combat Damage Step, all of the combat damage is dealt at the same time. Since your Baloth has trample, it only has to deal as much damage as the bird's toughness (1) to the bird, and it can deal the rest (3) to your opponent. The bird just deals 1 damage to your Baloth. Then your opponent would lose because they have -1 life.

In addition, flying and reach only affect what attackers a creature can block. They don't affect damage, or what creatures can attack.

As the attacker, you don't have to worry about what creatures the defender has. You attack a player, and that defending player gets to choose if and how to block.
Reach only matters on a blocking creature. It means that the creature may block other creatures who have flying. It is not relevant in this case.
Flying creatures cannot be blocked by creatures without flying or reach. There are no restrictions on what a creature with flying can block. That means that flying is also not relevant in this case.
This means that, if you attack in this case, your opponent may choose to block with his flying creature. If he doesn't, he will lose since you deal 4 damage to him. If he does, he will still lose, since your creature will deal 1 damage to the blocking bird, and 3 trample damage to the defending player, which is enough to bring his life to 0.

You can and, if you attack, you MUST attack the player. In Magic, you always (with exceptions in planeswalkers and multiplayer games) attack the player. It is the defensive player who CHOOSE if he will block or not.
Let's say the opponent has 5 lives. It is your attack phase and you attack (in a 1vs1 game, you don't even choose who to attack, you just Attack the opponent player). He can decide to block your creature with his 1/1 flier (losing it and getting 3 damages himself) or just let the damage go through, getting the 4 damages and keeping his creature alive.
In the actual state of the game the trample MATTERS, because he will die because of the 3 trample damage points. Without trample, he could just block with the flier and stay alive in 2 lives.

MUST is too strong.  Not attacking at all is a perfectly legal option.  The existing answers covered the situation well, where your new one just adds confusion.

Edited to be clearer about the bwarner comment.

@bwarner the point in that the guy is (obviously) new to the game, so I wrote this answer to be pretty simple even if you don't know (and don't want to) know the rules in a deeper way.


text:
What is the purpose of castling in chess?
Having played chess on occasion I know the basic rules and moves to the game. However, it seems like a possibly wasted move when there are players who play a dominant game of chess and don't castle their king. Is castling a necessary move or is it more of a preference choice by the player?

Castling is always an option - it is never forced upon a player. It is however a very commonly taken option as it:

places the king in an easily defended position
moves the rook towards the centre of the board where it is easily developed
and does all that in one move, improving the player's tempo


text:
What datacards should a chaos space marines player use in a maelstrom of war game?
My friend plays chaos space marines with the old codex. We want to play maelstrom of war and I think that having datacards to draw objectives is very handy. I can't find a chaos space marines datacard deck anywhere. What deck should he use? There are chaos daemons and chaos daemonkin, but I reckon that these are different armies from the chaos space marines. Is there any other option?

You have two options - there is a basic set of objective cards that is not army specific - any army can use these.  Additionally, the book "Traitor's Hate" details a new, Chaos Space Marine specific set of objectives that can be used.
It does not appear that you can buy these as a set of cards on their own, but it would not surprise me if this changed eventually.
Additionally, the only difference between any army's specific objectives and the generic objectives are in objectives 11,12,13,14,15,16.  You could use the basic cards, and replace those when they appear with the ones in the book (though, this requires you to pay more attention when drawing).

For my maelstrom deck, I've marked  my 11-16 cards with a big orange circle on the front so when I draw them it's really obvious, and I can easily use the appropriate army rules.


text:
Can a unit use a markerlight token to fire a seeker missile at BS 5 after jinking?
The rules say that skimmers who have jinked can only fire snapshots (BS 1) on the next shooting phase. On the other hand, the markerlight seeker rule says that one can spend a markerlight token to have a unit carrying a seeker missile fire that missile, resolving the shot at BS 5 and not counting as having shot a weapon.
If my skimmer has a seeking missile and had to jink in the previous opponent turn, will it still resolve the seeker missile shot at BS 5 if I spend a markerlight to use the seeker rule and fire it? Don't I have to fire the missile as a snapshot because the skimmer jinked?

I found this thread where it is discussed, http://advancedtautactica.com/viewtopic.php?f=44&t=22862 but they don't reach a consensus. Do you know how it is done in tournaments or if GW has any FAQ on that? I couldn't find anything on my own.


text:
Is there an easy, web based, multi player board and card game prototype tester?
Is there an easy, web based, multi player board and card game prototype tester ? Som that has stack and shuffle for objects?
let's say I wanted to mock up some cards or playing pieces as a jpg and upload them to this virtual tabletop. I would like to be able to turn, shuffle and stack pieces. maybe have some built in custom dice? no rules enforcement, just objects to manipulate.

Could you add more details to what you mean? What's a use case you have in mind?

let's say I wanted to mock up some cards or playing pieces as a jpg and upload them to this virtual tabletop. I would like to be able to turn, shuffle and stack pieces. maybe have some built in custom dice? no rules enforcement, just objects to manipulate.

Seems straight forward. I think it's a good question. Edit that comment into your question.

you might also get some good advice on SE Software Recomendations

An open-source boardgame engine, could be what you are looking for:
Vassal Engine
http://www.vassalengine.org/
It provides counters, cards, board and does not enforce any rules, it provides solely "component handling". You need to create your own module (a container which holds all components as images and text) and then you should be able to send that module to other players or designers to test your prototype.
You can even play together if the game is multiplayer and not solely solitaire. Play by Forum (PBF), Play by Email (PBEM), Peer-to-Peer (P2P) playing is supported.
Here is a direct link to the user guide to evaluate the features:
http://www.vassalengine.org/mediawiki/images/8/8c/Userguide.pdf
If you want to get started, you follow these tutorials:
http://www.vassalengine.org/wiki/Tutorials
Especially:
http://www.vassalengine.org/wiki/Card_Game_Tutorial
http://www.vassalengine.org/wiki/Board_Game_Tutorial
While VASSAL certainly is powerful, the initial steps for simple games are quite simple. Yet after a while, the options like automated game setup will be a blessing for you and your playtesters. The game logs will be important to evaluate the game, i.e. find too weak or too powerful strategies.
FAQ for module creation:
http://www.vassalengine.org/wiki/Creating_Modules

This looks like a powerful tool, but it is much more complicated than i'm looking for.
I used to use a web based application called  TAEBL where you could just import graphics as generic objects and then manipulate them. You could select some objects and right click to "stack" them they didn't have to be cards. you could "stack" a container with the cards and shuffle the whole thing.

I would always go the extra mile to ensure, that I am later not hurt by any limitation coming from the software I use. I've edited the answer to include the link to the module creation wiki page.

The tutorials should help with creating a simple initial module (e.g. a card game). This approach should not differ too much from your fast prototyping software, however it will be more powerful later when you are more familiar with VASSAL.

Roll20 is a website primarily designed for digital RPG games, but I know that it includes dice, tokens, a playing field, uploadable images, and a variety of other open ended tools for DMs and players. However, it sounds like it may be usable for your purposes.

I've been using Tabletop Simulator for a couple of weeks now, and it's really easy to create components and play a game. Has physics simulation and nice rendering to make it feel more realistic. Just another option to consider.


text:
Activating a robber in Catan clarification
Our family is new to Catan, please help settle a rule interpretation.
Does the player who activates the robber by rolling a 7 also fall victim to the "lose-half-your-resource-cards" penalty or are they immune from it because they rolled the dice?

a) Rolling a “7”✹ and Activating the Robber
  If you roll a “7,” no one receives any resources.
  Instead, every player who has more than 7 Resource Cards
  must select half (rounded down) of his Resource Cards and
  return them to the bank.

https://www.catan.com/en/download/?SoC_rv_Rules_091907.pdf
There's no mention of an exemption for the player who rolled a 7.

The word 'every' is explicit.  There are games where similar mechanics don't effect other players (the 'debt' in expansions to Seven Wonders) but in this case the rules are very clear.


text:
Holding a card by accident
What happens if you did not realize you could have laid a card down, and used it later in the game?
For instance player one lays a 2, player 2 a Q, player 3 a 6, player 4 a 6, then four goes, so player four moves one; but then at the end of the game noticed on the last round player four could have put down another six that she had in her hand. How would you play that six? Would you be allowed to use it, or would it be a dead card?

According to the ACC's tournament rule 7.3, on reneging:

Any cards played after the renege occurs or the pegging of a "go" shall be retrieved by both players, and any points pegged (or scored) are retracted. The non-offending player receives two points for each card that singly could have been played (judges confirm number of cards). The nonoffending player decides if the reneged card(s) will be dead or played. Play continues, and all cards in both hands and crib are counted.

In your example, the play would be brought back to the point of the incorrect go call, the non-offending team would peg two points, and then decide whether or not the remaining six would get to be played.  The scoring of the hands would be unaffected.


text:
A card game that has an ultimate skill for each character
I can't really recall what is this board / card game.
I am not sure is it a werewolf, vampire, some other social deduction game, or it's a different one from what I have mentioned.
Each character card will have an ultimate skill. In order to use the skill, you need to reveal your role card.
Anyone can figure out what is this game?
Sorry for the small amount of details.

Sounds to me like you are thinking of Shadow Hunters. Its got some social deduction aspects to it, and each player has a special ability that they can use by revealing who they are.

Perhaps it's Citadels.
Each turn, players get to pick their role cards from a deck of 8 or 9, the King calls each character (Assassin, Mage, King, Priest ...) forward in a fixed order and in your turn, the chosen character card grants certain abilities and advantages. Some of these characters have a color that can correspond to the color of buildings you own, generating extra income.
During one turn, depending on the number of players, you could get to pick two characters and effectively have two turns-in-one.

In Citidels you reveal your role as part of the game when it comes around to your turn not in order to use an ability.

Thanks for your help steenbergh though it's not what I wanted to find. =)


text:
Is there negative marking when destination cards are drawn and not enough trains are left?
A problem occurred during a recent game of Ticket to Ride.
After completing the 3 original destination ticket, the player drew 3 new destination cards.
The player didn't have enough trains left to complete ANY of the 3 destination but the player is required to keep at least one of those newly drawn destination cards.
What happens in this case?
Is the player still liable to negative points at the end of the game for the destination that is impossible to complete?
Is this one of the pure bad luck elements of the game?

The question seems a little odd, in that they player was not at all required to draw new destination tickets. There are other options near the end (block opponents, work towards longest route, or just complete the segments worth the most points.)
My recommendation is often to look for long segments to be completed. A 15 point segment is a much safer goal than an unknown destination ticket.

Agreed. The player wasn't required to draw new cards. But that is assuming that the player understands the strategy properly and is somewhat of a veteran. When playing with a newbie or a child, they do not always agree that they needn't draw more and we can't force anyone to not draw. :) So the question was about resolving these rare happenings.

It is common that when drawing new destination tickets, none of them will be possible to complete. Especially if drawing later in the game. It makes no difference if the reason that it's impossible to complete is because you don't have enough trains, or because all routes into and out of the necessary cities are blocked, etc. Drawing new tickets is intended to be a risk vs reward proposition.
So yes, the player in that situation just gets unlucky, and will keep the 1 ticket that's worth the least points, so they lose the least amount.
Even then, it can be the right move to draw tickets near the very end, especially if you are otherwise losing. Sometimes it's even the right move to draw tickets as your very last move, even knowing you can't ever play trains again! You might know you are losing, and have no choice but to hope to get lucky and draw a ticket that you've already completed.

If it's "common" to draw nothing but tickets you can't complete, you're drawing too late in the game.

Players get negative points for any destination tickets that are incomplete when the game ends, period. Either this player got unlucky, or made a foolish decision drawing new tickets so close to the end of the game.


text:
What's the name of the board game with dinosaur cards?
I remember having and playing this game in early to late 90's when I was a kid. There was a deck of dinosaurs with stats like "length", "ferocity", and two others I cannot remember. When you finished your turn on one of four special fields which were located in the corners of the board, you'd have put down one of your dinosaur cards and compare the specified stat with other player(s) cards. I faintly remember that whenever you would win, you would move your other indicator away from the volcano which was pictured in the middle of the board. HELP!

The timeframe is off, but Evo (2001; 2nd edition in 2011) has many of the features you describe. Likely inspired by your game; potentially an alternative if you have trouble sourcing the game you're looking for.

Could it be Lost Valley of the Dinosaurs? While technically published in 1985, it could easily have been a staple in the '90s.
The description from BoardGameGeek:

You have discovered an ancient chart to a lost valley. It shows that once the valley was occupied by a fierce tribe of natives who had collected a vast wealth of treasure and used vicious dinosaurs to help protect it.
No humans inhabit the valley now and the chart shows that the 'treasure' is still hidden in a temple at the top of the valley but the dinosaurs are still there!
The secret of the valley and its treasure have been stolen and you know that other expeditions are currently journeying to discover the lost secret of the valley.
As your party enters the valley a volcano which has been dormant for centuries rumbles and threatens to engulf the valley in lava.
The race is on, who will win the fabulous riches of the temple and who may die?

It appears to use "Adventure Cards", and involves the adventurers being chased around the board by dinosaurs while collecting treasure.

I have Lost Valley of the Dinosaurs, and, while they both feature dinosaurs, can confirm that the game described above is not it, since none of the other mechanics the OP mentioned are present in LVofD.

From www.spotlightongames.com
Return of the Dinosaurs
(unknown); Spear's Games-1992; 2-4; 20
A double-sided board affords two different games. Escape from the Volcano is a roll-and-move game. The challenge spaces trigger a contest among the players. Whoever plays the card having the higher value in the chosen category gets to move one space further away from the soon-to-erupt volcano. The first to reach the tenth space wins. The Dinosaur Dig is a roll-and-move game of collecting pieces to build up a dinosaur. A dig space permits drawing a dinosaur piece card. The first to collect all four pieces wins. Cards contain a number of facts about dinosaurs.

This is undoubtedly correct. The stats are Period, Age, Weight, Length, Ferocity and Diet.


text:
Can you prevent a permanent from untapping with a tapping ability?
In a match against someone (a professional), I was faced with a Tyrant's Machine. He tapped my best creature and he said that my permanent never untapped, not even during my untap step. Needless to say, I lost. Was he correct?

Yeah... that "professional" was either lying to you or is really not as "professional" as he seems to believe.

The current answer is correct based on how your question is worded, but from your question the specifics of the situation that caused you to lose aren't entirely clear. For instance if your opponent had an untapped Tyrant's Machine at the beginning of your turn, they would have been able to tap your creature before combat and you would still be unable to attack.

No.
All of your permanents untap during your untap step unless an effect has specifically said they do not untap or that you can choose not to untap them. Tyrant's Machine has neither of those effects.

For example, see Giant Oyster.

I was going to edit the answer with the relevant rules quote, but interestingly, I believe that would make it sound less clear than what's already here. For anyone looking for it, the relevant rule is CR 502.2

This would actually depend on which phase he tapped your creature in. The phases of a turn go in this order:

Untap > Upkeep > Draw > Main > Combat > Main > End

So there is a point, between your untap and draw step, in which he could tap your creature until your next turn. This explanation does not account for him saying that the creature didn't untap during your untap step. There could also have been some other effect on the board that would stop your creature from untapping during your untap step (aka hard tapped). However, without knowing the rest of the board state, that is impossible to tell.

The question states that they are wondering about the entirety of the game, not the rest of the turn. Even if you tap the creature after this turns' untap step, it will untap in the next turns' untap step, as explained by another answer.

@TheThirdMan The way I read the question was that he "never untapped" on his turn, so I see what you mean. Regardless, the point stands that there could be some other effect on the board that would stop his creature from untapping.

True, but if you were to assume that, you could make any question infinitely complex. It's generally sensible to assume that what's stated is everything that's relevant to the situation (which wil also provide the most useful answers), and only stray from that principle when the question is as broad as "How could I do (...)".


text:
When a card says "you may choose new targets for the copy", do you have to choose new targets?
For example, can you use Pyromancer's Goggles' ability to use a spell twice on a single target creature or player? Like, can my opponent cast Chandra's Fury on me twice for 8 damage?

Yes, that's what "may" means: you may choose new targets for the copy, but if you don't, it keeps the original target.
One of the many rulings on the Gatherer page for Pyromancer's Goggles says as much:

The copy will have the same targets as the spell it’s copying unless you choose new ones. You may change any number of the targets, including all of them or none of them. If, for one of the targets, you can’t choose a new legal target, then it remains unchanged (even if the current target is illegal).


text:
Can I counter a spell that can't be countered?
Specifically, can I counter Dragonlord Dromoka with Voidmage Apprentice's triggered ability?

"Since Voidmage Apprentice's flipping effect isn't a spell or ability..." - even if it were true, how does it matter? Dragonlord's abilty doesn't say "can't be countered by spells or abilities" - it's just "can't be countered".

Kind of funny that the question is also an answer.

Note that you can target uncounterable spells with counter spells and abilities, it's just that the countering part won't do anything when it resolves. Other parts of the counter spell might still have an effect, such as gaining life or dealing damage.

No, you cannot counter Dragonlord Dromoka with Voidmage Apprentice.
Dromoka cannot be countered at all, it doesn't matter what is trying to counter it.
Also "When ~ is turned face up, ..." is a triggered ability. So flipping a card face up is a special action that doesn't use the stack, and once the card is face up its ability triggers and is put on the stack.
If instead you were trying to counter something like Abrupt Decay that "can't be countered by spells or abilities." you still couldn't counter it because you would still be using an ability to try and counter it. The "by spells or abilities" rider is there on spells with targets so that if a spell has no legal targets it can still be countered by the game rules.

Perhaps worth emphasizing more clearly: the question is simply wrong about this not being an ability.

Is there a limit on Dromoka's can't be countered? Nope, so it can't be countered.
And the flip itself isn't an ability, but the triggered counter is an ability.

I suppose....well, at least Dragonlord Dromoka is easy to banish/unsummon/mind control/tap/....wait, why was I worried about this Dragon?

@NRTaylor You worry about the dragon because it makes that player's turn much safer.  Combat math is skewed in his/her favor, and casting creatures/spells is much safer.

You can still target Dragonlord Dromoka with the triggered ability - the ability just won't do anything when it resolves. There probably isn't a good reason to do so, though. (Maybe to get a stifle target to up storm count?)

@NRTaylor If you cannot get it off the stack by countering it doesn't mean it has to resolve. You can use Time Stop to exile the spell entirely or Ertai's Meddling to do so for a limited time. For the same mana cost (or possibly cheaper) as flipping the mage, Mindbreak Trap means death by blood cell incompatibility for the dragon flavorwise: blood ties are a dead end,

The answer to the question as written is no.  But, the answer to the question in the subject line is different.
The answer is, it depends on your definition of "counter a spell."
If your definition is the usual, technical definition, then as other answers have pointed out, you cannot counter a spell that cannot be countered.
However, if your definition is a bit broader, such as, "stop that spell from resolving, no matter what."  Then the answer is YES.  Here is what we've found so far:

Remove the Spell from the Stack.  Venser Shaper Savant, and Brutal Expulsion are cards that directly return spells from the stack to their owner's hand.  This is a tempo play, but sometimes that's all you need.
End the turn.  Here, Time Stop, or if it's your turn, Sundial of the Infinite are two options.  If you have a way to cast sorceries as instants (for instance Hypersonic Dragon) you can also use, Day Undoing but only on your turn will it destroy the stack.
Kill the player.  Sort of obvious, but if you're in a multiplayer game, and someone is casting that creature using a flash ability during Bob's turn, you can "just" kill Bob while that spell is on the stack, and that will stop the spell from coming into play.

Don't forget things that directly remove a spell from the stack: [mtg:Venser, Shaper Savant ]


text:
If the ancient one awakens after an investigator dies in the mythos phase, does the player draw a new investigator?
When an investigator is defeated after the ancient one awakens, that player is eliminated. What if the investigator is defeated and the ancient one awakens before the end of the mythos phase?
The ancient one is awake when the investigator would be replaced, but wasn't awake when the investigator was defeated.
In our session, the defeat of the investigator caused the awakening. My reading of the rules is that the player is not eliminated as a result of this. Is there a documentation implying otherwise?

The player draws a new investigator and continues play.
From the FAQ (emphasis mine):

If an investigator is defeated, the player controlling that investigator chooses a new investigator at the end of the Mythos Phase.
...
After the Ancient One has awakened, when an investigator is defeated or devoured, the player controlling that investigator is eliminated.

Resource guide says the same thing.
This isn't MtG, there isn't a stack.  My understanding of the "wait til the end of the mythos phase to start new guy" rule is to prevent any/all confusion about what actions (and interactions) that person can take.

I don't completely understand the relevance of the final comment, but if the rule quote is to be read literally as 'if the moment the investigator is defeated occurs after the ancient one already woke, the player is eliminated', then this makes sense to me.

@Joey So before I knew this rule, we incorrectly put new investigators right into play after they died.  Then we would trade with them, use actions on them, wonder if they got to act in various remaining phases.  IMO, that's why the "wait til the end" rule exists, to prevent all that confusion.  They could have alternatively put "The new investigator cannot be interacted with and does not make dice rolls until the start of the next mythos phase."  But that is more confusing to remember and phrase.  Hope that sheds some light.