text:
Do I need to call Uno after swapping hands?
I play the card Swap Hands. As it happens I got the hand of the person who said Uno when he was down to his last card the turn before me. Now I have his one card. Do I need to say Uno now? I ended up winning and I was called out for it.

Regardless of the rules, I would have a tendency to say "Uno" as I'm passed the hand.  This removes any doubt from my part of the game, anyway.  I would probably also do it in a smug way, so it would also remove any doubt about who the SOB of the game is.  :-)

TL;DR: While there is some room for argument, it seems that according to a literal reading of the official rules you do not need to call "UNO" if you go down to one card by swapping hands (or by any other means that don't involve placing a card on the discard pile; see below).  However, to avoid any ambiguity, you may still choose to do so if you want.  In any case, as long as nobody called you out on it before the next player started their turn, you won fair and square.

The unorules.com site cited by Nij does not seem to be in any way affiliated with Mattel, the makers of the game, and the rules there do not seem to be official in any sense.  The official rules are available on the Mattel & Fisher-Price customer service site, under "instruction sheets".  The page for UNO® Card Game (Product # FFK04) there currently links to this set of English rules, which say (emphasis mine):

When you play your next-to-last card, you must yell “UNO” (meaning “one”) to indicate that you have only one card left. If you don’t yell “UNO” and you are caught before the next player begins their turn, you must draw two cards.

In fact, the paragraph quoted above is the only part of the rules, except for some of the suggested custom rules in the "Using Customizable Cards" section, that says anything about calling "UNO".
Notably, the paragraph quoted above says that you must call "UNO" when you play your next-to-last card, not when you go down to one card for any reason.  So, according to a literal reading of this paragraph, you do not need to call "UNO" if you go down to one card by some means other than by playing your second-to-last card — e.g. by giving your hand to some other player and receiving only one card in return.  (Of course, if Swap Hands was your second-to-last card, then you would still need to call "UNO" when you play it.)
(As an aside, another edge case which the official rules cover only implicitly is what happens if you play Swap Hands as your last card.  However, the official UNO Twitter account — of course there is one — has explicitly confirmed that, according to the latest rules, in this case the player you choose to swap hands with wins.  Unfortunately, the official account never seems to have replied to this question in the same thread asking about the very case being debated here.  And this reply to what might or might not be the same question — the phrasing is kind of ambiguous about whether "the person" refers to "you" or "someone" — just repeats the official rules as written.)

A possible counterargument to the literal reading above is that one of the suggested custom rules in the "Using Customizable Cards" section reads (again, emphasis mine):

Tell a joke. If someone laughs, discard down to 1 card (don’t forget to yell “UNO!”). If no one laughs, draw 4 cards.

Reading between the lines, one might claim the parenthetical note as evidence of the intent of the rules being that one must call "UNO" whenever going down to one card, regardless of how that happens.  However, there are at least two reasonable counterarguments to that:

While the rules do not explicitly define what "playing a card" means, the wording of the "Let’s Play" section clearly implies that one plays a card by placing it "on top of the DISCARD pile".  If one is willing to infer designer intent by reading between the lines, one could therefore also argue that, by extension, any placement of cards on the discard pile implicitly counts as "playing" them, and therefore that the instruction to "discard down to 1 card" necessarily means having to "play your next-to-last card" (at least unless you only had one card left anyway, in which case you would've already had to call "UNO" when you played the custom wild card anyway).
In any case, the quote above comes from a suggested custom wild card house rule.  There's no particular reason to assume that it reflects the intended standard rules in any way (to put it in context, the next suggested custom rule in the list requires the following player to play without bending their elbows until someone calls "UNO"), nor, in any case, that the suggested requirement to call "UNO" when that particular custom card is played is anything but a special exception to those standard rules.

Still, if somebody's going to argue that you do need to call "UNO" when receiving a one-card hand from Swap Hands, that suggested custom wild card rule is probably the closest thing to be found in the current official rules to support their position.

Anyway, it's worth noting that the UNO rules have changed over the years, and in any case many groups play with longstanding house rules that they may even believe to be official (because who reads the rules leaflet anyway?).  Some of the more common (and most blatantly non-standard) such house rules I know of include being able to play multiple cards with the same number (or even multiple action cards of the same type) at once, being required to play a card instead of drawing one if you can, having to keep drawing if you don't have a playable card until you get one (instead of just drawing once and then ending your turn if you can't or don't want to play the card your drew) and not being able to play an action card as your last card.
I'm sure the same goes for having to call "UNO" after swapping hands with someone with only one card in their hand, and if your group is used to playing with such a rule, insisting on following the official rulebook may not be the best or most tactful approach.
In any case, there's (officially) no penalty for calling out "UNO" at any time, even when you don't have to(!).  So the cautious approach may be to call "UNO" any time you go down to one card in your hand for any reason, no matter what the rules say — at least unless you're playing with a house rule that forbids you from saying "UNO" when you don't have to.

Ps. For the historically curious, the old official UNO rules from 2001 also used very similar wording regarding when to call "UNO":

Before playing your next to last card, you must say “UNO”.

and even the 1983 rules from International Games, Inc. phrased it in pretty much the same way:

As a player plays his next to last card, he must call out “UNO” (meaning “ONE”).

Of course, neither of those old versions of UNO had the Swap Hands card, or any other means of getting rid of cards without playing them, so this issue never arose with them in the first place.


text:
Coat Of Arms And Goblin Tokens
I currently have a Goblin deck, it constantly racks up 1/1 goblin creatures. I now place Coat Of Arms onto the battlefield. I have 100 1/1 goblin tokens on the battlefield, a goblin warrior and a goblin shaman does this mean each goblin creature gets +3/+3? Do goblin tokens count?

Each of your creatures (including the token goblins) get +101/+101. I hope your opponent has a sweeper.
I think your confusion comes from misreading the things that are being counted. You don't count the number of different types: each creature counts the number of other creatures that share at least one subtype. (In the card's example, the two Goblin Warriors and Goblin Shaman share the subtype Goblin.)
And yes, the tokens count. They may not be cards (technically they don't count as cards even if you use token-cards), but they are permanents, creatures, and goblins.

If you have 100 goblin tokens, a goblin warrior, a goblin shaman, and no other player has goblins, warriors and shamans, all your creatures will have +101/+101.
Coat of Arms affects all creatures on the battlefields, counting the number of creatures that share a type, so in your case warrior and shaman don't matter, because each goblin will see 101 other goblins and get +1/+1 for each other goblin. If another player were playing goblins, they would get the same bonus, and it would be bigger. If another player were playing warriors, your goblin warrior would get a bonus from the other player's warriors, but they would get a bonus from your goblin warrior (not the 100s, since those came from being goblins.) A creature with changeling would get a bonus from all creatures on the board, since the changeling has all types.
Door of Destinies is a similar card that cares about casted creatures of a chosen type, not creatures in play. For Door of Destinies, the cast does not need to be successful, just have the right type to add power, and tokens would not add to the size, but would get the bonus, since they are never cast.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
How can I prevent my old card sleeves from sticking together?
I've been playing Magic: the Gathering for a while now, and I have collected a fair amount of the "penny" card sleeves (clear plastic, no frills). Now they're old and, due to humidity or some other factor, they have a tendency to stick together. Is there a way to store them and/or play with them to fix/prevent this?

don't buy cheap sleeves?

like John said, they are penny sleeves, they aren't meant to hold up and be used forever.

In my experience, even the nice sleeves eventually stick together.

Yeah, I'm learning that now. What can I tell you, I was young and naïve once.

I'd say if your deck is even relatively valuable, I'd upgrade from the penny-sleeve treatment. Penny sleeves are fine for protecting bulk rares and draft decks but the premium stuff is usually a tighter, tougher sleeve with opaque backs (which matters if you want to do any serious competitive play). I would avoid Dragonshield Gloss though because the backs get scratched pretty easily from the pointy corners while shuffling. The Mattes are fine and actually real good.
On the topic of cleaning and storage, here's a few suggestions. if you live in a very humid area, throwing one of those silica packets in your deck box can do quite a bit of work. To avoid collecting those weird little dirt clumps, using a play mat removes the dirty table element and will prolong their cleanliness for a bit (and plus they're nice to play on). If they do get dirty, rubbing alcohol will clean them up decently but after awhile, just replace them.

If you're just looking for new penny sleeves and the like you might want to check you LGS. For example my local store has a box of free sleeves where you can drop of old sleeves or pick up some sleeves for free. While they aren't in the best condition I've sleeved many a commander deck with these free sleeves. If you're lucky you might even find a full set of dragonshields or something like I have.

Thanks. I'll have to check out and see if any of the LGSs around me do that.

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


text:
What happens when I copy a spell with cascade?
Yidris, Maelstrom Wielder states that when he deals combat damage to a player, spells you cast from your hand gain cascade.
Let's say that a hit with Yidris connects on a player and I cast a spell from my hand. Let's also say, for instance, that I have a creature with Dual Casting attached to it. If I copy the spell that I cast from my hand which now has cascade, does the copy also have cascade? I would think so, but I don't know where to look this up.

The copy of the spell does not have cascade, and even if it did, the cascade ability wouldn't trigger.
Copying objects in general is described in rule 706.2:

When copying an object, the copy acquires the copiable values of the original object’s characteristics and, for an object on the stack, choices made when casting or activating it (mode, targets, the value of X, whether it was kicked, how it will affect multiple targets, and so on). The “copiable values” are the values derived from the text printed on the object (that text being name, mana cost, color indicator, card type, subtype, supertype, rules text, power, toughness, and/or loyalty), as modified by other copy effects, by its face-down status, and by “as . . . enters the battlefield” and “as . . . is turned face up” abilities that set power and toughness (and may also set additional characteristics). Other effects (including type-changing and text-changing effects), status, and counters are not copied.

The cascade ability is not printed on the card or part of a copy effect. It is also not a choice made while casting the spell. It is granted by a continuous effect created by Yidris's ability. That effect is not copied, so the copy of the spell will not have cascade.
In addition, the rule for specifically copying a spell is 706.10:

To copy a spell, activated ability, or triggered ability means to put a copy of it onto the stack; a copy of a spell isn’t cast and a copy of an activated ability isn’t activated. [...]

And the definition of Cascade is in rule 702.84a:

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

Since the copy of the spell is not cast, cascade never triggers for a copy.

An interesting side-note is that Isochron Scepter copies its imprinted card and casts it. The neat distinction being that it's a copy of a card and not a spell until it hits the stack.

(mode, targets, the value of X, whether it was kicked, how it will affect multiple targets, ***and so on***) The 'and so on' tells us that this is NOT an exhaustive list. Both Cascade, which is not mentioned and Kicker which is mentioned are both Keyword Abilities. (702.32 and 702.84, respectively) unless there is some other part of the copying rule that says that different keyword abilities should be treated differently when copying, then I think it is safe to sat that Cascade is, in fact, copied.

However, as you point out, Since the copy of the spell is not cast, cascade never triggers for a copy.

I've made an edit to try to clarify why the copy won't have cascade. Does that help?


text:
Do Collective Restraint and Nylea's Presence work together in a non-5-color EDH deck?
Say I have a four-color commander deck that includes blue and green. I have a Collective Restraint on the field and I cast Nylea's Presence on one of my lands. Do my opponents need to pay 5 to attack me now, even though my deck is missing a color of mana?

Yes.
Since Nylea's Presence turns the enchanted land into every basic land type, it means that you have all basic land types under your control. Whether you could have originally have them or not doesn't matter to either continuous effect of your enchantments.
Here's a ruling that supports this:

2/1/2009: A number of nonbasic lands have basic land types. Domain abilities don't count the number of lands you control — they count the number of basic land types among lands you control, even if that means checking the same land twice. For example, if you control a Tundra, an Overgrown Tomb, and a Madblind Mountain, you'll have a Plains, Island, Swamp, Mountain, and Forest among the lands you control. Your domain abilities will be maxed out.

This doesn't refer specifically to your question, but as you can see, since your enchanted land will have every basic land type, Collective Restraint's ability will consider it as being a Forest Mountain Swamp Island Plains land.

See comment above.

That rule about colored mana has been dropped in January 2016, if I recall correctly. Also, the colors of mana generated by a land do not influence whether a land has a basic land type or not, so it wouldn’t be relevant to your question.

Domain effects which actually wanted you to have "one of each" would need to be phrased in some very convoluted way. Something along the lines of "For each basic land type, select up to one land you control which has that land type. X is the number of selected lands."

Yes.
Nylea's Presence doesn't care about your Commander's color identity or what kind of lands you have in your deck. It grants all five basic land types.
Collective Restraint doesn't care about your Commander's color identity, what kind of lands you have in your deck, or what color of mana the abilities of your lands produce (if they produce mana at all). It only counts the number of different basic land types among the lands you control (five).

I understand how each of them separately work; I was specifically asking about the context in EDH, since I believe if a land would produce an amount of mana of a type not in your commander's color identity, it produces colorless mana of the same amount instead. I was wondering if that affected the situation.

The rule that turned out-of-commander mana colorless was dropped back when OGW came out and made colorless costs a thing, but even with that rule the answer would be the same

Re "it produces colorless mana of the same amount instead", Neither of those cards care about the color of the mana produced by the land. They don't even care if the lands produce mana. Added this to my answer.


text:
What happens if I exile The Grand Calcutron with Do-It-Yourself Seraph?
Let's take a look at The Grand Calcutron and Do-It-Yourself Seraph.
As you see from Calcutron's third ability, the "program" is treated like a zone, into which the cards of your hand are moved into.
While it doesn't say it on the card, Wizards stated the cards in the players' program are moved back to their hands if The Grand Calcultron leaves the battlefield.
What happens if I have The Grand Calculatron in my library and put Do-It-Yourself Seraph into play, attack, and exile the Calculatron with it?

Players are initially unable to play cards.

The Seraph gains the following ability:

When The Grand Calcutron enters the battlefield, each player's hand becomes a program (an ordered row of revealed cards).

It will never trigger because Seraph is already on the battelfield when it gains the ability.

The Seraph gains the following ability:

Players can only play the first card of their program.

Players are unable to play cards (play lands or cast cards) except the first card of their program. Since nothing placed cards in their programs, they are initially unable to play cards.

The Seraph gains the following abilities:

If a card would be put into a player's hand from anywhere, that player reveals it and places it anywhere within his or her program instead.
At the beginning of each player's end step, if that player's program has fewer than five cards, he or she draws cards equal to the difference.

These provide means of adding cards to one's program, allowing the players to play cards again.
In particular, the cards in one's hand are not counted when counting the cards in one's program.


text:
What happens if someone Doomblades a creature in response to you trying to give it Indestructible?
I got a bit confused about what would happen in this situation since the stack resolves in reverse order. So, the situation: I have a creature, and then I cast Adamant Will on it causing it to be indestructible, my opponent then casts Doom Blade- that would usually kill the creature. But the stack is in reverse so would doom blade kill the creature BEFORE it got indestructible?

The trick is that you do not “cast Adamant Will on it causing it to be indestructible.” It will only become indestructible when Adamant Will resolves, not when you cast it.

This is exactly the point of the stack, and playing things "in response". The creature dies before the indestructible property reaches it.

Your creature will be destroyed
As you correctly noted, the stack resolves in reverse order of casting, and if your opponent casts Doom Blade while Adamant Will is still on the stack, Doom Blade will indeed resolve first and destroy the creature. When Adamant Will would resolve, it will go to the graveyard without resolving  because it has no more legal targets.

I edited the last sentence fizzled because spells are no longer countered.

@Gendolkari, There's no reason to stop using the word "fizzle". It simply means "put in the graveyard as it would resolve" instead of "countered by the rules" now.

@ikegami You misread me. The post said countered; I changed it to not say countered, because the definition of “fizzle” has changed.

Ah. Didn't check original text (nor can I in this app). Comment made it sound like you removed "fizzled"

This also means that you could play them the other way round - cast Adamant Will in response to your creature been Doom Blade'ed, and it will survive as it became indestructible by the time Doom Blade resolves.

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


text:
Can you sacrifice Corpse Hauler to its own ability and return it to the battlefield?
The cost for Corpse Hauler's ability is to sacrifice it and pay 3 mana and then you can return target creature card from graveyard. Does that mean you can sacrifice the Corpse Hauler and then return it?

No, because Corpse Hauler won't be in your graveyard yet at the time you need to choose the creature you return.
The process of activating this particular ability goes like this*:

Announce you're activating the ability and put that ability on the stack.
Choose the ability's target.
Determine the cost, then pay it.

The problem here is that in step 2 we have to choose a creature already in the graveyard, but we don't actually put Corpse Hauler in the graveyard until step 3.
It also says “another target creature”, where “another” means the target must be something other than this object. That doesn't change anything (since you couldn't target Corpse Hauler even if didn't say this), but helps make things clearer that the target must be something else.**
However if you have two Corpse Haulers—one in the graveyard and one on the battlefield—they could loop each other back and forth.

* Rules section 602 tell us how to activate abilities, and specifically 602.2b tells us to follow steps 601.2b–i which are the rules for casting spells in rules section 601.
** Thanks GendoIkari.

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


text:
What happens if someone builds a MtG Turing Machine in a tournament setting?
In this paper, the authors prove that it's possible to construct a Legacy-legal combo deck where the comboing player constructs a Turing Machine through mandatory actions, which begins to execute a series of actions that will result in one player either winning or losing the game, but determining which of these actions will occur is as hard as the Halting Problem.
What would occur if a player were to construct and execute this combo in a real Magic: the Gathering tournament?

There is a video where somebody actually built this and also asked a judge what would happen:
https://youtu.be/pdmODVYPDLA

They would lose to someone that has a deck that is optimized for winning.

"which begins to execute a series of actions that will result in one player either winning or losing the game" - no, either one player wins, or the game is a draw due to an infinite loop. If there was sure to be a winner, then the victor could be determined simply by playing the game to conclusion.

@user2357112supportsMonica: It doesn't sound like you're familiar with the Halting Problem

@MooingDuck: I am quite familiar with the halting problem. If you read the paper linked, you'll see that it matches my description and not the question's description. The reason it can't be "one player either wins or loses" is because there's no way to turn an infinite loop into a victory for either player (or if there is some weird card that does that, the paper doesn't use it).

The only way to guarantee that one player either wins or loses is to construct the combo in a way that is guaranteed to halt, and if the setup guarantees halting, then you don't have to solve the halting problem.

(Particularly, note section IV.F of the paper, where halting is encoded as Alice winning, and non-halting is considered a draw by infinite loop due to rule 104.4b.)

"In computability theory, the halting problem is the problem of determining, from a description of an arbitrary computer program and an input, whether the program will finish running, or continue to run forever."  Applying that here: there's no generic rules you can apply to determine if the deck is infinite, other than playing it out and watching for patterns in board state.

I understand the halting problem. If the game is a draw, you may not be able to tell. Following the MtG rules may require hypercomputation. That's the point of the paper. My point is simply that the question says the combo results in a win or a loss, but the actual combo results in a win or an infinite loop draw (which may be impossible to determine).

ok, that paper was a good read :)

According to the rules, the machine would be played out until one of the following occurs:

It halts. (A player wins and the other loses)
It visits a previously-visited state. (Loop of mandatory actions ⇒ Draw)
Time runs out. (Draw)

Of course, tournaments have human judges and human organizers, and these may decide a different outcome is appropriate.

Sometimes, a game of MTG returns to a previously visited state. When this happens, the game is deemed to have looped, and one of two things happens:

If non-mandatory actions were taken in between the two identical states, a player must take a different action.[CR 721.3]

If only mandatory actions were taken in between the two identical states, the game ends in a draw.[CR 721.3]

It's crucially important that we don't need to determine if a loop will occur; we only need to determine if a loop has occurred.
Determining if a loop will occur requires solving the halting problem.
Determining if a loop has occurred "merely" requires comparing the current game state against the previous game states. While unbounded storage may be required to record every achieved game stats and whether the action that caused the transition to each state was mandatory or not, solving the halting problem isn't required.
In practice, keeping track of each state isn't necessary because each state is assumed to be unique until the assumption has been demonstrated to be false. In other words, people only start paying attention if they suspect a loop is occurring.

721.3. Sometimes a loop can be fragmented, meaning that each player involved in the loop performs an independent action that results in the same game state being reached multiple times. If that happens, the active player (or, if the active player is not involved in the loop, the first player in turn order who is involved) must then make a different game choice so the loop does not continue.
721.4. If a loop contains only mandatory actions, the game is a draw. (See rules 104.4b and 104.4f.)

We've established that it isn't necessary to solve the halting problem to determine if the game has resulted in a draw.
So what are the actual consequences of being able to implement a Turing Machine in M:TG?
Proposing a Shortcut May Require Solving the Halting Problem
When players propose a shortcut, they describe a sequence of game choices which may be a loop that repeats a specified number of times. For a shortcut to be proposed, the resulting game state must be known by the player proposing the shortcut, and it must end with a player gaining priority. As such, the loop only occurs if the loop is already known to halt.
But it does mean that a player may have to solve the halting problem to determine final state of the shortcut he wants to propose. Attempting to do so with result in a Slow Play error. They will be forced to abandon their shortcut.
In short, a timeout is utilized to avoid having to solve the halting problem.
Knowing If a Game Will End May Require Solving the Halting Problem
It's possible for a M:TG game to never end. Trying to determine if they will end (and when) would require solving the halting problem. Rather than trying to do this, tournament games are given a time limit.
In short, a timeout is utilized to avoid having to solve the halting problem.

Assuming the loop like this exists in a single turn, and doesn't meet the first two conditions, would timeout even ever occur? Is there even an actual timeout rule that doesn't require turns to end?

@Andrew, That isn't possible with the machine in the paper linked by the OP. But let's say that someone comes up with such a machine. A judge would probably rule that they are failing to "take their turns in a timely fashion" and to "adhere to time limits specified for the tournament". Both are these are Slow Play. It's hard to defend that it's not your fault that your machine is taking too long when you single-handedly constructed the machine.

Executing a complex combo is not slow play. If you have only mandatory actions available and you are taking those individual actions quickly, you can't actually make the game go faster at that point in the game so it doesn't make sense to penalize you for playing slowly. The slow play rules do not mention the tournament time limit at all, and nothing in the rules addresses what happens if the turns after time is up take an unreasonable amount of time.

@murgatroid99, Re "The slow play rules do not mention the tournament time limit at all", The passage I quoted is a directed quotation from the definition of SP. /// Re "so it doesn't make sense to penalize you for playing slowly", It does make sense to penalize people intentionally creating a situation where a turn takes over an hour. (Not saying they should or they will.)

OK, you're right, I actually missed that part. But there are specified additional turns after the time has ended, and those have no specified time limit. So there's no established standard for penalizing someone for having those turns take too long. In any case, the point of the slow play rules are about penalizing taking actions slowly and taking actions that do not advance the game state, not for simply playing a combo that takes a lot of steps to play out.

@murgatroid99, Re "So there's no established standard for penalizing someone for having those turns take too long.", Also, there's no established standard for handling hour-long turns. But something has to happen. Ultimately, it will be a political decision, not a rule decision.

The usual interpretation of "loop" in rule 104.4b doesn't require revisiting game states. For example, a situation where one player is forced to put more and more +1/+1 counters on a creature forever would be ruled a loop draw. Also, rule 104.4b says that the game is a draw as soon as the loop is entered, not after it revisits a previous state or after the loop executes a complete iteration (however you want to define iterations).

This situation, in which no player knows whether a sequence of mandatory actions will end or loop forever, is so rare and so niche that neither the comprehensive rules nor the tournament rules address it. By a strict reading of the rules, players would need to continue executing the loop until they either know it will end, or that it will loop forever.
Practically speaking, in most situations either the players will eventually agree to end the game in a draw, or one player will just concede.
In a tournament, if neither player wants to end the game, they will keep playing, the game will go to time, and after the 5 overtime turns, the game will end in a draw. Or the "Turing Machine" will halt during that time; that's always a possibility. If someone ever finds a combo like this that never needs to pass the turn, a judge will probably rule that the game ends in a draw after it goes on long enough to start cutting into the next round's time.
If one player wants to end the game with a draw, but the other doesn't, and neither wants to concede, the first player will probably call a judge. There is no guidance for a situation like this in the existing judging documents, so they will have to make a judgement call, which will probably be either that the players have to continue playing it out, or that the sequence of mandatory actions has gone on long enough to qualify as a loop, and the game is a draw.

Side note, there are examples of bannings (Second Sunrise) and rules adjustments (treatment of the Four Horsemen combo ) to ensure that tournaments can be played in a timely manner.

To go along with @SwimmerF’s comment, the ultimate example is probably Shahrazad, which is banned in every format ever, including casual formats like Commander, because of how preposterously long it takes to execute.

The problem with the Turing deck is that it need a exact hand to even work so most likely  it would lose ever match and then draw for time if it got the right hand.


text:
Does kicker make my spell multicolor?
An opponent was playing with a Rewards of Diversity, which makes him gain 4 life each time one of his opponents plays a multicolored spell.
I played Probe ({2}{U}) and paid the kicker cost (an extra {1}{B}).
Does Probe count as a multicolored spell? Does my opponent gain 4 life?

No.  Probe is not a multicolored spell, regardless of whether it was kicked.
The color of a card is based solely on the mana cost defined in the top-right corner.  Using a Kicker ability (or anything else that modifies the cost of the card) does not change the color of the card.

Relevant entries from the comprehensive rules (emphasis mine):

105.2. An object can be one or more of the five colors, or it can be no color at all. An object is the color or colors of the mana symbols in its mana cost, regardless of the color of its frame. An object’s color or colors may also be defined by a color indicator or a characteristic-defining ability. See rule 202.2.
202.1. A card’s mana cost is indicated by mana symbols near the top of the card. (See rule 107.4.) On most cards, these symbols are printed in the upper right corner. Some cards from the Future Sight set have alternate frames in which the mana symbols appear to the left of the illustration.
202.4. Any additional cost listed in an object’s rules text or imposed by an effect isn’t part of the mana cost.

It does, however, have a blue/black color identity.  Color Identity is used solely for determining card legality in Commander/Brawl decks, and is determined by the colors of all mana symbols in a card's cost and rules text.  (See Rule 903.4)

Also, cards without mana costs (other than lands, which are colorless) use a color indicator (Rule 204) to define their color, and there are various characteristic-defining abilities like Devoid, Painter's Servant , and Moonlace which affect colors as well.


text:
Can I lose more life than I have?
In a multiplayer game, I'm playing Exquisite Blood and resolve the second ability of Aetherflux Reservoir, dealing 50 damage to an opponent who's life total was only 10. I was able to pay the 50 life - that's not part of the question.
What I want to check is if, when Aetherflux Reservoir's ability deals 50 damage to my opponent, Exquisite Blood's ability will make me gain 50 life, or if I only gain 10 - because that was my opponent's "available life" before.
Rule 119.2 says “Damage dealt to a player normally causes that player to lose that much life”, and Rule 119.6 says “If a player has 0 or less life, that player loses the game as a state-based action”. The “or less life” makes me think that a player's life can be negative, and so I would gain 50 life - but I may be missing any other relevant rule here.
I know I can't pay more life than I have per rule 118.4. But that doesn't tell me anything regarding losing more lives than I have.
(not sure if tagging mtg-multiplayer since this can happen in 1v1, but can't think on a situation in which it matters)

Aside: this would make a difference in a two-player game if Phyrexian Unlife were in play and the player had between 1 and 49 life.

I would make a difference in the sense that the player would still be alive, and would need to gain life to have 0 life. That is also true of other cards that stop you from losing the game that way, including Soul Echo, Platinum Angel, and Gideon of the Trials.

Since this isn't "I", would a better title be "Can a player have negative life?" or "Can a player have negative life before losing?" ?

Losing life is different to taking damage. Please edit the question to be clear about what you're asking about (Aetherflux Reservoir deals damage, rather than causing your opponent to lose life).

@nick012000 But the question is about Exquisite Blood's effect, which triggers on life loss.

I could see this mattering in 1v1 for some kind of achievement in MTG Arena like "gain 100 life in a single game" if they chose to implement such a thing.

Yes, you can have a life total below zero. This is mainly a consequence of rule 107.1b:

Most of the time, the Magic game uses only positive numbers and zero. You can’t choose a negative number, deal negative damage, gain negative life, and so on. However, it’s possible for a game value, such as a creature’s power, to be less than zero. If a calculation or comparison needs to use a negative value, it does so. If a calculation that would determine the result of an effect yields a negative number, zero is used instead, unless that effect doubles or sets to a specific value a player’s life total or a creature’s power and/or toughness.

A player's life total is a game value, so it is possible for it to be less than zero. In addition, the last sentence specifically calls out that it is possible to set a player's life total to a negative value or double a negative life total.

Just to add a specific answer to the questions

What I want to check is if, when Aetherflux Reservoir's ability deals
50 damage to my opponent, Exquisite Blood's ability will make me gain
50 life, or if I only gain 10 - because that was my opponent's
"available life" before.

Your opponent looses 50 life regardless of how much life he has. Damage causes loss of life.


text:
Imposter Mech copying Devotion God
What happens when an Imposter Mech, which entered the battlefield as a copy of a Theros God (e.g. Nylea, Keen-Eyed), is crewed? Will it be a creature, or does the phrase on the god which checks for devotion overrule the crew ability?

It will be a creature.
Those are two continuous effects: from the God's ability making it not a creature, and from the crew ability making it an artifact creature.

613.1. The values of an object’s characteristics are determined by starting with the actual object. For a card, that means the values of the characteristics printed on that card. For a token or a copy of a spell or card, that means the values of the characteristics defined by the effect that created it. Then all applicable continuous effects are applied in a series of layers in the following order:
[...]
613.1d Layer 4: Type-changing effects are applied. These include effects that change an object’s card type, subtype, and/or supertype.

Both of those continuous effects fall into layer 4, so we look at the next step:

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

Now we have to determine whether either effect is from a characteristic-defining ability.

604.3a A static ability is a characteristic-defining ability if it meets the following criteria: (1) It defines an object’s colors, subtypes, power, or toughness; (2) it is printed on the card it affects, it was granted to the token it affects by the effect that created the token, or it was acquired by the object it affects as the result of a copy effect or text-changing effect; (3) it does not directly affect the characteristics of any other objects; (4) it is not an ability that an object grants to itself; and (5) it does not set the values of such characteristics only if certain conditions are met.

No, neither effect is from a characteristic-defining ability: in particular, the God's ability does not satisfy (5).
Therefore, the two continuous effects are applied in timestamp order.

613.7a A continuous effect generated by a static ability has the same timestamp as the object the static ability is on, or the timestamp of the effect that created the ability, whichever is later. If the effect that created the ability has the later timestamp and the object the ability is on receives a new timestamp, each continuous effect generated by static abilities of that object receives a new timestamp as well, but the relative order of those timestamps remains the same.

The timestamp of the God's ability's effect is the same as the timestamp of the permanent in question...

613.7d An object receives a timestamp at the time it enters a zone.

...which is of the time it entered the battlefield (unless something unusual has happened to it that gives it a new timestamp).

613.7b A continuous effect generated by the resolution of a spell or ability receives a timestamp at the time it’s created.

The timestamp of the crew ability's effect is of the time it resolved, which is later. Therefore, this effect is applied last, and the permanent ends up being an artifact creature.
There's one more thing to check. Rule 613.3 also said "Note that dependency may alter the order in which effects are applied within a layer. (See rule 613.8.)"

613.8. Within a layer or sublayer, determining which order effects are applied in is sometimes done using a dependency system. If a dependency exists, it will override the timestamp system.
613.8a An effect is said to “depend on” another if (a) it’s applied in the same layer (and, if applicable, sublayer) as the other effect; (b) applying the other would change the text or the existence of the first effect, what it applies to, or what it does to any of the things it applies to; and (c) neither effect is from a characteristic-defining ability or both effects are from characteristic-defining abilities. Otherwise, the effect is considered to be independent of the other effect.

There is no dependency between these continuous effects (as (b) is not the case).

How is rule 613.8a clause (b) not the case? Applying the crew effect changes the existence of the devotion effect: the permanent would not be a creature ordinarily, the application of the crew effect causes it to be a creature, therefore applying the crew effect erases the devotion effect and changes its existence.

No, it does not change the existence of the devotion effect. The devotion effect still exists, even though it ultimately does not make a difference to the result. An example of a situation that does change the existence of an effect is Dress Down and Groundshaker Sliver.


text:
Does Imoen, Mystic Trickster's ability trigger if I don't have the initiative?
Imoen, Mystic Trickster has a triggered ability worded:

At the beginning of your end step, if you have the initiative, draw a card. Draw another card if you've completed a dungeon.

I feel like that the second sentence still relates to the trigger in the first sentence, so I only would draw cards if I have the initiative. Did I read this correctly?

You are correct; if you don’t have initiative then the entire ability will never trigger and won’t do anything.
The if statement there is an “intervening if clause”, meaning that it not only is a condition to get the effect of the triggered ability, it’s also a condition to have the ability trigger at all.

603.4. A triggered ability may read “When/Whenever/At [trigger event], if [condition], [effect].” When the trigger event occurs, the ability checks whether the stated condition is true. The ability triggers only if it is; otherwise it does nothing. If the ability triggers, it checks the stated condition again as it resolves. If the condition isn’t true at that time, the ability is removed from the stack and does nothing. Note that this mirrors the check for legal targets. This rule is referred to as the “intervening ‘if’ clause” rule.


text:
What happens to spells on the stack when a player leaves the game?
Let's say, in a multiplayer late-game (3+ players) I want to cast/activate anything during another players turn. Everyone is rather low on life, and in response to my spells/abilities on the stack another player reduces the life of the player whose turn it currently is to 0 or below, because of which he loses the game.
It is obvious, that anything that player controls/owns is taken from the stack and the battlefield and his turn ends immediately. But what happens to my stuff on the stack? Does it fizzle or still resolve?

@Soulus101 Related, but not a dupe. That answer doesn't mention what happens to the current turn.

It does point to 800.4 as the relevant rules section. But fair enough.

Since that is sort of a canonical Q&A, you could add that information to the answer, and/or this scenario to the question.

I've voted to reopen because I can't find where this information is present in the marked duplicate. I also don't think we're doing anyone a favor by having one giant mega-answer about all the possible distinct situations that can occur on a player leaving the game. This question's small and distinct, so I'd prefer leaving this question open to adding this into that mega-answer.

No, the turn continues as normal, without that player.

800.4i If a player leaves the game during their turn, that turn continues to its completion without an active player. If the active player would receive priority, instead the next player in turn order receives priority, or the top object on the stack resolves, or the phase or step ends, whichever is appropriate.


text:
What is "Z generic mana"?
According to the MtG wiki, the symbol  is a "Generic mana symbol", specifically representing

Generic mana in costs that only can be paid with mana from a source that can produce two or more colors of mana.

However, I can't find any reference to it in the Standard Rules, and I've never seen or heard of it before.
Where does this symbol come from? What cards does it appear on? And what does it mean, exactly?

Here you can look up all cards with {Z} in their mana costs: https://scryfall.com/search?as=grid&order=name&q=mana%3A%7BZ%7D and all cards with mana cost {Z} in their card text: https://scryfall.com/search?as=grid&order=name&q=oracle%3A%7BZ%7D

There is exactly one card with the {Z} symbol: The Ultimate Nightmare of Wizards of the Coast® Customer Service.  It is a silver bordered card from Unglued, and is not legal in regular play.  On this card, Z functions exactly the same way X normally does, and the different letter merely serves to distinguish it from the X and Y already present on the card.
The wiki description comes from Experiment Five a "playtest card" from the recent Mystery Boosters.  These are not real cards and were not intended for actual play (even more so than the silver bordered cards, which were intended for play, just not regular play)
As to what it means, it means exactly what it says.  The playtest cards have no actual rules support.  All interactions have to be interpreted by players from the cards themselves.

As a kind of explanation, some time before Unglued the Oracle text of Fireball was changed to have cost {R}{X}{Y} and text to the effect of roughly "deal X damage divided evenly between Y+1 targets".
It was printed that way at least in the "Beatdown Box Set" (https://gatherer.wizards.com/pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=26621) and apparently confused many players who (apparently) called the Wizard Customer Service. So the Ultimate Nightmare was created to mock that, by introducing an additional {Z} cost on top of {X} and {Y}.


text:
Can I place a row of letters that makes multiple new words in combination with tiles already on the board?
player A makes LACE as a horizontal line play.
player B adds Y to make LACEY then puts E A vertically to make YEA down in the same play
I claimed that was not legal as it is two  turns in one. The other 3 players all disagreed and allowed the play

The answer below covers why this is a legal play.  As a suggestion be on the look out for pluralising words.  Sticking an 'S' on the end of a word whilst creating a new one going other direction is a good thing to look out for.

From the official rules on the Hasbro website:

3: [...] All letters played on a turn must be placed in one row across or down the board, to form at least one complete word. If, at the same time, they touch others letters in adjacent rows, those must also form complete words, crossword fashion, with all such letters. The player gets full credit for all words formed or modified on his or her turn.
4: New words may be formed by:

Adding one or more letters to a word or letters already on the board.

Placing a word at right angles to a word already on the board. The new word must use one of the letters already on the board or must add a letter to it. (See Turns 2, 3 and 4 below.)

Placing a complete word parallel to a word already played so that adjacent letters also form complete words. (See Turn 5 in the Scoring Examples section below.)

So player B was following the rules by playing the word YEA in a single row, and at the same time it adds the Y to the LACE already on the board, as per the second dot point above.
Player B will score points for both LACEY and YEA in this case.

Note than when scoring points for LACEY, any modifiers under the L, A, C, or E are not applied, as they are only applied once.

Or more accurately, the bonuses only apply the turn you put the tile on top of them. If you played the Y on a double-letter, for example, it would be worth double points in both LACEY and YEA.

My understanding is that YEA is being played in a column.


text:
Is there a list of routecards for Ticket to Ride: Nordic Countries?
Is there a list of all routecards with points on the internet for nordic countries? I tried to look for it but could only find them for the normal version.

BoardGameGeek has what you are looking for here. They require an account to download files, so I've copied the relevant information below:
24  KØBENHAVN – MURMANSK
21  OSLO – HONNINGSVÅG
18  KØBENHAVN – NARVIK
18  STAVANGER – ROVANIEMI
17  BERGEN – TORNIO
17  STOCKHOLM – TROMSØ
16  BERGEN – NARVIK
14  KØBENHAVN – OULU
13  HELSINKI – KIRKENES
13  NARVIK – TALLINN
12  GÖTEBORG – OULU
12  HELSINKI – BERGEN
12  KRISTIANSAND – MO I RANA
12  NARVIK – MURMANSK
11  NORRKÖPING – BODEN
11  TROMSØ – VAASA
11  ÅLBORG – UMEÅ
10  HELSINKI – KIRUNA
10  HELSINKI – KØBENHAVN
10  OSLO – MO I RANA
10  STOCKHOLM – KAJAANI
10  TAMPERE – KRISTIANSAND
10  TURKU – TRONDHEIM
10  ÖREBRO – KUOPIO
9   OSLO – VAASA
8   BERGEN – KØBENHAVN
8   HELSINKI – ÖSTERSUND
8   OSLO – HELSINKI
8   STAVANGER – KARLSKRONA
8   STOCKHOLM – BERGEN
7   BERGEN – TRONDHEIM
7   GÖTEBORG – TURKU
7   STOCKHOLM – IMATRA
7   STOCKHOLM – UMEÅ
6   GÖTEBORG – ÅNDALSNES
6   STOCKHOLM – KØBENHAVN
6   SUNDSVALL – LAHTI
6   TAMPERE – BODEN
6   TORNIO – IMATRA
6   ÅRHUS – LILLEHAMMER
5   HELSINKI – LIEKSA
5   ÅLBORG – NORRKÖPING
4   OSLO – KØBENHAVN
4   OSLO – STAVANGER
4   OSLO – STOCKHOLM
3   TAMPERE – TALLINN


text:
Demonic pact and Harmless Offering
If I play Demonic Pact and then before my fourth upkeep, then just before I pass the turn I use Harmless Offering to give it to an opponent, what would happen?

There used to be decks using this very combo: https://www.mtggoldfish.com/articles/against-the-odds-harmless-pact-standard

Let's start with the basic question: can you make your opponent lose the game by "giving" them Demonic Pact after all but the last mode have been chosen?
Short answer: yes.

Demonic Pact's ability includes several uses of the words "you" and "your," which always refer to its controller.109.5  Harmless Offering makes your opponent the controller of Demonic Pact, so they must now deal with the Pact during their upkeep.  This also means that "You lose the game" refers to them losing, regardless of who used to control the Pact.
Another question to ask at this point would be whether the previously chosen options are "reset" when the card changes controller.  The Gatherer rulings confirm that they do not:

It doesn’t matter who has chosen any particular mode. For example, say you control Demonic Pact and have chosen the first two modes. If an opponent gains control of Demonic Pact, that player can choose only the third or fourth mode.

Putting all this together: if you can "use up" the first three modes of the Pact and then give it to your opponent, Demonic Pact's ability will require them to pick the only remaining mode and lose the game.

Note, however, that there are ways for your opponent to deal with your clever ploy.  They could, for example:

Use a Counterspell to eliminate Harmless Offering before it resolves.
Destroy Demonic Pact using Naturalize during your end step.
Stifle Demonic Pact's ability before it can resolve.
Use Angel's Grace to prevent the Pact from making them lose.

All in all, though, it's going to be tricky for them to get out of this situation.  After seeing you play Harmless Offering, they'll certainly be wishing they could ignore the Gatherer rulings and "refuse your generous donation!"

They could also destroy the Pact, but it would have to be done at "instant speed".

@ikegami For clarity, they would need to do it before their upkeep; destroying it in response to the trigger would not help.

@ikegami Harmless Offering is a sorcery, so it would have to be played on your turn. You opponent would then have at least your end phase to respond to it.

Flicker also reset it, right?

@Acccumulation Flicker would do the same thing as destroying it.. as long as you do it before your upkeep, you will survive. But doing it in response to the trigger will not help.

@GendoIkari Destroying it gets rid of it. Flicker just delays it: you now have three turns of choosing something other than "lose the game".

@Acccumulation Of course... I was just referring to saving you from losing at that moment.

Your opponent will lose, unless he has something that prevents him from losing, or a way to counter the triggered ability.
From the gatherer rulings for Demonic Pact:

It doesn’t matter who has chosen any particular mode. For example, say you control Demonic Pact and have chosen the first two modes. If an opponent gains control of Demonic Pact, that player can choose only the third or fourth mode.

The key here is that changing control of an object does not cause it to become a new object in the same way that changing zones does. The Demonic Pact that your opponent has after you give it to him is the same one that you had.


text:
Can I have two planeswalkers with the same planeswalker type out on the field?

Can I have two versions of Huatli out at the same time even though they are the same planeswalker, just with different names?

Yes, you can have multiple Huatli planeswalkers on the battlefield at a time.
This is a recent change when it comes to magic, but planeswalkers are now Legendary permanents so planeswalker type is no longer considered for determining if it gets to stay on the field.

306.4.: Previously, planeswalkers were subject to a “planeswalker uniqueness rule” that stopped a player from controlling two planeswalkers of the same planeswalker type. This rule has been removed and planeswalker cards printed before this change have received errata in the Oracle card reference to have the legendary supertype. Like other legendary permanents, they are subject to the “legend rule” (see rule 704.5j).
704.5j: If a player controls two or more legendary permanents with the same name, that player chooses one of them, and the rest are put into their owners’ graveyards. This is called the “legend rule.”

So as long as the two planeswalkers don't have the same card name, you can have them both on the battlefield simultaneously.

In addition you can have nonlegendary copies of a PW. Currently only Jace, Cunning Castaway has the ability to create tokens of itself, but maybe some other cards will allow you in the future to create new PW-token. Thinking of a Gideon made a creature with Helm of the Host... oooh... since the Gideon-soldier still is a PW... ooooh, this could be fun =D

@ErikLohmann Yup, you can also use [mtg:Mirror Gallery] to get around the restriction

If those are the two cards you are meaning then no because of the  Legendary Planeswalker - Huatli

This is incorrect. The Legend rule only stops you from controlling 2 cards with the same name; the 2 cards in the OP each have a different name. The fact that they are both versions of Huatli doesn't matter (it used to matter with the Planeswalker uniqueness rule, but that rule no longer exists).

This answer was once true, but is outdated. The change is as of Ixialan, where the planeswalker rule (which cared about type) was removed and all planeswalkers were made legendary, and subject to the legend rule (which cares about name not type)


text:
Can you change your mind about how a multi-target burn spell assigns damage after casting it?
So, my brother and i are playing mtg for fun. I have down a
Nezahal, Primal Tide, a 7/7. He plays a Fight with Fire and kicks it, distributing 7 damage to Nezahal and 3 to other creatures. In response, I play a Moment of Triumph, giving my Nezahal +2/+2. He then declares that he is “redistributing damage”, doing 9 damage to Nezahal and 1 elsewhere. Can he do this?

Stack Exchange: Helping brothers find new ways to gain the upper hand in an argument since 2008!

Nope.
The Gatherer rulings for Fight with Fire have this to say (emphasis mine):

You choose how many targets Fight with Fire has and how the damage is divided as you put the spell onto the stack. Each target must receive at least 1 damage if Fight with Fire is kicked.

Fight with Fire is already on the stack when you respond with Moment of Triumph, so it is too late to make any changes to the way damage is divided.

He can't do that because the distribution of damage is done as part of casting a spell.

601.2. To cast a spell is to take it from where it is (usually the hand), put it on the stack, and pay its costs, so that it will eventually resolve and have its effect. Casting a spell includes proposal of the spell (rules 601.2a–d) and determination and payment of costs (rules 601.2f–h). To cast a spell, a player follows the steps listed below, in order. [...]
601.2d If the spell requires the player to divide or distribute an effect (such as damage or counters) among one or more targets, the player announces the division. Each of these targets must receive at least one of whatever is being divided.

This is summarized in a ruling for Fight with Fire.

You choose how many targets Fight with Fire has and how the damage is divided as you put the spell onto the stack. Each target must receive at least 1 damage if Fight with Fire is kicked.


text:
Do you lose the counters on Azor's Elocutors if it's returned to your hand?
If Azor's Elocutors is returned to your hand do you lose your filibuster counters you had on it? I have tried to get this question answered before but no one is sure.

Yes, you lose the counters.

121.2. Counters on an object are not retained if that object moves from one zone to another. The counters are not “removed”; they simply cease to exist. See rule 400.7.
400.7. An object that moves from one zone to another becomes a new object with no memory of, or relation to, its previous existence.

So the Elocutors that’s in your hand has nothing to do with the one you previously had on the battlefield.
There is one card that overrides this rule: Skullbriar, the Walking Grave, but even that won’t keep counters in your hand. It really can’t, because the hand is a hidden zone. There would be no way of tracking which card it is that has the counters on it; keeping it separate from another card of the same name.


text:
Can a planeswalker ability be activated in response to another spell or ability?
If I cast a Lightning Helix targeting my opponent's Gideon, Ally of Zendikar on his upkeep with it having 3 Loyalty, can he in response use Gideon's plus 1 ability to put it out of Lightning Helix's range?

No, a player can't activate loyalty abilities during his upkeep nor in response to spells or abilities. Loyalty abilities can be activated at "sorcery speed", only during a player's main phase. The specific rule from the Comprehensive rules is:

606.3. A player may activate a loyalty ability of a permanent they control any time they have priority and the stack is empty during a main phase of their turn, but only if no player has previously activated a loyalty ability of that permanent that turn.

Teferi, Temporal Archmage is the only exception to that rule, but it is stated quite explicitly.

You can [Only] if, you have either Teferi, Temporal Archmage's <-10>Emblem or Teferi's Talent Enchanted Planeswalker's <-12>Emblem.

For what it's worth, we've generally found that answers to MtG questions saying "unless you use (insert specific card here)" are generally not that well-received, unless of course that is specifically what the question is asking for - MtG is such a broad game that there's a card which gives an exception to every rule.


text:
To kill or remove an Indestructible
Will the following cards kill something with "indestructible"?:

Swords to plowshares
Terror
Wrath of God

Indestructible means the permanent cannot be destroyed. Something would be destroyed if something says to destroy it, or if it takes lethal damage (e.g. a 3/3 takes 3 damage, or is dealt damage by something with deathtouch).
Terror and Wrath of God don't do anything to it. An indestructible creature isn't regenerating from destruction, it just isn't destroyed in the first place.
The common ways we remove an indestructible permanent are:

Put it into any other zone:

Exile it. This means Swords to Plowshares works.
Return it to its owner's hand (known as "bouncing" it): Drag Under, Peel from Reality, and others.
Put it back into its owner's library (known as "tucking" it): Condemn, Chronostutter, and others.

Make its controller sacrifice it.
If it's a creature, reduce its toughness below 0, such as with Tragic Slip.

There are some oddball other methods, such as making it a non-issue (Song of the Dryads) or unable to participate meaningfully (Claustrophobia, Arrest), or making it lose its abilities (Snakeform, Gift of Tusks), or just lose indestructible specifically.

There's also the option of using something like Claustraphobia or Arrest (similar to the aforementioned Song of the Dryads): you're not removing it, per se, but you're making it unusable.

@JohnDoe Thanks for bringing that up, I'd forgotten about that category. :)

you may want to add that the old keyword bury also means destroy.

@NeilMeyer It also sometimes meant sacrifice, so it's a bit messier than that. I'd rather not go there & just stick with recent rules concepts; all the cards here have errata anyway.

You can also gain control of it ;)


text:
Can I transform a token copy of a double-faced card?
If I activate my The Scarab God on Jace, Vryn's Prodigy and then flip the token of Jace, do I still get a Jace, Telepath Unbound? And if so, what zone does Jace, Telepath Unbound go to when he dies?

No, you cannot transform a token of Jace, Vryn's Prodigy this way.

110.5g A token that has left the battlefield can’t move to another zone or come back onto the battlefield. If such a token would change zones, it remains in its current zone instead. It ceases to exist the next time state-based actions are checked; see rule 704.

So any effect that exiles a token and then brings it back will fail to bring it back, and it will cease to exist next time state-based actions are checked.
Note that you cannot transform any token that is copying a double-faced card; but for a different reason. If you have a token copy of Delver of Secrets, and try to transform it, it will also fail.

701.27a To transform a permanent, turn it over so that its other face is up. Only permanents represented by double-faced cards can transform.
110.5e A token is subject to anything that affects permanents in general or that affects the token’s card type or subtype. A token isn’t a card (even if represented by a card that has a Magic back or that came from a Magic booster pack).

Agreed I have changed the subject. Thank you for the answer!


text:
If my opponent takes control of my creature, then it's exiled and later returns, is it still theirs?
I was wondering, if someone casts Kari Zev's Expertise and I cast Seal Away on it, when it returns from exile does it return under my control or theirs? For example if I Blink of an eye the Seal Away?

@doppelgreener If I understand correctly, the edit to the title is misleading... “blinked” generally refers to effects such as Cloudshift or Acrobatic Maneuver, which would have a different answer than the question being asked.

@GendoIkari oops, how about this?

The creature will return to play under its owner's control.
The comprehensive rules have the following to say on the matter:

610.1. A one-shot effect does something just once and doesn’t have a duration. Examples include dealing damage, destroying a permanent, creating a token, and moving an object from one zone to another.
[...]
610.3 Some one-shot effects cause an object to change zones “until” a specified event occurs. A second one-shot effect is created immediately after the specified event. This second one-shot effect returns the object to its previous zone.
610.3a If the specified event has already occurred when the initial one-shot effect would cause the object to change zones, the object doesn’t move.
610.3b An object returned to the battlefield this way returns under its owner’s control unless otherwise specified.

So exiling a creature is a one-shot effect, and Seal Away causes a creature to change zone from the battlefield to exile "until Seal Away leaves the battlefield", which means that 610.3 applies.
Thus according to the rules, as long as the Seal Away was still on the battlefield when its triggered ability resolved (so that the exiling happens at all, see 610.3a above), whoever owns the creature gets to control it when Seal Away is removed form the battlefield. Normally, that means whoever started the game with that card in their library (although there are exceptions, like a commander starting in the command zone, or cards brought into the game by the different wishes).


text:
Getting Joker from the existing groups in Rummikub
I have a group of tiles made up of 3 fours and a joker:

4 4 4 Joker

Now, if a player removes the joker, do they have to replace it with another 4?

The Joker has poorly written rules, and the version of the rules you are playing by matters.
First of all, sets of 4 tiles are never required to remain as 4 tiles, the minimum of 3 tiles is the only requirement. So a fourth tile can always be removed from a set without needing to be replaced.
By the latest version of rules, if you have (4-4-4-Joker) as a set, the Joker is already clear and ready to be used elsewhere without needing to be replaced. Here's why:

OLD RULES:
The 2009 version of rules says (emphasis added):

A joker can be retrieved from a set on the table by a player who can replace it during his turn with a tile of the same numerical value and color it represents. The tile used to replace the Joker must come from a player's rack and not from the table.

This version is very restrictive, and even though it says can and not must, it does not provide any alternative examples of how to clear the Joker. So if you want to play in a way where the Joker MUST be replaced no matter what, then these are the rules you want to follow.
But the game has been improved since then, so I suggest following the new rules. It makes for much more interesting manipulation of the table, where the fun of the game lies.

NEW RULES:
The 2017 version of rules says this about Jokers:

A joker can be retrieved from a set by replacing it with a tile of the same numerical value and colour it represents. The tile used to replace the joker can come from the player's rack or from the table.

Notice the small update there so that Jokers may be cleared now either from the rack or from another tile on the table. The rest is still worded the same but it does say can instead of must.
HOWEVER, this version of rules includes a section, 4 ways to clear the joker are:

1 Joker is replaced.
2 Joker is not replaced
3 Joker is not replaced
4 Joker is not replaced
There is nothing in the rules that differentiate between Jokers in groups and runs, so the fact that example 1 shows replacing in a group should not be taken to mean that Jokers in groups must be replaced but Jokers in runs do not need replacing. If Jokers in runs do not always need replacing, then Jokers in groups do not always need replacing.

Also, rummikub.com/rules/ has a video tutorial for the basic game. Watch the section on Jokers here:

@2:30 "You can clear the Joker with tiles from your rack, or by manipulating the table."
  @2:45 "Cleared Jokers on the table are waiting to be used again, as long as 3 tiles remain in every set"

While explaining, the video shows the same example (#2) in the image above. There is no mention of needing to replace the Joker. That line has been updated to simply say "as long as 3 tiles remain in every set" as the only requirement. Sometimes you have to replace to achieve that, but not always.

Another source is the Official Rummikub App, where the Joker can be cleared from a group of 4 tiles without needing to be replaced. Below the game on that webpage, another version of rules are written. About Jokers it says:

Sets containing jokers may be split and manipulated like regular sets.

And under Manipulation Examples of regular sets it has:

Removing a fourth tile from a set and using it for a new set

So if the Joker (or any tile) is a fourth tile of a set, then it can be removed without needing to be replaced.

Very thorough answer! I'd suggest perhaps reordering a bit or adding a summary up front because as it stands the most important answer is at the end, while the first two sections are primarily history (which is great for completeness and demonstrating correctness, but may not be as important to your average reader)

@BenjaminCosman great suggestion, edited.

I got an original Rummikub board game and the rules in the printed version of the manual are completely different than these on the official Rummicub website. I guess the authors don't know the rules themselves LOL.

No, a group has at least 3 members. So a group of 444 (of different colors) is still a valid group.
If you follow the rules to the letter, you have to replace the joker. But  according to my common sense, if you remove the joker, there is still a valid group left so it must be possible.
Besides, a sane player wouldn't have left the joker in such a position.

The 'old rules' as mentioned above has an inconsistency in a specific situation which I can describe in an example:
Board: Y8, Y9, Y10, J
Rack: R11, B11
Now if you don't allow the joker to be 'cleared' here, had the joker been a Y11 and not just a joker representing a Y11, then the Y11 could be moved away and create the new set of 3, but since the joker using the old rules cannot be moved as it hasn't been replaced you cannot use it in the set. So the Joker is therefore NOT equivalent to a Y11 as it can't be moved as a Y11 would be able to be moved.
The only solution to this is to allow any manipulation of the board with the joker where the final board state contains all valid groups and runs. (essentially not limitations).

Can you explain what the inconsistency is in that situation?

Sorry to disagree with you. All the people that I play with agree that if you clear a joker from a group you must replace it with the number you replaced it with either in a 3 tile group or 4 tile group.

That is fine for you and those you play with, but it falls within my lengthy answer, under playing by the 2009 rules. You just can't say that you are playing by the latest version of rules with strict replacing.


text:
Sacrificing a creature I control that my opponent owns
If I were to cast Hijack on one of my opponent's creatures then, while that creature is under my control for the turn, I cast Blood Divination choosing to sacrifice the creature I took from him/her, does that creature go into my graveyard (since I control the permanent), or does it go into my opponent's graveyard?
This happened recently while playing with friends and we just decided to put it in the original owner's graveyard.

Because Magic has physical cards worth money, they go to some lengths to ensure your cards don't accidentally end up with another player. So there is NO way one of your cards ends up in another player's deck, hand or graveyard. (The other zones are shared.)

400.3. If an object would go to any library, graveyard, or hand other than its owner’s, it goes to its owner’s corresponding zone.

That said, things don't get that far in this situation. Sacrificing instructs you to place the card in its owner's graveyard.

701.16a To sacrifice a permanent, its controller moves it from the battlefield directly to its owner’s graveyard. [...]

There used to be an exception when playing for ante, but that doesn't exist anymore.

Only the battlefield is shared space, and it's visible for all players. That is incorrect. All zones except library, hand, and graveyard are shared (CR 400.1), and all zones except hand and library are public (400.2). In any case, your answer would be a better fit as a comment.

I started writing it as a comment, but then those are meant for asking clarification on the question. IMO it's just something worth putting into an answer as long as piotrek's is already there.

This does not provide an answer to the question. To critique or request clarification from an author, leave a comment below their post. - From Review

I think this stands as a proper answer to the question; it just approaches it from a "why it's that way" instead of a rules quote.

@JoeW: this obviously isn't critique or a request for clarification.

Re "I think this stands as a proper answer to the question", In fact, what RemcoGerlich said is the embodiment of 400.3, which does answer the question. I hope they don't mind that I've smoothed the edges to produce a good answer.

Re "this obviously isn't critique or a request for clarification.", You're looking about this backwards. Answers have the stricter requirements: They are only for answers. It's not "This doesn't meet the exact criteria for a comment, so I'll post it as an answer." It's "This doesn't meet the exact criteria for an answer, so I'll post it as a comment.". But it's all fixed now :)

@ikegami: well, I disagree. An answer is an answer, there are no exact criteria other than answering the question, which it did -- if cards never go to the opponent's graveyard, then they also don't in his scenario. Before ikegami's edit it wasn't a particularly good answer perhaps, but an answer nonetheless.

@Hackworth Is that only for normal mode, or is there only one command zone as well?

@Acccumulation 400.1 seems to say that Command Zone is shared as well, though this is surprising news to me.

@GendoIkari it is a little surprising, but as a public zone that isn't a pile (like the graveyard), I guess they saw no need to make them individual.  The easy way to tell if a zone is shared or not is if cards refer to "Your Command Zone" or "The Command Zone"

It's interesting how exile applies to this. It's the only way to cast your opponent's cards. I guess there is technically only one exile?

You put it to its owner's graveyard, so in this case it's your opponent's graveyard. Magic comprehensive rules define how you sacrifice a permanent:

701.16a To sacrifice a permanent, its controller moves it from the battlefield directly to its owner’s graveyard. (...)


text:
What is the Fling interaction with Removal?
I'm trying to make a Sarkhan's Unsealing deck using G/R. How does the interaction work with Fling if say;

I play a creature
The creature is targeted by removal when entering (Murder, Ixalan's Binding, Essence Scatter)
I play Fling sacrificing my creature

Does the damage from Fling get priority and complete the action?

Please ask the separate question separately, since it's altogether a different matter.

It is not normally possible for you to cast a creature and your opponent to cast Ixalan's binding on the same turn. Something would have to give one of you the ability to cast things as instants (or using a creature with Flash).

@GendoIkari Leyline of Anticipation, Vedalken Orrery,
Alchemist's Refuge, Emergence Zone, Tidal Barracuda, and Vernal Equinox would all make it possible (not strictly speaking likely but possible)

It sounds like you're confused or have misconceptions about how spells are cast and resolved. That's fundamental to this issue so I suggest you read this answer about how casting and the stack works. Go check it out now, then come back here. The following will make more sense once you've done that.

Let's first go through how this scenario plays out before we add Fling or removal:

You cast your creature. In doing so, you put it on the stack. It's now a spell in the stack zone.
One of the triggered abilities of Sarkhan's Unsealing triggers. We put that triggered ability on the stack. If it's the first ability you choose its target whilst doing this. The stack now looks like this:

Sarkhan's Unsealing triggered ability (top)
Your creature (bottom)

Sarkhan's Unsealing's triggered ability resolves, dealing its damage.
Your creature resolves, and then enters the battlefield.

OK, so, let's add to this:

Effects that reference a "creature" (not "creature card" or "creature spell") exclusively reference a creature permanent (card or token) on the battlefield.
Effects that reference a "creature spell" exclusively reference a creature card on the stack.

This means Fling, Murder, and Ixalan's Binding can only target your creature after step 4, once it's on the battlefield. Essence Scatter can only target your creature whilst it's a creature spell on the stack, i.e. after step 1 and before step 4.
So what happens when we add those in?

Essence Scatter: Your opponent can cast this spell after you finish casting your creature. They cannot cast it before step 2, because they do not receive priority yet. They can counter your creature, but they cannot counter Sarkhan's Unsealing nor stop it resolving. You'll deal your damage. You cannot Fling your creature in this scenario because it is not on the battlefield, it's on the stack.
Murder: They can cast this only after step 4. You will already have your creature on the battlefield and the damage will have been dealt. You can cast Fling in response, and sacrifice it to deal damage.
Ixalan's Binding is similar to Murder: they cast the spell, it enters the battlefield, its ability triggers targeting your creature, and  then you can Fling your creature in response. Note they can't do this in response while it's your turn: Ixalan's Binding isn't an instant and doesn't have flash.

I believe there are possibilities not covered by the existing answers, so I will make my own covering the possible interactions.
Essense Scatter and Fling
Essence Scatter and Fling will not interact. Essence Scatter targets a "creature spell" while Fling sacrifices a "creature". Although both use the word "creature", it is impossible for something to be both a "creature spell" and a "creature" at once. There is no way to Fling a creature that is being Essence Scattered.
Murder and Fling
Fling can be cast in response to Murder, and sacrifice the creature targeted by Murder. If no other effects are involved, Fling will sacrifice the creature and deal the expected damage, then Murder will have no effect because it no longer has a target.
Ixalan's Binding and Fling
Mostly, Ixalan's Binding works the same as Murder, but the timing is different. Ixalan's Binding as a spell does not have a target at all. If Fling is cast in response to Ixalan's Binding being cast, then Fling will resolve normally but where Murder had no effect Ixalan's Binding would still resolve. It would then enter the battlefield and its trigger would be free to exile a different creature. If the Ixalan's Binding enters the battlefield, then Fling can instead be cast in response to that triggered ability; if so, then the Fling (again) resolves normally and the triggered ability would have no effect. In this case Ixalan's Binding would remain on the battlefield but would not exile anything.
Fling and Murder
Not specifically mentioned in the question, but changing the order of spells in this case is different from most cases where spells are cast in the opposite order. Spells resolve "Last In - First Out", which means a Murder cast after a Fling would resolve before the Fling. However, the result might not be as you would expect. Fling includes the phrase "As an additional cost to cast this spell". The listed cost for this phrase, "sacrifice a creature", happens when the spell is cast, unlike the rest of the text which happens when the spell resolves. The net effect here is that, although Fling can stop a Murder by removing its target, Murder cannot stop a Fling by removing its sacrifice. If Fling is cast before Murder, then Murder cannot even be cast unless it targets a different creature.
Fling and a different counter spell
Although Essence Scatter cannot interact with Fling, other counters can. If Fling is cast, and then a Cancel is cast targeting that Fling, then the interaction is again somewhat different. Normally a counter spell would stop all the effects of whatever it counters. However, as noted above, Fling sacrifices a creature "as an additional cost" not as part of the effect. The result is that Fling will still sacrifice the creature even if it is countered and deals no damage.

The interaction with Murder is very different than the interaction with Essence Scatter.
If your opponent casts Murder, then yes, you can cast Fling in response. When your opponent casts Murder, it goes on the stack, and you then have a chance to respond to it before it resolves.
You respond with Fling, which requires you to sacrifice a creature as part of casting it. Now the stack is Fling on top, with Murder below it. If no one else has any response, then Fling will resolve, dealing damage.
Then murder will attempt to resolve, but as it no longer has any legal targets (because the creature it was targeting no longer exists), it will fail to resolve and just go to the graveyard instead.

608.2b If the spell or ability specifies targets, it checks whether the targets are still legal. A target that’s no longer in the zone it was in when it was targeted is illegal. [...] If all its targets, for every instance of the word “target,” are now illegal, the spell or ability doesn’t resolve. It’s removed from the stack and, if it’s a spell, put into its owner’s graveyard.

Note that even if your opponent wanted to cast Murder in response to you casting fling; they couldn't target the creature you sacrificed because it was already sacrificed as part of casting Fling.
However, Essence Scatter cannot do anything to a creature on the battlefield; it only targets creature spells. A spell only exists on the stack; when you have declared that you are casting a creature, but before that creature has resolved. If your opponent casts a counterspell like Essence Scatter, you cannot do anything with Fling and the creature you are casting. Fling requires you to sacrifice a creature, which means a creature permanent on the battlefield. You cannot sacrifice a creature spell.

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

and

111.1. A spell is a card on the stack.

Re "A spell is a card on the stack", Or a copy of a spell [111.1a]. Or a copy of a card on the stack [111.1b].


text:
How does the ability on Urza, Lord High Artificer interact with Treasure Nabber?
Does Treasure Nabber grab artifacts tapped with Urza, Lord High Artificer?

Hi Paul; please ask one question per question. How Urza interacts with Treasure Nabber is already a complete question on its own. The exception is when multiple questions are interrelated such that they don't make sense being asked separately — but you can ask about Urza's interactions with other cards separately.

It's sort of surprising and counter-intuitive, but Treasure Nabber won't nab artifacts that are tapped for mana with Urza's ability.
The rules are fairly specific about what counts as “tapped for mana”, and it's more specific than we might intuit:

106.12 To “tap [a permanent] for mana” is to activate a mana ability of that permanent that includes the {T} symbol in its activation cost. See rule 605, “Mana Abilities.”

The {T} symbol here is the tap symbol. That is to say, we have to use an ability found on the permanent itself that is similar to the form “{T}: Add some mana.”
This means when we tap an artifact using Urza's ability, even though we get mana out of it and tapped something, it isn't considered to have been “tapped for mana” by the rules: we didn't use an ability found on the permanent we tapped.
The rulings on Treasure Nabber also describe this for us:

An artifact is “tapped for mana” when a player activates a mana ability of an artifact that includes {T} (the tap symbol). Notably, tapping an artifact to pay for a spell with the improvise keyword is not tapping that artifact for mana.

I feel like Springleaf Drum is an interesting alternative example for this question since it uses both the {T} and wording similar to Urza.  The activated ability on Springleaf Drum taps the drum for mana but not the creature, so Treasure Nabber steals Springleaf Drum when it is used, but not any Artifact Creature that happens to be playing that drum.


text:
How many copies did Risk's original 1959 version sell?
How many copies did the original version of 1959 of the board game Risk sell?
I found this article stating that it sold more than 100,000 copies in its first year. However there are no sources given from where this information is from.

La Storia di Risiko! e l'Anello Mancante, book by Roberto Convenevole and Francesco Bottyone, estimated 40.000.000 copies sold worldwhide from the beginning to the release of their book, which was in 2002.

How does this answer the question?


text:
Does "-5 on your next combat" include helping someone?
So this was a huge dispute a while back and still is. If you play a curse or trap on someone that gives a “-5 on your next combat” would you consider your next combat to be the one on your next turn or could you help someone else in combat and then get rid of the curse? From my thinking, since you had to add that -5 to you combat strength when helping someone, it would go away but others think that since it says YOUR next combat it specifically has to be on your next turn. Please help us settle this!

The Official Munchkin FAQ states:

Q. If a card that affects "your next combat" is played on you during a combat, does it affect THAT combat, or the next one you're in?
A. If the combat is still unresolved (and obviously it is, because people are still playing cards on you for it), then that combat is the "next" one. Most Munchkin games say this explicitly in the rules, but it's true even if we left it out by mistake.

That seems quite clear. The next combat to resolve  in which "you are a participant".

This quote is about the card being played on someone mid-combat, not about helping someone else in combat. It's therefore useless at answering the question.


text:
Beetle crawling up more than one level
Can the beetle crawl up more than one level in a single move? For example, if the beetle is on ground level (level zero), can it move up on top of stack of two pieces (i.e. onto level 2) in one turn? I feel like it shouldn't be allowed to move in top of a stack of n pieces (i.e. onto level n+1) unless it is already on level n, since an actual beetle cannot jump or fly... I'd appreciate an answer, thanks.

Yes it can jump multiple levels.
From the rules here it says as follows.

The only way to block a Beetle that is on top of the Hive is to move another Beetle on top of it.  All four Beetles can be stacked on top of each other.

There is no reference in the rules to moving one level at a time.  If a beetle was to move on top of a stack of all Beetles (as stated in the rules is possible)  then the Beetle would have to jump (or climb if you feel that makes more thematic sense) up more than one level at once.

Yes. From the FAQ on BoardGameGeek:

A beetle can directly climb up or down several levels (from the ground
  to the top of an adjacent tall stack, or from a tall stack down to the
  ground).


text:
How do multiple Underrealm Liches interact?
If I have more than one Underrealm Lich on the battlefield and I draw a card, do they both trigger? Would it be the same as if I drew two cards with one Lich? Would one trigger cancel the other one out? Would I look at the top six cards and only choose one? Please Help!

It would be the same as if you only had one.
Underrealm Lich does not "trigger". It has a static ability that generates a replacement effect; it does not have a triggered ability.

614.1a Effects that use the word “instead” are replacement effects. Most replacement effects use the word “instead” to indicate what events will be replaced with other events.

So when you would draw a card, you have two different replacement effects that are trying to replace that card draw. You get to choose which one you apply:

616.1. If two or more replacement and/or prevention effects are attempting to modify the way an event affects an object or player, the affected object’s controller (or its owner if it has no controller) or the affected player chooses one to apply, following the steps listed below.

Once you have replaced the draw using one Lich or the other; the other Lich now has nothing to do:

616.1e Once the chosen effect has been applied, this process is repeated (taking into account only replacement or prevention effects that would now be applicable) until there are no more left to apply.


text:
Creating a copy of a creature with "entering the battlefield" abilities
The other day, while playing, my friend triggered Glimmervoid Basin, which gives each player a token which is a copy of a targeted creature (except the creature's owner). He chose to copy the Noggle Hedge-Mage, which has two enters-the-battlefield abilities. The question is: when these copies are generated, do they trigger the enter-the-battlefield abilities? Do token-copies "enter the battlefield?"

Yes, the enter-the-battlefield ability will trigger.

701.6a To create one or more tokens with certain characteristics, put the specified number of tokens with the specified characteristics onto the battlefield.

When a token is created, it enters the battlefield. In the case of Glimmervoid Basin, the token's characteristics are defined by the creature it is copying, which includes any abilities it has.

706.2. When copying an object, the copy acquires the copiable values of the original object’s characteristics [...] The “copiable values” are the values derived from the text printed on the object (that text being name, mana cost, color indicator, card type, subtype, supertype, rules text, power, toughness, and/or loyalty), as modified by other copy effects, by its face-down status, and by “as . . . enters the battlefield” and “as . . . is turned face up” abilities that set power and toughness (and may also set additional characteristics). Other effects (including type-changing and text-changing effects), status, and counters are not copied.

Thank you for your thorough answer! This is exactly what I was asking. Thank you!!

Yes
For simple proof, the card Anointer Priest has a triggered ability that is triggered only when creature tokens enter the battlefield, so creature tokens must enter the battlefield and trigger 'enters the battlefield' abilities, or Anointer Priest makes no sense.
Gendolkari covered the exact rules involved, so I won't repeat them.
It's worth noting, though that when Noggle Hedge-Mage's ability says "When Noggle Hedge-Mage enters the battlefield", it is specifically referring to itself, and each copy will be referring to their selves.

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

The full sequence:
Glimmervoid Basin's ability goes on the stack targeting Noggle Hedge-Mage
Basin resolves, creating N-1 noggles (where N is the number of players)
All the noggles' "enters the battlefield" triggers trigger and are placed on the stack in "active player, non-active player" order.  That means that your friend (assuming he has a noggle and the requisite lands) will place both his abilities on the stack (in whichever order he chooses, choosing targets for both).  Then the next player in turn order with a noggle (and the requisite lands) will place their triggers on the stack in either order, choosing targets for both.  Repeat until all triggers have been placed on the stack.  All of the noggles will be viable targets for the "tap two permanents" trigger.
Active player gets priority, and may activate abilities and play spells.
Once all players have passed priority, the stack starts resolving like normal.


text:
What languages / countries do not have a dedicated Scrabble set?
There are, obviously, different Scrabble sets for other countries with different letters and - I assume - alphabets. I also assume the letter breakdowns (and point values?) differ - letter commonality may not be the same between languages.
But are there any (major) languages that don't have a set? I don't know if Chinese has a phonetic alphabet in addition to kanji, so I can't imagine they could have one if they don't.

Please ask that side question separately. It's a valid question, but functionally unrelated to what you're asking here as far as answering goes.

@VBartilucci :Scrabble and Mattel are the joint owners of the copyright for Scrabble. https://www.zdnet.com/article/scrabble-ownership-and-the-public-domain  You could simply find out how in how many languages they publish the game.

@Vbartilucci : Kanji is a Japanese writing system borrowed from the Chinese but the Chinese do not call it Kanji. Their phonetic writing system is called «Bopomofo» https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bopomofo

In 2008, there were 29 versions in different languages according to The Telegraph
The Boardgame Geek database includes 26 language versions (see the pulldown for languages here). That list doesn't include Chinese.
However: Wiki has a breakdown of most (all) language versions (including Chinese language version Zhuyin).

Some supplementary data: out of the top ten most spoken languages, only 5/10 have their own Scrabble version.  There isn't one for Mandarin, Hindi, Arabic, Bengali, or Punjabi.

I'll also note that the 29 figure might include multiples under each language. e.g., both the French-Canadian and the French versions are listed under French on BGG, while it could be that the Telegraph source counted them separately.

I am dying to know what the letter breakdown is for the Welsh set. Soooo many consonants...

Well I'm glad you asked. In researching, I found Wiki has a more complete answer than I initially gave. Welsh tile distribution: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scrabble_letter_distributions#Welsh

I've updated my answer with the wiki information.


text:
Can cards that say "deal damage to any target" deal damage to a planeswalker?
I have a card that says "whenever Karplusan Hound attacks, attacks, if you control a Chandra planeswalker, this creature deals 2 damage to any target."
Does this mean I can target a planeswalker?

I'd love to see this "attract" mechanic :D

Yes, any target includes planewalkers
The wording was a relatively recent change. Previously, very few damage-dealing spells and abilities could target planeswalkers directly. Instead, you redirected damage from targeted players to one of their planeswalkers at resolution.

114.4. Some spells and abilities that refer to damage require “any target,” “another target,” “two targets,” or similar rather than “target [something].” These targets may be creatures, players, or planeswalkers. Other game objects, such as noncreature artifacts or spells, can’t be chosen.


text:
Are there cards that turn opponents' life loss into my life gain?
I was wondering if there is a card that says something like "whenever opponent loses life, you gain life." It doesn't matter how much life gain, just need to know if a card like this exists.

Yes. As this query reveals, there's the following card:

Exquisite Blood
  {4}{B}
  Enchantment
  Whenever an opponent loses life, you gain that much life.

It combos nicely with Sanguine Bond and a number of other cards.

@doppelgreener, I already provided a link to the card. I included the search query as an example of what the OP could have done so they (and other readers) can learn. And I feel it's best to keep things as general, at least until it's found to generate too many matches.

Yeah but... it's a search that mentions both phrases... why would you not? (We could just include every card that mentions "life" and leave it at that, but there's a reason we won't.)

It's too easy to filter out legit results even when one thinks one knows the proper templating. If anything, I'm tempted to make it wider to include taking damage. /// Also, one gets to learn or related cards that could be included

Ok, sure, whatever floats your boat then. I've added a quote around the card quote at least.

Sorry, didn't mean to undo that.

No problem. And on further thought a 7 result query seems like a good idea even if it's got more results than necessary. (An enterprising searcher might go "but what if I filter it down with o:"gain life" as well.... aha!")