text:
Does Master of Cruelties survive being blocked by a creature with 4 or more power?
Master of Cruelties is a 1/4 with first strike and deathtouch. If I were to attack with Master of Cruelties and he gets blocked by a creature with 4 or more power, would Master of Cruelties die or would the first strike and deathtouch combo cause the other creature to die before Master of Cruelties is dealt damage?

Generally speaking, the Master will survive the battle; the first strike/deathtouch combo is that powerful (but appropriate for a 5 mana multicolor card). First strike will make sure the Master deals combat before creatures without this ability; with deathtouch, even a single damage is enough to kill a creature. In the 'regular' combat damage step, when the blocker would deal damage, it's already dead.
Some exceptions are when the blocker has first strike as well (or double strike), or when it has protection from black or from red. In the first case both creatures die, in the second case only the Master.

You say the first strike/deathtouch combo is powerful, but I think it would really help to explain how the mechanisms of combat work so that the Master of Cruelties will usually survive.

Yeah, true. I'm on mobile so I have a hard time properly citing the Basic or Comprehensive Rules...

Indestructible also will get the Master killed.

Master of Cruelties will typically kill any single creature that blocks it before the blocking creature can deal damage back.  This is because first strike causes Master of Cruelties to deal damage first, and deathtouch causes any damage dealt by Master of Cruelties to be lethal.  If a creature without first strike or double strike dies during the first strike combat damage step, it doesn't deal damage during combat damage step.
The relevant rules are the following:

702.7b If at least one attacking or blocking creature has first strike or double strike (see rule 702.4) as the combat damage step begins, the only creatures that assign combat damage in that step are those with first strike or double strike. After that step, instead of proceeding to the end of combat step, the phase gets a second combat damage step. The only creatures that assign combat damage in that step are the remaining attackers and blockers that had neither first strike nor double strike as the first combat damage step began, as well as the remaining attackers and blockers that currently have double strike.
702.2b A creature with toughness greater than 0 that's been dealt damage by a source with deathtouch since the last time state-based actions were checked is destroyed as a state-based action. See rule 704.

There are a number of ways that this can be foiled however.  Here are some examples:

If the blocking creature has first strike or double strike, the creatures will deal damage simultaneously.

If the blocking creature doesn't take damage, such as from protection (Mother of Runes), damage redirection (Harm's Way), or damage prevention (Healing Salve), deathtouch doesn't apply because the blocker hasn't taken damage.

If the blocking creature has indestructible, it is not destroyed by lethal damage (including damage from deathtouch) and will deal damage to Master of Cruelties.  (Note that regeneration will save a creature from dying but will not allow it to subsequently deal damage in this case because Master of Cruelties is dealing damage first and regenerating removes the creature from combat).

If multiple creatures block Master of Cruelties and Master of Cruelties power is still 1, Master of Cruelties can only kill one of them.  The other(s) will survive to deal damage to him.

If an effect reduces Master of Cruelties's power to less that 1 (Cower in Fear, Serrated Arrows, Night of Souls' Betrayal, etc), Master of Cruelties can't kill anything in combat because he needs to deal any damage for deathtouch to work.

All of this is contingent on Master of Cruelties having both first strike and deathtouch.  If he loses either or both abilities (Sudden Spoiling, Humility, Urborg, etc.), all bets are off.

Generally Master of Cruelties(Master) will survive any block like that, but there are exceptions, it all depends on the creature that is blocking Master. The cases where he dies are (Assuming the blocker has enough power or also has deathtouch):

The blocker also has First Strike, or has Double Strike - Since both creatures do damage in the first combat damage step, they both take damage. In this scenario both die.
The blocker is indestructible - Since the blocker is indestructible Master can't kill it. The damage will be done during the first damage step, indestructible prevents the effect of deathtouch, the blocker won't die and will hit back during the second damage step. Even if the creature loses indestructible (Burn from Within) after the damage is dealt, this will not kill it, deathtouch only works as the damage is dealt.
The blocker has protection from one of Master's characteristics - If the blocker has protection, Master can't do damage to it, without damage deathtouch does nothing and the blocker has the chance to hit back. Currently protections that would work are: Black, Red, Multicolored(Enemy of the Guildpact), All Colors(Iridescent Angel), Creatures(Beloved Chaplain), Mana Cost(Mistmeadow Skulk), Player (True-Name Nemesis) and Everything (Progenitus)
There are multiple blockers - Master is a 1/4 creature, for deathtouch to work he needs to do 1 damage to each creature in the block, If he is blocked by two 4/4 creatures he will kill one, but the other will get the chance to hit and kill him.
Master cannot do damage or the blocker cannot take damage - There are effects that prevent creatures from doing damage Fog, or prevent them from taking damage, like Protean Hydra. Some of these effects are very targeted, preventing damage to or by a specific creature (Heart of Light), by creature type (Moonmist), or by opponent's creatures(Winds of Qal Sisma), that would let the blocking creature still hit Master back.
Master has no power - There are ways to reduce a creature's power, either for the turn or in the form of -1/-1 counters. If Master has no power when he hits, no damage is dealt.
Damage is redirected - If the damage is redirected(Harm's Way) that Master would do, it is never dealt to the blocker, this means the blocker is still there in the second combat damage step. The damage still is done by Master so it still has deathtouch when it is dealt to whatever it is redirected onto, possibly even Master himself.
Some other effect destroys master - Engulfing Slagwurm for instance destroys everything it blocks, before any damage is dealt either way, in this case Master never reaches the first combat damage step.


text:
Can a player tap lands for mana, in response to Elder Deep-Fiend tapping those lands at the beginning of the turn?
I have Elder Deep-Fiend, a creature which has flash and allows me to sacrifice another creature towards the cost of its mana. When the creature is played, it allows me to tap 4 target permanents.
I have been doing this during the upkeep step/beginning phase of my friend's turn to tap 4 of their lands so they can't use them. However, they say they have priority and add mana to their mana pool before I can.
As I am playing an instant creature which has an ability when it enters the battlefield, just after they have untapped, I think they shouldn't be able to tap their lands first as they are not up to that phase yet.
Basically, they are saying I can only use it to tap creatures before their combat phase.
Who is right?

Are you talking about Elder Deep-Fiend? Please edit to include the specific card; as precise wording can matter, You can auto link to the card in Gatherer with [mtg:card name]. Welcome to the site!

This question/answer may help: https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/12652/in-plain-english-how-does-casting-spells-and-using-creature-abilities-work-with

I am not quite sure what you are asking. Are you asking who gets priority at the start of a step/phase i.e. whether or not your friend can tap lands before you cast your creature? Or are you asking whether your friend can respond to you casting your creature spell? Or are you asking at what point in your friend's turn you can cast your creature?

When you cast your creature, its triggered ability goes on the stack. At this point, all players have a chance to respond to the ability, before it resolves and taps the lands. They can respond by tapping the land for mana. The mana that is produced will go away at the end of the upkeep step, however, so they would have to use it then; they can’t keep it to use later.
So you can use this to tap their lands, but they have a chance to respond with an instant effect during the upkeep. It will prevent them from using those lands during their main phase.

106.4. [...] Each player’s mana pool empties at the end of each step and phase, and the player is said to lose this mana. [...]

Thanks so much Gendolkari... I had a look at the rules further last night and as @ikegami said, at the end of each step a players mana pool empties. So I get that they have a chance to respond to me tapping 4 of their mana before they do, however if they tap the mana themselves they wont be able to use it during their main phase to play mana spell/abilities. And yes... the specific card im talking about is [mtg:Elder Deep-Fiend]

The last paragraph to be better worded. The lands wouldn't be available for the main phase, but they could respond with an instant speed effect in the upkeep.

@DrunkCynic Not sure I see what you are saying... it already specifies that they can't use them "during their main phase", and to "cast something other than an instant".

And the first paragraph states that they would have to use the mana then (in the upkeep).

The ambiguity of the sentence implied the lands could be used during the main phase to cast instants. I've made an edit that exemplifies what I'm saying.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Removing persist from a creature -- will it still trigger?
Suppose there is a creature with persist on the battlefield, for example Safehold Elite. The creature loses persist somehow, for example because a player casts Turn to Frog on it. The creature then dies, for example due to combat damage. I know that the creature card will have persist again once it's in the graveyard. Does the persist trigger go off, or does the creature simply die?

No, persist only triggers when it was on the creature at the moment it died.
Normally, triggered abilities only work when they exist by the time the relevant event has happened. However, in the example case of a creature with active persist, by the time that creature has hit the graveyard, persist is no longer active because it's a creature ability that only works on the battlefield. That would mean that abilities such as persist would never work.
Therefore, a zone-change trigger ability such as persist has to look back in time to work properly. Conversely, if persist is not on the creature when it would look back in time, it won't trigger. It doesn't matter if the new object in the graveyard has persist.

603.10a Some zone-change triggers look back in time. These are leaves-the-battlefield abilities, abilities that trigger when a card leaves a graveyard, and abilities that trigger when an object that all players can see is put into a hand or library.

702.78a Persist is a triggered ability. “Persist” means “When this permanent is put into a graveyard from the battlefield, if it had no -1/-1 counters on it, return it to the battlefield under its owner’s control with a -1/-1 counter on it.”

Key here is "triggered ability", which happen as the event occurs.

603.2. Whenever a game event or game state matches a triggered ability’s trigger event, that ability automatically triggers.

At the time the event happens, the permanent doesn't have Persist, so nothing triggers. It's only after the event concludes that Persist returns to the card.

While this answer has the correct conclusion, the explanation is not quite correct: most triggered abilities are checked for after the event occurs, not as it occurs. Persist specifically works this way because leaves-the-battlefield abilities look back in time as described in the other answer. An ability with a slightly different trigger condition like on Kozilek, Butcher of Truth would result in a different answer here.

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


text:
Can I respond to my infinite loop by casting a creature spell?
Can I respond to my own triggered infinite loop with Sporemound and Life and Limb by casting Acidic Slime to destroy Life and Limb or by paying to activate Gobbling Ooze ability to destroy Sporemound?

Alternatively, you are entirely allowed to say you won't do anything to stop this, and if your opponent can't stop it either it's a draw. This might be a good idea if, for instance, you have low life total and your opponent has a flying creature you can't do anything about no matter how many saprolings you have.

You may cast an instant spell to end the loop as you describe.
You may activate an ability to end the loop as you describe.
But you may not cast a creature spell (unless it has Flash).

The following is the loop in detail:

[You play a Forest or something]

Sporemound's ability triggers.

You place Sporemound's ability on the stack.
Player's get priority.
Sporemound's ability resolves.

You create a 1/1 green Saproling creature token that enters as a 1/1 green Forest Saproling land creature token.

Sporemound's ability triggers.

Goto 2.

In step 3, you get to cast a spell or activate an ability in response to Sporemound's triggered ability. These will resolve before step 4 (because the last thing added to the stack resolves first). Step 4 will still happen (since the ability was added to the stack in step 2), but step 5 won't happen if Sporemound's ability doesn't trigger (e.g. because it's not there, or because the created Saproling didn't enter as a land), thus breaking the loop.
Note that the stack isn't empty in step 3, so the only spells you can cast are instant spells and spells with Flash, so casting Acidic Slime is out. Activated abilities of creatures are fine, though, so activating Gobbling Ooze is possible.

Oops, you can't cast Acidic Slime. See updated answer.


text:
Is there an opposite for Guiding Ariadne?
Most pendulum monsters have an opposite. For example Dragonpulse Magician, Dragonpit Magician.  One is pendulum value 1 the other 8. My question is, is there an opposite for Guiding Ariadne? Something like:

Monster effect, Level 5 or 7, Pendulum level 6 or 8, Type Fairy, Attribute Light, Attack _____, Defense _____
Pendulum Effect: Each time you activate a counter trap card your opponent takes 500 damage.
Monster Effect: Each time you activate a counter trap card you gain 500 life points.

Basically a card that ties with the pendulum effect of Guiding Ariadne but is higher pendulum level.

A search of Yu-Gi-Oh's database indicates that the only card that fulfills your first line of requirements is Rain Bozu.

I do not believe there is a card to your exact specifics.
There are some online tools though that might help you find cards relevant to your needs. You can use sites like:
https://www.db.yugioh-card.com/yugiohdb/card_search.action
https://www.duelingbook.com
With these you can filter cards to find only pendulums with certain scales/types/attributes and search for keywords in the name and description (for example, you could look for the word damage to look for cards with a burn effect)


text:
Does proliferate give my creatures +1/+1 counters?
So I'm using proliferate cards in my white/green deck. If I use the ability proliferate on, let's say, Pollenbright Druid, does it allow me to give a +1/+1 to my druid?

The reminder text of proliferate is:

Choose any number of permanents and/or players, then give each another counter of each kind already there

So if your creatures have +1/+1 counters already on them, you can add more with proliferate.
If they have no counters, proliferate will not add any.

The strict answer to the question as asked is usually no. You will not be able to use Pollenbright Druid's proliferate trigger to give +1/+1 counters to Pollenbright Druid herself, because what proliferate does is add more of a counter that players and/or permanents already have - not add new types of counters to those that do not already have those types of counters.
If somehow Pollenbright Druid entered with a +1/+1 counter, say from Chorus of the Conclave or more commonly seen recently (though not for WG like your deck) from Grumgully, the Generous or Rhythm of the Wild, she will already have a +1/+1 counter when she entered and thus that counter can be proliferated by her ability.
Proliferate, as defined by the comprehensive rules:

701.26a To proliferate means to choose any number of permanents and/or players that have a counter, then give each one additional counter of each kind that permanent or player already has.

Pollenbright's other mode, "Put a +1/+1 counter on target creature" can however be used to put a +1/+1 counter on her, but in a deck that uses counters usually proliferate will be the more valuable choice, since it lets you add counters to everything that already has one.

If - with the expression "my druid" - you mean the same Pollenbright Druid, then the answer to your question is:
- No, since proliferate ability allows you to add counters on a given creature only if at least one counter is already present on the given creature.

I think "my druid" is not enough to make someone understand we're talking about Pollenbright Druid...even it is well asked,expression is important!


text:
Diminishing Returns vs Increasing Returns
I'm making a board game about constructing molecules out of elements. For example you can construct water out of 2 hydrogen and 1 oxygen. When a player constructs it they take a water card worth 6 points. However this currently has a diminishing return, the next player to construct water only get's 4 points, then 2 points, then 1 point. I felt it simulated a supply/demand system, where to more you supply the lower the value of the commodity becomes. I then asked myself, what if it was the other way around? Water is worth 1 point to begin with, then 2 points and so on. While this doesn't make sense with the supply/demand analogy it does create interesting decisions to think ahead.
Edit to make answers more objective:
What are the pros and cons for each system? What games have these mechanics?
(the game is calle Entropy btw, you can read more about it here http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/1032958/wip-entropy-chemistry-and-chaos-2-4-players-pnp)

Welcome to the site! I like the idea of your game, but I don't understand what you're asking. The way this question is written makes it too subjective and the answers opinion based and not a good fit for a stackexchange site.

I can see your point about it being subjective. I suppose I can ask what are the pros and cons for each system.

Turning in Risk cards in the game Risk is an example of increasing returns. It is a tough decision to turn in cards for extra armies knowing that next turn an opponent can retaliate with a larger army than you just got.

The decision is obviously localized to the game and requires a significant amount of background to answer objectively.
The important distinction between the two is this: diminishing returns is easy, but amplifying returns is hard.
When you have diminishing returns, you introduce two elements.

The first is resourcefulness (no pun intended). If you can only do the same thing 2 or 3 times before it becomes worthless, you (as a player) need to structure your play such that you don't rely on a single mechanic.
The second is awareness of what your opponents play. If two people have played water already, you really should do something else with your hydrogen. But this means you have to be very aware of who has played water, who is set up to play water again soon, and what options you have with your water components.

When you have amplifying returns, you introduce a different set of elements.

The first is that you have a huge risk of being bah-roken. Magic: the Gathering's two most broken mechanics were Storm and Affinity. Storm copied a spell for every spell played before it this turn (majorly amplified!) and Affinity made artifacts cost 1 less for every artifact on the board (allowing you to play things that should be out on turn 8 on turn 3 or even sooner!) The amplification effects in Magic are strictly regulated and playtested to death before being released because of how powerful they've been in the past. Typically, they're prohibitively expensive or fragile to be used in competitive play, as otherwise they would easily dominate the format.
The second is that your players will probably focus on them. Most casual players like big things. If this gets big fast, they're going to go for it. You must be careful not to make your game all about these 2 or 3 mechanics that explode super fast, or your game will run out of steam.

So in summary, diminishing returns put a lot of work on the designer not to make the game a chore to play, while amplifying returns put a lot of work on the designer to make the game last long enough to be fun for everyone in the game.
I would recommend using linear acceleration or deceleration in whatever one you pick (if anything) as using anything higher than that explodes in value after only a few iterations, and obviously the safest thing to do is to not have it. A core tenant of game design is that the game should have as few mechanics as necessary to make the game fun.

It all depends on what you want your players to do.
Diminishing returns tells your players that you want to be the first to do this, and you don't want to do a lot of it. As soon as I have H2O in hand, I want to make water before anyone else does. Once it's been done, I don't want to do that unless I have to because other plays are more valuable.
Amplifying returns, on the other hand, tells your players the opposite - to wait as long as possible to do it, and then do it as much as possible. If there's any chance that an opponent will play H2O as well, I want to try and make them go first so that I get the higher score.
The big concern with amplifying returns is that it can lead to paralysis unless the mechanics force you to make plays - otherwise the first player to move loses.
A variation of Amplifying is where the scoring escalates per player. Any sort of set-building game (like Acquire or Bohnanza) has this, where it's better to have a lot of one thing rather than a couple of many.
For your game specifically, I'm guessing that if you're making molecules you'll have more complex molecules at higher point values. With diminishing returns players will naturally start moving away from the simple ones to the complicated ones because they want more points. Under escalating, I would expect people to farm Hydrogen and Oxygen to get all those nice high-point Waters before looking at something that would require more effort.

I know this is an old question but just wanted to add one more point i feel is relevant for others reading.
Increasing the cost each play makes sense to me with limited resources, as the reward should be related to the difficulty. With limited resourses if water has been completed twice, there is less hydrogen resourses avaliable which would make constructing water a more difficult feat. Thus the reward should be higher.

This would depend on the availability of raw materials in the game, how players access those materials, and what knowledge is available to all players; none of these factors declared by the question or available at the link provided.

This is why i said it makes sense with limited resources

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


text:
"Diplomacy" rule clarification, unit under attack
Referring to the original game.
If a unit is under attack from Province X, can it still interfere with the actions of a unit on Province Y?
For example:

English fleet unit on "English Channel" ordered to convoy an army unit
French fleet unit on "Mid Atlantic Ocean" ordered to move to "English Channel"
English fleet unit on "Irish Sea" ordered to move to "Mid Atlantic Ocean"

I think that the order #3 should keep the fleet unit at "Mid Atlantic Ocean" busy in the stand off and thus not able to interfere with the convoy. I've been told this is not the case but we could not find verification in the rule book. Can someone please explain?
Here is an image of the Diplomacy board if it helps:

No need to edit your question to indicate you've answered it. Someone else may still come up with a better/different answer. Also, if you are satisfied, you can accept your own answer to indicate this (click the green checkmark next to the answer).

That's my map!  I'm surprised people are still using it...

All good. Only way to disrupt a convoy is to dislodge the convoying fleet unit. So even if order #3 was not present, the convoy action would proceed

Do you have a reference for this answer that you could link to?

http://www.wizards.com/avalonhill/rules/diplomacy.pdf - page 12, section "Disrupting a Convoy"
(I was too busy looking at other sections about cutting support and what not)

There is a rather complicated convey chain you can set up which results in a paradox under the rules, as the army will cut support from its destination if it is convoyed, but if its cutting an allies support to keep its convoying fleet in place then the fleet will be dislodged, so the convoy doesn't happen, which means the support isn't cut...

No, a movement is not interrupted by an attack. Nor is a convoy, per se.
But the attack on the convoy is still not strong enough to prevent it! Unlike supports (which you can interfere with by a single attack, by std rules) a convoy is only interrupted if the convoying fleet has to retreat.
A support would be interrupted, though. It would be changed to a hold order (and could be supported as such)
Just some hypothetical additions to your scenario:

F MID-ENG is an unsuccessful move which has a defense strength (in its start region) of 1. (In standard diplomacy all unsuccessful moves have a defense strength of 1. Since you can not support to hold a unit that is ordered to move this is always the case when the move is blocked.)
F IRA-MID is therefore also just an unsuccessful move, because it has not enough strength to dislodge F MID.
A convoy F ENG con A Bel-Lon is therefore successful.
Even it there were an additional support of F Bre sup F IRA-MID which would dislodge F MID and the convoy would be successful.

If a unit is under attack from Province X, can it still interfere with the actions of a unit on Province Y?

Yes, but the only action you can 'interfere' with is support, and only against other provinces.  So in this case if the unit in province Y had a support order OTHER than supporting an attack against this unit, it would be cut.
In your case, Y has a Convoy order, which is unaffected by an attack that doesn't dislodge it.

Don't forget that you can cut support for attacking X if you successfully dislodge Y.

Basically, a fleet that exists in a "square" can't be dislodged by the attack of a single fleet. But a fleet under attack in a square is prevented from supporting ANOTHER fleet.
Without help, the fleet in the MidAtlantic Ocean can't dislodge a hostile fleet in the English channel on convoy duty. But if that fleet were supporting say, an allied fleet in the North Sea, the attack from the Midatlantic would "cut" the North Sea support.
Likewise, the fleet in the Irish sea can't dislodge the enemy fleet in the Midatlantic ocean. At least not without the help of the fleet in the English Channel. But then THAT fleet could not conduct convoy duty on the same turn.

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


text:
Use exactly 36 combinations instead of two dice
I like playing Settlers of Catan with one extension: "Catan: Event Cards"
The deck consists of 36 dice cards to represent the 36 different combinations that can be rolled with 2 dice. This means that number "rolls" are evenly distributed according to its probability.
How can I get this running on Android? Is there a way to roll two dice with predictable probability?
There is one Android app, where you can use those cards, but unfortunately there is one card in it that causes shuffling of all cards, which destroys the probability sorting.

http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/20038/catan-event-cards?
http://www.catan.de/spiel/ereignisse-auf-catan

Especially in settlers I would also like to take the sevens out of the pile and roll each turn only to have random amounts of sevens but if I didn't roll a seven I would take one card instead.
Also optimal, I would like to have such a dice app that allows to set the number of dice to one or more and roll accordingly to play other games too.
How can I get this running on Android?

It seems like you are wanting to 'stack the deck'. Isn't that deck supposed to be shuffled between every turn? If not, it is not holding the same probablity as 2D6, despite having 36 options. If you think about it, once a card is drawn, even if it is placed on the bottom of the deck, it is 100% certain that it will NOT be drawn the next turn. Therefore, the next player is playing with 35 cards. The following player 34 cards, and so forth. Thus, to reflect 2D6, the cards should be shuffled between turns. Unless, you like how those numbers are.

It is not about playing those cards. What I try to achieve is about creating an alternative for games that rely on much luck into a more strategical way: If all numbers are now "drawn" as many times as the propability of the dice predicts, you can for example at settlers rely on the resources you expect to gain if you set your town at an eight.

If you're going to use something like this, I would recommend never using the entire stack, because it gets predictable towards the end. You could use half a stack, or you could add a 'shuffle now' card to the deck.

Shuffle now cards make it totally random again. I think it is not a great drawback that it is predictable towards the end. It allows more strategy for everyone

Without getting into how much I disagree with your motivations here (besides mentioning it), a good solution would be the Clay Crucible variant. After initial setup, there is no randomness.

It would not be 'totally' random. It would result in a better spread of each of the outcomes of the dice, since you're forcing 18 outcomes in a row to be distinct outcomes of a 2x6 dice roll. You can't get more than twice the normalized outcome with half a card stack, while with dice you can theoretically play a game where no 8 is rolled at all.

There is an app called Catan Smart Dice which does exacly what I need.
With the possibility to have the dice be a fair dice: there are 36 possible rolls (1-1, 1-2, 1-3...) And such a fair dice rolls all the possible permutations once before repeating a permutation again

Also an app, where you can also adjust the number of dice and adjust the "fairness": Fair Dice

If it's guaranteed to roll all 36 before it repeats one, it isn't a fair dice roll.

An example of what corsiKa is talking about: If you count the rolls and how many are sevens, you get an extraordinary amount of information about the robber. "Oh, it's the seventh seven? I'll use my soldier now, knowing that you have to get a dev card or suffer the soldier for at least 10 turns!"

What are you talking about? And there are only 6 sevens in 36 rounds.

@rubo77 He meant the sixth seven; but the point still stands. This is why the official event cards have a card that causes them to reshuffle.

the original event cards try to simulate two dice. But I want to change the game into a more strategical, so I am fine with knowing exactly which numbers are still to come within 36 rounds. every player knows this, so it is totally fair


text:
What happens when a Jace, the Mind Sculptor is played in an unspecific format?
If I'm playing casual without a specific format but I'm still trying the rules, what happens when a Jace, the Mind Sculptor is played?  It is banned from Modern but not from Legacy.

I'm not sure what you are asking here. Can you please explain why you think Jace would behave differently in different formats?

Your and your opponent either agree to a format (in which case, you follow the restriction of that format), or you agree to use your own format (in which case you get to decide what cards are allowed in it). The rules have no say in this.

Formats regulate what cards are allowed in decks and sideboards in the first place.  At the point at which you have already started to play with those cards in the decks, then either the cards are allowed or the game is invalid.


text:
Is there a card that makes an enemy play my spell?
I'm an amateur player in Magic: The Gathering (Modern format) and I was looking for a card that makes an enemy play a spell from my hand.
For example if I had a "Discard your hand" card I could make him play that as if it was him (making him pay the mana cost or not).
I'm aware Hive Mind enchantement exists; are there any other cards with a similar effect?
Thank you

Mindslaver is somewhat similar.

@beam022, That acronym sounds corny.

Hive Mind is definitely the simplest. Apart from that, there are other ways but they're a lot more convoluted. Things like:

Put your One with Nothing on an Isochron Scepter. Donate the scepter, then Mindslaver your opponent and make them cast it.

Put One with Nothing on top of your library (perhaps with Brainstorm or Insidious Dreams), then cast Knowledge Pool. Then use Mindslaver and have them cast any spell, and choose to turn it into One with Nothing.

There are a couple of other ways that are just as complicated.

Do you mean Knowledge Pool instead of Omen Machine?

+1 for the 4 card Mirrodin-Donate combo that only raises the question, "Wouldn't a Pact have been simpler?"

@diego: Oops, yes I did! Answering from memory without checking rules text - always a bad plan.

@deworde: Indeed - the example given just gets you Wit's End at a 6 mana discount, but an off-colour Pact works just as well and is a lot more evil.

Shared Fate could also do the trick instead of Knowledge Pool :)


text:
When does Mardu Hordechief's raid ability trigger?
I'm new to MTG and I'm quite confused about when exactly raid is triggered.
For instance, say I have Mardu Hordechief (which creates 1/1 tokens) and I tapped, let's say, 2 creatures to attack.
What exactly is his ability going to happen?
Is the raid ability triggered while/after the combat phase or even right after the declare attackers step?

I think what's tripping you up is that there are two conditional statements involved — one is the trigger and the other is a condition that limits when the ability can work.

Raid — When Mardu Hordechief enters the battlefield, if you attacked with a creature this turn, put a 1/1 white Warrior creature token onto the battlefield.

The Raid ability is triggered "When Mardu Hordechief enters the battlefield." That's the only time you'll actually do any of the other stuff in that sentence.
The action, however, is conditional — you only do it "if you attacked with a creature this turn."
Intervening "if" clauses are checked both when the ability triggers and when it's placed on the stack[CR 603.4], so it goes like this:

Attack with some creatures.
Cast Mardu Hordechief on your second main phase.
When the spell resolves, it puts Hordechief onto the battlefield. This triggers its ability, but only because you attacked this turn. (If you hadn't attacked this turn, it wouldn't trigger at all.)
Its triggered ability goes on the stack.
As the triggered ability is about to resolve, you check the intervening "if" condition again. For this particular ability, this check can't fail, so it goes on to resolve, and you get a token. (If the check were to fail, the triggered ability would be removed the stack without resolving.)

It could be helpful to specify that Raid is an ability word, which means it has no special rules associated with it at all - the card would function exactly the same without the word "Raid."

thank you very much , it's already helping me a lot in understanding this ability (and the meaning of). However , you mention to cast Mardu Hordchief in the second phase. Does this mean : resolve the raid hability or place the creature during the second main phase ? I ask this one because I just read  : http://mtgsalvation.gamepedia.com/Raid Raid abilities evaluate the entire turn to see if you attacked with a creature. So if I understand correctly , I can place the creature during the main phase and the "spell" will be activated during the second phase if I attacked. Is that correct ?

@Smiless "Cast" as in "play the card from your hand by paying its mana cost."

@Smiless: if you play him on your first main phase, then the ability triggers (as Hordechief enters the battlefield), but it won't do anything as you haven't attacked yet. The only way to have him do something with his ability is to have him enter the battlefield after attacking, so in your second main phase.

Actually, the ability only triggers if a creature already attacked. See rule 603.4: "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."

@RemcoGerlich, No, it won't trigger at all if you didn't attack that turn. See updated answer.

@murgatroid99, Fixed


text:
What are some strategies to beat Rise of the Dark Realms?
How can Rise of the Dark Realms be beaten/avoided?
Is it possible to deflect this card so that you end up consuming it?

Although I appreciate you accepting my answer, It is often good to wait a while before accepting an answer. This encourages others to contribute answers which may be of higher quality or contain information mine does not.

There are lots of cards that can counter this. Here are just a few categories.

Cards that say 'Counter target spell' - Counterspell or the many variants that are capable of targeting this card.
Don't let creatures build up in graveyards. (Tormod's Crypt, scavenge cards, play a deck heavy on token creatures, etc.)
Let it resolve, then destroy all creatures. (Wrath of God, Damnation, Day of Judgment, etc.)
Make sure you always have Phage the Untouchable in your graveyard (or other cards they do not want like Tempting Wurm or Eater of Days).

So, first off, it's important to understand why Rise of the Dark Realms isn't a very powerful card in competitive one-on-one Magic: you're paying nine mana for an effect of highly variable power (since you don't always have perfect control of what's in the graveyard, especially an opponent's). It's a very slow spell that lacks most of the characteristics of a good "finisher."

That said, not every game of Magic is the same as one-on-one Constructed. So, what happens if you run into this in Commander, multiplayer, or even a "casual" duel?

Graveyards are fragile. Since the graveyard is a great zone for both cheating on costs and card selection, there are a lot of cards printed that specifically counteract graveyard strategies. Look at how cheaply you can get graveyard hate in the form of Rest in Peace or Grafdigger's Cage, for example. It's pretty easy to sneak graveyard hate into most decks, since many effective cards replace themselves (e.g. Relic of Progenitus) or do more than just attack graveyards (e.g. Rakdos Charm, Scavenging Ooze).
Nearly every strategy relying on a single powerful spell is weak to countermagic. Your opponents like to play big, powerful spells? Counter them! There are tons and tons of counterspells that can meet your needs, ranging from super-fast counters (Force of Will, Spell Pierce) to big value-generating counters (e.g. Cryptic Command, Draining Whelk) to just plain old Negate.
There are lots of spells that just kill ALL of the creatures. Magic has a lot of "sweeper" effects that can clear the whole board with one spell. A simple Wrath of God (or Damnation, or Terminus, or Rout, or Supreme Verdict, ...) will reset the board for a very minor cost.
Someone stealing your stuff? Steal it back. Someone cast Rise of the Dark Realms? Let them pass the turn and then cast that Insurrection you've been holding! Or just tap your Homeward Path and laugh.

Also, while uncounterable spells exist (eg, Thrun, the Last Troll) and normal spells can be made uncounterable (eg, Boseiju, Who Shelters All), there are still ways to answer a spell without using the keyword action "counter" -- such as exiling the spell with Mindbreak Trap, or bouncing the spell with Venser, Shaper Savant.

The logic is if the format allowed Rise of the Dark Realms to be cast, Insurrection would be equally viable.

This particular spell requires two pretty hefty things:
1. 9 mana (sure, not as difficult for black to gather as any other colour)
2. Several creatures in the graveyard
The best way to win in Magic is, and always has been, with speed.  If a game is going on to the point where your opponent can easily gather 7 mana and there are a dozen creatures in the graveyard, then the game has gone on too long.  End the game before it gets to that point, and suddenly this is a card in your opponents hand that they can't use.  Which changes the card from "a game winner" for your opponent into a liability.
My advice therefore, is to ignore the cards in your opponent's deck and focus on your own.  Speed it up, make it more dangerous, end the game before this card can become a game-changer.

The converted mana cost is actually 9 not 7. Speed is often a good strategy, but I disagree with you stating it has always been the best way to win.

I agree with Colin. There are control decks that don't care how long the game goes on - you haven't done anything all game. In fact, it's those control decks that kill and counter all your creatures that might run this card: they kill or counter 5 of your creatures, and then cast this. Now they have your 2 drop, 3, drop, 4 drop, 5 drop and 6 drop for 9 mana. Yikes.

What are the most valuable cards? Instant mana, free cards, a free turn; pure 'speed' cards.  Speed is good because it's difficult to beat.  I'm saying it's the best way to beat this card and others like it: Keep the game short and don't let the card become usable and game-changing.

@Task, The best cards are the best because they are 'efficient' not because they are 'fast'. I agree that beating your opponent before he has a chance to play sounds like solid advise, but isn't that the same advise for all cards with cmc 6+

Gather Specimens and Reins of Power are cards that do that. Spelljack. Fork and Wild Ricochet and other copy effects as well, since your copy would resolve first and the original copy would resolve after the graveyards are empty.


text:
Is it ever a good strategy to discard cards in Race for the Galaxy?
Imagine a a tabuleau which contains both Contact Specialist and Drop Ships, and my hand contains Reptilian Uplift Race and at least one other card, or more generally any other setup which contains both a red to black conversion ability and a total positive military strength in the tableau and a military world in hand.
Is there ever a situation (including cards from any official expansion) in which it would be advantageous to use the red to black conversion ability to settle the military world, thus spending one or more cards, as opposed to simply conquering the military world?

The only situation that this happens in practice that you want to discard for the sake of reducing your hand size is with the Brink of War card Retrofit and Salvage, which allows a player to take all cards discarded at end of turn by other players into hand.  If you preemptively throw cards away to avoid discarding, then you won't be forced to give an opponent more cards.
Round end: After discarding, take all other players' discards into your hand and keep them
In terms of incenting players to use peace rather than military, there is also Pan-Galactic Mediator in Brink of War that rewards you for settling worlds with military to peace settle abilities.  If you have that card in play, you might want to use the peaceful approach to get the reward.
You could also imagine a hypothetical situation in which you discard to avoid claiming the "First to Discard at end of Round" goal, so that another player will chase the goal and take a phase that you want in a multiplayer game.  Such a situation might occur if you are coaxing your opponent to call trade when you have Trade League.  But I've played thousands of games and I've never seen that happen.

Nice; I hadn't considered the possibility of a card which gives you a straight benefit for settling rather than conquering.

Likewise, there is also the card (I think the name is Galactic Scavengers) that allows you to place one of the discards when you develop/settle under the card, and retrieve them during the production phase. Here, discarding would allow you to temporarily reduce your hand so you could store a card and not have to discard later.

@karl My understanding was that Galactic Scavengers stored cards from payments for developments / settling, not from disards.

Exactly. By choosing to settle as black instead of red, you can save one card for later. Only really useful if you would have had to discard that card later because of the hand limit.

Ah gotcha. I was slightly confused by your terminology as "discards" is used in the rule for the cards you are forced to get rid of at the end of a turn due to having more than 10 cards, as opposed to "payment" which is for the cards used to buy a development / settlement. You should make your comment into a separate answer as it's another valid case.

In addition to the scenarios rrenaud mentions, this can also be of benefit if you have Galactic Scavengers. This is another card from Brink of War, and it allows you to save one card from your payment for developments and black/civilian worlds.
You could choose to settle by card payment instead of by military strength in order to save a card for later, temporarily reducing your hand size so you don't have to discard at the end of the round. It's highly situational, but it could happen.


text:
Does Alien Fuel Refinery count as having a trade power in Race for the Galaxy?
In Race for the Galaxy, does the Alien Fuel Refinery restriction ("you may not trade a good from this world") count as a "trade power" for the purposes of Trade League, or in other words do I score a point for having Alien Fuel Refinery in my tableau if I also play Trade League?
It seems a bit strange to me that Trade League gives you points for not being able to trade, but (unless I've miscounted) Keldon's AI thinks that it does. Is there anything more official out there as a ruling on this one?

It does count. The Alien Artifact rules actually cover this!

Consume powers, such as Trade League’s power, can be used.
  Trade League and Wormhole Prospectors do score for this world.

Similarly, the Brink of War rules explicitly state that Trade League does score for the can't sell power of Alien Oort Cloud Refinery (bottom of page 13)

It has a trading power, the restriction is that you have to trade goods from other worlds. This could be done to restrict the card from being to good, or it balances with higher VP-score or lower cost to attack/buy.
In this specific case, the reason that you cannot trade its own good is probably because it is cheap, or, that the designers wanted a cheap producing alien world.
It produces a yellow good which combined with a trading power is a really good combination.

"If it has a trading power, it has a trading power". Is that an official ruling, or your interpretation?

It does indeed keep the card from being too good. But that's pretty separate from whether it's a trade power. It sounds like you've never even seen the card?

@PhilipKendall - It has a trading power. It is right there on the card. You can use it to trade. And Google is my friend (Image wise that is). Edited to make the answer less ambiguous.

Either I (and Keldon's AI) are massively misinterpreting the meaning of the card, or you are; you cannot use the trade power to trade in any way - it explicitly stops you from selling the good from Alien Fuel Refinery when you select the "Consume - Trade" action (or, I guess get a trade option in some other way like Black Market Trading World or Trade League, but I haven't tested that in the AI).

@TobiasWärre Philip is completely correct here. You can't use the power to trade. All the power does is keep you from trading (from this world). You can still trade goods from other worlds (it doesn't prevent that), but it has nothing to do with this card; that's just normal trading.

You can use Trade League and Black Market Trading World on the Alien Fuel Refinery good.


text:
Does Increasing Devotion create 10 tokens if cast from the graveyard without flashback?
Increasing Devotion creates 5 tokens, or 10 tokens if it is cast from the graveyard. While the "normal" way to cast this from the graveyard is with its own flashback ability, do I still get 10 tokens if I cast it from the graveyard in some other way, for example with Yawgmoth's Will?

Yes, you get 10 tokens if you cast it from the graveyard in any way.
If the alternative effect only happened on casting the spell through flashback, the card would say so by making an explicit reference to its flashback ability. There are no flashback cards that do so, but presumably it might read "if you cast this spell for its flashback cost", similar to the wording of the Mutate ability.
Since it doesn't make a reference to flashback, it happens if you cast it from your graveyard in any way. There are several more flashback cards that use the same template.


text:
Does a Panharmonicon effect Torpor Orb's ability?
Does Torpor Orb work as usual with a Panharmonicon in play? For example, my Viridian Shaman's ability would still not trigger as is usually the case with Torpor Orb, the Panharmonicon does not change anything in this situation?

Can you expand on why it's not clear? I mean, it seems like a pretty straightforward interaction to me, and I think if you can clarify why it's not straightforward for you, you're likely to get a more useful answer.

@DavidZ I think it's a reasonable enough question to ask "this MtG interactions looks obvious to me, but I'm just checking because sometimes my intuition about MtG interactions is wrong".

@PhilipKendall That's fair; I just happen to disagree that that on its own makes a question reasonable. Like, in this case, the question has a straightforward yes-or-no answer, but that's not very useful in terms of providing value to other readers.

Torpor Orb does not directly interact with Panharmonicon, but with Torpor Orb in play, Panharmonicon has no effect when creatures enter the battlefield.
Torpor Orb's ability says

Creatures entering the battlefield don't cause abilities to trigger.

and Panharmonicon's ability says

If an artifact or creature entering the battlefield causes a triggered ability of a permanent you control to trigger, that ability triggers an additional time.

With both on the battlefield, if a creature enters the battlefield, Torpor Orb prevents any abilities from triggering, so the condition of Panharmonicon's ability is never met, so Panharomonicon's ability does nothing. Panharmonicon still works as usual if a non-creature artifact enters the battlefield.
Panharmonicon's ability is very similar to a replacement effect, and rule 614.7 says

If a replacement effect would replace an event, but that event never happens, the replacement effect simply doesn’t do anything.


text:
Does the discount from Mindsplice Apparatus apply to flashback costs?
If I target a Time Warp with Snapcaster Mage and there is a Mindsplice Apparatus with 3 oil counters in play on my side,  can I cast Time Warp for {U}{U}?

The total cost to cast a spell = mana cost or alternative cost + additional costs and cost increases - cost reductions. Flashback is just an alternative cost.

Yes. Flashback is just an alternative cost (CR 702.34a):

Casting a spell using its flashback ability follows the rules for paying
alternative costs in rules 601.2b and 601.2f–h.

and 601.2f explicitly allows reductions to apply to alternative costs:

The total cost is the mana cost or alternative cost (as determined in rule 601.2b), plus all additional costs and cost increases, and minus all cost reductions.

(Rule references to the 2023-02-03 Comprehensive Rules)

As a somewhat interesting addendum, because of how casting costs work, cost reductions are not optional unless the ability providing them says they are, so not only could Time Warp be cast for {U}{U} in the OP's example, it has to be cast for {U}{U} if being cast via flashback in that case. This usually does not matter, though there are edge cases where it has nasty implications (for example, if an opponent has Lavinia, Azorius Renegade in play and your cost reductions reduce the cost to zero, then you functionally can’t cast it).


text:
Can Henzie blitz cards exiled with Atsushi?
I play a Henzie "Toolbox" Torre commander deck. I blitz Atsushi, the Blazing Sky. When it dies I decide to use its first ability to exile the top two cards of my library.
If those two cards are creatures with mana value four or greater can I then blitz them with Henzie from exile?
The relevant abilities are:
Henzie:

Each creature spell you cast with mana value 4 or greater has blitz. The blitz cost is equal to its mana cost.

Atsushi:

When Atsushi, the Blazing Sky dies, choose one —

Exile the top two cards of your library. Until the end of your next turn, you may play those cards.
Create three Treasure tokens.

@PhilipKendall Thanks for the edit.

Yes, you may blitz applicable creatures from exile.
You blitz a card by casting it for the alternative mana cost granted by Blitz. Blitz makes no limitation on from where you may cast that creature, so casting it from your hand, from exile, or from anywhere else works all the same. You simply follow the normal spell casting procedure for alternative cost spells.

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 [..]

702.152a [..] “Blitz [cost]” means “You may cast this card by paying [cost] rather than its mana cost,” [..] Casting a spell for its blitz cost follows the rules for paying alternative costs in rules 601.2b and 601.2f–h.

It may be worth noting that you would not be able to use Blitz if the creature is being cast with a different alternative cost. For example, if a creature is exiled using a Foretell ability then it cannot be blitzed.

You also can't use Blitz if a creature spell gets onto the stack without you casting it (e.g. the spell is copied) or if a creature gets onto the battlefield without being cast.


text:
Why don't cards that exile themselves go to the graveyard?
Calamity's Wake is a card from the Brothers' War set that has the text “Exile Calamity's Wake.” at the end of it.
The clear intention of this card is that after it is cast, it goes to exile instead of the graveyard. However, I'm curious about the wording because it isn't worded as a replacement effect, which means there doesn't seem to be anything stopping this card from going to the graveyard as part of resolution.
The relevant comprehensive rules are:

608.2k If an instant spell, sorcery spell, or ability that can legally resolve leaves the stack once it starts to resolve, it will continue
to resolve fully.
608.2m As the final part of an instant or sorcery spell’s resolution, the spell is put into its owner’s graveyard. As the final part of an
ability’s resolution, the ability is removed from the stack and ceases
to exist.

These two rules together suggest to me that Calamity's Wake exiles itself, continues resolving, then moves to the final steps of resolution which according to 608.2m moves the spell to the owner's graveyard. Nothing about 608.2m looks like it requires the spell to currently be on the stack to happen.
Is there any other comprehensive rule that clears up how a spell exiling itself is supposed to behave? I know how it's clearly meant to work, but I'm just looking for the justification from the comprehensive rules.

This is a consequence of CR 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.

and the "Golden Rule" 101.3:

Any part of an instruction that’s impossible to perform is ignored. (In many cases the card will specify consequences for this; if it doesn’t, there’s no effect.)

As you note, 608.2k means that we do the following things in order:

"Exile all graveyards": no problem here.
"Players can't cast noncreature spells this turn": no problem here.
"Exile Calamity's Wake": this moves the spell from the stack to the exile zone. As per 400.7, the object in exile is unrelated to the object on the stack so any effects which would have applied to the spell do not apply to this object.

If there were further text on Calamity's Wake, we would continue to follow those instructions as per 608.2k. There isn't, so we don't need to worry about that here.
We now come to 608.2m; this instructs us to put the spell into the owner's graveyard. We can't do this, because the spell doesn't exist any more, so we apply the golden rule. The card (or rules in this case) don't specify a consequence for this so there is no effect.
The spell has now finished resolving, and there is an object in exile called "Calamity's Wake". The game continues as usual by checking state-based actions.
(All rules quotes from the 2022-10-07 Comprehensive Rules)

preventing confusion is also why spells that exile themselves always have the self-exile instruction as the last one on the card. Helps to avoid problems with people not familiar with CR minutiae.

@Andrew Absolutely. I really only brought 608.2k into it because the OP mentioned it in the question.

While I trust you that this is the official justification for this behaviour, I can't help but be unsatisfied with it, purely because 400.7 seems very vague. The text on 608.2m doesn't sound like it requires memory of the original spell cast. By 608.2k the spell continues resolving after it changes zone. It may not remember how it got there, but it IS a spell, and it IS resolving. And if it's a spell that's resolving, after resolution 608.2m states that it goes to a graveyard. This is far from clear to me

I am accepting however, as again, I trust this is the official justification

@Cruncher It is not a spell when it is in exile.  112.1 "A Spell is a card on the stack..."

@Cruncher Read rule 400.7 as meaning something effectively like this: "If an object would move to a different zone, run it through a shredder, burn it to ash, and disperse the ashes to the wind. Separately, as a nominally unrelated action, get a card (or whatever) with the same name and put it into the other zone." The card that ends up in exile is not the spell that just resolved. It is a new object that is (as far as the rules are concerned) completely unrelated to the spell.

What about 400.7h "If an effect causes an object to move to a public zone, other parts of that effect can find that object." ?

One way of looking at it is that when rule 608.2k says that "it will continue to resolve fully", you're not continuing to resolve the object that the spell has now become in some other zone, but rather the spell object that existed up to the point that it was exiled. This is similar to how last known information is handled in rule 608.2h.

@Taemyr If the card isn't a spell anymore then what is resolving? What is the "it" in 608.2k referring to?

@Cruncher "It" in 608.2k refers to the spell on the stack.  There might have been a semantic issue here if the rules had been phrased "once the spell is moved to a different zone it will continue to resolve".  But given that the phrasing talks about what happens as the spell is moved to a different zone it has not been moved yet and so there is no issue.


text:
How do continuous effects interact with the stack, your hand, and other zones?
For example, Chief of the Foundry has an ability that says:

Other artifact creatures you control get +1/+1.

If I were to cast a 1/1 Artifact Creature it would enter the battlefield as a 2/2 due to the Chief of the Foundry's continuous effect.

Am I correct that continuous effects do not normally apply to cards in your hand?

Ex: I believe that in my hand that same Artifact Creature would be considered to be a 1/1.

What would its power and toughness be on the stack?

Ex: In response my opponent casts an instant that says:

Counter target creature spell with power 1 or less.

Would the Artifact Creature be a legal target for that counter spell?

Would the Artifact Creature card be affected in other zones? (Graveyard, Library, Exile, etc.)

The creature card would have 1 power and 1 toughness in all zones other than the battlefield

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

The only things that can change a creature card's power/toughness off of the battlefield are Characteristic-Defining Abilities, like what Tarmogoyf has.

208.2a The card may have a characteristic-defining ability that sets its power and/or toughness according to some stated condition. ... This ability functions everywhere, even outside the game. ...

Thanks, that Tarmogoyf example is actually what made me wonder about this.

To explain my edit: creatures only exist on the battlefield. In every other zone, they are creature cards. I can't find this spelled out in the rules, but it is obvious if you consider the fact that you cannot target creatures in the graveyard with, for example, a Lightning Bolt.

@Rainbolt you're right, I think the appropriate rule is the 109.2 that murgatroid quoted

Effects like the one in your post refer only to permanents on the battlefield. Rule 109.2 says

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.

The other cases (when the spell or ability does use one of the mentioned words) can affect other zones.


text:
Is there a way for Braille-Cribbage players to find each other?
It's already known that Cribbage can be played by blind people by using Braille-cards, but what I need to know is whether there is a database for Braille-players to get together in their local areas.
The Blind-Foundation here in Hawaii can not find any other blind-cribbage players, so I post here to hopefully find a blind-cribbage partner here in Honolulu.

It might be more reasonable to find other blind card players and teach them cribbage. Who knows, maybe you'll learn some other games that you'll enjoy, too.

I didn't have much luck because I couldn't take the time to sign out and getting recommendations not based on my preferences is apparently quite hard. But have you tried MeetUp? On the continent I know it's a very popular website for finding local gamers. You might be able to use MeetUp as Hao Ye suggests to find a blind meet up and see if anyone is interested in cribbage. The best I could find was this Singles Group but there might be others and you might be able to create one if you're interetsed. You could also scan your local subreddit.


text:
Can a clone of a double-sided planeswalker transform?
Suppose my opponent has Nicol Bolas, the Ravager on the battlefield, and has not yet transformed it into a Planewalker.
I cast Clone, making my own copy of Nicol Bolas.
What happens if I activate my cloned Nicol Bolas' ability? What would happen if the ability were phrased differently, such that it doesn't require the creature to leave the battlefield and re-enter?

Duplicate of https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/42680/can-a-card-copying-a-flip-walker-transform. I had voted to close as a different duplicate, but re-opened when I noticed the difference. Now I can't close again.

To be specific, this question is about a double-faced card being a copy of a flip-walker, while this one is about a single-faced card (like Clone).

I would suggest to leave this open, because in my answer I also correct the usage of "flipped".

Please note that flip in MTG refers to the kamigawa mechanic that turned the card 180 degrees, not turned the face up side face down. see Rune-Tail, Kitsune Ascendant

No, a Clone'd creature cannot transform because Clone is not a double-faced card, even though it copies one face of a double-faced card. If you activate the ability, the Clone will be exiled and stay in exile.
First of all, to flip a card has its own meaning in Magic. It is a mechanic used exclusively in the Kamigawa block. Even though transforming a card is the spiritual successor to flipping, they are very different mechanics. Nicol Bolas, the Ravager transforms into a planeswalker.

110.6. A permanent’s status is its physical state. There are four status categories, each of which has two possible values: tapped/untapped, flipped/unflipped, face up/face down, and phased in/phased out. Each permanent always has one of these values for each of these categories.
701.27. Transform
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. (See rule 711, “Double-Faced Cards.”)

Second, you can activate the Clone'd Nicol Bolas' ability and exile it, but it will stay in exile. Following the instructions of Nicol Bolas' ability, you exile the Clone, but it will not return to the battlefield. It will stay in exile:

711.8a If a player is instructed to put a card that isn’t a double-faced card onto the battlefield transformed, that card stays in its current zone.

A Clone copy of Nicol Bolas, the Ravager cannot transform into anything, even if you didn't have to exile the Clone:

711.1. A double-faced card has a Magic card face on each side rather than a Magic card face on one side and a Magic card back on the other. Each face may have abilities that allow the card to “transform,” or turn over to its other face. Tokens and cards with a Magic card back can’t transform. (See rule 701.27, “Transform.”)
701.27c If a spell or ability instructs a player to transform a permanent that isn’t represented by a double-faced card, nothing happens.

The last part is incorrect, see 711.8a. The Clone will stay in Exile; it won't return.

okay, i think i understand. what if i clone a creature which has an ability that says "exile [self], then return [self] to the battlefield under your control" (no transform)?

@WoodrowBarlow If you have a new question, please do ask a new question.

Technically, double faced planeswalkers don't transform.  They exile and return transformed (Because otherwise they wouldn't get loyalty counters)


text:
What's the etymology of the name Eldraine?
Ravnica is based on a Serbo-Croatian word for plain.
And the other planes, like Phyrexia (basically "land of Phyresis") seem to have etymologies for their names...
So, what's the etymology of the name Eldraine?

I don't want to put this as an answer because it doesn't feel satisfactory, but I think we don't yet know. The whole set/plane is inspired by Arthurian knights and Grimm's fairy tales, and Eldraine sounds vaguely Medieval themed. I don't think a more specific answer than that has been stated yet. We do know, though, that Eldraine is the name of the plane, and not just someone in the set.

Is there an etymology tag? Should there be?

Guessing, but perhaps it has something to do with the word "Eldritch" (other worldly, weird, etc.)

Presumably patterned after "Eldar," Tolkien's often-recycled (by Midkemia, Warhammer, &c.) endonym for elves. The question is: does anything short of asking the designers and copy-pasting their reply here actually count as an answer?

I think the name comes from two words, Old and Land.
Eld is part of the word "elder". Other answers think that it relates to "Eldritch" but "Eldritch" also just means old.
Raine is like in "Ukraine" which literately translates to Borderland
From Wiktionary

1651 Ukrain, 1671 Ukraine, 1688 Ucrania, Ukrania, 1762 Ocraine.
  Adaptation of Polish Ukraina, Russian Украи́на (Ukraína), or Ukrainian
  Украї́на (Ukrajína), from the specific use, originally meaning
  “borderland”

Now clearly Wizards took liberty with this. I am not sure the R in the world was taken correctly, but in our minds "-ania" is a place, and many fantasy writers use this.
So the game Land of Old fits perfectly for a place full of Arthurian knights and fairy tales

update:
personal take on a possible etymology no official etymology has been published
If your looking for etymology here goes. To really get into it you have to break the word into parts Eld( which is an old english term for senior/) and Raine (small stretch incoming which is an old english name that comes from the german name Ragin meaning council). Those eldraine meaning old council. Fits pretty well. Below is where chasing this rabbit hole took me.
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/eld
https://www.ancestry.com/name-origin?surname=raine
https://www.behindthename.com/element/ragin

Do you have any citation to back up that this was the etymology they were actually using? “This word resembles these other words” doesn't in and of itself demonstrate etymology. When Samuel Johnson formalised English spelling in the 1700s, he though "ache" came from the greek "akhos" (meaning pain), but he was wrong—modern etymological methods show that it came from another altogether different Old English word. Being a plausible origin doesn't mean it necessarily is the actual etymology.

This is speculation without WotC citation, but my guess would be:
First part coming from eldritch, it's own etymology described here.
Less certain about the second part (maybe it just sounded good), but in both English and French the suffix -aine means "approximately".

Eldritch as a source doesn't make much sense given the theme of the set is not Lovecraftian at all. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eldritch Also note that there already is an MtG expansion, called "Eldritch moon", that has nothing in common thematically with Eldraine.

I think you are using too narrow a definition of eldritch. Lovecraft may have repopularised the word, but it was certainly around before him and is often used to describe the darker side of fairytales, such as that presented by some of this set. The etymology link I included does explain this, in particular it includes the idea that eldritch itself may have derived from elf. I don't think having a previous set that uses the word eldritch precludes the idea that some of the etymology might be similar.

Whatever the dictionary says about the word eldritch, the "Eldritch Moon" expansion makes it quite clear how WotC uses the word. Do a google image search on "Eldritch Moon" and you will immediately see an abundance of tentacled space monsters, which is clearly Lovecraftian, not fairy tale-ish, not even dark fairy tale-ish, and that's how most people would understand the word. WotC designs for the mass market, and suspecting that they would suddenly change their definition of eldritch for an obscure etymology is an extraordinary claim that would require extraordinary evidence.

There is a much simpler word in English "elder" which clearly shares a root with eldritch, and most likely Eldraine


text:
Game I thought was called "By Popular Demand"
Where I work we have a quiz every Friday.  I'm trying to find a quiz like game we can do by email instead whilst many of us are working remotely.
I'm trying to find online rules to a game that I thought was called By Popular Demand.  I recall playing it online in the early 2000's I think on the now defunct psychozine website.
The rules as I recall:

Players are given categories.
They write down a (correct) answer in each category
They score 1 point for every one else who gave same answers.
Highest overall scores win

There was also an opposite game that I thought was called By Unpopular Demand.  Same rules except lowest score wins.
Have I dreamt these or are they real games known by a different name?  I'm trying to find an online rules link to send with the game tomorrow or I will just write rules out for my fictional game.

This sounds kind of like Scategories, except in Scategories you earn points for unique answers, not shared answers.  Also, there's an alphabet die in Scategories.

Seems potentially related to Family Feud...

Also sounds like Hive Mind and at least one unpublished prototype ("Sheep"?) I've played

It is similar to the UK Gameshow Pointless too; I suspect there are lots of games based on the concept and if I were the original poster, I’d just make up my own rules...

I played it on a website in early 2000's so what I played had a name.  I think the rules are so simple as defined I can just use as is and not need to edit rules

The problem is if you played it on a website 20 years ago, it may have just been a creation of someone on that website, perhaps based on Scattergories as Lupus suggests, rather than being a published product - and there are so many game websites that have died over the years, even more now that flash is being fully retired.

By Popular Demand is still played in games 'zine Variable Pig (and possibly others) and their rules are online at https://www.variablepig.org/rules/bypop.html


text:
Are the cards in Zendikar vs Eldrazi standard yet, before Battle for Zendikar comes out?
Is the new duel deck Zendikar vs Eldrazi considered standard before the Battle for Zendikar comes out? I have been playing it for a few days and I don't want to waste money buy more of those cards if I cannot play them in standard.

May be better if generalised to "Are Duel Decks released during a standard rotation legal during that rotation?", that way it will be distinct from the "is a deck legal" question, and will not become outdated. Zendikar vs Eldrazi can be used as an example.

I'd like to suggest changing the question to "How do I find out whether these cards will be in Standard?" (future tense). That would make it not a duplicate in my opinion.

No, those cards are not all in Standard. Some already are, some aren't yet, some won't be.

Some already are Standard: Read the Bones and others have been printed in Standard sets. You can use those.

The cards we know will be in Battle for Zendikar aren't standard yet. They will be after that set actually comes out and enters Standard rotation. Dominator Drone and others aren't available in Standard yet.

Some are old cards that might not become Standard at all. Like other duel decks, Zendikar vs Eldrazi contains many cards from past sets no longer in Standard. Butcher of Malakir and Corpsehatch have not been seen in Standard since the original Zendikar block several years ago. There's no guarantee these cards will become Standard at all.

If you're expecting to buy exclusively cards usable in Standard, Duel Decks are not the product for you. Buy those to actually duel with, or if you play a more open format like Modern or Commander.

Cards to note in particular are the dual lands in the decks, like Akoum Refuge, which is not in Standard and definitely won't be reprinted in BFZ.

What makes you say that Akoum Refuge definitely won't be reprinted in BFZ, at least more-so than any standard card?

@GendoIkari it already has several full dual land cycles and there are loads still in standard

@Gendolkari Fair question though, I've removed the speculation.

@GendoIkari We already know what the dual land cycle in BFZ is, and it isn't that. But I'll admit that it's possible that they'll print more than one of those. A better example would probably be Rocky Tar Pit, because Mark Rosewater explicitly said that they would not print fetchlands in this block.

@doppelgreener We have one full dual land cycle for BFZ.


text:
1935 Paul Heath's New Battleship Game
We recently found a game entitled "Paul Heath's New Battleship Game", 1935 buried in a box. It appears to be a resin board and the board contains rows of holes and the game includes many colored wood pegs.
I can't seem to find anything about this particular game online. Does anyone have any information about it?

Your description of the game contents is completely consistent with a similar length description of the Milton Bradley game Battleeship: https://cf.geekdo-images.com/images/pic288374.jpg or even the paper and pencil version: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/65/Battleship_game_board.svg/220px-Battleship_game_board.svg.png

It's a variation on the classic Battleship game, mostly played in the same way as normal.
There are possibly two versions as the patent for the game (US2058079) describes a different layout to the one that I've encountered.


text:
What is this (solitaire?) card game called?
I'm not sure if this falls under the solitaire category, but it is played with one player.  Someone taught me this card game and was under the impression that it was called Kings, but apparently it's not, as upon looking it up, I didn't find this game.
The player deals the cards in 13 piles, 4 to each pile, face down.  Jokers are not used.  Each of the 13 piles represents a rank.  The player starts by picking up a card from the top of the King rank pile, looks at the card, then places it underneath the corresponding rank pile, face up.  Then the player picks up a card from the top of the previous rank pile and places it under the next corresponding rank pile.  To win the game, the player must return each rank to its proper pile before all the Kings are returned to their pile.
For example, the player picks from the top of the King pile and receives a Four of Clubs.  The player places the card underneath the Four pile face up, then draws a face-down card from the top of the Four pile.  The player receives a Jack of Spades, which he/she places underneath the Jack pile face up, and so on.

This is Clock Patience (or Clock Solitaire), although as the Wikipedia article describes it is usually played with the piles arranged in a circle and the King pile in the centre.

Indeed it is.  And the clock idea does make sense; I've never heard to play it like that.  Thank you!


text:
Is it possible to generate mana at instant speed when tapped out
Supposing my opponent is tapped out, has no floating mana, and has nothing on the battlefield capable of directly generating mana at instant speed (No Moxen or Loti, for example), or of untapping their lands, or otherwise being self-evidently relevant.
Is there any risk of the opponent acquiring new mana, or otherwise casting non-zero-mana spells?
Are there any zero-mana instant-speed spells?
Can you think of any abilities, that could really subtly end up with mana available, but might not be obvious at first glance?
Basically, does "tapped out + no obviously relevant abilities on the battlefield" equal "I am guaranteed that I can play un-hindered?"
Ideally, it would be good to know the answer for any given format (Standard, Modern, etc.)

Plus no mana in their mana pool, right?

@doppelgreener indeed :)

Lotus is a word in English borrowed from Latin which borrowed it from Greek; the English plural would be lotuses, Latin plural would be loti, and the Greek plural would be lotoí (the Greek word is lotos rather than lotus) – lotii isn’t a word in any language that I’m aware of.

The plural form of lotus (as an English word) is lotuses or lotus, not loti, according to Merriam-Webster. Since it is used in an English context ("Black Lotus", "Lotus Petal", "Gilded Lotus", etc.), and not in a Latin one it seems one of the English plurals would prevail instead of the Latin one.

You asked two different questions. For both, we are assuming that the opponent is tapped out with no relevant mana abilities on the field.

It possible for my opponent to generate mana at instant speed?

Yes, players can generate mana at "instant speed" (mana abilities technically don't use the stack and can't be responded to like an Instant spell). As an example, see Simian Spirit Guide.

Am I guaranteed that I can play unhindered?

Even without cards that can generate mana, like Simian Spirit Guide, the answer is no. Cards like Force of Will can disrupt you for an alternative cost. Cards like Pact of Negation or Slaughter Pact allow your opponent to pay later.
Three of the four cards I mentioned are legal in both Modern and Legacy. Standard rarely has effects like this, but it happens every now and then.

Cards like Pact of Negation make understanding the deck your opponent is playing even more important, so you can accurately guess what "Gotcha!" cards like that they're running!

Excellent answer, demonstrating exactly the sorts of behaviours that I was imagining could conceptually exist.

Having effects like this in decks that usually don't can be useful. I remember a situation where I had only an untapped Gaea's cradle with no creatures, my opponent attacks with Phyrexian Negator, met by a Vine Dryad and Giant Growth. He played a land before attacking which was a mistake.

@JollyJoker Ah, their turn 2: dark ritual->negator, land, attack, crap lost both lands?

@Yakk T1 land, Ritual, Negator, T2 land, attack but yes

Don't forget convoke, you could chord of calling for a mystic snake as a countering option (needs 7 creatures, at least three green, but doable)

As an extension of Rainbolt's answer, anything that depends only on Phyrexian mana could be played.
E.g. Mental Misstep

Another extension to both Rainbolt's and Brondahl's answers; as it is somewhat relevant.
You say their field is clear of any creatures that are "capable of directly generating mana at instant speed". First thing that pops into my mind is the Convoke mechanic used in Stoke the Flames or Chord of Calling. It can tap creatures to assist in paying for the spell on cast, each creature tapped contributes (1) mana of that creatures color, usually going towards the generic cost. This is very relevant with things like Chord or Stoke.
While you did mention them being tapped out, this is still relevant in situations where they have so much as an untapped token creature on the board.
Some other possibly relevant mechanics:
Dredge, Energy (about halfway down the page), Trap spells, or just graveyard interactions in general.

I think you may be confusing Dredge with Delve (it is a bit confusing for WotC to have chosen two words with very similar ordinary English meanings with very different MtG meanings).

Phyrexian costs can be paid with 2 life instead.
I can't think of any Phyrexian counterspells, but Mutagenic Growth can buff a creature for +2/+2 for 2 life.
Modern Infect uses this as a defence mechanic.

There's already an answer that points out Phyrexian mana: http://boardgames.stackexchange.com/a/34084/6692

@Rainbolt yes but all it does is points it out, it doesnt explain what it is or how it works.

Mental Misstep, as mentioned in the link answer, is a counter that can be played with only phyrexian mana, though of course it would have to be responding to a very specific list of spells due the the CMC restriction.


text:
Am I technically allowed to look up cards during a Magic tournament match?
Am I allowed to look up a card during a game, if it's being played with serious Rules Enforcement? Either to read the full card from the Gatherer, or to try to find the exact card I'm vaguely thinking of.
Two possible scenarios:

An opponent has revealed a card previously, and I want to remember the exact details. (Something like the exact wording of a sorcery, mana cost, keywords on a creature, subtypes, etc. etc.)
I have a "name a card and remove it from the opponent's deck" type card, and I want to, say, ask google for "Blue Gearhulk" to remember that it's that that one is called "Torrential Gearhulk".

Obviously, in casual or semi-casual games neither of these are a problem. Any reasonable opponent will just re-reveal the known card (assuming it IS still guaranteed to be known) or will accept "I name the Blue Gearhulk".
Also obviously, it seems unlikely that I (or anyone else) would get to the stage of playing at the REL without knowing the cards too thoroughly for this to be relevant.
But in principle... is it permitted? Or not? (and if not, is there a good reason, or just "we decided 'No'"?)

You're allowed to ask a judge about any card (e.g. "what does card X do?" or "what's the name of the blue gearhulk?")

I would encourage you to change the accepted answer here to this answer, because the rules have changed and the currently accepted answer is no longer correct.

@murgatroid99 by all means :)

As of the July 2021 Magic Tournament Rules Release Notes, you are now able to look up cards on your electronic devices as long as you do so in the open:

A few years ago, we opened Regular Rules Enforcement Level to allow electronic device usage, and that was quite successful. Now, we're unifying the rules across all Rules Enforcement Levels—you can use your device during matches if you do it out in the open. This allows for looking up Oracle text in Gatherer, or using a die-rolling app, but keeps the concerning behavior—outside assistance—in check.

There are still instances where you can't use your device though:

Electronic device use is still prohibited during drafts and Limited deck building, as the idea of "publicly visible" doesn't apply as cleanly and there's no reasons to be using them during those periods.

MTR 2.12 has the updated rules governing electronic devices.

"there's no reasons to be using them during those periods" Is the assumption here that the cards in a draft will be printed in a language you're able to read?

@nick012000 IIRC drafting at high REL is done to a clock, you (probably) don't have time to read all the text of all the cards, let alone look them up.

Is only Wotc official gatherer allowed?

@NeilMeyer MTR 2.12 lays out explicit restrictions, but generally you're able to use any resource as long as it's not giving you strategic advice and as long as it's not done privately

You can look up things on the Internet during a match per MTR 2.12:

Electronic devices are permitted, but players may not use them to access information that contains substantial strategic advice or information about an opponent’s deck.

When using electronic devices, you have to follow these rules:

Device use during a match other than brief personal calls must be visible to all players. Players wishing to view information privately on electronic devices during matches must request permission from a judge.

There are additional rules for limited tournaments:

At Competitive and Professional Rules Enforcement Level during drafting and deck construction, players may not use electronic devices capable of taking and storing notes, communicating with other people, or accessing the internet.

And as always, the Head Judge always has the final word:

The Head Judge or Tournament Organizer of a tournament may further restrict or forbid the use of electronic devices during matches.

This wasn't always true. Prior to the 2021 MTR update, the wording in 2.12 was:

At Competitive and Professional Rules Enforcement Level during drafting, deck construction, and playing of matches, players may not use electronic devices capable of taking and storing notes, communicating with other people, or accessing the internet (with the exception of taking brief personal calls with the opponent’s permission).

As for the Torrential Gearhulk. I've asked a judge at a Standard PPTQ Tournament (Competetive REL) if it's enough to name a card by describing it as "Blue Gearhulk". His answer was that it's OK, because there is exactly one card that can be described as "Blue Gearhulk" in the sets permitted in the format we are playing. This is per MTR 3.6:

A card is considered named in game when a player has provided a description (which may include the name or partial name) that could only apply to one card. Any player or judge realizing a description is still ambiguous must seek further clarification.

MTR 3.6 also clarifies that:

Players have the right to request access to the official wording of a card they can describe. That request will be honored if logistically possible.

So yes, you can ask about the card.

Model answer: Yes, you have the right that information (and here are the rules citations); but No you can't acquire it in that particular manner you've asked about. Thank you!

"That request will be honored if logistically possible." Then I guess the judge can look up the card on Gatherer, or show you a copy if they have one handy.

The quoted rule from MTR section 2.12 has changed in a recent update in a way that substantially changes the answer to this question. This new answer has the correct answer under the new rules.

"Players have the right to request access to the official wording of a card the can describe." I find it a bit odd that "they" turned into "the". Did you retype the quote by hand? Or did the site originally have "the" and they edited it?

@Acccumulation corrected

MTR section 2.12 has also changed. You should update that too.

As a supplement to piotrek's answer, there is a story in which Gerard Fabiano repeatedly attempted to name "Humpus Wumpus," for the ability of Demonic Consultation.  Humpus Wumpus was not allowable in order to specify Hunted Wumpus.  My point is that one judge may take "blue gearhulk" to uniquely describe only one magic card, but a judge may not allow "Humpus Wumpus" to uniquely describe Hunted Wumpus.  Meanwhile, they might allow a mispronunciation like "Tarmogoof" in place of Tarmogoyf, and you might get away with naming a legendary creature without enumerating its entire name.  A judge might know absolutely for certain what creature you're trying to name, and still not tell you what card it is you're thinking of; similar to Wheel of Fortune* not accepting a mispronunciation, even when all of the letters on the board are filled-in.  So a description is acceptable when it is literally correct, rather than commonly clear.
*Originally I had accidentally said The Price is Right instead of Wheel of Fortune.

Is "The Price is Right" a mispronunciation of "Wheel of Fortune"?

That's a very old article; it's not optional that you have to specify a real Magic card, so nowadays if "Humpus Wumpus" were not accepted your opponent would have to clarify as you made the choice, not after it's resolved.

Maybe a more relevant example (which I believe is still compatible with the current rules) would be the "Borborygmos/Borborygmos Enraged" flap from a couple years ago.

I would like to point out that in the story you refer to, the very next line says "Nowadays it would be acceptable to say “Humpus Wumpus” and describe what card you wanted to name, but 9 years ago the rules were different", and that article was published over 8 years ago. Overall, this entire answer is based on a very outdated view of the rules.


text:
How does the Commander interact with Banishing Light or Oblivion Ring?
What happens if a commander is sent to the command zone via Banishing Light and then enchantment is destroyed? Can the commander return to the battlefield from the command zone?.
I think that Oblivion Ring would not allow that to happen.

Neither Banishing Light nor Oblivion Ring can return a commander from the command zone to the battlefield.
In the Commander rules, rule 903.9a says

If a commander is in a graveyard or in exile and that object was put into that zone since the last time state-based actions were checked, its owner may put it into the command zone. This is a state-based action. See rule 704.

So, after the ability on Banishing Light or Oblivion Ring finishes resolving, this state-based action moves the commander again from exile to the command zone. At that point, the enchantment loses track of the card, and can't bring it back later.

This is a change from previous rules, which allowed the commander to move to the command zone instead of the graveyard or exile as a replacement effect. Under those rules Banishing Light could return the commander from the command zone to the battlefield, but Oblivion Ring could not do that.
The main reason that it worked that way is rule 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.

Banishing Light's effect is one of these. The important thing to note is that returning the object to its previous zone does not depend on which zone it originally moved to.
Oblivion Ring, on the other hand, has two separate abilities, which are called linked abilities. Rule 607.2a describes how this kind of linked ability works:

If an object has an activated or triggered ability printed on it that instructs a player to exile one or more cards and an ability printed on it that refers either to “the exiled cards” or to cards “exiled with [this object],” these abilities are linked. The second ability refers only to cards in the exile zone that were put there as a result of an instruction to exile them in the first ability.

Because Oblivion Ring's second ability refers to "the exiled card", it can only find cards that are actually in the exile zone when it resolves.

Ultimately this seems right, but it is not immediately obvious how "Banishing Light's ability is all one effect" and thus 400.7h is relevant in the light of 610.3 and the first ruling on Banishing Light (containing "cards like Banishing Light have a single ability that creates two one-shot effects").

I switched the rule reference to 610.3. I think that is a better one to point to, and you're right that 400.7h is probably not actually relevant here.

Re "you're right that 400.7h is probably not actually relevant here", Without 400.7h, BL wouldn't be able to find the card in Exile or the Command Zone to bring it back. So the scenario does indeed rely on 400.7h, but it's not the answer, so it doesn't need mentioning.

Great question and answer! Normally, when dealing with zone changes and the answer is "no", the reason is 400.7 (a moved object is a new object). But not here! One of the exceptions applies. Oblivion Ring can still see the Commander in the Command Zone because it put it there (400.7h), so it could return the card to the battlefield from the Command Zone (just like Banishing Light, and for the same reasons as Banishing Light) ...except, as you say, because of 607.2a


text:
Exotic Orchard and Command Tower
What colors of mana can Exotic Orchard produce in Commander if my opponent has a Command Tower?

A Command Tower can produce any color of mana in its controller's commander's color identity. So, if your opponent controls one, your Exotic Orchard can produce any color of mana in that player's commander's color identity (assuming there are no other lands).
The relevant rule here is 106.7:

Some abilities produce mana based on the type of mana another permanent or permanents “could produce.” The type of mana a permanent could produce at any time includes any type of mana that an ability of that permanent would produce if the ability were to resolve at that time, taking into account any applicable replacement effects in any possible order. Ignore whether any costs of the ability could or could not be paid. If that permanent wouldn’t produce any mana under these conditions, or no type of mana can be defined this way, there’s no type of mana it could produce.

If mana outside the color identity of your Commander is ever added to your mana pool, that mana is considered colorless. So, in effect, it could only produce colors that overlapped between your and your opponents' commanders.
http://magic.wizards.com/en/game-info/gameplay/formats/commander

That page is out of date. If you look at the most recent Comprehensive Rules, you will see that the section about Commander (903) no longer has that rule. It was removed in the Oath of the Gatewatch rules update, when colorless mana became specifically useful in certain situations.

Also the changelog from the official Commander site for 1/18/16 Rule 4 removed. Decks may now generate mana of any colour.