text:
Can I cast a spell after a certain part of the stack is resolved in MTG?
Let's say my opponent plays a spell like Fireball. It is put on the stack. I cast a Snapcaster Mage in response. My opponent does nothing in return. The Snapcaster Mage resolves first and it seems like I can play any card in my graveyard now like a Mana Leak to counter the fireball.
Can I really do this after the resolving of spells on the stack has begun? Or must the stack be empty before I can put new spells on it?

Initially I forgot that Snapcaster Mage has Flash. Oops.
Yes you can do this. The resolution goes like this.

Fireball is cast, put on the stack.
In response, you put Snapcaster Mage on the stack. (Which you can only do, of course, because it has Flash and can be cast as an instant.)
You put nothing more on the stack, your opponent declines to put anything else on the stack.
Because both players pass priority, stack starts resolving in Last In First Out order. Snapcaster Mage resolves.
Triggered ability of Snapcaster Mage is put on the stack. You choose Mana Leak as the target.
Both players pass priority. Last effect on stack resolves, Mana Leak gains flashback.
As Mana Leak is an instant (IMPORTANT) you can now pay the flashback cost (in this case same as the casting cost) to put Mana Leak on the stack.
Both players pass priority. Mana Leak resolves.
Your opponent must now pay {3} or Fireball is countered.

The important bit to remember is that yes, as usual, you can put spells/effects on the stack at any time even after spells have started to be resolved, as long as said spells/effects can be cast at "instant speed", not "sorcery speed".
The comprehensive rule which answers your question "Can I really do this after the resolving of spells on the stack has begun?" is 116.3. which determines when players have priority and I will paraphrase:

Active player gets priority at the beginning of steps and phases (after "beginning of" triggered abilities are put on the stack.)
Active player gets priority after a spell/ability on the stack resolves.
A player gets priority after they put a spell/ability on the stack.
If a player passes priority, the next player in turn order receives priority.

So the priority rules make it clear that there is always a chance to respond even after spells on the stack start resolving.

Good answer. I was just typing up pretty much the same thing.

@AlexP gee, thanks, usually I'm the one posting comprehensive rules and long-winded explanations. :) I think the important comprehensive rule that directly answers the question is 116.3, will add edit.

@ghoppe Do you know when was this added to the rules?  (Since I'm fairly sure that when I learned how to play back in 7th edition, nothing could be added to the stack after resolution starts..)

@Izkata The stack was added in 6th Edition, and the priority system has been more or less the same since (barring the change of the "cleanup step" etc.) If you played that nothing could be added to the stack after the top "pseudospell" on the stack starts resolving, you were playing incorrectly. See 408.1c of the Comprehensive Rules posted on 04/23/99.

@ghoppe Most people I played with used a misunderstanding of Fast Effects and didn't understand the stack, so I suppose it was fine back then.  Thanks, though - I'll keep the correct version of the stack in mind from now on

@ghoppe, Snapcaster says that flashback cost is "equal to manacost". What does "equal to manacost" mean when the manacost has an X? For example, imagine we're trying to flashback a card called Fireball.

@Pacerier Like any spell with X in the cost, you choose the value of X. Of course, you must have the available mana to pay X.

The short answer: You resolve effects on the stack one at a time, and everyone gets a chance to put new stuff on the stack before you resolve the next effect.
More detailed answer: The Magic comp rules use a system called "priority" to determine when you have a chance to play abilities and put stuff on the stack. Generally speaking, you can always respond to an event that changes the game state, but players get to do so in a defined order.
For our shared convenience,I'm going to blockquote all of section 116, Timing and Priority, and then mark the critical parts in bold.

116. Timing and Priority
116.1. Unless a spell or ability is instructing a player to take an action, which player can take actions at
         any given time is determined by a system of priority. The player with priority may cast spells,
         activate abilities, and take special actions.
116.1a A player may cast an instant spell any time he or she has priority. A player may cast a
             noninstant spell during his or her main phase any time he or she has priority and the stack is
             empty.
116.1b A player may activate an activated ability any time he or she has priority.
116.1c A player may take some special actions any time he or she has priority. A player may take
             other special actions during his or her main phase any time he or she has priority and the stack is
             empty. See rule 115, “Special Actions.”
116.1d A player may activate a mana ability whenever he or she has priority, whenever he or she is
             casting a spell or activating an ability that requires a mana payment, or whenever a rule or effect
             asks for a mana payment (even in the middle of casting or resolving a spell or activating or
             resolving an ability).
116.2. Other kinds of abilities and actions are automatically generated or performed by the game rules,
         or are performed by players without receiving priority.
116.2a Triggered abilities can trigger at any time, including while a spell is being cast, an ability is
             being activated, or a spell or ability is resolving. (See rule 603, “Handling Triggered Abilities.”)
             However, nothing actually happens at the time an ability triggers. Each time a player would
             receive priority, each ability that has triggered but hasn’t yet been put on the stack is put on the
             stack. See rule 116.5.
116.2b Static abilities continuously affect the game. Priority doesn’t apply to them. (See rule 604,
             “Handling Static Abilities,” and rule 611, “Continuous Effects.”)
116.2c Turn-based actions happen automatically when certain steps or phases begin. They’re dealt
          with before a player would receive priority. See rule 116.3a. Turn-based actions also happen
          automatically when each step and phase ends; no player receives priority afterward. See rule
          703, “Turn-Based Actions.”
116.2d State-based actions happen automatically when certain conditions are met. See rule 704.
          They’re dealt with before a player would receive priority. See rule 116.5.
116.2e Resolving spells and abilities may instruct players to make choices or take actions, or may
          allow players to activate mana abilities. Even if a player is doing so, no player has priority while
          a spell or ability is resolving. See rule 608, “Resolving Spells and Abilities.”
116.3. Which player has priority is determined by the following rules:
116.3a The active player receives priority at the beginning of most steps and phases, after any turn-
          based actions (such as drawing a card during the draw step; see rule 703) have been dealt with
          and abilities that trigger at the beginning of that phase or step have been put on the stack. No
          player receives priority during the untap step. Players usually don’t get priority during the
          cleanup step (see rule 514.3).
116.3b The active player receives priority after a spell or ability (other than a mana ability) resolves.
116.3c If a player has priority when he or she casts a spell, activates an ability, or takes a special
          action, that player receives priority afterward.
116.3d If a player has priority and chooses not to take any actions, that player passes. If any mana is
          in that player’s mana pool, he or she announces what mana is there. Then the next player in turn
          order receives priority.
116.4. If all players pass in succession (that is, if all players pass without taking any actions in between    passing), the spell or
  ability on top of the stack resolves or, if the stack is empty, the
  phase or step    ends.
116.5. Each time a player would get priority, the game first performs all applicable state-based actions    as a single event (see rule 704,
  “State-Based Actions”), then repeats this process until no state-based
  actions are performed. Then triggered abilities are put on the stack
  (see rule 603, “Handling    Triggered Abilities”). These steps repeat
  in order until no further state-based actions are performed    and no
  abilities trigger. Then the player who would have received priority
  does so.
116.6. In a multiplayer game using the shared team turns option, teams rather than individual players    have priority. See rule 805, “Shared
  Team Turns Option.”
116.7. If a player with priority casts a spell or activates an activated ability while another spell or ability    is already on the
  stack, the new spell or ability has been cast or activated “in
  response to” the earlier    spell or ability. The new spell or ability
  will resolve first. See rule 608, “Resolving Spells and    Abilities.”

How about an example?
Alice and Bob are playing. They're trying to brush up on technical play, so they're making sure to follow each little step in order to be ready for tournaments and judges.
It is Alice's main phase.
As the active player, Alice has priority.
Alice casts Fireball. She moves the card from her hand to the stack for all players to see. She determines the parameters (the value of X, how many targets it will have). She pays all costs, in this case by tapping her mana. Now Fireball is on the stack.
Alice receives priority, since she just put an effect on the stack. Pass.
Bob receives priority. Bob casts Snapcaster Mage. Same thing: put the card on the table, choose any parameters (none while casting it: you target his ability after he comes into play), pay the costs. Now Snapcaster is on the stack, above Alice's Fireball.
Bob receives priority, since he just put an effect on the stack. If Bob wanted to, he could play another (instant-speed) spell or ability at this time. He decides to pass.
Alice receives priority, since she is the other player and Bob passed. Alice passes. (Note that Bob does not get an opportunity to put anything new on the stack after Alice has passed, because he passed already as well.)
Now, since both players passed, they resolve the topmost thing on the stack, which is Bob's Snapcaster. The Snapcaster Mage spell resolves, becoming a Snapcaster Mage creature on the battlefield. His "enters the battlefield" trigger goes on the stack. Bob chooses a target for it: the Mana Leak in his graveyard. The stack looks like this: Snapcaster Mage trigger, Fireball.
Alice receives priority, because a spell just resolved. If she had Surgical Extraction, she could put it on the stack on top of the Snapcaster's trigger to remove Mana Leak before it has a chance to resolve. Alas, no dice. So she'll pass.
Bob receives priority. Pass.
Since both players passed, they resolve the topmost thing on the stack. Snapcaster Mage's ETB ability resolves. Bob's Mana Leak now has flashback 1U. The only thing on the stack is Fireball.
Alice receives priority, because a triggered effect just resolved. Pass.
Bob receives priority. If he passes now, the Fireball will go off. Instead, of course, Bob casts Mana Leak from his graveyard: Bob moves Mana Leak to the stack, targets Fireball, and pays its flashback cost by tapping mana. Now Mana Leak is on top of the stack, above Fireball.
Bob receives priority because he just played a spell. If he wanted to put another spell on the stack on top of Mana Leak, he could do so right now. Pass.
Alice receives priority. Pass.
Both players passed, so now Mana Leak resolves. During resolution, Alice gets the choice to pay 3 mana to stop it. She declines to do so. (If multiple players had to make choices -- like, for example, if you resolve Smallpox, you would go in APNAP order, just like you do after an effect resolves.) Then, Mana Leak counters the Fireball. Fireball is removed from the stack (going to Alice's graveyard). Since Mana Leak was cast with flashback, Bob puts the card into the exile zone. Now the stack is empty.
Alice receives priority because a spell just resolved. Since the stack is empty and it is her main phase, she can play any spell she wants, not just instants. Alice passes.
Bob receives priority. Pass.
Both players passed with an empty stack, so we go to the next step or phase (i.e. combat if this is Alice's first main phase).

When Wizards rejigged the way the stack worked (for 6th edition? a long time ago, anyway), one of the fun examples I recall was:

Player 1 puts Armageddon on the stack.
In response to Armageddon, Player 2 sacrifices all his lands to Zuran Orb.  This resolves.  Armageddon is once again at the top of the stack.
In response to Armageddon, Player 1 now Counterspells (his own!) Armageddon.

I always found this really helpful as a visualisation aid to the stack, and the fact that you keep removing things from it one at a time (by resolving them), first in last out, but only as long as neither player wants to add a new thing to the top of the stack.

Haha, that's a good example of some rough beats there. :)

@thesunneversets I'm fairly sure that when I learned how to play in 7th edition, once the stack starts to resolve, nothing can be added back on the top of it.  Maybe it happened in 8th?

@Izkata You're definitely either misremembering or played incorrectly at the time. The stack has always worked this way. See my comment on my answer.

@Izkata: the stack worked this way before 6th edition came out. Or rather, there was no stack before 6th edition, but there was something called a "batch" which worked more or less like you're describing. However, batches have not existed in MTG rules at all since the 6th edition rules change in 1998.

@thesunneversets, Surely the above events didn't actually occur on a real battlefield right...

@Pacerier Who cares? The example is more than reasonable enough to occur

No, the stack doesn't have to be empty but you need to have priority.
In this case you can cast another spell after the Snapcaster mage but your opponent can play a spell or ability first.
Here's how it goes:

Player 2 casts Fireball.
Player 1 receives priority. He casts Snapcaster mage.
Player 2 receives priority. He can't counter Snapcaster so he takes no action.
Snapcaster mage resolves.
Player 2 receives priority again since it's their turn. They can play spells or abilities.
Player 1 receives priority after Player 2 passes, and can cast counterspell.


text:
Can someone counter a creature ability with a counter target creature?
If I activate a creature ability that puts creatures on the battlefield, can my opponet counter it with a counter target creature spell?

for clarification, what are the names of the cards involved?

No, you can't counter an ability with an effect that says counter target spell. You can only counter a spell
One of the reasons why people play aether vial, because you can't counter creatures put into play with aether vial

You need to pay attention to the wording of the ability.  Because if the ability says that you can "cast" the creature such as Garruk's Horde, than it does take the form of spell, and can therefore be countered.
But if the ability says to put it onto the battlefield than it's not a spell, and can't be countered

Given what the OP said, it probably says "counter target creature spell". But this is of course right - an ability putting creatures onto the battlefield is still not a creature spell.

No, for the reasons Sam cited.  But he could probably counter it with a spell like this, if he really wanted to:

But only if you have the judge foil Stifle; normal ones aren't strong enough.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Avoiding stealing a resource when moving the robber in Catan
Is it allowed to move the robber, but not take a random resource from another player? Avoiding stealing a resource may sound odd. One reason you might want to: you need to play a soldier card to move the robber, both to block another player from getting resources and to remove the robber from a vital hex for yourself. However, you already have seven cards in hand, and gaining one would put you at risk of discarding if a seven is rolled afterwards.
There are a few more related special cases:

Can you move the robber to the hex with no adjacent settlements (no stealing)?
What if the only player whose city is adjacent to hex of your choosing has no resources - can you move the robber there?
What if there are two cities adjacent from two players, but only one of them has resources - do you have to steal one from him or can you choose to steal from the player with empty hand?

I've edited your explanation of why you might want to do this down to a very short summary; I think it's still perfectly understandable, but feel free to edit more or roll it back if you disagree. I've also added your extra questions from the comment below into the question, so that people will be more likely to see them and answer.

you could also steal from someone, then trade it immediately back

@warren I don't think trading before rolling the dice is allowed in Settlers of Catan.

@beam022 - I was more indicating that you could 'return' it as soon as was allowed :)

@warren I understand, however the whole point of not stealing the resource was to have the same amount of resource cards in hand (7 to be specific) at the moment of rolling the dice. It was to avoid risk of having to discard half of your hand in the event of rolling 7 and activating the Robber.

@beam022 But you have rolled the 7, if you aren't building anything this turn, you don't want to start your next turn with the same 7 cards and still not build anything. You therefore NEED some card, and taking it now when you have the chance is the best option. You could easily gain a card next turn, and then get robbered before your next turn anyway.

Answering the question and its follow-ups:

In general, you are not allowed to decline to take a resource. Page 12 of the rules gives a more detailed explanation of the rule Pat Ludwig cited. There is no option about whether or not to take a resource card if you place the robber next to a city/settlement of one or more players, all of whom have at least one resource card. However, as the answers to your other questions will indicate, you can may have some tactics to wiggle out of this requirement if you really want to move the robber  away but not get your (presumably 8th) resource.
Yes, you can deliberately place the robber in a spot where you will not able to steal a card. P. 12 again states, "You must move the robber away from his current spot and
onto the number token of any other terrain hex." (p. 11 clarifies that the desert is legal even though it does not contain a number token.) Any other indicates that a hex is legal even if it contains no neighbors that have a stealable resource.
Yes, you can deliberately choose to steal from a player who has no resources. Again from p. 12:

If there are 2 or more such players, you may choose your victim.
  The player you elect to rob keeps his cards face down while
  you take 1 of his cards at random. If he has no cards, you get
  nothing!

Thank you. In the original question I mentioned that not only you'd want to move the robber away, but also put it on specific hex - one that has all adjacent settlements belonging only to players with 1+ resources. In that case, there is no option to achieve this and not get 8th resource?

can you not also put it on a hex only you border, thus stealing from yourself?

@warren I'm not sure if this is what you meant, but it is an interesting question. I understand that it's allowed to put robber on hex only you are adjacent to, obviously without stealing any resources. But is it allowed to steal from yourself if there are also other players with resources, whose settlements are adjacent to the hex of your choosing?

@beam022 - not sure ... it's an interesting thought though :)

No,
From the rules:

If you play a Knight Card, you must immediately move the
  robber. See “Rolling a ‘7’ and Activating the Robber” above
  and follow steps 1 and 2.

Step 1 tells you how to move the robber.
Step 2 tells you to randomly take a card.
These are the rules of the game and they're quite clear.  It certain cases it is understandable not to want to take a card.  Absent a rule allowing that, you must take the card.

Thank you. I know this wasn't my question, but rules doesn't address many special cases here - maybe they are too obvious. Can you move the Robber to the hex with no adjacent settlements (no stealing)? What if the only player whose city is adjacent to hex of your choosing have no resources - can you move Robber here, since stealing won't be possible and you have to do it? What if there are two cities adjacent from two players, but only one of them has resources. Do you have to steal one from him or can you choose to steal from the player with empty hand? If you can, please expand your answer.

In order to try to make things clearer, I edited the OP's extra questions into the question - sorry, it makes your "no" slightly less clear, but I suspect you'll answer the other questions anyway.

Actually nothing in the rules says you have to move the robber in a manner that allows you to take a card. You CAN move the robber somewhere not adjacent to anyone, and if you move next to two people, you can choose to steal from the one with no resources. See the Soldier section in the Almanac for confirmation.

Yes, in some cases, but you'd have to work at it.
You can move the robber to a hex that is not adjacent to anyone. Even to the desert (this wasn't always the case.) You can move the robber next to someone who has no cards and choose to steal from them, even if the robber is also next to someone who has cards.
What you can't do is move the robber next to someone and choose not to steal resources from them.
The exact steps are:

Pick a new hex for the Robber and move it there.
Pick someone with an adjacent settlement or city.
Take one random resource from them.

Yes, you can avoid taking a card.
The rules state you have to:

Move the Robber to any other hex
Take 1 resource card at random from a player who has a city or settlement adjacent to that hex.

It does not specify that that player cannot be you! This means if you really don't want a card you can place the robber either:

On a hex with no players
On a hex where at least one player has no cards
On a hex where you have a settlement

This would only be in your interests if you were playing a soldier card before rolling the dice, and the currently robbered hex offered you a greater chance of winning this turn than rolling any other number and taking a random card from another player.

Thank you for your answer. However I don't understand two things. First, I was under the impression that you can't build anything before rolling the dice. Second, I'm not sure why you assumed that I wasn't going to build anything in this turn. The plan was to move robber away (increase the chance of getting specific resource), block opponent, be left with 7 resource in case of the robber and (after rolling, depending on the result) build accordingly. So I wouldn't be left with the same 7 cards after this turn. Am I getting something wrong here?

@beam022 Ah, I see you mean use a soldier to move the robber before rolling, but not taking a resource. I thought you meant if you rolled a 7. The question then is, why play a solider when you won't take the card? Better to roll the dice (you might get a 7 anyway and move it) and then play the solider afterwards letting you steal a card up to 8 (or 9 if you rolled something you needed.) Seems like a waste of a solider card to use it and not take a card on purpose!

Robber is on your hex, blocking your from collecting important resources. If you get rid of the robber, you gain one more opportunity to collect resources (4 for example) from this hex - you might just get them this turn and win the game. Please check my original question before edit.

@beam022 Yes, that makes much more sense. In a "You need 4 ore to win" with 4 wheat, 2 ore and a wood in your hand situation then removing the robber from your 6 ore hex with 2 cities before rolling would give you a chance to win before your opponent wins for sure in his next turn.

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


text:
What is proper order of resolving players actions?
In Jamaica each player selects a card with two actions on it. The left action is connected to the Morning die and the right one to the Evening die. So, basically there is somerhing that happens for every player in the morning and then later, in the evening.
The way we played our first game was that we woukd resolve morning action of each player first, starting with the captain of the turn. Then, we would go to the evening phase and resolve second action of each player in the same order. That's how I understood the rules, since morning comes to all residents of Jamaica at the same time, not after one of them has already seen an evening.
I watched a few playthroughs on the youtube and I noticed that this is not how other people are playing the game. So, I suspect I got this order of action rule wrong.
So, my questions are:

are both actions of the player to be resolved before moving to the next player? Is the Morning/Evening confusion just an effect of poor choise of wording?
playing with our simultaneous Morning actions rule, how would you say it affects the gameplay? Does it give you more or less control of the course of the game? Does it make it more exciting? Increase battle frequency? Randomness?

I believe that resolving Morning actions for all players seems more logical and it does minimise the downtime between player's involvement in the game, little as it is.

The rules seem very explicit.
"The captain turns his over and carries out the two actions"
"In turn, the other players do the same: they turn over their card and carry out the two actions"
I can't comment on what the effect of your house rule would be, but it clearly is not the intended way to play.


text:
Who goes first in Pandemic?
I've recently bought Pandemic and I'm going to play it for the first time tomorrow. Having read the rules I wasn't quite sure how to interpret:

The player who was most recently sick goes first.

Does this mean the person who most recently vomited? Or just generally ill? What about long-term / chronic conditions such as asthma or diabetes?
Given that it's a co-operative game, does it actually matter who starts?

It means the person who has most recently been a victim of bioterrorism.

Roll a dice. Six makes you sick. If more than one people is sick, reroll.

Voting to close as primarily opinion based; any play group can decide what they want to consider "sick" for these purposes. Though the latest answer is actually correct and objective; but it's mismatched with the question which is based on older rules.

They mean (infected) since the game is about infectious diseases (viruses probably, but possibly also bacteria), not physically ill such to induce vomitting. Long term conditions such as diabetes, heart conditions, or alcoholism are not what they are referring to.
It doesn't actually matter who goes first (because of the games co-operative nature), unless the cards that each person has in hand is open information to other players.

The most recent Pandemic rules now read:

The players look at the City cards they have in their hand.
The player with the highest City population goes first.

Good find! Answers to old questions with new information helps keep the site relevant and is encouraged.

I'm very confused by this rule. I would think that the vast majority of the time, all players sitting together to play the game are going to be from the same city.... Either way, I always ignore silly things like these in rulebooks and randomly determine the start player.

I see now that it's referring to in-game mechanics of City cards; which makes it actually (slightly) relevant, and not just random. Will edit answer for clarity.

Thank you for editing the answer, I was confused by this yesterday, and now I get it. Totally makes sense now, though I must say I still like the "last person to be sick" way to determine first player.

I agree with user1873 on what they were getting at.
As a general answer for most board games, what they're usually getting at is to choose the start player randomly. Many games, like Pandemic, use a thematic method to do so. I think Pandemic's actually works well, since that will change over time with a static group; Ticket to Ride uses something like "the most well-traveled player", which is less likely to change if you always play with the same people.
I generally try to keep a die around even if no games I'm playing use one to determine start player. That way, even if there are some interpretation disagreements over the start player rule (which I'm certain was not intentional), we can still determine it randomly and relatively quickly.

You can always use a system that involve the current game.. for pandemic, although is really not that important who plays first, We usually pick city cards before the whole deal, and the southest one go first...

Just as a side-note.. Start Player (a card game from Ted Alspach) is specifically designed to determine the starting player of any other board game.


text:
Tactics for Othello
I understand that occupying the corners is desirable, as a counter placed there can never be flipped. Also, placing a counter on a square next to a corner seems to be bad as it usually hands the corner to your opponent.
What other tactics are useful to know?

you could expand your corner rules to: try not to place 1 row/column away from the boards edge. As it will allow your opponent to place in a space along the boards edge, which are hard to take.

In addition to trying your best not to allow your opponent to control edges and corners, trying to place in such a way that your opponent cannot play is a good tactic. This is effective during the mid- and late-game. This tactic is as much about luck in your opponent's placement as it is about your vision in being able to accomplish this.
Frequently, when you force them to miss a placement, there is another opportunity on your part to make them miss another, which can sometimes domino to 5 or 6 consecutive placements for you. This also gives you a large advantage since players continue to take turns if they can, so you will have placed more than your opponent over the course of the game.

More broadly, though, IIRC even limiting the number of moves available to your opponent appears to be a good heuristic - moves that have forced replies are usually better than moves that leave multiple replies.  I have a conference proceedings that includes a paper on Othello AI, I'll try to take a look later and see what else it mentions heuristically (they mostly talk about their learning algorithm).

In addition to "Go for corners"...
Don't take edge spaces adjacent to opponent pieces. Your opponent can usually just capture them. There are (rare) times to do so, but those times usually are ones which allow capturing the corner


text:
When should a player decide to fold in Texas Hold'em Poker?
In Texas Hold'em poker, when it is a player's turn, he tries to make a best hand out of his hole cards (private cards) and the communal cards.
Now my question is: On what factors does he decide to add more chips and play for the next round or fold?

This might be a question better asked at poker.stackexchange.com

Can I transfer this question there?

you might be able to flag the question as 'needs mod attention' and explain in the comments it should be migrated. Alternately, if after you think your original question has been answered, if you have new related questions post them there instead of here.

@Colin D - Poker is perfectly on topic here. There is no need to transfer the question.

@ire_and_curses I did not mean to imply that poker was off-topic. Just that there are poker experts over at poker.stackexchange that might have better quality answers or already written answers for this question.

Poker will probably be among the the next sites to "fold," and the questions will be migrated here. So why not ask them here?

Appropriate location aside, I can't imagine how this is either answerable or reasonably scoped - the FAQ says 'if you can imagine an entire book that answers your question, you're asking too much', and I think it's safe to say that several hundred books have been written that answer this question at this point...

It's a hard question to answer, and depends on the player's style and whether the player likes to bluff, as well as the style and skill of the other players.
If I don't have decent hole cards (low cards or nothing matching) I fold. I might risk it if I'm one of the blinds, but if I'm raised I'll fold. If I have a decent starting hand I usually wait for the flop.
In my opinion you should bet based on the strength of your cards. Generally speaking, the games I've won have always been ones where I've consistently been conservative, and I find the same applies to my opponents. By conservative I mean don't bet unless you're sure the odds are in your favor.
For more on odds, read this article.

how do i check if the odds are in  my favour?.
When are you talking about the strength, do you mean if we have three of a kind or above we continue or else we fold?
http://www.pokerstars.com/poker/games/rules/hand-rankings/

Again, there's no solid rule. It depends what cards are out, what you have in your hand, etc... That's a topic within itself, but it comes with experience. Check this out: http://www.texasholdem-poker.com/odds

The general concept here is known as "pot odds".  The basic goal is to figure out your probability of winning, and then compare the amount of money to "call" to the total amount of money you would win if you are successful.  Neither of those are known values though, so you need to do your best to guess what they are.  That requires both thinking about both the probability of upcoming cards that might improve your hand, as well as what hands you opponents might be able to create based on their private cards and upcoming cards.
All of this ignores the idea the concepts of bluffing as well as the fact that you often want to raise people if you feel you have better pot odds than them, to raise the amount of money you can potentially win and to decrease the chance that they stay in the pot and win on a lucky card on the river.  So you can imagine that many books have been written on this subject, and thus it is impossible to give a complete answer on a site like this.

I can think of two reasons why someone would decide to add more chips:

He thinks he has the best hand at the table (he wants to win a large pot).
He thinks he can convince others that he has the best hand at the table (he wants the stakes to be too high for others to continue).

with respect to point 2 we are betting on all the other players folding right?

@Sid Yes, you want those with a better hand than you to fold.

A player "folds" when someone bets and  he decides he can't win.
He may have a bad hand, with "long odds" to improve, and there are one or more bets from players that seem to have a better hand.
The players at the table can't be bluffed out (particularly in limit), and are not known for playing hands worse than the player holds.


text:
Check for adjacency after or before using a moving tile?
I'm white player and I draw a desert card.

I place my three settlements there:

Now I use my special ability to move any settlement to a desert field:

I choose the settlement on the right:

Now my question is: Can I place this settlement on a different desert terrain OR do I have to place it on the same place where I took it from?
I haven't built on (or next to) any other desert fields yet. So the only adjacent desert field would be that one.

In the BoardGameGeek FAQ it says:

Harbor and Barn: Adjacency is checked when placing the piece
Check for eligible hexes after picking up the settlement to move. E.g. if you place 3 settlements together on 3 canyon hexes and now have no settlements adjacent to any canyon hexes, and then you pick up one of those settlements with the Barn, then you have to put the settlement right back on the hex it came from, since that is an empty canyon hex next to one of your settlements.

It links to a thread where the game designer confirmed it:

Moving a piece means picking it up and then placing it. Adjacency is checked when placing the piece, which is after removing it.

So, no, you can't place this settlement on a different desert terrain. You have to place it on the very same field you took it from.

The answer to your question, as asked, is "The settlement must go back to where you picked it up from."
But your question includes this phrase
I haven't built on any other desert fields yet. So the only neighbouring desert field would be that one.
This is not the correct rule.  Perhaps you meant to say that you haven't built on or next to any other desert fields.  If you've built next to other desert fields, then your settlement could be moved to a desert field next to those settlements.


text:
What are some good house rules to balance the sides in Saboteur?
My group of gaming buddies, after playing plenty of Saboteur, has found that the "good dwarves" can pretty easily win consistently once they learn which pieces are most valuable and how to best respond to revealed saboteurs.
What are some good house rules to even things up?

One technique we've used is to ensure that the saboteurs know each others's identities before starting the game.
After everyone has checked their role cards, everyone puts their heads down.  One player calls out for the saboteurs to put their heads up and identify each other.  They put their heads back down, then everyone puts their heads up and starts playing.
This lets the saboteurs be much more effective and strategic - if one of the other saboteurs reveals himself, you can play more cautiously to reserve for sabotage later.  You can also collaboratively lie about Map results if you want.
With my group of (fairly experienced) players this rule has resulted in a much more balanced ratio of wins for the good dwarves and the saboteurs, while not going so far as to outright allow the saboteurs to directly communicate.
Another house rule we use is to always guarantee the maximum number of saboteurs, rather than having a chance for one fewer as in the normal rules.  Otherwise the saboteurs are typically screwed when they're one man down.

(8 players) Move the gold farther away
My group plays Saboteur most frequently with 8 players, and we've developed some house rules for that size that are probably not applicable for smaller groups.
We were already playing with a guaranteed 3 Saboteurs in an 8-player game and with the Saboteurs having knowledge of each other, but wins for the Saboteurs were still very rare and highly dependent on an ideal draw for the Saboteurs' hands.
We recently started moving the gold in this case - the middle treasure card moves back, so it is now 8 cards from the starting point.  The two side treasure cards move out, so that they are 7 cards away in the "forward progress" direction, but 2 cards away from the middle.
We unanimously agree so far that this has led to some extremely fun games - the wider board gives more space to improvise, but punishes good dwarves who dig all the way to the wrong treasure card.  We had one win where the Saboteurs didn't even play any "dead end" pieces, but used their near-monopoly on Map cards to confuse the good dwarves and get them to dig to the wrong treasure.  At that point the good dwarves couldn't QUITE make it back to the correct one with the pieces available, but it would have been a trivial correction in a standard game.
Spreading the board out like this also makes the pieces that make "sideways progress", especially the one that splits three ways (), much more useful.  Under the normal rules I will almost always consider a straight-sideways piece to be useless as a good dwarf (though obviously it occasionally comes in handy), but with the spread board these pieces can be very key.

Although I agree with the ways @lilserf listed to make it less difficult for the saboteurs to win, the game is intended to be difficult for the saboteur team.  From my experience, the saboteurs shouldn't be able to win any more than a third of the time.  It is because of the difficulty that if the saboteurs win, each saboteur gets 3 gold.
A win by the good dwarves may result in one or more receiving three gold but it is likely that only 1 or 2 gold will be handed out to each since the gold cards are drawn randomly for good dwarves.
This alone has been sufficient to keep play balanced and fun in my many plays of this game.

Yeah, we may have a saboteur win rate higher than 33%, but I think it's still less than 50%.  It's just no fun when the good dwarves win 6 out of 7 games.

I agree that's no fun if the saboteurs are losing that often.  Your tip about ensuring the max number of saboteurs are in the game would certainly help there.  I'll probably be using that when I play next.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/


text:
Sea of Blood seems broken, what did we miss?
We started some time ago a Descent campaign on Sea of Blood, but ran across some heavy problems.
Currently we are stuck on a battle with a lieutenant of the evil lord on a sea chain siege, trying to stop it. The problems are:

Apparently the ship can't turn and can only go forward, with a bit of steering.
The rocks sink the ship oneshot, and are hardly avoidable right at the beginning on the battle map we got (Wild Vortex)
The lieutenant (Siren) can move freely 10 spaces in the water and go behind the ship.
Because of this the players are forced to swim ti go hit the siren, but they don't have Swim and the current is moving them in the opposite direction.
The cannon is also useless here because of distance and accuracy.

What could we do to tweak this? Did we miss some rules? Is the game supposed to be this hard?
Feel free to correct me and suggest anything related with SoB player/game master balance.

"Apparently the ship can't turn and can only go forward, with a bit of steering."

You are correct, this is something my heroes often complain about that I explain by saying the map is too small for the ship to turn meaningfully. It's a design flaw that isn't easily fixed without changing the course so it isn't squares.

"The rocks sink the ship oneshot, and are hardly avoidable right at the beginning on the battle map we got (Wild Vortex)"

Your crew has some options here. The obvious, and kind of difficult one, is scoot the ship towards the vortex until it clears that troublesome chunk of three rocks. At that point the ship should be able to avoid the vortex and/or flee.
I made a house rule where players are allowed to roll to stabilize the wheel to prevent the ship from being dragged by the current. So long as the number of movement points rolled by the hero holding the wheel exceeds or is equal to the distance tugged horizontally by the current, the ship doesn't move. This helps avoid unintentional death that does seem pretty unfair.
About fleeing, since the rocks are placed rather inconveniently for a quick escape for the Revenge, I think a loophole in the rules is for the heroes to simply swim off the edge of the ship. While I didn't allow this for some time, in rereading the rulebook, I found something weird on page 18: "a lieutenant may flee off of the board through an edge of the map just like a hero." While the game doesn't really say heroes specifically can do this before this part is mentioned, it does say that lieutenants can leave off the edge of the map, just like a hero, so it follows heroes can leave just like lieutenants. A bit of a lame escape, swimming away from your ship. Surely you wouldn't die that way! But apparently it's allowed, and I don't like ignoring rules that help the heroes.

"The lieutenant (Siren) can move freely 10 spaces in the water and go behind the ship."

While I would prefer hiding behind the rocks to try and draw the Revenge closer to an accidental death, going behind the ship is a pretty clever trick. The quickest solution would be to drop anchor to prevent the Siren from taking too much advantage of a blind spot, or you could always flee. A riskier attack plan would be to try and use the cannon's Knockback ability to maneuver her into the center of the vortex, immediately killing her. Since she can swim though, it's unlikely she'll be dragged in.

"Because of this the players are forced to swim ti go hit the siren, but they don't have Swim and the current is moving them in the opposite direction."

Sounds like the players aren't placing themselves so they current does their work for them, allowing them to move towards the Siren rather than past her. In general, the best solution for this appears to be to flee.

"The cannon is also useless here because of distance and accuracy."

Other than giving the Overlord a pat on the back for avoiding some devastating cannon fire, my only concern for your heroes is the singular. Tell them to get some more cannons. If they can't kill the Siren on this encounter draw, they should flee and draw a new zone.
Overall, the best solution for the heroes here is to run away. The Siren has quite an advantage if the Overlord is willing to wait, but the heroes can be patient and wait her out too with carefully placed rest orders (trust me, my heroes did it to me). Another zone will probably present a more favorable outcome for the heroes (see whichever terrible zone lets them control the sharks). Outfitting the ship properly should happen quickly too to prevent the Overlord from having too much of an advantage at sea.

Thank you for your answer, I will take time to comment it properly when I discuss all this with my friends.


text:
Prevent combat damages dealt with trample
If a creature with trample attacks me and I block with a creature on which damages are prevented, will I receive extra damage over my creature toughness?
Examples: Undergrowth Champion, Wall of Shadows

Please do not change links to gatherer links because they are not compatible with non english browsers.

Gather links are more friendly with browsers and what is supported by the site. There is a request on meta to use a different site for the links but as of now the links that you are using are less friendly for users as they do not by default use a popup or open a new tab.

@JoeW, as long as you have an english browser, you don't mind about other users but gatherer links have no interest for them. I added this request on meta.

You may want to consider accepting my answer if it has sufficiently answered your question.

@NeilMeyer ok, I did. I found the rule 510.1c mentioned in the duplicate usefull too.

Yes, the attacking player only has to assign enough damage to the blocking creature for the attack to be lethal, that means damage equal to all the blocking creature's toughness, whether the creatures actually die from combat damage is not strictly necessary. There may be a myriad of ways in which damage may be prevented, but that does not change how the damage is assigned.

702.19b. The controller of an attacking creature with trample first assigns damage to the creature(s) blocking it. Once all those blocking
  creatures are assigned lethal damage, any remaining damage is assigned
  as its controller chooses among those blocking creatures and the
  player or planeswalker the creature is attacking. When checking for
  assigned lethal damage, take into account damage already marked on the
  creature and damage from other creatures that's being assigned during
  the same combat damage step, but not any abilities or effects that
  might change the amount of damage that's actually dealt. The attacking
  creature's controller need not assign lethal damage to all those
  blocking creatures but in that case can't assign any damage to the
  player or planeswalker it's attacking.

The rule deal with lethal damage, and in this case damage is not lethal since it's prevented. Also, damage is dealt to creature before it's dealt to player or planeswalker, so there's no remaining damage because it's prevented...

@sinsedrix "lethal damage" is a game term, it doesn't actually have to kill the creature to be called "lethal damage". It says in the quote that you don't take into account abilities or effects that might prevent damage and save the creature.

@sinsedrix, Re "in this case damage is not lethal since it's prevented.", Read again. "When checking for assigned lethal damage, take into account damage already marked on the creature and damage from other creatures that's being assigned during the same combat damage step, but not any abilities or effects that might change the amount of damage that's actually dealt."


text:
Where can I find a list of Magic expansions?
I always have problems to remember expansions.
I am looking for a cheat sheet list of all Magic expansion with symbol, name, year, border color and translated name (to french).
Where can I find it?

Regarding border color, that may be difficult to find since there are some general guidelines for what sets have what color border, but there are exceptions (especially with older sets). This question has some information on that topic: http://boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/23709/mtg-what-set-is-seelenruhe-tranquility-in-german-from/23714#23714

You may find this guide from a previous question useful:  http://boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/5120/how-can-i-tell-the-difference-between-early-magic-the-gathering-card-editions

You can find the list of existing products along with their logo, symbol and release date on the Magic's official card archive page.
The page is available in french as well.
While this page doesn't contains informations about border colors, each products page links to the corresponding card gallery on the Gatherer.

In addition to the previous answer, MTGSalvation and Wikipedia have good lists.


text:
Does undying triggers an addition of counter?
When a creature with undying comes back on the battlefield, does it get a +1/+1 counter or is the counter already on it?
For example: I have a Strangleroot Geist, a Hardened Scales and an Animation Module. My Geist is destroyed and comes back "with" a +1/+1 counter on it, does the counter is "placed" so it triggers Hardened Scale or Animation Module?
EDIT
There is an ambiguity on counters that are placed and cards that come with the counter already on it... are they "placed" anyway?
Does Winding Constrictor behaves as a replacement effect like Hardened Scales and do they cumulate?
Does Walking Ballista +1/+1 initial counters behaves like on undying?

Yes.
Counters are always placed onto objects (they never exist without having been placed).

121.6. Some spells and abilities refer to counters being “placed” on an object. This refers to putting counters on that object while it’s on the battlefield and also to an object that’s given counters as it enters the battlefield.

A ruling on Hardened Scales (similar cards such as Doubling Season and Winding Constrictor have similar rulings) clarifies this:

“Placed on a creature you control” includes that creature entering the battlefield with +1/+1 counters on it.

When undying triggers and returns a creature to the battlefield, that creature is entering the battlefield with a +1/+1 counter on it.

702.92a Undying is a triggered ability. “Undying” 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.”

As a technical note, Hardened Scales does work (resulting in the additional counter) but doesn't trigger ("trigger" has a specific meaning in Magic) because it's a replacement effect, not a triggered ability. This means it modifies the way something happens as it happens. Triggered abilities are placed onto the stack as a reaction to something happening and then resolve separately.
Added information:
Winding Constrictor and Hardened Scales both provide replacement effects. When an event occurs that they would replace, you choose which one happens. Because the replaced event still places counters, the other one will still happen afterwards. Each replacement effect can only modify an event once, so you don't have an endless chain. You'll get one extra counter for each Winding Constrictor and each Hardened Scales.
For Walking Ballista, as detailed earlier in the question, counters on an object always get there by being "placed". Yes, Walking Ballista is given counters as it enters the battlefield, which is part of rule 121.6.

I don't understand what you mean by does work but doesn't trigger. Can I place an additional counter on the Geist with Hardened Scales? Can I pay {1} to create a Servo with Animation module?

Hardened Scale doesn't trigger, it creates a replacement effect. That is necessary so you don't create an infinite loop with just 2 Hardened Scales on the field. The Geist does trigger Animation Module, with or without Hardened Scales.

Yes, you can do both. The word trigger has a game meaning in MTG which describes what happens with Animation Module but not with Hardened Scales. There's a bit too much for me to go into in comments, but AM has a triggered ability (it causes something to try to happen after the triggering event) and Hardened Scales has a static ability that provides a continuous replacement effect (it floats around, changing the game rules about how certain things occur).

Another way to look at it is that triggered abilities create new, separate events (e.g. with AM there are 2 events: placing N counters and paying for servo). Replacement abilities change other events (e.g. with HS there's only 1 event: placing N+1 counters).

@sinsedrix Also, if it was a triggered ability, it would cause itself to trigger again and again. Triggered abilities trigger every time the condition is true (so every time a counter is placed). As a replacement effect, it applies only once.

@Samthere could you update your answer regarding the additional questions under EDIT?

@sinsedrix I've added more information to help your understanding of the situation. However, in general, if you want to ask other things, it's better to ask a new question than to invalidate answers from your existing question. If you'd like a more detailed understanding of how multiple replacement effects interact, and find that your answers are being closed for having duplicates, ask for an explanation in chat. :)


text:
How does Maddening Hex behave in 1 vs 1?
Maddening Hex contains the following action:

Then attach Maddening Hex to another one of your opponents chosen at random.

When there's only one opponent, what happens to Maddening Hex?

Maddening Hex stays attached to your opponent.
Since you don't have another opponent, the instruction is impossible and it simply won't be executed.

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.)

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


text:
How does Oracle en-Vec work in multiplayer games?
When playing in 2v2 or 3v3, if I activate Oracle en-Vec ability, can other opponents' creatures attack?
I hope no because it says:

other creatures can’t attack

And it doesn't say it's only other creatures of target player...

When you say 2v2, are you referring to the Two-Headed Giant format?

Yes, the Oracle's ability prevents other opponents' creatures from attacking on the same turn.
When the card says "other creatures" without any additional qualifiers, it is referring to every other creature on the battlefield. So, if the targeted opponent takes their turn at the same time as another player, none of that player's creatures can attack.

Great, useful ;)

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


text:
How do I make this zombie mill deck faster?
Although I'm not that bad at sealed deck format (I usually end up in the first 5 places) I suck at draft. This is my first attempt to build a T2 deck.
I need help because I think the deck is too slow.
Deck Objective: Milling
24 lands (I don't have trouble with lands)
Non-creature spells:

4 Sever the Bloodline
1 Grindclock
1 Black Sun's Zenith
4 Increasing Confusion
1 Black Sun's Zenith (this was listed twice)
1 Endless Ranks of the Dead
1 Go for the Throat

Creatures:

2 Mindshrieker
2 Havengul Runebinder
4 Undead Alchemist
4 Diregraf Captain
4 Geralf's Mindcrushers
1 Gravecrawler
1 Havengul Lich
2 Evil Twin
2 Ghoulraiser
2 Cemetery Reaper

I am thinking about taking out the Gravecrawler and the Havengul Runebinder,
the Gravecrawler because it can't block and the Havengul Runebinder because it won't work until my turn 5, and I can't block with it that turn because it might be die.
I don't know about the Evil Twin because it's a destruction but it can't block the turn it enters the game, I mean it can but if it dies it won't be of a lot of help.
The Captain is pretty good because it has dead touch. Maybe the spell that gives him undying until end of turn, but I don't know what to take out.
My idea is to gent alive to my (4-5) use the Undead Alchemist (but I won't use it to block) and use Increasing Confusion next.
I think that's a good combo, and since Undead Alchemist is a zombie and I think Geralf's Mindcrusher is a good card (although I might be wrong) because if he dies that's a total of 10 milled cards, that's also a zombie, I thought the black cards will support and help me to stay alive until I start milling, especially with so many destructions.
Maybe I need other black cards or another color (not excluding the mono blue possibility)?

In general, mill decks are a bit slow.
If you want to keep the mills in your deck, you have to structure it around them - probably you'll end up with a mill+control deck.
If you want a fast deck, then it would be better to go for a strategy that doesn't involve mills...

Ehm, I really meant "in general", i.e. without fancy/lucky combos kicking in at will... like here: http://boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/5628/what-is-the-fastest-mtg-mill-deck-that-can-be-made ;-)

i dont want fast decks i want a mill, i know mill decks are slow but i think mine is too slow, i need advice to make it faster, not the fastes but faster

You are correct in your assessment that this deck is too slow. You should select one direction and go with it - either Zombie or Mill - rather than trying to do both. I recommend removing the Mill strategy, as it is likely to slow for the format, given the current metagame.
I suggest you look at sites such as mtgtop8.com for reference when building decks. There you will see decks with good winning records played by the top players, and be able to use those as a basis for your deck.  For example, this deck finished in the top 32 at the recent Pro Tour in Hawaii.
As for specific feedback on your deck, Standard is a fairly creature heavy, aggressive format. You are playing expensive removal (Sever the Bloodline) in favor of cheap (Tragic Slip, Go for the Throat (play more of those!)). Black Sun's Zenith is probably bad for you, as many of your creatures are low toughness.
Examine the mana curve of your deck. You can do this pretty easily by using any of the deck building sites (like TappedOut), or by arranging your cards by casting cost. In this deck, you have very few cards that you can cast for one or two mana, and as a result you'll lag behind those decks which can play something on turns one and two.
Hope this helps!

Here are some low cost card that could help:

Phantasmal Image - can copy your more expensive creatures for just two mana and if your opponent has the advantage it can even the odds by copying their creature, also the easiest way to take out thrun or any other legendary creature.
Ghoulcaller's Chant - cheap card advantage
Undying Evil - essentially casting any creature you've got with a +1/+1, only drawback is that it needs to be about to die
Surgical Extraction - a little bit of mill and can really mess with decks that rely on certain cards
Nihil spellbomb - Its a cantrip that helps you get to cards you want, and can help against effects that can allow your opponent to benefit from cards in their graveyard.

Cards I would reduce the number of:

Grindclock: doesn't really have anything to do with zombies and you don't have any way of putting counters on it besides itself.
Geralf's Mindcrusher: 4 6 cmc creatures is pretty slow and you have no mana ramp.
Sever the Bloodline: 4 mana removal like somebody else said is a bit much
Increasing Confusion: is great but 4 is a bit much since you can cast them twice.

Thank you, it looks like you made it have bullets, right?


text:
Chandra, Fire of Kaladesh as commander
If I take Chandra, Fire of Kaladesh as commander (edh or tiny), is it still my commander when it's turned to planeswalker face? If so, can it be returned to command zone when it changes zone  (hand, graveyard, exile)?

Might be worth editing the linked question, as it only talks about the commander becoming a colorless forest and being turned face-down (à la being manifested), and not being transformed.

Ok the linked question is answering this one but keep this question alife as it is a good redirection point. Thanks

agreed, this question is more searchable


text:
Can I return Verdant Eidolon with the spell I casted with?
Can I return Verdant Eidolon to my hand with the muticolored spell I cast with mana from its ability? Is it in the graveyard as soon as I sacrifice it?
For example: if I sacrifice Verdant Eidolon to cast Boggart Ram-Gang, can I return it to my hand from the graveyard?

The latest possible time you can activate the Eidolon to pay for (part of) the multicoloured spell is during the process of casting that spell, right before paying for it (601.2a-i details the process of casting a spell, in order):

601.2g If the total cost includes a mana payment, the player then has a chance to activate mana abilities (see rule 605, “Mana Abilities”). Mana abilities must be activated before costs are paid.
601.2h The player pays the total cost in any order. Partial payments are not allowed. Unpayable costs can’t be paid.

(This is the reason some mana abilities, in particular random or unpredictable ones, have a restriction to only be activated whenever you could play an instant: It would be very strange to activate them at this stage, when you've revealed the card from your hand, chosen targets and modes, and then hope you can afford it.)
The trigger for a spell being cast comes later (emphasis mine):

601.2i Once the steps described in 601.2a–h are completed, effects that modify the characteristics of the spell as it’s cast are applied, then the spell becomes cast. Any abilities that trigger when a spell is cast or put onto the stack trigger at this time. If the spell’s controller had priority before casting it, they get priority.

At this stage, regardless of how you chose to activate the Eidolon, the mana ability has already been activated, paid for, and the mana received and used, so the Eidolon is in the graveyard, and it will therefore trigger.

Sacrificing Verdant Eidolon is part of the cost of the ability. Costs are paid immediately; they don't use the stack. In addition, this is a mana ability, so the ability itself doesn't use the stack. So as soon as the ability is activated, Verdant Eidolon is put in the graveyard.
Normally, a permanent's abilities apply only when the permanent is on the battlefield, but abilities that make sense only in some zone other than the battlefield are active when in that zone. In this case, since the second ability makes sense only when Verdant Eidolon is in the graveyard, it is active when Verdant Eidolon is in the graveyard.


text:
Countering cards played with flashback
Can a card cast using its flashback ability be countered by a spell such as Cancel?

Yes. The only thing that flashback modifies is where the spell is being cast from when paying it's Flashback cost before being put on the stack, and where it goes when it leaves the stack if its Flashback cost was paid.

702.31a Flashback appears on some instants and sorceries. It represents two static abilities: one that functions while the card is in a player’s graveyard and the other that functions while the card is on the stack. “Flashback [cost]” means “You may cast this card from your graveyard by paying [cost] rather than paying its mana cost” and “If the flashback cost was paid, exile this card instead of putting it anywhere else any time it would leave the stack.” Casting a spell using its flashback ability follows the rules for paying alternative costs in rules 601.2b and 601.2e–g.

Note the remark about 'exile this card instead of putting it anywhere else' - countering a spell cast with Flashback will always exile it, no matter what the countering effect says to do with it.  Venser, Shaper Savant won't return it to its owner's hand, Spell Crumple won't put it on the bottom of its owner's library, etc.


text:
How does Vorinclex's second ability work at the time of his death?
The Green New Phyrexian Praetor Vorinclex, Voice of Hunger is quite the beast, his second ability reads:

If an opponent taps a land for mana, it does not untap during his next untap step.

Say my opponent taps his land for mana, and sometime during his current turn or my next turn, Vorinclex dies somehow. Do his lands remain tapped for the extra turn as originally stated, since they were tapped during the time Vorinclex still lived, or does the effect end immrdiately upon his death, allowing my opponent to untap them as usual?

They will not untap as usual in the next untap step.
The reason is that after the ability triggered (while Vorinclex was alive) it went on the stack as a replacement effect for the next untap step.
When Vorinclex died, it didn't undo that effect.
Any lands tapped after Vorinclex died would untap in the next untap step.
If Vorinclex instead said something like "While Vorinclex is in play lands do not untap as usual" then it's death would change the situation.

Or indeed if Vorinclex said just "Lands do not untap as usual", right?  A permanent's continuous effect stops working once that permanent leaves the battlefield; it's just that their triggered effects don't retroactively get erased once they leave play - just as the effect of an activated ability (e.g. "tap [this] to give target creature -2/-2 until end of turn") doesn't get reversed when the creature with that ability leaves play.

@thesunneversets Yes, that's it exactly.

thats what i thought, thanks Stephen, you tend to answer most of my magic questions lol. (actually most of my questions are confirmations to challenges I receive in-game, the majority of the time I'm right but magic is so darn complicated at times I like to make sure)

@Ender Actual game play is the best source of good questions, IMHO


text:
How do twitch effects work with the stack vs activated tap abilities?
I'm becoming more and more confused as I learn about how things have changed during a break in play I had some time ago. Seems the stack has changed now, and oft times abilities use a source's last known status rather than its current stats when resolving.
That being mentioned, if I have a card that taps a permanent, and I want to tap a creature in response to it activating an inherent tap ability, does that work? Can I tap it to prevent it from using such an ability? Is this different for mana abilities?
Some examples:

Player B says he is tapping his Steel Overseer to put a +1/+1 counter on all of his artifact creatures. Can I tap it first to prevent him from doing so?

Player B says he is tapping his Forest to add a green mana to his mana pool, can I tap it first to prevent him from doing so?

If I cannot, then what use is my ability to tap his permanents other than to prevent him from attacking or to take advantage of his tapped status (either by counter-attacking or perhaps an 'assassination' effect)?
Also, if I cannot, is there a point in a turn when I COULD tap his lands and accomplish starving him of mana? If in theory, he could always tap his lands for mana in response to my attempt to tap them, how long would such mana remain unused in his pool until it expires and he cannot use it?

What is a twitch effect?

Twitch effect is a slang term that references effects that result in a card being tapped or untapped against it's owners will.

There are certain actions that you undertake in Magic which do not use the stack, and therefore cannot be responded to. (AFAIK this has never been different for as long as the stack has existed, so this is not really a recent change.) The most important of these are:

Paying costs
Activating mana abilities

Your first example above is an instance of #1. The cost of the Steel Overseer's ability is to tap the Overseer. After the Overseer is tapped, the +1/+1 ability goes on the stack, and each player gets priority. At this time it's too late to tap the Overseer, since it's already tapped and the ability is already on the stack.
Your second example is an instance of #2. Tapping a land for mana does not use the stack,  so you cannot attempt to tap a land in response to your opponent starting to play a spell. By the time you receive priority, the land is already tapped and the mana is in your opponent's pool (or has already been spent to put the spell on the stack).
Generally, then, you need to play your tap abilities before your opponent has the chance to do anything. This means:

If you're trying to deprive your opponent of mana, you should tap his lands in his upkeep step. Your opponent will be able to tap them in response to pay for instant-speed spells and abilities if he has any, but he won't be able to use that mana for any main-phase spells.
If you're trying to keep a creature from attacking, the last time when you can do so is the Begin Combat step. By the time you get priority in the Declare Attackers step, your opponent's creatures are already tapped and attacking, so tapping them has no effect.
If you're trying to prevent your opponent from using some sort of other tap ability on a creature or artifact, your best bet is to tap it at a time when the ability is not relevant or has no targets. For example, tap your opponent's Avacynian Priest in his end step. He could activate the ability in response, but it doesn't matter since your creatures will untap at the beginning of your turn anyway.
If you're trying to tap something like the Steel Overseer, which has an ability that's always relevant, you're basically SOL.

I'll address your specific examples.

Player B says he is tapping his Steel Overseer to put a +1+1 counter on all of his artifact creatures. Can I tap it first to prevent him from doing so?

If the tap is part of the cost of activating the ability (ie. tap symbol is before the colon) then the answer is no. You can't stop a cost from being paid. If you put an ability on the stack to tap it, they could tap in response. If they tap it to activate the ability, the cost is already paid, and tapping it in response does nothing.
In your preamble you seemed to indicate that in the past you could prevent activated abilities with a tap cost by tapping them first. The truth is, the game has always worked this way, even before the addition of the stack. Back in the day, the last person to cast contradictory instants got to determine order of resolution. There was even a ruling, back in the mists of time, clarifying that if you tapped something that had already been tapped, it has no effect on the action.
You could never twiddle a Prodigal Sorcerer to prevent it from dealing 1 damage to your dome.

Player B says he is tapping his forest to add a green mana to his mana pool, can I tap it first to prevent him from doing so?

You cannot, nor could you ever.

If I cannot, then what use is my ability to tap his permanents other than to prevent him from attacking or to take advantage of his tapped status (either by counter-attacking or perhaps an 'assassination' effect)?

What use? Tapping stuff, even if it doesn't prevent activated or mana abilities is still very very useful. Preventing a creature from attacking is usually quite important. It is also extremely useful to tap a defender after you declare attackers to give them a significant advantage. Especially if said defender has, say, deathtouch, first strike or regeneration.
This isn't to say that you are necessarily incorrect in your assessment of the utility of the tap effects in your particular deck. If your deck already keeps the ground clear by a constant barrage of direct damage or other removal, or your big beaters have trample and don't particularly care what gets in the way, by all means, remove the tap effects from your deck.

Also, if I cannot, is there a point in a turn when I COULD tap his lands and accomplish starving him of mana? If in theory, he could always tap his lands for mana in response to my attempt to tap them, how long would such mana remain unused in his pool until it expires and he cannot use it?

Comprehensive rule 106.4:

106.4. When an effect produces mana, that mana goes into a player's mana pool. From there, it can be used to pay costs immediately, or it can stay in the player's mana pool. Each player's mana pool empties at the end of each step and phase.

So you could tap the mana during that player's upkeep, and that will deprive them of using that mana during their main phase for sorceries or summoning a creature. Or you could tap their mana during their end step and that might prevent them from using nasty combat tricks or counterspells during your turn.

If you have allowed your opponent to tap something, without skipping phases by short cuts or something like that, then no, tapping is not an ability you can interrupt since tapping doesn't go on the stack.
If you aren't declaring steps and you move directly into the combat phase without offering a change of priority in a pre-combat phase (main phase end step) then you can tap something that's being declared as an attacker (but this is because you're going back and playing the skipped phase, not because of some timing issue with tapping).  After the first time you do this, expect to hear the words "pre-combat ... combat" every turn forever and ever.
Chapter 5 of the comprehensive rules describes the turn structure in great detail.
Review chapter 6 (CR 601 deals with spells 602 with activated abilities) of the comprehensive rules for the nitty gritty but essentially the process is Declare the Spell/Ability, Move the card from your hand if necessary, put it on the stack, make any choices necessary (if the card is modal for example), pick targets, announce any divisions the card might require (divide damage, etc), determine and pay the full cost of the spell ... the spell is now cast.  There is no change in priority for you to legally activate any ability or cast any spell in order to affect the caster's cards.
Your "tap something" cards are not meant to give you the ability to roll back time and undo things that are happening.  You use them to make your best judgements on how to deprive your opponent of resources.  For example BEFORE you declare attackers you may tap some of his creatures so they can't use them as blockers.
If you want to deprive your opponent of mana, it is more difficult because your activated ability (tap that land) will go on the stack.  In response to your activation they can tap the land to cast a spell.  You can't prevent this but it can still throw them off their tempo or force them to cast things out of order.  They can't just tap them to add to their mana pool for "later".  It's handy to do this sort of thing in your turn to prevent counterspells for example.

The traditional method of depriving an opponent of mana by tapping down his lands is to tap them during his upkeep.  Yes, this isn't 100% effective: he can cast an instant in response.  On the other hand, it does impede him from casting creatures or sorceries, and also happens before his draw step, so may stop him from using the card he draws that turn.
(Your opponent can fill his pool with mana if he likes, but that mana will all leave the pool at the end of his upkeep: he can't "save" that mana to cast a sorcery or creature later.)
Similarly, suppose you want to nullify a creature with an activated tap effect: let's say a Prodigal Pyromancer.  You could tap it down at the end of your opponent's turn, then untap in your turn, cast that 4/1 Haste creature that's been sitting uselessly in your hand for a while, and then attack with it while the Pyromancer is temporarily indisposed...


text:
How does trample work against infect?
My opponent attacks me with say, a 6/6 trample generic Wyrm of some sort, and I block with a Whispering Specter, a 1/1 infect with flying. When damage is dealt the Specter will deal it in the form of a -1/-1 counter from its infect ability. Well, the Wyrm would normally deal me 5 leftover trample damage, so is this damage lowered by -1 from the counter given by the Specter?

Also, welcome to BG&G SE!

Thanks, I've been a member on gaming.SE for a while now, and it just now occured to me that I can ask MTG related questions here so I was like YEAH! (god MTG creates so many interesting situations so often, that a site like this is golden)

No, you would suffer up to 5 damage if the opponent choose to assign the trample damage to you.
When two creatures deal combat to each other, it's simultaneous. So, for example, a non-trampling 6/6 would deal 6 damage to your 1/1, causing 6 damage to become "marked" on it, while, concurrently, your 1/1 would deal 1 point of infect damage to the 6/6, causing a -1/-1 counter to be put on it. The counters are the damage.
Trample doesn't add an extra step to damage resolution, it just changes how damage is assigned. So, a trampling 6/6 allows its controller to assign 1 damage to your 1/1 (since that's enough to kill it) and as much of the remaining damage as he wants to you. You, your blocker, and the attacking creature all take damage simultaneously.
If you blocked the 6/6 trampler with a 1/1 creature that had both infect and first strike, then its infect damage would be applied first, giving the 6/6 a -1/-1 counter, and then you'd only take a maximum of 4 trample damage.


text:
Can Mirrorworks' ability be activated multiple times for the same artifact?
Mirrorworks reads like this:

Whenever another nontoken artifact enters the battlefield under your
control, you may pay 2 (colorless). If you do, put a token that's a
copy of that artifact onto the battlefield.

If I cast say, a Darksteel Relic, could I then pay 4 colorless and get a total of 3 Darksteel Relics (the original and two copies)?

Mirrorworks' ability can never be activated, because it is triggered. This is mentioned in the answers but I think it's worth emphasizing.

No sir, it's a one-shot effect only: you either pay 2 and get one copy, or pay nothing and get no copies.
I'll look into the comprehensive rules to find something that explicitly proves this, forthwith...
In the meantime, you can see this is backed up in the rulings on Mirrorworks' Gatherer entry:

Each time the ability triggers, you can pay {2} only one time to get one token.

I think this may be the most relevant section of the Comp Rules I've found so far:

603.2c An ability triggers only once each time its trigger event occurs. However, it can trigger repeatedly if one event contains
  multiple occurrences. See also rule 509.4. Example: A permanent has an
  ability whose trigger condition reads, "Whenever a land is put into a
  graveyard from the battlefield, . . . ." If someone casts a spell that
  destroys all lands, the ability will trigger once for each land put
  into the graveyard during the spell's resolution.

I think it's obvious that the ability only triggers once.  Though I'm still hunting for an explicit rules statement that you can't pay a cost for an effect as many times as you like to reduplicate that effect.  I'll let you know if I make any progress on that!

603.2c is the closest I can think of that you're going to get to that... I see that user1873 has already done the legwork to show it ;-)

Since the thesunneversets is looking for an explict rules that prevent paying multiple costs to get multiple effects.
No. You can only get one token copy of Darksteel Relic for each nontoken Darksteel Relic that enters the battlefield.
Mirrorworks contains a triggered ability. We know this because its rules text begins with the word "When."

112.3c Triggered abilities have a trigger condition and an effect. They are written as “[Trigger condition], [effect],” and begin with the word “when,” “whenever,” or “at.” Whenever the trigger event occurs, the ability is put on the stack the next time a player would receive priority and stays there until it’s countered, it resolves, or it otherwise leaves the stack. See rule 603, “Handling Triggered Abilities.”

From rule 112.3c, we also know that the [Trigger Condition] is "another nontoken artifact enters the battlefield under your control", and with rule 117.12 (below) the [effect] is, "put a token that's a copy of that artifact onto the battlefield."
Rule 603.2c explains that abilities only trigger one time for each event that occurs (so if multiple nontoken Darksteel Relics were coming into play, it would trigger once for each occurence).

603.2c An ability triggers only once each time its trigger event occurs. However, it can trigger repeatedly if one event contains multiple occurrences. See also rule 509.4.
Example: A permanent has an ability whose trigger condition reads, “Whenever a land
is put into a graveyard from the battlefield, . . . .” If someone casts a spell that destroys all lands, the ability will trigger once for each land put into the graveyard during the spell’s resolution.

The final piece of the puzzle. We know from all the above, that there is a single existence of the triggered ability on the stack, and we know from the rule below that you can only get one token copy of the nontoken Darksteel Relic (the ability didn't say, "you may pay 2 any number of times", and this isn't an activated ability which allows playing a cost for an effect any time you have priority)

117.1. A cost is an action or payment necessary to take another action or to stop another action from taking place. To pay a cost, a player carries out the instructions specified by the spell, ability, or effect that contains that cost.
117.12. Some spells, activated abilities, and triggered abilities read, “[Do something]. If [a player] [does or doesn’t], [effect].” or “[A player] may [do something]. If [that player] [does or doesn’t], [effect].” The action [do something] is a cost, paid when the spell or ability resolves. The “If [a player] [does or doesn’t]” clause checks whether the player chose to pay an optional cost or started to pay a mandatory cost, regardless of what events actually occurred.
Example: You control Hesitation, an enchantment that says “When a player casts a spell,
sacrifice Hesitation. If you do, counter that spell.” A spell is cast, causing Hesitation’s
ability to trigger. Then an ability is activated that exiles Hesitation. When Hesitation’s
ability resolves, you’re unable to pay the “sacrifice Hesitation” cost. The spell is not
countered.

When the Mirrorworks trigger resolves, it gives you the option of paying a cost may pay 2. Then the [If you do] clause checks whether the cost was paid to determine if the [effect] (put a token that's a copy of that artifact onto the battlefield) occurs.

Holy wall of text. Good Job! +1. This is one of the rare situations I'm upset that I can only upvote an answer once.

I logged in to boardgames.se for the first time just to vote you up :)

It doesn't say you can't pay 2 multiple times; it says "Pay 2 and put a copy," nowhere does it state this ability can only be activated once.
And since it dose not state a limit it should work multiple times provided you pay 2 for each copy since each "pay 2" is added to the stack as the artifact comes into play, then it resolves and the copies are made.
Since this is actually not a triggered ability it is actually an activated ability since mana is payed for it to resolve.
For example, triggered abilities resolve as the result of an action being made, i.e. a land entering and you gaining life--no mana cost involved. If there is mana involved it always states you cannot activate more than once.
And activated ability, e.g. "Pay 1 red, get +1/+0 until end of turn," since it does not say you cannot pay 10 red and get +10/+0, you can!
Mirrorworks is both a triggered and an activated ability since its conditional is "When a nontoken..." and its activated is "Pay 2..." you can pay 2 multiple times provided it is paid as the artifact is put into play since each instance of the pay 2 resolves at the same time.
Basically, because the card does not state "this can only be activated once," it should be able to be activated multiple times for the same card, and after you have paid the 2 for each copy you wish to make then the copies come into play.
If it can only be activated once it should say "Pay 2 only once". With the text as is, you should be able to pay 2 multiple times.

-1 Your answer directly contradicts the ruling in Gatherer.

You chose to pay 2 as part of the resolution of the trigger.  The trigger only goes off when something ETBs.  One ETB equal one trigger.

It is most assuredly not an activated ability. See comprehensive rule 112.3b: Activated abilities have a cost and an effect. They are written as "[Cost]: [Effect.] [Activation instructions (if any).]" There is no [Cost] then a colon in the instructions, therefore the cost cannot be paid multiple times. There is a triggered ability, an optional cost that may be payed when the ability triggers, and then a conditional effect if you pay the trigger cost.

"if there is mana involve it always states you cannot activate more then once." — this is not true. This phrase will only be seen in activated abilities, never triggered abilitites. If there is no colon : in the instructions, you will not see this phrase.

Welcome to the site!  As you can see we're a bit fanatical about ensuring the quality of the answers.  Just because you fell a little short on this one is no reason not to try again, or ask your own questions.  FYI, you can choose to delete this question.  Doing so will reward you with a somewhat difficult to get badge!


text:
What is the expansion symbol of Face the Hydra set?
What is the expansion symbol from the Face the Hydra set?

OK. So it is actually the Theros one reused in FTH.

Yeah, that card is from a Theros event deck.