text:
How do Panglacial Wurm and Imoti interact?
Let's say I control Imoti, Celebrant of Bounty. I then cast Panglacial Wurm while searching my library. Panglacial Wurm will have cascade.
Since the library is kept in the same order while searching, I will know exactly what Panglacial Wurm will cascade into, and I will have access to this information before making the decision to cast Panglacial Wurm, is this correct?

No, you won't know what it cascades into.
Cascade is a triggered ability. This means that the ability triggers when you cast the Wurm, and then goes onto the stack once players receive priority. This only happens once you're done resolving whatever spell or ability let you search in the first place. At the end of the search, you are almost certainly instructed to shuffle your library (I don't know any searching effects that doesn't make you shuffle your library afterwards, but I don't know that none exist).
So here is the order of events:

You search your library, cast the Wurm, the cascade triggers
You finish your search, and shuffle your library as instructed
The cascade is put on the stack
Players have opportunities to cast instants and activate abilities
The cascade resolves and you exile cards from the top of your library

So the search that let you play the Wurm does not let you know what it cascades into. You would have to do something like a scry in step 4 above in order to know that. But by then you have already decided to cast the Wurm.

re: any searching effects that doesn't make you shuffle your library - Doomsday I think might be the only card https://gatherer.wizards.com/pages/card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=15397.  It's the only card that comes up with you search gatherer for "search your library" and not "shuffle"

You're almost right - except I think you and OP are missing an important detail: Cascade doesn't involve searching your library - you exile cards off the top of your library, one by one, until you find one that matches a critera, then put it into play, and add the exiled cards back to your deck in a random order. That's not searching, so the Wurm can't be played from your library. Apart from Imoti granting Cascade to the Wurm, the cards don't have any further bearing on one another.

I crack my fetch.  I search my library for the swamp I want.  While searching, I cast Panglacial Wurm.  Because of Imoti, it has Cascade.  Because I'm in the middle of my search, I know the order of my deck and what cascade would hit if it triggers before the shuffle part of cracking the fetchland does.  So, what happens?  That is the question.  You are correct, revealing PG Wurm during a cascade won't allow it to be cast, but that's not what's being asked about.

Since the key to the answer is the sentence "this only happens once you're done resolving whatever spell or ability let you search", I think it would be useful to point to the Gatherer ruling that makes that explicit: "After you cast Panglacial Wurm, you pick up the search effect where you left off. When the search effect finishes resolving, the active player gets priority with Panglacial Wurm on the stack. Any abilities [such as PG Wurm's Cascade] that triggered when the spell was cast are put on the stack now."

Might be worth adding that some tutors (e.g. Vampiric Tutor) put the searched card on the top of the library, in which case you will know what the Wurm cascades into.

The rules for Magic are pretty clear on how this works. Cascade is covered in rule 702.84, with the important part for answering the question in 702.84a (Emphasis mine):

702.84a Cascade is a triggered ability that functions only while the spell with cascade is on the stack. “Cascade” means “When you cast this spell, exile cards from the top of your library until you exile a nonland card whose converted mana cost is less than this spell’s converted mana cost. You may cast that card without paying its mana cost. Then put all cards exiled this way that weren’t cast on the bottom of your library in a random order.”

This shows what kind of ability Cascade is, triggered. The rules for triggered abilities are covered in 603, the important part for this question is 603.3 (Emphasis mine):

603.3 Once an ability has triggered, its controller puts it on the stack as an object that’s not a card the next time a player would receive priority. See rule 117, “Timing and Priority.” The ability becomes the topmost object on the stack. It has the text of the ability that created it, and no other characteristics. It remains on the stack until it’s countered, it resolves, a rule causes it to be removed from the stack, or an effect moves it elsewhere.

And the part in 117 that matters here:

117.3b The active player receives priority after a spell or ability (other than a mana ability) resolves.

Effects that cause a player to search their library are almost always a spell or ability, abilities like Fabled Passage or spells like Demonic Tutor. The active player receives priority only once that spell or ability fully resolves, which always includes shuffling the deck. This means that while the Cascade ability will trigger during the search, it won't be put onto the stack until after the deck is shuffled.
For some tutors, like Worldly Tutor or Vampiric Tutor, this means you will get to chose the spell you cascade into, since those tutors place the found card on top of the searched library, but for most search effects, you will shuffle the full library before the cascade is put on the stack or resolves.


text:
If I no longer control a permanent when it would be sacrificed, is it still sacrificed?
Let's say I control Planar Chaos and in response to its ability give it away with Zedruu the Greathearted's ability, will Planar Chaos still be sacrificed if I lose the coin flip?

The rules say:

701.16a To sacrifice a permanent, its controller moves it from the battlefield directly to its owner’s graveyard. A player can’t sacrifice something that isn’t a permanent, or something that’s a permanent they don’t control. Sacrificing a permanent doesn’t destroy it, so regeneration or other effects that replace destruction can’t affect this action.

(emphasis mine)
So in that case, your opponent will control Planar Chaos and it won't be sacrificed.

Worth clarifying that you cannot activate Zedruu's ability during the resolution, so you would have to use his ability before you flip. You can't do it in response to losing the flip.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
What might these inscriptions added to an «Easy Money» board mean?
These inscriptions, for example S153 and P330, appear to have been added to an Easy Money board.
Does anyone know of house rules that might explain their addition?

(click to enlarge images)

The P looks like the payoff value for the mortgage: It's the M value plus 10% (mostly -- it looks like some of the numbers are just approximations to this value or round in arbitrary ways: 175 + 10% is rounded down to 192, while 395 + 10% is rounded up to 435). So: a remedy to having to calculate mortgage payoffs on the fly (and perhaps to avoid arguments over rounding).
The S value is similar: it looks like the B value minus 10%. Perhaps this was a house rule that allowed a player strapped for cash to sell some houses instead of mortgaging the property: selling a house would thus incur a 10% loss.

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


text:
Removal of cloudform
If Cloudform is in play and is attached to a face-down (manifested) creature card, what happens to the face-down creature card if just the Cloudform enchantment itself is destroyed by another spell?
Does the face-down manifested creature remain in play, and can it still flipped up by paying its casting cost, or is the face-down card destroyed along with the enchantment?,

The manifested card remains as a 2/2 creature without abilities.
The manifest event is independent of Cloudform being attached to it.

701.33. Manifest
701.33a To manifest a card, turn it face down. It becomes a 2/2 face-down creature card with no text, no name, no subtypes, and no mana cost. Put that card onto the battlefield face down. That permanent is a manifested permanent as long as it remains face down. The effect defining its characteristics works while the card is face down and ends when it's turned face up.

Cloudform simply gives the manifested card flying and hexproof, and destroying the aura simply makes the creature lose those abilities. It will remain a 2/2 creature, however.
Turning the manifested card face up is also independent of Cloudform:

701.33b Any time you have priority, you may turn a manifested permanent you control face up. This is a special action that doesn't use the stack (see rule 115.2b). To do this, show all players that the card representing that permanent is a creature card and what that card's mana cost is, pay that cost, then turn the permanent face up. The effect defining its characteristics while it was face down ends, and it regains its normal characteristics. (If the card representing that permanent isn't a creature card or it doesn't have a mana cost, it can't be turned face up this way.)


text:
God-Pharaoh's Statue and Finale Of Promise
I am bringing forward a case to the judges of Magic. Was I screwed by Magic Arena, or do I not know how to play?

Opponent has a God-Pharaoh's Statue.
I play a Finale of Promise with X = 2. I pick a Shock and a Chart a Course.

Now as the jury can clearly see, both of my picked spells are below the converted mana cost of 2. Also as the Finale of Promise states "You may cast up to one target instant card and or up to one target sorcery card from your graveyard each with converted mana cost X or less without paying their mana costs.
So the spells trigger, I play my shock. I then go to play my chart a course and the game asks me to pay mana to play it. Of which I have none. Shouldn't this spell be free as stated by Finale of Promise?

When you cast a spell without paying its mana cost, you are still required to pay any additional costs that other effects might impose.
This is reflected in one of the rulings on Finale of Promise:

If you cast a card “without paying its mana cost,” you can’t choose to cast it for any alternative costs. You can, however, pay additional costs. If the card has any mandatory additional costs, such as that of Spark Harvest, you must pay those to cast the card.

Basically the formula for a spell cost is as follows:

601.2f [...] 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. If multiple cost reductions apply, the player may apply them in any order.

Choosing to cast a spell without paying its mana cost is an alternative cost, one that treats the cost of the spell as {0}. But God-Pharaoh's Statue still increases that cost by {2}, meaning your spells are not actually completely free: you are not forgoing all mana costs, you are just forgoing the initial mana cost of the spell before cost increases apply.
In order to cast Finale of Promise for X=2 targeting two spells while God-Pharaoh's Statue is out, you will pay 10 mana total ({8}{R}{R}). Finale will cost {2}{R}{R} normally plus another {2} from the Statue, then you must pay {2} for one of the free spells, then {2} for the other free spell.
Both of those spells are still definitely legitimate choices for Finale of Promise. Shock still has a converted mana cost of 1, and Chart a Course still has a converted mana cost of 2, because the converted mana cost formula does not factor in any cost increases or reductions we might face when actually casting the card:

202.3 The converted mana cost of an object is a number equal to the total amount of mana in its mana cost, regardless of color.
Example: A mana cost of {3}{U}{U} translates to a converted mana cost of 5.

FYI: our local mana symbols userscript will convert the mana symbol notation in this post into mana symbol imagery.

Wouldn't it be 10 mana to cast Finale for X=2?

forego: go before forgo: go without

In the dictionary "forego" is listed as an alternate spelling of "forgo" and in some dictionaries the other definition is listed as archaic.

@murgatroid99 I did some reading about it; forgo is at least unambiguous in meaning only "go without".


text:
What game does this black die belong to?

Bought a house and found this die in the backyard. The icon is in the spot where the 1 would go. This has peaked my curiosity and have tried to search google image but have had no luck. I also thought it looked like a boxer's glove. I have asked friends & family if they knew. Thank you for your help!

It's possible its not from a game and maybe a promotional item?  I've had dice from conventions where the '1' was replaced by logo of event.  Its possible you might get dice with a logo made for promotional reasons?

These dice are from the Pokèmon XY Furious Fists Elite Trainer Box.
source: https://www.pokemon.com/us/pokemon-tcg/product-gallery/xy-furious-fists-elite-trainer-box/


text:
Spark Double copying my planeswalker - do I have to sacrifice?
So when I play Spark Double and copy one of my own planeswalkers, do I have to sacrifice one of them because they are the same planeswalkers or do I keep both because it says the copy is not legendary?

Not directly relevant to the actual question, but the legend rule doesn't count as sacrificing a permanent

You get to keep both. It would be a pretty useless ability if it didn't. The "legend rule" still applies to the original, but you need two legendary permanents with the same name for it to apply, and Spark Double (which isn't called Spark Double then) is not legendary itself.

704.5j If a player controls two or more legendary permanents with the same name, that player chooses one of them, and the rest are put into their owners’ graveyards. This is called the “legend rule.”

Planeswalkers used to have their own "legend rule" checking their subtypes, which Spark Double does not provide for, but it's no longer in effect:

306.4. Previously, planeswalkers were subject to a “planeswalker uniqueness rule” that stopped a player from controlling two planeswalkers of the same planeswalker type. This rule has been removed and planeswalker cards printed before this change have received errata in the Oracle card reference to have the legendary supertype. Like other legendary permanents, they are subject to the “legend rule” (see rule 704.5j).


text:
Armory Automaton and Dowsing Dagger/Sword of the Animist
What happens if I cast Armory Automaton and equip to it Dowsing Dagger and/or Sword of the Animist that an opponent controls?

When Armory Automaton attacks while equipped with Sword of the Animist, will I or my opponent search for a land?
When Armory of Automaton deals damage to an player while equipped with Dowsing Dagger, will I or my opponent get control of Lost Vale

More generically, if the equipment says "When equipped creature attacks, do XXX" (where XXX is draw a card, gain life, put counters etc) - Who will do it, me or my opponent?

The term 'you' in an object's text always refers to that object's controller. Since your opponent remains as the controller of the equipments Armory Automaton attaches to itself, your opponent will continue to receive their effects.
The ability that triggers off Dowsing Dagger and Sword of the Animist respectively are on that equipment, not on the creature. Therefore, these abilities look for the controller of the equipment:

109.5. The words “you” and “your” on an object refer to the object’s controller, its would-be controller (if a player is attempting to play, cast, or activate it), or its owner (if it has no controller). For a static ability, this is the current controller of the object it’s on. For an activated ability, this is the player who activated the ability. For a triggered ability, this is the controller of the object when the ability triggered, unless it’s a delayed triggered ability. To determine the controller of a delayed triggered ability, see rules 603.7d–f.

Note that there are equipments with different wordings that directly grant abilities to the equipped creature, such as Avarice Amulet. In that case, the granted ability would look at the Armory Automaton's controller, which would be you, even though the equipment itself is still controlled by your opponent.
Also note that if you attach e.g. Sword of the Animist as a result of the Automaton's "attack" trigger, the Sword's own "attack" trigger does not trigger in that same attack, because it had to be attached already.

In both cases, the triggered abilities are the equipment's, not the creature's, so the controller of the equipment gets the benefits. Armory Automaton explicitly mentions control of the equipment doesn't change (because normally, you wouldn't be allowed to equip an opponent's creature), so your opponent gets to search for a land and/or will decide whether to transform Dowsing Dagger into Lost Vale (which he/she then will control, obviously).


text:
How to randomly choose a hex tile
I’m designing a board game which uses hexagonal tiles (hex[es]) to form the game area the players move about in. There is a single hex which is the players starting point, and one “layer” of hexes around that centre one. This is the starting layout:

After this, players can add new hexes to the structure in any direction. The only rules are they fit in to the hex ‘grid’ and they touch an existing hex. Therefore they do not need to fully complete concentric layers, they can go one direction in a line of hexes for example.
I would like to introduce a mechanic that targets a random hex, and this is where I’m struggling to come up with a good way of determining that random hex.
Ideally, the method should give an equal chance for any hex to be targeted; and it should only use components which are generally found in board games. It would be very easy to do this with the addition of a mobile phone, for example, but I would like to try and keep this classic. Common components are items such as dice, spinners, tokens, cardboard components, etc. Feel free to suggest anything that might help. The other requirement would be that the process is not overly complicated - but as that’s subjective I’m open to anything.
TL;DR Is there a method of choosing a random hex from any number of hexes, in any formation, using common board game components?

Are you aware of a mechanic that works for squares?  If so, it can be adopted to hexes.

In a non-regularized arrangement, you'll have to provide an artificial/external way to order them somehow. Something like Catan's chits numbered 1 to N (well, Catan's are lettered, but you get the idea), where N is the most number of hexes that can ever be in play, would work.

@L.ScottJohnson No need for that you can still break it down to a square grid and the example shown it would be a 3x5 grid and just need to make a rule to deal with the 4 corners that don't have tiles.

@JoeW I think you're overlooking the irregular growth of the board allowed by the game's mechanics (or eliding the issues that come up from that. It'll be a great deal more than "four corners" in the general case).

The best way to deal with variable count randomization is to use a drawing bag
Create two sets of tiles.  Whenever you add a tile to the board, add its copy to a drawing bag.
Now whenever you need a random tile, draw it from the bag.
This technique requires all your tiles to be unique. If they are not unique, and can't be given a unique identifier, then create a double set of numbered tokens, and assign a number to each tile as it is placed.
Deck vs Draw Bag
StartPlayer mentioned using a deck, which is also an excellent suggestion. The two options have slightly different use cases, so which one you choose should depend on how you need them.
Draw bags are better if you are frequently adding items between draws, because it is easier to shuffle a bag, especially if there are only a few items.
On the other hand, a deck is better if you need to remove specific items in a manner besides randomly drawing them, because it is easier to search a deck than a bag.

I did question whether this would be a little unwieldy for players - finding a token that matches the tile they've just placed - although it certainly works.
Inspired by the concept though, I think you could print a unique two digit reference on each tile, such as [A-Z]-[1-n] and have two bags (one for letters, one for numbers) and a pool of A tokens, B tokens, 1 tokens, 2 tokens etc.
Although the process is slightly longer on average it would rule out the annoyance of not finding one specific token or it being lost.

@djfw a two-token method runs a danger of screwing up the probabilities if the tiles aren't evenly distributed. Adding the tokens is a bit fiddly, but if you can sort the tokens ahead of time it isn't so bad.

To clarify, there would be pools of each type of token and two bags. When you draw a tile, you put a matching letter token in the letter bag, and a number token in the number bag. Each bag would have the same number of tokens with the same distribution as on the board. To choose your random tile you would then draw a letter and a number and find that tile. I'll prototype and see what's better, two bags and the extra time drawing two tokens, or one bag and the extra time finding the exact matching token.

@djfw If I understand you correctly, if you had the tiles A1, A2, and B2, you'd have one bag with A A B and one bag with 1 2 2.  Is this right?  This gives you a 44% chance of drawing A2, a 22% chance each of drawing A1 or B2, and a 11% chance of drawing B1 and needing to redraw.

Depending on how many of your tiles are usually in play, it might also be more efficient to keep all the tokens in the bag/all cards in the deck and just keep drawing until you hit a valid one each time you need to pick a random hex.

yes, that was my thinking, but you're right about the chance of a redraw and that would be an issue.
@EikeSchulte - in my game it starts out as 7/44 and by the end of most games you've got about 20-30 tiles out.
Given the issues with getting a random tile without any chance of redraws - i've given up on that as a mechanic. For now i'm just rolling a dice; with directions given on the central "home" tile. You follow the direction indicated to the edge of the play area and that's the tile chosen. I've had to adjust other game mechanics to suit this grouping of random tiles.

There is a print and play on BGG called Beehive  (full disclaimer I'm the designer).
Throughout the game I needed to select random hexes. This was achieved by each hex having a unique number and a deck of cards with each number as well.  Throughout the game cards would be removed and added back to the deck as required.  This meant is was always possible to randomly choose any hex.  If each of your hexes is numbered and placed you can add its matching card to a deck when you need to choose one randomly.

Eclipse has a similar hextile placement method. It also has a unique number printed on every hextile - the galactic center is tile 001, the next ring is 100-115 or so, then 200-230, and 300+.
If you implemented a similar numbering scheme that was printed on the hextiles, you could then have 3 dice that are rolled to determine which random hex is selected (like how d% is two d10s, one for the tens place and one for the ones place.) So a roll of 2, 6, and 1 would be hex number 261. If the hex does not exist on the board, reroll.

The problem with this method is that you're going to be rerolling constantly.  You'll have only a dozen or so tiles out, with the potential to roll any of 400 numbers.

@ArcanistLupus sure, that is a problem with it. It could be mitigated by matching the dice to the actual number of hexes available, i.e if there are 40 tiles, a d4 and a d10. Still more rerolling than ideal (I like your draw bag personally) but a good option for people who get scared away by fiddly bits. I love fiddly bits myself :)


text:
Does Awakening of Vitu-Ghazi trigger the ability of Kiora, Behemoth Beckoner?
Does Awakening of Vitu-Ghazi

Put nine +1/+1 counters on target land you control. It becomes a legendary 0/0 Elemental creature with haste named Vitu-Ghazi. It's still a land.

trigger the ability of Kiora, Behemoth Beckoner?

Whenever a creature with power 4 or greater enters the battlefield under your control, draw a card.

Not a duplicate, but related: https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/38506/does-transforming-a-card-trigger-an-enters-the-battlefield-effect?rq=1

I'm not sure if this is a duplicate: https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/q/47193/9999

Possible duplicate of Is Simic Ascendancy triggered by Awakening of Vitu-Ghazi?

It doesn't trigger.

It's not simply a question of checking if the state of the game went from not having a creature of power 4 or greater on the battlefield to having one.
An object only enters the battlefield when it moves from a zone other than the battlefield (e.g. hand, graveyard, exile) to the battlefield or when it's otherwise created on the battlefield.

Enters the Battlefield
  A nontoken permanent “enters the battlefield” when it’s moved onto the battlefield from another zone. A token “enters the battlefield” when it’s created. See rules 403.3, 603.6a, 603.6d, and 614.12.

Since the land in question already existed, and since the land in question was already on the battlefield, no object entered the battlefield (much less one that was a creature with power 4 or greater). As such, the ability isn't triggered.
A ruling on Kiora, Behemoth Beckoner reminds you of this:

However, you can’t have a creature with power 3 or less enter the battlefield, raise its power with a spell, an activated ability, or a triggered ability, and have Kiora’s ability trigger.

No. When an object changes type, it does not "enter the battlefield". Note also that the rulings page for Kiora explicitly says:

However, you can’t have a creature with power 3 or less enter the battlefield, raise its power with a spell, an activated ability, or a triggered ability, and have Kiora’s ability trigger.

While this is not the exact situation you are describing, it is functionally equivalent. In both cases, and object starts out as not "a creature with power 4 or greater" and later becomes one.

No, it doesn't. The land you target with Awakening of Vitu-Ghazi is already on the battlefield, so it doesn't cause any enter-the-battlefield effects like Kiora's.


text:
Is there a good place to find information about strategies, tricks and caveats for specific cards?
Sometimes, I'm surprised when I see that a certain card is considered good. I don't get it!
For example, when I first saw Skullclamp, I just saw a card that increased power by one at the cost of reducing toughness by one - not a very good deal. I didn't see why it was considered so good it was almost broken. I had to be explained that for a small cost (typically a token creature), it would draw you two cards, a very good deal in most decks.
Ok, I admit that I should have spotted that one, but I have experienced the same feeling several times. I look at a card and think "why the heck is this card so expensive" or "why is everybody talking about this card, saying it will ruin Magic". Or, in my playgroup, someone will play a card and the whole gang goes "ooh, I love that card, it's so awesome", and I just nod and smile and pretend I know what they're all so excited about.
Where should I go to find out why a card is considered so good by so many? Is there some database online that will explain why a card is good? I usually end up googling the card's title, and sometimes get lucky and get that aha-feeling, but not always.
I would like to find a source online where I can look up a card and someone will explain the strategies they use that makes that card effective.

I think this is too broad to be properly answered here.

"Why are cards good" is almost certainly broad, but I think that "What are some resources for understanding which cards are good" might not be.

Ask on the Boardgames Stackexchange Chat to see if someone else knows! Even if no one else will, I will do my best to answer your question

If it was obvious that SkullClamp is broken Magic R&D would not have released the card!  If paid professionals can't spot a card as broken, you should not feel bad or surprised that you don't easily spot that it was broken.

Simply searching for the cardname + the word 'combo' already gives some interesting results:

Skullclamp abuse. - Casual & Multiplayer Formats - The Game - MTG ... on MTGSalvation
Why is Skullclamp banned? on this very site
What makes skullclamp such a good, highly regarded card? on Reddit

I'm not aware of any database with this kind of information. A 5/5 rating on Gatherer tells something about the competitiveness of a card, but not whether it's part of a combo. Kird Ape has a 5/5 rating as well but it's 'just' a Zoo staple.

Kird ape is rated between 4.38 and 4.70 ratings and comments are printing specific - cards with no ratings always show up as 5 stars and wizards has messed up their system on gather, you can't actually get in to comment and rate cards anymore, so anything for the past couple years will all show up as 5 stars, ignore new printings.

A card's strength and playability is always relative to the other cards that exist around it. A good way to determine a card's position in the game is to find decklists using that card. I like to use MTGGoldFish's deck searcher tool to find decks. It has definable search parameters that let you make general statements like "oh, it's a great card in modern control decks". You can get more specific answers by picking a deck that uses the card and googling the deck name looking for a "deck tech" write-up or video that should explain the card's usefulness in the deck and possible synergies with other cards. If that fails, you might be able to simply find videos of people playing that deck or a similar deck to give context as to what the card is doing.

Cards are generally not graded on their own, context is very important. The strengths and weaknesses of any given card depend on the format and the meta. Since both of these are large and constantly moving targets, you won't generally find any one collection of card discussions.
If you want to learn about the game so you can develop your own skill of card evaluation, you can't help but do the legwork yourself. Visit the official Wizards site and some of the countless existing fan sites for articles about decks and formats that interest you. I don't want to give specific recommendations for fan sites since I don't really visit them myself, but Google will easily help you get started.


text:
Can attacking players use activated abilities after blockers have been declared?
Yesterday I was playing a game of Commander with a friend and we ended up in this situation. He attacks with his commander, Yasova Dragonclaw which has an equipment that doubles her power/toughness to 8/4 and gives her trample. I declare blockers with my commander, Anafenza, the Foremost, which is a 4/4. After moving her to the command zone, he then activates Bow of Nylea and states Yasova is a 9/5 and tells me to take another damage point.
So my question is this, if I have already declared blockers and it has resolved, can he activate an ability to pump up his attacking creature? Or would that have to be done as he declares attackers?

"After moving her to the command zone" According to the standard rules of grammar, this means "After my opponent moves Anafenza to the command zone". Is that what you meant?

Combat Phase

506.1. The combat phase has five steps, which proceed in order: beginning of combat, declare attackers, declare blockers, combat damage, and end of combat. The declare blockers and combat damage steps are skipped if no creatures are declared as attackers or put onto the battlefield attacking (see rule 508.8). There are two combat damage steps if any attacking or blocking creature has first strike (see rule 702.7) or double strike (see rule 702.4).

Declare Blockers Step

509.4. Fourth, the active player gets priority. (See rule 116, “Timing and Priority.”)

So there is room (for either player) to cast spells or activate abilities after blockers have been declared and before combat damage is being assigned.
But what you describe, "moving her to the command zone" looks like combat damage has already been assigned and dealt. Your opponent can still pump up their creature (in the general case; it looks like it should've already died, as @Arthur noted in the comments), but it won't affect the combat damage already dealt.

It's not clear whether the opponent had passed priority (and was in error assigning more damage) or if @Giveuptheghost was acting out of turn assuming no effects in the declare blockers step.

"Your opponent can still pump up their creature, but it won't affect the combat damage already dealt." Not of this is combat as described: as soon as we move to combat damage step, both creatures die before anyone receives priority.

Yes, attacking players can activate abilities after blockers have been declared, but before damage is dealt, to modify the amount of damage that will be dealt. (See Glorfindel's answer for complete rules on this).
However, in your particular case, it seems that there is some miscommunication that occurred in your game; where someone acted out of turn, and it's not clear whether that was you or your opponent.
Once blockers are declared, both players get a chance to activate abilities or cast instants. When the stack is cleared and both players pass priority, combat damage is then dealt simultaneously:

Combat Damage Step

510.1. First, the active player announces how each attacking creature assigns its combat damage, then the defending player announces how each blocking creature assigns its combat damage. This turn-based action doesn’t use the stack. A player assigns a creature’s combat damage according to the following rules:
510.2. Second, all combat damage that’s been assigned is dealt simultaneously. This turn-based action doesn’t use the stack. No player has the chance to cast spells or activate abilities between the time combat damage is assigned and the time it’s dealt.

After you declared blockers, you say you moved your commander to the command zone. But it isn't clear if you only did this after both you and your opponent said that you were passing priority. If you simply said "I'm blocking with Anafenza", and then moved Anafenza to the Command Zone, then you acted out of turn, because it was not yet time for combat damage to be dealt.
You also did not say if your opponent expected Yasova to die or not. If your opponent did not activate Bow of Nylea until after combat damage were dealt (which he would be doing in the end of combat step), then Yasova would die due to having 4 damage and 4 toughness. But if your opponent was activating Bow of Nylea during the declare blockers step, before combat damage was dealt, then Yasova would still be alive, having 4 damage and 5 toughness.
So the correct answer comes down to the communication that took place after you declared your blockers. Did your opponent make an indication that he was ready for combat damage to be dealt? Or did you just assume that as soon as the blockers were assigned, combat damage was happening? Aside from the 1 difference in how much damage you would take, it would also determine whether or not your opponent's commander lived or died.


text:
Can "SWOT" analysis be useful in bridge
SWOT stands for (an analysis of) strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats. There are four "fields" and yes, four suits.
Here's an example from this deal, which came up in today's New York Post. West opened 1 diamond, South doubled (takeout), and later bid 4 hearts after North's (forced) response.
          Jxxxx
          QT
          Jxx
          Qxx

KQxx              xx
xx                xx
AKQTx             xxx
xx                KT9xxx

          Ax
          AKJxxxx
          xx
          AJ

The trump suit is solid, that is a strength. There are two diamond losers, that's an obvious weakness. With seven trump tricks and two black aces, the club suit an represents opportunity for the 10th trick the QJ together are worth one trick. The spade suit is the threat, you don't want a spade loser.
After south ruffs the third diamond, he should lead the jack of clubs to either steal a trick or force out the king. He then wins any return, draws trumps in dummy, and leads the Q of clubs to discard his low spade.
But South played A, then J in clubs, and went down when East won and led back a club for West to ruff.
Does SWOT analysis make it easier to focus on where the "problem" lies in the hand?

Sort of, I certainly think people do something like this when they first look at their hands (even if they don't call it SWOT). Also analyzing play for a squeeze covers many of the SWOT areas if you squint hard enough (though interestingly threat cards aren't a threat)

strength = your squeeze card
weakness = your threat cards (possibly also communication cards)
opportunities = the squeeze itself/opponents discard under your squeeze card
threat = the opponents busy cards

And I'm sure many other areas of play will also be mappable to SWOT. I suspect that this isn't covered more as we generally have much mores specific methods to analyze a hand for different situations

On the hand as given, declarer should draw trumps (ending in South) after getting in with a diamond ruff at trick three, and only then attack clubs.  You could call this part of a SWOT analysis, as the possibility of a defense club ruff is a threat here, and there is no benefit to risking it. Then the club A followed by the Jack gives the slight extra chance of the king falling singleton, and assures that either the club Q or J will win a trick.

I would say that SWOT could be a good way to introduce planning the play at trick one. However Threats comes before Opportunities. You have to appreciate the threat before you decide how to nullify it.
Strengths: Your top tricks, trump controls, high card controls.
Weaknesses: immediate losers, slow losers, poor trumps
Opportunities: methods of generating extra tricks (very wide range here) and methods of disrupting the defence (hold-ups, blocking, etc)
Threats: Where is the danger hand? What happens if there is a bad break? Can we neutralise it? - cue Opportunities.
Of course as declarer your SWOTs are much more obvious than when defending.
Strengths: high cards, favourably placed cards, length in declarer or dummy's suit. shortages in certain suits.
Weaknesses: finessable honours, even breaking suits, potential squeeze cards, squeezable hand
Opportunities: setting up defensive tricks, ruffing, removing entries, forcing declarer, killing the menace, deceptive discards
Threats: Long suits in dummy, being squeezed or endplayed - cue opportunities,

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


text:
For Scrabble, is there a most common phonies list anywhere?
There are all kinds of lists out there to improve one's Scrabble play.  For instance, I have a book called Bob's Bible which helps with all kinds of anagrams and other unique groupings.  Google search has given me nothing.  I want to know is there a list out there of the most commonly played phonies?

I would argue that the reason it's 'neglected' is because it plays a relatively miniscule part of most Scrabble games - for various reasons, phonies just aren't a major part of most club play.  That's not to say that they don't show up from time to time, but I would only start worrying about phonies after you have, e.g., not just all the twos but all of their extensions to threes pretty well in-hand.

I'm not a Scrabble expert, but to me it looks like you are going about this the wrong way. Your stated goals

I learn for sure which words sound like words but really aren't so I
  don't play them.
I become a better challenger. Part of the game (at
  least in tournaments) is to be able to recognize when your opponent
  has played a bad word. From my experience, this is an often neglected
  part of a new Scrabble player's development.

can both be achieved by learning all legal scrabble words. If you know all the legal words, anything that isn't one of those words is (obviously) an illegal word.
While this might sound like an insurmountable task, to me it sounds a lot more feasible than learning everything that isn't a word. The set of legal words is much smaller than the set of illegal words!

This does not answer the question.  The question is "Is there a most common phonies list anywhere?"

@demongolem You are correct, but I believe that the underlying goal is "How do I detect a player has played a fake word?", in which case some people may find this answer useful

But I asked the question and that is not my underlying goal.  It is a comment, a valid comment at that, as you bring up some useful points.

"You're asking the wrong question" is a valid answer, as long as the answer gives sufficient proof to back it up.

There is such a list, I've seen it. I can't swear to it 100%, but I think that it's in this book. As a matter of fact, I think it is in chapter 15 (use the "look inside" feature).Everything Scrabble

I don't see a list there, but I do thank you for the answer.  Chapter 15 seems to deal with should I intentionally play a phoney or should I not?  Is it ethical?  Can one use a phoney for one's strategic advantage?  In fact, it breaks down what the most common scenarios are for intentionally playing a phoney.  Points to be considered in a separate Board and Card Games Question for sure

@demongolem, darn. The fairly long (obviously not complete, the possibilities are infinate) list is out there somewhere, like I said - I've seen it. The funny thing about phonies is when you know full well that the word isn't real but play it off with a poker face, "Sure, it's an Ethiopian vegetable." Next turn? Opponent puts an "S" on it. Ask yourself, just how ruthless are you?

As a novice scrabble player, in my experience the most common "phonies" are real variants of real words that are simply not recognized by various scrabble dictionaries. This includes adding -s to many obscure nouns, or adding -er/-or or -ing to less common verbs.

I can't speak to other Scrabble dictionaries, but the OSPD4 is really good about that.

Here are two lists, generated with help from the AI Elise.


text:
Kingsbridge Scarlet: trade 1 cloth for 3 VP
In Chapter 4 long-term (blue) event card, there's one that says:
Each player may trade 1 cloth for 3 VP
If this were a one-time card, there wouldn't be any issues. However, as this is a blue permanent card, there might be different ways to interpret this text.

You can do this once in Chapter IV, does not matter when.
You can do this once per turn, may be at a specified time, such as after an event card is placed, and before the personal income is resolved (i.e., at the time when the grey one-time cards are usually resolved)
You can do this as many times as you want on your turn.

Well, Option 1 is not really compatible with the concept of a permanent card, and tracking who used it, and who has not, is difficult. Options 2 and 3 seem to give too much to the player who happened to have the wool and/or cloth in Chapter 4: otherwise, one cloth would be worth 2 points if you sell it for money, the second cloth would be worth 2 points if you played "Privilege" to sell it, as well, and others would not be worth anything. One of the players managed to get 12 or 15 points with this card though in our recent game (although she still lost to a powerful project builder); we played it as Option 2. I was unprepared enough to discard my "Cloth production" in the first turn of Chapter 4 before this blue card appeared.
Are there any official explanations for this card? What are the existing house rules for this card? One possible way to mitigate its power is to say that you can trade cloth for VP in place of your action, for instance -- nothing except for "Build project" can give you 3 VP at once, and one, obviously, is not allowed to play it four or five times in a row.

This is one of my favourite games and it gets played at least once a month.  I think your wrong that its over powered.  Each chapter has 11 cards and you only see 6 of them each game, your also don't know when it will appear.  If you go into next game thinking that you need to just make cloth, build the tower or cure plague then it might be the tower is completed round 1 of chapter 4, the bonus points for cloth never appear and all unrevealed plague markers are removed.  The more you play the game you will be familiar with events and plan accordingly and not rely on one thing for your points.

I cannot find an authoritative source, but according to my best reading of the rules and BGG's forums, you can make the trade once per turn, during the phase of your turn when you play your action card, as long as that event is in play.
My justification:

p. 7 of the rulebook indicates that "for long-term events, you may make the trade once per round."
p. 3 indicates that blue event cards must be taken into account when playing your action card.

Together, I take these to mean that you can only make the trade once, but that you can make it every turn, and around the time of your turn when you are using your action card.
These threads on BGG suggest the same thing. One of the posters cites an official Mayfair answer, but it's not linked anywhere.


text:
Do you get to draw a card if you rotate a tile?
In Eruption, one gets to draw new tiles by connecting lava flows to cities. If there is already a tile connected to a city, and it is rotated using a Aftershock card, and the lava is still connected to the city in the same way, can one draw new cards?

No, new draws can only be made if a new location is in contact with the lava.
Check the rules on page 6: (emphasis mine)

If this tile is rotated as shown, only one
  Action Card is drawn because there is
  only one lava flow in contact with a new
  location in the village

Also, this was answered on BoardgameGeek by the Designer Chris James

Good to know it is in the rules somewhere:-)

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


text:
Are there times when it is right to underlead an ace against a suit contract?
First, my own example.
With only N-S vulnerable, I was sitting West at matchpoints when South dealt and opened 1NT (15-17). I passed, North bid 2 hearts, and South transferred to two spades, all pass.
Holding ♠ AQ7 ♡ A9863 ♢ T8 ♣ T54,
I led the fourth highest heart. South said (after the game), "You shouldn't have done that. What if I had a singleton king?" While this was just barely possible, I doubted that because of his 1NT bid.
Here's what I was thinking:

North had shown great weakness with her bidding sequence, but she had most of her side's trumps, which would be exposed on the board.

Because of 1, above, my partner and I had half the points in the deck, with the need to take only six tricks to defeat the contract. I expected to (and actually found) honors with my partner, who held QJ stiff, and was able to ruff a third heart. Moreover, we had at least equal strength, though not length in spades.

While the contract was technically a suit contract, the strong South hand was actually a no trump hand.

Because of all of the above, I wanted to start a "dog fight," playing this as a quasi no trump game.

The other lead I considered was a low trump. I didn't fancy leading one of my weak minor suit holdings.
Here's an expert example (Frank Stewart). South gets to five spades after he and North bid three suits, and find that they are off the AK of the fourth suit, clubs. So West underled his ace of clubs, East put up the king, returned his last club to West's ace, and they won the setting trick with a club lead from West, ruffed by East.
Surely, the expert West did the right, or at least a reasonable thing. Did I (a non-expert) do so by underleading an ace? If not, how does my situation differ from the Stewart example.

I lead the T of diamonds.  I hope partner can figure out to duck the ace if they have it, though I can probably find their other entry.  Note, assuming the king is with declarer, you might have done even better if your partner is the one to lead the hearts.

@AlexanderWoo: Partner's key cards were KJx of spades, and QJ stiff of hearts. Also, a "stranded" Q of diamonds. My second choice lead was a low spade.

Underleading the A here is pretty risky because the points are on your right.  I'm assuming the layout was something like
   QJ
xxx  KTx
  A98xx

If you don't give partner a ruff here, you're still getting two heart tricks, so you didn't really win anything.
Dummy could also quite easily have a singleton heart.  Only when partner has the stiff K or Kx do you really win here, and then likely only when the hearts are split between your opponents.  So it's just not very likely.
I would lead the T of diamonds or a passive club.  Yes, your clubs are weak, but passive leads, which are unlikely to give up tricks, are okay especially at matchpoints!
The T of diamonds gives me the opportunity to get a ruff.  I've got one or two spade stoppers which may give me time to develop my 7 as a ruff.  Yes, it still requires luck, but many diamond holdings from partner will help as opposed to hearts where I specifically needed the K.
I do occasionally underlead aces against suit contracts.  The ideal situation is when the points are on my left and I believe neither opponent has a singleton.  Or perhaps my right hand opponent has neglected to cue bid in the suit.  But beware--even sometimes when it can theoretically work, partner will not play you for the A.  Imagine this situation:
   Qxxx
KJT9     xx
   Axx

Here, it's correct for partner to duck, playing you for xxx and declarer for Ax, unless P has strong conviction that you would underlead an A.

Yes; but not on this hand.
You have missed the key point in Stewart's column, repeated here (with my emphasis):

... North's raise to five spades asked South to go to slam if he had a control in clubs, the unbid suit. South couldn't oblige.
...
North-South's bidding should have been punished. Since the bidding indicated (really, it roared loudly) that they lacked a high club, West's opening lead should have been the deuce of clubs. ....

You received no such friendly signal from opponents, and should disdain making such an aggressive (nay, presumptive) lead in your example.
Your description suggests that South had the heart king - if so, you are probably entitled to six defensive tricks and a one trick set on this hand. Did you find them? Does the heart ace lead assist this in any way? If not, perhaps reconsider your approach to opening leads; and stop putting specific cards in partner's hand without much clearer signals that they might be there.
For reference, here is the suggested play summarized above with defensive winners in bold and [enumerated]:

Diamond 10 lead won by Declarer (in either hand).

Spade lead won by East's jack. [1]

Heart jack lead by East (reversing the usual card order to signal the doubleton). Assume not covered so that [2]

East continues with heart queen, showing the doubleton and thus overtaken by the ace regardless of South's play. [3]

Heart deuce (suit preference for clubs) returned for East to ruff low. [4]

Club spot led by East, won by Declarer wherever.

Spade lead won by your ace to lead another diamond toward Partner's queen. [5]

Diamond 8 lead to partner, possibly establishing a long high diamond in Partner's hand (where were the J and 10?).

Your spade queen is high trump for the sixth defensive trick, and Partner possibly wins the third diamond round for a seventh.
Declarer does better to cover the heart jack, if he can. You then win the Ace and return one to Partner's Queen. In this case win the second spade with the ace to give partner a heart ruff; but the possible diamond trick has now likely been ruined unless Declarer is end-played in the suit.


text:
When is it appropriate to raise opener's one of a major with only a king and four of their suit?
The first example was that of Zia Mahmood, as recorded in Larry Cohen's "To Bid or Not to Bid." Hearing his partner bid one spade, Zia raised, with both sides vulnerable, holding
♠ K974
♡ 82
♢ 8652
♣ 432
Trying to "ape" this behavior with only us vulnerable, I raised partner's one heart to two hearts with
♠ 9532
♡ T872
♢ 653
♣ k6
That is, four trumps and a side king.
Zia's partner bid and made four spades with
♠ AJT63
♡ K93
♢ Void
♣ AQJT9
My partner bid four hearts and went down three with a hand that looks to me to be about the same strength as the one Zia's partner held.
♠ AQ7
♡ AQJ43
♢ K987
♣ 8
Given that Zia was right to raise his partner, was I wrong to raise mine? If I was wrong, was it because my king was located outside, rather than inside, my partner's suit?

Switch spades and clubs in either of your hands and the game isn't hopeless though not good (even vulnerable), so it wasn't a terrible idea, but...
Yes - the king being in trump makes a significant difference.  The king of trumps is guaranteed to be a useful card and likely to be an entry.  Any other king has a chance (something like 50%) of being useless, as it was here.
(I do think your partner was worth a jump to game over your single raise.  Are you really going to accept an game try with only both major suit kings and a diamond doubleton, when game has good chances of an overtrick?)

shogi xiangqi lol https://chess.stackexchange.com/a/33848

Zia's hand is a bit better than yours, but I think it's reasonable to raise with your hand as well, as long as it doesn't cause partnership disharmony. You'd be happier if your K was not in your shortest suit.
Your partner's hand is not as good as Zia's partner's. I think it's worth a game try, not a jump to game, particularly at matchpoints. The good side 5-card suit, a void, and Kxx are much better holdings than a weak 4-card suit, a stiff, and concentrated values in a 3-card suit not mentioned by partner.
However, Zia was also luckier than you were. Your CK ended up being wasted across from partner's stiff and your partner's shape meant you had no ruffing values. There's no way to know that will happen when you have to make your decision whether to raise.

There are times to "raise opener's one of a major with only a king and four of their suit." This might not have been one of them.
I would definitely raise with a king and four in the opener's suit if the king were one of the "four."
Change my hand slightly to ♠ 9532 ♡ T872 ♢ 65 ♣ K63,
and I would consider raising because I have both a "side king" in clubs and a ruffing value in the short diamond suit.
Given a chance to do it again, I would not raise with the actual hand because the value of the king and the ruffing value of the doubleton are duplicated in one suit.

Actually - the hand you got is a little unusual, because the opponents have 10 clubs, the majority of the hcp, and neither of them bid.  I'm not convinced Kx is less useful than Kxx overall.  Sure Kx is worss than Kxx if partner has QJx in the suit (and for many other fixed distributions), but having Kx rather than Kxx increases the likelihood of partner having a 5 card second suit there.


text:
In Diplomacy, can a fleet in a coastal province be used to convoy?
The situation I had in mind was that in Spring, 1901 Italy orders army, Venice to Albania. The Austrian Fleet Trieste does a convoy, since the fleet in the Trieste coastal region is adjacent to both the other two coastal regions. (This would be a Lepanto opening.)
Another player argues that this is not possible. His reasoning is "the convoy is only possible if the fleet vacates Trieste and moves into Adriatic Sea."
According to Diplomacy Wiki, "A fleet can convoy an army that is adjacent to it into another land space that is adjacent to the fleet."
Who is right?

Fleets in coastal provinces cannot convoy.  To convoy, you have to be in the open water.  From the rules (emphasis mine):

Convoying an Army Across One Water Province
A Fleet in a water province (not a coastal province) can convoy an
Army from any coastal province adjacent to that water province to
any other coastal province adjacent to that water province.

Convoying an Army Across Several Water Provinces
If Fleets occupy adjacent water provinces, an Army can be convoyed
through all these water provinces on one turn, landing in a coastal
province adjacent to the final Fleet in the chain

Thus, in the situation you describe, a fleet in Trieste cannot convoy; it would need to be in the Adriatic Sea.


text:
Does my creature get stunned after killing Pip Pip with a Red Planet Ray Gun?
I equip a creature with a Red Planet Ray Gun:

This creature gains, “Reap: Choose a creature. Deal 1 damage to that creature for each Mars creature in play.”

Afterwards I reap with that creature and kill the only Pip Pip in play. Pip Pip has the following effect:

After an enemy creature reaps, stun it.

I would assume, that the effect of Pip Pip doesn't trigger, because Pip Pip dies during reaping, and the effect would only trigger after reaping. But I am not sure about the ruling. Does my reaping creature get stunned?

The active Player chooses
Do you want your creature to be stunned? If there are multiple abilities that trigger after the reap, the active player chooses the order to resolve them in. So, if there was some reason you wanted your reaping creature to be stunned, you could resolve Pip Pip first, then the Ray gun. If you didn't want to be stunned, you could resolve the Ray Gun first, killing Pip Pip before it's ability could be applied.

But is it even possible to trigger Pip Pip anymore? Red Planet Ray Gun is a reap ability and Pip Pip - according to the card text - triggers AFTER reaping. Can you point me to the ruling where the exact sequence is explained? Is there something like a "reap phase" and a "after reap phase"? Based on your explanation, those two theoretical phases would happen at the same time. Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't rule that out - that's why I asked. But an official ruling would be great for reference.

"When a player uses a creature to reap, the player exhausts the creature, gains 1 Æmber for their Æmber pool, and then all “Reap:” abilities on the creature resolve." After you Reap any "Reap:" abilities resolve. Pip Pip ALSO resolve after a creature reaps. You could just as easily replace "Reap:" with "After this creature Reaps," if that helps make it make more sense to you.

It's worth noting that the rules are very explicit about BEFORE : but noticeably lacking when it comes to AFTER  however resolution can be safely inferred from reciprocity.

Excellent, thanks for the clarification! I accepted the answer and I know how to resolve this situation the next time.


text:
How fast can you win against a passive opponent in the Innistrad block format?
There have been legacy decks in the past that were able to win a game in the first round, without even giving your opponent a chance to act. I wonder how many rounds minimum it would take to win a game in the Innistrad block format. In this format there are only cards allowed from Innistrad, Dark Ascension and Avacyn Restored.
The assumptions are:

Your opponent is totally passive and does not play more than a single land each turn until he loses.
You start with the perfect hand and each card you draw is the perfect card.
The deck must be legal.

Please show the winning sequence with your answer.

I like this question. It's open-ended, but you can still compare different answers to see which ones are better. It will be interesting to see how things change when Avacyn Restored is released.

A solution for turn 2 on the draw. I can't seem to hit turn 2 on the play, but I -think- it's possible.
Edit: This looks kinda ugly, so here's a link to a picture: https://i.sstatic.net/aw30D.png
                                                                           Mana Pool           Cards in Hand
Turn one                                                                    0                   8
Plains                                                                      W                   7
Doomed Traveler                                                             0                   6

Turn two                                                                    W                   7
Mountain                                                                    WR                  6
Infernal Plunge, sacrificing Doomed Traveler                                WRRR                5
Infernal Plunge, sacrificing Spirit, hold priority                          WRR                 4
Increasing Vengeance, targeting Infernal Plunge                             WRRR                3
Increasing Vengeance, targeting Infernal Plunge                             WRRRR               2
Increasing Vengeance, targeting Infernal Plunge                             WRRRRR              1
Resolve Infernal Plunge                                                     WRRRRRRRR           1
Desperate Ravings, discarding Past in Flames                                WRRRRRR             1
Doomed Traveler                                                             RRRRRR              0
Flashback Past in Flames                                                    R                   0
Flashback Infernal Plunge, sacrificing Doomed Traveler                      RRR                 0
Flashback Infernal Plunge, sacrificing Spirit, hold priority                RR                  0
Flashback Increasing Vengeance, targeting Infernal Plunge                   RRRRRR              0
Flashback Increasing Vengeance, targeting Infernal Plunge                   RRRRRRRRRR          0
Resolve Infernal Plunge                                                     RRRRRRRRRRRRR       0
Flashback Desperate Ravings, discarding any card                            RRRRRRRRRRR         1
Devil's Play for X=8, hold priority                                         RR                  0
Flashback Increasing Vengeance, targeting Devil's Play, dealing 16 damage   0                   0
Resolve Devil's Play, dealing 8 damage                                      0                   0

Here's how to do it with Mindshrieker:

Forest, Avacyn's Pilgrim.
Island, Mindshrieker.
Mountain, Infernal Plunge. Activate Mindshrieker three times on yourself, milling three Blasphemous Acts for +27/+27. Attack with Mindshrieker for 28 (-8).

This uses only six cards, and even wastes a mana on turn 2.
Here's a variant that doesn't use any red cards:

Forest, Avacyn's Pilgrim.
Island, Mindshrieker, Avacyn's Pilgrim.
Activate Mindshrieker twice, milling two Ghoultrees for +16/+16. Attack with Mindshrieker for 17 (3). Swamp, Bump in the Night for 3 (0).

This uses seven cards.

How about an alternate win condition?

Forest, Avacyn's Pilgrim.
Island, Avacyn's Pilgrim.
Island, Mirror-Mad Phantasm.
Activate Mirror-Mad Phantasm, conveniently milling your entire library. Island, Laboratory Maniac, Thought Scour. You try to draw from your empty library, and win.

You can use Cackling Counterpart to copy the Phantasm, which guarantees that it will always empty your library, but doing so requires an extra turn.

From the OP's assumtions, "each card you draw is the perfect card" so I don't think the Cackling Counterpart is necessary.

Forest, Avacyn's Pilgrim.
Forest, Strangleroot Geist, swing for 3.
Mountain, Infernal Plunge the Pilgrim, then using the mana generated cast a 2nd Infernal Plunge on the Geist, Now with 5 Mana, cast Trepanation Blade and equip to the returned undying Geist, Swing with Geist. Enemy player reveals 14 non land cards, so you deal 17 damage.

Let's get the ball rolling:

Forest, Young Wolf. (Reckless Waif would also work here.)
Attack with Wolf for 1 (19). Mountain, Infernal Plunge, Markov Blademaster. Hunger of the Howlpack on the Blademaster.
Furor of the Bitten on the Blademaster. Attack with Blademaster for 6 (13) and 7 (6) and Wolf for 2 (4). Mountain, Fling the Blademaster for 8 (-4).

This wins on turn 3 on the play, leaving you with no cards in hand.

Turn 1) Island, Delver of Secrets.
Turn 2) Reveal Dream Twist (Transform Delver of Secrets into Insectile Aberration), Forest, Wreath of Geists enchanting Insectile Aberration, Dream Twist (targeting self, milling 3 creatures). Attack with enchanted Insectile Aberration for 3+3=6 (13).
Turn 3) Forest, Wreath of Geists, Wreath of Geists, Dream Twist (targeting self, milling 3 more creatures), Attack for 6+6+6+3=21 (-8).
No cards in hand (total cards used 9) or remove Wreath of Geists, Dream Twist flashback the Dream Twist** instead of using a second copy in Turn 3) for 2 cards in hand, 6+6+3=15 (-2) life for opponent, and a more efficient less overkilly win.

Stacking Wreaths and Dream Twists is good value. I like it!

1 Mountain
2 Mountain, Immolating Souleater
3 Pay 18 life to pump up Souleater to a 10/1. Attack for 10. Fling Souleater for another 10.
This uses 4 cards

He limited this to cards in Innistrad, Dark Ascension and Avacyn Restored.

Mountain, Memnite, Infernal plunge, Immolating Souleater.
Mountain, Pay 18 life to pump Souleater to a 10/1, Swing for 10, Fling Souleater for 10 damage.

Immolating Souleater is from the wrong edition.


text:
Are cards of the same "rarity level" really equally rare in MTG?
In Magic the Gathering there are 4 rarity levels: common, uncommon, rare and mythical rare. In a booster pack you usually get 10 commons, 3 uncommons and 1 rare or 1 mythical rare. In Innistrad that changed a little. Instead of 10 commons you only get 9 and a dual-side card of random rarity. In addition you have the chance to get an additional foil card or a land or a token. As far as I know the cards who actually fill those card-slots are chosen randomly from the card-pool.
I wonder if all cards of the same "rarity level" are really equally rare within this card-pool. Lets take "Army of the Damned" and "Liliana of the Veil" for example. Both are mythical rare. When I buy a booster pack, are the changes of getting "Army of the Damned" the same as "Liliana of the Veil"? Did Wizards of the Coast ever made a public statement about that or are there statistics available?

Cool trivia: you can get 3 rares in a pack in Innistrad: your regular rare, a foil rare, and a flip rare. I saw it happen at the pre-release, it was pretty cool.

Haha, I opened Bloodline|Lord of Lineage, Reaper from the Abyss, and Foil Devil's Play in a draft, hardest first pick ever!

I believe that, these days, a card at one level of commonality is pretty much equally common (or rare) as a card at another level.  However, it's pretty hard to work out exactly what the chances of getting a card of a specific rarity is, due to the complications introduced by premium foils, and other maverick card slots such as Innistrad's double-faced cards, which are going to get a slot all of their own.  I dug up the following information from Wikipedia to demonstrate quite how arcane the system of putting together a modern booster pack is:

15 cards per booster: 1 rare, 3 uncommons and 11 commons; Core Set
  boosters contain a basic land as one of the commons. Starting with the
  Shards of Alara block, booster packs for both Core Sets and Expansions
  began to contain 1 land, 10 commons, 3 uncommons, either 1 rare (7/8
  chance) or 1 mythic rare (1/8 chance), and either a tip card (which
  explains the new rules in the set, such as exalted in the Alara Block
  or Infect in the Scars of Mirrodin Block) or a token (which is of a
  type produced by a card in the set). Also, roughly one in every four
  booster packs contain a foil card, which can be of any rarity,
  including basic land. Since foil cards replace a common, no matter
  what the rarity of the foil, it means that there is a chance that a
  booster pack could contain 2 rares, a rare and a mythic rare, or even
  2 mythic rares. Also, the presence of a foil card means that there is
  a chance that there are two of the same card in the booster pack (one
  foil and one regular), which would not occur otherwise.
Note: Innistrad boosters, first released in September of 2011, contain
  a slightly different proportion of cards due to the introduction of
  double-faced cards. In Innistrad boosters one of the 10 commons is
  replaced by a double-sided card. This double-sided card can be of any
  rarity and either regular or foil, with the likelihood of a specific
  card being present depending on its rarity. Also, there is roughly a
  3/4 chance that the basic land will be replaced by a checklist.
  Finally, non-double-sided foil cards may still be present, probably
  still in roughly 1/4 of the boosters.

I believe this means that in Innistrad, you could get a pack containing
3 Mythics - one in the normal rare slot, one in foil replacing a common,
and one in the double-faced card slot.  And of course, you still hear rumours of errors at the factory producing all-rare packs from time to time!
To answer your more specific question, though, I believe Wizards have print runs of commons, uncommons and rares, in which each card at a specific rarity is printed once per sheet; so in theory at least any given rare (or whatever) should occur exactly as often as any other given rate.  This wasn't always the case: in the old days you had things like "C1" and "C3" rarity, which meant that the first card would be printed only once per "common sheet", making it exactly three times as rare as a "C3", that is to say about as rare as an uncommon! There were also accidents of history, such as when only half of the Legends uncommon sheets were shipped to certain locations (such as the UK, where I lived at the time), making some uncommons easy to get hold of in my location, and some like gold dust...
As I say, I'm pretty sure they don't do this kind of thing any more though.  A rare is a rare is a rare... unless it's a mythic of course!

There are still rare exceptions to the "once per sheet" thing. In Rise of the Eldrazi, the two common Eldrazi, Hand of Emrakul and Ulamog's Crusher, were printed 1.5 times as often as the other commons (basically something like 2 cards in 3 common slots, alternating 2:1 and 1:2 on different sheets). That's why the set has 248 cards.

In your first sentence, don't you mean "pretty much equally common (or rare) as a card at the same level"?

First thing to understand is that magic boosters are not assembled randomly.  The cards are printed in sheets, cut up and packaged in order.  There's one sheet for the rares per set (although there may be more than one printed in slightly different order to thwart box mappers), and the sheets are 11 x 11, or 121 cards.  What's on them isn't super secret or anything, they turn up, Wizards gives them as thank-yous sometimes, or they show up as tournament prizes.
Anyway, at 121 cards for the rare sheet, you can see this actually come out in the set design, as a constraint on the designers is that they have to be able to print and package the cards!
Innistrad has 53 non-double faced rares and 15 non-double faced mythic rares.   53 * 2 rares on the sheet + 15 mythics on the sheet = 121 cards! Therefore there are 7 times more rares than mythic rares and a mythic rare is in roughly every 8th booster.
So in order for Army of the Damned to actually be more common than Lilliana of the Veil, that means Army of the Damned would be on the sheet twice, making some other rare a 'secret mythic!'  While anything is of course possible, deceiving customers like that in a way that will eventually come out when someone sees the sheet, just doesn't add up for a company like WOTC.
Remember, for every time you say "WTFMates, yet another Army of the Damned?"  some kid in a comic shop somewhere is whooping for joy over getting two Lilianas in two packs.  Partly from shop owners dumping the last of one box into another, messing with the distribution, and partly because once the boosters are made wizards does do some sort of pseudo random collating to get in the way of people who would "map" boxes based on the order of the print run.  This means you will occasionally get two of the same non-foil mythic in a single booster box.  (making it possibly look more common.)

Other answers have touched on modern boosters, so I thought I'd answer the question for the older stuff.
In older sets (prior to Exodus), there wasn't specifically a "rare" rarity level ("mythic" is, of course, an even newer invention in MtG than rare). Cards were printed on a common sheet or an uncommon sheet, and not all cards were printed the same number of times on each sheet!
Today, those cards' rarity is referred to by the sheet it was printed on and the number of times is was printed. For example, a C1 card was printed once on the common sheet, and U2 was printed twice on the uncommon sheet. U1 cards are generally considered the "rare" cards of their expansions. However, because these older sets were larger, a specific U1 was more rare than a specific rare today.
Trivia #1: There is one card printed at C11 -- Desert, from Arabian Nights.
Trivia #2: In the early days, the MtG developers wanted to obfuscate how rare the different cards were. Because of this, one of the Island cards in Alpha was a U1! A rare basic land, who would have thought?

Overall, most cards of the same rarity have the same frequency of occurring. As an exception, in sets with 101 commons, exactly 1 common is short printed and shows up 5 times for every 6 times each other common in the set would.
This is because there are 2 Print Sheets of 121 cards, Sheet A with 60 cards showing up twice and 1 showing once and Sheet B has 40 cards showing 3 times and the same card showing once. Sheet A and B are printed at a ratio of 3:2.
For sets containing double-faced cards, the double-faced cards use their own sheet. For example, in shadows over innistrad, a regular uncommon card would occur exactly 1/80 + 1/79 + 1/78 times per pack on average (3.8% of the time), while a double-faced uncommon would occur exactly 1/30 times per pack on average (3.3% of the time).
Both the double-sided uncommons and commons occur on the same sheet in SOI, as there are only 5 double-sided commons in the set. This is also assuming the double-sided uncommons occur 4 times per sheet, while commons 8 times per sheet, which creates the ratio closest to the regular ratio, the closest ratio on the other side would be uncommons 5 times per sheet, commons 4 times would have each unique uncommon show up more often than each unique common which is opposite of normal.

Although the cards are equally distributed by rarity, there have been times when issues involving sorting and packaging have made certain cards more likely to appear together, or in the same booster box, or even be more likely depending on the area of the country you are in.


text:
How do I deal with Enchantments while playing mono-red?
I have played different mono-red decks in the past and my main problem with all of them is playing against decks with strong enchantments (e.g. Circle of Protection: Red). As soon as this enchantment is out on the battlefield, I have lost. This can be played on turn 2, and my opponent can even mulligan to increase his chance of having this card in his starting hand.
While playing mono-red, I don't have Counterspells and enchantment destroyers. How do I handle these threats? I am looking for ideas legal in Standard, and legal in Legacy. "Red must be fast and win before enchantments are out" is not a good solution, because in the example above the enchantment can hit in round 2.

What Standard-legal enchantments are having trouble with, exactly?

Isn't the answer to 'How do I deal with X with mono-red?' always 'kill him or her before X has a chance to matter in the game' ;)

@adamjford : Leyline of Sanctity from M11 troubled my red shooter deck a lot, it basically is an instant lose if my opponent has it in his opening hand. After M11 leaves Standard, this will only haunt me in Extended and Legacy.

@Affe : I know, that's the usual response. But against a Circle of Protection in round 2 or a Leyline of Sanctity before the first round it is hard to land a killing blow earlier ;).

Keeping in mind that CoP's aren't in standard and often don't even make the sideboard (depending on current metagame) in other formats, I think "Kill them before it matters" Is a good strategy for red a lot of the time.  And keep in mind that the metagame is often a "rock-paper-scissors" type alot.  There will always be some deck where you will almost always against that deck and other decks where you would almost always win against that deck.

There are a few artifact answers to Enchantments in standard. Red will have access to those dealing with permanents, which are going to be slower. However, there are "ramp" cards in Standard for red that help you get them out more quickly.
Ratchet Bomb, can come out quickly, but takes time to "charge up" to the point where it can deal with more expensive enchantments. Although slow, it also deals with other permanents (eg. planeswalkers). If you get it out before the enchantment or planeswalker and charge it up, it can be a threat on the board causing your opponent to think twice before casting.
If you can ramp into a Spine of Ish Sah, say with a Geosurge on turn 4, you will be well on your way to victory, and getting rid of that pesky enchantment.
However, I think the most efficient way to deal with enchantments in standard, if you insist on mono-red, is to use the Sylvok Replica, and access green mana through dual lands  and/or a colourless ramp like Alloy Myr, Manalith or even Sphere of the Suns that also helps you power your X burn spells and getting bigger threats out more quickly.
But at that point you may as well just splash green dual lands or ramps and put Naturalize on the sideboard.
In Legacy, if it's Blue enchantments you're concerned about, Jaya Ballard, Task Mage is a great choice. Aura Barbs punishes those who dare use enchantments against you. Of course, Larry Niven's Disk has been the go-to solution for red burn decks since forever.
PS. I don't agree with this:

Red must be fast and win before enchantments are out" is not a good solution, because in the example above the enchantment can hit in round 2.

Meh, CoP:Red isn't in Standard anymore, and even in Legacy the opponent is unlikely to have enough mana to deal with all your threats if you have a red weenie swarm, or save some of that red magic for when he's tapped out. You also have colourless options.
Red decks still win because they're fast. They generally aren't afraid of many enchantments.

+1 for everything from the "PS" onwards.  Mono red doesn't have a serious problem with enchantments in Standard; the question is based on a really quite doubtful set of assumptions.

+1: OMG! I never thought about Ratchet Bomb, that's a great idea. Especially since I have 4 of them lying around already :). I will have to experiment with splashing other colors, although I prefer to keep my burn decks mono-colored. Using Geosurge and the Spine seems a little bit expensive to get rid of a single enchantment. Without any testing, I think I prefer Ratchet Bomb, especially against cheap enchantments.

@thesunneversets : How do you deal with Leyline of Sanctity if your deck contains a good amount of shooters? You can of course target enemy creatures and hope to do enough damage with your own, but in my experience I need to do some direct damage as well against a strong deck to be fast enough with mono-red.

@Demento: just point your burn at the opponent's creatures and then use your creatures to attack.

If you're genuinely that afraid of Circle of Protection: Red, fight fire with fire and resolve a Manabarbs or three; back in standard as of M12.
Alternatively, there are many, many red cards in the history of Magic that specify that their damage can't be prevented.  Banefire, Demonfire, Everlasting Torment, Excruciator, Flames of the Blood Hand, Flaring Pain, Leyline of Punishment, Lightning Surge, Unstable Footing, Urza's Rage...

+1 for unpreventable burn, especially for Legacy. The obvious solution to prevention effects hadn't occurred to me, alas. :)

+1 for the long list of cards with unpreventable damage. I will see which ones I can get my hands on to experiment with. Manabarbs is also interesting, although I have to test it to see how effective it is with my red decks.

For white enchantments, Anarchy should do the trick in Legacy.

This was my thought as well...

+1: Interesting card. Could be a useful sidedeck card for private play when I expect to be up against W.

+1: COPR is the only enchantment that can resonably prevent a red deck from winning.  That does not mean that a red mono deck is unbeatable just that a copr will pretty much beat one every time if you can not deal with it.

Chad: Actually, I generally have a much easier time going through CoP: Red (which stunts their own development a bit and can be overwhelmed) than, for instance, something like Warmth...

One of red (and black)'s weaknesses is not being able to deal with enchantments. If you're insistent on remaining mono-red, and you're playing with Legacy-legal cards, Chaos Warp is one of your only options.
With regards to (pre-Innistrad) Standard, this mono-red deck seems to do fine without enchantment removal. I'm not convinced that red's inability to deal with enchantments is a problem in this format.
However, in post-Innistrad Standard, if any decks with problem enchantments end up being top tier, one possibility is to play Boros (red/white) instead, and use Silverchase Fox as a sideboard card.

+1 for a good answer. Chaos Warp seems dangerous against some decks, but I can see me using it against a specific deck I am having problems with. Looking forward to Innistrad a lot - if I want to do something red again, I will consider Boros as an option.

Artifacts are the way to go in that case.
Phyrexian Revoker and Pithing Needle shut down COP:Red, and the Revoker itself can deal damage (and isn't affected by the Circle of Protection in the first place).
These cards are also good against other stuff like planeswalkers 'n 'at.

Welcome to Board & Card Games SE! I'm surprised no one else remembered Pithing Needle.

Various answers have given a lot of different ideas, so this is an attempt to put them all in one place.  These are some options for dealing with enchantments in mono-red:

The one red card that can remove arbitrary permanents: Chaos Warp
Colorless spot-removal, like Karn Liberated, Lux Cannon, Unstable Obelisk, or Ugin, the Ineffable
Colorless mass-removal, like Nevinyrral's Disk, All Is Dust, Ratchet Bomb, or Blast Zone
Splash another color, such as using Rootbound Crag and Game Trail to give you access to Naturalize or Back to Nature
If the enchantment has an activated ability (such as Circle of Protection: Red), you can prevent its ablity from being used, such as with Pithing Needle or Phyrexian Revoker
If the enchantment is a particular color, you can destroy it with cards like Anarchy or Jaya Ballard, Task Mage
If you are having problems targeting creatures (such as from Privileged Position), use Arcane Lighthouse
If you are having problems targeting players (such as from Leyline of Sanctity), use Stuffy Doll
If you are having problems from damage being prevented (such as from Circle of Protection: Red), use unpreventable damage, such as Everlasting Torment, Leyline of Punishment, Banefire, or Skullcrack

Mages' Contest is a red counter spell from Invasion. Instant, two red and one colorless. It reads: You and target spells controller bid life. you start the bidding with a high bid of 1. In turn order, each player may top the high bid. The bidding ends when the high bid stands. the highest bidder loses life equal to the high bid. If you win the bidding, counter target spell.

I've always played red. I just stick a couple of Nevinyrral's Disks in, sure its going to take all the creatures, artefacts and enchantments. Team it with Safe Haven then hide your biggest slugger before setting off the bomb. I use Bogardan Phoenix (comes back into play if placed into the graveyard) which allows me not to worry too much if I have to set it off and be left with nothing on the table. I use Fiery Mantle which comes back to your hand if it hits the graveyard and allows me to pump up any character to do some serious damage.
I've built my deck to be able to achieve 3-4 turn victories but also to go toe to toe for 30 turns with a white deck with protection. Inclusions of cards like Mirror Universe (swap life with your opponent) Zuran Orb (sacrifice a land: gain 2 life) will keep you plugging if things get dire.
hope that helps.

I had the same issue a while back so I sideboarded

4 Ratchet Bomb
4 Lux Cannon

and then so I would get out of the red damage play Volt Charge so I can, if not deal damage to the player, at least kill a creature and put counters on the Ratchet Bomb and/or Lux Cannon. The cannon is best because you can use it over and over again and if you have it in play and have no real threats keep pumping it it says remove 3 counters so you can simply end of his turn remove 3 counters, destroy one permanent, beginning of your turn destroy another one (even lands!). A Lux Cannon is a response to most threats. Its one setback is that it costs 4, and if you don't have Proliferate, it takes 3 turns to pump it.
In my deck I added more Proliferate, Tezzeret's Gambit is simply awesome. More than once I played Lux Cannon turn add counter passed next turn two Volt Charge, Proliferate 2 times, turn cannon destroy target permanent
to finish I have 8 UR dual lands that come into play untapped about 80% of the time,
so I can play Tezzeret's Gambit.
I have 3 Flashfreeze sideboarded because if my opponent has red or green he can Naturalize or Shatter the Ratchet Bomb or Lux Cannon before I can use it.

I edited this pretty heavily, but parts of it (esp. 2nd paragraph!) are still barely understandable...


text:
What caused "Liliana of the Veil" to double its price during a single week?
When Innistrad came out in the beginning of September 2011, the most expensive card was "Liliana of the Veil", selling for a little over $25.

This card kept this price for almost a month. On September 30th the price suddenly increased - a week later the price has already doubled. This graph shows the development.
What caused this sudden increase? Has someone discovered a combo that is really strong or is there a specific deck that runs well and requires Liliana? I am asking because I was lucky and got 2 of them from boosters and I wonder how I could put them to good use. I also want to use this example to learn about price development in trading card games as well.
Important Edit: Sorry guys, I am pretty stupid... Innistrad came out on September 30th, not in the beginning... Mixed that up somehow. The increase started the day Innistrad was released. Thanks to Ian for pointing that out.

Innistrad came out on Sep. 30th - everything before that was a prerelease order, and even then the average price was in the $30s.

@IanPugsley : +1, I don't know why I though Innistrad came out a month earlier. Especially since I bought my booster packs on the first day of the release.

It does seem a little incredible that it's only been 10 days since launch.

Magic cards rise in price when the pro players start analysing the new sets and proposing that certain cards will be key players in the new Standard.  I believe Liliana has attracted a lot of favourable press, and has appeared in some successful "Solar Flare" decklists at big events lately: of course people are going to jump on that bandwagon, in case she turns out to the be the next big tournament all-star Planeswalker.
Having said that, a cautionary word from channelfireball's Traderous Instinct column:

Liliana of the Veil
Over the past few days, Lilly has started making an end run toward
  Jace, the Mind Sculptor prices.
She’s out of stock both here and at Star City, and if you want her on
  eBay you’re going to have to spend at least $55.
If I had one for trade at the moment, I would be asking for around $70
  worth of stuff in return.
While many people immediately point to Jace as the obvious comp for
  Liliana, a better comparison is Tezzeret, Agent of Bolas. That card
  debuted around $45 retail, and had fallen to around $30-$35 by the
  first weekend it was tournament legal. The deck performed well, and
  the card gained $25-$30 in value overnight.
Yeah, people REALLY don’t want to miss “the next Jace.”
Just like Tezzeret, though, Liliana is REALLY narrow. She is currently
  seeing Standard play, and I don’t expect that to change, but she
  doesn’t draw cards, bounce creatures, lock your opponent out of the
  game, and then win the game like Jace does.
The thing is, though, Magic players like to have fun – even tournament
  players. And for many Spikes, fun is roughly equivalent to playing the
  most wonky, slow, toolsy control deck that it’s possible to crush the
  opposition with.
Much like mono black control, people REALLY want Solar Flare style
  decks to be good. So when two show up in the top 16 at an open, game
  on!
Even if Solar Flare is tier-1, there’s no way Liliana holds a $60+
  price tag for long. She’s only there because she’s a planeswalker and
  we still haven’t really figure out how to value those yet, five years
  after their inception. I recommend that you sell on Liliana right now
  and buy back in when the hype has died down somewhat.

I pitched mine for $55 the other day, and I'm a happy camper.  There's no way she'll maintain.

It's kinda funny reading this two years later. Not so much because of the price -- her initial $50 price didn't hold, but it's rising back up pretty aggressively, and she will clearly be a lasting card like Dark Confidant or Thoughtseize -- but because Chas' evaluation of her role turned out to be dead wrong.

It took a long time for her role as one of (if not) the best planeswalkers in modern to solidify. I traded off mine towards the end of her standard run, and then bought back in (at a slight loss on the last 1 or 2 copies) as she became a modern staple, very glad I did as she has almost tripled in price since then.

Looking back at her 6+ years later, as she is at around $95 dollars now. It just goes to show how hard it can be to predict card prices.

The main reasons are that some big decks in the current metagame are mono-black, UB control, and Solar Flare - all of them will run her.  A planeswalker that protects herself and whose discard is particularly useful in the current block (and has convereted mana cost of 3) is very, very playable.
Solar Flare is the one people seem to be liking quite a bit - the combination of things like Sun Titan and Liliana (along with Unburial Rites or Forbidden Alchemy for discard/flashback fodder) is actually very mean.  So yeah, the combination of good Solar Flare decks and it's playability in the current metagame have driven it up pretty quickly.

+1: I built a Solar Flare deck myself today and my first games went really well. A fun deck to play - I can see why it got popular so fast.