text:
Nahiri, the Lithomancer + Skullclamp + Cathar's Crusade
The following situation came up in an EDH game and I'm not sure what is supposed to happen. I control a Cathars' Crusade, Nahiri, the Lithomancer and a Skullclamp on the battlefield.
I activate Nahiri's +2 and equip the Skullclamp to the 1/1 Kor token that is created. Does the 1/1 get the passive +1/+1 bonus from Cathars' Crusade before or after the Skullclamp gets equipped? This determines whether I get to kill my own token to draw cards or not.

I notice you use the word "passive" when describing Cathars' Crusade. It is a passive, in that it's not an activated ability, but calling it that can be confusing. The important distinction is between a static ability and a triggered ability (both of which are passive). If Cathars' said "Each creature you control enters the battlefield with a +1/+1 counter." it would be static, and would keep the Kor in question alive. Because it uses the word "when*" it's a triggered ability that uses the stack.

You will lose your token because the equipment is attached when instructed, but triggered abilities use the stack. On the plus side, you will be able to draw cards.

You activate Nahiri's +2. It goes on the stack.
[Players get priority]
Nahiri's +2 resolves:

Put a 1/1 white Kor Soldier creature token onto the battlefield. Cathars' Crusade's ability triggers.
You may attach an Equipment to the Kor Soldier at this point. Say you attach Skullclamp to it.

The Kor Soldier with Skullclamp equipped dies here. Skullclamp's triggered ability triggers.
Cathars' Crusade's ability and Skullclamp's triggered ability are placed on the stack in the order of your choice. The order doesn't matter here, so say you place Skullclamp's triggered ability on the stack first.
[Players get priority]
Cathars' Crusade's ability resolves:

Put a +1/+1 counter on each creature you control.

[Players get priority]
Skullclamp's ability resolves:

Draw two cards.

Glorious Anthem would have saved your token since the token would be affected by Glorious Anthem's continuous effect at all times both are on the battlefield.

This is because Cathar's is triggered, correct? [mtg:Glorious Anthem] would keep it alive?

@deworde Yes. Glorious Anthem is a static ability and so applies constantly; i.e. it is being already applied whenever state-based actions are checked. This also works because Skullclamp is attached as the token is created. Attaching Skullclamp normally would happen after the triggered ability resolves.

The token dies, and you get to draw the cards. Here's how it works, specifically:

You activate Nahiri's +2 ability. The ability resolves, you put a Kor token into play, and attach the Skullclamp to it.
Cathars' Crusade's triggered ability goes on the stack.
State-based actions are calculated. The token has 0 toughness, so it dies. Skullclamp's triggered ability goes on the stack.
Skullclamp's ability resolves and you draw two cards.
Cathars' Crusade's ability resolves, and each creature you control gets a +1/+1 counter. The token you just made doesn't get a counter because it is already dead.


text:
If I gain control of an equipped creature, do I keep the equipment when it dies?
If I use Act of Treason on an equipped creature then sacrifice it while under my control, can I equip the equipment to one of my creatures during the same turn or does the equipment go back to the original owner the moment I sacrifice the creature?

No.
You don't control the equipment.
Control of the equipment is separate to control of the creature. The same is true for attached auras, or any other kind of permanent. If something gives you control of one, you only control that one unless stated otherwise.
If timing allowed it (e.g. if you took control of the creature permanently, or with an instant-speed equip ability such as Cranial Plating), the equipment's controller could attach it to something else.
However, a lot of equipment cards give abilities to the creature. For example, Hankyu gives the equipped creature the ability to add or remove counters on the Hankyu. You could, for example, tap the creature to waste any counters they built up.
Conversely, Umezawa's Jitte's ability is on the equipment itself. The controlled creature's attacks would generate counters for the equipment, but the controller of the Jitte would be the one to activate its ability.
If you gained control of the equipment (e.g. Steal Artifact), it would remain attached to their creature, but you could use the equip ability to attach it to something else.

Anything attached to a permanent that you can control of does not change ownership of the equipped object. Equipment, Aura's, and Fortifications remain under their owner's control unless there is a control changing effect acting on them as well.
You'll notice that there are rulings on cards like Demonic Appetite, an enchantment that can only enchant a creature you control. It specifically address what happens if you're opponent gains control of the creature or of the enchantment, but not both.
Some sources from the Comprehensive Rules

301.5d An Equipment’s controller is separate from the equipped creature’s controller; the two need not be the same. Changing control of the creature doesn’t change control of the Equipment, and vice versa. Only the Equipment’s controller can activate its abilities. However, if the Equipment grants an ability to the equipped creature (with “gains” or “has”), the equipped creature’s controller is the only one who can activate that ability.
303.4e An Aura’s controller is separate from the enchanted object’s controller or the enchanted
player; the two need not be the same. If an Aura enchants an object, changing control of the
object doesn’t change control of the Aura, and vice versa. Only the Aura’s controller can
activate its abilities. However, if the Aura grants an ability to the enchanted object (with “gains”
or “has”), the enchanted object’s controller is the only one who can activate that ability.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Do effects that give +1/+1 counters restore those counters after they're removed?
Say you have a creature A that gives your creatures a +1/+1 counter, and a creature B you control with that counter on it. If that counter on B is removed, does A restore the counter on the following turn?
For example, Mikaeus, the Unhallowed (creature A) is on the battlefield (giving all non-humans +1/+1 and Undying), and Noosegraf Mob (creature B) enters the battlefield (with 5 +1/+1 counters) and gets the counter from Mikaeus. When a spell is played, a counter is removed from Noosegraf and I put a 2/2 zombie onto the battlefield. In my following turn, is the counter from Mikaeus put back onto Noosegraf Mob?

@ikegami I believe that's a complete answer; the question is being asked out of a confusion between the two, and is completely resolved by understanding the difference.

@ikegami Yes, but the "returning counters" question is based on a case with a static +1/+1 effect rather than a single event that adds counters. By understanding that Mikaeus doesn't give counters, there's no longer a need to ask about returning the counter he provides.

@ikegami But the question didn't ask about those (except with the modified title). The original question was "does the counter from mikaeus go back onto noosegraf"? Or in a general case "do the counters from a static +1/+1 effect get replaced after they're removed"? There's no indication of any confusion about the way you remove counters from a Noosegraf on its own.

There's every indication that they think that a specific counter is put back on, because that "counter" is created through a static effect. Under the misinterpretation, Mikaeus permanently says it "has a counter" even after that counter is removed. The question explicitly talks about the case where a counter is removed that it received from an anthem-type effect. If anthem-type effects were counters, it would be entirely reasonable to ask if they return or persist through being removed. I believe that misunderstanding is the basis for the question.

I'm confident in my interpretation of what the OP is asking. They're asking about whether a very particular counter is put back on the Mob. "does that counter come back from the other creature"? "does the counter from mikaeus go back onto noosegraf"? It's clear that the OP thinks Mikaeus might track and restore the counter it provides. However, we know that Mikaeus doesn't provide a counter at all.

The linked question doesn't need to address the specific case because it addresses the misunderstanding. Once that's cleared up, there's no case in Magic where a creature gives a counter as a static, continuous effect.

Let us continue this discussion in chat.

First of all, Mikaeus doesn't grant any counters. This is covered by Are +1/+1 counters different from +1/+1 effects?
So you start with a 6/6 Mob with undying and 5 +1/+1 counters.
When a player casts a spell, the Mob will lose a counter, and you will gain a 3/3 zombie with undying. The counter is not placed on the zombie; it simply ceases to exist, so the physical object representing it is removed from the game.
Nothing causes the Mob to gain tokens when a zombie dies. This means you can create at most 5 zombies. But thanks to Mikaeus, the Mob won't be destroyed when it loses all of its counters (since it'll still be 1/1).

It's important to note the difference between +1/+1 as a static buff, and +1/+1 counters - Mikaeus, the Unhallowed provides a static buff (which isn't represented by a counter, but instead "just there"), whereas Noosegraf Mob actually has counters placed on it.
The +1/+1 that Mikaeus, the Unhallowed provides can't be removed by Noosegraf Mob's ability, and neither will you get a Zombie from it. It will, however, allow Noosegraf Mob to survive on the battlefield as a 1/1 creature after all of it's counters have been removed.

@ikegami: Before the title change, there was no reason to assume that there was any confusion about that, and I still find it hard to see that this would be what the questioner intended to ask.

@ikegami: The way they asked that implies a connection to Mikaeus's ability, the way I understand it, and as I said, I didn't see any reason to assume anything in this question isn't about Mikaeus before the title change. That said, the original question was rather inconclusive in a few ways, and you may well be right with your conclusions, so I guess we are left guessing, or waiting for another action of the questioner...

@ikegami: Well, that's why I earlier said "I still find it hard to see that this would be what the questioner intended to ask", implying that there is an ever-so-slight possibility that you were reading a bit too much into it. If you look at the edit history, it's not that I haven't considered the possibility, just figured it was a long shot to assume that's the core of the question from what was there, seeing as it would've changed the nature of the question entirely - much like your edit possibly did. Again - it seems to me that only the questioner can provide any insight to that.

Let us continue this discussion in chat.

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


text:
Are the Bay of Ice and the Shivering Sea areas connected?
Since Westeros is an island, the seas should continue around the north. Can ships move around the edge of the top of the map, between the Bay of Ice and the Shivering Sea?

No.
There's no movement outside of the board, and no justification in the rules for these areas to be treated differently. The two sea regions you mention aren't adjacent to each other, nor are they the same region, so ships can't move between them.
As for the lore behind this, the Game of Thrones world is big, and not thoroughly explored. It's likely too dangerous or lengthy to sail around the North pole. The wiki says:

The maesters also understand that theoretically, a ship should be able to circumnavigate the globe, by continuing to sail west from Westeros until they come around to Yi Ti on the other side, then continue going west until they return to Westeros. They also understand that a ship could sail north over the pole and reach Yi Ti on the other side—provided that there is no landmass or arctic ice in the way. However, as of yet no ship has ever successfully circumnavigated the globe. Ships that have sailed west of Westeros and returned report finding only a vast ocean, and other ships simply never returned. Even the far south of Sothoryos and eastern end of Essos are unknown to men in Westeros. There have been some attempts to navigate north over the pole, but all have ended in failure due to dangerous ice and other unknown dangers.

Oh thank you very much. I have played the wrong way !!

Wow, you actually played it like that? What bit in the rules made you think that you could do that?

I just think that the Westeros is a island lol


text:
Reanimating a creature with X in its cost
Say I reanimate an Apocalypse Hydra using Rise from the Grave. How strong is the hydra?

It would enter with 0 +1/+1 counters, then get put back into the graveyard for having 0 toughness as a state-based action.

107.3f If a card in any zone other than the stack has an {X} in its mana cost, the value of {X} is treated as 0, even if the value of X is defined somewhere within its text.


text:
Do you waste your attack if you try to attack a monster that can't be attacked?
In haunt 28, the Traitor's Tome says:

The Revolver and other Speed attacks can't be used against the Demon Lord.

The Secrets of Survival book doesn't mention this. If a hero tries to make a speed attack against the Demon Lord, do they waste their attack, or do I have to tell them about this before they try?

You have to tell them, but only when they're about to try.
They don't waste an attack by making a speed attack, because they can't make a speed attack. As soon as the hero announces that they're going to make a speed attack, the traitor must tell them that they can't, and they carry on with their turn. However, they may have already wasted some time getting into a position to find this out.
Unfortunately due to how Betrayal is made, there's no rules reference to clarify this specifically. While it's not identical, there's a similarity in the "Make an Attack" rules (page 13):

You can’t use a trait to attack an opponent who doesn’t have that trait. For instance, if a monster doesn’t have Sanity, you can’t make a Sanity attack against it.

It's not that the attack just fails; you can't even try it. You might not know that the monster doesn't have Sanity until you tried to attack with it, and the traitor says "you can't, it doesn't have Sanity." In that case, you haven't made an attack yet.
This is distinct from monsters that are immune to, or can't be damaged/stunned by a particular type of attack, as they can still be attacked in that way.


text:
Does the Valkyrie have to win to earn extra glory?
The Valkyrie monster upgrade card states, "Gain 2 glory per enemy figure destroyed in battle with this monster."
It does not say "per enemy figure destroyed in a battle with this monster."
It does not say "per enemy figure destroyed in battle by this monster."
I believed it to mean "destroyed with this monster", meaning that the Valkyrie has to be on the winning side of the battle to claim the glory.
It was argued that it meant in any battle involving the Valkyrie, all casualties gave the player 2 glory, even if the Valkyrie lost and was sent to Valhalla. In combination with Frigga's Domain, the Valkyrie can become incredibly powerful. Returning from the dead (for 1 rage!), your Valkyrie could lose in another battle, claiming 2 glory per destroyed figure.
How does the Valkyrie monster upgrade for Blood Rage work?

Never assume that you're playing Blood Rage wrong just because something seems "broken".  The entire game is based around so many "broken" combos existing that they balance each other out.

Also, dropping the Valkyrie repeatedly is unlikely to earn you many extra points, since a big battle with lots of enemies dying makes it less likely that your opponents will have the figures for another big battle with lots of enemies dying. If it's just the Valkyrie dying, you're just wasting rage and giving points to the opponent.

The player controlling Valkyrie will gain points for all destroyed figures in that battle, even if it is destroyed.
From the official FAQ on CMON's site:

Q. Does the Valkyrie (gain 2 Glory per enemy figure destroyed) get glory for destroyed enemy units if she is destroyed in the course of a battle?
A. Yes, with the Valkyrie you get Glory for all figures destroyed from the Call to Battle to the battle’s Resolution, even if she is destroyed at any point during the battle.


text:
What should we do if we realise the Queen should have been on the board?
We forgot to return the Queen to the board after my opponent failed to cover it, and continued to play. What's the correct way to rectify this?

Treat it as covered.
According to these rules:

96) If the Queen is pocketed by a stroke and is not covered, the Queen shall be taken out for placing. If not noticed by the Umpire or by the opponent, before the next stroke is made, the Queen shall be recorded as properly covered.

In a casual setting, however, I'd take it out and place it before your next turn (so you get the next shot on it).

What is the source of these rules? Are they from a Carrom publisher or just something that some guy made up? The bright green website doesn't inspire a lot of confidence. He mentions some books, but I don't know anything about them.

They line up with these http://www.carrom.org/icf/?page=3&subcat=20 but that site seems to be broken on additional pages. I've seen the same rules in a few places previously, but it's been a while since I looked.around.


text:
Where does Hexpion go being under the Backup Copy?
I've got a Hexpion with a Backup Copy "installed" on it. The Hexpion gets destroyed. Where does it go? To archives or on the top of the deck?

The active player decides which order the destroyed abilities resolve in.
Because the creature has two separate destroyed abilities, they both trigger at the same time.
If Backup Copy resolves first, you'll (probably) have Hexpion in archive:

Backup Copy moves Hexpion to the top of the deck.
Hexpion's ability can't track it anymore (see the rule from page 13 below), so you just do the second part of it (archive the top card of the deck). As long as nothing weird has happened, that card just so happens to be Hexpion!

If Hexpion resolves first, Backup Copy does nothing:

Hexpion puts itself and the top card of the deck into the archive.
Backup Copy resolves, but can't interact with Hexpion because it's been moved to a hidden zone.

From the rules, page 9:

ACTIVE PLAYER
The active player is the player taking the current turn. The active player makes all necessary decisions for all card abilities or timing conflicts that need to resolve during their turn.

Page 13:

When a card moves from an in–play zone to an out-of-play zone in which the identities of cards are hidden from the opponent (such as a player’s hand, deck, or archives), any pending effects that are currently or about to interact with that card no longer do so, unless a card effect explicitly states that it interacts with that zone.

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


text:
South African and Mozambican board games?
As I love both traveling and board games, I always try to buy a local made game with roots from, or great popularity, in that specific country/region.
E.g. I got Shogi when I was in Japan, and Dominoes from a trip to Cuba.
Now I'm going to South Africa and Mozambique and would like to get my hands on a local game.
Do you know of any board games that are native to South Africa or Mozambique, besides different types of Mancala?
I already have a Mancala-type game called Omweso from Zambia, but I guess I wouldn't turn down a more original type Mancala from Mozambique if that's the only alternative.

Welcome to Board Games Stack Exchange! This looks like a recommendation question, which is not within the scope of questions defined in our help center. Recommendation questions usually become obsolete pretty quickly and it's hard to pick a "right" answer out of multiple people's suggestions. Still, we'll be happy to answer any other questions you have about board games!

If you are looking for localised versions of games through Africa another option to the Mancala family are games of the Nine Men's Morris family, which potentially migrated down through Africa at the height of the Roman empire.
For South Africa there is Muravava or Umlabalaba, which is closer to Twelve Men's Morris in that there are more moves available.
In Mozambique you'll find Gulugufe, which is played on two intersecting triangles. There is also Ntchuva, which is the local variant of Mancala.

This is great! Thanks. I definitely keep my eyes open for one of these games!

I can reccomend 30 seconds. It is a SA boardgame in the more western approach. You used to get those in checkers supermarks and picnpays but Im not sure if they still sell them


text:
What happens if I pocket the Striker at the same time as I cover the Queen?
My teammate pocketed the Queen. Then, when making a strike to cover the Queen, he pocketed a piece correctly but also pocketed the Striker. What's the outcome?

This question is incorrectly tagged. I do not believe it has anything to do with Android: Netrunner.

Sorry for wrong tag.. but I need the answer please

The game will continue, returning the pocketed C/m along with a penalty. If the stroke was proper, your turn continues with you trying to cover the Queen. From the ICF rules:

a) While covering the Queen by a proper stroke, if a player pockets the striker along with his C/m, the C/m so pocketed plus one
  C/m as Due shall be taken out for placing by the opponent. The player shall however, continue his turn. If in that subsequent stroke no C/m of the player is pocketed, the Queen shall not be considered to have been covered and it shall be taken out for placing.
b) While covering the Queen, if a player pockets his Striker along with his C/m by an improper stroke, the C/m so pocketed plus two C/m as due and penalty shall be taken out for placing by the opponent and the player shall lose his turn. The Queen shall be taken out for placing by the Umpire.

*This is the same answer I used for this question, but it hasn't been accepted so I can't mark duplicate.


text:
Does Copperhorn Scout untap land creatures?
I have an Ambush Commander out which makes each forest that I control a 1/1 green Elf creature that's still a land.
If I have four tapped Forests and I attack with Copperhorn Scout, does this cause the land creatures to untap (since they are creatures), or would they stay tapped (since they are lands)?

They are creatures, therefore they untap. If the ability doesn't specify that it applies only to nonland creatures, then it applies to all creatures, regardless of other types they might have.


text:
Pocketing the striker while covering the Queen
Say I'm white, and the board has 1 white, 3 black and 1 Queen left on it.
I pocket the Queen. Then, when covering the Queen, I pocket both the remaining white piece along with the striker.
What is the outcome?

Think you've used the wrong tag.

Please suggest and guide me in carom rules

Mr Samthere yes ur right. But what will be outcome ?

Two of your pocketed pieces are removed and placed on the board. You continue playing, trying to cover the queen.
I'm referring to the ICF Laws of Carrom:

101) a) While covering the Queen by a proper stroke, if a player pockets the striker along with his C/m, the C/m so pocketed plus one C/m as Due shall be taken out for placing by the opponent. The player shall however, continue his turn. If in that subsequent stroke no C/m of the player is pocketed, the Queen shall not be considered to have been covered and it shall be taken out for placing.


text:
Can Debt tokens be taken to pay any coin costs?
According to the Cities rules, players can lose coins and incur debts. The rules mention that a player can either pay coins or take Debt tokens.
Does this allow a player to choose to take Debt tokens in lieu of paying coins in general (for example, if a card has coins in its cost)?
Alternatively, is it only possible to incur debts when a card explicitly requires a player to discard coins?

You may only take Debt tokens if a card with the Debt icon would cause a loss of coins for you.
So you may not decide to take Debt tokens instead of paying for a building (or for anything else).
Source
The rules for the Cities expansion explain the Debt mechanic on page 4. The first paragraph starts with "A card with the [Debt icon] symbol", and no other condition is mentioned.
The FAQ (also linked from the answer linked above) contains this Q & A:

Q: Can a player chooses to gain debt tokens?
  A: No, only the black cards with this symbol [Debt icon] can cause players to incur debts.


text:
How are creature token cards used?
Me and my mom had a small conflict over this. Can you summon token creatures if you have the token, without a card effect that says to use it? I don't think so, but I don't know how to verify this.

Are you asking if you can just create token creatures at will? As in... I want an Elephant token, okay, I have one? Or is there a specific card you're trying to ask about?

More broadly, given your previous question about discarding, maybe it'd be useful for you to think of the rules like this: there are certain very basic things the game itself lets you do via the phases/steps of the turn (untapping, drawing for the turn, attacking/blocking, etc), and beyond that, everything that you can do is on the cards themselves. Want to discard a card, besides discarding down to 7 at the end of the turn? You need a card to let you do it. Want a creature? You need a creature card, or a card that produces tokens. There aren't really any "secret" things you can do.

I suspect the situation involved either using token cards as cards in a deck, or in trying to play tokens because they were [physically] available. I've edited the question to reflect this and voted to reopen.

Can I summon a token?
No.
The "standard" way to cast a spell is to follow these steps (this is an extremely condensed version of comprehensive rule 601.2):

Take the card out of your hand and put it on the stack
Announce the spell (e.g., "I cast Elvish Mystic.")
Pay the costs of the spell

Tokens are not real Magic: the Gathering cards. They cannot exist in your hand. They do not have mana costs. You cannot add tokens to your deck. The rules simply do not allow you to cast them.
What are "tokens", exactly?
Tokens are markers that represent permanents.

110.5. Some effects put tokens onto the battlefield. A token is a marker used to represent any permanent that isn’t represented by a card.

How are tokens created?
It goes something like this:

You cast spells and activate abilities.
Spells and abilities create effects.
Effects create tokens.

What about those cards that come with booster packs that look kinda like real cards?
Those are tokens, and again, they are not real Magic: the Gathering cards. They exist only to give you, the player, something to use as a marker. They usually look like the thing they are representing, which makes them far more player-friendly than, for example, a die, or a piece of torn paper. You can't exactly turn a die sideways to show that it is tapped.

Sweet thx now I can brag that I was right lol

I think your last point (What about those cards that come with booster packs that look kinda like real cards?) greatly clears up what could be a source of confusion for new players.


text:
Identify a card game where players are asked questions about life situations
Loved playing a board game back in early 90s. On your turn, you would pick a card which asked various questions on life situations. Then you had to pick someone playing who you thought the card would best apply to.
Examples:

Who's most likely to commit murder.
Who's most likely to have an affair.
Who's the kindest person here.

Everyone else playing had to make their guess and then you would read out your choice. Made for a lot of debate.
Loved it and would love to try and find it again but cannot remember what it's called. Can anyone please help? Thanks all.

Could it be one of the ones mentioned here?

Why would this question be marked as a duplicate of /27806 when the criteria are different?

In A Question of Scruples, each player is dealt several cards which pose ethical questions, along with a single answer card (YES, NO, DEPENDS). The goal is to be the first to empty your hand of question cards.
The question cards pose a range of hypothetical scenarios, in the general format of "You find a wallet with £50 in it. Do you keep the money?"
On a player's turn, they pick a question in their hand and try to choose who to ask in order to receive the answer written on their card. If it does, the asker discards the question card; if not they replace it with a new one.
After the answer, the asker or other players have the opportunity to challenge the answer. If so, the challenger presents an argument as to why the target's answer would have been a different one, and the target has a chance to rebut it. The rest of the table votes, and the winner of the challenge passes a question card to the loser.
For example, if the target answered NO, the asker (or another player) could challenge, arguing that the answer should instead be DEPENDS; "If there wasn't ID in the wallet I don't think you'd try to find out who owned it." To this, the target responds, "If I couldn't tell whose it was I'd turn it in to the police." The remaining players then vote on who should win, based either on which they think is more likely from their knowledge of the player, or on whose argument was better presented.

I'm assuming this game an English-language party game printed in the United States, because that's what I know best, but variants of the "who would X" mechanic have been published for decades in many countries.  That said, searching BoardGameGeek for party games with social mechanics (particularly voting on other players) and limiting the list of games to those published in the USA from 1970 to 1999 gives four likely candidates:
True Colors (1990):  Cards show a question, and you vote on who best fits it - and try to bet how many players will choose you.  Questions are things like "WHO would still clip coupons after winning five million dollars in the lottery?" and "Flirting is an art, WHO is the undeniable expert?"  Has been published under other names and in several art styles, the link shows the box and components from the 1990 Pressman edition.  Closest match in mechanics and publication date.
The Ungame (1973):  This roll-and-move "board game" is more about explaining yourself to other players or discussing other players.  Questions include "Talk about a happy marriage." and "Share a childhood experience with death."  Not the closest match for mechanics or publication date, but it sold like hotcakes so worth mentioning.
Family: The Game (1990):  A board game about dealing dirty laundry about family members, questions include things like "When it comes to smelly feet, our family's champion would have to be _____!"  Not a very popular game and it doesn't use cards, but it's otherwise a very close match for mechanics.
Who Said That? (1998):  A card-based board game, everyone writes an answer to a question like "You're in a bar and find a wallet full of money, what do you do?" and you try to guess who gave what answer.  Close match in mechanics but published a few years after the "early 90s."
Speaking personally, this is also how most of my games of Nomic and 1000 Blank White Cards end up, but neither game has set cards.


text:
Can a player change perspective after entering the center?
In the game ...and then we held hands, after the first player enters the center, is he allowed to change perspective (change which side of the cards can be used)?
Normally when the player ends his turn in the middle of the board, he is allowed to choose if he is going to change perspective. However, the rules says:

If at the end of a turn the player’s token is located on a node on the middle line (i.e., in neither half of the board), the player may choose whether to change perspective or not, deciding whether to do this without looking at the covered halves of the emotion cards.

Is the center considered a node on the middle? And so, after the first player enters the center, can he change the visible side of the cards in order to help the other player?
Thank you.

The game is called ...and then we held hands

Thanks, I didn't realise that was the game name! I've added a tag for it.

I´ve sent an e-mail to Ludicreations and this is what they´ve replied:
"yes, you are allowed to change perspective after entering the center."


text:
What happens to the cards revealed when building a tunnel?
What happens to the 3 cards that are turned up when claiming a tunnel on the Switzerland map? Are they placed back on top of the draw pile or are they placed at the bottom of the draw pile or are they discarded?
There's no information in the rules about it.

They're discarded.
From the Switzerland rules, page 2:

The three Train Car cards revealed for the Tunnel are discarded.

Note that train cards are never put on the bottom of the draw pile. Only when the draw pile is empty does the discard get shuffled to replace it.

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


text:
What happens if I pocket both my own coin and my opponent's while covering the Queen?
I pocketed the Queen, and then in the covering strike I pocketed a coin of each player. What happens?

Can you please tell which game. The "identify-this-game" does not look apropriate here.

Could you confirm the game is indeed Carrom?

Possible duplicate of What happens in these end-game situations?

@GendoIkari I don't think it's a duplicate of that as it can happen at times when the game isn't ending (the same question with "last coin" would be).

@Samthere Ok. The original question said "who will win" so I assumed it was the end of the game; but I know nothing about Carrom.

@GendoIkari Ah I see your point, I read that as asking "who wins the situation/who covers the queen", but your way is feasible too.

Under normal circumstances, you count as having covered the Queen, but your opponent has a coin pocketed for free and your turn ends.
If the Striker was pocketed with it, you would pay the penalty for pocketing the Striker and then try to cover it again. However, since you pocketed the opponent's coin, you can't take another turn, so the Queen is put back on the board.
If it was one player's last coin, that player wins.
If it was both players' last coin, you win. If the Striker was pocketed with it, you lose.


text:
Does pocketing the Queen at the start of the game end the game immediately?
What happens if the Queen is pocketed at the break? Is that the end of the game, or otherwise how does play continue?

I’m guessing that this is about Carrom? You should use the tags to give the name of the game you are asking about. I’ve edited accordingly, feel free to edit again to add more detail or fix the tags.

No.
For full rules look here.
Firstly, the Queen being pocketed doesn't end the game under normal circumstances anyway. It would only end the game if you pocketed the Queen and your last piece at the same time.
You can only pocket (and then cover) the Queen once you have at least one piece pocketed. If you pocket the Queen without this, it's returned to the board and your turn ends.
If you pocket your first piece at the same time as the Queen, you then play to cover the Queen normally.
If you already have pieces pocketed and you pocket a piece at the same time as the Queen, the Queen is covered.
If you pocket your first piece plus one more piece at the same time as the Queen, the Queen is covered.


text:
3 Missiles in a Single Combat packet - how should this sticker be treated?
3 Missiles in a Single Combat packet spoilers in this question:

 Does the mutant faction gain 1 troop after each turn in the Fallout Zone territory like it does in biohazard territories? We have a different opinion of “treat it like a biohazard” and the rule where mutant faction gains a army in biohazard scars.

Yes.
3 Missiles in a Single Combat packet spoilers:

 Mutants ignore the troop-loss effects of the Fallout Zone and treat it like a biohazard. Mutants gain a troop at the end of the turn in a biohazard, so they gain a troop at the end of the turn in the Fallout Zone.


text:
How should damage counters be put on a Pokémon?
Who gets to choose how damage counters get put on, or are there rules for it?
I have a Primeape with the attack:

Karate Chop
  Does 80 damage minus 10 damage for each damage counter on this Pokémon.

If it has 50 damage on it in five 10-damage counters, that attack will do 30 damage, but can I combine the 50 damage into one 50-damage counter so that it does 70 damage?

Switch when you need to? I don't think it matters how many counters are on a card as long as the total is correct.

@JoeW I believe OP is reading the ability as you use the number, not the value, of counters to determine Karate Chop, so by their reading changing to a single 50 point counter would up the damage by 40 from five 10 point counters.

@Andrew That is something that would be critical to have in the question as it would clarify what the real question is. As it stands it appears to be just about tracking damage on the card rather then asking about the number of counters on a card.

@JoeW the very first line is about the primape ability

@Andrew That may be the case but it should still include why he is asking. From my reading of the question it seems that it is just asking about consolidating counters and not that it is about how the consolidated counters work with that ability. From my reading and understanding is a 50 point counter is treated the same as  five 10 point counters so I didn't fully understand what was being asked and it appears you are making an assumption about what is being asked.

I am asking should i use a 50hp counter or 5 10hp counters

Primeape from Plasma Freeze has this ability, Karate Chop, however the ability doesn't care if you consolidate counters into something else like higher value counters or dice, counters as referred to by this are the standard 10 damage counter. Changing to some other method to show the 50 damage on the primeape does not change the effect of the ability, effectively the ability does 80-[the total damage Primape has taken].
Generally though I would suggest using Dice to mark damage, it's a lot simpler to have 2d6 on the card than it is to cover it with 8 counters (as the 9th would knock it out) This is however an opinion there, and temper it with how things are enforced where you play and by your opponents.

So i should count every 10dmg as it's own counter. No matter what sort of dmg counter i use? If i took 80dmg i would have 8 counters correct?

@unicornturtle for the purposes of an ability like karate chop, absolutely. The way you represent the damage isnt supposed to matter for karate chop, saying it this way just makes it easier for younger players to handle the math.

oh ok.. is this the same for cards that say place one counter on the enemy?

@unicornturtle Yes, if something is placing one damage counter on a pokemon, that is a single 10 point damage counter.

Yes you may, damage counters are only used to denote if the pokemon card still have enough HP to keep fighting. If you have watched official tournaments, you may notice they would rather use dice to show the damage counters since it require less component. Each die can be used for 6 different damage values. You can rotate the face of the dice to denote the damage (x10pts). It's more efficient since most tournament pokemon have huge HP. So two or more dice is enough for each pokemon instead of 20 or more 10pt counter tokens.

So when the abilities say something about a counter, they are referring to 10 dmg right?


text:
What information is shared when using the Gate or the Divine Theater wonder?
In the Pantheon expansion, if you use the Gate or the Divine Theater wonder, what information does your opponent get to know about your options? On Board Game Arena it doesn't show the opponent anything, but in person it would be obvious if you reveal the Divinity Enki and need to take the extra Progress tokens.

Can the opponent see the Divinity cards you reveal? If not, how do you hide the fact that Enki is an option?
With the Divine Theater, does your opponent know the order in which you stack the unused card?

Yes to both questions - all the information is public.
From the rules here with emphasis mine.
For the Gate:

Reveal the top Divinity card from each Mythology deck.

For the Divine Theatre wonder:

Reveal all the cards from a Mythology deck of your choice.

Reveal would mean the cards are face-up on the table for both players to see. They are not hidden in any way. The word reveal is used elsewhere in the rules, always to refer to public information. The setup rules make a clear distinction between face-down Mythology tokens which are then revealed. When you take a Mythology token, the rules say you "draw" two Divinity cards; which is distinct from revealing them. You secretly choose a Divinity card, it's placed face-down, and then revealed in Age II Setup.

For question 2 with the Divine Theater, while the rules aren't entirely explicit about it, it seems reasonable that since the cards are revealed, the order you stack them in is also public information. Technically this point is moot, because the Divine Theater reveals all the cards, then stacks the unused cards, but doesn't turn them face-down again. Thus both players can see the order after anyway. If this was done before activating the corresponding Mythology token, that will put the chosen and remaining cards face-down on the Pantheon and Mythology decks, so until Age II starts the other player won't know which of the two was placed.

With Enki specifically, the rules say:

When Enki is revealed, randomly draw 2 Progress tokens from those discarded at the beginning of the game. These tokens are placed face-up on Enki's card.

This means that while you're making the choice, you and the opponent both know which Progress tokens are available. The FAQ in the rules also says:

Q: What happens if Enki isn’t chosen when the Gate or the Divine Theater are activated?
A: The revealed Progress tokens are returned to the box with those discarded at the beginning of the game.

This could mean in theory that Enki is revealed twice during a game - first with the Divine Theater during Age I, not chosen, and then by being added to the Pantheon normally (or with both the Divine Theater and the Gate in either order). The Progress tokens are still returned when the Theater/Gate player doesn't choose Enki, and new ones will be drawn the second time.

thx for the answer.
on the BGA website, system doesn't let opponent see the cards. this is why I had a doubt

BGA is normally totally faithful to games but occasionally they will tweak a rule for their interface.   It may be worth you asking on the forums there for clarification if its played differently.

Just a note that I've edited the original question for clarity, but expanded question 2 slightly. Hopefully that's helpful and appropriate! As a result your summary isn't quite applicable in the same way; I'll edit your answer to address it directly, but I just wanted to alert you in case you have a different reading!


text:
What happens when playing Narwhal Torpedo to remove Pandamonium and Tiny Stable?
In my stable I have 6 unicorn cards and both the Pandamonium and Tiny Stable downgrade cards. I don't have to sacrifice my 6th unicorn because it is considered a panda.) On my turn I play Narwhal Torpedo. What happens first? If Pandamonium is sacrificed first, my unicorns are not pandas so I would have to sacrifice two unicorns.

Tiny Stable (Downgrade card): If at any time you have more than 5 Unicorns in your Stable, SACRIFICE a Unicorn card.
Pandamonium (Downgrade card): All of your Unicorns are considered Pandas. Cards that affect Unicorn cards do not affect your Pandas.
Narwhal Torpedo (Magical Unicorn card): When this card enters your Stable, SACRIFICE all Downgrade cards in your Stable.

And if I only had 5 unicorns and Tiny Stable. When I play Narwhal Tornado, which will activate first?

All downgrades leave simultaneously.  Checks to see if any unicorns need to be sacrificed do not occur again until after all downgrades are no longer present and as such no unicorns will need to be sacrificed to tiny stable's effect since it is no longer present.

In this case, you'll keep all of your unicorns.
Generally, applicable effects all activate simultaneously, and if those effects cause more effects to happen, all those new effects happen simultaneously, and so on. See The Effect Chain for full details.
So when you play Narwhal Torpedo, we look to see what needs to happen. You have 7 pandas in your stable, so the only effect happening is the Torpedo entering. That happens, and all of the downgrades are removed simultaneously. Because they're gone, there are no more steps in the chain.
If you didn't have Pandamonium, and you played Narwhal Torpedo as your 6th unicorn, then both it and Tiny Stable would happen at the same time. You'd sacrifice all your downgrades, and a unicorn card.
But let's say that you played White Elephantcorn instead of the Narwhal Torpedo. Its enter ability lets you give away a downgrade. So you play it and trigger its effect, but nothing else happens in this moment because you have 7 pandas. You give away Pandamonium, which causes Tiny Stable's effect to be relevant, and thus there's another link in the effect chain. You have 7 unicorns and Tiny Stable is there, so you have to sacrifice a unicorn. Once that's done, you still have 6, so you have to do it again.


text:
Which Magic Ring should I choose in DungeonQuest?
Which Magic Ring is superior to the others on average?
Does the best ring vary based upon which character you have?

Which version of the game? And, if it's the Games Workshop version, with the expansions or not?

@MattTrower, are the enemy distributions different? I was interested in the original, no expansion.

I don't know, but the rings are certainly different :)

In FightingFantasy's version, they're Runes instead.

I usually try to get the Healing Ring every time I play because the Champion of Chaos and Skeleton Warrior tend to hit me pretty hard if I encounter them.


text:
Hypersonic dragon => instant scavenge?
The rule text of Hypersonic Dragon says

You may cast sorcery spells as though they had flash. (You may cast them any time you could cast an instant.)

Can I cast scavenge as an instant now?

Exile this card from your graveyard: Put a number of +1/+1 counters equal to this card's power on target creature. Scavenge only as a sorcery.

The real question is, if you have Hypersonic Dragon out, will you have the right colors to Scavange at all? :-)

@corsiKa There are some black creatures you can salvage.

I see, in hind sight, only 2 creatures require two different colors for scavenging. I suppose +1 or +2 counters on hypersonic dragon would make it an even bigger threat.

No. Scavenge is an ability, not a spell
The official MTG rules for the ability do not appear to be up on wizards site, but from the cards reminder text, you can clearly see that the ability is an activated ability (the colon ':'), that functions only while the card is in your graveyard, with specific activation instructions that only allow activation whenever you could cast a Sorcery (on your turn, during a main phase, when the stack is empty).

112.3b Activated abilities have a cost and an effect. They are written as “[Cost]: [Effect.] [Activation instructions (if any).]” A player may activate such an ability whenever he or she has priority. Doing so puts it on the stack, where it remains until it’s countered, it resolves, or it otherwise leaves the stack. See rule 602, “Activating Activated Abilities.”

[Mana cost], Exile this card from your graveyard:Put a number of +1/+1 counters equal to this card's power on target creature. Scavenge only as a sorcery.

602.5d Activated abilities that read “Activate this ability only any time you could cast a sorcery” mean the player must follow the timing rules for casting a sorcery spell,

Activating abilities is not the same thing as casting spells, so Hypersonic Dragon will have no effect on your ability to Scavenge only on your own turn, while the stack is empty. What Hypersonic Dragon will let you do, is to cast cards with the Card Type - Sorcery whenever you have priority, even on other players turn, when you normally could not.

205.1. The type line is printed directly below the illustration. It contains the card’s card type(s). It also contains the card’s subtype(s) and supertype(s), if applicable.

307.1. A player who has priority may cast a sorcery card from his or her hand during a main phase of his or her turn when the stack is empty. Casting a sorcery as a spell uses the stack. (See rule 601, “Casting Spells.”)

When they say "any time he or she could cast a sorcery", it actually means "any time he or she could normally cast a sorcery".

307.5. If a spell, ability, or effect states that a player can do something only “any time he or she could cast a sorcery,” it means only that the player must have priority, it must be during the main phase of his or her turn, and the stack must be empty. The player doesn’t need to have a sorcery he or she could actually cast. Effects that would prevent that player from casting a spell or casting a sorcery don’t affect the player’s capability to perform that action (unless the action is actually casting a spell or casting a sorcery).

Hypersonic Dragon's ability does not change that, so it does not affect the Scavenge ability.

According to the Comp Rules:

602.5d Activated abilities that read "Activate this ability only any time you could cast a sorcery" mean the player must follow the timing rules for casting a sorcery spell, though the ability isn't actually a sorcery. The player doesn't actually need to have a sorcery card that he or she could cast.

While not explicitly stated, "Scavange only as a sorcery" is shorthand for "Activate ~scavange only at any time you could cast a sorcery". We can infer this translation by comparing the card text and oracle text of the Equip keyword.
If we review the keyword "Equip" we see the following:

702.6a Equip is an activated ability of Equipment cards. "Equip [cost]" means "[Cost]: Attach this permanent to target creature you control. Activate this ability only any time you could cast a sorcery."

This is another similarly worded ability, with the explicit wording "Activate this ability", not "Equip only as a sorcery". However, many cards, such as Adventuring Gear state explicitly on the card "Equip only as a sorcery". So we can safely infer that "~ only as a sorcery" is shorthand for "Activate ~ only at any time you could cast a sorcery"


text:
Types of EDH mana base
After looking at a number of EDH deck lists I have seen two distinct types of mana bases used by various decks.
Some decks use a large number of basic lands, dual lands and utility lands.
Other decks use a minimum number of basics, dual lands including the Alpha, Beta, Unlimited, Revised duals plus Shock lands, a range of fetch lands and the relevant utility lands.
The cost is a obvious factor for choosing the first type of mana base but for what other reasons would you choose one type over the other?

Fetchlands + duals is a formula used by almost all the top decks in every format that allows them. The main advantage is monumental consistency.
Verdant Catacombs, for instance, can fetch any of the following original dual lands:

Badlands (Swamp / Mountain)
Bayou (Swamp / Forest)
Savannah (Forest / Plains)
Scrubland (Plains / Swamp)
Taiga (Mountain / Forest)
Tropical Island (Forest / Island)
Underground Sea (Island / Swamp)

That translates into easy access into any color you need, significantly superior to even what you'd get running a full set of Shards of Alara tri-lands.
In addition,

The duals you fetch can produce two colors, so you'll have good color depth among the lands you have in play (color depth is an advantage of multi-color non-basics in general).
Fetches provide a way to shuffle away the top of your library, commonly employed with cards like Brainstorm and Sensei's Divining Top: put the cards you want on top of your library and the cards you don't underneath them, draw the cards you want, then crack your fetchland to shuffle the chaff away.
Many multi-color lands come into play tapped at least some of the time. Both old-school duals and shocklands can come into play untapped, so there's no loss of momentum compared to playing basic lands.
Since cracking a fetchland actually removes another land from your library, it thins your deck, reducing your likelihood to draw lands in the late game when you'd rather have spells. This effect is rather marginal, but it's a tiny little bonus.
Fetches basically double your landfall triggers.
Unlike other non-basics, these lands make it very easy to use domain-like abilities. This is basically why "Zoo" even exists as a deck type in Modern and Legacy. In Commander you'll see this used to support some powerful cards like Collective Restraint.
Fetchlands give you an easy way to put lands in your graveyard, which powers up Deathrite Shaman, Tarmogoyf, Life from the Loam combos, threshold cards, and other stuff.

Why shouldn't you play fetches, duals, and shocks, besides the cost of owning the cards?
Strategically speaking,

Fetch abilities can be countered by a few rare effects. In Legacy, the spell for this is Stifle. In Commander, you could fall prey to repeatable effects like Azorius Guildmage or Voidmage Husher.
Fetches are vulnerable to search hosers like Aven Mindcensor and Shadow of Doubt. Commander has a very powerful hoser: Stranglehold.
A heavily non-basic mana base is vulnerable to non-basic-land hate like Wasteland, Back to Basics, Blood Moon, Price of Progress, and Ruination. Experienced players can easily mitigate many of these effects by using their fetchlands to get basic lands, though; ultimately you still have better protection against them than you would with a multicolor deck that doesn't use fetches and duals.
Fetches and shocks drain your life. A couple life here and there seems inconsequential, but it can add up pretty quickly.

Also, practically speaking, shuffling your deck all the time is annoying. I can't even shuffle 100 sleeved cards without splitting the deck in half. Although you can at least reduce some of the inconvenience by cracking fetches on an opponent's turn (similar to proper Divining Top etiquette).

Thanks for the comprehensive answer,  also interested if you know of any article(s) or discussions on mtg etiquette as being a better opponent is always nice. (will google when I get a chance).

@ThunderHorse Muse Vessel probably has a good bit of stuff about the social aspects of multiplayer, among their other articles. (To be honest, I probably still shuffle my library about once every three turns in my mono-black EDH deck, due to the volume of cards like Solemn Simulacrum, Demonic Collusion, and Expedition Map.)

Might be worth noting Aven Mindcensor as another search hoser as that's arguably less conditional than Leonin Arbiter and sees a fair bit of play (at least in the groups I've seen).

@StevenStadnicki Good call! Updated. Feel free to modify the other examples.

@AlexP Why did you list those 7 lands, and not all 10? Is there a difference?

@GendoIkari Because Verdant Catacombs can't fetch Volcanic Island.

@AlexP, oh duh, you listed just the ones that are Swamps or Forests. Got it!

You would avoid nonbasic land if your group regularly sees
.


text:
Choose new modes for a copy
Can I choose new modes when I copy a spell whith modes.
For example, I copy a Cryptic Command with a Reverberate, can I choose new modes for my copy of Cryptic Command?

Does this answer your question? Could you use Twincast to counter Cryptic Command?

No, when you copy a spell, you also copy all choices made for the original.

707.2. When copying an object, the copy acquires the copiable values of the original object’s characteristics and, for an object on the stack, choices made when casting or activating it (mode, targets, the value of X, whether it was kicked, how it will affect multiple targets, and so on). [..]

Of course, this does not include choices you make on resolution, for example when you copy Akroma's Blessing. But Cryptic Command's choice is a choice of modes, so the copy will have the same modes and you only get to choose new targets if you want.

How is Akroma's Blessing different from Cryptic Command? Why is "choose a color" different to "choose two:"?

The wording is different. The former simply happens as part of resolution, the latter is defined in the rules as part of the casting process and thus copiable. I will edit my answer to include the relevant rules refs.

@nick012000 I'll answer as comment because it's not really relevant to the question, since OP knows what a mode is: 700.2. A spell or ability is modal if it has two or more options in a bulleted list preceded by instructions for a player to choose a number of those options, such as “Choose one —.” If the wording doesn't conform to this definition, it's not a mode and thus part of the resolution.

So "choose two" is modal and choice is copied but "choose one" is not modal and the choice can done at resolution? :/

@sinsedrix that is not correct. Both are modal. "two or more options" refers to the number of options in the bulleted list. The instruction for how many to choose from that list can be variable.


text:
How can I improve a Zombie deck to work faster?
I created a deck with the new expansion (Dark Ascension) using the cards I got from a couple of boosters last week.
My initial deck form is [Zombies Nightmare] (created by me) but I feel like it needs to be improved, to increase the probability of being able to play something on the first 2 turns.
I am very inexperienced (I only started a month ago) so any tips on how to make this deck more functional would be very appreciated.

Can I be the first person to say that I liked Zombie movies better when the zombies moved really slowly, rather than zooming around at high speed like they often do today? ;)

@thesunneversets I agree with you. It made the experience more thrilling specially since Zombies are supposed to be rotten bodies, so how can they move as fast (and most times faster) like we do? With that said, I love old school horror movies (most old school movies are more interesting than today's) so I share your opinion.

@thesunneversets Slow inexorable zombies is a big part of the Innistrad theme. There's a pretty good MaRo interview about it in the Channel Fireball archives.

The cards Endless Ranks of the Dead and Army of the Damned hit the zombie trope really well because they're both slow and overwhelming.

In that case, everyone, I feel like the ultimate MtG Zombie deck should not be improved to work faster, it should be improved to work slower!

You're a newbie that wants to improve on a deck so I won't go into deck building theory or anything like that, I'll just try to be useful and point out a possible approach (which is not the only one, by all means).
You have a nice zombie theme going on. I think you can go for a nice aggro deck with cards from the last couple expansions (Innistrad and Dark Ascension).
First of all, the focus. How do you kill? I'd say zombies are good at swarming. Let's go for overwhelming the opponent with a lot of creatures: Diregraf Ghoul, Gravecrawler are your all stars, so ideally you'd play 4 of each! Highborn Ghoul can be interesting for its evasion, Black Cat is also cheap and provides value when it dies and Geralf's Messenger is nuts although it costs too much black mana (so you just want 2 or 3).
Let's not forget some blue zombies as well! Diregraf Captain is pretty neat because it pumps all the other guys (4 of him as well), Stitched Drake is really powerful and cheap but once again, costs two blue (maybe play only 3)!
About your spells, I think they're all over the place! I'd just focus on getting rid of opposing creatures so that your zombies can hit.
Undying Evil is a neat trick to save one of your guys (plus it plays really well with Black Cat or the Captain). Other than that, you want Tragic Slip, Dead Weight or Victim of Night. If you can get your hands on other expansions I'd say Go For The Throat, Doom Blade and Dismember are all very powerful standard legal removal spells!
Finally, since you're playing blue, maybe some Ponder and Forbidden Alchemy would be good to trim your deck and get the good cards out!

thank you for explaining so much to me. As a newbie, getting info from experienced people (and also from winning and most likely losing games hehe) is all I'm searching for right now. I got some of the cards you mentioned from packs I bought from some other expansions. One last question (which I think isn't worth opening a new Question), can I play in Standard events mixing cards from other expansions with Dark Ascension? I was going only for Dark Ascension since I thought that your deck could only have cards from that expansion in order to play in a tournament.
Glad for the help!

Standard means you can play with the last core set and the last two blocks. A block is a group of three related expansions. For example, right now you can play Scars of Mirrodin block (which is Scars of Mirrodin, Mirrodin Besieged and New Phyrexia) plus Innistrad Block (which is Innistrad and Dark Ascension) and M12. Once Avacyn Restored comes out, you'll be able to play that expansion in Standard with all the other ones I just mentioned.

thanks my friend. With the info you provided me I am able to build a much better deck. I have a ton other zombies from the blocks you mentioned!

It's unfortunate that despite the fact OP specifically mentions wanting to cast on turn 1 and turn 2, this answer doesn't mention the mana curve. It's not a difficult concept, and it does wonders for improving deck consistency.

Use Army of the Damned, Endless Ranks of the Dead, Rooftop Storm, Undead Alchemist, Zombie Nightmare and 4 Dark Rituals with a couple of Gilded Lotuses and the game is practically yours.
Using just Army of the Damned, Endless Ranks of the Dead and 4 Dark Rituals I've been able to bring out an endless horde of zombies (I mean 32 2/2 black zombie tokens storming the battlefield plus being able to sacrifice with them to keep alive your most valuable zombie creatures). Play Rooftop Storm and you can play any zombie card free of mana.


text:
How do you play Scrapheap Scrounger's ability?
Scrapheap Scrounger has an ability that allows you to return it from the graveyard to the battlefield. However, it doesn't say you can play this ability while the card is in the graveyard. I am trying to figure out the order of effects that would let me use this.
I assume that the idea is you can play it in response an effect that would destroy it or otherwise send it to the graveyard. But, wouldn't the Scrounger's ability then resolve first, at which point the card is still a creature on the battlefield and not a card in the graveyard? Then whatever effect is about to kill it would resolve and kill it? Doesn't that even apply to dying from attack damage?

Scrapheap Scrounger's activated ability works if and only if it's in the graveyard. That is implicit for all such abilities, when they wouldnt make sense otherwise.
Generally, you are correct in that abilities on permanents only function on the battlefield. There are, however, exceptions to that. The Scrounger's ability falls under one of them:

112.6. Abilities of an instant or sorcery spell usually function only while that object is on the stack. Abilities of all other objects usually function only while that object is on the battlefield. The exceptions are as follows:
112.6k An ability whose cost or effect specifies that it moves the object it’s on out of a particular zone functions only in that zone, unless that ability’s trigger condition, or a previous part of that ability’s cost or effect, specifies that the object is put into that zone. The same is true if the effect of that ability creates a delayed triggered ability whose effect moves the object out of a particular zone.

Just to complement Hackworth's answer explaining how this actually works (you activate the ability only when Scrapheap Scrounger is in the graveyard), I thought it might be helpful to point out how an ability that works roughly how you describe might be written.
The closest thing is probably regeneration. For example, Drudge Skeletons says:

{B}: Regenerate Drudge Skeletons. (The next time this creature would be destroyed this turn, it isn't. Instead tap it, remove all damage from it, and remove it from combat.)

You activate the ability before it dies, and it creates a "regeneration shield" so that when it would die, it instead gets to stick around as described. Applying the regeneration shield is an example of a replacement effect. In the end this is sort of similar to what you describe, in that it lets you pay mana, perhaps in response to something that would kill the creature, in order to prevent a creature from dying.
There are also other kinds of replacement effects that can prevent creatures from dying, like Necromancer's Magemark:

[...] If a creature you control that's enchanted would die, return it to its owner's hand instead.

The words to note there are "would" and "instead", which indicate a replacement effect. This time there's no mana payment involved, but it still does prevent a creature from dying. This is a pretty rare effect, though; it's far more common to see dying replaced with something even worse: "If a creature dealt damage this way would die this turn, exile it instead."


text:
What happens when a miracle trigger is copied?
One of the newly spoiled cards in Magic 2014, Strionic Resonator, allows you to copy a triggered ability you control. This allows you to copy any of a number of things that previously would happen only once.
If you used this card to copy a miracle trigger such as Terminus, what happens?

You can choose to play the card for its Miracle cost on either the original or the copied triggered ability, or not at all, but not twice.
From the comprehensive rules:

702.93. Miracle

702.93a Miracle is a static ability linked to a triggered ability (see rule 603.11). "Miracle [cost]" means "You may reveal this card from your hand as you draw it if it's the first card you've drawn this turn. When you reveal this card this way, you may cast it by paying [cost] rather than its mana cost."

702.93b If a player chooses to reveal a card using its miracle ability, he or she plays with that card revealed until that card leaves his or her hand, that ability resolves, or that ability otherwise leaves the stack.

The triggered ability that gets copied is the "you may cast it (the card) by paying [cost] rather than its mana cost" part.
So now you have the revealed Miracle card in hand, and 2 of those triggers on the stack.
When the first trigger resolves, you may choose to play the card for its Miracle cost.
If you do, you cast it, and eventually the 2nd trigger gets to resolve. However, the card the trigger refers to is no longer in your hand and the trigger simply vanishes without further effect. That also applies if another effect (such as Remand) returns the card to your hand before the second trigger resolves, because it's a new object.

400.7. An object that moves from one zone to another becomes a new object with no memory of, or relation to, its previous existence. There are nine exceptions to this rule:

If you don't cast the card on the first trigger, the card will remain in your hand, revealed, and you may choose to cast it for its Miracle cost on resolution of the 2nd trigger.

Technical note in case anyone else tries to follow the logic of 702.93b in this case. The card is revealed until the original ability resolves, however the original ability is the 2nd trigger in your explanation as the duplicate is the first to be resolved (due to going on the stack above it).


text:
Hideaway Lands and Additional Costs
If I were to use say Spinerock Knoll's or Mosswort Bridge's Hideaway ability to cast Tooth and Nail, am I able to then pay the entwine cost to have both effects?
Im not sure whether the card being exiled effects whether I can use the entwine cost or not.
I am also not sure if casting without paying the manna cost stops me from being able to use the entwine cost...
My gut feeling is that additional costs are separate from Manna costs so I would be able to do this? Am I right?

I just want to point out how powerful this combo could be after you use an Imperial Seal (Tutor a card and put on top of library) or Insidious Dreams (Tutor multiple cards and put on top of library, presumably 1 that you want to Hideaway and 3 you want on the bottom of your library)

Yes, you may choose modes and pay additional costs for a spell if you cast it through a Hideaway land.
Tooth and Nail is a modal spell; if you choose both modes, you incur an additional cost. You may choose modes if and when you cast a spell. As long as you do cast the spell (as opposed to copying it, or putting it on the stack in some other way), it does not matter where you cast it from or whether its mana costs have been altered in any way. Choosing to Entwine simply increases the cost of the spell from (in your case) {0} to {2}, after you paid {G} for the land's ability.
The Hideaway lands' activated ability reads:

You may play the exiled card without paying its mana cost if [..]

It allows you to play the exiled card (which means cast if that card is a spell) for no mana cost (the cost printed in the upper right of the card), if a certain condition is met. If you do, you proceed to cast the exiled card just like you would from your hand.

Casting Spells

601.1a Some effects still refer to “playing” a card. “Playing a card” means playing that card as a land or casting that card as a spell, whichever is appropriate.
601.2. To cast a spell is to take it from where it is (usually the hand), put it on the stack, and pay its costs, so that it will eventually resolve and have its effect. [..]
601.2b If the spell is modal, the player announces the mode choice (see rule 700.2). If the player wishes to splice any cards onto the spell (see rule 702.46), he or she reveals those cards in his or her hand. If the spell has alternative or additional costs that will be paid as it’s being cast such as buyback or kicker costs (see rules 117.8 and 117.9), the player announces his or her intentions to pay any or all of those costs (see rule 601.2f). [..]
601.2f The player determines the total cost of the spell. Usually this is just the mana cost. Some spells have additional or alternative costs. Some effects may increase or reduce the cost to pay, or may provide other alternative costs. Costs may include paying mana, tapping permanents, sacrificing permanents, discarding cards, and so on. 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. [..]
702.41a Entwine is a static ability of modal spells (see rule 700.2) that functions while the spell is on the stack. “Entwine [cost]” means “You may choose all modes of this spell instead of just one. If you do, you pay an additional [cost].” Using the entwine ability follows the rules for choosing modes and paying additional costs in rules 601.2b and 601.2f–h.


text:
Does Hardened Scales trigger when +1/+1 counter are moved from one permanent to another?
If a +1/+1 counter get's moved from one creature to another does Hardened Scales double the amount of counters that the second creature gets?

Yes, Hardened Scales triggers off moving +1/+1 counters. From the official rules:

121.5. If an effect says to “move” a counter, it means to take that counter from the object it’s currently on and put it onto a second object. If the first and second objects are the same object, nothing happens. If the first object has no counters, nothing happens; the second object doesn’t get a counter put on it. If the second object (or any possible second objects) is no longer in the correct zone when the effect would move the counter, nothing happens; a counter isn’t removed from the first object.

Note that Hardened Scales only triggers once per batch of counters moved, so if several counters are moved at once, it will not double the amount, but only add 1.


text:
Is it possible to activate mana abities during the resolution of Transmute Artifact?
If I play Transmute Artifact, do I have to put mana into my mana pool before Transmute Artifact resolves, or can I tap my lands during Transmute artifact resolving?

You can activate mana abilities whenever you are asked to pay a cost, including during the resolution of a spell or ability. You can, but don't have to activate them beforehand.

605.3. Activating an activated mana ability follows the rules for activating any other activated ability (see rule 602.2), with the following exceptions:

605.3a A player may activate an activated mana ability whenever they have priority, whenever they are casting a spell or activating an ability that requires a mana payment, or whenever a rule or effect asks for a mana payment, even if it’s in the middle of casting or resolving a spell or activating or resolving an ability.

"Rulings
05/02/2021  Birgi’s first ability uses the stack and can be responded to. It isn’t a mana ability."

More generally, a triggered ability can only be a mana ability if it is triggered by another mana ability, or by mana being added to the mana pool (605.1b)


text:
Does a phased-out Ring-bearer stop being the Ring-bearer when the Ring tempts you?
When the Ring tempts you, a creature you control becomes the Ring-bearer and the previous Ring-bearer, if any, stops being it.

701.52a Certain spells and abilities have the text “the Ring tempts you.” Each time the Ring tempts you, choose a creature you control. That creature becomes your Ring-bearer until another creature becomes your Ring-bearer or another player gains control of it.

A designation, while not explicitely defined in the rules, is a marker inherent to an object or player. For example, see the definition of "Monstrous".

701.31b Monstrous is a designation that has no rules meaning other than to act as a marker that the monstrosity action and other spells and abilities can identify.

The event of phasing itself does not remove the designation via 701.52a since it remains the same object and no change of control happens. The phasing rule 702.26d does not mention what happens to designations on phasing, but that can only mean that phasing does not affect them.

702.26d The phasing event doesn’t actually cause a permanent to change zones or control [..] Counters and stickers remain on a permanent while it’s phased out. [..]

For a rule to affect phased out permanents, the rule has to mention phased out permanents explicitely.

702.26b If a permanent phases out, its status changes to “phased out.” Except for rules and effects that specifically mention phased-out permanents, a phased-out permanent is treated as though it does not exist. It can’t affect or be affected by anything else in the game. A permanent that phases out is removed from combat. (See rule 506.4.)

The Ring-bearer rules don't mention phasing, so 701.52a is unable to remove the designation while the Ring-bearer is phased out.
So the question is: Can a phased out permanent stop being the Ring-bearer, and what is the rules justification for it?

This is amusing because canonically the Ring-bearer does "phase out" (become invisible) and cannot be interacted with by other permanents (say, orcs) if they wear the One Ring.

Yes, a phased out permanent can stop being the Ring-bearer.
Rule 701.52a says (with my emphasis):

Certain spells and abilities have the text “the Ring tempts you.” Each time the Ring tempts you, choose a creature you control. That creature becomes your Ring-bearer until another creature becomes your Ring-bearer or another player gains control of it.

Then rule 702.26f says (with my emphasis):

Continuous effects that affect a phased-out permanent may expire while that permanent is phased out. If so, they will no longer affect that permanent once it’s phased in. In particular, effects with “for as long as” durations that track that permanent (see rule 611.2b) end when that permanent phases out because they can no longer see it.

Technically, the part of the rule that makes a creature a Ring-bearer is not a continuous effect as defined in rule 611.1:

A continuous effect modifies characteristics of objects, modifies control of objects, or affects players or the rules of the game, for a fixed or indefinite period.

However, rule 702.26f establishes that something with a duration that affects a permanent can expire while the permanent is phased out, and that thing then does not affect that permanent after it phases in. There is no contradiction with rule 702.26b here, because the Ring-bearer rule is not directly acting on the phased-out permanent. Instead, it is only ceasing an existing action that was originally taken on a phased-in permanent.

Well that is the crux of the matter. Designations such as Ring-bearer are not continuous effects and carry no inherent effect. The only continuous effects in this context come from the Ring emblem, but the designation itself doesn't. So how does 702.26f apply to the designation?

Also, remember the advice we gave in the previous QA: If it's not in the rules, it doesn't happen. 702.26f refers to continuous effects only, so if it's not a CE, it's not affected.

You can apply that both ways. There's nothing in the phasing rules that say that designations phase out along with the permanent they refer to, which means that the phasing rules cannot prevent another rule from manipulating those designations.

Well, since a phased out Ring-bearer does not exist as far as the Ring rules are concerned, it seems safe to assume its designation can't be removed either. You don't seem to dispute that assumption in your answer either, instead focusing on the time immediately after phase in. If you can make the case that the Ring rules see the phased out bearer and remove the designation, or that the designation somehow doesn't phase out together with the permanent it's on, let's hear it

Consider the designation as an arrow pointing to a permanent. Phasing out the creature doesn't do anything immediately, but if you move the arrow to point to something else, it's still pointing to that something else after the creature phases in. I'm not saying that the Ring rules can see the phased out Ring-bearer, I'm saying that they don't need to.

@Hackworth: My reading (and I am a MTG noob, admittedly) would be the Ring-bearer phases out, the Ring-bearer "does not exist", and so the Ring rules force the owner to choose of a Ring-bearer (which cannot be the old Ring-bearer as it does not exist), which moves the Ring-bearer designator to the new creature. I read it as you always choose a "new" Ring-bearer, just you can choose the same Ring-bearer repeatedly (if existent).

I think nobody is disputing that if the ring tempts you while your most recent Ring-bearer phases out, you have to choose a new Ring-bearer from among your other phased-in creatures. The question here is whether the previous Ring-bearer also continues to be your Ring-bearer after it phases in (resulting in simultaneously having two Ring-bearers).

Nothing says that any given designation has to be unique, see monstrous. Designation uniqueness, where intended, is ensured through proper rules design. I don't think you can substantiate that unique pointer analogy through rules, since designations are not properly defined. Ring-bearer is obviously intended to be unique, but I think they just forgot to account for phasing.

The point of the arrow analogy was not specifically that the designation is unique, but that it doesn't phase out. I could instead say that choosing a new Ring-bearer creates a new arrow, and you remove all other arrows whenever you create a new arrow. Either way, the point is that the thing the rule is operating on is the arrow(s), not the creature, so it is not impacted by phasing.

So the pointer analogy seems to be a rewording of the claim that there is a 702.26f analogue that would apply to designations. I still don't think that analogue exists, and we are back to my first 2 comments.

As I said before, the strict reading of the rules goes both ways. Point to a rule that says that designations do phase out with the permanent they refer to, and I'll delete this answer.

My perspective here is that there is a general principle that time marches on and effects start and end independent of the existence or status of individual objects that they might effect or refer to, and that the first sentence of 702.26f is simply a reminder rule of how this principle should be considered in the context of phasing. Therefore, its conclusions should not be considered to be restricted to continuous effects, even though it only refers to them.

"Point to a rule that says that designations do phase out with the permanent they refer to [..]" Designations are not defined, so there is no rule to quote. However, the known examples agree that permanents can "have" designations or "are" what the designation represents. When you designate a permanent and it phases out, you no longer control a permanent with that designation. I find that sufficient proof that the designation and the information it represents has phased out too, i.e. it no longer exists. That does not imply I want your answer retracted, that is entirely up to you.

That being said, I find your 702.26f analogy more persuasive philosophically, but still not sufficient for the game rules - the rule says and does exactly what it says, no more and no less. Unlike the designation definition or lack thereof, there is nothing to piece together or interpret with varying wordings. If the rules managers want the Ring-bearer designation to expire like a continuous effect, which I even agree they want, I say they have to write a rule to that effect because designations, as we agree, are not CEs.

The rule says that the designation lasts until another creature becomes your ring bearer. In this scenario, another creature becomes your ring bearer, so the designation no longer applies. That's what the rule says, no more, no less. The way I see it, it really is that simple.

Another way to answer this question is to test on Arena (and to then assume that Arena has implemented the rules correctly.)  I ran this test last night.
If you phase out your ring bearer (e.g. Teferi's Protection), and do nothing else, when your ring bearer phases in, it is still the ring bearer.
If you phase out your ring bearer, and the ring tempts you again, and you assign a new creature as your ring bearer, then when the former ring bearer phases in, they are no longer the ring bearer.

"then assume that Arena has implemented the rules correctly" This is a moderately large assumption.


text:
Two Experiment Kraj are on the battlefield, what are their abilities?
Through the use of e.g. Sakashima the Impostor, Mirror Gallery, or Helm of the Host, there are two Experiment Kraj on the battlefield, each with a +1/+1 counter on it. How many additional copies of their activated abilities does each Experiment Kraj have: one, infinite or some other number?
Apart from curiosity about the rules interaction, it actually matters for abilities that can only be activated a limited number of times per turn.

While I cannot answer the question, I can't think of a case where it might ever matter. Is there some specific situation you are thinking about where the answer would make a difference?

@Odalrick It does matter for activated abilities that can only be activated N times, typically 1. If I had infinitely many of them, I could activate each of them up to N times.

@Hackworth I went ahead and made an edit that I think is necessary to actually create the conundrum you're asking about. Have I got the right idea..?

The answer is "one copy of each ability". Now we just need to wait until someone explains it with the layer system.

@doppelgreener Any one creature with a counter and an activated ability is necessary, it doesn't have to be any of the Krajs.

@Hackworth It's necessary for them to copy each other and have any potential at all to go infinite.

@Hackworth Could you give an example of such an ability? As far as I know, the cost is usually what limits an activated ability, not the number of instances of the ability itself.

@Odalrick Aggressive Mining. (The search term is "once each turn.")

@Odalrick http://magiccards.info/query?q=o%3Aonce+o%3Aturn&v=scan&s=cname

http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Search/Default.aspx?action=advanced&name=+[activate]+[this]+[ability]+[only]+[once]||text=+[activate]+[this]+[ability]+[only]+[once]&type=+[%22Creature%22]

@Odalrick: loyalty abilities of planeswalkers turned into creatures? -- edit: Hmm no, even if the experiment had infinite copies of the loyalty abilities, you'd still only be allowed to activate one of them, nm

@RemcoGerlich Actually, that's not true (unless something changed). This was a corner case featured in one of the Cranial Insertions. The "one ability per turn" is  tied to the "Planeswalker" card type. If some creature manages to copy the creaturified planeswalker's abilities, it doesn't gain the "one ability per turn" with those. Unless it also copies the "Planeswalker" card type, of course.

@tsuma534 Something changed a number of years ago. The once per turn now applies to loyalty abilities for a given permanent.

@MichaelSnook Thank you! Now it's sure that I'm no longer up to date with magic rules. I'm toying with an idea to put them under version control.

@tsuma534 http://yawgatog.com/resources/rules-changes/

In addition to their own abilities, the first Experiment Kraj will have 1 set of copies of applicable abilities, while the second Kraj will have 2 sets. Ultimately, the total number of copied abilities will grow exponentially.
The rules to look at are found in

Interaction of Continuous Effects

An object's characteristics are determined through a system of layers. Ability-modifying effects are handled in layer 6. This is where the continuous effect of Experiment Kraj's static ability is applied:

613.1f Layer 6: Ability-adding effects, ability-removing effects, and effects that say an object can’t have an ability are applied.

When 2 Kraj are on the battlefield and they try to add each other's activated abilities, their effects are dependent on each other:

613.7. Within a layer or sublayer, determining which order effects are applied in is sometimes done using a dependency system. If a dependency exists, it will override the timestamp system.
613.7a An effect is said to “depend on” another if (a) it’s applied in the same layer (and, if applicable, sublayer) as the other effect (see rules 613.1 and 613.3);

True because they are the same ability.

(b) applying the other would change the text or the existence of the first effect, what it applies to, or what it does to any of the things it applies to;

True because applying one ability influences what the other would do.

(c) neither effect is from a characteristic-defining ability or both effects are from characteristic-defining abilities. [..]

True, because both add abilities to the creature it's on. Abilities (card text) are a characteristic.

613.7b An effect dependent on one or more other effects waits to apply until just after all of those effects have been applied. If multiple dependent effects would apply simultaneously in this way, they’re applied in timestamp order relative to each other. If several dependent effects form a dependency loop, then this rule is ignored and the effects in the dependency loop are applied in timestamp order.

The 2 abilities would form a loop, because each depends on the other. Therefore, they are instead applied once, in timestamp order.
Therefore, the Kraj with the lower timestamp would be applied first. It gains all abilities of other creatures with a +1/+1 counter on it. Next, the other Kraj is handled. It also gets all activated abilities of other creatures with a +1/+1 counter on it, including the already handled first Kraj.
Example: There are 2 Experiment Kraj and an Avizoa on the battlefield. All creatures have a +1/+1 counter on them.
After continuous effects are handled, the first Kraj will have its own activated +1/+1 counter ability, the other Kraj's counter ability, and the Avizoa's "{0}: +2/+2, use once per turn" ability.
The second Kraj will have its own counter ability, the two counter abilities from the first Kraj, and two of the Avizoa abilities (one from the first Kraj, the other from the Avizoa)
Each Experiment Kraj on the battlefield will have the sum of copies of all other Krajs, some of which will already have been handled by the continuous effect rules. At 2 Krajs, the total is (2+3) = 5. At 3 Krajs, the first will have 3, the second 5, the third 9. At 4 Krajs, the last Kraj to be handled already has 25 total. Here are some diagrams for visualization:

This shows the total number of abilities each Kraj has with 1, 2, 3 Krajs etc. on the field.

The triangle completed upwards.

A little more info.
Mathematically speaking, if there are n Krajs on the battlefield, the m-th Kraj to be handled will have a total of

1 + (n-1) * 2(m-1)

sets of copies.

What if they enter the battlefield simultaneously, such as through Living Death?

613.6j If two or more objects would receive a timestamp simultaneously, such as by entering a zone simultaneously or becoming attached simultaneously, the active player determines their relative timestamp order at that time.

I know what you mean and you are right but I believe that the word extra in the bolded answer is confusing and should be left out. I first read extra as 'in addition to the copies he already got' or something


text:
Do you die instantaneously if your life total hits 0?
Way back when, the first combo I built a deck around was

Force of Nature
with a
Spirit Link
on it. If, at the beginning of my upkeep, I have less than 8 life and I don't pay the upkeep, will I lose the game before the life gain kicks in?

104.3b If a player’s life total is 0 or less, he or she loses the game the next time a player would    receive priority. (This is a state-based action. See rule 704.)

When the Force of Nature damages you, Spirit Link's trigger goes on the stack. If, between sustaining the damage and getting 8 life back from Link, your life total hits 0, you'll die.
This is confirmed by the Oracle text for Spirit Link:

You only gain the life when the triggered ability resolves. If you are
  reduced to zero life before the ability resolves, you will lose before
  gaining the life.

Luckily, you can avoid this problem by replacing Spirit Link with Lifelink.

Note that in earlier versions of the rules, life totals weren't checked until the end of a phase or combat, so you had plenty of time for the trigger to resolve and bring you above 0 life. I'm not sure when this changed to the modern ruling, but it was well after Force of Nature and Spirit Link were printed.

@StuartCook Actually, the change was made for Sixth Edition, so Spirit Link was reprinted five times after this change, even though it was made significantly weaker. The Lifelink keyword was introduced in Future Sight on two spells from the future when evidently new magic spell technology "fixed" Spirit Link. :) Thus, Spirit Link was replaced by Lifelink in the next M10 base set.

@ghoppe The funny thing is that Future Sight lifelink it didn't even "fix" Spirit Link right away! The first iteration of lifelink was also a triggered ability (see the reminder text on Daybreak Coronet), and all the old lifelink-like spells were changed to use it in Oracle. Then, even later, the rules team decided to make it a damage-changing static ability, and all the old cards had their Oracle text reverted -- except Loxodon Warhammer, which had already been reprinted with "lifelink" in the text box (oops!).

Perfect example of how some cards make old cards completely obsolete. :D

@CrazyJugglerDrummer - I wouldn't call it obsolete.  Multiple Spirit Links stack whereas multiple Lifelinks do not.

and you can't lifelink your opponents creature to gain back the damage it does


text:
Does the Battlestar Galactica game spoil the TV series?
I've watched the first few episodes of Battlestar Galactica, and a friend recently got the game. We love The Resistance, and I'm eager to try a similarly deceptive game with more going on than just deception. But, I don't want to spoil the suspense of the TV show. Do I need to watch more before I play the game?

There's a Penny Arcade comic showing what happens when you play the game without having watched the show at all!

Absolutely
(Very) broadly speaking, the base game spoils Season 1, Pegasus spoils Season 2 (and the start of Season 3) and Exodus spoils Seasons 3 and 4.
At least one exception to this that I can remember is that one Pegasus character's card spoils an event in Season 4. (Spoiler follows)

 Dualla's disadvantage

Having said that, I've played with multiple people who were watching the series at the same time. As long as you're roughly half-way through the first season, you should be (mostly) fine for the base set (as long as you don't read too much flavour text!). I'd hold off on the expansions until you've seen a lot more though.

The base game contains several spoilers that are not completely revealed until you finish the first season, and a couple of episodes into Season 2. If you have watched the mini series, and the first disk of Season 2.0 you will be.fine.
The Battlestar Galactica expansions contain spoilers that go well into the 4th season.
As for some specifics (SPOILERS)

 Cylon Sympathizer card image, Helo character card, Adama is an Admiral....

Yes. I will not link to specific examples because that would defeat the purpose of not spoiling, but the the Crises cards encountered, character abilities,and still-frames chosen to illustrate the cards contain major spoilers as to events, identities, and loyalties of various characters.
Once you have seen all of Season 1, you are clear to play the base game. I don't remember how far in the series the Pegasus and Exodus expansions span.

The best you can do is to say that a game will be "minimal spoilers" as opposed to "no spoilers".  Problem is, someone who's more perceptive in observation and putting two and two together will notice things that give away plot points, personalities, and situations from the various cards.  Hell, many of the crisis cards depict struggles in the TV show, with some of them the actual names or the main plot of the episodes themselves.  Even just looking at the box front, backs, and reading the game description will do that too!
If you want to reduce the # of spoilers, have everyone watch at least the miniseries before playing the base game.  Otherwise:
mini-series = decent chunk of the base game
season one = roughly base game.  Do NOT read flavor text in this case!
Season 2 = Pegasus
season 3 = Exodus
Season 4 = Daybreak
Note though that some of the stuff does spill over, hence the "roughly".  For example, there was probably a crisis cards in Pegasus that was actually a season 3 occurrence.