text:
How does priority work in these cases?
I understand the ruling that when a Planeswalker resolves the player controlling the walker can activate its ability without their opponent getting priority in between.
Are there any other rules that take on priority that are important?
How does priority work for these circumstances?

A player's sorcery spell resolves. Does the player have the priority to do something else knowing that there is no ETB effect to consider, or does it go to the opponent who gets to do something after the sorcery resolves?
If an opponent controls a triggered ability that triggers on their opponent's upkeep, and that player also has an upkeep effect, who determines arrangement of the stack if multiple triggered effects happen?

The answer by @samiam is correct, you can get all the nitty-gritty details in section 116. of the comprehensive rules

After any stack-using effect(spell, ability, or otherwise) resolves, or whenever any player would get priority, the Active Player, (the player who's turn it is) gets priority first, and then the NonActive Player gets priority after the active player passes priority.
A player may put any number of spells onto the stack before they pass priority.
If multiple sources controlled by both players would trigger an effect at the same time, they're put on the stack in APNAP order. The Active player puts effects from his sources on the stack first, and he chooses the order for his own effects.  After all of the active player's effects have gone onto the stack, than the Non-active player can put his effects onto the stack, and he can chose the order in which they go onto the stack.
This results in the Non-active player's spells resolving first.

I would recommend expanding to mention that APNAP order of stacking results in NAP having their effects resolve first. Also note that the NAP may play multiple spells/abilities without yielding priority. Otherwise good explanation.

That's not true. The AP does not always get priority first. When a player casts a spell or activates an ability, that player gets priority first.

@ikegami that is essentially what I said, when I said that a player could cast any number of spells or abilities

There are only a few basic rules you need to know. The most important rule being one of Magic's Golden Rules, APNAP order rule.

101.4. If multiple players would make choices and/or take actions at the same time, the active player (the player whose turn it is) makes any choices required, then the next player in turn order (usually the player seated to the active player's left) makes any choices required, followed by the remaining nonactive players in turn order. Then the actions happen simultaneously. This rule is often referred to as the "Active Player, Nonactive Player (APNAP) order" rule.

The other basic rules is covered in Timing and Priority. The Active Player receives priority at the beginning of phases or steps, and after a spell or ability resolves from the stack. Additionally, players do not give up priority until they choose to pass.(i.e. they can chain as many spells/abilities in a row as they wish before relinquishing priority)

116.3a The active player receives priority at the beginning of most steps and phases, after any turn-based actions (such as drawing a card during the draw step; see rule 703) have been dealt with and abilities that trigger at the beginning of that phase or step have been put on the stack. No player receives priority during the untap step. Players usually don't get priority during the cleanup step (see rule 514.3).
116.3b The active player receives priority after a spell or ability (other than a mana ability) resolves.
116.3c If a player has priority when he or she casts a spell, activates an ability, or takes a special action, that player receives priority afterward.

The last priority issue is covered under Handling Triggered Abilities. Since triggered abilities can trigger anytime, a rule is needed for how to assign priority and order triggered abilities on the stack. Just before a player would receive priority, any triggered abilities that are waiting to be put on the stack are placed on the stack in APNAP order (the AP's triggered abilities will resolve last, since they are on the bottom of the stack).

603.3b If multiple abilities have triggered since the last time a player received priority, each player, in APNAP order, puts triggered abilities he or she controls on the stack in any order he or she chooses. (See rule 101.4.) Then the game once again checks forand resolves state-based actions until none are performed, then abilities that triggered during this process go on the stack. This process repeats until no new state-based actions are performed and no abilities trigger. Then the appropriate player gets priority.

The only remaining types (besides the Loyalty Ability you already mentioned) of are Turn-Based.actions, State-Based actions, and Spell Abilities. No player receives priority while handling these.

I wonder if I could have simplified this to, "1)The AP receives priority unless stated otherwise. 2)Players do not give up priority, unless they specifically say so. 3)Triggered abilities can trigger at any time, they are put on the stack in APNAP order." I was going for simple and became longwinded, especially with the CR quotes.

I stuck to the actual questions. I was going to list the four times when someone gets priority (caster after casting, AP after resolving, AP in most steps/phases, next player when one passes) until I noticed the OP actually asked specific questions, and it would be information overload to answer more than the questions.

There's nothing special about Planeswalkers with respect to getting priority. The active player always gets priority after a spell resolves. Since you normally cast a Planeswalker on your on turn, you get priority when it resolves.
Similarly, the active player will get priority when the Sorcery resolves. That would usually be the player you who cast the Sorcery, but not always.

116.3b The active player receives priority after a spell or ability (other than a mana ability) resolves.

This is not determined by priority, but by the rules for handling triggered abilities.
Triggered abilities are placed on the stack in APNAP order. The active player's triggered abilities are placed on the stack first, then the non-active player places his triggered abilities on the stack.
If a player has more than one triggered ability to place on the stack, he places them on the stack in the order he desires.

603.3b If multiple abilities have triggered since the last time a player received priority, each player, in APNAP order, puts triggered abilities he or she controls on the stack in any order he or she chooses. (See rule 101.4.) Then the game once again checks for and resolves state-based actions until none are performed, then abilities that triggered during this process go on the stack. This process repeats until no new state-based actions are performed and no abilities trigger. Then the appropriate player gets priority.


text:
Nivmagus and cipher card rulings
Well since the new set is available I was wondering the combo between Nivmagus Elemental and cipher cards[1].
So let's assume that Nivmagus is on the field then I cast a cipher spell from my hand can I:

Eat the spell and mount it on Nivmagus
Eat the cipher spell on each attack

Also is it possible to have multiple of the same cipher spells on a target creature?

The definition is assumed to be "You may exile this spell card encoded on a creature you control. Whenever that creature deals combat damage to a player, its controller may cast a copy of the encoded card without paying its mana cost."

If you eat a spell with Nivmagus, it won't resolve, so you don't perform any of its spell abilities, so you don't perform its cipher ability. You'll get the +1/+1 counters, but that's it.
Now let's say you did let a cipher spell resolve, and you did attach it a creature. Since a copy of a spell is a spell, you can eat the copies created by cipher. But again, the spell won't resolve if you do. You'll get the +1/+1 counters, but that's it.
Note that you can't encode the copies created by cipher because you can only encode spell cards with cipher, so eating the spell copies is not as expensive as eating the original. It actually sounds like a good use of cipher to me :)
Note that the spell triggers after damage is dealt, so the +1/+1 counters it gets will only help it the next combat (except possibly if it has first strike or double strike).
Yes, multiple spells can be encoded on a single creature.

Although, I have to admit, the idea of growing by +2 for every combat damage is quite appealing!

I like it too. It's a good use of cipher. The whole point of cipher is to create a loop, and this is a proper use of a loop :) ...There, made that clear in my answer.

You cannot have Nivmagus "eat" the spell and still cipher it on Nivmagus. Ciphering is part of the spell's effect, and if the spell is countered or exiled before resolution, then none of its effects occur.
You can, however, encode the cipher spell on any creature and have the Nivmagus Elemental exile the copies that are cast. Note that this will happen after combat damage, so unless the ciphered creature has first strike, the +1/+1 counters will not count towards the Elemental's damage for that turn.
As far as I understand, there is no limit to the number or identities of cipher cards that can be encoded on a creature.

Minor point: it doesn't matter if the ciphered creature has first strike, the +1/+1 counters still won't add to damage that turn.  No one has priority to cast spells or place triggered abilities on the stack during either combat damage step, so the counters can't be added until after all damage is dealt.

@mjqxxxx, that's incorrect. Both players get priority after the combat damage step and the first-strike damage step (if it occurs). If an encoded spell goes on the stack when first-strike damage occurs, then it's perfectly possible to exile the encoded copy and have the Nivmagus elemental get the +1/+1 counters in time for the regular combat damage step.

@mjqxxxx See the comp rules sections 510.4 and 510.5.

since cipher triggers by combat damage to the player, first strike shouldn't apply any real changes to the mechanic of cipher. first strike applies damage first during blocking to a creature assigned to block, thus not applying damage to the player. unless double strike may be interrupted during the damage phase, double strike will not benefit nivmagus that turn, but the next.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Dark Confidant and split cards
On my upkeep controlling a Dark Confidant I trigger revealing a card and losing life to it's cmc cost. What happens if I have a split card with 2 identifiable spells? Do I get to choose which one I would prefer to lose my life on?

Please link to cards (by using [mtg:Card Name]).

Don't use split cards with the new dark confidant vampire!

@wesdfgfgd Why not? Blood Scrivener only makes you lose 1 life, not life equal to the CMC. It would be  abetter option that Dark Confidant.

@SocioMatt Blood Scrivener is the Dark Confidant Zombie.  Wes is talking about  Duskmantle Seer.

@AlexP Good call. It was the word "new" that threw me off.

If it's somewhere other than on the stack or if it's fused, a split card's CMC is the sum of each half's CMC.

708.4. In every zone except the stack, the characteristics of a split card are those of its two halves combined. This is a change from previous rules.
708.4b The mana cost of a split card is the combined mana costs of its two halves. A split card’s colors and converted mana cost are determined from its combined mana cost.
Example: Assault/Battery’s mana cost is {3}{R}{G}. It’s a red and green card with a converted mana cost of 5.  If you cast Assault, the resulting spell is a red spell with a converted mana cost of 1.

708.4b is rather poorly worded. As the example shows, the mana cost and converted mana cost of a split card is only the combined mana costs or converted mana costs of its two halves when it's not on the stack or when it's fused.

With the latest update to the comprehensive rules (June 5, 2017), the converted mana cost of split card is the sum of both halves.  This happens to align with the previous "apply both answers" approach previously, but now split cards return a single answer instead of having to deal with "halves" of cards. From the rules:

708.4. In every zone except the stack, the characteristics of a split card are those of its two halves combined. This is a change from previous rules.

Specifically regarding CMC (emphasis mine):

708.4b The mana cost of a split card is the combined mana costs of its two halves. A split card’s colors and converted mana cost are determined from its combined mana cost.
Example: Assault/Battery’s mana cost is {3}{R}{G}. It’s a red and green card with a converted mana cost of 5. If you cast Assault, the resulting spell is a red spell with a converted mana cost of 1.

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


text:
Is it legal to take advantage of my opponent's priority mistakes?
Suppose I attack with a creature with infect, and then my opponent tells me he won't block.
My intent is to use Giant Growth on my infect creature regardless of whether or not my opponent blocks.
HOWEVER, my opponent forgets that I have priority and goes straight for the Lightning Bolt.
Now it seems as though my opponent has just made a game-play error by casting that bolt when he didn't have priority.  Is it legal for me to take advantage of that, and play Giant Growth in response, thus benefiting from the error?

You can always play instants in response to your opponent casting spells. (unless the spell they cast has split second)

@Matt not what I was asking.  I was asking whether it is legal to take advantage of my opponent's gameplay mistake when he skipped my priority

Related: http://boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/9213/how-do-you-handle-fast-players-in-a-casual-setting-that-skip-priority

Your opponent attempting to cast Lightning Bolt when they don't have priority is a legal shortcut as outlined in the comprehensive rules:

716.1. When playing a game, players typically make use of mutually understood shortcuts rather than explicitly identifying each game
  choice (either taking an action or passing priority) a player makes.

and also:

716.1a The rules for taking shortcuts are largely unformalized. As long as each player in the game understands the intent of each other
  player, any shortcut system they use is acceptable.

Clearly your opponent's intent was to cast Lightning Bolt assuming you just planned to pass priority. Therefore, after your opponent has tried to cast Lightning Bolt, you have the option of either:

Telling your opponent that he doesn't have priority and forcing him to undo the casting of Lightning Bolt
Allow the shortcut to happen at which point you can still cast Giant Growth as you should now have priority

Yes, it is legal for you to cast Giant Growth in response to your opponent ignoring your priority.
Edit
Some people claim that only the player with priority can propose a shortcut. While the rules do state this, they also state that any shortcut method that is understood and unambiguous is acceptable. Since players in every magic game I have ever seen (including MTG pro tour and similar high level play) ignore their opponent's priority when moving from their upkeep to their draw phase it seems to me that this behavior should be acceptable during other phases as well. Players may also go into the declare attackers phase by just tapping some of their creatures effectively skipping their opponent's priority. This is fairly common and took me no more than about one minute to find this example and this example. Skipping your opponent's priority in this manner is exactly the same as skipping it after they declared attackers so you can cast Lightning Bolt.
What is not okay is saying you are going to do something and then not actually doing it after your opponent decides to not respond to it. (I'm not really sure how this situation came up as it isn't in the original question, but some answers have addressed it)

Also, none of the conventional shortcut examples in section 4.2 of the Tournament rules includes a situation where a spell is cast without requesting priority first. Especially during the Combat step, the shortcuts I'm familiar with are: "declare attackers" "Blockers?" "Assign Damage", etc. I'm not a Judge, so I don't know whether casting spells without requesting priority is simply unwise or an infraction, but I don't think CR section 716 justifies it.

@ghoppe, Matt is correct. Consider the shortcut "Go." It means: "I propose we both pass priority until it is no longer my turn." Similarly, "I cast Lightning Bolt" is a shortcut for "I propose that you pass priority and I cast Lightning Bolt." Shortcuts can definitely include choices made by other players, such as the choice to pass priority.

Umm, okay... I guess you could argue that, but since I can find no other way to interpret someone casting a spell when they don't have priority than them proposing that I pass priority and then they cast their spell, I can't see how there could be any confusion about the shortcut.

although really he didn't have the right to do so, unless he proposed the shortcut before declaring blockers, as only the player with priority can propose a shortcut through 716.

Here I thought I was being overly pedantic, but this has turned into an interesting debate. The issue for me is that simply declaring a spell isn't universally understood to be a shortcut for "we agree you pass priority first, yeah?" There are many examples of shortcuts in the tournament rules which would be irrelevant if this "master shortcut" were in force. In other words, simply declaring a spell when you don't have priority (or implied priority through words like "go" "combat damage?") is a misplay, not a shortcut.

If you don't interpret someone trying to cast a spell when they don't have priority as them suggesting that you first pass priority then they cast the spell, then what do you interpret it as? Can you provide some of those examples?

We're talking about the meaning of the word "shortcut" in the rules and the mutually agreed shortcuts which speed up the game. I interpret it as a mistake, clearly.

@Matt So in fact, per the rules, assuming an implied shortcut of 'declare no blockers, you pass priority, I lightning bolt, it resolves', it is actually REQUIRED that either the first three steps occur as written, or the attacking player performs an action when they are given priority in the declare blockers step.

Either the first steps must occur as listed, or the other player must interrupt it at any point where they would have priority.

@LK2, Asked on Wizard's Rules Q&A forum for MTG.

Hello commenters!  I'm deleting much of the back and forth above.  Please upvote which ever answer you feel is useful.  Submit your own answer if you can't get behind one of the answers already here.  Thanks.

@ikegami The question you asked on Wizard's Rules Q&A doesn't really represent the same situation as was discussed here. That said, I believe the discussion that resulted indicates my original answer is in fact correct.

@Matt, I believe they proved the opposite. I've added an answer.

About @Matt's edit. He's right it's convention for players to not worry about priority during the upkeep, but in games I've seen and played, the opposite happens during combat and each step is usually explicitly handled: "Declare attackers?" "go" "attack with these" "No blockers" "combat damage?" Here's an interesting article on wizards.com about shortcut guidelines.

@ghoppe That may be how you play, but it took me very little time to find the two examples I just added to my answer of high level players skipping their opponent's priority when declaring attackers.

I like this answer a lot, but I feel like it needs some citation from the MTR to really be complete.

Your edit makes no sense. The rules don't say anything that's understood and unambiguous is acceptable, it merely says it has to be understood and unambiguous to be acceptable. It also says it has to the the turn of the player with priority to be acceptable.

@ikegame umm, yes they do 716.1a The rules for taking shortcuts are largely unformalized. As long as each player in the game understands the intent of each other player, any shortcut system they use is acceptable.

While I initially believed Matt was correct, it was pointed out (by LJ2?) that one cannot create a shortcut if one doesn't have priority.

716.2a At any point in the game, the player with priority may suggest a shortcut [...]

As such, your opponent is merely requesting priority, leaving you the following two options:

Tell your opponent that he doesn't have priority, preventing him from actually casting the Lightning Bolt at this time. (Any action he already took would be rolled back.)
Acquiesce his request and give up priority. Since no shortcut was proposed, he's not required to follow up with Lightning Bolt or he could change his choice of target, but he must follow up with an action (other than passing) according to the Tournament Rules. (If he doesn't, the game rolls back to when you had priority.)

So, you have the option of casting your spell before his Lightning Bolt, in response to it, or even after it resolves.

As an aside, your opponent should have waited for you to pass priority which you could have done explicitly or implicitly by assigning damage.

You can't say you are going to cast something and then not cast it (unless you cannot cast it due to not being able to pay the cost, or any other reason that would prevent you from legally casting the spell)

@Matt, Why not? (Rule #?) To my knowledge, there's nothing that says you can't. The only time someone is bound to do something they said they were going to do is if they proposed a shortcut and the other players accepted that part of the shortcut. The Lightning Bolt caster could not have proposed a shortcut since he did not have priority, and he's not bound by a shortcut someone else proposed.

From a judging perspective, we basically have to either treat this as understood player communication where B is proposing he cast LB next time it's his priority and is bound to it if A does not want to take an action, or else we start handing out infractions to B for a game rules violation every time this happens.  That is absurdly impractical to consider it a rules violation every time someone tosses down an instant before their opponent explicitly passes priority.  If both players understand the intent it's fine.

If we allow the 'take back' we also get constantly bogged down into cheating investigations to determine if B is "faking" spells to fish for information about A's hand.

@Affe, B is not allowed to propose since he doesn't have priority. /// Nothing is taken back since B never started casting it. // Absolutely no information was gathered from A. All A did was give up priority.

@ikegami when A allows B to cast the spell A is essentially saying he isn't going to counter it. Consider the situation where B has 2 big creatures x and y and A may have a counter. B wants to cast x without it getting countered so he plays y in an attempt to get A to cast his counter. When A doesn't counter it B then takes it back so he can instead cast x. That is most certainly not legal even if I can't cite a specific rule. In your example A gave up priority under the assumption that B was going to cast something he could respond to. There is a rule in the Tournament rules covering this.

@Matt, "When A allows B to cast the spell A is essentially saying he isn't going to counter it. " makes no sense whatsoever. B can't counter the spell until A casts it.

@Matt, "When A doesn't counter it B then takes it back so he can instead cast x." This would not be legal. Again, noone's taking anything back, so that simply does not apply to this conversation.

Anyway, whoever's right, the outcome is the same in the OP's scenario. The attacker has the option of casting his/her Giant Growth before, in response to, or after the Lightning Bolt.

@ikegami When you say you are going to cast something and your opponent says something along the lines of "okay" that means they agreed to let it resolve. If you then don't cast it you have violated a rule (most likely a player communication rule)

@Matt, No it's not. You can't accept a spell resolving before he even states targets and taps the mana! Now, if he does that, he's playing out of turn, and the attacker can tell the attacker to wait, or allow it to happen. No shortcut involved there either.

In a friendly game with someone just learning the game, I would let him take the Lightning Bolt back.
But if it's a tournament situation, and he did not wait for you to say "done" "go" "no fast effects" "moving to damage" or something similar, you're well within your rights to respond to the Lightning Bolt with a Giant Growth. (I took a look at section 4.2 Tournament Shortcuts of the MtG Tournament Rules, and I didn't find anything specifically saying taking advantage of information due to skipping of priority was illegal.)

Actually, saying "wait, I had priority" and doing nothing should not be done in a tournament. You can't request priority and then do nothing: tournament rules 4.2: A player may not request priority and take no action with it. If a player decides he or she does not wish to do
anything, the request is nullified and priority is returned to the player that originally had it.

@Pablo I think you're right and I'll strike that part of the answer. There's no need to go through the ceremony.

You should reverse actions until the game is in a legal state. He should not be able to play the spell until you pass priority. I have not been able to find anything regarding you using the information gleaned from his misplay. It is probably not stated anywhere, but is an ethical decision based on your setting.
In a tournament setting, your opponent might even receive punishment. See section 2.5 Gamplay Error - Game rule violation http://www.wizards.com/ContentResources/Wizards/WPN/Main/Documents/Magic_The_Gathering_Infraction_Procedure_Guide_PDF1.pdf

If the error was discovered within a time frame in which a player
  could reasonably be expected to notice the error and the situation is
  simple enough to safely back up without too much disruption to the
  course of the game, the judge may get permission from the Head Judge
  to back up the game to the point of the error. Each action taken is
  undone until the game reaches the point immediately prior to the
  error. Cards incorrectly placed in hand are returned to the location
  in the zone from which they were moved (if the identity of the
  incorrectly drawn card is not known to all players, a random card is
  returned instead). Once the game is backed up, it continues from that
  point.

However is it not a good idea to try and rely on this as a meta strategy. Doing so can be considered fraud. http://magic.tcgplayer.com/db/article.asp?ID=10794

If players had to pass priority explicity always, the games would be boring and too long. There is no gamepley error here, this is just a shortcut.

the question is worded in a way to make it sound as if it is not a shortcut: my opponent forgets that I have priority...

Rules knowledge (knowing if your opponent has priority in that situation) doesn't make an action a infraction or not. Under that premise, the same situation would be an infraction for an inexperienced player, but not for a veteran player.

@Colin I don't think you can know if your opponent forget you have priority or if your opponent is suggesting a shortcut where you pass priority.


text:
Does a Angel of Glory's Rise and a Fiend Hunter combo work like I think it does?
The scene I envision is that I have a graveyard full of humans, one of which is a Fiend Hunter. I play Angel of Glory's Rise and put all my humans from my graveyard and onto the battlefield, and when the Fiend Hunter enters the battlefield I target my Angel of Glory's Rise to be exiled.
So, does that mean that when the Fiend Hunter who is holding my Angel in Glory goes to the graveyard, the Angel of Glory's Rise comes onto the battlefield and thereby returns Fiend Hunter to the battlefield again, triggering his ability to exile a target creature anew?
If so, how does spells like Cloudshift effect that Fiend Hunter? If I used Cloudshift on the Fiend Hunter that was keeping my Angel of Glory's Rise in exile, would order of events look like this?

Cloudshift targets Fiend Hunter
Fiend hunter leaves battlefield - Angel of Glory's Rise returns from exile
Angel of Glory's Rise "enters the battlefield" ability triggers
Fiend hunter enters battlefield - Angel of Glory's Rise goes to exile

Or would using Cloudshift not trigger the Fiend Hunter's "leaves the battlefield" ability, exiling my Angel of Glory's Rise forever?
Finally, what if I had two or more Champion of the Parish that entered the battlefield from the graveyard due to the Angel of Glory's Rise's "enter battlefield" ability? Do they both come into play at the same time, so that both of them get a +1/+1 counter because they are both "another Human" to one another, or do they enter the battlefield one at a time?

My wife has a deck that abuses this exact mechanic.  Depending on your colors, if you run Blue, use a Dreamscape Artist to harrow, discarding humans and play your angel sooner.

The first part of your combo does work. When the Fiend Hunter enters the battlefield, he can exile the Angel of Glory, and when the Fiend Hunter goes to the graveyard, he will already be there when the Angel returns, which allows you to repeat that combo indefinitely.
However, Cloudshift on Fiend Hunter is another matter. When the Hunter leaves the battlefield with the Angel exiled, he will indeed trigger the return of the Angel. However, the Hunter leaving and returning to the battlefield are all part of Cloudshift's resolution, so by the time the Hunter returns and you get to choose another creature to exile, the return of the Angel is still on the stack and is not yet back from its exile. You will have to choose another creature entirely, and if you don't happen to have a second Angel on the battlefield, the combo will end with the resolution of Cloudshift.
As for the Champion of the Parish question: The creatures enter the battlefield simultaneously. Creatures that enter the battlefield at the same time see each other enter the battlefield, so a Champion's triggered ability will trigger for each other Human entering the battlefield at the same time. For example, if you have 5 humans in the graveyard, and 2 of them are Champions, then each Champion's ability will trigger four times, so each would get a total of 4 counters.

Technically, the champion sees creatures that enter after -or at the same time- as him. They both see eachother enter and receive a counter.

So to have an emergency "get my fiend hunter out of the battlefield" ability I would need something like Faerie Imposter.

@Robobot Since it doesn't have flash, it's not much of emergency. Presumably you'd not have time to get it out in an emergency. You'd want like unsummon or saving grasp.

So, does that mean that when the Fiend Hunter who is holding my Angel in Glory goes to the graveyard, the Angel of Glory's Rise comes onto the battlefield and thereby returns Fiend Hunter to the battlefield again, triggering his ability to exile a target creature anew?

Yep, that's correct.

If so, how does spells like Cloudshift effect that Fiend Hunter? If I used Cloudshift on the Fiend Hunter that was keeping my Angel of Glory's Rise in exile, would order of events look like this?

Cloudshift targets Fiend Hunter

Fiend hunter leaves battlefield - Angel of Glory's Rise returns from exile

Angel of Glory's Rise "enters the battlefield" ability triggers

Fiend hunter enters battlefield - Angel of Glory's Rise goes to exile

Or would using Cloudshift not trigger the Fiend Hunter's "leaves the battlefield" ability, exiling my Angel of Glory's Rise forever?

Cloudshift does make the Fiend Hunter leave the battlefield, so the ability does trigger. But you've got the order entirely wrong, because you're ignoring the stack.
Here's what actually happens:

Cloudshift exiles Fiend Hunter ("leaves the battlefield" ability triggers and is queued to appear on the stack), then immediately returns Fiend Hunter to the battlefield ("enters the battlefield" ability triggers and is queued to appear on the stack).

"Queued" triggered abilities are placed on the stack, in APNAP order. Since you control both abilities, you get to choose which order they go on the stack. Suppose you put the "enters the battlefield" triggered ability on first and then the "leaves the battlefield" triggered ability on top of it.

Players have a chance to play instants and abilities

The top thing on the stack, the "leaves the battlefield" ability, resolves. This returns Angel of Glory's Rise to play. (If you had stacked the abilities in the other order, you would instead exile the creature targeted by the other ability at this point.)

The top thing on the stack, the "enters the battlefield" ability, resolves. This lets you exile the creature targeted by that ability. (If you had stacked the abilities in the other order, you would instead return Angel of Glory's Rise to play at this point.)

Finally, what if I had two or more Champion of the Parish that entered the battlefield from the graveyard due to the Angel of Glory's Rise's "enter battlefield" ability? Do they both come into play at the same time, so that both of them get a +1/+1 counter because they are both "another Human" to one another, or do they enter the battlefield one at a time?

They enter at the same time, so they both see each other. Whenever an effect says "return all X to the battlefield" or "put all X somewhere" or something like that, you do it for all of them at the same time.

Targets are choosen for queued triggered abilities whenever those abilities are placed on the stack.  The other answer is correct that the Angel is not a valid target, because the Angel is still in exile waiting for Fiend Hunter's "leave the battlefield trigger" to return it.

Oh right, I forgot that the ability was targeted. I'll edit.

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


text:
Can Welding Jar target itself?
We had this issue come up in a game last night, and we weren't sure how to handle it. Player A had Welding Jar and another artifact in play. Player B cast Naturalize targeting the Welding Jar. In response, Player A sacrificed Welding Jar to regenerate itself.
Is this possible to do? I understand that Welding Jar is going into the graveyard either way, as sacrificed creatures can't be regenerated, but can Welding Jar legally target itself with it's own ability?
EDIT: If this seems non-sensical, let's assume that Player A has something in play like Furnace Celebration that gives them a benefit for sacrificing the Welding Jar.

Welding Jar can target itself.
When you cast a spell or activate an ability, you choose targets (601.2c) before paying costs (601.2g). So the Welding Jar is still on the battlefield when it's time to choose targets, and is a valid target for its own ability.
That ability will fizzle, of course, since you've already put Welding Jar in the graveyard by the time it would resolve.


text:
What is the name the creature that is X/X where X is the number of sorcery and Instant cards in your graveyard?
I saw a creature in standard who's power and toughness are equal to  the number of sorcery and instant cards in your graveyard.
Does anyone know the name of this card?

unless I am imagining it and it's really Runechanter's Pike?

Any more details other than its a creature? do you its color or mana cost? are you sure it is in standard? http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Search/Default.aspx?page=1&action=advanced&text=|[instant]|[sorcery]+[graveyard]

No sorry, I was played along with Notion Thief and Reforge the Soul. It was standard. I

http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Search/Default.aspx?text=+[power]+[toughness]+[number]+[cards]+[graveyard] There is no creature currently in Gatherer that matches your description.

Your card sounds like a mixture of Magnivore and Cognivore. Are you sure you're not mixing them up?

Definitely Runechanter's pike.

There is no such card (creature or otherwise) that matches your description.
MTG gatherer search for sorcery + instant + graveyard
The closest I could find was the same one you posted in a comment.
Runechanter's Pike

Thanks that must have been it . Just wanted confirmation.


text:
Can I buy a development card in the special building phase?
Can I buy a development card in the special building phase that occurs between player turns?

the special build phase inbetween turns.

yes.
Taken from the  5-6 players rules pdf: http://www.catan.com/files/downloads/settlers_5-6_rv_rules_100107.pdf
emphasis mine:

• Special Building Phase – Your opponents may build as outlined below. The
  Special Building Phase occurs just after the end of your turn (i.e.,
  between player turns). All the other players may participate in the
  Special Building Phase. Each player then takes his turn clockwise
  around the table, and is allowed to build anything he can create with
  his resources. 3 Note that no player is allowed to play Development
  Cards during the Special Building Phase. Also note that players are
  not allowed to do any trading with other players—nor are they allowed
  to use Maritime Trade—during this phase. They may only use the
  resources they have in their hands. For this reason, players are
  advised to trade as much, and as advantageously, as possible with the
  current player during his trading phase. They will then have the
  resources they need to build during the Special Building Phase. The
  Special Building Phase is an opportunity for all the other players
  (who are not currently taking their turn) to build roads, settlements,
  and cities, and/or to buy Development Cards. This phase allows each
  player to influence the game, even though it is not his turn! ...

This is also supported by the catan faq:

Development Cards in General - If I have bought a Development Card
  during the special building phase right before my turn, may I play
  this card on my turn?
Yes.


text:
"A player must capture as many pieces as possible." What happens if he doesn't?
There's a rule that says "A player must capture as many pieces as possible." What happens in the event a player didn't see the move with the most captures, and makes a move that takes fewer? What happens in this case?
(Is it against the rules to be not too good in checkers and be unable to see the best combination? Hmmm...)

As per the the Official FMJD Rules for International Draughts, if the opponent notices that you have not captured as many pieces as possible, they may decide whether the move stands or if it must be taken back and made again.

5.4. If a player has committed one of the following irregularities, his opponent has the right to decide whether that irregularity must be rectified, or on the contrary, must be allowed to stand.

…

5.4.8. Capture by a piece, of less or more than the number of possible pieces to capture;

This depends on the exact variant of checkers you're talking about. In the primary version played in the US, the forced capture rule says that you must make captures if possible, but lets the player arbitrarily choose between capturing moves (emphasis mine):

1.20 All capturing moves are compulsory, whether offered actively or passively. If there are two or more ways to jump, a player may select any one that they wish, not necessarily that which gains the most pieces. Once started, a multiple jump must be carried through to completion. A man can only be jumped once during a multiple jumping sequence.

The OP is not referring to 'forced capture', but the international draughts rule: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draughts

All right. I'll add a note that those are the rules for the primary variant in the US.


text:
In Omaha Poker, can we use 0,1,3 or 4 hole cards when selecting the best 5 cards?
According to Wikipedia, in Omaha, a player must use exactly two hole cards and three communal cards when selecting the best hand.
In Texas Hold'em Poker, it is possible to use only the communal cards without using any hole cards, if the communal cards alone give the best hand.
So, is Omaha different from Texas Hold'em, in the sense that an exact number of hole cards must be used in Omaha?

The Rules are the Rules. What about the Rules as you state them is unclear.

To answer you title question: No. You are obliged to use 2 and only 2 of your hole cards.
There are main 2 differences between Texas Hold'em and Omaha Hold'em.

The number of hole cards you have.
The number of hold cards you must use to create your final hand.

In Texas Hold'em you get 2 hole cards dealt to you, but are not required to use any of them to form your final 5 card hand.
In Omaha Hold'em you get 4 hole cards dealt to you, but are required to use 2 (and only 2) of them when forming your final 5 card hand.


text:
Where can I play magic in Berlin?
I am in Berlin right now. Does anybody knows some good pub, where it is possible to play Magic: The Gathering?

This question is too localized as is, and will probably be closed unless edited. If you change it to something more general, like "How can I find a local group to play Magic the Gathering with?" it would be much better.

@shujaa Actually, "too localized" is no longer a reason for closing. I'm not sure what close reason should be used.

@Pablo Well, let's just go with "this question should be edited to be more general, because general solutions exist and would probably be helpful to a lot more people". I'd much prefer to see edits than to place it on hold.

This question appears to be off-topic because this is not within the scope of a board game Q&A site to recommend individual available pubs to play a game in.

@JonathanHobbs, I disagree because part of the the gaming experience is the social aspect of meeting people to play, especially for MTG. Unless you're playing with friends or on MTGO, knowing where the local game store is located is necessary to play. I agree with shujaa that if edits are needed, we should edit it to be more general, i.e. "Where can you find a place to play MTG?".

Generalized version of question: http://boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/3840/finding-places-to-play-magic-the-gathering-games?rq=1

Cannot recast my vote to close, but this should be put on hold as both opinion based question  (asking for good pub) and a duplicate, not really off-topic.

Well you could go to http://www.dailymtg.com and Enter Berlin into the Magic Locator app on the Left Side of the webpage.
That will tell you where all the game stores that sell Magic: The Gathering are and what events they are running.


text:
Catan Junior: When drawing the "pirate ghost" Coco (parrot) card to move the ghost, do you recieve resources?
The rules for Catan Junior, for the "Coco" card with the Ghost Captain state:

Move the Ghost Captain as if you had rolled a ‘6’

The description of rolling a 6 says you move the ghost captain and take 2 resources.  Do you take resources when moving the captain in that case?
Its not clear from the wording for the Coco card whether you should take two resources as you normally would with the ghost.
If you do take resources there is almost no downside to building Coco cards.
(Sorry about the incorrect tag - I just joined, so I couldn't create a catan-junior tag)

We just got this game for our daughter for Christmas and have only played it once. Just as with regular settlers, there is no downside to building development cards so I would say there is no downside to building Coco cards as well. The description says

You move the ghost captain and take 2 resources.

Then move the ghost captain and take the two resources. I believe the inclusion of

as if you had rolled a ‘6’

is where the implication of taking the two resource cards comes in. It would be the same as playing a knight in Settlers. You still move the robber and take a resource from another player.

I concur. I've played many times with my kids and we always take the two resource tiles when placing the ghost captain from a coco card.

I have the Dutch manual here, and it literally states that you get to take two resources from the stockpile when moving the Ghost Pirate ("Kapitein Haak" in my book) using a Coco-card.

De speler verplaatst Kapitein Haak direct naar een ander landschapsveld naar keuze en neemt twee fiches 'een en ander' van de betreffende soort.

The player immediately moves the Ghost Captain to another tile of their choice and receives two resource cards of that type.

'Een en ander' would translate to 'Resource'- an attempt from the translators to avoid the word 'grondstof', i guess. So it specifically states that when you throw a 6 (it's also explicitly in the rules for rolling a 6) or move the captain to a tile by means of a Coco-card, you receive 2x the resource that this new tile could produce.


text:
Do I have to sacrifice non-token dragons to Day of the Dragons?
The Card Day of the Dragons says the following:

When Day of the Dragons leaves the battlefield, sacrifice all Dragons you control. Then return the exiled cards to the battlefield under your control.

Note the part I've highlighted. What exactly does that mean?
For example, if I invoke a dragon card after using the enchantment (Dromar, the Banisher for example), when the enchantment leaves play do I have to sacrifice both my 5/5 Dragon tokens and Dromar?

Yes, you would have to sacrifice all dragons creatures and creature tokens under your control, regardless of where they came from or when they were cast. All Dragons means all permanents (creatures, tokens) that have have Dragon in their supertype or subtype. "Under your control" should be clear.

Since it say you control, if I cast a card control (instant) on an opponent's dragon before the enchantment leaves play, I'll have to destroy it also, right? Anyways, that's sad I have to destroy dragons unrelated to the enchantment also. Thanks for answer.

Yup, that's what I was trying to get at with "regardless of where they came from". Similarly, you would sacrifice any Dragon tokens under your control created by any other spells/abilities.

pair this with a clever use of Ego erasure and Naturalize and you can get all your creatures back and keep all your dragons.

@Pow-Ian This combo is so pretty and cheap mana cost! Thanks for pointing out.

Thanks for asking the question, I would not have thought of it if you hadn't.


text:
Is it better to start with M13 and splash in RtR and GTC when building a deck?
I've been doing some reading on deck building and I'm getting the feeling that using the RtR and GC expansions are better mixed in with a solid M13 deck.  However, I can't really confirm this anywhere, which is why I'm asking here.
I've been focusing my booster pack purchases on RtR and GTC but I think I need to spend some more M13 time if this is the case.  Any advice?

On a nerd-note, the three letter code for Gatecrash is GTC. :) I figured the other two were using Wizard's three letter code, so why not, eh?

One note of meta-advice (which could go on many of your posts, which is why it's a comment here rather than an answer): if your interest is to build a deck to be (semi-)competitive with at FNM, at some point you're acutally going to want to switch from buying packs to buying singles.  Especially (counter-intuitively) outside of rares, singles make it much more cost-efficient to get the effects and cards you want, essentially without having to worry about which sets you're picking up. The singles market is another thing that's changed drastically (much for the better) since the 'old days'.

Thanks Steven.  I was actually aware of that already. :o)  but I'm glad you brought it up.  I doubt I'll be doing any competitive play but if my son were to want to, its good advice for him as well.  I kind of enjoy the excitement and mystery of tearing open a pack and thumbing through the cards, from a collectors perspective.

Generally speaking, whichever option you choose, this is no big deal. Expansions and core sets released together are designed to play well with each other. But core sets are also designed to be reasonable stand-alone products.
Learning Magic
Core sets are designed to help you learn Magic. The mix of cards is targeted towards newer players. The creatures and spells are generally about as powerful as the ones in expansions, but many of the lower-rarity cards are simpler. In particular, you're less likely to find surprising or "counterintuitive" mechanics that change the basic resource relationships in the game; cards are also less likely to have difficult requirements or restrictions.
However, there is no one-size-fits-all approach. In my experience, new players learn best when they're interested and excited about the game, regardless of what exactly it is that they're doing. The expansion sets are more complex but not overwhelmingly so. If you're really excited by the idea of taxing your opponent to death, for example, then by all means, grab that (Gatecrash) Orzhov intro deck — there may be a bit more up-front complexity in figuring out how to use the cards well, but your enthusiasm will also help you get up the learning curve faster. My wife learned to play just fine with Myr of Mirrodin, an expansion intro deck; the deck's strategy just clicked naturally for her, so within two or three games she was already making substantive improvements using cards from boosters.
The complexity difference is most noticeable in drafting. Core-set drafts tend to be much more forgiving, with more of a focus on deckbuilding fundamentals like building your deck around a mana curve and choosing cards that support a consistent game plan. Drafting an expansion set well, in contrast, tends to demand a good understanding of the internal synergies and idiosyncracies of the enrivonment.
Building a strong deck
Cards in expansion sets like Return to Ravnica aren't necessarily any more powerful than cards in the core set. Core sets usually have the "basic" version of an effect, whereas expansion sets tend to feature a modified version that plays to the set's mechanical themes (compare Cancel and Dissipate, for instance). However, there are always at least a few high-powered staples in core sets — cards like Mana Leak, Lightning Bolt, and Farseek — as well as powerhouse "bomb" cards like Sun Titan and Thragtusk.
Tournament decks pretty much universally have cards from a lot of different sets, because being able to cherrypick the best cards available gives players a competitive edge.
Specific themes
One area where the expansion sets really shine is exploring specific themes. Core sets often have some themed cards, like the different Soldiers in M13, but with fewer cards than a full block and less specialized mechanics, they don't go as deep as the expansions do. If you want to build a graveyard-abusing deck, or an elf deck, or an all-artifacts deck based around Tempered Steel, you'll likely want to focus on cards from a particular expansion set that focused on those themes.

Thanks for the detailed answer.  Playing MtG in 1994 was a simpler time and the game has really grown.  Just trying to get a grasp on it again and the number of blocks/sets/expansions can be a bit daunting.

At least now we have intro decks. I remember struggling mightily to actually cast anything out of an Ice Age ”starter deck” (random cards of all five colors; barely enough lands by modern standards). Also DotP is an amazingly helpful tutorial.

I went ahead and ordered the M13 Deck Builder Core Toolset.  Figured that was the best (cheapest) way to get a decent start on the core deck.  Then I can customize decks with my expansion boosters.

If you're not intimidated by the "complexity", than I personally would start with RTR and GTC if you intend to play in standard, because they'll rotate out a year after m13 will


text:
Can you use Trader to gain a Silver instead of a Farmland, but still get the buy side-effects of Farmland?
Can I buy a Farmland, trashing a card from my hand and gaining one costing up to 2 more, but then reveal Trader, and gain a Silver instead of the Farmland?
I always think of the "buy" operation as containing a "gain" operation, so any cards that trigger on gain also trigger on buy, but not vice-versa.  However, when does the "gain" reaction actually occur?  Is it after you have already resolved the "buy" reactions or operations?
A follow-up question is this:  because I converted the Farmland to a Silver, can I still put my Treasury cards back on my deck at the end of this turn?
I predict that the "correct" answer is going to look like the following algorithm, but I'm not 100% on this, hence my question here:

You "buy" a Farmland.
That triggers any "buy" reactions or actions on the card, using Farmland, (e.g. you can trash a Gold from your hand and gain a Province)
Add Farmland to the set of cards you "bought this turn".
You then "gain" the Farmland.
You reveal Trader, and gain a Silver instead.
That triggers any "gain" reactions, using Silver (e.g. Watchtower, to put the Silver on deck)
(Note, this does not trigger any gain reactions using the Farmland, e.g. imagine a new reaction card like Fool's Gold, except it triggers whenever anyone gains a victory card)
Add Silver to the set of cards you "gained this turn".
On cleanup, you cannot put your Treasury on deck, because the "cards bought this turn" includes a Farmland, which is indeed a victory card.
The next player will be able gain Silver via Smugglers because the "cards you gained last turn" includes a Silver, but it does not include a Farmland, so they will not be able to gain a Farmland via Smugglers.

The Treasury cannot go back on top of your deck. It depends on what you buy, not what you gain, and you definitely paid for and bought the Farmland.

On buy effects are resolved before on gain effects. So, you would buy the Farmland and follow it's on-buy effect of trashing a card, etc. Then, you are going to gain the Farmland. At this point, you can reveal the Trader to gain the Silver instead of the Farmland.
Your algorithm is correct, and your assumptions about Smugglers and Treasury are correct.

Yes,
This works, it is explicitly called out in the Hinterlands rules for the Trader card (page 11)

For example you can buy Farmland, trash a card from your hand and gain one costing 2 more, then use Trader to gain Silver rather than Farmland.

Thanks for the reference to the rules.  Apparently, I failed to learn "valuable rulebook-reading skills":  http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/607406/regarding-throne-room-amp-kings-court-with-duratio

@nonrectangular lol :)


text:
Does a 1st round takeout double always require 3 cards in all the opposition unbid suits?
Does a takeout double in the first round always require 3 or more cards in opposition unbid suits or can a strong hand (18+ points) do a takeout even without the requirement?
After the partner bids in response to a takeout double, if the doubler bids a suit different than partner's response to the takeout, it means he has a strong hand with 18+ points. In such cases, should the partner no longer assume that the doubler will have 3 or more cards in all opposition unbid suits?
I am mainly looking at Standard American & 2/1 bidding systems. Also I am asking about the standard rather than partners specific conventions.

There are two basic situations where the person after the opening bidder will make a takeout double: 1) Where the doubler expects to be the dummy, and 2) where the doubler expects to be the declarer.
The answer to the question is YES in the first case. After the opening bid, the second person ("seat") will double to show strength in all the unbid suits, with an average of four cards in each of these suits, and maybe a singleton in the opener's suit (occasionally a doubleton or a void). Such a call indicates that my length and strength in each of the unbid suits is reasonably close to the "average" of four. "Three" would fit this average, two would not. The meaning is, "if you bid your best suit and I am dummy, we should be able to make a low level contract if the opponents don't have a game. If they do, the penalty for our going down would be less than the score they would make for game.
In the second instance, the caller has a hand of 16 points or more with a five card (or longer) suit that is stronger than that of either the typical doubler or overcaller. Such a person wants to be declarer. In that case, the correct sequence of bids is for them to double first, then overcall. This overcall (the second thing said), doesn't require three cards in every suit (specifically yours), because it can override your bid. Instead, the doubler wants information about your hand, before going their own way. If you have an unusually long suit or support for the doubler's suit, you will be pleased to know that the doubler has "extra" strength beyond that of most doubles.

There certain cases (varying somewhat by System) where a first round Take-Out Doubler may be off-shape. In particular:

A hand too strong for a 1NT overcall, which will rebid in NT.

A strong (and self-sufficient) 1-suited hand which will jump rebid that suit (or simple rebid if Advancer cuebids).

Depending on Partnership agreements, specifically in regards immediate Cuebids and Jump Overcalls, there may be other cases that arise. These should always be thoroughly discussed in advance with Partner..

What about in 2/1 & Standard American - in both these systems does a takeout guarantee 3 cards in the opposition unbid suits? I will edit the question with this also. Also I am not talking about partners specific conventions.

Why do you want in the auction early, showing a strong and possibly mis-fitting hand, against a game-forcing Opponent's sequence? Just sit in the bushes for another round, and learn more.

How is it a game forcing opponent's sequence? All the opponents have done before the takeout double is an opening call.

I don't think this is quite right. I think that AKQx xx AK AKxxx clearly needs to get into the auction right away after RHO's 1H opening, and that X is the standard way to enter the auction, even though this hand doesn't fit either of your categories for an offshape takeout double

@ruds: Fine: Double; get a 2D advance from Partner; rebid 3C; and hear 3S back. Now what? This auction is very likely if Partner has more than 3 HCP, his rough expectation if Responder can't move. I much prefer to underbid slightly on these hands with 2C and let opponents think the unbid points are in their partner's hand for a round. A move by any of the other three players allows me a "Tell me more Partner" second round cue bid. With Diamonds and Clubs reversed a starting Double is more comfortable if one opts for that route.

@ruds: Clearly calculations are different if I'm in 4th seat against a frequent psycher - but Partner being a passed hand isn't specified in the OP, so one can't be making recommendations based on that assumption.

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


text:
Bidding: How to figure out if responder has 4 carder or 5 carder major?
Playing SAYC, you open 1 Minor. Left passes and partner bids 1 Major. How do you figure out if partner has 4 carder major or 5 carder?
Obviously if left overcalls, then partner can use a negative double to indicate  he has a 4 carder or bid 1 Major to show a 5 carder. But otherwise, is there any convention to figure this out?

In general no, there is no convention to convey this information because it is not (yet) important enough to warrant co-opting a call sequence. The subsequent auction will enable the partners to first determine if an 8-card fit exists, then whether either notrump is a suitable contract, or notrump is unsuitable but only 7-card fits are available.
Opener will show 4-card support eagerly (either by an immediate raise or a delayed jump raise) so that Responder will know there is an 8-card fit.
If forced by Responder to make a preference then Opener's minimum return to Responder's will be assumed to show only 2 card support. This will often be passed unless Responder has unrevealed strength to compensate for the lack of fit
If Opener returns freely to Responder's first suit then this delayed support shows three cards. At this point Responder holding 5 can indicate this by passing, inviting game, or jumping to game depending on his knowledge of the combined partnership assets. If Responder holds only 4 cards then a choice must be made to play in a Moysian fit of the major; in notrump; or in some other suit.
An essential point to note in these auctions is that the beginner's rush to rebid a 5-card suit is a terrible habit, and to be avoided whenever possible. Fast rebids of a suit should be reserved for showing 6-card holdings, so that partner can freely raise to show 2, revealing the 8-card fit.
AN exception to the above exists when Opener rebids 1 Notrump. Many partnerships will play some variation on Check-Back Stayman or New Minor Forcing to then explore major suit fits in more detail.
Update - as noted below in a comment:
by "fast rebid" is meant "at the next round of bidding." The tempo of the rebid itself, slow or fast, cannot legally (or ethically) be taken into account by partner!

+1. clarification in case OP is relatively new to bridge: by "fast rebid" you mean, "at the next round of bidding." of course the tempo, slow or fast, of the rebid itself, cannot legally be taken into account by partner!

@hunter: Thank you for the reminder. Your point is well made and important at all levels.


text:
When none of the opening bids are suitable - what do you bid?
Let's say I have a 4-4-4-1 distribution. I have somewhere between 20 to 22 points.
What do I bid in this case? 2NT is not possible because of the singleton. 2C is not possible because what would be the rebid after the partner responds - any response promises a 5-carder.
What would be the right bid in this case?
I play Standard American 5 Card Major or 2/1.

You're going to have to give us at least some information about what system you're playing.

@PhilipKendall - added the info.

Don't be afraid to downgrade the strength of a hand by 1 HCP when it is flawed for the call being made. Here, treat a (exactly) 20 HCP hand as just 19 and open 1D.
Remember that it is very rare for a distributional opening 1 bid to get passed out. Partner needs to have a hand with no excuse to respond; RHO needs a hand with no excuse to reopen; and LHO needs a hand with no decent 5-card suit. Just because you have a strong hand doesn't force you to open above the 1-level. With any doubt at all, just open 1D in tempo - Hands opening with a NT bid should be good examples of the type, not bad ones.
As I commented to steenbergh's answer:

Modern treatment (and rules!) now allows the 2NT opening with a singleton K as well [as with a singleton A]. This is an expert call, however, so should only be engaged in if partner is not going to react inappropriately when revealed.

If the singleton is an Ace (and an Ace only!) a lot of players will open this hand in 2NT. If it isn't an Ace, or if you very explicitly agree with your partner that 20-22 4-4-4-A is not 2NT, then just open in the lowest available 4-card and, if partner answers, jump to indicate points. If opponents start bidding, double*.
'Worst case' scenario is that everybody passes and you're playing a 1-level contract, but oftentimes partner's hand is very limited in these cases and a game-score is very improbable. You'd rather play a 1+2 then a 4-1, right?
(*) Note that opening and then doubling the opponents while Partner passed indicates a pretty strong hand on your side, and since you still have two unbid suits (or at least one if opponets are bidding one of your 4-cards) there is a good chance you will still find a fit with partner. Making this double a penalty is still an option for your partner, if he has length in opponents suit (probably your singleton).

Nice answer, but careful with the doubles. If opponents are bidding your singleton's suit, it can get expensive; if not, you may drive them towards it.

@TimLymington regardless, I alone hold the majority of the points. Partner might still have one or two points too, and may have some trumps when I don't, creating a threat on both sides of the declarer. And, if your opponents never make a doubled contract against you, you don't double enough.

Modern treatment (and rules!) now allows the 2NT call with a singleton K as well. This is an expert call, however, so should only be engaged in if partner is not going to react inappropriately when revealed.


text:
Can you use the Annihilation card on a Giant Skunk that someone else is fighting?
Sometimes people will try to save the Giant Skunk for when they're level 9 to fight it to prevent people from screwing them over too much at the end. However my friends and I have debated about whether or not you can use the Annihilation card to remove the Giant Skunk card from the game after someone plays it.

Giant Skunk: They may not help you, backstab you, or use any cards either for or against you -- except for Wandering Monsters and monster enhancers.
Annihilation: Play this card at any time to permanently remove any one card from the game. It does not go to the discard pile . . . put it back in the box and forget it. The target card must be in play when you use Annihilation on it. If an opponent had just played it, it is canceled and has no effect.

Some people say yes, others say no, and still others say it depends on the timing. Which is it?

If the Giant Skunk has just been played (via Kicking Down The Door or Looking For Trouble), then you may play Annihilation to cancel the Giant Skunk. At the time it's being played, it doesn't have all of its defensive text; Annihilation means it never existed.
Once it's in play, Annihilation won't help, because that isn't a monster enhancer or wandering monster.
So if you're going to Annihilate a Giant Skunk, be quick about it.
Source: Steve Jackson Games Forum

Don't forget about the tie breaker rule for Munchkin. "When in doubt, the owner of the game is right." So it depends on the opinion of the owner.

Whilst true, I don't think we should begin considering this a helpful and direct answer to the question. So the owner decides, but until then, what do we say is the case?

(or, more palpably: imagine if every Munchkin question had an answer like this.)


text:
How to force the opponent to take the x squares?
I've been told that I must do two things in order to win hard games in Othello (Reversi):

Take the corners
Do not take the X squares, as they are the worst squares on the board.

We all know that we have to take the corners. I am tired of keep hearing that stupid hint. What I want to know is how force my opponent into taking the x squares and the squares around the corners so I can use his pieces to jump into the corners. What squares do I have to take? what strategy to follow?

Taking corners early is almost always good, but as the game progresses it can be a poison pill... say you hold C1-G1; then taking A1 and allowing your opponent into B1 costs you the whole edge and corner H1 - from whence he can attack the east edge and H8. Sitting on an X square makes it hard to stop your opponent getting the corner, but it lead to a very profitable sacrifice.

@JuliaHayward I was planing to ask about how the importance of the corners in my next question :)

It actually can be a bad move to avoid the X squares as long as possible. I've seen games where players so pointedly avoided them that the four corners were taken before the first X space was played. If that happens, especially on an already-dense board, the corners lose a lot of advantage because it can be impossible to "riposte" and capture back any spaces taken by a play in the X square, because everything further along that line is already filled.
So, "Never make this move" is virtually never a good rule to follow. There's always a scenario, no matter how contrived, where it can not only be a good move, but a game-winner.
However, "avoid making this move" is a good rule in this scenario, and therefore forcing your opponent to play it is also a good tactic. As far as "how", the basic strategy is to make one or more of those Xs his only legal move at some point in the game. You do this by exploiting "parity"; make the move that is the best combination at the time of flipping as many discs as possible, while leading him to make the move that flips as few as possible. The fewer spaces of his color, the fewer lines and therefore spaces he can play on. The trick is usually to time a big move that tips the board in your favor and takes away a bunch of moves for your opponent at just the right time.
The basic mantra is, "make the last possible move on the line". If you take the last space in any row, column or diagonal, any further moves to recapture spaces in that line have to be made in a different direction. That generally gives the corners a high value because they are the endpoint of the three longest lines on the board; however if the corner play is the next-to-last move on a line, and you can still make the last move, it's often of very little advantage for your opponent to take the corner at that time, and so giving it to him by playing an X square can actually work to your advantage by removing his ability to use that corner to re-establish an edge. For the same reason, if you already have an adjacent corner to the one you and your opponent are fighting for, the advantage to him of owning that corner is reduced and the advantage to you of owning it is increased.
That will inevitably lead to a fight to avoid giving your opponent the first corner; once the first corner's taken by one color, it ends up a scramble to take the adjacent corners. The last corner's worth is often the least, as by the time it's taken the edges are typically very dense and taking it is unlikely to change very many spaces.

The permutations of the game makes it hard to come up with one specific strategy. Personally I like to "dance around" the X squares, trying to tease my opponent into placing his pieces there. But always remembering that it should cost him more than it should ever cost me.
As a general rule, your objective is to limit the number of liberties (that is, the number of moves) available to your opponent, while at the same time increasing yours. This is what is called the mobility strategy. When this objective is attained, one is said to have control of the game.
However, don't forget that you must force your opponent to make a bad move : it's not enough if he has even one non-disastrous choice at each move ; he must have no good moves at all.


text:
Is there a strategy to choosing the card used to construct a wonder phase?
When a player is constructing a wonder phase, what strategy is used to pick the card, and is the value of the card used for anything?
I'm assuming that:

The value of the card serves no purpose once being used to construct a wonder phase
The action of constructing a wonder is similar to discarding, except:
a. the player receives the benefits of the wonder phase instead of 3 coins, and
b. the card does not have the possibility of being reused later vs. those in the discard pile
Due to 2b, the player should pick a card that they don't want to and/or can't use themselves, and also don't want other players to be able to benefit from (I believe the instructions state something to this effect).

Are these assumptions correct, and/or are there other considerations I'm leaving out?

I only consider 2b is probably the most important. One thing is that in the 3rd age I always use the Guild cards (if I can't build/benefit from the Guild) so that there's no chance at all it will be used by anyone.

Yes, card denial is a major factor.  If it would be dangerous in your neighbor's hands and you can't use it for its primary purpose, using it for your wonder is ideal.

Picking the right card often is an important strategic choice, and I think you've got a decent feel for the main part of that - use a card that you don't want yourself, and that you don't want your opponents getting. In particular, I would tend to look at the next couple of players that the hand will be passed to, and see if I can spot a card that is key to their strategy that I can deny them. Alternatively, if nothing stands out, I'll see if any of the cards I have is a duplicate of one they already have, and bury a different card, thus reducing their options.

If you see that your neighbour could only afford to build one of your cards, and you can’t or don’t want to play this card yourself, it can make sense to bury it, although you’d like to play another card. However, only consider this if your neighbour is a strong player resp. (currently) better than you. Keep in mind that your next but one neighbour gets this hand after.
If your next but one neighbour could need one of your cards badly (e.g., the last Science symbol that would complete a set), consider not to bury it. Hand it over to your neighbour and let him/her do the (often disadvantageous) action of burying a card. However, this might only work if your neighbour is an attentive player.
Many tactics depend on the number of players.
A 3p (and 7p, but this doesn’t work so well with many players) game has the fewest brown resources per player. By burying specific resource cards, it’s often possible to make it impossible for one of your enemies to complete his/her Wonder, especially for those Wonders that need 3/4 resources of the same kind. Keep the Caravansery and Alexandria in mind.
A 4p game has the fewest gray resources per player. Depending on the Wonders in play, it can make sense to bury both gray cards of the same type (resp. build one and bury one). Keep the Forum and Alexandria in mind.
3p (and 4p, but works better with 3p) games have one military card per player per Age. If you build military yourself, burying a military card ensures that you win against (at least) one neighbour. However, this is probably only worth it if you need the specific Wonder stage and/or you can’t build the military card yourself.

Yes. Unless you need a wonder effect at a specific point in time, you're almost always looking to bury cards that are way better for your opponents than they are for you. For example:

You might bury a Loom if you're Halikarnassos and your neighbors are buying cloth from you
You might bury a military card near the end of an age to keep someone from suddenly having enough shields to beat you
You might bury science cards if you're not really building science but someone's threatening to win with it
Thanks to the "no duplicates" rule you might bury a great card that you already have one of

Of course, if you do need the wonder effects, you have to balance these considerations against how badly you need your wonder.


text:
Bidding response to convenient minor bid
If responder to a convenient minor 1 bid has 5 points or less I have been told the correct bid is 1 notrump.  Is a convenient minor 1 bid a demand bid?

What system are you playing?

The Convenient Minor as a forcing bid is a prohibited agreement in North America (ACBL Jurisdiction). To get caught regularly responding to it with less than 5 points will result in severe disciplinary action by the ACBL.
If you are not playing in North America, you must refer to the agreed conventions and agreements as per your national authority on the rules. In most countries such unusual agreements are typically prohibited except in extended team play competition, just as in North America.
Update
ACBL Convention Charts (pdf)

I've heard of things like "Bergen raises," where opener bids one of a five card major, and responder raises to four, with five trumps and zero points (law of total tricks). Is that also prohibited, or is it allowed because it is "non-forcing." Is there a ACBL link that shows what is permitted, and what is not?

@TomAu: I pointedly did not say 5 HCP. I said 5 points. If you have a sane evaluation system that more or less maps to Work Point Count, and have sufficient distributional points no authority has an issue with the game jump you describe.

Thank you for your reply. Greatly appreciated. My misunderstanding.

I would never respond 1NT to 1m with fewer than 5 HCP. with some partners, I only respond at the 1 level with sound values. With others, I'll respond 1 of a suit  with a weak hand whenever I lack 4-card support for their clubs or 3-card support for their diamonds. It's simply a matter of partnership preference; I don't think one way or the other is markedly superior; both leave you in trouble some of the time.
One point you and your partner should consider is whether you open strong 2-suiters with 2C or prefer to open 1 of your stringer suit and then jump-shift or reverse. If you sometimes open hands that nearly have game in hand 1m, you should respond with weak hands.

The permitted "convenient minor" forcing sequence is 1 club, pass, 1 diamond. In this case, the opener must have at least 10 high card points (hcp), if responder may have nothing.
A strong "minor" forcing sequence is 2 clubs, pass, 2 diamonds, where the opener has at least 22-24, and the responder might have "nothing.
Besides being prohibited, the sequence 1 diamond, pass, 1NT (with fewer than 5 hcp), doesn't work well because you skip two bids, hearts and spades, depriving both your team and your opponents of them. The ACBL frowns on sequences whose primary impact is to disrupt your opponents' bidding without helping your own cause (that is, sequences that hurt you some, and hurt your opponents more).
In the club-bid, diamond-response sequences, the response didn't take up any additional bidding space. Because it takes up bidding space, the 1NT response to 1 diamond must be "natural" (typically 6-9 hcp, although 5 will be permitted), and reasonably balanced.


text:
Cribbage Scoring Difficulties
We ran into a friendly argument while playing cribbage today and we're stumped as to how to count this hand.  How do you count 3 Sixes, 1 Seven and 1 Eight?

First of all, there's only one fifteen: the seven and the eight.  That's two points.  (Note that the sixes can't participate in 15s at all)
Next, there are three runs of three: each six in turn, the seven, and the eight.  That's 3*3 = nine points.
Finally, there's the trio of sixes, worth six points (or equivalently, three pairs of sixes).
So the final score for the hand is 2+9+6 = 17 points.

Another way to look at the hand is taking the shortcut that you have a triple run which is worth 15 (as opposed to a double double run which is 16) with a single "fifteen-two" for a total of 17 points.

@corsiKa: Those shortcuts are important in becoming a better player.

Here is a web page that you can use to score any cribbage hand:
http://www.bucktheodds.com/cribbage/score
And, here is your specific hand
http://www.bucktheodds.com/cribbage/score?cardsText=6S,6D,6H,7S,8D
The page is really cool because it shows a list of all scoring combinations:
Scoring Details
15 Count    7S,8D       2
Pairs       6H,6S,6D    6
Straights   6S,7S,8D    9
            6D,7S,8D
            6H,7S,8D
Jack                    0
Flush                   0
Total                   17


text:
How many cards can I buy in a turn?
How many cards can a player purchase during a turn? If it is three, is there a way to discard one of your cards to purchase another?

You can do as much purchasing as you like; each time a card is purchased, you draw a new one from the deck, which is available to purchase immediately. If you have somehow saved up 50 energy, you could buy many, many cards. There is no limit to how many cards you are allowed to own, but if you're collecting that much energy, somebody else has probably won already.
If you hate the cards that are available, you may spend 2 Energy to sweep all three available cards away into the discard pile, and replace them with new cards from the deck. You may do this repeatedly, at 2 Energy per time you sweep the cards, and you can do this both before and after buying a card. (You don't actually need to buy a card, either; if you only have 2 Energy, and your opponent is staring at a card you don't want him to have, you can sweep the cards without buying anything.)
(The above bits were paraphrased from the rules, under step three of your turn, "Buying Cards".)


text:
When are Keeper actions available?
In Star Fluxx, some Keepers give you abilities that don't take up an action. Are Keeper abilities in Star Fluxx available immediately after the Keeper is put on the table, on the next turn, or just the next time you have an action available?

This is the answer from Loney Labs (Alison Looney)

We would rule that you can use the power of a Keeper as soon as you
  play it.  There's no way it would depend upon keeper or hand limits,
  or play rules.  Your turn is not over until you have taken all
  optional extra actions, including those based on special Keeper powers
  and extra actions on Rules.  So, as soon as you play that Keeper (or
  that Rule) you can do what it says you can do, because your turn is
  not over until you have taken (or decided not to take) that optional
  extra action.
It may happen that a Keeper power has no effect at a given time.
  Example: in Star Fluxx, you could steal a crew member with the Captain
  as soon as you play the Captain - but if no other players have crew
  members on the table to steal, then that's not going to be an option.
  Another example: In Zombie Fluxx you could kill a Zombie with your
  Shotgun as soon as you play the Shotgun, but if there are no Zombies
  to kill, obviously nothing's going to happen.

All keeper actions can be triggered from the moment they enter play (unless otherwise stated).
However, if that keeper is your final play, your turn immediately ends and you will not be able to trigger any ability that requires it to be your turn.
Watch your play order and you can pop anything the turn it comes out.

Are you sure about the "however"? For example, if only the Rich Bonus rule is in place, and you play a keeper, which causes you to now have more keepers than anyone else, you would still get to play another card due to the bonus, right?

However, if that keeper is your final play .. you will not be able to trigger any ability that requires it to be your turn - So, you want to say that you need first to play a card, then draw a card in order for the effects to be usable in that turn ? If you always first draw a card, then play, your last card played will never take effect in that turn?

I think I got it. In manual http://goo.gl/sdDlN they say in On your turn section that you must first draw then play then do 2 more actions (obey limits). The rules also say Optional actions allowed by Keepers may be performed at any point during this sequence. Since play rule is the second action out of 4 you can always trigger the keeper action and it should hold even if there are no hand/keeper limit rules in play since you still play those moves even tho they are not applicable.

Anyway, I never noticed that there is play order, so you must not play before drawing which does make sense since you could get creeper that can prevent you from winning.

@GendoIkari, yes, you would get another action if your last play changed the rules so that you get more actions. If Play 1 is in effect, and you add Play All, then you get all of those additional actions.

To Clarify my "However", I use the term "Final" to mean the absolute last play allowed by the current cards and rules. If playing that keeper would mean you have ZERO remaining actions, your turn ends.

@JaredTritsch, your final is too vague. For instance, is it final if I play a card then have no limiting rules in play? And what do you mean by watch your play order and you can pop out anything ? There is nothing to watch since you have no choice in order. Do you mean that when I proclaimed my turn as finished then I can't do actions (since its not my turn any more).

Found what "final" means - Andrew Looney said on forum its when you say it, move fuzzy creature, or move token


text:
Where can I get a short run of standard cards with custom backs?
I want to print regular playing cards, with backs that I designed. Does anyone know where I could print a deck of cards for a good price with good quality cards? I only want about 50 to 100 decks to start with. Zazzle costs a bit too much for me ($20 a deck), and Bicycle doesn't give a set price.

possible duplicate of On-Demand Cards Deck printing service?

I don't think he ever found good quality card printing.

what makes you think asking the question again will get different results?

not a duplicate. on-demand and short-run have some overlap, in that he could just order 50 decks of his own game from an on-demand service, but there are companies out there that do short run printing for less money than an on demand service would charge.

PS: I just added another answer to @user1873's linked question

Bicycle has a custom card page: http://www.bicyclecards.com/custom, but you must contact them for pricing. They have two tiers personalized which is 1-500 decks, or custom which is 2500+ decks.

do you know how much it would approximately cost if i ordered the 2500 decks but used my own designs for just the backs but everything else the same as regular cards? what would be cheapest way?


text:
Is there a real disadvantage for the player kicking off step two in power grid?
Maybe I am just playing the game incorrectly.
The perceived disadvantage is that you are the last player to then be able to expand and be the second player in a city.

Could you describe the disadvantage you perceive? Maybe you are playing the game incorrectly, but there's not really enough info to even guess...

There is a significant disadvantage to kicking off Step 2, which is something a player will have to do deliberately by building their sixth/seventh/eighth city (depending on the number of players). As you point out, the other players will be much more interested in saving their money to buy the (likely-cheaper) second spot in several cities instead of buying additional cities this turn (which probably have high connection costs at this point).
In most games I've played, someone kicks off Step 2 for one of four reasons:

They think that the extra income this turn, and having more cities sooner, is profitable enough. If you enter Step 2 with 8 cities, and everyone else has 7 or fewer, you might be able to stay ahead of your rivals in city-building. If you build to 9 or 10 cities, this is an even bigger advantage and you're more likely to be the person who builds the game-ending number of cities. And if you're the person who builds the game-ending city, you can control when the game ends, and not build that city unless it's advantageous to you. (About half of the games I've played end with the winner not powering all of his cities, just having the most powered cities and building the game-ending city.)
They've gotten bored with waiting. The games I play sometimes have a full turn (or even two or three!) of everyone sitting with one-less-than-the-Step-2-trigger number of cities.
They desperately need to build a city somewhere, and avoid being hemmed in.
They don't understand the full implications of going last when building cities, the turn that second slot opens up in each city.

Right step 2! gosh I am not good.

ok.  I think its sounds really good.  Ill pop it off for a few hours maybe overnight

As mentioned by Marshall, when other players have enough elektro to reasonably expand once Step 2 hits, the cost to the activating player in terms of net city loss, expansion planning, increased connection costs, and risk of being boxed in is very high to the player who kicks it off.
There's also a slight cost to them in terms of being forced to auction after worst card is cycled out, because the extra card you burn through opens up the futures market slightly more for your opponents. This is relatively minor compared with expansion though.


text:
How do I deal with or avoid a full map?
I played a game of power grid with 6 players using the map of Italy, with one zone removed. In step 2, I had power plants to produce electricity for 11 (6-4-1) houses with cheap resources, and built 13 houses, preparing to end the game (14 houses) once a suitable plant is in the market. However, one of the players had plants to power 15 houses, so I didn't buy a 4-house plant in the market, fearing that once I bought it, he would build up to 15 houses immediately to win the game (he had 11 houses at that time), and waited for better plants.
Afterwards, step 3 was entered. My player order was 2 at that time. I bought a 6-house plant, replacing the 1-house plant, preparing to end the game with 16 houses, fully powered. However, the other players had filled in all the cities in the map immediately, with no more space left, making me unable to build the 3 additional houses to win the game.
Is this a rare scenario? Can this happen when everyone plays the game normally? Should I instead try to end the game earlier when I already had 13 houses?

If all the cities on the map have been filled in (35 cities in 5 regions), then SOMEONE will have built 14 cities and so the game ends -- 13 cities each for 6 players is only 78 of the 105 available places.
Its not necessary for a player to be able to power all 14 cities -- they just have to build them to trigger the end of the game.  The player who powers the most cities at the end of that turn (even if it is less than 14) wins.

This is a real possibility, especially for 6-player games. This happens because there are the same number of cities on most maps in a 5-player game and a 6-player game. This crunch is somewhat mitigated by only having to build to 14 to end the game. If you are the only one in lots of different cities during step 2, you should try to get into other places so this doesn't happen, particularly if you are near the front in turn order, even if it might be a bit more expensive.
I would say, however, that this scenario is uncommon. I've seen it happen only once or twice in all my plays of Power Grid.

The game is designed such that it will end if all city slots are bought.  Additionally, it's just about who can power the most cities, not who has built in the most cities, or even who can power more cities than the end-game threshold.
If the map filling up is something you are concerned about, buy cities in advance.  Doing so means you have less money (bad for opportunity cost) and are earlier in turn order (bad for a number of reasons), but guarantees you will get the cities you want at favorable prices.  Buying more cities than you can power can be a strategic move for a number of reasons, including you can buy them cheaply enough now to make it worth it.
Another possibility is to buy cities that are more expensive but leave you more expansion options.  For example, let's say that on the one of side of you are a set of cities developed by players A and B and on the other side are cities developed by a mix of players C, D, and E.  In this case, you probably want to buy a more expensive city that has been developed by C+D rather than a cheaper city developed by A+B because you are actively competing with E for the C+D city, where you can come back to the A+B cities later.


text:
If the starting card is a Wild, does the starting player still play after picking a color?
I've noticed that while playing Uno with friends we had a situation that came up that I am not 100% sure with, again we are playing official rules.
If the first card off the top of the deck is a wild card, I understand the person to the left of the dealer chooses a colour but does he/she also place/draw a card in the same turn or is it up to the player next to him/her?

The normal rule is that the player-to-dealers-left plays the first card.  If the wild card exception rule doesn't say that the player-to-dealers-left doesn't play a card, then I assume that he would.

http://www.unorules.com/

If the first card turned up from the Draw Pile (to form the Discard
  Pile) is an Action card, the Action from that card applies and must be
  carried out. The exceptions are if the Wild or Wild Draw Four cards
  are turned up, in which case – Return them to the Draw Pile, shuffle
  them, and turn over a new card.

From the latest rules (emphasis mine):

Wild Card - ... If this card is turned up at the beginning of play, the person to the left of the dealer chooses the color to begin play and plays the first card.

The rule has been in place for a while, What rules changes have there been in Uno?

There are two sets of rules on that page.  One says "If a Wild card is turned up at the beginning of play, the person to the left of the dealer chooses the color that continues play. [...] If [Wild Draw 4] turned up at the beginning of play, return this card to the deck and pick another card."  The other says "If the top card is a Wild or Wild Draw 4, return it to the deck and pick another card."

There is still some confusion. The rules (papercopy) that you get with each deck says that if a wild card is turned up first at the beginning the player to the left of the dealer chooses the colour that continues play, nothing about whether this same player plays a card or the player to his/her left plays/draws a card.

We had player to the right of the starting color chooses the color of an initial wild. If it weren't for the fact that most of us didn't have big enough hands yet to shuffle I'm pretty sure that would have been dealer. Since the rulebook was missing in action before any of us could read either, it could just as well have been a local rule.


text:
What happens to the current color when you successfully challenge a Wild Draw 4?
What happens If you challenge a player who say nominates red with his/her wild draw 4 card and you challenge successfully, then the person who played the card would pick up 4 cards instead of you. My question is, does the colour stay as red in this situation or to the colour just before it was reds?

Challenge? Nominate? Is this for a variant of Uno?

Nope, it's in the official rules

Just looked it up... not that I play Uno often at all, but I think I was taught wrong and have always played wrong; I never heard of the rule that you can't play a Wild Draw 4 unless it's your only option.

@AndyPandy91 Nominate is a funny word to use because it's not like you are having some kind of political convention.  Dictate would be more like what happens when a wild or wild draw 4 is played.

If the Wild Draw 4 is challenged the person who played the card must show their hand to the challenger. If there is a card in their hand that they could have played then the player must draw 6 cards. If the person who played the the draw 4 has no cards that they could have played then the challenger must draw 6 cards. Regardless the outcome of the challenge the Wild Draw 4 stays in play and the game is played normally. All of this info can be found in the rulebook that came with the cards.

Based on https://www.unorules.com/, the player who played Wild Draw 4 may have a card that they could play, they just can't have a card of the same colour as the top card. Also, if they do have a card of the same colour as the top card they have to draw 4; drawing 6 is only for an unsuccessful challenger. That's two mistakes in your answer. Please make sure you read and quote rules in your answers. (As to actually answering the question - I don't think it is specified that the Wild Draw 4 remains in play and the game continues normally; I think that is interpretation.)

The person who willfully plays a wild draw 4 card to change the color when they had an obvious card to play, is to discard their hand and go watch TV or something, as they have broken the first rule of playing games: No cheaters.  Uno is not a bluffing game, and cheating is not expected or tolerated.
--But perhaps I'm being a bit sensitive.
That said, we usually just have the miscreant pick up their wild and play the appropriate card, as our rule breakers are normally the younger kids who didn't recognize the valid card to play.
(Edit)
The rules stat that if challenged, and player had a valid card to play, they forfeit their turn.  I don't see any rule addressing what happens to the Wild+Draw 4.  But if a player has to forfeit their turn, I would think that you would continue play and their card was never played. They would need to pick it up, since they can't play any cards.. they forfeited.

Ok thanks, but it does not say in the rules that you can pick it up, where or how do you know this?

I added an edit to my answer.  Sorry.

Actually from the rules it looks like this part of Uno IS a bluffing game. "A player holding a Wild Draw Four may choose to bluff and play the card
illegally, but if he/she is caught certain rules apply."