text:
What are the key strategy differences between Settlers of Catan and Seafarers?
Just starting out with Seafarers of Catan—what are the key strategy differences between Settlers of Catan and Seafarers?

After trying Cities and Knights, all other expansions dissapoint...

For me the big strategy for seafarers is to realize that most of the time the islands are not worth it.  If it is very convenient to go for an island then do it, but usually I find that the resources I expend could have been better used elsewhere.
(Though if everyone is following this strategy, then the islands are great because of the free space.  Basically you want everyone else to go for the islands but you.)

I disagree.  Whether the islands are worth it or not is map and resource dependent.  Most of the maps are too cramped on the starting island to win without expanding.

When placing 1st or 2nd in the basic game, I always look at the board and determine which of the two basic strategies (ore/hay & wood/brick) works best.  If I place 3rd or 4th, and my opponents know what they are doing, I often have to use the opposite strategy (or one of the others i.e. balanced/monopoly/etc).
Seafarers adds wood/sheep as a third equally viable strategy.  I enjoy this since it gives you more options when placing 3rd or 4th.  Since both wood/sheep are needed for boats, players with higher probability wood/sheep hexes will be more able to explore.  Don't under value the 2 bonus points for building on an island.  Unlike longest road and largest army, you can't lose these points.
One key difference to the wood/sheep strategy in seafarers is that it is a two-part strategy.  Building towards a high-probability outer island hex allows you to make-up for a lack of that resource on the main island.  In this way, you almost shift strategies mid-game.
My first choice is to build towards a good Gold hex.  You can do anything with it.
My second choice is to build towards a good hay or ore hex.  Both allow you upgrade your cities and free up settlement tokens for further expansion.  Good access to sheep/hay/ore also allows you to hoard development cards and go for largest army & victory point cards. (If you are using the wood/sheep strategy, I assume you already have good access to wool.)
If I don't have good access to brick on the mainland, building towards brick helps to build settlements without having to trade-in, and also to go for longest road.

To me, the big benefit of playing Seafarers is the diversity of maps, and the ability to play random maps.  I find the default random map is a little sparse on land, but this only makes you think harder on where you want to build.  These new maps open up new strategies, and change the dynamic of land settlement from being contained on a single land mass.  Depending on the map and the starting positions, you could want to focus on boats or completely ignore them.  As said above, you might want to strike out visit new land in order to get more victory points.
Depending on what scenario your playing, and what the map looks like, changes how you play.  Seafarers games take longer, but if your playing random maps, it makes each new game different.
There is also the discovery map, where you never know what tile your uncover next.

You need sheeps and wood to build a ship, so sheep are slightly more important.
Second, most games give extra victory points for the first settlement on a new island. This can be nice, but realise that you will have at least two settlements on a coast, reducing the number of goods for them.

In my experience, small islands are usually not worth going for in the beginning of the game because the amount of territory you get access to is not worth the resource requirements. Obviously, the larger the island, the closer it is to your starting position, and the more dots worth of production, then the more worth while it is to go for.
However, even if you don't settle any islands for the first 80% of your game, there are two big strategy changes:
1) Ships can be moved (1 per turn). Building many ships can be a strategic choice that offers many tactical advantages during the game:

It is possible to build an additional settlement without needing to first build
a road or ship, by relocating a ship.
In basic Settlers it can be very risky to go for a settlement site when
there's competition, as you may end up with 2 or more stranded and
useless road links. Now if you compete with ships to a coastal site,
you can relocate them if you lose a race.
You can do tricky things with getting longest road.
In scenarios where resources are earned for island exploration, you
can move your ships around to keep getting more resources, then
relocate them to their final destination later.

With ships opening up so many more opportunities, wood and sheep are more valuable in Seafarers than in Settlers.
2) The bonus victory point(s) offered in many scenarios for building your first island settlement makes for an interesting end game strategy not available in basic settlers. As discussed in What is optimal end play in Settlers?, it can be hard to win Settlers by increasing one victory point at a time, as players gang up to slow the leader. In Seafarers, islands make it possible to catapult to victory with a 4-6 victory point turn. You do this by waiting to settle your first island on the turn you think you can win because you have the right combination of resource and development cards, as follows:

play a key development card (Monopoly? Year of Plenty? Road
Building?)
move a ship
build more ships/roads until you have longest road (2 victory points)
build a settlement on the island (2-3 victory points)
add in your developments cards that are victory points (0 or more
points)

Building your first settlement on an island counts for 1 victory point for the settlement, and 1-2 bonus points depending on the scenario and the edition of Settlers of Catan edition you're using. Older editions have a 1 victory point bonus, while the newest edition usually offers a 2 victory point bonus.
About gold: In most games I've played, islands with gold usually take a lot of resources to reach and then attract the robber disproportionately. So going for gold is rarely a winning strategy.

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


text:
Does Welcome Decks 2016 contain cards that aren't reprints?
There's a new Magic: the Gathering product called Welcome Deck 2016.  This consists of five 30 card preconstructed decks, and has its own expansion symbol.
The webpage "Magic Welcome Decks" on Wizards Play Network says

Each deck includes 1 special rare that cannot be found in other Magic products!

But from Gatherer, it doesn't seem like that's true.  Gatherer lists five rares in this product: Aegis Angel,  Nightmare,  Shivan Dragon,  Soul of the Harvest,  Sphinx of Magosi.  All five of those are already accessible as rares in recent core sets or expansion sets that predate this product.
The linked page also indicates that the product was released on April 9 of an unknown year.  I guess that the year is 2016 or perhaps 2015, so the product was already released.  This is confirmed by the Tournament Rules which says all cards of that set are legal in the Standard format.
Does this product really have cards that don't appear in other M:tG products?  If so, which cards are they?

There do not appear to be any cards that were only printed in the Welcome Decks.
The most likely explanation I see is that the rares you mention appear in the Welcome Decks but not in the concurrently released Shadows over Innistrad block. So, the quotation you reference could mean

Each deck includes 1 special rare that cannot be found in other Magic products [that we are currently publishing/distributing]!

This would be my guess too. It looks like the most recent one of the rares was last printed in Magic Origins.

I think at least a couple of those were only printed in Magic Origins in that set's corresponding event decks, so the last substantial printing may be older than it looks.

@murgatroid99: That is relevant, yes. The last large scale printing of Shinx of the Magosi is in Rise of the Eldrazi, Aegis Angel in M2012, Soul of the Harvest in Avacyn Restored, Shivan Dragon in M2014, Nightmare in M2014.

The printings in 2015 core set and Origins were actually for welcome decks and did not appear in boosters despite technically being part of the set. None of these rares have been printed outside of welcome decks or deckbuilder's toolkits since 2013 or earlier.

Welcome decks are designed to teach new players how to play and aren't meant to hold real value to discourage people who already know how to play from taking all of them. So if they were to include exclusive cards, they would have to intentionally suck. Although a few of the commons and uncommons haven't been put in any other products for years either

This is really only technically true. The rare in each of these decks - Aegis Angel, Sphinx of Magosi, Nightmare, Shivan Dragon and Soul of the Harvest - are all reprints of cards from past sets. However these copies of the card, stamped with the set symbol for Welcome Deck 2016 , can only be found inside these welcome decks. They are the same cards the way you are thinking of them, but different in the same way any two copies of the same cards from different sets are. There were 16 cards stamped with Welcome Deck 2016 set symbols, most were printed last in sets that had rotated out of the standard at the time.

I don't really understand the emphasis on the set symbol here. Wizards generally does not treat reprints as unique cards; are you saying that that is what they intended with the statement quoted here?

@murgatroid99 They don't treat them differently in the rules, no, but for sales and marketing purposes they definitely do (Secret Lair is a prime example). The post by WotC did say "can't be found in other products" not unique, if they had meant they couldn't be found in current products like others have said, that's a lie, as Aegis Angel was in Origins, released less than a year earlier and still standard product.

"Still in standard" is not the same as "still in print". And, as noted in the comments on my answer, Aegis Angel wasn't really in Origins either, it was just in an event deck, which was more likely to be out of print at that point.

source: Stack Exchange

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

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

sort: votes


text:
What is an LCG (Living Card Games)?
What is an LCG?
I was looking at Lord of the Rings board games and came across Lord Of The Rings: The Card Game.
I saw that all of the expansions were marked with LCG. I've done some Google searches, but there doesn't seem to be anything like a Wikipedia entry for LCG.

Is LCG a genre?
How does it compare to Magic (CCG)?
Or Dominion (Deck Building)?

I believe that Living Card Games is a term used (and owned) by Fantasy Flight Games.
You can read about them on their website.  The basic theory is that they release a core set and potentially endless expansion packs.  However unlike Magic: The Gathering and other collectible card games, each set (core or otherwise) comes complete in each pack.
This should keep the cost much less for LCG's.

By coincidence, I'd just read about this the other day, in a question about asymmetrical living card games.

Ah ok. So you don't have to buy packs and packs and packs to get the best deck?
Is it mandatory that everyone have the core set? Or the core set satisfies everyone (1-4 players, etc.)?

@ericf - the core set generally comes with enough for two players.  You only need more packs if you want more copies of cards.  Many of the expansion sets come with multiple copies of the cards as well.

@ire_and_curses that article really helped

@PatLudwig ok, I got it after reading that article. If you add the article link to the answer I will mark it as correct.

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


text:
May opponent play fatal leaky pipe on my pipeline?
In the Parker Brothers card game Waterworks, may an opponent play a leaky pipe that makes it impossible for me to win?  I don't just mean a play that stops me from winning this turn; I mean one that stops me from ever winning.
Typically this would be done by playing a leaky elbow pipe that directs my pipeline into an area already enclosed by earlier sections of my own pipeline, with some open space but not enough to construct a pipeline of sufficient length to win.
Is this allowed?  Or is it my own fault for building my pipeline in such a way?

BTW, "Fatal Leaky Pipe" is a great name for this tactic!

From a scan of what looks like the official rules:

If a leaky pipe is connected to the last pipe card it can be any shape as long as it continues the pipeline.

Reviewing the rules from this site, the relevant line is:

"If the player adds a leaky pipe to the end of the player’s set of
  pipes the card can be any shape as long as it allows the player to
  have at least one path available to add pipes in future turns."

I could not find any rules that expressly forbids forcing a players pipeline towards a path that blocks the player's ability to win. So as long as the player can continue their pipeline path at least once more after a leaky pipe is placed, then it's a fair play (based on the rules).
Personally, for better games, I would bring up this situation with my opponents and decide if we want to allow this tactic and declare the blocked player lost, or disallow this tactic by assuming the rules mean:

...as long as it continues the pipeline with sufficient space for the player to meet the required number of pipes to win.

If you are the Rule Lawyer type, then the play you described is allowed. I just suggest you bring it up before play, so everyone can guard against it, instead of springing it on your opponents, causing this type of argument.
Good Question.


text:
Can I use treasure to pay for a counterspell?
Many cards, including Depths of Desire, produce colorless Treasure artifact tokens with "{T}, Sacrifice this artifact: Add one mana of any color to your mana pool."
I have three Treasure tokens and a Cancel in my hand. My opponent plays a creature - can I sacrifice a Treasure token to pay the cost of the Cancel?
The way I see it, the Treasure token's abilities would go on the stack after the creature spell does, so I wouldn't have the mana for Cancel until the stack resolves and the creature is summoned. The only way to play it would be to sacrifice the treasures preemptively before my opponent tries to play the creature. Is that correct?

@diego The question is less about the stack, and more about the mana ability of the Treasure Token. That said, there is demonstrated misunderstanding on how the stack works.

Just the top card on the Stack has to resolve before you play another one.

Note that there's no difference between lands and Treasure tokens here. Counterspells work normally anyway.

Mana is special, but even if it wasn't your responses would resolve first, it is a stack not a queue.  Last In, First out.

Yes, you can do this, for 2 different reasons.
First, as mentioned in Drunk Cynic's answer, treasure tokens' activated abilities are mana abilities, just like tapping a land for mana is.

605.1a An activated ability is a mana ability if it meets all of the following criteria: it doesn’t have a target, it could add mana to a player’s mana pool when it resolves, and it’s not a loyalty ability. (See rule 606, “Loyalty Abilities.”)

But also, you seem to be incorrectly thinking that once the stack begins to resolve, it finishes resolving all the way. This is not the case.
Each player gets priority after each thing on the stack resolves. This means that even if your only way of getting mana was from something other than a mana abiltiy (such as needing to activate an ability that would get you treasure tokens), you could still do that.

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

So you could activate a non-mana ability that gets you mana in some way, then when that resolve, you can then cast your counterspell, while the spell you are still trying to counter resolves.

Unless the OP is coming back to the game after a 25-year absence this is unlikely to be the cause of the confusion, but note prior to the introduction of "the stack" with the 6th Edition rules changes, we had "the batch", which did resolve all at once, and you couldn't further respond after each spell/ability resolved (except with "interrupts" or "mana sources", or in certain situations with "damage prevention effects" or... well, let's just say there were good reasons we don't do it that way any more).

In response to your opponent, the active player, casting a creature, it is your desire to sacrifice three treasures in order to cast Cancel.
The activated ability of a Treasure token counts as a mana ability, per rule 605.

605.1a An activated ability is a mana ability if it meets all of the following criteria: it doesn’t have a target, it could add mana to a player’s mana pool when it resolves, and it’s not a loyalty ability. (See rule 606, “Loyalty Abilities.”)

Because it is a mana ability, the following applies, with emphasis added.

605.3a A player may activate an activated mana ability whenever he or she has priority, whenever he or she is casting a spell or activating an ability that requires a mana payment, or whenever a rule or effect asks for a mana payment, even if it’s in the middle of casting or resolving a spell or activating or resolving an ability.
605.3b An activated mana ability doesn’t go on the stack, so it can’t be targeted, countered, or otherwise responded to. Rather, it resolves immediately after it is activated. (See rule 405.6c.)
605.3c Once a player begins to activate a mana ability, that ability can’t be activated again until it has resolved.

You are trying to cast a spell, so you can use the mana Abilities of the treasure tokens to pay the mana cost of Cancel. Since they are mana abilities, they don't use the stack, so you don't need to mysteriously activate the abilities before your opponent casts the creatures.

I think your last sentence may be a tad misleading. Yes, the player doesn't need to activate the abilities before the opponent casts the creature, but the reason is not because they are mana abilities - I mean, the statement would also be true if they weren't mana abilities, because the player could activate the ability and let it resolve to produce the mana before casting Cancel.

I recall being able to counterspell instants that produce mana.

@DavidZ That sentence is directly answering the thought process posed by the question.

@DrunkCynic Sure, I'm just saying it's an imprecise answer.

@Joshua Yes, because an instant that produces mana is a spell on the stack, not a mana ability. One it resolves, the mana is added, but after it is cast, the other player gets priority.


text:
Enchantment Auras and returning to hand
If my opponent uses a spell with the effect "return all nonland permanents to their owner's hand", does that include enchantments - auras?

Yes. A permanent is a card or token on the battlefield. An Aura attached to a permanent is therefore also a permanent, and will be returned to its owner's hand by that effect.

Yes, assuming the enchantment is not also a land, it counts as a nonland permanent. It would be returned to your hand by Coastal Breach, for example.
We know that enchantments go to the battlefield when they resolve.

303.2. When an enchantment spell resolves, its controller puts it onto the battlefield under his or her control.

And finally, we know that any card on the battlefield is a permanent.

110.1. A permanent is a card or token on the battlefield. [...]

Yes, you have to return your enchantments to your hand.
They are technically nonland permenants. Section 110.1 of the rules states this.

I appreciate the help.

If you are going to mention that one section of the rules states this, it would be a good idea to include that section of the rules.

Part of the reason for quoting that section of the rules is that the rule numbering changes sometimes, and without the quote, if a removal and an addition meant rule 110.1 became rule 109.2 we'd have no idea what's being talked about here.


text:
Suspend spells and outpost siege
Let's say I have Outpost Siege in play with Khans chosen. I exile the top card of my library during my upkeep, that card being Wheel of Fate. Am I able to play Wheel of Fate for free, or is it exiled since I cannot play it without suspending it?

It's stuck in exile.

You can't suspend it.
You can only suspend a card when in it's your hand.

702.61a Suspend is a keyword that represents three abilities. The first is a static ability that functions while the card with suspend is in a player’s hand. The second and third are triggered abilities that function in the exile zone. “Suspend N—[cost]” means “If you could begin to cast this card by putting it onto the stack from your hand, you may pay [cost] and exile it with N time counters on it. This action doesn’t use the stack,” and “At the beginning of your upkeep, if this card is suspended, remove a time counter from it,” and “When the last time counter is removed from this card, if it’s exiled, play it without paying its mana cost if able. If you can’t, it remains exiled. If you cast a creature spell this way, it gains haste until you lose control of the spell or the permanent it becomes.”

You can't cast it.
Unless some alternative cost applies, casting Wheel of Fate is illegal because it would require paying an unpayable cost.

117.6. Some mana costs contain no mana symbols. This represents an unpayable cost. An ability can also have an unpayable cost if its cost is based on the mana cost of an object with no mana cost. Attempting to cast a spell or activate an ability that has an unpayable cost is a legal action. However, attempting to pay an unpayable cost is an illegal action.

The ability that triggers when the last time counter is removed from a suspended card provides an alternative cost ("without paying its mana cost"), but Outpost Siege doesn't provide an alternative cost.

You cannot play or suspend Wheel of Fate. It will just stay in exile.
Wheel of Fate has no mana cost, so you cannot cast it normally. Outpost Siege's effect that exiles the card does not allow you to cast it "without paying its mana cost" or otherwise give you an alternate cost that would let you cast it. And you can only suspend cards from your hand, so you can't suspend the Wheel of Fate from exile.

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


text:
Can I kill Lurrus directly after it enters the battlefield, before it's controller gets priority to cast a permanent from their graveyard?
The two following rulings for Lurrus of the Dream-Den apply:

You must follow the normal timing permissions and restrictions of the spell you cast from your graveyard.

Once you begin to cast the spell, losing control of Lurrus won’t affect the spell. You can finish casting it as normal.

By the second quoted rule, I see if I don't respond to Lurrus being cast and entering, and my opponent chooses to cast a permanent from their graveyard, even if I then kill Lurrus, the chosen permanent will still be cast.
So my question is if my opponent casts Lurrus and it enters the battlefield, can I immediately kill it before my opponent gets priority to cast a permanent from their graveyard.

Not normally. When ever a spell resolves, per the rules of magic, the active player gets priority.

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

This means that your opponent who cast Lurrus will almost always have the opportunity to cast a spell before you get priority to try and remove Lurrus, in the same way players pretty much always have the ability to use a planeswalker ability before their opponents can kill the planeswalker.
There are three edge cases I can think of that would make this untrue:

Lurrus entering the battlefield caused some ability to trigger, say Soul Warden. This means that something goes on the stack before Lurrus' caster has priority, and since the spells Lurrus allows to be cast are generally not instant speed, the caster will need to pass and try to resolve that effect first. You can respond to that triggered ability when you get priority with an instant meant to kill or exile Lurrus.
Lurrus was cast with flash and someone other than the caster is the active player. In this case Lurrus' caster still needs to wait for their turn to cast anything using Lurrus' ability and he can be dealt with. This might work  if it was cast with flash on a non-empty stack during the caster's turn, but not likely as the permanents meant to make use of Lurrus would probably also be under the same effect.
Lurrus' caster is prevented from casting additional spells - there are about a half dozen spells that would prevent additional spells being cast with Lurrus, Rule of Law is the most recent one, Curse of Exhaustion would only affect one player, and Ethersworn Canonist would prevent casting anything other than an artifact after Lurrus, etc.

Unfortunately, the rules say

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

So if it is your opponent's turn, then once Lurrus has finished resolving and entered the battlefield, your opponent receives priority, and keeps it until they have declared that they will cast no more spells and activate no more abilities for now, passing priority to you.
In particular, if the stack is empty after Lurrus has resolved, they can cast a permanent spell before you are allowed cast anything.
The second quote you quote is actually rather rarely relevant. The process of casting a spell includes paying its costs. This cost can include sacrificing a creature, returning a creature you control to your hand, or similar. What the quote says is that you're allowed to pay such costs with Lurrus, and still complete the casting, even if Lurrus is the reason you were allowed to cast it in the first place.

This is a problem similar to Destroying a Planewalker before its ability is used. Maybe it would be helpful to link that question, since it's actually a "class" of similar questions.


text:
Master Transmuter + token artifacts
The card Master Transmuter reads:

{U}, {T}, Return an artifact you control to its owner’s hand: You may put an artifact card from your hand onto the battlefield.

Can Master Transmuter return a token artifact to your hand (which causes it to cease to exist) and then put an artifact card from hand to the battlefield (like Metalwork Colossus)

Technically, whatever object you return to your hand ceases to exist, token or not.[CR 400.7]  (The fact that the new object in your hand also ceases to exist in the case of a token is irrelevant.)

And so does the mana you payed to cover the {U} cost.

Yes, the artifact was returned to your hand. The fact it then ceased to exist doesn't matter, you still returned it to your hand.


text:
Inspiring Statuary = Improvise for Planeswalkers?
The card Inspiring Statuary states:

Nonartifact spells you cast have improvise. (Your artifacts
  can help cast those spells. Each artifact you tap after you're done
  activating mana abilities pays for {1}.)

Are Planeswalkers considered Nonartifact spells, and therefore gain the keyword Improvise?

Even Karn Liberated is not an artifact.

@NeilMeyer I checked on him specifically before making my post!

Yes. A spell is anything that you cast to put on the stack. Basically every card except lands have the potential to be spells by casting them. As a planeswalker isn't an artifact (one could be, but none currently are), it is a nonartifact spell.

111.1. A spell is a card on the stack. As the first step of being cast (see rule 601, “Casting Spells”), the card becomes a spell and is moved to the top of the stack from the zone it was in, which is usually its owner’s hand. (See rule 405, “Stack.”) A spell remains on the stack as a spell until it resolves (see rule 608, “Resolving Spells and Abilities”), is countered (see rule 701.5), or otherwise leaves the stack.

Planeswalkers are nonartifact spells. They do not have artifact on the type line, therefore, they are nonartifacts.


text:
Mirage Mirror - does copy suffer from summoning sickness?
The card Mirage Mirror states:

{2}: Mirage Mirror becomes a copy of target artifact, creature,
  enchantment, or land until end of turn.

If Mirage Mirror becomes a copy of a target creature that does not have summoning sickness until owner's next turn, does the copy suffer from summoning sickness becomes it becomes a copy of a creature?

Yes, one of the paragraphs covers that.

No, summoning sickness is not a copyable value
Copiable values
The copiable values of an object are its name, mana cost, color indicator, card type, subtype, supertype, rules text, power, toughness, and loyalty. These values are usually copied exactly as printed. However, copy effects do respect changes to those values resulting from other copy effects, face-down status, and some effects that set a creature's power or toughness. The last are only considered if they have the wording "as [the object] enters the battlefield" or "as [the object] is turned face up".
Additionally, for objects on the stack (that is, spells or effects that have not yet resolved), copies also copy any choices made while casting it, such as mode, targets, or additional or alternate costs that were paid. Many, but not all, effects that copy spells allow the controller of the copy to choose new targets for that copy.
Information not copied
Counters on the object being copied and objects attached to it, such as Auras or Equipment, are not copied.
The collective status of the original object is also not copied. Unless otherwise stated, the copy will be created untapped, unflipped, face-up, and phased-in. This leads to an important distinction and oddity regarding copies of face-down creatures. A copy of such a creature will acquire the copiable values of the original face-down creature, and become a 2/2 colorless, costless, nameless, subtypeless creature, but it will instead be face-up. Such a copy is unable to morph, and never acquires the face-up characteristics of the original creature.
source

The html support sure does lead to some neat looking answers.

Everything you did in this answer is possible with markdown, which at least in my opinion is much easier to read in source. Furthermore, horizontal lines aren't meant to be used as (at best arguably good-looking) design elements, but as thematic breaks and don't exactly help in terms of readability.

I've removed the horizontal rules under your headings. They have semantic purpose to machines and screen readers and decrease the accessibility of our knowledge base. Our formatting isn't just decorative so we ought to avoid using it purely for decoration -- it means stuff to people reading our stuff. (Also, yes, all of that is available via markdown -- there's no HTML allowed that isn't also a subset of our markdown.)

@doppelgreener You're forgetting <kbd>, <sup>...

@wizzwizz4 Whoops, you're totally right about those. kbd, sup, sub don't have equivalents.


text:
MTG Doomsday card, cast at 1 life
Doomsday reduces your life total by half, rounded up. If you're at 1 life and play this card, would that not deal 1 damage and kill you?

First of all, Doomsday doesn't deal damage (so it won't be stopped by effects that prevent damage). It causes life loss.
Secondly, the amount of life you have when you cast Doomsday is of no relevance; it's the amount of life you have when you are instructed to lose life when it resolves that matters.
Half of one rounded up is one, so you drop to zero life if you have one life when the spell resolves. If you still have non-positive life the next time a player would get priority (probably right after the spell resolves), you will lose then.

Glad to hear I won the match then. figured I had. thanks

@Talizzar Did someone play this at 1 life and say that they lost 0 life from it?


text:
How do Pitiless Plunderer and Bontu's Last Reckoning interact with each other?
Would Pitiless Plunderer create treasure tokens if you had two other different creatures on the battlefield when a board wipe like Bontu's Last Reckoning is cast?

Yes.
Triggered abilities trigger once per event, and the trigger conditions defines the event.
"Whenever a creature dies" will trigger every time a creature dies.
Since Pitiless Plunderer is phrased similarly to this, it triggers twice.
"Whenever one or more creatures die" will trigger every time one or more creatures die simultaneously.
Since Pitiless Plunderer isn't phrased similarly to this, it doesn't trigger only once.

Where did "Whenever creatures die" come from?  Neither of the cards in the question says that - are you referring to some other card that uses this text?

@BJ Myers, It's an example of what wouldn't trigger for each death. Since the ability in question isn't phrased that way, it doesn't behave that way.

There are no cards that say "Whenever creatures die" or "Whenever one or more creatures die" or anything like that, so I think it's not really helpful to refer to that wording.

@murgatroid99, Quite the opposite many triggers trigger only once even if multiple X happens simultaneously. Are you suggesting I change the question because they used a bad example?

What do you mean "they used a bad example"? You introduced the phrase "Whenever creatures die" to this question, and no card has ever been printed with that trigger condition.

many triggers trigger only once even if multiple X happens simultaneously - I've never seen one that works this way.  Can you provide an example?

@BJ Myers, e.g. Damage. Some trigger on damage from a source, some trigger on damage.

@murgatroid99, You answered your own question. It's bad example because no card has it. /// Why do you keep saying I introduced the possibility of the trigger only triggering once; the OP did. That's their question.

As far as I can tell, the OP is asking "do you get treasure tokens, or not?", i.e. the standard "do I get death triggers when multiple creatures die including the one with the triggered ability". I don't think they're asking whether you get one treasure token or two.

@murgatroid99, Then why did they specifically mention they have two other creatures on the battlefield, and if they get treasures (plural)? Compare "Why is there a blue elephant in the room?" vs "Why is there an elephant in the room?" Unlike the person asking the second question, the person asking the first question is not surprised that there is an elephant in the room; they are surprised by its colour.

@BJ Myers, "Whenever ~ becomes blocked" vs "whenever ~ is blocked by a creature"

@BJ Myers, "Whenever ~ deals damage" vs "whenever ~ deals damage to a player"


text:
Azor's paradox resonator
If I have a least one Paradox Haze on the battlefield, and during my upkeep tap the Strionic Resonator targeting Azor's Elocutors upkeep ability, would the ability copy twice or would I need a second Resonator?

Tip: You could copy Paradox Haze's ability just as easily as the Elecutor's. This would allow you to benefit from multiple "At the beginning of your upkeep" abilities.

Good point slipt my mind I guess. Either option give the same result.

The ability would just copy once, and you would end up with a total of 3 filibuster counters after both upkeeps.
Paradox Haze gives you a second upkeep step. That just literally means that after one upkeep, another one happens. At the start of each of those 2 upkeep steps, Azor's ability will trigger, go on the stack, and resolve.
You activate Strionic Resonator during the first upkeep step or the second; either way there will be 1 copy of Azor's ability on the stack at that time, which you can target and copy.
To copy both of them for a total of 4 counters, you would need to also untap Strionic so you can use it a second time (or have another Strionic).

Would you have any good replacements for the resonator?  Aside from obviously more paradox haze on the field

@LordShadowheim there are plenty of things such as Voltaic Key that can untap the Resonator to let you use it again. That seems like one of the simplest ways.

Your Azor's Elocutors will end up with 3 filibuster counters.
The step by step of the interaction will work as follows:

It is the beginning of your turn. You have your untap step, you untap everything and proceed to the next step.
It is your Upkeep. Paradox haze triggers and will creates a second upkeep that we will get to later.
Azor's Elecutors triggers. The ability goes onto the stack.
You respond to Azor's Elecutors ability by tapping Strionic Resonator targeting the Azor's Elecutors "add a filibuster counter" ability on the stack. If the other player doesn't respond with effects of their own, the stack begins to resolve.
Strionic Resonator's copy ability resolves, there are now two "add a filibuster counter" abilities on the stack.
The copied "add a filibuster counter" ability resolves. Azor's Elecutors now has one filibuster counter.
The orginal "add a filibuster counter" ability resolves. Azor's Elecutors now has two filibuster counters.
End of 1st Upkeep. Because of Paradox Haze's ability you will get an additional Upkeep.
It is your second Upkeep of the turn. Paradox Haze dosen't trigger this time.
Azor's Elecutors triggers. The ability goes on the stack.
This time your Strionic Resontor is tapped so you can't copy it again.
Assuming no response from your opponent, Azor's Elecutors ability resolves. Azor's Elecutors now has two filibuster counters.
End of 2nd Upkeep. You proceed to your draw phase and the rest or your turn.

As you can see you only receive 3 filibuster counters total. This is because (from gatherer rulings):

Strionic Resonator targets a triggered ability that has triggered and is on the stack.

Strionic works by copying an ability that has already triggered, not by causing the ability to trigger twice. That is why Azor's Elecutors only ends up with 3 counters.

Paradox Haze has a triggered ability, but it does not create a delayed triggered ability. It doesn't really matter in this case though, so good answer overall.

@Rainbolt whoops, you are correct, I misinterpreted the card as "get an additional upkeep after the first finishes" instead of "get an additional upkeep". Corrected now


text:
Can Improvise pay for "twobrid" costs?
A recent question had some confusion about what costs can be paid using Improvise, mainly stemming from the confusing differences in representation between "colorless" and "generic" mana. However, the Rulings of Inspiring Statuary only indicate that it cannot be used to pay for costs requiring specifically a single color of mana or specifically colorless mana.
It seems pretty clear to me that Improvise would not be applicable to other costs requiring a specific type of mana, such as Hybrid, Phyrexian, or Snow mana, even though those symbols are not listed as "things Improvise can't pay", so the list in its ruling isn't complete. However, the "twobrid" mana costs blur the line between colored and generic costs by requiring "two generic or one specific color" of mana. To my knowledge the most famous card with this type of mana is Reaper King, though it would not be affected by Inspiring Statuary so Beseech the Queen or Spectral Procession might be more relevant.
If I am casting Beseech the Queen while I control Inspiring Statuary, can I cast it for {2 black mana + tap 2 artifacts}? Can I cast it for {2 black mana + 1 colorless mana + tap 1 artifact} (i.e. can the twobrid be split between mana and improvise)? Or does Improvise not apply at all because the spell has no "generic" component even though some of its costs could be paid with any color of mana? The Gatherer rulings on the subject are... odd, and I'm not certain I understand them even in normal situations.
(Note: The official term for this type of mana appears to be "monocolor hybrid", but I've heard "twobrid" a lot more)

As part of casting a spell, you must announce the nonhybrid equivalent cost you intend to pay.[601.2b] For Beseech the Queen, this is any of the following:

{6}
{4}{B}
{2}{B}{B}
{B}{B}{B}

Each artifact you tap covers {1} of the cost, so yes, you can pay for Beseech the Queen by paying {1}{B}{B} and tapping an artifact if you first pick {2}{B}{B}.

601.2. To cast a spell is to take it from where it is (usually the hand), put it on the stack, and pay its costs, so that it will eventually resolve and have its effect. Casting a spell includes proposal of the spell (rules 601.2a–d) and determination and payment of costs (rules 601.2f–h). To cast a spell, a player follows the steps listed below, in order. [...]
601.2b [...] If a cost that will be paid as the spell is being cast includes hybrid mana symbols, the player announces the nonhybrid equivalent cost they intend to pay. [...]
702.125a Improvise is a static ability that functions while the spell with improvise is on the stack. “Improvise” means “For each generic mana in this spell’s total cost, you may tap an untapped artifact you control rather than pay that mana.”
702.125b The improvise ability isn’t an additional or alternative cost and applies only after the total cost of the spell with improvise is determined.

ug, hard to explain without incorrectly using the words "reduces", "replaces" and "produces".

I think this answer could be improved by referencing how the "Total Cost" is determined. Specifically, it seems to be defined by rule 601.2f, and it references the earlier rule 601.2b for determining how hybrid costs are calculated into Total Cost. The answer is correct (basically, in 601.2b you must choose one of the 4 options you listed as the "nonhybrid equivalent cost" and that is used for calculating the Total Cost that Improvise cares about), but I think these two rules are an important step in the link between hybrid mana and Improvise.

@Kamil Drakari, Updated

Can you tap 6 artifacts and pay 0 mana?

@Neil Meyer, Yes.


text:
Star of Afrika - Horseshoes confusion
I'm a bit confused about the rules for horseshoes.In the rules it is said to put them aside.
What does that exactly entail?
Is it then so, that if you find them before the star is found....you just put them out of game. And when the star is found all other horseshoes found can now be taken by the player finding them instead of being put aside?
(which leads to the star player automatically winning in case no horseshoes are left?)
Or are the rules meant to work differently?

I edited the tag with the assumption that the question refers to this game

@ikegami  thanks got too few points to create a tag myself so mechanics was the nearest tag I could go for.   Find it surprising still that the name is so different per language (the official one being afrikan tahti while in many countries it is known as star of africa)

Yeah, happens all the time. If I could create an alias for the tag, I would create star-of-africa. I don't know which of the two name is more appropriate, so I went with the one used by BGG

the tahti is also the one in wikipedia (english version) so I count it as official name as its not a german language game to start with (german version of wikipedia says "stern von Afrika").

"Star of Afrika" would be an accurate translation of the original name, there doesn't seem to be one official translation  to English. (But two different ones back in the 80s.) I can see why an English tag, or at least an alias, would be useful for this site.

According to the rules on wikipedia,

Before the star of Africa has been found, horseshoes are useless and are discarded. After the famous diamond has been found, however, they become effective substitutes for it. Taking a horseshoe to Cairo or Tangiers when another player has the star of Africa wins the game.

This does seem to imply that if all horseshoes are found before the Star, they will all be discarded and so the person who finds the Star has a guaranteed win.
Note that, according to the same article, the expansion changes this dynamic:

In 2014, an expansion for the game called Retkikunnat ("The expeditions") was published, making the game more complex... As a new feature, it is now also possible to steal the Star of Africa from the player who found it.

Thus in the expansion, even if all horseshoes have been discarded, the Star can still be stolen so finding it does not guarantee that you will win.

For the first part: yes, exactly. (source: I'm Finnish.) The game is from the 50's, it's not a very good game compared to modern board games.


text:
Magic the gathering changing creature types
So me and a couple friends were playing a hand of MTG. While doing so, I played a card called Seraph Sanctuary which has the ability

Whenever an Angel enters the battlefield under your control, you gain 1 life.

While playing an Angel card, however, one of the friend's used an ability to change the Angel's creature type to none at all during its casting. However the card reads Target creature. Does this imply that the Angel has to be in play before the creature type is changed? Because if you use it as an instant, it takes place before the angel is ever cast as per the "last played first to resolve" rule, so the angel won't technically even exist before the type is changed to nothing, therefore I believe it to be an illegal target for the creatures ability to change a creature type to none. I need to know the exact ruling if this is a legal move or if someone owes me an apology

Interesting... The answer wasn't closed on my vote alone. Probably because the tags were changed?

You can't use an ability during casting unless it's a mana ability. /// You can't change an object's creature type to "none" (there is no such creature type). /// Please note how to link to cards ([mtg:NAME]) and the correct tag for your question.

You can't goldhammer a question if you're the one that added the tag you're gold in.

@ikegami I believe by during its casting OP is referring to while it is on the stack, not in the steps involved in a cast which you are correct, can't be interrupted in that way.

@Andrew, Correcting terminology is important.

"Creature" (used as a noun) means "creature permanent", which means "creature permanent or token on the battlefield".

109.2. If a spell or ability uses a description of an object that includes a card type or subtype, but doesn’t include the word “card,” “spell,” “source,” or “scheme,” it means a permanent of that card type or subtype on the battlefield.
110.1. A permanent is a card or token on the battlefield. [...]

So, for example, Amoeboid Changeling's abilities can only target objects on the battlefield, so Seraph Sanctuary's second ability would already have triggered before you could even activate one of Amoeboid Changeling's abilities.


text:
When playing Talisman as the assassin, can I assassinate creatures I encounter following the draw of a card?
When playing Talisman Revised 4th Edition as the assassin, can I assassinate creatures I encounter following the draw of a card? Or is the assassination limited to when I, the assassin, decide to purposefully attack a creature or a character?
The character chard and the linked wiki merely say:

You may assassinate when you attack a character or creature. You cannot assassinate when you are attacked by another character. When you assassinate, battle takes place as normal except that your victim may not roll a die to add to his Strength. If you win, you must force the loser to lose 1 life; you cannot take an Object or gold instead.
You may not assassinate while at the Crown of Command.

An extension to this question is: can the assassin assassinate the pitfiends and the werewolf in the inner region?

According to the official errata (linked here for reference), yes, you can assassinate creatures you encounter on cards you draw.

Q1: Can the Assassin assassinate any creature, regardless of whether or not it is drawn from the Adventure deck or already faceup on the space when he encounters it?
A: Yes.

Essentially you can always assassinate a creature you do battle with (i.e. has a strength value that you are choosing to engage in battle), unless the rules on some other card specify otherwise. Regarding pit fiends or the werewolf (or other board enemies like the sentinel, mutant, ice beasts, etc.), that seems like a separate question so I'd post that separately.

Is it really a separate questions? Aren't werewolf and pitfiends encounters handled like card-drawn/faceup encounters?

I think it would be a separate question, "Can board enemies be targeted the same way card enemies can?", since the results would go beyond the scope of the assassin's ability. This is just my opinion, though, so anyone who thinks otherwise feel free to chime in.

It's worth noting that only creatures that you attack in Battle (Strength-based Combat) can be assassinated, as creatures that you must attack in Psychic Combat use Craft instead, and the Assassinate ability explicitly only prevents adding a roll of the die to Strength. So Spirits, etc. cannot be assassinated.

This is very true: I'll update my answer.


text:
Hostage taker and player death
If my opponent plays Hostage Taker, takes a creature of mine, casts it, and then I die, does he still control that creature? Or is it removed from the game back to me?

It's removed from the game if you own it. When a player loses the game, they leave the game and every card they own does as well. You'll take back the physical card, and they lose control of whatever it was because it's vanished out of the game. This happens no matter where it is (in exile, on the stack, on the battlefield, etc). The rules that handle this don't leave behind a copy for them to use — the thing is gone.
There's a pragmatic reason for this: the cards are your legal property, and once you're done in that game you're entitled to leave and take your stuff with you. The rules won't presume they can leave someone else in possession of your stuff, so those rules just say your stuff goes away.
In 1v1, the game would already be over when you lose, so I presume you're not actually playing 1v1. In multiplayer, we go by these rules:

104.5. If a player loses the game, he or she leaves the game. If the game is a draw for a player, he or she leaves the game. The multiplayer rules handle what happens when a player leaves the game; see rule 800.4.
800.4a When a player leaves the game, all objects (see rule 109) owned by that player leave the game and any effects which give that player control of any objects or players end. [...] This is not a state-based action. It happens as soon as the player leaves the game.


text:
Discarding Coins in Splendor
In Splendor there is a max coin limit of 10. If I exceed that limit by one, Would I need to return the most recently acquired coins, or could I return any in my hoard?
The rules:

A player can never have more than 10 tokens at the end of
  their turn (including jokers). If this happens, they must return
  tokens until they only have 10 left. A player can return all or
  some of those they’ve just drawn.

You may return any of your tokens. The wording in the rules just confirms that the tokens you return can include any of the ones you just took.


text:
Can you transform after declaring blockers, but before dealing damage?
Let's say I attack with Duskwatch Recruiter, a 2/2, and someone blocks with a 1/1 token. After they choose their blockers, could you cast Waxing Moon to transform Duskwatch Recruiter to Krallenhorde Howler, and assign damage as Krallenhorde Howler, a 3/3?

@ikegami I’m not a fan of this edit. The distinction between declare blockers step and combat damage step is important; so asking if you can do it during the combat damage step has a specific answer (no) that is different than the correct answer to the edited version.

Sure, the distinction between the steps is important, but that's irrelevant. The title didn't match the question. They didn't even have the same answer. The answer to the question and what the OP wants to know is yes, but the answer to orig title was no.

Yes, there is nothing that prevents you from Transforming at anytime you could cast Waxing Moon.
There are no special timing restrictions when transforming a double faced card.
Lets break down your example step by step:

You attack with Duskwatch Recruiter, your opponent declares a 1/1 goblin token as a blocker.
After blockers are declared, but before combat damage is assigned, you cast Waxing Moon targeting Duskwatch Recruiter. Your opponent has no responses.
Waxing Moon resolves, Duskwatch Recruiter transforms into Krallenhorde Howler and gains trample.
You proceed to damage step. The goblin assigns 1 damage to Krallenhorde Howler, Krallenhorde Howler assigns 1 damage to the goblin token and 2 damage trample over onto your opponent.

Final Result: Token Dies, Krallenhorde Howler survives, Opponent takes 2 damage.

You can do what you want, but NOT during the combat damage step.
The combat phase is broken up into 5 steps:
Beginning of combat
Declare attackers
Declare blockers
Combat damage
End of combat
During combat damage step, players don't get priority until after combat damage has been dealt. That means that if you waited until combat damage step to cast Waxing Moon, it would be too late; Duskwatch Recruiter would have already dealt 2 damage.
However, during the declare blockers step, each player also gets priority, after blockers have been declared. So you can cast Waxing Moon then, which is before combat damage step. Then, during the combat damage step, each creature will deal damage equal to its power, and your Recruiter will have 3 power at that time, so it will deal 3 damage.

Declare Blockers Step

509.1. First, the defending player declares blockers.
.....
509.4. Fourth, the active player gets priority.

Combat Damage Step

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


text:
Attacking someone that is using the Ring
The person holding the ring was being attacked by a werewolf. They claimed that since they were holding the Ring, the werewolf and the hero have to roll for Sanity instead of Might. I thought that since the werewolf was attacking, they roll for Might, since that is the trait the werewolf is attacking with? Is this correct? Would the dice roll be for sanity or for might?

You should break this up into 3 different posts since you have 3 different questions that will get 3 different answers,

Since you didn't repost your additional questions, I posted #3 here. #2 is too simple: You gotta follow the instructions the game give you. Immediately.

You were correct; the attacker determines the stat used.

The Ring reads:

If you attack an opponent that has a Sanity trait, you can attack with Sanity instead of Might.

As it states, one can only use the Ring when taking the attack action. If someone is merely the subject of an attack, they may not use the Ring.
As usual, the attacker determines the stat used for both the attack and the defense. In this case, Might is used by both the attacker and the defender.

Preferred over the other answer because it explicitly mentions that the type of attack always determines the type of defense - it's not a special interaction of/with the ring.

As a side note it should also be mentioned that you can only attack with the stat if both the attacker and defender has that stat. While it does not matter in this case but if you where attacking a monster that didn't have sanity you could not use the ring to attack them.

@Joe W, This question is not about what can be attacked with the Ring, and that limitation is already mentioned in the Ring itself.

It was more a statement about attacking in general.

You can only use the Ring when attacking.  If you are being attacked, use whichever stat the other character is attacking you with (usually Might, unless they have a special attack of their own)


text:
MTG Rhonas the Indomitable + Saving Grace
What happens if I cast Saving Grace on Rhonas the Indomitable after attackers are declared?
Does Rhonas block all damage even if the conditions are NOT met aka : don't have another creature of power 4?
Rhonas's deathtouch/indestructable combo seems perfect for blocking any creature dmg

Rhonas the Indomitable doesn't block anything, and won't deal damage, but the damage does get redirected to Rhonas.
Usually the flow goes like this:

Your opponent declares attackers. (Then both of you can cast spells, activate abilities, etc.)
You declare blockers. (Then both of you can cast spells again, activate abilities again, etc.

Rhonas can't be assigned as a blocker during this step, but that's OK for your plan.

Attackers, and the creatures blocking them, deal damage to each other simultaneously.

You'll be modifying this slightly with Saving Grace's ability:

When Saving Grace enters the battlefield, all damage that would be dealt this turn to you and permanents you control is dealt to enchanted creature instead.

That "instead" makes this a replacement effect which, this turn only, changes how damage would be dealt to you and permanents you control. Rhonas still can't block, but this changes step 3 to the following:

All attackers that would deal damage to you or permanents you control instead deal that damage to Rhonas. Simultaneously with that, all of your blockers deal damage to the attackers they're blocking.

Rhonas is still indestructible and won't be destroyed by what is almost certainly lethal damage.
Rhonas is not however involved in combat. Rhonas wasn't declared as a blocker, isn't considered to be one, and isn't blocking any creatures at all. It's just taking a bunch of damage. Rhonas will deal no damage in this step. This also means it won't deal lethal damage via deathtouch to anything.

That being said, the damage dealt to Rhonas is counted as combat damage, if anything cares about that.

All damage would indeed get redirected to Rhonas. In the normal English sense of the word we might thus say Rhonas "blocks" all the damage, but this is not the same as what "blocking" means in MtG: Rhonas can still not be declared as a blocking creature, and does not deal any damage to any of the attacking creatures (so deathtouch is irrelevant).


text:
Good game for parents to play with 4 year old son?
What would the best board game be for mother and father to play with their 4 year old so?
I was recommended Exploding Kittens or King Of Tokyo, but Amazon says that they are for ages 8+.

StackExhange sites such as this one are not well suited to provide recommendations.

@ikegami Well, the existence of a recommendations tag with ~75 questions does make that confusing.

Hey, That's My Fish! or Loopin Chewie would be my suggestions

@Mattmatt yet clicking the tag shows it is "generally off-topic" and the tag is "primarily for historical reasons". Going to learn note explains in depth that these questions are off-topic and that they are not accepted.

@Matt, 1) I added that tag to the question, so the OP wasn't confused by that. 2) Every single question with that tag is closed. 3) The description for [tag:recommendations] is "Generally off-topic. Suggestions for games that meet specific requirements. (tag exists primarily for historical reasons)"

@ikegami Yes, I am aware of all of those things (except that the op didnt add the tag). It doesnt change the fact that people dont read tag descriptions for tags that seem self explanatory and people certainly dont look up historic use of the tag to notice the questions are all closed.

@Matt, So maybe someone should tell people who get it wrong... Oh wait, that's what I did!

Reasons for having the tag aside, these sites exist to help people, so my own grievances with the decisions by the powers-that-be aside.... my 2c is that it depends. I've got lots of cousins and they have varied wildly in game-playing ability, and it all comes down to the 4yo in question. My advice is just to try one and see, and if they can't grasp it yet, you can just play it in a few years. Exploding kittens may not be the best as there's lots of text, and the vindictive/random nature of play can be frustrating for adults, let alone toddlers. Haven't played King of Tokyo to comment

HABA Dancing Eggs Game which I once played in a pub, with alcohol handicapped adults. It's a hilarious physical game, I know a 2 yo who would love seeing their parents play it and acting silly, the game says 5+ so your little one could probably join in. You'd probably be quite verbally encouraging in this game, it's quite active so it wouldn't be suitable before bedtime! Or for a quieter one, funnily enough same company HABA Rhino Hero (5+), it's a dexterity game where you stack cards up. I'd imagine this would be more of a "be quiet, be still, we don't want to push it over" game


text:
Interaction with printed stats and token/equipment with stat reduction
I just debuted playing magic 2 weeks ago, and I have a question. Let's say a creature has 4 +1/+1 token on it and has base stats of 2/2. If I play Breya, Etherium Shaper's ability to inflict -4/-4 to that creature, does it affect the creature with all his power (6/6 bringing it down to 2/2) or does it affect the printed value of 2/2, killing it since it goes to 0 toughness?

There is no such thing as a "+1/+1 token"; those are called counters, not tokens.  Counters are featureless markers placed on things.  A token is a permanent (planeswalker, land, artifact, creature, and/or enchantment) that is represented by something other than a Magic card.

It becomes 2/2.

The ability in question is

Target creature gets -4/-4 until end of turn.

To determine a creature's power and toughness:

Start with the printed value (or the value with which a token was created).
Apply power- and toughness-setting effects (e.g Turn to Frog) in the order they were created.
Apply power- and toughness-modifying effects (e.g the ability and the counters mentioned above).

The result is the power and toughness of the creature.

Important to note: State Based Actions (such as "should this creature die") are NOT checked in between these steps, so theoretically a creature could have negative toughness somewhere in the process of calculating it's stats, but as long as it ends up with positive toughness at the end it's okay.

More precisely, only the final values are the creature's power and toughness. Nothing sees the intermediary values. Not SBAs, not triggers, nothing.


text:
Returning an enchantment to your hand
Krasis Incubation has the following ability:

{1}{G}{U}, Return Krasis Incubation to its owner's hand: Put two +1/+1 counters on enchanted creature.

When Krasis Incubation is being targeted by Cancel, can I put it back to my hand to save it?

Yes krasis incubation

Please make this question more descriptive.
What does "When you have an enchanted aura is cancelled" mean?
Is there an Aura in play that has another Aura on it? Something got counterspelled (Cancel) or is it being destroyed? Which specific cards are you dealing with?

like i lay down that card you have a cancell spell

Are you asking if you can use a "Return  to it's owner's hand" ability on an Aura if the Aura is countered?

yes i am that is what I'm asking

No.
Krasis Incubation's ability only functions on the battlefield[1], but Cancel can only target spells, and spells only exist on the stack[2]. Therefore, you won't be able to use KI's ability to protect the KI from being countered.
On the other hand, the ability could possibly be used to prevent KI from being destroyed (as opposed to being countered). For example, if your opponent casts Abolish targeting KI, you would normally be able to activate KI's ability in response, and this would return KI to your hand before Abolish resolves.

Generally speaking, if it makes sense for an ability to work when the object on which it resides is on the battlefield, the ability can only be used when the object on which it resides is on the battlefield.[CR 112.6]
A spell is a card on the stack, a copy of a card on the stack, or a copy of a spell.[CR 111.1]

No.
By default, activated abilities on cards only function while those cards are on the battlefield. So if you have an ability such as Krasis Incubation's activated ability, you can only activate that ability when the card is on the battlefield. If your spell is countered, then the card never goes to the battlefield.

112.6. Abilities of an instant or sorcery spell usually function only while that object is on the stack. Abilities of all other objects usually function only while that object is on the battlefield. The exceptions are as follows: None of the exceptions apply here.
701.5a To counter a spell or ability means to cancel it, removing it from the stack. It doesn’t resolve and none of its effects occur. A countered spell is put into its owner’s graveyard.


text:
Can multiple copies of Fraying Sanity activate at once?
In theory, let's say I have several copies of Fraying Sanity on several different players. Would multiple copies of Fraying Sanity activate at once or does one copy activate first, then another?

What do you mean by activate? Do you mean the ability triggers, or the ability resolves?

Regardless of the number, Fraying Sanitys will resolve sequentially.
In Magic, no two things can resolve at the same time, they must be put on to the stack and then resolve in last in first out order.
When multiple activities trigger at the same time, the active player gets to choose the order in which effects they control go onto the stack. This is covered in the Comprehensive rules here:

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.

So, when you have multiple copies of Fraying Sanity that you control (as in the example in your question), you get to choose the order in which they resolve each end step. One thing to note is that if you have multiple Fraying Sanitys on the same player, the ones resolving afterwards will take into account how many cards have entered the graveyard by previous Fraying Sanity effects. This is covered in the special rulings on the gatherer page:

The value of X is determined only as Fraying Sanity’s triggered ability resolves. For example, if three Fraying Sanity Auras are attached to one player who had four cards put into his or her graveyard this turn, X will be four for the first ability to resolve, eight for the second, and sixteen for the third.


text:
VP value of space 0 & 1 on the reputation track in Above and Below
In Above and Below, the area next to the starting space and the 1-reputation space on the reputation track have a 2/3 and a 5 vp symbol next to them:

My group has become mixed on whether those symbols are meant to indicate that you get 2 points for the 0-reputation space and 5 points for the 1-reputation space. I was on board until I realized that those matched up to the 1st/2nd place bonuses, and that it might indicate that instead.
As far as I could find, there doesn't seem to be anything in the rules in favor of either case, nor could I find anything online to help. Does anyone know if there's a ruling on this somewhere?

I don't have enough reputation to create a tag for this game, so I picked something that was somewhat relevant. I also couldn't find a "rules-clarification" tag or anything similar, so I went with scoring.

If you wouldn't mind, please take a second to create a tag wiki for [tag:above-and-below] (or ask another question about the game) so the tag doesn't get auto-reaped

The reason there isn't a "rules-clarification" tag is because 90% of our questions are rules clarifications. Not really worth it to create a tag if so many of our questions cover that.

There are no reputation points at these positions.
The 2/3/5 is a reminder for the rank-based scoring of reputation. The smaller numbers are for position-based scoring. There are no bonuses or penalties for being within -1 and +2 reputation.
In the end-of-game scoring, reputation is used for two different point awards. One of these is rank-based, where you get points for having the first or second most reputation. The other is position-based, where you gain (or lose) points based on your individual reputation. In a game where nobody gains or loses much reputation, the ranked points are still relevant. In a game where everyone has high reputation, you'll still get the points from your position regardless of your rank.
From the rules (emphasis mine):

Reputation
At the end of the game, the player with the most reputation gains 5 extra village points. The player with the second-most reputation gains 3 extra village
  points. The player with the third-most reputation gains 2 extra village points. If playing with two players, only the player with the most reputation gets the bonus: he gains 3 points (this is why there is a person symbol with the number “2” in this village point symbol).
Players also gain or lose village points indicated by a smaller village point symbol next to their position on the track. For example, if a player ended the game with his cube on the highest space on the track, near the surface, he would lose 2 village points.

The 2/3/5 are the larger symbols.


text:
Upkeep Priority
On opponents turn I chump blocked to trigger Archangel Avacyn's transform on my upkeep.
Opponent has Giltspire Avenger on the battlefield, and Faith's Shield in hand. Is it possible for him to cast it for pro-red, before Avacyn's transform into Purifier deals it lethal damage?
If so and even if not so, does the 3 damage Avacyn does to opponent allow Giltspire to tap and destroy it?

Yes, your opponent can do both of those things and destroy Avacyn, unless they have less than 5 life, in which case no damage will be dealt.
First, Avacyn's ability normally plays out like this, if the opponent does nothing.

At the beginning of the upkeep, Archangel Avacyn's triggered ability goes on the stack. At this point, both players have a chance to respond.
Archangel Avacyn's ability resolves, and she transforms into Avacyn, the Purifier. Avacyn, the Purifier's triggered ability goes on the stack. At this point, both players have another chance to respond.
Avacyn, the Purifier's ability resolves, and she deals 3 damage to each other creature and each opponent.

Your opponent can cast Faith's Shield after step 1 or 2 to save the Giltspire Avenger.
Assuming the opponent acts after step 2 and they have more than 5 life, the full scenario you described plays out like this:

At the beginning of the upkeep, Archangel Avacyn's triggered ability goes on the stack.
Archangel Avacyn's ability resolves, and she transforms into Avacyn, the Purifier. Avacyn, the Purifier's triggered ability goes on the stack.
In response, the opponent casts Faith's Shield targeting their Giltspire Avenger.
Faith's Shield resolves. Giltspire Avenger has protection from red.
Avacyn, the Purifier's ability resolves, and she deals 3 damage to each other creature and each opponent. The damage to Giltspire Avenger is prevented.
The opponent activates Giltspire Avenger's ability targeting Avacyn, the Purifier. This is legal because Avacyn, the Purifier has dealt damage to you this turn.
Giltspire Avenger's ability resolves, and Avacyn is destroyed.

If the opponent instead has 5 or less life, that scenario plays out differently starting from step 4:

Faith's Shield resolves. The opponent and each permanent they control has protection from red.
Avacyn, the Purifier's ability resolves. All damage it would deal is prevented.
Avacyn has not dealt damage to the opponent, so it is an illegal target for Giltspire Avenger's ability.

Your opponent can do what he wants (pro-Red his Avenger and destroy your Avacyn).
Both Avacyn's flip and Avacyn's damage are triggered abilities that go on the stack.  As such, they can be responded to since both players get priority before they resolve. (See this question about how the stack works)
There is a small kink in this scenario: if your opponent is at 5 or less life, they also get pro-Red, so no damage is dealt to him/her, and Avenger can't tap to destroy Avacyn (yet).

Is it possible for him to cast it for pro-red, before Avacyn's transform into Purifier deals it lethal damage?

Yes, players can cast instants in response to triggered abilities being added to the stack.
They can cast Faith's Shield in response to the triggering of
Archangel Avacyn's delayed triggered ability.
They can cast Faith's Shield in response to the triggering of
Avacyn, the Purifier's triggered ability.
Faith's Shield will resolve before the ability resolves, giving Protection from Red, preventing the damage from Purifier.

If so and even if not so, does the 3 damage Avacyn does to opponent allow Giltspire to tap and destroy it?

Yes. If you took damage from Purifier, Giltspire can be used to destroy it.
You'll have to use it on your opponent's turn (since that's when you took the damage), but that's not a problem since you may activate activated abilities on an opponent's turn.


text:
Surveil and Blood Operative
If you surveil a Blood Operative into your graveyard can you immediately use its triggered ability to return it to your hand?

Whenever you surveil, if Blood Operative is in your graveyard, you may pay 3 life. If you do, return Blood Operative to your hand.

I heard that it would "see" the surveil and trigger even though it wasn't in the graveyard until the actual resolution of surveil but I'd like to confirm that and understand what the relevant rule is.

Yes, Blood Operative's ability will trigger if you put it into your graveyard as the result of a surveil action. The L3 judge who runs the Ask a Magic Judge tumblr blog explains it better than I can:

Triggered abilities that look for a specific action to happen trigger after that thing has happened. (They can’t trigger before since it hasn’t happened yet.) Normally, the thing that’s happening is relatively instantaneous, such as entering the battlefield or dying, but this also holds true for events that take more time, such as scrying or surveiling. This means that triggers like Blood Operative’s that trigger when you surveil won’t trigger until the surveil action is complete, but more importantly the game won’t check to see which cards that have relevant triggers will trigger until after the event as well.

The specific rule they are referring to is 603.10:

Normally, objects that exist immediately after an event are checked to see if the event matched any trigger conditions, and continuous effects that exist at that time are used to determine what the trigger conditions are and what the objects involved in the event look like. However, some triggered abilities are exceptions to this rule... [none of those exceptions apply]

Perfect, that's the exact information I was looking for thanks.

Yes, its ability will trigger.
From the Gatherer rulings:

If you surveil and put Blood Operative into your graveyard as you do so, its ability triggers once you’ve finished surveilling.


text:
Why isn't Selvala, Explorer Returned's ability restricted from being used as a mana ability?
Selvala, Explorer Returned's ability is very similar to the ability of Charmed Pendant, so I don't understand why the latter has an instant speed restriction and Selvala does not. I'm looking for insight into this difference.
In the history of Magic, there are three cards with abilities that have the clause "Activate this ability only at any time you could cast an instant" (more when you include times when it's in reminder text, but I do not). In all three cases, the ability is a mana ability, as that's the only thing with less timing restrictions than an instant (as you can activate it while casting a spell). These three cards are Lion's Eye Diamond, Rhystic Cave and Charmed Pendant. For LED, this is to stop people from dumping their hand after the spell is already on the stack. For Rhystic Cave, one could attempt to cast a spell, then revert game state if an opponent pays to stop the Cave, and try again forever. Both these cases are fine and I include them mostly for completeness.
Charmed Pendant mills a card, then gives you mana based off that card. Selvala makes everyone reveal cards (and draw), then gives you mana based off those cards. These abilities seem very analogous, yet Selvala can be activated mid-cast and Charmed Pendant cannot. Why is this?

Considering there's also cards like Deranged Assistant and Millikin, a more pointed question might be "why are these three old cards instant speed and new ones not?"

Those two make reverting game state difficult, but also don't give variable mana like Charmed Pendant and Selvala. I suppose that's the distinction that separates the cases, to me.
EDIT: By the way, the ruling on cards like Selvala, Millikin et. al that reveal hidden information as they generate mana, is that you can't rewind the ability; if you fail to cast the mana is left floating and the card remains in yard/hand.

I wouldn't expect a complete answer to come out of this. You're asking for the justification for one of Wizards' design decisions, and without their internal knowledge, the best answer we can give you is basically that their design team thought the restriction was necessary when making Charmed Pendant, but not when making Selvala.

The rules about ability speeds were standardized with the 6th edition. No more mention of speed was necessary on the cards after that. Some older cards were rewritten, some weren't. The 10/4/2004 ruling makes it clear that this wasn't an oversight (as the ability, despite being a mana ability, changes the board's state, while Selvala's doesn't - I'm guessing).

Selvala's ability changes the board state very similarly to Pendant, if not more. Her ability causes every player to reveal the top card of their library, and then draw a card. It also fits the definition of mana ability, in that it does not target, it adds mana to someone's pool, and it's not a loyalty ability.

Yes, sorry, I missed the last line in the ability. I'll just ascribe this to the convenience of not changing the text of an old card if possible, then :)

Hmm, I didn't realize that the instant speed rider was on original text. That, along with the ruling that draw/mill mana abilities cannot be reverted implies to me this is a holdover from an old card, and were it to be printed today, the templating would be more like Selvala's. Accepting.

@monoRed I agree with you that it would be different nowadays, without the instant speed limitation.

This is wrong. Lots of "speed" restrictions were assigned after that. For example, the Equip keyword has a "speed" restriction.

A brand new example of a speed restriction is Outlast.

The simplest answer is probably the correct one: The developers didn't see the need to restrict Selvala's ability, and they didn't see the need to retroactively change Charmed Pendant to match.
A competing answer claims it's because "speed restrictions" are a thing of the past (1999), but that's blatantly false. The Outlast ability has one, and that's a very recent addition to the game (2014). This is far from the only example.

@murgatroid99, Fixed. I'm not sure why having what turns out to be a little bit of extra irrelevant info warrants two downvotes, though! At least I answered the question, unlike the accepted answer!

The first quote and answer still reads like a misunderstanding of the question. The question is clear that by "not at instant speed", it means "at mana ability speed", which is a speed less restrictive than instant speed. It's like if he asked why a particular model of car wasn't limited to 55 MPH, and you respond by pointing out that indeed that car can go 55 if you drive it slower than the max speed.

@Gendolkari, You are confused because someone edited the question since I answered it. The original subject was "Why can't the car go 55 mph?" Yes, I realize the subject and the remainder asked different questions, but that wasn't a problem with my answer! Fixed.

Ok, got it. I'll remove my comment.


text:
Multiple War Raptors on a Base
If there are three War Raptor minions on a base, how do you count them? Would it be 15 or 9? Each has a base power of 2, and the following ability:

Ongoing: Gains +1 power for each War Raptor on this base (including this one).

I assume you mean the "War Raptor" (The original text was "Rapture").
The War Raptor text:

Ongoing: Gains +1 power for each War Raptor on this base (including this one).

This means, that each War Raptor gives a +1 bonus to power on each other War Raptor on the same base. The power of each War Raptor is 2 + the total number of War Raptors on the base.

One War Raptor give 2+1 = 3 power
Two War Raptors give 2 times (2+2) = 8 power
Three War Raptors give 3 times (2+3) = 15 power
Four War Raptors give 4 times (2+4) = 24 power

This is a hint that a single raptor is weak, but they become deadly while fighting in packs.

Not exactly weak; it's the deck's 2-power minion, after all!


text:
Double Spawn in the last zone
If I draw a Double Spawn card in the last zone in a spawning spree, I must use that for the first zone. But since I already spawned one card there, should I spawn one more or two more cards? Example: I have 3 spawn points. Spawn first, one walker, second, 1 fatty, third, double zombies. Now should I draw one or two cards for the first zone?

If the Double Spawn card is drawn for the last Spawn Zone
  or building Zone, use it for an extra double Spawn on the first
  Spawn Zone or first building Zone (even if you previously
  spawned Zombies in it!).

"Extra" means "added to an existing or usual amount or number", so two more cards.

So in the end there will be 3 spawns in the zone; that first one and two after the double zombies?


text:
When a creature affected by a change-of-control effect is destroyed, where does it go?
If I use Captivating Crew to gain control of opponent's creature before my combat phase and then attack with that creature, if that creature is then blocked and destroyed does it go to opponent's graveyard? Seems like it would. Just wanting to know for sure.

Yes, cards will always go to the owner's graveyard, not the controller's. The other answer quotes the rules dealing with specific cases of a permanent going to the graveyard, but there's another more general rule that ensures that it is impossible to lose track of which cards are actually owned by which player:

400.3. If an object would go to any library, graveyard, or hand other than its owner’s, it goes to its owner’s corresponding zone.

This rule is important, because "owner" is more than just an in-game term, it generally refers to the actual real-world owner of a card:

108.3. The owner of a card in the game is the player who started the game with it in his or her deck. If a card is brought into the game from outside the game rather than starting in a player’s deck, its owner is the player who brought it into the game.

Of course, you may be playing with a friend's deck, etc, so the in-game owner may not be the real-life owner, but this is still a necessary rule for dealing with the common situation of players playing with their own cards.

Yes, when a creature, or any card, goes to a graveyard, it goes to the graveyard of the owner, not the controller.
From the comprehensive rules

701.7a To destroy a permanent, move it from the battlefield to its owner’s graveyard.
701.15a To sacrifice a permanent, its controller moves it from the battlefield directly to its owner’s graveyard. A player can’t sacrifice something that isn’t a permanent, or something that’s a permanent he or she doesn’t control. Sacrificing a permanent doesn’t destroy it, so regeneration or other effects that replace destruction can’t affect this action.
704.5f If a creature has toughness 0 or less, it’s put into its owner’s graveyard. Regeneration can’t replace this event.
704.5g If a creature has toughness greater than 0, and the total damage marked on it is greater than or equal to its toughness, that creature has been dealt lethal damage and is destroyed. Regeneration can replace this event.
704.5h If a creature has toughness greater than 0, and it’s been dealt damage by a source with deathtouch since the last time state-based actions were checked, that creature is destroyed. Regeneration can replace this event.
704.5i If a planeswalker has loyalty 0, it’s put into its owner’s graveyard.

As far as the game is concerned, the owner of an object is the person who's deck the card was in, or who cast the spell that created the object (in the case of tokens)


text:
Smash Up - Teddy Bears "Group Hug" Card
"Group Hug" card in Teddy Bears Faction reads:

Give one of your minions +1 power for each other minion at the same base until the end of the turn.

Player A (owner of Teddy Bear faction who is playing Group Hug) proceeds to play Group Hug on top of 1 of their 3 in-play minions on that base.  Player A thus has 2 other in-play minions at the time on that base (total of 3, the one on which Group Hug is played + 2 more).  The rest of the base looks like this:  Player B has 1 minion in play, Player C has 2 minions in play.
How many extra points does Player A garner from playing Group Hug:  3 or 5?  In other words, does Player A get to count only other players' minions as the +1 power, or does Player A also get to count their own "other minions" as extra points here?  It goes to how do you define "other minion"?

5.
By default, "minion" refers to any minion card on any base. Qualifiers such as "your", "each other player's" and "on the same base" are added to refer to subsets of those.
Since Group Hug uses neither qualifier "your" nor "each other player's", who controls the minion is not a consideration when counting the other minions on the base.

The game consistently uses "each other player's minions" to refer to minions you don't control. The lack of this qualifier indicates not just the minions others control are included.
For example, Compare Ninja Master and Nukebot.

Ninja Master: You may destroy a minion on this base.
Nukebot: ..., destroy each other player's minion on this base.

The game consistently uses "your" to refer to minions you control. The lack of this qualifier indicates not just the minions you control are included.
For example, Compare Friendship is Power and Snow White.

Friendship is Power: Move one of your minions ...
Snow White: Talent: Move a minion ...

Hello, thanks for your response.  There is no confusion about the use of "your."  The confusion is on the use of "each other minion."  I agree the answer is 5, but another player was disagreeing.  The argument was over whether "each other" means yours + others' (or just others') minions.

@ikegami The question was whether it counts yours at all, not if it counts only yours. In effect, the question was asking if it should be read as "each other player's minions." While I agree the answer is 5, you are focusing on the wrong end of things.

@Andrew, wow. Fixed.


text:
Worldfire and Protection
Let's say I have Progenitus on my side of the field, and my friend plays Worldfire. Would Progenitus still be on the field after Worldfire resolves or is he also exiled since he has "Protection from everything?"

Protection (only) prevents DEBT: Damage, Enchant/Equip/Fortify, Blocking and Targeting.

Your Progenitus would still be exiled.
According to the Gatherer rulings:

2/1/2009: “Protection from everything” means the following: Progenitus can't be blocked, Progenitus can't be enchanted or equipped, Progenitus can't be the target of spells or abilities, and all damage that would be dealt to Progenitus is prevented.
2/1/2009: Progenitus can still be affected by effects that don't target it or deal damage to it (such as Day of Judgment).

Since Worldfire doesn't target anything, Progenitus will be exiled along with everything else.

Recommend removing the "Yes"; because the question asks which it is; not a yes-or-no.


text:
Strionic Resonator and triggered abilities
I have two creatures in my goblin deck which I believe to be a great case for using Strionic Resonator, but I’m unsure how it gets played. Say I have Hamletback Goliath which has a triggered ability “Whenever another creature enters the battlefield, you may put X +1/+1 counters on Hamletback Goliath, where X is that creature's power.” Can this be copied? What happens if this is copied? Can I put a 1/1 on another creature?
Also what about Goblin Rabblemaster with “Whenever Goblin Rabblemaster attacks, it gets +1/+0 until end of turn for each other attacking Goblin.” Can this be copied? What happens if this is copied?
Does the triggered ability’s stay permanently or till end of turn?

I'm not sure, but I think that you assume that the Resonator ability is about copying text on cards on the battlefield. If that's true then this is the point of confusion. Because what can actually be copied are particular triggered instances of abilities on the stack.

Yeah that makes sense, so it’s not like you can copy annihilation on a creature to another creature it means that annihilation will be twice as powerful that round ? Then after the ability resolves then it will go back to being the same base annihilation as stated by the card text  ?

@JoshuaDuxbury Unfortunately I didn't understand this point of confusion until just now... but the text on the card is NOT the triggered ability. The triggered ability is the object on the stack that is created when the triggering event occurs.

You can copy any triggered ability, so yes you could copy Hamletback Goliath's and Goblin Rabblemaster's triggered abilities.
You can tell something is a triggered ability based on if it starts with a word indicating that it's stating the triggering condition.

603.1. Triggered abilities have a trigger condition and an effect. They are written as “[When/Whenever/At] [trigger condition or event], [effect]. [Instructions (if any).]”

So if an ability starts with "when" or "whenever" or "at", it is a triggered ability. This includes Annihilator, because as you can see from the reminder text on most cards with the ability, Annihilator is short for "whenever this creature attacks[...]"
An ability such as the double damage ability on Angrath's Marauders is not a triggered ability; it is a static ability that creates a replacement effect; so you cannot copy it with Strionic Resonator.
Triggered abilities are never on the battlefield. When they trigger, they go on the stack, and when they resolve, they cause some sort of effect to happen. If that effect is something like "target creature gets +1/+1", then often the ability will state how long it lasts, such as "until end of turn".

611.2a A continuous effect generated by the resolution of a spell or ability lasts as long as stated by the spell or ability creating it (such as “until end of turn”). If no duration is stated, it lasts until the end of the game.

This works exactly the same with a copy of a triggered ability created by Strionic Resonator; if the original ability us "until end of turn", then the copy will be as well.
To sum up, the triggered abilities are never on the battlefield and don't last a certain amount of time. However, the effects generated by triggered abilities may have a limit on how long they last; that limit will be stated in the ability itself.

For your specific examples:
If you copy Hamletback Goliath's triggered ability, then there will now be 2 triggered abilities on the stack, both which say “you may put X +1/+1 counters on Hamletback Goliath, where X is that creature's power.” So when each one resolves, you will add X counters, thus giving you a total of 2*X counters. There’s no difference between the counters created by the original ability and the counters created by the copy; nothing will go away at the end of the turn.
You cannot put a counter on a different creature with this, because it is not a targeted ability. It only puts counters on the Hamletback Goliath that has the ability. If it said “put X +1/+1 counters on target creature” instead, then you could choose a different target for the copy, thus adding counters to 2 different creatures.

Goblin Rabblemaster works just the same. You can copy its ability, and if you do, then the Rabblemaster will get more power twice, ending up with a total of +2/+0 for each other attacking goblin. All this power will go away at the end of the turn because the ability (both the original and the copy) says “until end of turn”.

You could copy the ability given by Thornbite Staff, but it would only untap the same creature twice. If a creature has "Whenever a creature dies, untap this creature.", then copying it would mean that the stack now has 2 instances of "untap this creature". So each would resolve, and each would untap that creature.  This would only help if you tapped that creature again after the first triggered ability resolved, but before the second did.
You can't untap a different creature because the ability says "this creature", not "target creature". If it said "untap target creature", then you would choose which creature you want to untap when you put the ability on the stack, and you could choose a different target with the copy.

Note that "target' has a specific meaning; it's not simply something that is affected by the ability. It's only a target if the ability uses the word "target"; (or if the ability is a keyword whose rules use the word "target").
For an example where the "You may choose new targets for the copy." part of Strionic Resonator helps, look at Weaver of Lightning's "Whenever you cast an instant or sorcery spell, Weaver of Lightning deals 1 damage to target creature an opponent controls." If you cast an instant while controlling Weaver of Lightning, then you could use Strionic Resonator to copy the triggered ability, and pick a new target for the copy so that you deal 1 damage each to 2 different creatures.

Is annihilation a triggered ability? Also I have an enchantment that says if a creature does damage then it does twice that damage, would that be triggered? And when would these triggered abilities leave the battlefield if I copied them? For example, when the enchantment or creature they where copied on die? Thank you!

Also, Thornebite staff’s triggered untap ability, could I copy the triggered ability that makes it untap to another creature?

@JoshuaDuxbury Yes, Annihilator is a triggered ability; it is "whenever this creature attacks..." I'll try to update to clarify more, but you seem to be confusing something... a triggered ability is never "on the battlefield."


text:
Can Actions Be Played on 1 base and "jump" to affect play on other bases?
Can you play an action on one base ("Base A") (e.g., Hidden Ninja Special Action "before a base scores, you may play a minion there") and thereby affect play on another base ("Base B") where there is an action-blocking card (e.g., Ornate Dome)?
Ornate Dome:

Play on a base. Destroy all other player's actions played here. Ongoing: Other players cannot play actions on this base.

How does playing an action on Base A "thereby affect play on another base"?

In this specific example you would not have a rules collision.  Your action card would not be played on a base - it simply goes to your discard pile when used.  Since it specifies that you can play a Minion, and Ornate Dome says you can't play an Action on that base you are ok.

An Ornate Dome on base B only prevents players from playing cards on base B (i.e. playing cards with "play on a base" on base B). I don't understand the scenario you are presenting in your question, but it doesn't seem to include anything affected by an Ornate Dome on base B. Specifically, Hidden Ninja is not played on a base, so it's not affected by Ornate Dome.

Hidden Ninja is a "special action" and as such, it doesn't technically play on a base. The "action" though, moves a ninja from another base (a) to base b, where the ornate dome lies. The ornate dome does not block minions from moving, only actions, but the action was not played on the specific base.


text:
In Pandemic, can the Coordinator's ability be used on another player's turn?
In Pandemic, one of the role is "coordinator" aka "dispatcher".
The rules say:

Move your fellow players' pawns on your turn as if they were your own.
Move any pawn to another city containing a pawn for 1 action.

It is not clear if the coordinator can move the pawn at any time or only during their turn.

Only on your turn.
If you're asking about the first ability
All the first ability does is allow you to treat all pawns as your own when you take a move action.
You can only move your own pawns on your turn, so you can only move their pawns on your turn. The same action cost that would apply to moving your own pawns applies when moving their pawns.
If you're asking about the second ability
You may only take actions on your turn. You have no action points to spend outside of your turn.

Why does it say "on your turn" only for the first move? It seems to me that it can move the pawn to a city containing another pawn at amy time.

Because people find it confusing otherwise. I thought you did too, but it now appears you're asking about the second ability? Adjusted my answer.

Ok. Even though, it could be that the coordinator uses the action of the pawn to move: at the turn of player X, the coordinator moves X's pawn using one action.

Or at the turn of X, the coordinator moves Y's pawn using X's action.

Re "it could be that the coordinator uses the action of the pawn to move: at the turn of player X, the coordinator moves X's pawn using one action", No, it couldn't be. As the answer already explains, you have no actions to spend on another player's turn.

Re "Or at the turn of X, the coordinator moves Y's pawn using X's action.", No, nothing about the dispatcher's ability suggest that other players can use the dispatcher's ability on their turn. Just like the dispatcher can't use the Medic's ability.