text:
Passing the Lv.1 Judge Exam
I have Lv.1 Judge exam test 2 month later and I'm start to prepare now
I found I have to read and study Comprehensive Rules, IPG, MTR.
and I will try some test question on Judge center too
I found it's too much to read..should I read all those document carefully?
What else should I check? Thank you.

I'm not a judge, but it seems advisable to read and study the Comprehensive Rules, so that you can understand them and remember them well enough to apply them in games.

Relevant thread. http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/magic-fundamentals/magic-rulings/251939-how-to-become-a-magic-judge

Please remember, all content on the test is confidential. You may discuss it with your L2, but not with anyone else (especially not online!)

I'm voting to close this as too broad. "Do you have any tips or advice or links?" is not a practical question with a single best solution for a Stack Exchange site to answer, it's an invitation to a discussion. You should discuss this on an MTG forum.

This is a common question and there is a reasonably narrow set of things that are recommended by Judges, it will have a single set of instructions that the vast majority of judges would agree with. It is also a question that Google should provide lots of good answers to, so closing it wont hurt too much.

It is important to study effectively for the L1 exam. Remember that the L1 exam is just the first step into the judge program and isn't intended to be too gruelling.
The IPG isn't part of the L1 test at all. The L1 test only uses the JAR (Judging at Regualar REL) for it's questions where the players have done something wrong.
When studying the CR (Comprehensive Rules) focus on just the following topics:

Parts of the turn and the things that happen in each of them
How spells and abilities are played
How they resolve
How the layers interact
What Two-Headed Giant is (really just read the 2HG FAQ).

A couple of quick skims of the MTR are likely to be enough for the few questions that might be based on it. There will be a few things in there that might surprise you, those are the bits to remember.
Most usefully log onto the Judge Center (judge.wizards.com) and do some practice tests. Easy Practice tests are a good gauge of how hard the L1 test is and the fully explained answers will help you understand what you didn't understand.
The other thing that must be done is you need to judge a few events, preferably with the Level 2 judge that will be testing you. Judging a couple of events is required before you can be certified as a Level 1 judge. Remember you don't need to be certified to judge events.

Here is a link to the page on the Magic Judges website that covers what this answer says: https://blogs.magicjudges.org/o/judge-testing/the-level-1-exam/

Yes you should read them thoroughly because as a judge it is your duty and responsibility to understand all of those documents thoroughly so that you can issue rulings to players and be able to explain to them them why a ruling is being made. You would be doing a disservice to everyone involved if you issued bad rulings in a tournament do to a lack of understanding of the rules and documents.

Surely there are corners of the rules that most L1 judges don't have memorized right away though - I can't imagine you need to read them all thoroughly and remember every detail?

@Jefromi I didn't say memorize in my answer, I said thoroughly understand them and there is an important difference. If you have a good understanding of the documents and rules then it will be much easier to find answers for questions that you don't have the answer to right away. It will also help give a better understanding of the spirit of the rules and make a ruling in cases that may not be explicitly spelled out in the rules. It is never about blatant memorization of the rules as it is easy to misremember something but rather understanding so you can look up and prove when needed.

I think that's a helpful thing to mention in your answer. The OP might be feeling a little overwhelmed by the idea that they need to read them to study, which suggests they're expecting to be tested on any arbitrary part, and puts on some pressure to memorize.

@Jefromi The problem is though with exams it is about memorization while when it comes to using the knowledge it is about understanding.

@JoeW The exams aren't actually that much about memorization for L1 exams. L2 and on moreso, as it is generally more policy based questions comparatively, but you can't get through the L1 exam just with memorization alone.

L1 judges just need to get most of the things that are going to come up at the average FNM or Prerelease right. Being confidant at judging GPTs and other more important events is part of the progression towards L2.
The level of rules knowledge this answer is advocating implies an L3 level of rules knowledge. Many L3 judges don't event have that. Judges aren't expected to be perfect.


text:
Can you Rez an upgrade during a run? And when?
If I have an upgrade (eg: Strongbox) on a server (eg : Archives) - can I Rez it during a run?
If i can, how does this differ if there is Ice or not?

You can rez an upgrade anytime the "Rez" symbol appears on the timing chart for the structure of a run.
This is mostly the same as when paid-abilities can be used, there are a couple of paid ability windows where you cannot rez cards, the most notable being the "Encounter" window with ICE.
From the rules, this is timing sections 2.3 and 4.3. Also before and after every action.
1. Runner starts, names server.
2. Approach outermost ICE.
2.1. Paid ability
2.2. Jack out (goto 6) or not
2.3. Approached ICE can be rezzed
     Paid ability can be used
     Cards can be rezzed.
2.4. Check if ICE is rezzed.
3. Runner Encounters Ice if rezzed.
3.1. Icebreakers can interact
     Paid abilities can be used
3.2. Resolve all unbroken subroutines
     If run hasn't ended, and there's another piece of ICE, goto 2.
     If run ended, goto 6.
4. Runner approaches attacked server
4.1. Paid abilities can be used.
4.2. Jack out (goto 6) or continue.
4.3. Paid abilities may be used
     Cards may be rezzed.
4.4. Run is successful. Trigger abilities if any.
4.5. Access cards. Trigger abilities if any.
5. Run ends. Trigger abilities if any.
6. Run is unsuccessful. Trigger abilities if any.

If there isn't any ice, you won't have the 2.3 timing window, and so you can only rez your upgrade at the 4.3 timing window.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Djinn of Infinite Deceits interacting with other control-changing effects
I have two closely-related questions regarding Djinn of Infinite Deceits.  I think I understand how both of these cases work, but my rules-fu is rusty and I'd love the opinion of the experts here.

Case 1:  A permanent control effect, such as Control Magic.  If I use the Djinn to give away a creature that I have enchanted with Control Magic, which reads "You control enchanted creature.", what happens?  My understanding is that after the Djinn's ability finishes resolving, states would update and Control Magic would cause the creature I gave away to return to my control.

Case 2:  An ongoing control effect, such as Rubinia Soulsinger's activated ability.  If I use the Djinn to give away a creature I'm currently controlling using Rubinia's ability that reads "Tap:  Gain control of target creature for as long as ... Rubinia remains tapped.", what happens?  My understanding is that Rubinia's effect doesn't continue to update, and so the creature would remain under my opponent's control.

When considering the interactions of continuous effects, it's of no consequence whether the continuous effects were created by a static ability or by the resolution of spell/ability.

Nothing permanent about Control Magic. Destroy the Enchantment, and the enchanted creature will return to its previous controller (unless an effect is overriding Control Magic's).

In both cases, the result is the same: the new control effect overrides the old one. This is because Magic uses a timestamp system: whenever there are effects that modify the same thing (like control, or type, or color), the one that was created last and hasn't ended determines the final result.
This is part of rule 613: Interaction of Continuous Effects:

613.1. The values of an object's characteristics are determined by starting with the actual object. For a card, that means the values of the characteristics printed on that card. For a token or a copy of a spell or card, that means the values of the characteristics defined by the effect that created it. Then all applicable continuous effects are applied in a series of layers in the following order:

613.1b. Layer 2: Control-changing effects are applied.

613.2. Within layers 1-6, apply effects from characteristic-defining abilities first (see rule 604.3), then all other effects in timestamp order (see rule 613.6).
613.6. Within a layer or sublayer, determining which order effects are applied in is usually done using a timestamp system. An effect with an earlier timestamp is applied before an effect with a later timestamp.

613.6a. A continuous effect generated by a static ability has the same timestamp as the object the static ability is on, or the timestamp of the effect that created the ability, whichever is later.

613.6b. A continuous effect generated by the resolution of a spell or ability receives a timestamp at the time it's created.

Please note that these rules do not describe a sequence of actions to take, but rather a process to determine the current characteristics of an object. Also, timestamps don't really have a "value." The only important thing is what order they are in.
All of the effects discussed here are continuous effects. That is because rule 611.1 says

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

So, here's how we determine the controller in each of your situations:
Case 1
Your Control Magic has a static ability that says "You control enchanted creature." This creates a continuous effect that causes you to control the creature with a timestamp corresponding to when the Control Magic entered the battlefield (613.6a). Then you activate your Djinn's ability. When the ability resolves, it creates a continuous effect that says that your opponent controls that creature (and one that says that you control one of your opponent's creatures, but that's not relevant), with a timestamp corresponding to when the ability resolves (613.6b).
Then, when we want to determine who controls the creatures, we see that there are two control changing effects. We apply them in timestamp order, so we first apply the Control Magic effect, which says that you control it. Then we apply the Djinn's ability's effect, which says that your opponent controls it. The end result is that your opponent controls it.
If the Control Magic ever goes away, the Djinn's ability's effect will be the only control changing effect. It says that your opponent controls the creature, so they control it.
Case 2
First, your Rubinia Soulsinger's ability creates an effect that says that you control the creature, with a timestamp corresponding to when the ability resolved. Then your Djinn's ability creates an effect that says that your opponent controls the creatures, with a timestamp corresponding to when that ability resolved.
Then, when we want to determine who controls the creatures, we again see that there are two control changing effects. As in case 1, we apply the effects in timestamp order. This means that we first apply Rubinia's ability's effect, then your Djinn's ability's effect. And, as in case 1, the result is that your opponent controls the creature.
If you then decide to untap Rubinia, there will then be just one control changing effect: the one that says that your opponent controls the creature. So, they control it.

The Djinn's effect is considered a continuous effect?  That seems...  counter-intuitive, at least.  It appears to be a one-time effect.

You can't have a one-time control changing event. It wouldn't stick. I'm looking for a rule for that now.

If you can find it, I'll accept ASAP - I thought effects like the Djinn were one-time effects that just "set" the controller and leave it set to the new controller, where a continuous effect like Control Magic would keep "setting" it every time states updated.  I wasn't really sure which way to look at Rubinia's - did it set it once and then set it back when she untaps, or did it keep setting it like Control Magic would?  However, if the Djinn's is also considered continuous as well, that would totally clarify the situation.

I added a reference to rule 611.1. Also, consider this: continuous effects and one-shot effects can't do the same sort of thing because there is no rule for how they interact.

Yep, that...  completely kills my combo, but I can't complain too much, as I felt it was WAY too powerful for a two-card combo in EDH anyway.  Thanks a ton, I would never have realized that a one-off ability like that could still be considered continuous without some help.

@gatherer818 - You can always use something like Deadeye Navigator or Bazaar Trader to create a newer effect that gives you control permanently.

@HaoYe Actually, I'm looking up an exact wording now, but I think I found something else terrifying.  My combo as written still doesn't work, but I have another combo in this deck that I think will let me keep stealing creatures and not giving them back - and this is the precon Commander deck, no tweaks at all.  It's ridiculous.  Commander is supposed to be a casual variant :P

@HaoYe I started writing my question and discovered it would be a duplicate.  I can steal cards with Rubinia and then have Conjurer's Closet make them mine permanently at a rate of one per turn.  EVEN IF THEY ARE OTHER PLAYERS' COMMANDERS.  dies of brokenness

Actually, not if they are Commanders. If your commander would go to exile, you can have it go to the command zone instead. That's true even if someone else controls it.

You have Case 2 correct, but not Case 1. There's not any real difference between the two. In both cases, there is one continuous effect giving you control of a creature, and then you apply a second effect giving control to an opponent. In general, the most recent effect "wins out", and so you've given away your creature. The rules don't make a distinction between what you refer to as "permanent" and "ongoing"; both are simply "continuous effects".

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


text:
Predator's Rapport and counters
Suppose Predator's Rapport's target has counters (for example, a few +1/+1 counters). Do the counters count when calculating the gained life? I thought power and toughness do not change after adding counters.

Yes. When a card refers to any creature's power or toughness, it always means the creature's current power or toughness, not what is printed on the card. This includes any +1/+1, -1/-1 or other counters that modify power and toughness; any equipment or enchantments attached to the creature that modify power and/or toughness, and any effects from cards such as Giant Growth, Glorious Anthem, or Bile Blight.
Note that damage on a creature does not change its toughness.

+1/+1 counters count for power and toughness. The power and toughness of a creature are modified by counters in Layer 7. You can also change the P/T with other spells, such as Giant Growth. Giant growth is also applied in Layer 7.
It's hard to explain in a few sentences, but more info about the layer system is explained in this article.

You do not need to know about layers to answer this question. All you need to know is that power means power, not base power.

P/T on its own is not a CDA, it's simply a characteristic. Some creatures have a CDA that defines its P/T (the various goyfs, for example), but that doesn't make P/T a CDA in the general case.

Counters are still applied in Layer 7, despite not being a CDA. I should be able to clean this answer up a bit. Oh, and Giant Growth happens to be applied in the same layer (Layer 7), so I fixed that too.

@Jefromi You do need to know about layers if the creature in question is an Ogre. Because Ogres are like onions: they have layers.

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


text:
Does Mewtwo-EX's Damage Change exchange or move damage counters?
Mewtwo-EX from BREAKthrough has a Damage Change attack:

 Damage Change
  Switch all damage counters on this Pokémon with those on your opponent's Active Pokémon.

The Damage Change attack states that the damage counters are switched onto that of the opponent. Does that literally mean exchange or put the counters on?
I think the former, but the phrasing is ambiguous.

While there isn't a specific ruling in the Compendium, there is a ruling in the compendium that implies that swapping is correct.  (As a general rule, "Move..." would be used if they meant just move the damage counters to the other Pokémon.)

Damage Change    (Mewtwo EX - BREAKthrough)

Q. What happens if Mewtwo EX uses its "Damage Change" attack against a Pokemon that blocks effects of attacks? Does nothing happen, or does Mewtwo EX get to remove its damage counters?
A. Mewtwo-EX would remove its damage counters, but the opponent's Active Pokemon would not remove nor receive any. If you try to move damage to something that blocks effects, the damage disappears. If you try to move damage from something that blocks effects, the damage stays there. (Oct 29, 2015 TPCi Rules Team)
    [/quote]

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


text:
Pokemon cards with the same name and different features
I have noticed that some Pokémon have the same name but different features (be it hit points, attacks or abilities). How does this work? I am accustomed to card games where the same card, even with different art, has the same behaviour but here it seems that you can have variations on a theme. Do they count towards the "max 4 per deck" rule even if they are different? Does it change something at tournament/competitive play Vs casual play?

According to Rulebook, page 22:

DECK BUILDING
(...)
Also, except for basic Energy, you can only have 4 cards with the same name in your deck. This means you can have only 4 cards called “Pignite” in your deck, even if they all have different attacks. Finally, your deck must have at least one Basic Pokémon in it.
(...)

You can see that deckbuilding rules does not talk about cards, but card names.
There are also some parts of Pokémon's name that do not count toward this rule, that is outlined in Rulebook on page 21:

WHAT DOES AND DOESN’T COUNT FOR A POKÉMON’S NAME?
• Some Pokémon cards have extra information after their name, such as a Level or a symbol like GL. A Pokémon’s name changes how you can evolve or play certain cards. Level is not part of a Pokémon’s name:
    ◆ Gengar, Gengar LV. 43, Gengar LV. 44, and Gengar LV.X all have the same name
• Symbols at the end of a Pokémon’s name are part of a Pokémon’s name:
    ◆ Alakazam, Alakazam 四, and Alakazam ☆ all have different names from each other
    ◆ However, δ (Delta Species) is not part of a Pokémon’s name. Aerodactyl and
Aerodactyl δ (Delta Species) have the same name
• An owner or form name in a Pokémon’s name is part of the Pokémon’s name:
    ◆ Meowth, Alolan Meowth, and Rocket’s Meowth have different names
When you are building a deck, you can have only 4 copies of a card with the same name in it, except for basic Energy cards. If your deck has 1 each of Gengar, Gengar LV. 43, Gengar LV. 44, and Gengar LV.X, you can’t put any more cards named Gengar in your deck! However, you could have 4 Meowth, 4 Alolan Meowth, and 4 Rocket’s Meowth.
When evolving, the “evolves from” Pokémon name must match the Pokémon being evolved. So Graveler can evolve from Geodude, or Geodude LV. 12, but not Brock’s Geodude.

There is no difference in casual or tournament play, if they follow official rules. There might be some formats that change those rules, like Prerelease tournament that diverges from official rules such as:

40 cards in deck
only 4 prizes
no "only 4 Pokémon with the same name deck" rule

I strongly recommend to play using the official rules at all times so you are not surprised when you attend a league or a tournament for the first time.

The casual u150 format allows evolving  past owners names.


text:
Does Incineroar's ability, Strong Cheer, affect attacks that normally deal no damage?
I have a benched Incineroar (Unbroken Bonds 29) with Strong Cheer ability.

Strong Cheer
  Your Pokémon's attacks do 30 more damage to your opponent's Active Pokémon (before applying Weakness and Resistance). You can't apply more than 1 Strong Cheer Ability at a time.

If I have an active Cosmog (Sun & Moon 64) with Dust Gathering attack, does it do 30 damage? I assume Strong Cheer would make it do 30 damage, but I have been unable to find clarification online.

[C] Dust Gathering
  Draw a card.

Using Dust Gathering with a benched Incineroar with Strong Cheer ability does no damage.
From the official Rulings Compendium BW:

An attack has to do "some" damage before an effect can add "more" damage to it. (Jan 31, 2008 PUI Rules Team)

This is generally true in the game - for example, if something makes a card have "no retreat cost", nothing can add to the retreat cost, but if the retreat cost is reduced to 0 then it can.

thanks for the link to the rules compendium -- I'd looked for something like that, but was unable to find it.

Does this rule still hold for something like poisoning? This does no damage until Pokémon checkup, which is after the attack.

Poison does no damage, it puts damage counters which is a different thing :-)


text:
Does damage of Echoed Voice (Toucannon SUM) increment each turn?
My brother and I were playing another round of Pokémon TCG, and we encountered an argument that we can't solve involving Toucannon's Echoed Voice attack.
Me: Echoed Voice does 60 damage on the first round, 60 + 60 on the second and 60 on the third. (The damage resets it's increment on the third round)
My brother: Echoed Voice does 60 damage on the first round, 60 * 2 on the second, 60 * 3 on the third and so on. (The increment continues)
Who's right? I would like to find out as soon as possible!

[CC] Echoed Voice 60
  During your next turn, this Pokémon's Echoed Voice attack does 60 more damage (before applying Weakness and Resistance).

"does 60 more damage" adds damage to the base damage, 60 here. It basically checks if you used the attack last turn, if yes, bonus damage applies. There's no increment.
None of you is right here. The damage goes 60-120-120-120... if the attack is used every turn.
This follows official ruling from The Rules Compendium EX:

== EXTRA COMET PUNCH (Metagross ex - EX:Hidden Legends)
Q. Metagross-EX's "Extra Comet Punch" attack says, "During your next turn, E.C.P. does 50 damage plus 50 more damage". Does this mean that on the first turn I do 50, then on the second consecutive turn 100, then on the third consecutive turn 150, then 200, etc.?
A. No, but it does mean that whenever you do Extra Comet Punch in consecutive turns you add +50 to the base damage of the attack. So on the first turn you would do 50, then second turn does 100 (Base 50 plus extra 50 from previous turn), then third turn does 100 (again, Base 50 plus extra 50 from previous turn), etc. But don't forget, benching or switching Metagross-EX ends this effect! (Jun 17, 2004 PUI Rules Team)

And also another official ruling from The Rulings Compendium LVX:

Silver Wind (Mothim - OP Series 7; Mothim - Secret Wonders; Dustox ex - Legend Maker; Others)
Q. If I use Silver Wind once, then I use it again on my next turn, it would do 60 damage (assuming there's no weakness or resistance, and that neither active Pokémon is switched out). On the third turn would it do +30 more damage (bringing it up to 90), and on the fourth 120 damage, and so on?
A. Sorry, but Silver Wind only adds 30 to the base damage done by the attack; it is not cumulative in the manner you suggest. (Jun 17, 2004 PUI Rules Team)

Joe pointed out in comment that there is also another official ruling in the latest version of compendium, The Rulings Compendium Black and White:

Meteor Mash    (Metagross - Celestial Storm)
Q. If I use Metagross' "Meteor Mash" attack several turns in succession, does the damage keep piling up as 60, 120, 180, 240, etc.?
A. No, Meteor Mash tops out at 120. It only adds +60 to the base 60 damage, it does not accumulate on successive turns. (Celestial Storm FAQ; Aug 2, 2018 TPCi Rules Team)


text:
Can Alolan Muk use Tri Hazard GX attack even if opponent has no benched Pokémon?

If the opponent only has the Active Pokémon left and no benched one, can the Tri Hazard GX attack still be used even if there is nobody on the bench?

There's an official ruling for this attack in The Rulings Compendium Black and White (the official ruling source):

Tri Hazard GX (Alolan Muk-GX - Burning Shadows)

Q. If my opponent has no Benched Pokemon, can I still use Alolan Muk-GX's "Tri Hazard-GX" attack?
    A. You can use it, but it won't have any effect, and it will count as having used your GX attack for the game. (Burning Shadows FAQ; Aug 3, 2017 TPCi Rules Team)

You can use the attack, but it won't have any effect except it counts as you've used your GX attack for that game. Switching 1 of your opponent's Benched Pokémon with their Active one is a required step to do the effect.


text:
Does Altaria GX Euphoria Attack heal Knocked Out Pokemon?
I am playing Pokemon TCG with my kids. My son has the Altaria GX card. The GX Attack is Euphoria GX which states "...Heal all damage from all of your Pokemon." Does the healing effect knocked out Pokemon (i.e. those that have been reduced to 0 HP)? Thanks!


text:
As the first player, can I choose whether to perform a Special Activity after completing my Operation?
When I'm the first player on a card in Cuba Libre, can I perform my Operation before deciding whether to perform a Special Activity or not? The distinction is important because the desirability (and even possibility) of certain Special Activities can vary based on the die roll(s) of an operation. Also, one might desire to see their operation through before deciding to Launder (which is only possible without Special Activity), particularly if depending on another player's Cash to Launder.

The rules as written of Cube Libre have no say in whether the Special Activities must be declared beforehand. The turn track is adjusted after the player completes its activities so it can be deduced that the player can choose to add a Special Activity if the rest of the involved rules are respected.
I have played several COIN games and only Pendragon comes to mind in that all Operations and Special Activites (Feats in that game) must be declared and marked on the map before executing any action.


text:
How much mana does Radiant Fountain provide when tapped?
Radiant Fountain reads "{T}: Add {1} to your mana pool." Does this card alone produce a total of {1} or {2}?
Basic Land cards produce mana when tapped. So, either

All land cards produce mana when tapped, and Radiant Fountain adds another due to the {T} description, resulting in {2}.
The {T} description is the only result, there is no implicit mana from a land card, resulting in {1}.

{1}.
You will only get one colorless mana added to your mana pool when you tap Radiant Fountain. Lands do NOT have an automatic built-in ability, only lands with one of the basic land subtypes do. Radiant Fountain does not have one of these subtypes (Mountain, Forest, Plains, Island, or Swamp).
Even if it did have one of these subtypes, you would still not be able to tap it for 2 mana. Say you have a Radiant Fountain and a Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth in play. Radiant Fountain now has 2 abilities:

{T}: Add {1} to your mana pool
{T}: Add {B} to your mana pool

In this case, you have these 2 separate Tap abilities, but you can not tap once to get both mana. You would have to choose which ability you wanted to activate by tapping the card, and you would get just 1 mana whichever one you chose.

Mana provided by default: no such thing.
There's no such thing as lands producing mana by default. They only produce mana according to the abilities given to them. It's entirely possible to have lands which generate no mana at all: consider Dark Depths, for example.
You're probably now thinking "how do Islands work then? They have no abilities at all." However, basic lands — Islands, Mountains, Plains, Swamps and Forests — all implicitly, because of having that basic land type, have an ability of the form:

{T}: Add {color} to your mana pool.

Where {color} is blue, red, white, black or green depending on the type of land. So if a land is a Forest, being a forest implicitly means it has the ability:

{T}: Add {G} to your mana pool.

Lands of more than one basic land type, such as Steam Vents which is an Island Mountain, implicitly have this ability for each of their types, but you can only activate one. Hence the reminder text at the top of the card's description:

({T}: Add {U} or {R} to your mana pool.)

It really has these two abilities implicitly:

{T}: Add {U} to your mana pool.

{T}: Add {R} to your mana pool.

But tapping a card doesn't mean activating all tap abilities on it. You pick an ability (just one), and tap it to pay the cost of that ability. When a card like this has two tap abilities, that limits you to only being able to activate one at a time. (Unless you can untap it somehow, such as with Kiora's Follower.)
Radiant fountain has no basic land types (it's not an Island, Forest, Plains, Swamp or Mountain). It has exactly one mana ability, which adds 1 colorless mana to your mana pool. That is the only mana it produces.

Interesting that the reminder text is inaccurate with lands like Steam Vents. I wonder if there's any situation in which is matters that it's 2 separate abilities instead of 1.

When tapped, Radiant Fountain will add only one colorless mana to your mana pool.
A player only has one mana pool which holds all mana produced for that player, whether from a land or an ability on a different card type.
This effect is the same as the intrinsic ability of basic lands which add mana of a specific color to a player's mana pool. Tapping Radiant Fountain and a Forest would give you {1} and {G} mana in your mana pool giving you enough mana to play a Runeclaw Bear for example.

This is wrong. Radiant Fountain only adds one colourless mana to the mana pool.

@MattEllen Was this answer edited since your last comment? I don't see a revision history, and your comment doesn't make any sense.

Ah, I think I misread it.

Your "yes" is a little confusing to me. I'm interpreting the OP's question as, "Does tapping Radiant Fountain and nothing else produce {2}?". Shouldn't your answer then be "no", since you say it produces {1}?

@Kevin is correct. "Yes" is the WRONG answer.

On the other hand, "yes" is the correct answer to "does tapping Radiant fountain, in addition to the mana produced by tapping a separate basic land, give me a total of 2 mana?". I guess it depends on what you think the OP meant by "the mana that tapping a Basic Land card would provide". Is he talking about a second land separate from the fountain? Or does he think that all lands, including nonbasic ones, have an implicit "basic" ability to add one mana to your mana pool, even if it's not printed on the card?

@Kevin I suppose that is possible, but then he may as well be asking "can I tap more than 1 land to get more than 1 mana per turn?"

The question was clarified after I answered. "Yes" is wrong based on the more accurate and specific wording used in the question. Thank you for the edit to my answer to make it appropriate to the edited question.


text:
How fair is an almost perfect riffle shuffle?
I've been practicing an in-hands riffle shuffle, just to make it look and sound smooth. In doing so, I've noticed I'm able to weave the cards almost perfectly.

An almost perfect shuffle.
Is such an almost perfect shuffle, repeated a reasonable number of times, less fair than one with a higher proportion of imperfections?
Note
The question is about almost perfect shuffles. Obviously a perfect shuffle does not randomize the deck at all, as anyone who has seen a magician do a faro shuffle knows.
Simply observing an almost perfect shuffle randomizes the cards less is not an answer. The premise of the question implicitly states that. How much does an almost perfect riffle shuffle randomize or not randomize the deck? Do eight almost perfect riffle shuffles mostly not reorder the deck, with perhaps a dozen cards out of order? Or do the errors compound with each shuffle such that it's really impossible to shuffle unfairly if the shuffle is done N times? How big must N be?
Please, no speculation or guessing. Cite sources, or show some math.

There is a respectable body of academic discussion on this; this answer is a good place to start.

An almost perfect riffle shuffle of a 52 card deck is not perfectly random, but should be sufficiently fair for any casual purpose.
I decided to test this experimentally.  I coded up a quick python function* to perform riffles and almost perfect riffles.
When performing a perfect riffle, the code takes a "deck" of integers and rearranges them so that the first half and second half are interlaced, so the deck

[0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51]

becomes

[26, 0, 27, 1, 28, 2, 29, 3, 30, 4, 31, 5, 32, 6, 33, 7, 34, 8, 35, 9, 36, 10, 37, 11, 38, 12, 39, 13, 40, 14, 41, 15, 42, 16, 43, 17, 44, 18, 45, 19, 46, 20, 47, 21, 48, 22, 49, 23, 50, 24, 51, 25]

For an imperfect riffle, the function adds a defect where two numbers are kept together without an intervening one from the other half.  For example, the 0-51 range might instead become

[26, 0, 27, 1, 28, 2, 29, 3, 30, 4, 31, 5, 32, 6, 33, 7, 34, 8, 35, 9, 36, 10, 37, 11, 38, 12, 39, 13, 40, 14, 41, 15, 42, 16, 43, 17, 44, 18, 45, 19, 46, 20, 47, 21, 22, 48, 23, 49, 24, 50, 25, 51]

The defect is added at a random point during the interlacing.

Repeating the perfect riffle shuffle on a 52 card deck 7 times generates a very regular pattern:

[40, 28, 16, 4, 45, 33, 21, 9, 50, 38, 26, 14, 2, 43, 31, 19, 7, 48, 36, 24, 12, 0, 41, 29, 17, 5, 46, 34, 22, 10, 51, 39, 27, 15, 3, 44, 32, 20, 8, 49, 37, 25, 13, 1, 42, 30, 18, 6, 47, 35, 23, 11]

The imperfect shuffle on the other hand, generates a unique pattern every time.  One example was

[31, 0, 38, 51, 26, 8, 44, 29, 14, 36, 2, 20, 3, 5, 27, 46, 24, 33, 32, 17, 40, 25, 10, 22, 48, 30, 35, 1, 50, 42, 7, 12, 45, 13, 39, 37, 19, 43, 4, 18, 28, 34, 15, 23, 16, 41, 6, 11, 21, 49, 9, 47]

That looks pretty random. Is it, though?  I decided to Monte Carlo it, and "shuffled" the deck 100,000 times to look at how the numbers distributed.
It turns out that this is not nearly as random as it appears.  In a perfectly random shuffle each number should have a 1/52 chance (1.92%) of appearing in any position.  But my results were instead that the probabilities ranged from 0.02% to 18.5%.  That's a great deal more likely than 1.92%.
But while it's not good that card 10 is ending up in slot 26** 18% of the time, it's not something that is easy to abuse either.  Did you know what card #10 was?  Do you care what card #26 is?  Your goal is not a random deck, but instead a fair one.  That means that a bit of unrandomness is fine, as long as no players are taking advantage of it.  7 almost perfect shuffles leaves patterns that could be taken advantage of, but they are sufficiently complex enough that you would have to dedicate significant time and energy to do so.
And it's easy to add extra randomness by cutting the deck or throwing in a few extra shuffles.  Furthermore, I've almost certainly underestimated the amount of randomness, since the "almost perfect riffle" pictured in the OP has 3 defects instead of 1, and shufflers will not always perfectly divide the deck in half like I assumed.
All told, I do not think that you need to worry about your excellent riffling skills disrupting your card games.  But perhaps be careful if you play with professional card counters.

*I can share the code if anyone's interested, but it isn't really relevant.
**Or possibly the other way around.  I get my axes confused sometimes.

A perfect riffle shuffle is not very effective at randomizing the cards.  Cards from one half of the deck are (perfectly?) interleaved with those from the other, not changing the order of any cards relative their previous neighbors, but only leaving zero or more cards (one, in a perfect shuffle of a perfectly cut deck) from the other half between them.
There are other shuffles that randomize much better (though a proper "52 pick-up" is too slow for most card players and has the hazard of "misplacing" cards).  A riffle shuffle looks and sounds nice, however, lends itself to the "bridge" square-up afterward, and can be easily undone by a card manipulator (which, along with its appearance and sound, is why it's popular with card magicians).

This doesn't really answer the question, which is about almost perfect riffle shuffles.

Also a fair riffle shuffle does an excellent job of randomizing the cards if it's done at least seven times: http://www.dartmouth.edu/~chance/course/topics/winning_number.html

What do you mean by "almost perfect?"

@TheChaz2.0 It's explained in the question.

Right. Then what do you mean by "usually?"

@TheChaz2.0 Why don't you explain why it matters in an answer?

A perfect riffle does not randomise at all. The exact  new order is determined from the previous order.

@PhilFrost, on the other hand, a perfect riffle shuffle, done eight times, doesn't randomize the cards at all.

Again, almost perfect riffle shuffle. Please read the question.

The point of a shuffle is to eliminate knowledge of the order in the deck.
A perfect riffle shuffle (one which follows a left-right-left-right-... pattern) does not eliminate any knowledge. It is possible to determine, from the initial state, the exact position of all cards after a perfect riffle.
To eliminate the knowledge, we need to introduce randomness. For a riffle this means not knowing from which side the next card will come, supposing we knew which side the last card came from. Such a riffle can provide effective randomisation after seven riffles.
Obviously, if you know more about which card comes next, you know more about where each card ends up. The closer to a perfect riffle you make, the closer to the original order you're likely to have. For example, if only two "errors" (instances of breaking the perfect riffle pattern) are made, you can expect at most four cards to be out of place from the order expected in a perfect riffle. More "errors" push you closer to the point of a random riffle, but interestingly, a 100% error rate is equivalent in knowledge to a 0% error rate. Being as close to 50% wrong as possible provides the best randomisation, and this is equivalent to the statement made previously (we need to know as little as possible as which side the next card comes from).
Thus, an almost-perfect riffle will not disorder the deck as much as a shuffle that includes many more errors, but will be no worse than one which has almost all possible errors.
However that considers only a single riffle. This is not practically the case in real shuffling of game decks where we use many repetitions. Assuming we don't know where the errors will be, having fewer errors simply means we need more shuffles to ensure every card has had an opportunity to be exposed to at least one error. By knowing every card may be in error, and not knowing the order of those errors, we reduce the knowledge of the order until it reaches the same as that of random guessing.
For a random riffle, this is approximately seven repetitions. For an almost-perfect shuffle, it's probably in the multiple hundreds.

Do you have a reference for "probably in the multiple hundreds"?

@PhilFrost: The number of shuffles required would depend on how "almost" perfect the shuffle is.  If there's an average of one "slip" per shuffle and it's uniformly randomly distributed, then about 50 shuffles should probably suffice, but if the slips aren't uniformly randomly distributed some cards might never get mixed in.

I tried finding the paper where this was simulated, but don't remember the title and GScholar keeps bringing up others. If it's one expected error per riffle, definitely well into three digits. It has a decline to somewhere in two digits if there's a dozen expected errors, and then approaches single digits as you hit an expected rate of errors of half the riffles (i.e. when you can't tell approximately whether this card will or will not be an error).


text:
Am I understanding the China Card right in Twilight Struggle?
I want to make sure I understand this right.
Most cards, I can either choose the Event, or use the OPS Points in the top-left corner.  If I choose the Event, then the OPS points in the corner is irrelevant to that specific card play (unless the Event tells me otherwise).
However, for the China Card, if I choose the Event, I actually do use the 4 OPS points for that card.
Is that correct?  I am under the impression that OPS Points are only relevant if I ignore the Event.  But the China Card was throwing me off.
On a side note, I understand the concept that if I am holding a card that helps my enemy, and I choose to use the OPS points, the Event triggers anyway.

That's correct. The China Card is only used for operation points. What's unique about the China Card is the operations value differs depending on where you decide to spend the points. If you spend all of the points inside Asia (and Southeast Asia) you can use 5 OP instead of the 4 printed on the card. If you use the card anywhere else, or in combination with Asia, you can spend 4.
Additional notes from the Deluxe Edition rulebook:

9.1 China’s role in the Cold War
  is abstracted through ‘The China
  Card’. Either player may play
  ‘The China Card’ as if it were part
  of his regular hand. ‘The China
  Card’ does not count towards the
  hand limit.

and

9.2 Every play of ‘The China
  Card’ counts as one of the Actions
  (6 or 7) that a player is permitted
  during a turn. As a result, players
  may have more cards left in their
  hand than usual, if ‘The China
  Card’ is played.

Got it.  And I remembered, that the China Card can NOT be used as a Headline Phase card.  Thanks for the reply.


text:
How do I promote a board game to the masses?
I created a board game for playing while watching American Football with your friends. We always had a great time playing it and anybody outside of our group who saw it immediately loved it. So I thought it's a no brainer, it's time to sell this.
The name of the game is Big Bucks Football. And I built my website and twitter and Facebook and YouTube, and I believe I have about 8 hits. I am active, I tweet on twitter, I share on Facebook, I have instructional videos on YouTube, but still no success.
My question is, has anyone here had any success, or have any ideas on how to promote the game? I have a limited budget but I'm willing to put the time in. I just started my Kickstarter campaign, but I'm already worried if that doesn't work I may start pulling my hair out cause I'm out of ideas.

I think in this form your question comes across as spammy. Maybe it would be better to remove the links and focus on the question, rather than trying to use the question to promote your game.

@Jefromi Fair, enough, I was trying to show I put the work in which is why I downplayed the links - either way, the links are removed.

@Jefromi also thought if an answer was going to be provided people may want to take a look at the material and see where I could improve. Come to think of it, I'm wondering how you could provide an accurate answer without the links?

I think simply describing what you've done is plenty. Asking people to look over all your content is probably too broad (and maybe even off topic). And besides, it's better not to ask a question that's limited to your own specific case; you can instead ask a generic question that'll be useful to future readers.

You are asking the community to help you put together a marketing campaign for a board game. I think that is off topic here. I don't see a Stack Exchange for marketing, but if there was one, I imagine that "How can I market this?" would be too broad in the same sense that "How can I program this?" is too broad for Stack Overflow. You should consider investing in the Digital Marketing proposal over on Area 51.

@Rainbolt probably a good idea, this is becoming counter-productive.

@JohnnyUX, this would be on topic if it's specifically about what it takes to market a boardgame, separately from marketing other products.  I have some experience with that, which I'd be happy to share.

Promoting a board game (design, prototype, print&play or kickstarter) should definitely involve BoardGameGeek, and similar communities.
I could expand, but everything's covered in this article: http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/322382/game-design-self-publishing-resource-game-designer
You should provide print&play materials for playtesting groups, to see if most people actually agree on your game's quality. And the feedback can lead to an improved game.
If your game is better than good, the word will spread (forum threads growing longer, enthusiastic playtesters recommending it to their neighbours' moms, etc.)
And: the "masses" (as in: everybody not actively following the boardgaming industry) will only encounter a game once it's physically for sale in shops. That's why every family with two kids has a copy of Monopoly but not Agricola, Diplomacy or Twilight Struggle.

Thanks Frederik. The game is listed on boardgamegeek. I'll look into the play testing groups and similar communities.


text:
Ways to remove creatures with Shroud
I was playing Forge last night and the computer brought out Wall of Denial.  What an annoying wall!  Is there any way to destroy it other than attacking with a big creature and having the wall block the creature.  It says it can't be the target of spells or abilities.  Any other ways to destroy it?

Literally any wrath ever.

So you're talking about Wrath of God or Kirtar's Wrath I'm guessing?  I was hoping to just destroy the wall, not all my creatures as well.

May wish to specify that in the question then.

I think this question can't be answered well unless colors, or even better a more specific deck is mentioned in the question

possible duplicate of Does Wrath of God really destroy creatures with shroud? The answers to that question clarify that creatures with Shroud and other protective abilities can still be destroyed by sweeper spells and give examples of what cards are able to do that.

@Hackworth I don't think this is a duplicate of that. This question is asking for ways to kill a shroud creature; that one is asking whether a particular method actually kills shroud creatures.

Author, are you opposed to changing the title of your question to "Ways to remove creatures with Shroud"? I think being less specific here would improve the overall usefulness of the question.

@Rainbolt, that's a good idea; done.

Yes, there are. A creature with shroud can't be the target of spells or abilities, but it still can be effected by ones that don't target.
Some examples are ones that destroy all creatures like Wrath of God, deals enough damage to all creatures like Blasphemous Act, or gives all creatures -X/-X like Black Sun's Zenith.
Another common way of dealing with shrouded creatures is by forcing its controller to sacrifice it with something like Diabolic Edict, though this require them to only have one creature, or want to keep their other creatures more than the wall.
You can also remove shroud from the wall either with Arcane Lighthouse or cards that remove all abilities without targeting like Polymorphist's Jest.
You could also give smaller creatures that it blocks deathtouch with something like Coat with Venom.

Sudden Spoiling is another consideration to mention.

Diabolic Edict is a good one remove removing creatures with Shroud.

Sacrifice effects in general are a pretty common answer for shroud/hexproof. Beyond that, it's just one wall; if you can attack with multiple creatures it can't really save them.

Just the usual answers to shroud/hexproof, including board wipes like Supreme Verdict and spells that don't have the word target in them.
If you already have removal in your deck, you might want to sideboard in Arcane Lighthouse, which is useful for being able to get rid of shroud/hexproof creatures.

Eliminate it Directly
The obvious answer is to just get rid of it directly, with a non-targeting effect.  Here's two that I have found, I'd be very interested in others that people know of:  Council Judgement, Porphyry Nodes and drop of honey.
That said, the possibilities here are truly almost endless.  So, let us walk through ways around this problem...
WIPE the BOARD
There's nothing quite like brute forcing your way through a problem.  In multi-player, don't be surprised if you get countered though....  Wrath of God is the obvious example here, but there are almost 100 cards that give you a massive board wipe.
Damage all Flying Creatures
The above is a bit brutal, a "softer" way is to "just" damage the flying creatures.  There are about 10 spells that can do this.  Windstorm is a nice one.
Damage it indirectly
There are a number of cards that can do this, but some related to creature types are: Coordinated Barrage, although Engineered Plague, Outbreak, Roar of the Crowd.  These can be considered variants of "Damage all flying creatures"
Force your opponent to Sacrifice it

Cast a spell/use an effect that forces your opponent to sacrifice a creature.  There are roughly 50 cards that can be used to do this.  far and away is an obvious example
attack with any creature that has  annihilator

Force your opponent to block your deathtouch or massive creature

Deadly Allure is the best card for this.  Although Irresistable Prey works nicely as well as a cantrip.  In all there are 10 cards that match the "must block" description.
There are roughly 100 cards that have, or can give deathtouch.
There are roughly 100 creatures that have power 8 or greater, and I'm not counting cards that can pump a creature's power like Giant Growth or Titantic Growth.

Force it to lose shroud
I think this is clear enough.  How to do that is a bit tricky, as you can't target it.  But there are a variety of ways:

Arcane Lighthouse.
Humility
Polymorphist Jest
Sudden Spoiling

Force it to lose flying
Not quite what you had in mind, but still helpful.  I can't find many cards to do this however:

Gravity Sphere
Invert the Skies
Archetype of Imagination
Mystic Decree
Thundercloud Elemental
Whiteout

Wear it Down
Attack it with a creature that has wither or infect, (over 100 options) i.e. does damage with -1/-1 counters.  Use a "force to block" effect described above to force the block.
Take it out of Combat
Force it to tap, before it can block and affect you.  I can't find a good search criteria for this.  Since it has shroud, you'll have to tap all their creatures, but hey, that's just gravy!  Some examples are:

Cryptic Command
Angel's Trumpet is an interesting card.
Ensnare
Turnabout
Sleep this is my kids' current favorite card lately.  They beat me all the time with this one.

Avoid It
These approaches may not apply to your case, you wanted to destroy it, but really, avoiding it is a perfectly legitimate strategy to deal with any threat.

Riders of Gavony can avoid it nicely.
Intimidate:  There are about 35 cards that have or give intimidate.
Fear:  There are roughly 70 cards that have or affect fear.
Shadow: There are roughly 60 cards that give or have shadow.
Plainswalk:
Mountainwalk:
IslandWalk
SwampWalk
ForestWalk

There are lots of other "can't be blocked" creatures, those are just some ideas to get you going.
Overwhelm It
Cast another great creature.  Or create a creature army....  The list here is too long to go into, but Sacred Mesa & Goblin Warrens are personal favorites.

Your very first suggestion does work, but I think the "exile it" header is misleading. The reason it works is that Council's Judgment doesn't target, not that it exiles things. Good list, though!

Harsh Mercy won't work. Your opponent can just select Wall as the type they want to save.


text:
What if I don't own a house in Life and land on a pay square
The rules in my game say I don't need to buy a house. So what happens in the game if my house is destroyed per the board? Playing the other night I landed on two squares that we treated differently. What was correct?
First square: "Burglary. Pay $50,000 if not insured." I figured an apartment or whatever I'm living in could be burglarized so I paid it. Should I have?
Second square: "Tornado destroys house. Pay $125,000 if not insured." I don't own a house - hence I did not think I should pay this square. Should I have?
[Edit]: The version I have is Hasbro 2005. The rules state "Draw 2 House Deeds at random from the deck. Decide which one, if either, you want to buy."

The issue of semi-optional housing exists in the 2003 version of the rules, and unfortunately there isn't an official clarification on what to do, leaving it up to house rules.
The easiest of which is to just use the mandatory purchase rules from the 1991, 1994, or 2007 versions.
There have been a number of changes to the way buying a house works in The Game of Life since Milton Bradley published the first modern version in 1960.
Before the 1991 printing houses were not an integral game part, but from 1991 to 2003 owning a house was mandatory, with a single house deed being drawn which must be paid for:

The 2003 update moved to an optional selection between two house deeds, resulting in the rules gap you encountered.

This issue was potentially somewhat hidden by the large variety of themed versions released in 2004 of which most carried the optional house purchase rules, but didn't have the conflicting instructions due to their customized boards.
Hasbro never issued a clarification on how to resolve the problem of non-existent house destruction, but very few board games of that time published any form of errata.
In the 2007 edition they again returned to a single randomly selected house deed, and in 2010 the rules were updated to allow players a choice of starter homes, requiring at least one be purchased:

Crazy you found all this history! After 7 1/2 years I'm finally marking an answer. Ultimately this means my edition is ambiguous and house rules apply.

I'm not sure what version of the game you are playing.  From Hasboro's rules for LIFE:

BUYING A HOUSE When you reach this space [the red one that has a stop sign and the words BUY A HOUSE], stop --even if you have
  moves left. Draw 1 House Deed at random from the deck. Pay the bank
  the price on the deed (not the insurance amount; that’s a separate
  transaction). If you’re short on cash, you must borrow from the bank.
  Then spin and move again.

You do have to buy a house.  So if your house was burglarized or destroyed by a tornado, you still have to pay the money.  Note that having a tornado doesn't make you get rid of your house, you just have to pay to "repair" it.

The rules that came with mine are different. I don't have them on me however they say to draw 2 house cards not one. Then the rules say "Decide which house (if either) you wish to buy." The "if either" is part of the rules.

@Paul I've never heard of that.  The game in my house has the rules that I found above.  At least in mine anyway, there is no way to avoid buying a house, so you are always assumed to have one so this never comes up.

I'll update with the exact text from my rules as well as the maker, year, etc. tonight.


text:
Which enchantments allow tapping a creature to inflict direct damage?
What creatures across all sets and expansions have the ability to inflict direct damage, à la Prodigal Sorcerer?
Are there any Enchant Creature spells that have target creature gain "Tap to do 1 damage to target creature or player" or something similar?
Edit: My apologies for such an easily query-able answer. I was not aware of the existence o such comprehensive databases and easily-searchable databases like magiccards.info before posting these questions. I will surely do more research from now on. Thank you!

Dude, you need to try researching before using stackexchange as your "query". I believe somewhere here was told that everytime you want to ask, you need to show what you have tried.

Not to mention that this kind of question is easily queried out of magic card database sites.

In deed, I was certainly hasty. A combination of excitement of getting back in to the game since 3rd Edition, discovering a community of enthusiasts, and my ignorance of the power of tools available to find such information have resulted in some pretty inane questions on my part in the last two days.  Please accept my apologies, and I will certainly do my best to bring questions that enhance the site rather than pollute it next time!!

Great attitude. Ill remove the downvote on this question.

There are a few Aura cards that grant creatures the ability to tap to deal damage to a target (some with more restrictions than others). To find these cards, I used the magiccards.info search o:"Enchant Creature" o:"Enchanted creature has" o:deal o:"{T}", which finds Auras that enchant creatures that mention dealing damage and have an ability with a tap cost. Those cards are:

Archery Training

At the beginning of your upkeep, you may put an arrow counter on Archery Training.

Enchanted creature has "{T}: This creature deals X damage to target attacking or blocking creature, where X is the number of arrow counters on Archery Training."

Burning Anger

Enchanted creature has "{T}: This creature deals damage equal to its power to target creature or player."

Fire Whip

Enchant creature you control

Enchanted creature has "{T}: This creature deals 1 damage to target creature or player."

Sacrifice Fire Whip: Fire Whip deals 1 damage to target creature or player.

Hermetic Study

Enchanted creature has "{T}: This creature deals 1 damage to target creature or player."

Hypervolt Grasp

Enchanted creature has "{T}: This creature deals 1 damage to target creature or player."

{1}{U}: Return Hypervolt Grasp to its owner's hand.

Lavamancer's Skill

Enchanted creature has "{T}: This creature deals 1 damage to target creature."

As long as enchanted creature is a Wizard, it has "{T}: This creature deals 2 damage to target creature."

Lightning Prowess

Enchanted creature has haste and "{T}: This creature deals 1 damage to target creature or player."

Power of Fire

Enchanted creature has "{T}: This creature deals 1 damage to target creature or player."

Predatory Urge

Enchanted creature has "{T}: This creature deals damage equal to its power to target creature. That creature deals damage equal to its power to this creature."

Psionic Gift

Enchanted creature has "{T}: This creature deals 1 damage to target creature or player."

Quicksilver Dagger

Enchanted creature has "{T}: This creature deals 1 damage to target player. You draw a card."

Sinstriker's Will

Enchanted creature has "{T}: This creature deals damage equal to its power to target attacking or blocking creature."

Wow excellent! I paused on Magic around the time 4th Edition was introduced, and I am impressed with the evolution of the game. I have almost come to expect that anything I can conjure up has been done -- looking through what is now probably over 100,000 unique cards seems a little daunting though! Thank you!

A great resource for finding stuff like this is magiccards.info, which as a great advanced search. I found all of these cards with a search for 'o:"Enchant Creature" o:"Enchanted creature has" o:deal o:"{T}"', which searches for cards with the "Enchant Creature" ability that grant that creature an ability that uses the {T} symbol and talk about dealing damage.

So awesome. I got sucked in to magiccards.info last night for hours. So cool. Thank you for providing this information, as well as your comprehensive answer!

@murgatroid99: your comment should really be the first part of your answer- it's far more valuable than listing specific cards, and will be helpful far in the future.

There, I added it.

OP might also be interested in equipment like Heavy Arbalest. These weren't around back during 4th ed...


text:
Do opposite counters coexist or cancel each other out?
Nuance abounds nowadays; whereas it was commonplace to mentally coalesce opposing counters on a permanent, I imagine doing so is incorrect.
Scenario 1
Suppose one Sengir Vampire has amassed five +1/+1 counters from having sent five creatures to the graveyard, and it is now blocking a Regeneration-enchanted Putrefax, a 5/3 whose infectious damage is dealt in the form of -1/-1 counters.
Does Sengir Vampire have zero counters, or ten counters?
Scenario 2
Rabid Wombat, green 0/1, which gains +2/+2 for each enchantment on it, enchanted with Unstable Mutation, which gives it +3/+3, and gives it a -1/-1 counter during controller's upkeep. Is this accurate?
Consecutive Turns:
0/1. Rabid Wombat cast.
5/6. RW+Unstable Mutation. 3/4 + a 2/2 counter
4/5. 3/4 + a 2/2 counter + -1/-1 counter
3/4. 3/4 + a 2/2 counter + (2 x -1/-1 counters) no cancellation here?
2/3. 3/4 + a 2/2 counter + (3 x -1/-1 counters) ...
.. etc. correct?
Scenario 3
Rock Hydra comes into play with casting-time X +1/+1 counters, and receives damage in the form of loss of the counters. If it becomes infected by Putrefax, which deals damage as -1/-1 counters, is the infection essentially redundant to Rock Hydra's normal life cycle? Or does the state-based action's removal of the counter count as damage which then removes another head?
Is reduction of a creature's toughness due to counter-based actions considered damage?

As is answered in the linked question, there is a special rule which cancels out +1/+1 and -1/-1 counters. If you had +1/+0 and -1/-0 counters, they would not cancel out.

Rabid Wombat does not give counters. There's in no +2/+2 counter in Scenario 2

Zero counters. They cancel each other out.

121.3. If a permanent has both a +1/+1 counter and a -1/-1 counter on it, N +1/+1 and N -1/-1 counters are removed from it as a state-based
  action, where N is the smaller of the number of +1/+1 and -1/-1
  counters on it.

Any idea how that works with Rock Hydra?

@ProductionValues Rock Hydra doesn't take damage, it prevents the damage and removes counters instead. This means infect is irrelevant as the damage has already been prevented.


text:
Are there Magic cards that counter activated abilities?
Are there any Magic cards that nullify activated abilities?
Edit: My apologies for such an easily query-able answer. I was not aware of the existence o such comprehensive databases and easily-searchable databases like magiccards.info before posting these questions. I will surely do more research from now on. Thank you!

You really need to research more rather that machine gunning this site with your short questions that can be searched via advanced search in some magic card database site.

Several cards that counter activated abilities. They are

Ayesha Tanaka (only from artifact sources)
Azorius Guildmage
Bind
Brown Ouphe (only from artifact sources)
Interdict (only from artifacts, creatures, enchantments, and lands. It also prevents that permanent from activating abilities for the rest of the turn.)
Ouphe Vandals (only from artifact sources. Also destroys the artifact.)
Rimewind Cryomancer
Rust (only from artifacts)
Squelch
Stifle (also hits triggered abilities)
Trickbind (also hits triggered abilities, and prevents that permanent from activating abilities for the rest of the turn)
Voidmage Husher
Voidslime (also hits triggered abilities)

There are also cards that prevent activated abilities from being activated. You can find cards that do that with a Gatherer search for "can't be activated" There are a bunch of these, but the highlights are

Arrest (An aura that prevents the creature from attacking, blocking, or activating abilities)
Linvala, Keeper of Silence (Prevents any creature your opponent controls from activating abilities)
Null Rod (Prevents all artifacts from activating abilities)
Phyrexian Revoker (Lets you name a card, and stops any permanent with that name from activating abilities)
Pithing Needle (Basically the same effect as Phyrexian Revoker, but can't stop mana abilities)

As Michael Snook points out, Time Stop and Sundial of the Infinite end the turn immediately, and that includes exiling anything on the stack, including activated abilities.

Ayesha Tanaka can only counter activated abilities from artifact sources.

You're right. Fixed.

Azorius not ous

Yes, there's several: this Gatherer search covers cards with the words "counter target activated ability" in their rules text (not necessarily in that exact order), which covers that exact phrase and small variatons on it.
At the time of writing:

Instants that counter any activated ability: Bind, Squelch, Stifle, Trickbind, and Voidslime.
Instants that only deal with certain varieties: Interdict and Rust
Creatures which counter any activated ability: Azorius Guildmage, Voidmage Husher, and Rimewind Cryomancer
Creatures which only deal with certain varieties: Ouphe Vandals, Ayesha Tanaka and Brown Ouphe

For far more nuclear options, there's Time Stop amd Sundial of the Infinite, which exile everything on the stack as part of the turn ending.


text:
Which cards feature direct manipulation of counter types on permanents?
Are there any magic cards that allow for direct manipulation of arbitrary counter types? Eg, "Add a counter of any kind to target permanent"?
At this point (2014) I would be surprised if something along these lines didn't exist in some form or another, its ridiculously powerful abuse potential notwithstanding.
Edit: My apologies for such an easily query-able answer. I was not aware of the existence o such comprehensive databases and easily-searchable databases like magiccards.info before posting these questions. I will surely do more research from now on. Thank you!

Clockspinning, Gilder Bairn and Vorel of the Hull Clade allow you to add another counter of a kind that already exists on a permanent, and so does the Proliferate keyword.
And then there's Doubling Season which doubles the number of counters placed on permanents.

If you're mentioning proliferate, you should probably also mention Gilder Bairn and Vorel of the Hull Clade.

@jwodder, Added to the list.

Since you mentioned Doubling Season, it's fun to note that when a planeswalker comes into play Doubling Season doubles the number of loyalty counters initially placed on it. Ex: Play Nicol Bolas, Planeswalker, he normally comes in with 5 counters, Doubling Season makes him come in with 10, boom ult him, the first turn hes out.

It is only +1/+1 but Hardened Scales feels like it belongs since it effects all creatures you control.


text:
Is drawing multiple cards an atomic action?
Is drawing multiple cards an atomic action, or do effects triggered by drawing a card trigger for each card drawn instead?
Consider Spiteful Visions, which reads:

Whenever a player draws a card, Spiteful Visions deals 1 damage to that player.

If a player were to be compelled to draw more than one card, would that player be dealt the damage all at once, or one at a time? For example, how many times would Circle of Protection: Black need to be activated to prevent all damage?
Furthermore, if there exist additional effects that are triggered by damage dealt in this way, are such effects resolved together atomically or is each resultant effect resolved individually?

How about tutors, or other cards not using the word 'draw', eg: Tomorrow, Azami's Familiar

If you would draw a card, look at the top three cards of your library instead. Put one of those cards into your hand and the rest on the bottom of your library in any order.

Abilities resolve one at a time, so multiple instances of an ability that "deals 1 damage to that player" cannot possibly deal N damage simultaneously.

Are you asking whether Tomorrow's ability would cause Spiteful Visions to trigger or whether the cards put in your hand by Tomorrow are put there one at a time?

Spiteful Visions would trigger once for each card drawn, so if you cast Divination to draw 2 cards it would trigger twice and you would be dealt 1 damage for each trigger, and CoP:Black would need to be activated twice to prevent all the damage. Anything that triggers off of this damage would then trigger once for each time the artifact triggered.
For Tomorrow it would not trigger because it does not contain the word "Draw", if it doesn't specifically say "Draw" it does not count as drawing cards they are just put into your hand.

This answer is supported by a ruling on Courser of Kruphix: While playing with the top card of your library revealed, if you draw multiple cards, reveal each one before you draw it.

Also of note is that each draw can be individually responded to. If you watch professional players, they will never, for example, draw three cards in one swipe. The will draw one, carefully and visibly look at it, and then move it to their hand, and then repeat this action for each of their cards. Of course, they still do all this faster than I could draw them in one go, because they do it so much.

@corsiKa, No, you cannot respond in the middle of "draw 2 cards".

I don't see how 120.2 is relevant to the question. Even if they draws were simultaneous, abilities that trigger on drawing card would still trigger for each card drawn.

@ikegami Because the question also was wondering if "Draw 2 cards" was one single action or not, you're right though that it isn't because of that rule, Spiteful Visions would work regardless so to the edits

If you want to not depend on 120.2 (though it does make it really clear, I wouldn't call it irrelevant), I think the right rule is 603.2c: "An ability triggers only once each time its trigger event occurs. However, it can trigger repeatedly if one event contains multiple occurrences." Beyond that, the main thing to point to is cards that use the "one or more" phrasing like Sidisi - if they really want only one trigger for multiple occurrences, they make it clear.

@Rainbolt, depending on deck and format, being careful to look closely at the first card drawn each turn is also important for Miracles.

@Rainbolt "Drawing Extra Cards" is now called "Hidden Card Error" and no longer has a Game Loss penalty, as per the current IPG

@PhoenixFlames I know. That comment was 1.5 years old before I deleted it just now.

"This means that 'draw 2 cards' really means 'draw a card, then draw a card'". That is an over-simplification. Alms Collector would not work as intended if that statement were true. To Alms Collector, "Draw 2 cards" is indeed different from "Draw a card, then draw a card".

Drawing multiple cards is not atomic from the perspective of abilities that trigger.  The relevant rule is:

121.2. Cards may only be drawn one at a time. If a player is instructed to draw multiple cards, that player performs that many individual card draws.

So, if a player draws multiple cards (ex. with Concentrate), Spiteful Visions would trigger once per card drawn, and the player would need to activate Circle of Protection: Black once per card drawn to stop all of the damage.
A notable example of this is if you are playing with the top card of your library revealed.  See this ruling on Courser of Kruphix:

While playing with the top card of your library revealed, if you draw multiple cards, reveal each one before you draw it. If you put multiple cards on top of your library at once, reveal only the one new top card.

However, drawing multiple cards is atomic from the perspective of priority (players can't activate spells or abilities in the middle of the cards being drawn):

117.2e Resolving spells and abilities may instruct players to make choices or take actions, or may allow players to activate mana abilities. Even if a player is doing so, no player has priority while a spell or ability is resolving. See rule 608, “Resolving Spells and Abilities.”

Tutors like Tomorrow, Azami's Familiar are not subject to the rule on card draw because they don't involve drawing cards.  Looking at the top three cards of your library is an atomic action from all perspectives.

The other answers are correct, but I want to bring up the counter-example. There isn't a perfect one, but there are cards that look at replacing multiple card draws on an atomic level, those all specify they are looking at the whole event, saying "would draw X or more cards." The best example I can find for this is Alms Collector, which replaces an opponent drawing two or more cards with you and them each drawing one.
The same wording difference happens for other effects. There are cards that say "whenever a creature attacks" which trigger once for each creature, and others that say "whenever one or more creatures attack" which trigger only once for the entire combat - most of these also count the creatures or apply to all the attacking creatures - but as a single effect on the stack (needing only a single stifle to stop). The effects on Righteous Cause and Ancestor Dragon are a perfect example of the same end result being done both ways.

The general principle you are describing is that events can contain other events. I don't remember if that's directly stated anywhere in the rules, but it's mentioned in rule 616.1f. So, the event of drawing some number of cards contains that many single card draw events. In that sense, the draw multiple cards event is not atomic, because it is composed of other events. Similarly, the event of all of the declared attacking creatures attacking contains events for each individual creature attacking.


text:
When resolving Extract, do I need to know what card I'm looking for?
Extract is a Sorcery which reads:

Search target player's library for a card and exile it. Then that player shuffles his or her library.

Which option below, if either, is equivalent to the actual card text above?

Name a card, and then look through opponent's library for it. Exile a copy if any are found in the library. Opponent shuffles the library afterwards.

You may look through opponent's library; exile any card of your choice. Opponent shuffles library afterwards.

In short, do I need to know what I am looking for?

You don't need to name a card. If you need to name a card that card would say it, like with Cranial extraction for example.

Definitely unclear though isn't it? Any search "for" something without first determining what you're looking for is really just pilfering!

@ProductionValues: Different definitions of for. "To search for" is just Magic's way of saying "look at all cards in that zone and select one".

@ProductionValues seems pretty clear to me: you are looking for a card. Anything that counts as "a card" is fair game to be found by the search. If an ability said "search your library for a land card" then you could find anything that is a land card. If it said "search your library for a green creature card with converted mana cost less than 6" then you could find anything that is a green creature card with CMC less than 6. Would you argue that these are all unclear because you don't know which piece of cardboard you are allowed to get?

@DavidZ, yours are in deed find examples of sensible usage of the word "search". After all, the library is not known to be all lands, or known to consist of only creatures with converted mana cost less than 6. To determine if there are any, we must search. I am really curious about the nuance at play here. How would "Search your hand for a card and discard it." sound as an example? There is "Search your graveyard for a creature and put it into play." but not "Search your graveyard for a card and exile it.". It would simply read "Exile a card from your graveyard."

The rules for searching clarify exactly what you're supposed to do. Specifically:

701.15a To search for a card in a zone, look at all cards in that zone (even if it’s a hidden zone) and find a card that matches the given description.

This means that option 2 is exactly what you are supposed to do.

Let us continue this discussion in chat.

2 is very close.
You must look through opponent's library, then you must choose a card to exile (if possible) and exile it. The opponent must shuffle his library afterwards.
There's nothing odd about not being specific about what you are searching for. For example, Say you are an entrepreneur starting a business. You can say you are searching for an investor without naming an investor, and it doesn't mean you'll take the first offer that comes along.

In detail
Searching is defined as follows:

701.15a To search for a card in a zone, look at all cards in that zone (even if it’s a hidden zone) and find a card that matches the given description.

But in this case, the ability doesn't specify a quality to match, so you are simply searching for a number of cards.

701.15d If a player is searching a hidden zone simply for a quantity of cards, such as “a card” or “three cards,” that player must find that many cards (or as many as possible, if the zone doesn’t contain enough cards).

As you can see, there's nothing optional about it, and at no point do you need to name a card.


text:
Solution to Avalon board game

Question: If players are able to discuss strategy before playing Avalon, does the game have an optimal solution?

The strategy can be as convoluted as you want.  I just want to know if in principle this is a "solved" game.
The game rules are fairly simple and for reference the details of number of good vs evil players, and rounds can be read here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Resistance_(game)
If there are G good and E evil players, at the end of the game team evil can always just randomly guess Merlin to win.  So an optimal solution will be defined as:

for team good, a strategy in which (regardless of what team evil chooses to do) they can guarantee succeeding at least 3 missions and team evil can't do any better than 1/G chance of choosing Merlin
for team evil, a strategy which (regardless of what team good chooses to do) maximizes their chance of winning the game, with a chance greater than the trivial solution of guessing with chance 1/G

As far as I know, the rules are not entirely clear on what communication the players may do (besides forbidding just directly showing their character cards), for the purposes of this question, consider the following rule on communication (if playing by email, it would be equivalent to every message must be sent to all):

Cannot rely on 'under the table' note passing, texting, etc.  All statements made by a player must be public, in the sense that the every player has the raw message (even if not all players have enough context to derive the same meaning - ie. an Evil person stating he is Merlin is never confusing to an evil character since the evil characters all know each other, but can be misleading to a good character. Only the raw message itself must be public, asymmetric knowledge of intentions gained from a message is fine.)

I have a suspicion that despite not being able to trust any particular character is telling the truth, there might be a solution in favor of the good characters which takes advantage of the inherent asymmetry caused by the character Merlin and there always being more good characters than evil.
Can anyone think of a solution?

"All communication is public", surely an encrypted message is not public?

Its there for everyone to see.  There is no hiding the message.  If people didn't share the messages publicly, this wouldn't work.

Encryption/Encoding is hiding the message. :)

I'm not suggesting anyone actually play this way (it would be dreadfully boring and pointless). I am just analyzing this as a puzzle. All messages are public. The whole point of encryption is that you don't need to hide the message. Even the key exchange messages are public. If it is not allowed for a public message to mean different things to different players, then anything an Evil person says in normal games are "hiding the message", since the Evil players have additional context the good do not. Again, I am not suggesting anyone play it this way, I am just trying to analyze it as a puzzle

I see the question has been down-voted. If this kind of game strategy analysis is not acceptable for this site, is there another stackexchange site that would be more appropriate?  And is the downvote for my question itself regarding the limits of strategy, or my work-in-progress idea I gave to seed the range of answers? (I can remove the later and put it as an answer to be downvoted on its own if people prefer.)

If you're just trying to analyze it as a puzzle, you might want to check out the Puzzling Stack Exchange.

I think this is an interesting question, and it clearly shows "research effort".  I think you could improve the question by splitting out your potential answer into an answer and making a few things clearer in the question.  For example I'm fairly sure you're assuming a game with Merlin as the only special character, and I have never played Avalon like this.  Also it might be helpful to state some of the rules in the question, or at least a link to them - I can't remember off the top of my head the ratios of good to evil for different numbers of players.

@tttppp Good point on special characters. My suggestion would not work with Mordred (because I think Merlin doesn't know who Mordred is, right?). I don't think any of the other special characters would affect it though. Anyway, I really was hoping other answers would give suggested strategies.  I included my work-in-progress idea to get people thinking broader to seed the range of answers.  It seems to have just poisoned things instead.  I guess the consensus is that this is not appropriate for this site.  I might try out the puzzling site bwarner suggested.  Sorry for wasting people's time.

FWIW, I like the question, it is interesting and novel.  I've played enough to know some of the twists and have some ideas, but proving it is likely beyond me.

Despite not being able to trust any particular character is telling the truth, in some circumstances there appears to be a solution in favor of the good characters which takes advantage of the inherent asymmetry caused by the character Merlin and there always being more good characters than evil.
Here is an attempted mathematical solution for team good.
This relies on Merlin knowing all the evil characters. So will not work if the character Mordred is included (an evil character Merlin does not know about). If other special characters are used, it should not affect anything.  It is also a work in progress in that this strategy gives quite a bit of extra information to "team good", but there may still be some details that need working out. (For example, I've already had someone point out to me that one must be careful to pad out messages appropriately or just knowledge of the length is enough context to figure out who Merlin is with this strategy.)

After dealing character cards, a good person suggests:

the following strategy will allow good to win, so provably deviating from these rules will indicate you are evil
whoever is the first mission leader will be now referred to as player #0
players clockwise from #0 get numbered accordingly
each player (i) comes up with a secret phrase: phrase_i
from this, each player (i) generates a secret number for other player (j) as secret_ij = HASH( phrase_i + string(j) )
use these secret_ij numbers along with public key exchange to generate a crypto key between each player:  Key_ij = Key_ji = result of public key exchange between player (i) and (j)

Now with that setup, the good player goes on to suggest the following:

Special round of discussion: all players openly/publicly give encrypted messages to the other players stating one of the following:
7a) declaring themself as not-merlin
7b) declaring themself as merlin, stating who all is good, and providing his phrase_i so all keys and therefore messages from him can then be read by that person
Merlin should declare "merlin" to all good guys, and "not-merlin" to all evil. Normal loyal servants should just declare "not-merlin" to everyone.
if a good player gets a message deviating from this rule, they can immediately release the related key used for that communication to out the evil person.  So evil effectively must pretend to be normal good or merlin.
More generally, a good person should immediately expose any fake merlin (release his secret phrase) if they can prove they are fake without giving information about merlin.
For example, if a fake merlin ever claims another person claiming to be merlin is good, this outs themselves as fake, as the real merlin would never do this.  Unfortunately, a good person might need to keep this to themself, as revealing this could reveal information about Merlin.  However if multiple merlins choose groups such that there is no consistent way for one to be real (for example two merlins claiming each other as good, or three merlins claim such that it makes a cycle), then the entire group is fake and should be exposed.
Now a round of plaintext discussion (no encryption). Each player states which groups of good guys were declared to them by people declaring to be merlin. (Note: only the groups are released, not who claimed the group.)
If there is a group declared such that not everyone in the group states they were told they are in the group, then that group is clearly false (as good has no reason to deviate from the plan).
Since the number of good > the number of evil, any group with the correct number of people will necessarily include at least one good.  This means evil cannot usefully mislead here.
If there is a player who appears in all proposed sets of good players, he must be good.  All good players should release all secret phrases they know to this player.  Now even more restrictive than before, this player then can expose fake merlins whose group selections include each other in a revealing manner.
If there is enough information that every one should be able to deduce a guaranteed good team without revealing merlin, someone can just explain it.  Good, having superiority in numbers, can now ensure the correct group is sent each time.
If there is not enough information for everyone to determine good/evil, the mission leader picks a team which will eliminate as many proposed "good groups" from consideration as possible.  If Merlin was the mission leader, he could purposely pick a correct or incorrect group here, so no information about Merlin is lost here.  If the mission wouldn't actually eliminate a possible "good group", and the person still insists on this mission team anyway or calls a vote before discussion, it outs themselves as evil and good can vote the mission team down. (Note this of course does not indicate good/evil for the team they suggested though.) So evil has to play along here to try to help narrow down a team.
If the mission fails, it should by design eliminate at least one, if not more, proposed "good groups".  If the mission succeeds, it provides no information.  Proceed to pick the next one.

I may be missing something, but I do not believe team evil gains any information about merlin from this strategy.  I also am not sure how to prove it, but it appears to me there is enough information to always have good win.
First note that if every time a mission fails, at least one possible "good group" is eliminated, there have to be at least 3 fake merlins for team evil to have a chance.  So the only potential issue is in the 7-10 player version.
Second, note that the intersection of all proposed good sets must actually be good.
Third, if the intersection between two proposed sets has only one person, that person must be good.
This along with previous information and other simple deductions is quite restrictive.

For a concrete example, consider the seven person game: 3 evil, 4 good.
All three evil characters need to successfully claim to be merlin to have a chance. So if we can eliminate one by deduction, good wins.
If no fake merlins include an additional evil member in the proposed group, then there are E+1 people that have only been included in one group. The complement of this must be good.
If all fake merlins include an additional evil member in the proposed group, then there will be a cycle of fake merlins claiming other fake merlins are good, and thus out each other.
So at least one fake merlin must include G-1 good members in the proposed group.  Thus if there is a proposed group that doesn't have an intersection of size G-1 with at least one other group, it can be discarded. (Taking the number of groups down to 2, thus allowing the good to win.)
For a seven player game, there are three missions requiring <= G-1 people. So if no proposed group can be eliminated only with deduction, then always choose for the mission the intersection of at least two groups.  If evil fails the mission, they eliminate more than one group, and thus good again wins.

This "solution" give the good side perfect knowledge which goes against the rules and the spirit of the game.

@JoeW I think the point of this is that the good side don't have perfect knowledge at the start, but after a couple of failed missions they can derive it.  Consequently this answer suggests that if all players play in this (pain-staking) way then the good team can force a win.  It's definitely against the spirit of the game - MWilliams mentions in a comment on the question "I'm not suggesting anyone actually play this way (it would be dreadfully boring and pointless).".

In particular I don't think many people would like to be part of a game where they have to manually perform an asymmetric key exchange protocol before they can start playing!

@tttppp This is an attempt to get perfect knowledge without having to play the game and by using a method that violates the rules.

@JoeW What rules are being violated? The cryptography is all part of the discussion before the first mission, and since the communication is all "public" (if encrypted), it doesn't violate the letter of the rules. The premise is that Good will do crypto because it guarantees a win, and Evil will do crypto because they'll be outed if they don't do it. (I quite agree that the spirit of the game is utterly debased, but that's a different question.)

@PaulMarshall It may not be spelled out in the rules, but I am pretty sure that a game with hidden roles prohibits methods to deliver perfect knowledge to a side that is not supposed to have it before you even begin playing.

It seems all evil has to do is: all the evil players conspire who they think Merlin is (it can be a random guess), and they each pretend to be Merlin and out the other spies and declare the real Merlin as also a spy.
If they are right in their random Merlin guess, the other players gain no new information, and Merlin appears indistinguishable from other players. Play continues as normal, with the spies knowing they were right about their Merlin guess, so the assassin will win the game for them.
If, as is more likely, they are wrong, the spies are easily outed, the missions are brief and obvious, and the assassin has already eliminated one possible target for Merlin, and has a slightly better chance in picking.
Point is, still far from a guaranteed "good" win.

This makes some pretty big assumptions about what the other players would do. Particularly whether the non-merlin good guys would listen at all to someone claiming to be merlin and outing the spies, as the real Merlin is unlikely to do so.


text:
Is giving away items as bribes to other players restricted to table cards?
Under "trading" in the Munchkin instructions it states that:

You may trade Items (but not other cards) with other players. You may only trade Items from the table - not from your hand.

but in the following paragraph it says:

You may also give Items away without trade, to bribe other players - "I'll give you my Flaming Armor if you won't help Bog fight that dragon!" You may show your hand to others. Like we could stop you.

In the "Asking For Help" section it says:

You can bribe someone to help. In fact, you'll probably have to. You may offer your helper any Item(s) you are currently carrying, or any number of the Treasure cards the monster has.

And at the beginning of the "Turn Phases" section it says:

At the start of your turn, you may play cards, switch items from "in use" to "carried" or vice versa, trade items with other players, and sell items for levels

This would mean that carried items are those in your hand and would cause bribes to function differently than standard trading. Does this mean that "bribes" can only be given from you hand?

Yes, I'd say it does have to be on the table:
The line you quoted on bribing states (emphasis added):

You may offer your helper any Item(s) you are currently carrying, or any number of the Treasure cards the monster has.

An item is carried if it's on the table (Card Management):

In Play: These are cards on the table in front of you, showing [...] the Items you are carrying.

Also, under Items:

An item card in your hand does not count until you play it; at that point it is "carried"

This means you'll need to either discard that big item you're carrying if you want to bribe someone with a big item in you hand, or show them your hand with the big item, give them your currently held big item and then trade it back for the big item you've just played...

@Zaph-BenDuguid Thanks for the clear non-patronizing answer.

It clearly says that you can't trade non-items or items in your hands, and there's nothing contradicting that.
Being able to reveal your hand does not imply you can trade cards in your hand. You might show your hand to reveal that you are able to affect a combat as a threat or to show you can meet a promise.
Being able to trade carried items does not mean you can trade items in your hand. Carried items are not in your hand. Quite the opposite, the items you carry are on the table. ("[Cards in play] are the cards on the table in front of you, showing your Race and Class (if any) and the Items you are carrying.") Not all of the items are you are carrying are in use because some are single use items, some aren't usable by your race or class, some items would occupy an item slot that's already occupied, etc.

I would have wrote a "bribe" section if I were them but I guess that's good enough.

Updated answer to reflect to the update to the question.


text:
Odd Monopoly situation: rolling doubles to get out of jail is ALSO third double in a row!
I'm simulating Monopoly with a computer program and came across this situation:

Roll: 4 + 4 = 8 (first double)
Moved from "Tennessee Avenue" to "Atlantic Avenue".
Roll: 2 + 2 = 4 (second double)
Moved from "Atlantic Avenue" to "Go To Jail".
JAILED!
In jail!
Roll: 6 + 6 = 12 (third double)
FREED FROM JAIL!
3 DOUBLES!
JAILED!

3 doubles were indeed rolled in a row, so the poor fella was jailed once again. I'm assuming this is not how it should be though.... how should this work?

As per the official rules, "[y]our turn ends when you are sent to jail". So in that situation, having landed on the "Go To Jail" space, the player gets put in jail and his turn ends so he has no opportunity to roll the third time.

Ah, that makes sense. Time to add doublesInARow = 0; to the jail function!

Perhaps the question was a bit easier than I thought... I am only simulating one player, so I haven't programmed "beginnings" or "ends" of turns.

Out of curiosity, what is the purpose of simulating a single-player game of Monopoly?

@murgatroid99 Probabilities of landing on each space, probably? I don't think the other players can do anything to cause you to move differently.

While that is almost always correct, technically another player can minutely affect those probabilities (by choice) by choosing whether to hold or use a Get Out of Jail Free card. That affects the probabilities of getting certain movement cards from Community Chest, which in turn cascades out to subtly affect the probabilities across the board. That choice can also affect your probability of getting that card and having the opportunity to leave jail earlier.

@murgatroid99 Aha, good point! Suuuper small, but nonzero!

On the other hand, I'm pretty sure that's the only way for any player to affect any other player's movement by choice.

Yes. I also can't simulate very well the user's choice to pay their way out before the third turn so it makes little difference.

All these factors could be simulated. "Go To Jail" could be treated as a separate probability space ("once someone plays Go To Jail", reset the probabilities and use this chart instead"), and then you calculate the probability of Go To Jail at any point in the game.
The thing that really busts the whole thing apart is that official (aka non-tedious) Monopoly uses the Auction Rules, and that completely screws up what "landing on a space" means.