text:
What's the definition of a quality?
While reading through the comprehensive rules in mtg, I came across this:

112.12. ... if an effect states a quality of [an] object (“[creature] can’t be blocked,” for example), it’s neither granting an ability nor setting a characteristic

This was the first mention of object qualities, so I wanted to know what constitutes a quality and discovered there is no definition given in the comprehensive rules, or that I missed it.
Rule 112.12 gives this example:

Example: Muraganda Petroglyphs reads, “Creatures with no abilities get +2/+2.” A Runeclaw Bear (a creature with no abilities) enchanted by an Aura that says “Enchanted creature has flying” would not get +2/+2. A Runeclaw Bear enchanted by an Aura that says “Enchanted creature is red” or “Enchanted creature can’t be blocked” would get +2/+2.

In the example, I'm not sure why "can't be blocked" is a quality and "flying" is not. (Rule 112.12 precludes qualities from being abilities, and flying is an ability, so it's not a quality). So what does this rule mean when it mentions 'quality'?

I think it would greatly improve the question if you could edit to make it explicitly clear how you concluded that "'can't be blocked' is a quality and 'flying' is not".

@DavidZ Flying is a keyword ability. Can't be blocked is a quality; quoting myself: if an effect states a quality of an object "([creature] can't be blocked, for example)" means that can't be blocked is a quality

@DavidZ If flying was a quality then per the same quote, "it's neither granting an ability nor setting a characteristic", but flying grants the creature that ability because it is a keyword ability.

@DavidZ Ah, but look at my last response and you'll see that would leave me with no question. These deductions weren't clear to me until the current answer pointed out that flying was an ability, which led me to fill in the rest. So if you add an answer just explaining these deductions (since I hate self-answering unless I really need to), I'll accept it.

Let us continue this discussion in chat.

Keep in mind that the purpose of rule 112.12 - the whole rule - is to determine, out of all the cases in which an effect's text says something about an object, which of those cases count as granting an ability to the object. If the text says the object "gains" or "has" something, then (unless it's a characteristic-defining ability, like "...has power equal to...") the effect is granting an ability to the object, but other cases where the text says something about the object do not count as granting it an ability.
The rule uses the phrasing

...if an effect states a quality of [an] object...

to refer to those other cases where the text simply says something about the object. For example, if an effect's text says "[object] can't be blocked", it's just saying something about [object], but it's not giving [object] an ability that prohibits it from being blocked.
This is worth calling out, in part because there used to be a word, "unblockable", which was used to mean that a creature couldn't be blocked. Back in those days, instead of saying "[creature] can't be blocked" as is done today, an effect would say "[creature] is unblockable". Magic players who were active during that time but not so much since then may think that saying that a creature "can't be blocked" gives it a keyword ability "unblockable" (even though that's not what the effect "[creature] is unblockable" does). The rule is clarifying that that's not the case.

I don't think anything ever said "has unblockable", everything just said "is unblockable".

Hm, yeah I can't find any records about that so I'll edit. Although I thought there was a brief period where "unblockable" was actually a keyword ability.

Maro suggests it was never a keyword, and has a lot of posts about how they tried to make it one and failed because there were too many variants. I think it's safe to drop that bit; if there might happen to be a card that does say that (I can't find such a card anywhere) it is probably only 1 card from 1 set. Maybe someone will mention "but what about [that exact card]?" in comments, then it can be addresed on its own. :)

@doppelgreener Yes, I removed that in my edit shortly before you commented.

You are mixing two different things up quite a bit.
What is a quality?
You will only see "quality" get used in the Comprehensive Rules, and it gets used in context under its normal English meaning: it is some kind of attribute, characteristic, or property of a thing. Don't try to find a specific set of things about cards that is a "quality", because there isn't one; the word has no special meaning in the game and the rules are just using it in the normal English sense. For example, when the rules talk about Hexproof, they also talk about "Hexproof from white/black" as seen on the Knights of Grace and Malice:

702.11d “Hexproof from [quality]” is a variant of the hexproof ability. “Hexproof from [quality]” on a permanent means “This permanent can’t be the target of [quality] spells your opponents control or abilities your opponents control from [quality] sources.” A “hexproof from [quality]” ability is a hexproof ability.

Here they could equally write "Hexproof from _____". However they are instead using "quality" as a placeholder word that lets them easily and clearly reference whatever goes in the blank. That doesn't make "quality" be a special limited set of things in the rules though, they are just using an English word for its English meaning.
This is unlike words like "ability" and "characteristic". Those do have a specific definition in the rules (rules 112 and 109.3, respectively). There are limited sets of things that are "abilities" and "characteristics" and we can point to them and say "that is an ability according to this part of the rules" and "that is not an ability", etc.
"Quality" is not defined like these words, it is just an English term.
Muraganda Petroglyphs has nothing to do with qualities as such

In the example, I'm not sure why "can't be blocked" is a quality and "flying" is not. So what is the definition of a quality?

Flying is an ability. That ability is granted to the creature by the aura. The creature now has an ability. Therefore, Muraganda Petroglyphs will not give it +2/+2, because it is not a creature with no abilities.
"Enchanted creature can't be blocked" is not granting an ability, it is just a rules modification of how things can interact with that card. "Enchanted creature is red" is likewise granting it an ability, it is setting its color.
If you're trying to understand what is/isn't a quality in hopes of understanding Muraganda Petroglyphs, you're on a wild goose chase: instead you need to understand abilities. An ability is rules text on a card, including static keyword abilities such as flying, and things may grant creatures those abilities temporarily or permanently.

"...it is just a rules modification of how things can interact with that card" is what a quality is, then.

@person27 not at all. Flying is also a quality of the card, it's power is a quality, toughness is a quality, color is a quality, abilities are qualities, the name is a quality everything about that card is a quality of that card.

@person27 No, like I said, don't look for a specific thing in game that is a quality. There is no specific set of things that is a quality. It is just an English word used in its English sense in the rules, meaning anything could be a quality. "Red" is not "a rules modification of how things can interact with that card", is it? "Mark Rosewater has personally handled this card" could be a quality, though one I doubt we'd ever see a card referencing.

There really does have to be a definition of some sort or judges won't agree on it, i.e. rules would be non-deterministic. So I'll treat it as anything written like an ability that isn't, which satisfies the cases I can think of.

@person27 There is a definition: the English one. The rules only reference quality in limited senses: Hexproof from red (red is a quality), Equip legendary creature (legendary is a quality), Protection from a player (that player is a quality), search for a nonland card (nonland is a quality), etc -- and judges can clearly agree what is being referenced in each of those cases. Consider: if they used "Hexproof from ____" in the rules instead, would you be requesting a definition of what a "____" is?

@person27
Quality:
/ˈkwälədē/
Noun:
a distinctive attribute or characteristic possessed by someone or something.

The comprehensive rules don't need to include a copy of Websters dictionary in them.

Hey guys, a bit excessive to quote the dictionary at me.

@doppelgreener technically the quality for protection from player is the control over the permanent or spell

@Andrew Let's not go down that path: we're trying to unwind that train of thought for person27. The template is "Protection from [quality]", the ability says "Protection from the chosen player". In all senses, the quality for this ability is the chosen player.

@person27 based on your last comment you're still getting the meaning wrong though. Abilities are also qualities, but most qualities are not abilities.

@doppelgreener fair enough.

To be extra clear:  "Enchanted creature cannot be blocked" does not affect Muraganda Petroglyphs.  "Enchanted creature has 'This creature cannot be blocked'" would.

Yep, I knew what was going on since I wrote I'd treat 'quality' as not an ability. I only intended to ask with regard to rule 112.12; of course, since it doesn't have a unified definition across the Comprehensive Rules, the word has nothing in common with other rules it's used in. My question intended to show it didn't, but I'll edit it to be more clear

If you'd specifically like to better understand what does/doesn't count for Muraganda Petroglyphs, it may be better worth asking a new question directly asking that and why certain things do/don't count.


text:
Can you place landmarks in lake?
In Tobago there are only few rules when placing huts, palms and statues and implicitly I never placed these landmarks on lake tiles.
Is there any rule or hint saying whether or not they can be placed on lake tiles?

No, there is not. The only stipulations for landmarks are the following, according to the game setup sheet:

Each space may only contain one object.
All similar objects must be placed at least four spaces apart.
Statues may not be placed adjacent to the ocean.

If you're making the choice to not put trees or huts on lake tiles, while it is practical for "realism", there's no rule against it.

Flotaillas rule!

I was going to say, a hut on a lake? Seems like paradise.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Am I allowed to shortcut two abilities that allow me to search my deck?
If I have two abilities that allow me to search my deck for something and shuffle, may I use a shortcut to grab both to save time on shuffling?
Say I have two Polluted Delta on the field, and I attempt to activate both of them. I know I can put them both on the stack at the same time and cause them to resolve back to back, but is there any way I can skip over the first shuffle process since I'm about to search again anyway?

In casual play definitely. In a tournament I'd be surprised if a judge made you literally shuffle the cards immediately before looking through them again; but I won't leave an answer on that because I don't know tournaments that well. Just remember that either way, some things can trigger on you shuffling, so for those purposes you DID "shuffle" twice, even if you didn't physically shuffle the first time.

I can think of one situation where your opponent may not accept that shortcut: effects that say "Play with the top card of your library revealed." Naturally, your opponent may want to get a glimpse of that extra card in your library if that effect is in play.

In general yes you can do both searches, and only shuffle once. You would do this by proposing a shortcut where you resolve both abilities without them responding in between. Assuming they accept the shortcut you can shorten search, shuffle, search, shuffle to search, search shuffle. Since if nothing happens between the two abilities resolving the first shuffle is pointless and a waste of time. This is supported by a ruling on Green Sun's Zenith, which technically tells you to shuffle your library twice.:

In most cases, if you own Green Sun's Zenith and cast it, you'll shuffle your library twice. In practice, shuffling once is sufficient, but effects that care about you shuffling your library (like Psychogenic Probe, for example) will see that you've shuffled twice.

Obviously if there is a card on the battle filed like Psychic Surgery, that triggers on the shuffle and alters the cards in the library, or Future Sight that reveals the top card of the library you cannot use this shortcut as the game state would be changing in meaningful ways that you aren't able to account for with your shortcut. Some other cards that trigger on a shuffle like the Psychogenic Probe would not prevent you from using this shortcut however since their results are the same so you can account for them in your proposed shortcut.
And remember even if you only actually shuffle once the game still sees both shuffles, so anything that triggers on shuffling will trigger twice.

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


text:
What are the password requirements for the new Planewalker points system?
What are the requirements for the new planeswalker points login system? I attempted to log in with my DCI number today (which I don't do often) and it informed me I needed to upgrade my account. It was clear on the requirements for the user id but there are none listed for the password on screen and it refuses to accept anything I can think of.
My first instinct was to goto Wizard's support system, but it requires you to be logged in to contact them so I am locked out.

Click the "?" next to the field where you have to enter your new password, and it tells you the password requirements.

Password Must Contain:

Minimum of 7 characters
Maximum of 29 characters
Uppercase letter (1 or more)
Lowercase letter (1 or more)
Number (0–9)
Special character (e.g., !, $, *, etc.)

Passwords Cannot Be:

Your Login ID
Your email address
Your screen name
Your DCI number
A drawing of your favorite Planeswalker

What's your source for this information?

I just clicked on the "?" next to the field where you have to enter your new password when you update your account.

Interesting, I had no such "?". New software, new bugs I guess.

I was able to upgrade my account with a password consisting of uppercase letters, lowercase letters, numbers, and special symbols. I was able to use a 13 character password, so if there is a minimum length, it is no more than 13.
In general, some common requirements for passwords are:

Must contain at least one uppercase letter, lowercase letter, number, and special symbol (printable non-alphanumeric characters)
Must be at least 8 characters long
Must not contain any dictionary word of length at least 3
Must not contain your username

I think it was the symbol I was forgetting to try. I'm giving the answer to you for now since you got here first, but if someone references anything from Wizards I'll change it.


text:
What happens to cards cast from exile?
There are a few cards that allow you to exile cards and then cast them later (Narset, Enlightened Master for example). After a spell cast this way resolves, does it go back into exile, or does it resolve normally including being placed in its owner's graveyard? (assuming nothing else effects where it would go after being cast)

What happens to a spell after it's been cast is not affected by where it was cast from. It's the usual rule about cards being by default "reset" whenever they move from a zone to another.
Unless the spell itself (e.g. Pull from the Deep, White Sun's Zenith...) or another card (such as Rest in Peace) says it doesn't go to the graveyard, that is where it will end up.

If a card is exiled and played, then when it dies it will go back to exile,this is because when its exiled it is considered to be "out of the game" but it is still usable if you cast it, this is just the same as Spawnsire of Ulamog's ability or the affect from Coax from the Blind Eternities.

This is incorrect. A card doesn't care that it came from graveyard, or hand or exile unless it's ability says it does. When a spell is cast from exile, that spell goes to graveyard, unless it otherwise says to exile it. If you cast say Skittering Invasion from your sideboard for Spawnsire, it goes to graveyard. Creatures go to graveyard when they die unless they are told to exile, like with unearth.

Praetors grasp exiles a card facedown and you may look at and play that card as long as it is exiled what would be the point of this card if after playing it it is just put in the grave. Then it would say play that card then return it to its owners graveyard

The card remains in exile, until you cast it. Once you cast it it resolves as normal, including going back to the owner's grave. the meaning of "as long as it remains in exile" means you don't have to cast it immediately, you may wait and cast it, but once you do it is handled as normal.

But I can drop leyline of the void or planar void and keep it exiled so I can play it right?

No. once you cast it it leaves exile, going on the stack, the fact that it goes back to exile after you cast it does not change the fact that it has left exile.

It is not useless, one it removes it from the opponents deck, so they can no longer cast that copy themselves, and second it lets you cast it. Say it's Emrakul, instead of them getting to cast their bomb, you cast it, though you do still need to be able to pay the cost.

Are their any loophole cause I always used it to exile a counter spell of some kind so I can be captain dickhead

Nope, if it has said you may cast a copy, that would be what work. What you are looking for is Isochron Scepter with Counterspell or even better Mana Drain. This combo lets you cast a counter spell once per round at least.

Another option is Deadeye Navigator and Mystic Snake, the navigator flickers the snake and every time the snake enters it counters something.
Glen Elendra Archmage and Melira works for non creature, since Melira prevents the persist from turning off.

Oh, ok thks bruh you were a big help

Also exile is not considered to be outside the game, this is why Coax refers to both outside the game and in exile separately. The exile zone is a zone of the game, what is considered by the game to be "outside the game" is almost always the sideboard, in casual outside the game can be anything the players agree on.[IE everything you own]

@Andrew I think it is the confusion from old cards mentioning "removing from the game" = Exile and the concept of "outside of the game", meaning sideboard or in the case of spawn of Ulamog, your trade binder if you wanted to (in casual play)

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


text:
Exalted trigger timing
My opponent is playing an exalted deck and I am playing Pyxis of Pandemonium. The exalted text reads:

Whenever a creature you control attacks alone, that creature gets +1/+1 until the end of the turn.

After my opponent declares attackers but before we move into the declare blockers phase I activate Pyxis of Pandemonium's second ability:

Each player turns face up all cards he or she owns exiled with Pyxis of Pandemonium, then puts all permanent cards among them onto the battlefield.

As a result my opponent gets permanents that have the exalted ability. Will these newly created permanents exalted ability trigger or have they entered the battlefield too late? Does my opponent have the opportunity to change his attackers as we are still in the declare attackers phase? (not to the new creatures however as they will have summoning sickness)

The Judge's Corner has a great video on Youtube that covers the differences between "Attacking", "Attacked", "Blocked", and "Blocking". They cover every little detail of the phases, and they go over what triggers and what doesn't.

The creatures enter the battlefield too late for their "exalted" abilities to trigger.  "Whenever [object] attacks" abilities only trigger when attackers are actually declared; as the newly un-exiled creatures were not on the battlefield at that time, their abilities did not trigger, and they cannot trigger after the event has already taken place.

508.2a Abilities that trigger on a creature attacking trigger only at the point the creature is declared as an attacker.

Also, your opponent cannot change attackers after they have already been successfully declared, regardless of what step you're on.

I think you should reference rule 703.1 to provide support for the second half of your answer. Here is the relevant piece: Turn-based actions are game actions that happen automatically when certain steps or phases begin, or when each step and phase ends. Declaring attackers is a turn-based action, which explains why it can only happen at a very specific time.


text:
Do cards that say "creatures you control" trigger Heroic?
If I have a creature or multiple creatures that have a heroic ability and I activate a sorcery or instant that has an effect to "creatures you control" will this trigger the heroic ability?

Targeting requires the word "target". Note that some keyword abilities represent abilities that use the word "target", and note that Auras target what they will enchant when they're on the stack because the word "target" is used in the rules for casting Auras.

@ikegami I suspected as much, although another related question arises, what about an overloaded spell? As a normal spell it obviously would trigger since it says target. If I'm understanding this correctly given though since definition of overload removes the word target from the card it would not trigger anymore.

That's exactly right

No, those effects do not target a creature. The sorcery or instant card must specifically say that it targets a creature to trigger Heroic effects. Enchantment Aura cards also target a creature, although they may not say so explicitly on the card.

Ah yes, I suspected as much. My roommate got all angry with me for being "overly technical" but I think he's just upset I blew his deck strategy apart.

This is exactly what makes Cyclonic Rift a staple card for RTR/Theros standard's blue devotion decks. Hexproof and protection care about targeting. Cyclonic Rift doesn't target. It just gets rid of everything. Everything. (except lands)

@JonathanHobbs Cyclonic Rift doesn't target only when it is overloaded, just to be clear

@bengoesboom Right, yes. :) Good correction!

Clarification: Enchantment Aura spells target a creature; Enchantment Aura permanents do not.

@Fr33dan "Overly technical" is basically the only way to interpret Magic cards in a consistent manner.


text:
Can non-creature permanents have +1/+1 counters?
Say I have a Blinkmoth Nexus and Steel Overseer out. I tap the Steel Overseer for his ability to put +1/+1 counters while my Blinkmoth is a creature, and it gains a counter. After my Blinkmoth goes back into a land, does it keep the counter, or does it lose it?

Lands (any permanent, really) can have +1/+1 counters just fine. In fact, Llanowar Reborn enters the battlefield with one! The counter(s) will not go away just because your blinkmoth stops being a creature.
Of course, the +1/+1 counter doesn't do anything until the land becomes a creature again, but the +1/+1 counter will still be there.

Also, Raging Ravine.

@Hao Ye, Raging Raving gets the +1/+1 counter when it's also a creature, just like the card the OP asked about. It doesn't help.

But Raging Ravine doesn't stay a creature - if the rules made it so that +1/+1 counters were removed from non-creature permanents, Raging Ravine would be very awkward.

@Hao Ye, Everything you said applies to the OP's creature too, so again, it's a useless example since it just repeats the question. Llanowar Reborn is a good example because it actually places a +1/+1 counter on a non-creature.

@Ikegami: ?? OP's question isn't whether +1/+1 counters could be placed on non-creatures, it was what happens to +1/+1 counters on a permanent that stops being a creature.

@Hao Ye, Exactly. Raging Ravine, like Blinkmoth Nexus, doesn't given any indication of what happens after it stops being a creature, while Llanowar shows that it's possible for the counters to exists on non-creatures.

@ikegami: strictly speaking, you are correct, Raging Ravine doesn't say what happens to the +1/+1 counters when it stops becoming a creature, but it would be very silly for WotC to template the card that way (using temporary +1/+1 counters; Bounty of the Hunt excepted)

@HaoYe Yes, non creatures being unable to have power changing counters would make Raging Ravine awkward, but then, M:TG has had it's share of awkward, being awkward doesn't mean they didn't do it. As for templating the card that way, if they had intended the counter to only last the turn, they could have given it +1/+1 when it attacked until end of turn. would function the same way without counter removal. Moot point of course because none of it works that way, but interesting to think about.

Yes, the permanent keeps the counters. Nothing causes them to be removed.

There are only three instances when counters are removed from objects by the rules:

Dealing damage to a Planeswalker removes loyalty counters.
SBAs cancel out +1/+1 and -1/-1 counter pairs by removing them.
SBAs remove extra counters when a permanent has a limit to how many of a given kind of counters it can have.

That's it. Counters are never removed from objects except in those circumstances or by abilities that instruct you to move or remove them[1].
There's definitely no restriction about which type of counters can be on which type of objects.

You can have +1/+1 counters on non-creatures.
You can have charge counters on non-artifacts.
You can have flood counters on non-lands.
You can even have counters on non-permanents!

When an object changes zone, it ceases to exist, and so do any counters on that object. They are physically removed from the physically object (because they ceased to exist in the game), but they are not removed from the object as far as the game is concerned. Abilities that would trigger on counter removal don't trigger, for example.

121.2. Counters on an object are not retained if that object moves from one zone to another. The counters are not “removed”; they simply cease to exist. See rule 400.7.

This includes three keyword abilities that remove counters:

Fading (fade counter)
Suspend (time counter)
Vanishing (time counter)

What's an example of #3? (Though I just looked up 704.5s)

@Gendolkari, "Rasputin can't have more than seven dream counters on it." Might be the only case. Something other than Rasputin with more than seven dream counters would have to become Rasputin for the SBA to kick in.

Interesting, I would have thought that "Rasputin can't have more than seven dream counters on it." would have prevented the "put a dream counter on it" text from working in the first place, since "can't" always takes precedence.

@GendoIkari, It does. Something other than Rasputin with more than seven dream counters would have to become Rasputin for the SBA to kick in. (This sentence was added to my last comment, but I guess you missed the update.)

Clockwork Avian is another example. Sorry, I can't link to the Gatherer because it is currently down for maintenance.

@Rainbolt clockwork beast/clockwork avian don't work like Rasputin. They can't have more than 7 (or 4, respectively) counters granted by their own ability, but nothing is preventing other abilities (like proliferate) from adding more counters

@ikegami wouldn't a "example #4" of when the game rules remove counters be if a permanent changes zones? One funky card even allows this to happen, the very cool Skullbriar, the walking grave(http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=236485)

@chiliNUT, That causes the object to cease to exist. The counters cease to exist along with the object, but they are never removed from the object. Abilities that would trigger on counter removal don't trier. Sb's ability moves the counters to the new object.

@ikegami the first part makes sense to me, they don't get removed so much as they just cease to exist. the second part sounds like, sb becomes a new object when it changes zones, and the counters get reattached to that new object?

@chiliNUT, Well, "move" wasn't the right word for me to use, so neither is "re-attached". The new Sb object gets created with the same counters as the old Sb object had. They don't get re-attached so much as new-Sb was created with the counters on it.

@ikegami got it; i didn't realize moving zones is tantamount to "creating a new object," can you refer me to the section from the comprehensive rules that describes that?

@chiliNUT, Indeed. It's one of the key rules of MTG. "400.7. An object that moves from one zone to another becomes a new object with no memory of, or relation to, its previous existence. [...]"

@chiliNUT, CR 121.2. Counters on an object are not retained if that object moves from one zone to another. The counters are not “removed”; they simply cease to exist. See rule 400.7.


text:
What Is Eriku's Ability?
When I bought my copy of the Tokaido expansion "Crossroads", the shop had included a bonus player named "Eriku" in the box.
He's not part of the main game for either the original board or the expansion, and some Googling has shown that Eriku was a bonus character given away at particular conventions and events.
The catch is that Eriku's ability isn't easy to guess from the picture, and from what I can tell the rules for his character were only shown at the events where he was given away.
The most sensible interpretation I've found is this:

At each inn, including the first, Eriku can look at the first meal card and choose to buy it.

Is this the correct description? There are so many different variations of his ability floating around that I'm not sure which is right - can anyone help?

From Antoine Bauza (the designer of Tokaido):

Eriku can look at the first Meal card of the deck and choose to buy it
  instead of one of the regular cards. At the first Inn, He can also
  look at the top card and buy it (no regular hand here of course). So
  He can eat one more meal than the others... Official rules and wording
  will come on Funforge Website I guess...

So at the first inn, presumably before setting off, Eriku can look at the top card of the meal deck and choose to buy it. Then, on arriving at each subsequent inn, he may include the top card of the meal deck in his choices of what to eat.
Source:
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/1063646/what-is-erikus-ability


text:
What is the proper way to split uneven draft pods?
The optimal number for a draft pod is 8 people, but it can be often hard to get a even multiple of 8.
If there are an odd number of drafters how should the pods be split? Also if there is any justification as to why it's done that way that would be nice to know.
I am aware of the Wizards Event Reporter, and that it can split players into pods automatically. I want to know how to split pods by hand, in case I ever need to run an event with pencil and paper.

I thought there would have to be some kind of official rules on this, but apparently, the only thing the tournament rules say is that "players assemble into random drafting circles (called pods) of roughly equal size at the direction of the Head Judge."(!)

In my LGS it's solved this way.
6 players => 1 x 6
7 players => 1 x 7
8 players => 1 x 8
9 players => 1 x 9
10 players => 1 x 10
11 players => 1 x 11
12 players => 2 x 6
13 players => 1 x 6 + 1 x 7
14 players => 1 x 6 + 1 x 8
15 players => 1 x 7 + 1 x 8
16 players => 2 x 8
17 players => 1 x 8 + 1 x 9
18 players => 3 x 6
19 players => 2 x 6 + 1 x 7
20 players => 2 x 6 + 1 x 8
21 players => 1 x 6 + 1 x 7 + 1 x 8
22 players => 1 x 6 + 2 x 8
23 players => 1 x 7 + 2 x 8
24 players => 3 x 8
The idea behind is to not have a draftpod with less than 6 people, which yields in just too less cards in the entire cardpool. 9 players is still quite doable, 10 and especially 11 player pods are really bad (you basically won't see any card coming back to you).
To summarize:

Don't go below 6
Avoid going above 9
Try to fill as many 8 pods as possible

This is basically what my store does, so it would seem to be a common practice at least but I was hoping for a more definitively correct answer. Particularly since there is always a debate on numbers like 14, where some argue that two 7's is better because it's closer to 8 for the actual draft and others argue that preventing a bye takes higher priority.

AFAIK one should have the minimum number of draft pods, so 18 players should result in 2 pods an 8-player, and a 10-player. 8 is ideal, but one should err on the 9-11 side than the 6-7 side.

1 x 7, 2 x 8 etc - what are these numbers meant to represent? A single 7-player multiplayer game? A 7-player something or other?

@doppelgreener: it means 1 pod à 7 players, 2 pods à 8 players, etc.. Nothing to do with multiplayer, we are still talking draft here

Realistically, the simplest way to resolve having X players where X is odd, would be to treat it as if you were running an X+1 man pod and then someone dropped suddenly.
So you draw up the rankings with "Mr Missing" as the 8th players, and then the player that gets matched up with him gets a "bye", where you automatically win the round.
Obviously, this still means that one player is having to sit out every round (this is unavoidable unless you're doing a Conspiracy-style multiplayer draft), but because they count as winning, they'll automatically be facing someone next match, whereas one of the losers of the match will now get the bye for the next round, will win, and will then get another match.
This allows you to constantly rotate through who's sitting out the next game, and gives a real benefit to winning, because you get to play every round.
EDIT: Did some research, and the official rules for Swiss Pairings can be found here; basically confirming the above.

There's a difference between a bye and an opponent that drops. A bye does not affect tiebreakers. If your opponent drops, that opponent will still contribute to your tiebreakers. You can read more about tiebreakers here, but ultimately the best advice you can give someone is to not worry about all of that and just use the Wizards Event Reporter software to run the event properly.

This just tells is what to do in Swiss rounds when a single pod does not have an even number of players. I am concerned with how to place players into pods when the number of players is not divisible by 8.

Ah, I see. Okay, then @t.rathjen's answer is the best, but for the pods, I would apply the same philosophy. If you have 7 people, form the pods you would for 8 people and then cut one down.


text:
What are the dragonflies used for in Little Balancing?
My question is about this game for little people: http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/134434/little-balancing
The set is nice quality, it's fun and quick to play, and very collaborative without much strategy.  Along with the stems, lilies and frogs, the set includes a dozen dragonfly tokens.  But nowhere in the (small) rulebook or online can I find reference to how the dragonflies are used in the game.
Any ideas?  What do you do with your dragonflies?

Point trackers?

Sometimes you can get a hint from how they are named in the rules. Check the list of the box's contents.

The contents and rules that came with the game make no mention of the dragonflies. But I just found a newer set of English rules in the (cute but very difficult to navigate) Djaco website, which says they are point counters.

@Jeff Snider - That website is insane(I gave up)! If you can post a direct link to the English rules as an answer, that would be great.

@ire_and_curses, And you call yourself a gamer? Shame on you! ;) After the loading to 100%, you gotta through another wait to 100% which appear over the dude's head. Then pick a language from the road sign that pops up, then pick "Rules" from the menu that appears on the bottom. Easy! ;)

@Ikegami - Indeed, I lack tenacity. Oh, how obvious! ;)

Rules on the publisher's site lists them as follows in the box's contents:

15 “point won” counters

The only other mention of them in the rules follows:

When all the elements have been placed on the platform, the game is won. Each player thus takes a “point won”.

I'd add the comment that there is a picture of the dragonfly counters with "15x" next to it, before the text you quote.  Here's the deep link, for those without the patience to navigate the cute website: http://www.djeco.com/medias/rule/GB/DJ08554_GB.pdf

I already provided that link in my answer. I'm not sure how to mention the pictures or see the point of it.


text:
How do Rest in Peace and Progenitus interact?
What happens to my Progenitus when it tries to die and there is a Rest in Peace in play?

Recent http://boardgames.stackexchange.com/q/27374/8520 is related. Is there a canonical question for replacement effects?

You (as the controller of Progenitus) get to decide which replacement effect happens. After this first replacement effect happens, the remaining effect doesn't have anything to replace, because the "enters the graveyard" isn't part of the effect.

616.1. If two or more replacement and/or prevention effects are attempting to modify the way an event affects an object or player, the affected object's controller (or its owner if it has no controller) or the affected player chooses one to apply, following the steps listed below. If two or more players have to make these choices at the same time, choices are made in APNAP order (see rule 101.4).


text:
What are the characteristics of a flip card in my library?
Are the characteristics of a flip card in my library determined by both faces or just the front face?
For example, can I use an Enlightened Tutor to fetch Sasaya, Orochi Ascendant? Enlightened Tutor searches for enchantments and artifacts. If Sasaya is only an Enchantment after she's flipped, does that count?

In your library, a flip card has only the characteristics of the top half of the card. You cannot use Enlightened Tutor to find Sasaya, Orochi Ascendant, because

In every zone other than the battlefield, and also on the battlefield before the permanent flips, a flip card has only the normal characteristics of the card. (CR 709.2, emphasis added)

(From 709.1a and 1b, the top half defines the "normal characteristics", and the bottom half defines the "alternative characteristics".)
Basically, until it's actually flipped, the card/spell acts as if the flip version wasn't printed on it, so neither the tutor nor the enchantress will ever do anything with it (since it's not an enchantment either when you cast it).

This is nicely illustrated in the flip list card which you can use instead of the flip card due to the non generic background, only the front name is on that card.


text:
If Soulflayer exiles a Winged Sliver from the graveyard via delve does it gain flying?
Soulflayer has delve and reads

If a creature card with flying was exiled with Soulflayer's delve
ability, Soulflayer has flying. The same is true for first strike,
double strike, deathtouch, haste, hexproof, indestructible, lifelink,
reach, trample, and vigilance.

Winged Sliver reads

All Sliver creatures have flying.

My question is... does Soulflayer gain flying if a Winged Sliver that was in the graveyard is exiled?

I have updated my answer with another tidbit I found when looking closer at the Winged Silver page.

No, the Winged Sliver does not have flying but grants itself that ability along with all other sliver creatures. The first ruling on the Soulflayer page says that it does not happen.

Creature cards that have abilities that grant the listed keyword abilities to themselves won’t count. For example, exiling a Battle Brawler (a creature with “As long as you control a red or white permanent, Battle Brawler gets +1/+0 and has first strike”) with Soulflayer’s delve ability won’t cause Soulflayer to have first strike, even if you control a red or white permanent.

Also, for further clarification on the Winged Sliver page

If the creature type of a Sliver changes so it’s no longer a Sliver, it will no longer be affected by its own ability. Its ability will continue to affect other Sliver creatures.


text:
In the Game of the Goose, keep moving again and again if I keep landing on geese?
In the Game of the Goose, if you land on a square with a goose, you may move the same amount of squares again. If that lands you on a square with a goose again, can you move yet again?
In theory, since squares with geese are 9 squares apart, if you're on go and throw 9, you keep going again and again until you've won. This can't happen on your first turn, since throwing ⚂ + ⚅ (3 + 6) takes you to square 26, while ⚃ + ⚄ (4 + 5) takes you all the way to square 53. But if you land on square 58 and die, you go back to the start, but then it's no longer your first turn.
Am I correct in assuming that throwing 9 then, wins you the game?

The game of goose has many variants, including different square orderings, different rules for landing on certain squares and different numbers of dice.
The variant you describe (two dice, geese every 9 squares) is quite common, and the rule for rolling a nine on the first turn is as follows:

If the roll is a 6 and 3, move directly to field 26; if the roll is a 4 and 5, advance all the way to 53.

Since you could only roll a nine and land on a goose when you are on the start square, you don't have the opportunity to land on multiple geese in one go from any other square on the board.
The rules quote was from this goose page. Interestingly this set of rules explicitly says moving to square 26 or 53 only applies on your first go. So if you find yourself back at the start, e.g. due to the death square, or somebody landing on you on their first go, then you can throw a nine and win the game.
Another site with two-dice goose rules is here, and it features an image of the game board that shows a pair of dice on squares 26 and 53. This acts as a visual reminder of the rule. This rules page does not allow a throw of nine to ever win the game from the start square, as it associates the rule with the square:

A lucky throw of 9 at the beginning of the spiral path advances a player to one of the fields with dice.

The game of goose has been played over many hundreds of years, and plenty of variation has been introduced during this time. Consequently the important thing is to pick a set of rules everyone's happy with before you start the game.

But you could go to square 58 and die, which takes you back to the start, but then it wouldn't be your first turn anymore.

@ATS Yes, I agree. The first set of rules I linked to say that you can do that, roll a nine and win; the second set of rules say that you can't, you just end up at 26 or 53.

authors: Медерхан1 Мукашев1


text:
Does a +1/+1 counter remove a -1/-1 counter?
My opponent controls a Kulrath Knight. I control a 4/4 creature (with a -1/-1 counter on it, due to an earlier cast Black Sun's Zenith).
If I use an ability to put a +1/+1 counter on my 4/4 creature, will the +1/+1 counter and the -1/-1 counter cancel each other out, or will I just have a creature with both a +1/+1 counter and a -1/-1 counter on it?
In other words: Will my creature be able to block and attack or not?
I don't believe the rules are 100% clear on that?! (rule 704,5)

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. See rule 704.

Both counters will be removed as a state-based action (N=1). Your creature will be able to block and attack.

Seems like a bad ruling. Say for example I have a Tetravus, which comes into play with three +1/+1 tokens. My opponent places three -1/-1 tokens on it. At the beginning of my next upkeep, I should be allowed to remove all three +1/+1 tokens - in effect sacrificing the creature. I wouldn't be able to do this if these tokens had been neutralized by the -1/-1 tokens.

@primo: "because it would make my creature bad" is not a reason that a ruling is bad. If somebody does something that neutralises a creature, well that's kind of what magic is about. Finding ways to counter the powers of other creatures. And the rules seem pretty clear so its not the ruling that you should be complaining about but the rule itself.

@Chris "its not the ruling that you should be complaining about but the rule itself." Indeed, that was my intention. Consider a creature with a +2/+2 enchantment and a -2/-2 enchantment; they do not neutralize one another, both remain. What makes tokens different? Unless both tokens originated from the same source, or an abilty specifically states, 'place a -1/-1 token, or remove a +1/+1 token', I don't think they should be considered the same. It would be interesting to know when exactly this rule was added.

@primo I think that the reason a special case was made for +1/+1 counter and -1/-1 counters is because counters in general are supposed to serve as "reminders" to players. Once a creature has a +1/+1 and a -1/-1 counter, the player no longer needs to be reminded, and so they disappear. Other types of counters are less common, or can't really "cancel" in any mathematically satisfying way, and so they don't. Players probably don't need to be reminded of enchantments because the words are literally written on them. Please don't quote me on any of this, because I can't back it up.

@primo There have been many cases of cards getting weaker because of a new rule intended to simplify bookkeeping or streamline play. Other cards get stronger because of the same rule. I don't see an issue with this.

@ghoppe My objection is that the rule seems arbitrary and unnecessary. The cases where any particular creature would have so many tokens on it as to cause confusion are few and far between. I understand that for any particular new rule, some existing cards will be improved and others dimished, although I suspect in this instance that significantly more have been dimished than improved.

@primo Sorry, I have to disagree. It's not arbitrary at all. Even with just a few counters, it takes extra mental energy to cancel out the counters in your head when determining power/toughness for combat decisions, etc. There are enough P/T changing effects already; we shouldn't keep redundant ones just to avoid an ancient card like Tetravus getting marginally less powerful. Some cards, like creatures with undying, are more interesting with this rule.

@ghoppe I hold that it is arbitrary, and I think this can be demonstrated simply: all arguments made thus far in favor of this rule would be equally valid in defense of a rule stating exactly the opposite. Its intent may have been to simplify gameplay, but I think it's missed its mark; unnecessary rules do not simplify gameplay, they complicate it.

@primo You're correct that there is complexity in both cases, but in one, the complexity is one-time: The first time you add an opposing counter to the existing one and encounter this rule. The alternative is continual complexity: every time I look at your creature, I have to add, subtract, and work out its current P/T, whether it will Persist etc. Continual complexity is more problematic than "on-effect" complexity.

it's a rule, not a ruling. and a good rule, since it keeps the board simpler (it prevents most cases of having two different kinds of counters on the same creature).

Here's the text of the relevant rule:

704.5r 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, where N is the smaller of the number of +1/+1 and -1/-1 counters on it.

It's supposed to be pretty clear: if your creature has one +1/+1 counter and one -1/-1 counter on it, you remove one +1/+1 counter and one -1/-1 counter from it, leaving it with no counters. (One is the smaller of the numbers one and one.)
And then in the specific case of Kulrath Knight, yes, your creature will be able to attack and block, since it will have no counters on it.
If you find the "N" part of the rule confusing, you can really just think of it as "they cancel." If there are five +1/+1 counters and three -1/-1 counters, N is three (the smaller of five and three) and so you remove three of each. If there are one of each, then N is one (the smaller of one and one), and so you remove one of each. In every case, you're canceling out "as many as possible".

Well it was the N part that confused me. Since the smaller number of one and one is...both?... None? Anyways wouldn't it be even clearer to say that a +1/+1 counter and a -1/-1 one counter cancel each other out? But thanks for making it clear for me! :)

@user7268, 1 is the smallest of the numbers 1 and 1. ("Both" and "none" aren't even numbers.)

N syntax to refer to quantities can be confusing to some people, especially for those without a strong foundation in a math-heavy background. Seems like a completely reasonable thing to get clarification on.

@Ellesedil Which is why I clarified it. I just wasn't sure which part was confusing. And indeed, it wasn't the N that was confusing. It was the idea of taking the minimum of two equal numbers.

@user7268 They're trying to avoid having to apply state-based actions multiple times (instead of "cancel one counter, then cancel one more, then...", "cancel N").


text:
Grave Betrayal vs. Blightsteel Colossus
My opponent has to sacrifice a creature. He sacrifices a Blightsteel Colossus. I have Grave Betrayal on the battlefield. Will my opponent get to shuffle the colossus into his deck again, or will it return to the battlefield under my control?

This question is interesting if you consider it with emrakul(that actually enters the graveyard), or undying/persist creatures. In general, you win in these cases if you kill the creature on your opponents turn because of APNAP

@Cruncher: Well, not in this particular case because Grave Betrayal doesn't happen until the end step. But you are right if the reanimation were immediate.

@ChadMiller Oops, I didn't fully read the card

So I assume Emrakul would come under the opponents control whereas Blightsteel Colossus would not?

Consider this portion of the text on Blightsteel Colossus.

If Blightsteel Colossus would be put into a graveyard from anywhere,
reveal Blightsteel Colossus and shuffle it into its owner's library
instead.

This text creates a replacement effect. A replacement effect "watches"
for an event to happen. For example, regeneration is a replacement effect that watches for the creature to be destroyed.
The rules for replacement effects neatly state that the event being replaced never happens.

614.6. If an event is replaced, it never happens.

So, when Blightsteel Colossus starts to head for the graveyard, instead, he is revealed and shuffled into his owner's library. The event that got replaced never happens.
To die in Magic has a specific meaning:

700.4. The term dies means “is put into a graveyard from the battlefield.”

Blightsteel Colossus never went to the graveyard, and so Blightsteel Colossus never died. Therefore, Grave Betrayal never triggers.

Maybe it's obvious, but the other part of the answer here is that "dies" means specifically "is put into a graveyard from the battlefield", so a creature that sure seems like it's dying but for whatever reason doesn't go to the graveyard doesn't actually "die".

It will be shuffled into his deck.
To die is to be moved from the battlefield to the graveyard[CR 700.4]. Blightsteel Colossus never dies because he moves to its owner's library instead of moving to the graveyard when he is sacrificed[CR 614.6]. As such, Grave Betrayal's ability never triggers.

700.4. The term dies means “is put into a graveyard from the battlefield.”

614.6. If an event is replaced, it never happens. [...]

It's ironic that in Magic, dying is the act of going to the graveyard, where as in real life dying is the cause of going to the graveyard.

@corsiKa which is likely the cause of the intuitive disconnect in these kinds of cases.

Let us continue this discussion in chat.

It never goes to the graveyard and so it does not get affected by the delayed triggered event of Grave Betrayal.
They get to shuffle it back into their deck.

Even if Grave Betrayal could set up its delayed trigger, it wouldn't be able to find the Colossus after it changes zones, so the trigger would resolve and do nothing. The same thing (ie: nothing much) would happen if the opponent reanimated the creature before the end step.


text:
How does Life and Limb interact with Conspiracy
I control a Sporesower Thallid, Retreat to Emeria and a Kalastria Healer. Then I play Conspiracy and I choose Ally as Creature type. Then I play Life and Limb.
Now my questions are:

Will future Saproling tokens, made by the Sporesower Thallid, trigger both the Retreats Landfall ability, and the Healers triggered ability, when allies enters the battlefield?

Will future played forests do the same?

What will happen to forests already in play under my control?

Is there an infinite combo with the Retreat, Life and Limb, and Conspiracy/Xenograft with saproling chosen? I.E. Play Land -> Landfall -> 1/1/ Kor Ally (also saproling (also forest)) -> Landfall.

@Cameron. If you add Sporemound to the mix, you can go inifinte with both allies AND Saproling Tokens. Life and Limb + Sporemound = infinte Saprolings (+retreat = also inifinte ally Tokens. You just need some way to end the infinte cycle, like bouncing either Life and Limb or Sporemound.

Conspiracy and Life and Limb both apply in Layer 4.

613.1d Layer 4: Type-changing effects are applied. These include effects that change an object’s card type, subtype, and/or supertype.

When two effects apply in the same layer, they are normally applied in timestamp order (the order in which you played them). However, when a dependency exists between two effects, we ignore the timestamp system and instead follow a dependency system.

613.7a An effect is said to “depend on” another if (a) it’s applied in the same layer (and, if applicable, sublayer) as the other effect (see rules 613.1 and 613.3); (b) applying the other would change the text or the existence of the first effect, what it applies to, or what it does to any of the things it applies to; and (c) neither effect is from a characteristic-defining ability or both effects are from characteristic-defining abilities. Otherwise, the effect is considered to be independent of the other effect.

Life and Limb depends on Conspiracy. Life and Limb applies to Saprolings, but Conspiracy changes your Saprolings into Allies. Therefore, Conspiracy changes what Life and Limb applies to.
Conspiracy depends on Life and Limb. Conspiracy applies to Saprolings, but Life and Limb turns your Forests into Saprolings. Therefore, Life and Limb changes what Conspiracy applies to.
We have a dependency loop, so we revert back to just applying the effects in timestamp order.

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

You played Conspiracy first, so by combination of the rules above:

Apply Conspiracy's effect first. All of your creatures become Allies.
Apply Life and Limb's effect second. All of your Forests become Saprolings in addition to their other types.

The result is that all of your creatures are now allies, except for your Forests which are now Forest Saprolings (but not Allies).

Phew! That was a mouthful. Now I can answer your questions:

Will future Saproling tokens, made by the Sporesower Thallid, trigger both the Retreats Landfall ability, and the Healers triggered ability, when allies enters the battlefield?

Saprolings will enter as Allies. They will trigger Kalastria Healer's ability, but not Landfall.

Will future played forests do the same?

Forests will enter as Forest Saprolings. They will trigger landfall, but not Healer's ability.

What will happen to forests already in play under my control?

They will be Forest Saprolings, but not Allies.

Thank you for the very elaborate answer. It's always nice when people take their time to explain the rules behind their answers. Now I know excactly why the combo unfortunately doesn't work as intended.

@Lund What was the combo (assuming that it did work like you had hoped)? I'm curious about why Thallid needed to be involved. This is a little off topic, so if you want to discuss it, come into the site's chat room.

@Lund What was the combo (assuming that it did work like you had hoped)? I'm curious about why Thallid needed to be involved. If you want to discuss it, you could come into the site chat room. The chat moves a little slow, but the people in there always seem to enjoy brainstorming cards to combo with in a Commander deck. Maybe they can fix your combo.

This doesn't work exactly how you want because Conspiracy overwrites any existing creature types, so all of your creatures will be Allies with no other creature types, except your Forests which will be Saprolings (and not Allies).

205.1a [...] Similarly, when an effect sets one or more of an object’s subtypes, the new subtype(s) replaces any existing subtypes from the appropriate set (creature types, land types, artifact types, enchantment types, planeswalker types, or spell types). [...]

If you replace Conspiracy with Xenograft though it will work probably like you are hoping, since Xenograft adds creature types in addition to any types they already had.
With Xenograft set to Ally all of your Saprolings and Forests will have the type line Land Creature - Forest Ally Saproling. This means that all future Forests or Saprolings will indeed trigger Landfall and Rally abilities. All Forests or Saprolings that are already on the battlefield will become Land Creature - Forest Ally Saprolings but will not trigger Landfall or Rally abilities because they are already on the battlefield.


text:
What happens when a creature enchanted with Soul Link would deal lethal damage to a player?
Player A has 3 life left. Player B attacks with a Dauthi Marauder that has been enchanted by Player A's Soul Link. Does player B win, or does nothing happen?
On the one hand, "whenever" makes it sound like the trigger (dealing damage) and the effect (healing damage) happen simultaneously.
On the other hand, combat damage doesn't go on the stack, while most other things do. So, possibly the combat damage is dealt, state-based actions are checked, and now it's too late for the Soul Link effect to heal player A.
If anyone knows which way is correct, my thanks!

Do you mean that Player A has cast Soul Link on Player B's Dauth Marauder?

Yep, sorry! Edited.

By the way, what you describe in your second paragraph is not generally how triggered abilities work. Triggered abilities always go on the stack and resolve after the event that triggered the ability.

"As ..." modifies the event, but "At ...", "When ..." and "Whenever ..." indicates a triggered ability, and those use the stack.

@murgatroid99, Triggered mana abilities don't use the stack ;)

Soul Link's ability is a triggered ability. From the comprehensive rules:

510.2. Second, all combat damage that’s been assigned is dealt simultaneously.
...
510.3. Third, any abilities that triggered on damage being assigned or dealt go on the stack.

State-based checks occur before the triggered ability is resolved, so Player A loses before gaining life from the Soul Link.


text:
How do I identify the role of a singleton in a well-tuned deck?
In this instance, I'm looking at Matt Sperling's Pro Tour top 8 Boros Burn deck, and there's one thing I don't get--what's the single Eidolon of the Great Revel doing here?

Creatures:

4 Young Pyromancer
1 Eidolon of the Great Revel
4 Chandra's Phoenix

Spells:

4 Shock
3 Skullcrack
4 Lightning Strike
4 Boros Charm
4 Stoke the Flames
4 Warleader's Helix
4 Searing Blood

Lands:

4 Mutavault
3 Sacred Foundry
9 Mountain
4 Battlefield Forge
4 Temple of Triumph

I made the edit to the more general title because I think that title expresses the general goal of the question, in that I don't particularly care about that deck, but was concerned I'd get closed down for being too general if I didn't focus on a a specific case...

Given the excellent answer, which covers both the general and the specifics, I think the general question title is a good one, and helps more future searchers. The clarification from the OP ("I don't particularly care about that deck, but was concerned I'd get closed down for being too general") also makes his intentions clear.

Hrm, alright. I'll accept that. I don't know if that was necessary, since there's support that may get it reopened, and questions don't get closed for being too specific anymore - the too localised close reason is gone for a reason. Asking about specific cases is what we should be doing! But if you find the edit ok, I'll go with it.

I'm not familiar with this deck in particular, but it looks like this is a good example of a miser's copy (a singleton, usually with the connotation that it has a unique effect within your deck but you have no way to tutor for it). Some things to note about that card:

It is really good in some situations
It is really bad in others
In the situations where it is bad, it is horrible in multiples
Even if it is overall bad, drawing one is probably not the end of the world

(1) is the argument for running the card at all. (2) argues against running the card. (3) and (4) are where you might come to the conclusion to run exactly one.
I suspect "potentially horrible in multiples" was a major contributor here. Drawing too many of the Eidolon means you're not drawing targeted burn, and therefore not burning your opponent (or your opponent's blockers). They trigger each other, so casting multiple copies risks just killing yourself instead of your opponent; it's easy to envision situations where you lose a close race because you drew the second Eidolon, but literally any burn spell would have worked. Running too many also reduces the effectiveness of your other creatures, which need a lot of instants and sorceries to work at their full potential. Finally, "damages self" is not a drawback that stacks well; you only have one life total, so you can only eat into it so much before you need to gain life somehow or be certain you can kill the opponent first[1].
Adrian Sullivan has written about singletons in the past; in his terms, I'm arguing that the Eidolon suffers from diminishing returns.
[1] I didn't notice this until after I wrote the answer, but the deck only has 3 Sacred Foundry. This is a clue that avoiding too much self-damage was a factor in tuning the deck.

That's precisely the kind of answer I was looking for.


text:
How should I start with HeroClix?
I am interested in playing HeroClix but I'm not sure how to start. What starter set should I get? Are individual  figures expensive? How do I find a community of players?

Choosing a starter set:
Buy the starter set that most appeals to you. If you love Marvel, then look for something in that line. The latest starters will be the most up-to-date rules wise, but that shouldn't be the main thing driving your decision.
Personally, I love the Fantastic Four starter set: two great teams that form a perfect collection on their own.
Finding A Community:
Boardgamegeek.com is a great place to start. Check out the forums. I also recommend Google Plus, starting with a search for Heroclix. Lastly, search for Heroclix bloggers and ask them where they play. People who are active on the web have always been the most helpful to me.
There are ways to play HeroClix online. Look at hco.heroclix.com (although they might not be accepting new players) and www.vassalengine.org.
Getting Figures:
First focus on a starter set and a play group, then on getting figures. Players may have extra figures that they'll be happy to pass on if you're serious about getting started, and they can recommend good places to buy figures. Most of my collection has come from online contacts.
Learning the Rules:
YouTube. Again, people who are blogging or vlogging are a very helpful resource. Also, download the rules from the WizKids website.

There are also a variety of rules for playing HeroClix solo, which can be another good way to get familiar with the miniatures you do have. Playing with other will still get you going much faster.


text:
Beast combat in Scenario 19 (The Beastmaster)
In Scenario 19, the Traitor's Tome says that certain beasts get extra successes when they initiate an attack. What does "extra successes" mean?
When we played, we assumed it meant add the number of successes to the roll, but we were not sure. For example, we added 2 to the total of the dice when the Bear initiated an attack.

Which edition of the game are you talking about? In mine (2nd ed. by WotC), there's no haunt called the Beastmaster... And the #19 is titled "A friend for the Ages".

Consider the number of pips showing on any rolled die as a success.
Then, a standard creature/character rolling one die has a range of possibilities from 0-2.  Let's say a creature got to roll one die, but had one additional succcess.  Then that creature rolls a die (normal 0-2 distribution) and adds one.  So, their overall distribution is 1-3.
The impact of this is that the creature will always have some successes that must be defended against.

There's nothing in the revised rules for adding "success," but it looks like it might just be a typo. When the game wants you to roll another die, it will use the word die/dice.

The Book contains chess strategies. The explorer who has it can add
  one die (maximum eight dice) to Knowledge rolls attempted while
  playing chess against Death.

I can't find the term "extra success" in the revised rulebook, so here's the errata.

The Bear adds 2 successes to its Might attack roll when it initiates
  an attack (not when it's being attacked). The Crocodile adds 1 success
  to its Might attack roll when it initiates an attack (not when it's
  being attacked).

And always remember the golden rule.

What If There Isn’t a Rule for That? Many hours went into playtesting
  this game, but it’s still possible you’ll run into situations where
  the game rules or haunt books don’t clearly answer a question about
  game play. Don’t let that slow you down. In such cases, come to an
  agreement as a group for what makes the most sense and go with it. (If
  that doesn’t work, fl ip a coin to decide.) Then continue your
  experience in the house.


text:
Wall of Frost vs a cyphered Hidden Strings
My mate just attacked with 2 creatures. One is unblockable and has Hidden Strings as a cypher on it. The other has been blocked by Wall of Frost, which now doesn't untap next untap step. Can hidden strings untap it?
We are assuming it can.

Yup. It just prevents that untapping that happens from entering the untap step.

Keep in mind that you have to actually announce that Wall of Frost triggered directly after you declare blockers. If you wait until your opponent's next untap step and say, "I blocked him with Wall of Frost, so it can't untap.", then your opponent can say, "Sorry. You missed your trigger." and untap it anyway. This is not likely to happen when playing with friends (unless your friend is a jerk), but I wanted to point it out in case you decide to play in a tournament.

@Rusher: I don't think that's consistent with the current missed trigger policy. As there is no visible indication or targeting, the triggered ability is assumed to have resolved, and its controller only needs to demonstrate awareness when it would first have an effect (opponent's next untap step).

@HaoYe I watched the Wall of Frost missed trigger happen during Grand Prix Oakland, and (according to the commentators) it sounded like the judge ruled that the trigger was missed, but I can't find the exact video among the hours of coverage on Youtube. I watched it happen again with Triton Tactics during a recent tournament with Luis-Scott Vargas playing, but I don't know if that's exactly the same case because Triton Tactics' trigger is slightly different. In both cases, the player pointed a finger as if to say "That shouldn't untap.", and in both cases they were overruled.

@Rusher, That's weird because that goes against the current rules. A Missed Trigger is defined as "A triggered ability triggers, but the player controlling the ability doesn’t demonstrate awareness of the trigger’s existence the first time that it would affect the game in a visible fashion." For this type of of ability, awareness is demonstrated as follows: "The controller must prevent an opponent from taking any resulting illegal action." In other words, all you are required to do to avoid a Missed Trigger error here is to prevent the creature from untapping.

Ref: Infraction Procedure Guide from May 2nd, 2014

@ikegami I found the video on Triton Tactics, but still can't find the Wall of Frost video. Start watching at 31 minutes into this video (the link should put you pretty close). This occurred within the last month at a Theros Block Constructed tournament. Even though Triton Tactics would not have affected the visible game state at all, the trigger was missed, and LSV was able to untap his Courser of Kruphix. I'm not sure how that was allowed, but it's possible that we need a better definition of what "visible game state" means.

@Rusher, after watching the video, no judges were involved, and though LSV claimed that he had already drawn a card and was into main phase, I'm fairly certain a judge would have ruled against him in that situation.

Yes it can because Wall of frost says:

Whenever Wall of Frost blocks a creature, that creature doesn't untap during its controller's next untap step.

But it doesn't say anything about untapping by another way.

I never liked the wording of these texts. Does it mean that it can't untap during the untap step at all? Or simply that the untap step doesn't cause it to untap. For example, I could imagine a card: "When you untap this card, untap all other permanents you control". Surely this triggered ability could untap them on your untap step.

@Cruncher no, the triggered ability would go on the stack during your upkeep and untap the permanents during your upkeep. Only one thing ever happens during the untap step.

@Cruncher - David is correct, as per 502.3. No player receives priority during the untap step, so no spells can be cast or resolve and no abilities can be activated or resolve. Any ability that triggers during this step will be held until the next time a player would receive priority, which is usually during the upkeep step. (See rule 503, "Upkeep Step.")

@corsiKa / David Z, thanks. I'll leave my comment there as it's probably relevant for other who may make the same mistake.

502.3 is fairly relevant in the current standard, as inspired triggers and upkeep triggers will get put on the stack at the same time, meaning they can potentially be reordered. (e.g. Pain Seer and Thassa, God of the Sea)


text:
Dictate of Erebos and Undercity Informer stack question
Situation: My opponent has Dictate of Erebos out ("Whenever a creature you control dies, each opponent sacrifices a creature.").  He then attacks me with one of his creatures; I defend, killing his creature, but then I have to sacrifice a creature in response due to the enchantment.  I name Undercity Informer as the creature I will sacrifice.  In response to having to sacrifice him, I use his ability, pay 1, and sacrifice target creature (I chose Undercity Informer), and target opponent reveals cards from his/her library till they reveal a land and put all cards revealed into the graveyard.
Does this then mean I have escaped the cost of Dictate of Erebos as when the stack now unfolds Undercity Informer is sacrificed and his ability works and the creature to be sacrificed has already been sacrificed, so therefore cannot be sacrificed?
Or do I then pick a new creature to sacrifice?

You must pick another.

The Dictate's ability does not target, so the creature to sacrifice is chosen on resolution.
If you self-sacrifice the Informer in response to Dictate's ability, then it won't exist when the Dictate's ability resolves, so it won't be a valid pick for the Dictate's ability. You'll have to sacrifice a creature among the other ones you have (if any) when the Dictate's ability resolves.
If you wait for the Dictate's ability to resolve before doing anything, the Informer will no longer exist for you to activate its ability.

If the Dictate's ability targeted, the choice of creature to sacrifice would be made when the ability is placed on the stack, meaning you get a chance to respond after the choice is made. If the creature no longer exists when the ability is about to resolve (e.g. because you self-sacrificed it), the ability fizzles and you wouldn't have to sacrifice anything more.

The only way this can work is if Undercity Informer is your only creature.  When Dictate of Erebos's ability triggers, the choice of which creature you'll be sacrificing isn't made until the ability actually resolves; you cannot choose which creature to sacrifice and then "respond to" the choice with other abilities.  Before the Dictate's ability resolves, you can activate Undercity Informer's ability as normal and sacrifice it to itself to mill an opponent (Side note: The creature sacrificed to pay the Informer's cost is not targeted; it's just chosen.  This matters for things like shroud and protection.), but then after that you'll still have to sacrifice (another) creature to the Dictate.  The only ways to avoid a sacrifice are to have no creatures to sacrifice when the ability resolves or to control a Tajuru Preserver or Sigarda, Host of Herons, but in the latter case there's no pressing need to activate the Informer's ability early.

Even at Competitive REL, you should have been locked into this one from the beginning. The same would occur at Regular REL (Friday Night Magic), but judges at Regular can be a little lax on letting people take back their choices.

The moment you named a creature, you declared your intent to let the trigger from Dictate of Erebos resolve.
You should immediately follow through with its resolution and sacrifice a creature. You will not have a chance to make other choices until after the spell has resolved. In other words, you should never have even had the opportunity to activate Undercity Informer before the trigger resolved.
How do I know this?
Personal Experience
I once played Foundry Champion at a Pro Tour Qualifier sealed event in Dallas/Fort Worth. My opponent asked who I was targeting with the enter the battlefield trigger. I chose a creature. He then tried to counter my Foundry Champion. I called a judge, and the judge ruled that because my opponent prompted me to make a choice that could only be made after the creature had entered the battlefield, and because I made the choice, that he had declared his intent to let the creature enter and I had accepted. Therefore, it could not be countered, the triggered ability sits on the stack, and my opponent has priority.
Article by Scott Marshall
Read this. It will not only improve your game, but it will make you a better communicator and therefore more fun to play with.
Most situations involving shortcuts are judged by who has what to gain from making ambiguous choices. In your case, the state of the game was ambiguous. You thought you were making the choice before resolution. We assume that your opponent knows the rules, and thought you were making the choice during resolution. The ambiguity you created caused your opponent to give away information: he had nothing to do before resolution. Therefore, you cannot change your choice. You have gained information that you wouldn't normally have (however minor it may be), and so the game cannot be reverted.

Good point. Since the creature is chosen when Dictate's ability resolves, if you pick a creature to sacrifice to it, you must have allowed the ability to resolve. The two earlier answers cover what you can do; this answer covers what happens if someone were to try to do things in the wrong order.

That said, there's a major difference between the OP's scenario and yours which invalidates the parallel. In your scenario, your opponent proposed a shortcut (let the spell resolve, place its ETB on the stack and pass priority), and the shortcut was accepted (by you specifying a target). If the OP were to say "I sacrifice X. No wait, first I ...", it could be said that he proposed a shortcut that was never accepted. The outcome could very well be different (i.e. he could very well be allowed to take back the choice). If he actually did sacrifice it, then it's definitely too late.

@ikegami Looking at it again, there was no need for the opponent to accept a shortcut. There was no shortcut. The author simply passed priority and let the dictate trigger resolve. The opponent doesn't have to agree to let that happen. I admit that my parallel was poor because it involved more than pass of priority (which of course calls for a shortcut). However, both stories involve progressing the game by some number of passes, and then attempting to back it up. My answer needs a serious revision. Do you agree?

The difference is more in one player soliciting future information from the other vs one "thinking-out-loud" on his or her own.  In context you may sometimes be allowed a "take back" on the second.  Regardless it's still helpful information for OP to learn when different decisions are made.

@Rusher, Re "there was no need for the opponent to accept a shortcut". I never said opponent. Re "The author simply passed priority and let the dictate trigger resolve." He said he was going to do that, but he didn't.

@ikegami Almost. The author chose a creature to sacrifice, which could only have happened if the game were progressed by one pass of priority. He may be allowed to change his choice of which creature he is going to sacrifice, but I'm not convinced that the rules provide a way for him to rewind the game so far that he can undo his pass of priority. The rulings I have found mostly say it depends on how fast the player says "Wait, I change my mind." The author never declared his intent to change his mind about the pass of priority. (cont)

@ikegami (cont) He continued to take illegal actions after that point, and so the game should have been backed up to just before those illegal actions occurred and no further.

You need to take an action, your opponent needs to take an action, or secret information needs to be revealed to you to realize a shortcut. Otherwise, you are still proposing it. Saying while creature you will choose doesn't realize the shortcut. Priority has not been passed yet, so it does not need to be rewind. But being less than completely clear, it's possible to be misinterpreted.

It sounds like it would really depend on the exact wording. If he said something like "I'll sacrifice Undercity Informer, but before I do..." then he should be allowed to do that; he hasn't progressed the game beyond a certain point.


text:
If Anger of the Gods kills a creature, does it still trigger death effects?
Let's say I control Athreos, God of Passage and my opponent casts an Anger of the Gods. I'm fairly sure any creatures I own that die this turn are just exiled without Athreos' ability triggering, but I can't bring to mind a concrete explanation of exactly why that's the case.
Can anyone explain how abilities that trigger when a creature dies interact with effects along the lines of "If X would die this turn, do Y with it instead"?

The creature never died, so the ability doesn't trigger.

Anger of the Gods creates a replacement effect.

614.1. Some continuous effects are replacement effects. [...] Such effects watch for a particular event that would happen and completely or partially replace that event with a different event. [...]
614.1a Effects that use the word “instead” are replacement effects. Most replacement effects use the word “instead” to indicate what events will be replaced with other events.

So the creatures never went to the graveyard.

614.6. If an event is replaced, it never happens. A modified event occurs instead, which may in turn trigger abilities. Note that the modified event may contain instructions that can’t be carried out, in which case the impossible instruction is simply ignored.

So the creatures never died.

700.4. The term dies means “is put into a graveyard from the battlefield.”

If you have an ability that triggered on a creature being exiled, that ability would trigger.

Great stuff, this is the kind of answer I needed. I was fairly sure this was the case but I've not read the comprehensive rules in any serious depth and wasn't 100% sure whether the replacement effect stepped in before or after the event it is replacing.

Dies is short for "is put into a graveyard from the battlefield". Anger of the Gods say exile instead of dies (replacement effect), so the Athreos trigger will not be triggered because it completely replaces the die keyword.

700.4. The term dies means “is put into a graveyard from the battlefield.”

and

419.1. Replacement and prevention effects are continuous effects that watch for a particular event to happen and then completely or partially replace that event. These effects act like "shields" around whatever they're affecting.


text:
What mana fixing should I use in Khans of Tarkir Sealed Format?
Some Khans of Tarkir terminology:

Banners are a cycle of mana rocks that can be sacrificed to draw a card (e.g., Abzan Banner).
Wedge lands enter tapped and produce one of three colors (e.g., Mystic Monastery).
Life lands enter tapped, gain 1 life when played, and produce one of two colors (e.g., Dismal Backwater).

How do you know how many banners to play in your deck?
I've been practicing with this sealed pool generator, and on average, I get 1 Wedge Land and 2-3 Life Lands. Is that enough mana fixing? Would you guys advise throwing in 1-2 (maybe not 3) banners? Going to the basics of deck building for sealed pool, it's supposed to be 17 lands, 17 creatures, and 6 other spells. If you throw in 2 banners to fix your mana, it would only leave you with 4 other spells.
Am I doing it wrong? Are banners supposed to be counted towards the total land count?

Keep in mind that banners aren't only mana fixing, they're mana acceleration as well.

Yes I know, you can also use them to draw towards the late game. My concern really is I don't know where to count them towards to. Since they can mana accelerate, do they count as a land or half a land and half an "other spells"?

I don't have enough good information or consider myself a good enough player for an actual answer, but as a general rule, for cards that are not lands but can produce mana, I consider them about half a land each.

Posting to register my disagreement with this question being closed; while the question of where to draw the line with mana sources is difficult, the question of "what ratio of mana sources yields  the highest expected winrate in most decks" is 100% objective. There used to be a statistician on StarCityGames who wrote nothing but math-based answers to questions like this. I see no reason why this is any more "opinion-based" than other questions of strategy.

I mean, compare this question to http://boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/6145/what-are-good-strategies-for-sealed-deck

Perhaps an actual statistics question could be parsed out of this and then asked on Cross Validated.

I've altered the title, and think that this question should be re-opened, as it's an important topic, especially for the next year, and while it is opinion based, it's no more so than http://boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/4921/what-are-good-strategies-for-booster-drafts, which is one of the most debated topics in all of Magic and has not been closed. Compared to that one, this is practically "what's the p/t of a Rampaging Baloth?"

Also, I have a good answer for this question.

Voting to reopen: it's definitely possible to write math-based answers, and even if you write a slightly subjective answer based on solid reasoning about effects of various choices, that's totally fine - definitely not "primarily opinion-based".

The original question was fine IMHO, even better now.

"17 lands, 17 creatures, 6 spells" is an incredibly strict guideline that you don't need to follow to the letter.

This question (and the answers) is confusing and unhelpful to someone who does not know what Banners or Wedge Lands are... can someone please update with appropriate links / descriptions?

@GendoIkari I added descriptions and examples.

Mana fixers can virtually never be counted as full lands because you need mana to cast them.
Let's take the case of the banners specifically. If you swap out a land for a banner, the main difference is the banner:

Costs 3 mana to cast
Can be sacrificed for a card draw

(1) makes them a higher mana screw risk than a land (how happy are you if you mulligan into 2 land+banner instead of 3 land?), while (2) makes them a reduced mana flood risk than a land (sac them if you have nothing better to do with your mana).
They should almost certainly be counted as full spells for purposes of mana ratios, especially if you're also playing lands that come into play tapped.

This answer appears to be primarily opinion-based. Banners do not put you at a higher risk of mana screw in sealed Khans of Tarkir. The bombs in Khans are primarily tricolor and cost more than four mana. The curve in Khan's sealed sits on four, because the three drop commons in Khans are underwhelming. Aggro in Khan's sealed is slow for lack of good creatures under four mana, so you feel good dropping a mana rock on turn three. In a wedge set where the format is slow, a banner actually reduces mana screw.

@Rainbolt: It's an "opinion" based on hard math like almost any other statement you'd make about strategy in this game. And anyway, the stuff I said about mana screw has nothing to do with how good or bad it is to cast a mana rock on turn 3; it's about how mana rocks aren't going to establish your mana base if you can't cast them.

How did you relate casting a mana rock to increased risk of mana screw? It's almost like you forgot to write that part of your answer. You are equally likely to make it to three mana with or without a banner. On the other hand, you are more likely to hit four mana with a banner than without. Therefore, a banner decreases mana screw in some situations, does not affect mana screw in other situations, and never increases mana screw.

@Rainbolt: OP ended with "are banners supposed to be counted towards the total land count?" I opened with "Mana fixers can virtually never be counted as full lands..." and ended with "[Banners] should almost certainly be counted as full spells for purposes of mana ratios..." It's almost like you only read the second sentence of my answer. The things you say are all true if we take for granted we aren't cheating on lands by counting mana rocks as lands, which would be a reasonable assumption if OP didn't literally ask if that was a thing we should be doing.

@Rainbolt I think we should move this to chat. My argument is that this answer is sensible advice about not treating banners as replacements for your 17th/18th land.

@Rainbolt - if you have more to say, please submit your own answer.  I believe Chad understands the point you are making and simply disagrees. Vote your conscience and disengage here.  Thanks!  (Also, I'm removing much of the back and forth here which seems redundant)

@deworde I wish Pat had migrated the conversation instead of obliterating it. I opened a room for us to discuss this further.

18 lands, including all the on-colour heal lands you can get and all the tri-lands in at least 2 of your wedge's colours. Then add banners according to deck speed and colour balance.

The thing to consider with trading Banners for lands, as with any colour fixing rock is "what happens if you don't hit the mana on time". Between morph and delve, Khans is a format where less than 1/3 of the common/uncommon cards in the set require more than 3 mana to cast.
So if you miss your third land drop, you are going to be immediately behind and your opponent can start capitalising on that. And if when you finally draw your 3rd land, your first play is a banner, that's one more turn that you haven't done anything to slow your opponent's pressure or increase yours. If that banner had been a land instead, it would have got you to three sooner.
Beyond that, there's another threshold at 5, where creatures can unmorph that can actually just kill other morph creatures rather than trade. Again, once your opponent gets there first, you can't profitably send your morph creatures in any more.
So the answer is "if I stick on 2, I can't play the banner, and I'm probably going to lose". So you want to avoid that. Your risk appetite may vary, but here are the stats.
Sealed is of course one of the more bomb focused formats, but one of the wonderful things about bombs is that they can wait a few turns till you find your splash, as long as your opponent can't kill you in the meantime. Which is exactly what will happen if they're hitting you for multiple turns because they were on curve and you weren't. They'll also hit their bomb faster.
Note also that a lot of the Khans cards are mono-colour, and the common multicolours all have morph. You're rarely going to require 3 colours until turn 5 or 6, and even then, you could well have stuff to do if you've built your pool to focus on 2 colours with a 3rd splashed.
And finally, remember that to cast a multicolour card you still need the mana. Having 4 mana in three colours does not help you cast a Zurgo, because he costs 5.
My advice, from listening to the Limited Resources podcast, is 18 lands and 0-2 banners depending on your fixing requirements and your deck speed. The more you can focus on 2 colours, the less you need the banners. The more controlling your deck is, the more it can afford the tempo loss of playing the banner out. But you're playing the banners as a patch to handle a lack of colour fixing with an option to cycle, not as lands. You might be able to go 17/2, using the ramp and cycling from the banners to mitigate any missed drops, but 17/1 is going to hurt more than it helps.
If you can play a mostly black-white warriors splashing red for Zurgo, out go those banners. If it's blue-black-green delve that Scouts for key tri-colour cards and needs to hold the ground then pour in the mana into Villainous Wealth, in they go. Remember, if you're mana flooded, you always can crack the banner on your opponent's end step.
Obviously, the better your land fixing is, the less you need the banners. Also remember that an off-colour tri-land that covers 2 of your colours (e.g. Abzan triland in a Mardu deck), counts as a heal land for the purposes of fixing.
Addendum: Based on post-pre-release discussion and comment, my initial opinion would seem to be borne out. The LRR team suggest that "You have much better things to do on turn 3 than cast a banner", and you'd normally do it only to help in a situation where you need more than fixing than your dual/tri-lands can be provide. This is always a bit of a judgement call, even if you can work out the probabilities, the consequences will depend on your deck and your opponents (e.g. you'll get more punished for colour screw by an aggressive opponent, but your deck may be able to stabilise better without the banner).

Not specific to KTK, but my rule of thumb for limited environments has been to count non-zero cost mana sources as half lands, with a limit of about 1/3 my land count total reduction.
For instance in your example I would count 1 of those banners as a land. So 16 lands, 17 creatures and 5 other spells plus the two banners.
Note as a word of caution that I am used to efficient green methods or 2 CC artifacts that act as land, so this rule of thumb may not be applicable for 3 CC artifacts.
The reason I count like this is because there are two stages of mana. Your first couple of turns where you are using mana to start the game, and later when you have enough mana to spend mana to get more. You only count as half because the non-zero mana sources are only valuable in the second portion.
Finally I mention non-zero mana sources instead of lands due to my favorite form of limited being a powered cube.

Would you keep a hand with 3 banners and no lands? Would you keep a hand with  2 banners? what about 1 land, 2 banners? well, you should not, so the answer is NO, you can't fill lands slots with banners.
Furthermore, the banners can be sac if you are mana flooded, eliminating the problem of get them in addition to lands. You can play 2 or even 3 of them if you play bombs in 5-6 manas, because the important thing here is, as a comment says, they are accelerators too, so it is very likely you will play your 5 mana bomb in 4 turn, even if it is a 3 color or it is in your splash color. Eventually you will have more mana than your more expensive card, so you will start to burn your banners, getting more relevant cards.
To my taste (I do very well in sealed), 17 lands and 2/3 banners maximizing your bombs. (In KTK you could even play 2 main colors and 2 splashes if you get enough good lands and banners, so you can put in almost every bomb you get).

This answer draws an invalid conclusion based on a few examples. Counter example: in a deck of containing only spells with a converted mana cost of {5}, 16 lands plus 1 banner is almost always superior to 17 lands. The only thing you have really proven is that there are some cases where banners cannot replace lands.

@Rainbolt  Your "counter example" is a fallacy. Your are saying 0 banners. I said play the banners + your normal lands. 17 lands + 1 banner is strictly superior to "16 lands + 1 banner" idea. The probability of get your banner is the same (1/40) and your probabilties of 5 manas in 4th turn are more. Then, why you would put in a banner instead a land???
If you play just 5 mana spells, you need hit 5 lands in 5th turn of 4 lands + banner in 4th, you cannot afford a 4 mana game. As I explained, mana flood is not a risk with banners, so there is no reason to no add them to the normal land count.

@Rainbolt Can't edit my comment so I will add: "Your are saying 0 banners" means "In your example you are implying that I said 0 banners and that's a lie".


text:
In what zone do the lingering effects of spells reside?
Cyclopean Tomb, for example, creates an effect that continues for the rest of the game, even if it is destroyed.
Is there a name for the conceptual "board" of lingering effects whose originating cards are no longer on the battlefield?

Although it doesn't provide an answer, I think this article can at least provide some context for a good answer: Oracle Review - Cyclopean Tomb and Gaea's Liege

Note that many abilities function without the card ever having been on the battlefield. "Cycle" abilities, for example, work when the card is in your hand.

Note that continuous effects created by the resolution of spells and abilities last until the end of the game unless otherwise stated.

Consider explaining why it would be beneficial to have this question answered. Why is it important to know where these effects live?

Effects aren't objects, and thus they don't exist in any zone.

They do not reside in any special realm. They just continue to apply. CR 611.2a states

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

What is interesting is, that these effects continue to apply even if the controller of the spell or ability that generated it leaves the game in a multi-player. So, if you turned some of your opponent's lands into swamps and then are killed, those lands continue to be swamps as long as they remain on the battlefield with the counters. Since you already left the game, your turn will be skipped and no counters are removed by the tomb's second ability.

Most cards with lingering effects have had their oracle text changed to include "emblems", which goes into the Command Zone (example: Elspeth, Knight-Errant), however the Cyclopean Tomb is not one of them (likely due to them being unused in competitive formats).
Because Cyclopean Tomb doesn't mention an emblem, Rule CR 611.2a would apply.
Here's a good article to read about this specific issue:
http://humbabellasgamery.blogspot.ca/2013/07/oracle-review-cyclopean-tomb-and-gaeas.html

Did any cards actually change to create emblems? Or do you just mean that's how they do it on new cards now?

@Rainbolt I explicitly state in my answer that Cyclopean Tomb doesn't include emblems, merely the effect is most similar to an emblem.
Jefromi, yes they changed some cards. One example is Elspeth, knight-Errant

@Othya the challenge in this question would be citing why it gets treated as an emblem. If there's no rules around it at all, that's valuable to state. But it's also entirely possible that means these effects don't exist anywhere, they just are.

@Rainbolt. Changed my answer a bit. Let me know what you think.

I seem to recall Stigma Lasher getting errata about emblems at one point, but if it ever did, it's back to its original wording now. For the time being, emblems are produced exclusively by planeswalkers.

This answer is misleading. Continuous effects do not exist in any zone and they are not the same as emblems. Emblems are objects with abilities that create effects, they are not themselves effects.

@Jefromi, I believe Elspeth, Knight Errant is the only card to have a "for the rest of the game" ability changed into an emblem.