text:
Why is Tolarian Kraken worded this way?
Tolarian Kraken has this ability:

Whenever you draw a card, you may pay {1}. When you do, you may tap or untap target creature.

So if you choose to pay {1}, this causes a separate triggered ability to happen. Sparktongue Dragon is another example of this, but pretty much every other use I can find for “when you do” is in the reminder text for Madness or Conspire.
Most often, whenever a card has an optional ability like this, it says “if you do”, which makes the rest of what happens simply part of the same ability, rather than a separate triggered ability. There are a large number of cards worded this way, such as Carrion Thrash.
Is there a known reason that these 2 cards are worded differently than the rest? It is a functionally different, but most of the time it would work out the same. With this wording, you don’t have to choose targets for the second ability if you don’t choose to use the effect, but most of the time that’s going to be the same as choosing a target and then not choosing to use the effect anyway.
Has there been anything written about why these cards are worded this way? Or is there a more obvious explanation that I’m missing?

38 cards have "when you do" in the text. Many of those involve optional costs and targeted effects.

Many of those are exert, which I forgot to mention along side madness and conspire.

18 of them are exert. Of the other 20, 15 are "[optional cost]. When you do, [targeted effect]." 3 of the other 5 are "[non-targeted effect]. When you do, [targeted effect]", which has a different purpose: the original spell or ability isn't countered if the target becomes illegal.

Fyi: these are called reflexive triggered abilities.

Ah, for cards like Hypothesizzle it definitely makes sense; you wouldn't want the draw 2 cards to be countered just because your target gained hexproof or something; especially if you weren't planning on discarding a card to use that part of the effect.

I can't find a source, but I thought I remembered someone say reflexive triggers were created partly for digital play because it is un-intuitive when the game client asks you to choose a target for an ability you don't intent to pay for (which is much easier to gloss over in paper play). Also, rules technology was only added for this kind of ability in Amonkhet; they didn't do it before because seemingly no one had thought of it. (MTGA and Amonkhet are similar time frame.)

@tehtmi Found this after looking for "reflexive triggers".. https://blogs.magicjudges.org/rulestips/2017/05/heart-piercer-manticore-and-reflexive-triggers/

Imagine being faced with the decision to sacrifice or activate a creature simply because another player started their turn? By using a delayed triggered ability, the need to make that decision is delayed until after the cost is payed.

"When you do, ..." is triggered ability.

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

Specifically, it's a variation of delayed triggered ability called a reflexive triggered ability.

603.12. A resolving spell or ability may allow or instruct a player to take an action and create a triggered ability that triggers “when [a player] [does or doesn’t]” take that action or “when [something happens] this way.” These reflexive triggered abilities follow the rules for delayed triggered abilities (see rule 603.7), except that they’re checked immediately after being created and trigger based on whether the trigger event or events occurred earlier during the resolution of the spell or ability that created them.

The ability is only created on resolution.

603.7a Delayed triggered abilities are created during the resolution of spells or abilities, as the result of a replacement effect being applied, or as a result of a static ability that allows a player to take an action. A delayed triggered ability won’t trigger until it has actually been created, even if its trigger event occurred just beforehand. Other events that happen earlier may make the trigger event impossible.

This has two implications.
First, the target is chosen when the delayed triggered ability is placed on the stack, not when Tolarian Kraken's ability is placed on the stack. This is inconsequential.
The other, relevant implication is that this gives a chance to the players to react to the delayed triggered ability. This is beneficial to the opponents of Kraken's controller since they know the cost has been paid before having to react.
Doing otherwise would make Tolarian Kraken an overly powerful card. Imagine being faced with the decision to sacrifice or activate a creature simply because another player started their turn? With the current wording, Tolarian Kraken's controller must commit to paying for the ability before forcing a response.

[This is effectively the same answer as murgatroid99's, but it explains why the targets are chosen later than they would be with if.]

After some more research; this appears partially wrong... it's actually not a delayed triggered ability, it's a reflexive triggered ability. Which works similarly to a delayed trigger, but with a bit of difference. Specifically, if it were a delayed triggered ability, then it wouldn't work because the trigger didn't exist at the time that you actually paid {1}. 603.12 is the rule for this.

Sorry about that, fixed.

Waiting until after the cost is paid to choose the target is the big difference here.
If the ability used "if you do", like on Throwing Knife, then an opponent who wanted to "save" their creature from the ability would have to do so before they even know if you are going to pay for it. That gives the ability the unintentional power of forcing your opponent to react to the possibility of paying the cost, without actually paying any cost. With the "when you do" wording, the opponent can react to your choice to pay the cost, making it more like an activated ability.

@murgatroid99's answer is exactly correct, in my opinion, but I wanted to go deeper on illustrating his point.
Consider the two cards Savai Thundermane and Lightning Rift: both have an ability that can somehow deal two damage to a creature when a card is cycled. Now consider what happens when your opponent has these cards and you have a 2/2 creature you want to keep alive as well as a Ranger's Guile.
In the case where your opponent controls Savai Thundermane, they will need to actually pay the two mana in order to cause the second ability to trigger, at which point they will target your 2/2 and you can respond with the Guile to save it.
In the case where your opponent controls Lightning Rift, the burden is on you to act first. If you want to save your creature, you must cast the Guile immediately and your opponent will not have to waste their mana. If you wait until you know whether or not your opponent actually is willing to commit the mana, you no longer have any ability to respond and stop the damage.
Anecdotally, this situation where something may or may not happen but the opponent must act as though it will can certainly cause confusion. I remember a tournament game long ago where I controlled a Cursed Scroll, my opponent controlled a Ravenous Baloth. My opponent was at two life and I held five cards. I activated the Scroll targeting him, he let it resolve, I wound up revealing the named card, and then he was baffled at why he could not respond by sacrificing his Baloth. It seems that modern-day cards are trying to avoid these situations.


text:
Why doesn't Relentless Assault work if it is not cast during a main phase?
Inspired by this question; the gatherer rulings for Relentless Assault say that if it is not a main phase when it resolves, then there will not be additional attack and main phases. Is there a rule that explains this interaction?
I think I can understand why it works this way thinking about it logically, (it refers to "this main phase", and since it is not the main phase, "this main phase" simply isn't a thing that exists, therefore there is nothing after "this main phase"). But usually MTG comprehensive rules are more specific.
The only rule I found dealing with this in general is 500.8:

500.8. Some effects can add phases to a turn. They do this by adding the phases directly after the specified phase. If multiple extra phases are created after the same phase, the most recently created phase will occur first.

This doesn't mention what to do if the specified phase doesn't exist.
To clarify, I'm well aware that you cannot normally cast Relentless Assault unless it is your main phase, because it is a sorcery. But there are plenty of effects that would allow you to cast it during combat.

You can't "add a phase after this main phase" if the game isn't in a main phase, so do as much as possible: Just untap the creatures.

609.3. If an effect attempts to do something impossible, it does only as much as possible.

I think you find it confusing because "this {something}" is not usually a check, but that's because "this {something}" is usually used as the subject of an action verb, and those aren't checks.
The core of the issue of making it more readable is that it's hard to make the following template conditional:

After {phase}, there is an additional combat phase followed by an additional main phase.

The most readable options looks like an intervening-if, which is a problem in of its own.

After this phase, if it's a main phase, there is an additional combat phase followed by an additional main phase.

Removing the conditional entirely isn't an option either. The conditional is required to forbid the creation of an attack phase and a main phase after the Ending Phase, and even Sundial of the Infinite doesn't bypass the Cleanup Step.

I guess I was hoping for a rule along the lines of “if an effect refers to ‘this [specific phase]”, and it is not the specified phase, the effect is impossible.” But it sounds like they left it up to inference.

They couldve added something like "if it is a main phase" on the card to make it extra clear, but there arent that many ways to cast sorceries outside of their regular timing, so the text was balanced towards readability rather than redundant correctness.

@Hackworth, Easier said than done. The template is "After {phase}, there is an additional combat phase followed by an additional main phase." I don't see a good way of adding "if it is a main phase".

Of course they could have also simply not had that restriction.. "after this phase, there is...". The situations in which that would make the card stronger would be extremely rare. Makes me wonder why had that limitation in the first place.

I'm with Wizards on that one. Allowing the card to create a main+attack phase after the End step is too weird.

@ikegami Ah, yeah. I was only thinking of it being used during combat.

I misspoke. If used in the End Step, the extra phases would happen after the Cleanup Step (which is even worse).

@Ikegami that just goes to prove my point, which was less about the exact wording and more about readability vs. explicitness. Whatever wording they would have to use to make the card super duper obvious in terms of timing under all circumstances would decrease readability, and obviously they felt that the sorcery type was sufficient, if not 100% perfect, to get the point across. So they sacrificed a little bit of correctness and/or explicitness to gain a lot of readability.

Reconsider rule 500.8, specifically

They do this by adding the phases directly after the specified phase.

Relentless Assault adds an additional combat phase after this main phase.
As the spell resolves, it will untap creatures that have attacked during this turn. Then it will attempt to add an additional combat phase, followed by another main phase, after this main phase. If the game isn't in a main phase, it is impossible to complete the additions.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Which Age of Steam map is best to use for an initiation to the game for 5 or 6 players? Why?
I.e. with which expansion map is it easiest to initiate many newbies to the game of Age of Steam while playing a five or six-person game and why?
I have an answer, which I'll post in a few days (to give someone else a chance to post it first), but I'll "accept" the one that has the most votes after a week or so.

I have had multiple successes introducing the game with the Germany map in large groups and no failures (so far).
Failure, in this case, would be someone that doesn't understand the game enough to be able to identify why they lost or won. (Although, a friend of mine has a block on the game in general - she finds it too difficult and can't fathom ever winning.)
The greatest feature of the map that enables this success is the removal of one rule. Namely, the ability to construct unfinished links. I.e., all players must always connect both ends of the track they lay.
The effect of this rules tweak, in addition to various long-distance destinations (foreign terminals) being abstracted (tiles adjacent to them costing 6 to 12$), is that newbies cannot begin making a whole class of mistakes with far reaching negative consequences.
For example, they know connecting to Lyon will cost them, at least, 14$ - they don't have to start building it this turn, see that they don't have the money they need next turn and abandon the track they already laid to the next lucky player with a few dollars to spare.
This is not to say the map is boring for experienced players, there are still many possibilities to block (probably more, since the longest distance a link may have is three) and the board becomes quite crowded with more than four players so the newbies will still be developing the skills to cope with the game's challenges.
All being said, I don't know any other map that plays so well and simply with as many players. (The base Rust Belt map is still a good map to use, to teach the game, when playing with three or four, though.)

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


text:
Can I cast Killing Glare with X=0 while no creatures with zero power are on the battlefield?
I wonder if I am able to cast Killing Glare if there are no powerless creatures on the board?
For example to Extort after casting.

No, you have to pick a legal target (a creature with power 0 or less) when you cast the spell, as instructed by the third step of casting a spell.

601.2c The player announces his or her choice of an appropriate player, object, or zone for each target the spell requires. [...]

If you can't, any steps of casting the spell already taken are undone.

601.2. [...] If, at any point during the casting of a spell, a player is unable to comply with any of the steps listed below, the casting of the spell is illegal; the game returns to the moment before that spell started to be cast [...]

Presumably the card would work the way the OP wants if it was worded something more like "If target creature has power X or less, destroy it."

@thesunneversets, yeah, then any creature would be a valid target. "Destroy a creature with with power X or less." would also allow it to be cast since the creature would be chosen on resolution.

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


text:
What interesting 3-player strategy games are available?
In my apartment there tend to be 3 of us wanting to play board games regularly, and we're fond of strategy games. Unfortunately, 3 is not the optimal number for most of the more interesting ones that we've come across.
We're familiar with Carcassone, Cataan, and Forbidden Island, but we've been wondering if there are games that are more towards the Quorridor, Blokkus, etc style of game that are somewhat quicker to play and where moving and/or placing pieces is the main part of the game. And, for that matter, if there are games like this that explicitly work optimally with 3 people (We've tried 3 person Blokkus and it's messy).

Hello RSid, and welcome to the site!  I'm voting to close this question, as we've taken a recent policy decision against recommendation questions of this kind.  (For reasons why, see this meta discussion).  If you take this one over to the site chat, you should hopefully find that people are glad to work with you to understand exactly what kind of games your group prefers, and recommend some.

Thanks for letting me know! Seeing the recommendation tag/rec questions I assumed they were in.

They used to be in on a we-hadn't-decided-yet basis (hence the tag), but we ended up finding we almost-always closed them.  So now it's official policy.  (You raise a good point here; we should do something about the tag.  I'll go edit the tag wiki in the meantime...)

For a game like Blokus that's good with three players, I'd recommend Blokus Trigon.  The BoardGameGeek community even goes as far as to say it's best played with three: http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/21550/blokus-trigon

I really, really recommend Ticket to Ride: Nordic Countries as an interesting and balanced three player game. Its unique selling point, over the other Ticket to Ride games, is that it is specifically designed for three! You can play a two-player variant, but you can't for four or more. So you're genuinely getting a game that works best for three.
The other game that is universally acclaimed to be amazing, and is very good for different number of players, is Agricola.  Agricola gives you a different initial board layout for three players, and has many Occupation cards that are specially designed for 3+ players (in addition to the standard ones for 1+ players, and some for 4+ players).  You really feel like the designer paid lots of care and attention to making sure the game would work amazingly for 2 and 3 player games, as well as for larger groups.  (And indeed there's even a serviceable solitaire option!)

Check out Samurai. To be honest I haven't played it all that much yet (~10 games) but it feels like a game that's easy to learn but has depth in it. It plays best with 3 or 4 players. You can play it in a few different ways: with random placement, random tiles or chosen by players.

If by 'like Blokkus' you mean an abstract, then I recommend Talat.  A game of balancing focus between two opponents.  I've only been able to play it a handful of times, but have enjoyed it more every time.
Another quick recommendation if you want to play something with a variety of player (3 player included) would be 7 Wonders.  I love playing this game.  One thing that I continually enjoy about it is how differently it plays with different numbers of players.  The 2 player variant creates the most strategic game, while 3 players uses the normal game rules, but creates a big game of risk when deciding which cards to pass (since you will see each hand more than once).  Always ready to recommend 7 Wonders.

Have a look at San Marco - it's an older title but it is one of the best puzzle-ish "euro-style" games with three players (not as good with four).


text:
Jar of Eyeballs vs mass destruction
A Pernicious Deed is destroying my token army along with my counterless Jar of Eyeballs. Can I use the jar's activated ability before it goes to the graveyard?

Not really - X would be zero.
If you let Pernicious Deed's ability resolve, it destroys everything simultaneously. Even if it didn't, there's no chance to cast other spells or activate other abilities while something is resolving. The Jar's first ability does still trigger and try to put counters on it, but again, that doesn't resolve until after the Deed's ability does, so by the time it resolves, the Jar is also already in the graveyard. Its ability tries to put counters on it, but it's not there, so nothing happens.
So by the time you get a chance to do anything, your Jar is already gone. Your last chance to use it is before the Deed's ability resolves, but at that point your Jar has no eyeballs, so activating the ability won't do anything useful. You can still do it, but I don't think X=0 is what you were hoping for.

Based on this answer, won't the jar leave the battlefield with counters as its triggers resolved while the deed resolved?

No. First off, like I said, everything gets destroyed simultaneously. And additionally, while Jar does technically trigger like I said, those triggers have to go on the stack. They don't resolve until the Deed's ability is done resolving, and at that point there's nowhere to put the counters so like I said, nothing actually happens.

@CeesTimmerman In the answer you linked, the permanent in question already had counters on it. In this case, the triggered ability that adds counters only triggers as the recipient is entering the graveyard. By the time those abilities resolve, the recipient is in the wrong zone and can't receive counters.


text:
Looking for games with drop-in drop-out mechanic
When playing video games, I often prefer games that are easy to drop in and drop out of.  Games like Team Fortress 2 where players are always respawning so the new player isn't set back, especially if most people are ignoring the goal.
With board games I sometimes see two problems:  Sometimes the game stretches on longer than one player can afford or care for (I usually have a 1 hour rule for myself).  Sometimes the game has already been started and another prospective player shows up.
In these circumstances it would be nice if a game carried on even though players might start or stop playing at any time.  Are there any board games out there with good drop-in drop-out mechanics?

Hey tugs, sorry I closed your question.  Per our [faq] recommendation questions are not on topic here.  They aren't a good fit for a Q&A site.

Fluxx and a few other social card games allow players to join or leave at any time.

Coup you could just deal the new person 2 cards and start them with 3 cash, or just wait the few mins until the round is over and include them in the next one. The rounds are short enough that no-one will be waiting long to join.

I would suggest Mansions of Madness. With one change to the rules.
The rules currently have the keeper draw threat for the number of investigators that started the game. This would have to be modified to be the number of players currently playing the game instead of investigators.
This way the threat accumulation would be accurate to the amount of players.
other than that a new investigator could join in at any time because the game has a time limit and it is not dependent on the players still being around to complete, with the exception of the keeper.
Arkham Horror could also be dropped into and out of.

And Elder Sign. :)


text:
When the bio-terrorist is eliminated, do they discard their cards?
When the bio-terrorist is eliminated from play (via the purple disease being eradicated), should they discard their current hand of infection cards to the infection discard pile?

The rules don't specifically say:

The Bio-Terrorist wins if the players lose and there is at least 1 purple cube
  on the board. The Bio-Terrorist immediately loses (and is out of the game) if
  the players eradicate the purple disease.

They are out of the game, but it doesn't say what to do with their cards. Personally, I would just have them discard the cards in their hand, since that should make it easier for the other players (a more diluted infection deck), and that is what normally happens when the Bio-Terrorist is captured.

Capture (special player action) - Place the Bio-Terrorist’s pawn on your role card. The Bio-Terrorist must immediately discard all cards in hand to the Infection Discard Pile (without eﬀect).


text:
What percentage of board games on the market involve dice?
I realise there is probably no way to get an accurate figure, just looking for a ballpark estimate of approximately how many board games there are out there, and how many of those involve dice rolling.

BoardGameGeek has 58627 games listed*, and 11132 of them are marked with the dice-rolling mechanic** . So that's 19% - but of course, there's no guarantee that all of the games were appropriately tagged, so treat it as a lower bound.
If you're curious about more specific categories, you can used the advanced search and limit it to games with or without dice rolling with some other restrictions. But it maxes out at 1000 results (ten pages), and doesn't count them for you.

* Hover over "browse" on the home page
** 1114 pages of "linked items", 10 per page, 2 on the last page.

A good answer to a less-good question. +1


text:
Magic: Shuffle face down cards after opponent looked at one?
As I understand it, there is basically hidden and public information in Magic. Now let's suppose I have multiple face-down cards on the battlefield, and my opponent gets to look at one of them. Is there anything in the rules that specifies what I can do to those face down cards and what I can't? My opponent now knows what one of my face down cards is, but does he have the "right" to know which one it is, or may I shuffle them so that he no longer has access to that information? My guess is shuffling is ok, but I have no idea where I'd look in the rules...

There's a third kind of information: derived information, which is stuff that cannot be directly seen (like public) but which can be deduced from public information and the history of the game. If you (legally) get to look at hidden information (like what that face-down permanent is), it becomes derived information. Changing it would be changing the game state.

@Jefromi, That's not true. Whether something is private, derived or free has nothing to do with game state. It has to do with whether you must reveal that information to another player. e.g. Everyone could know the card on the bottom of your deck or the face-down characteristics of a card, yet it's still private information. You are never obliged to divulge or remind anyone of it.

@Jefromi, "Derived information is information to which all players are entitled access, but opponents are not obliged to assist in determining and may require some skill or calculation to determine." e.g. The number of Goblins a player has is derived information.

@ikegami Because of the line "All characteristics of objects in public zones that are not defined as free information." I understood derived information to include this, because when a face down card has been revealed, its identity is a characteristic that all players have access to, and subsequently you can use your powers of deduction to say "aha, five seconds ago I saw under that card, and it's the same card, so I can deduce its identity". But I guess then it becomes private again. Moot point, anyway.

@Jeromi, No player is entitled to know the characteristic of a face-down permanent. That line refers to the colour of a permanent, its type, etc Such information is derived as its affected by replacement effects. The only public characteristic of a permanent is its name.

@ikegami I see. In the situation described in the question, of course, the player was (a moment ago) entitled to know the characteristics of that face-down permanent. I simply didn't understand that "you can figure this out by remembering that I earlier played a spell that changed the color of that permanent" (thus it's derived) was different from "you can figure this out by remembering that five seconds ago you saw what this card is" (it's private). Thank you for clarifying.

@ikegami Since you know more than me about this, I would be interested in your answer to this related question.

No, you can't do that.
From Comprehensive Rules (bold mine):

707.6. If you control multiple face-down spells or face-down permanents, you must ensure at all times that your face-down spells and permanents can be easily differentiated from each other. This includes, but is not limited to, knowing the order spells were cast, the order that face-down permanents entered the battlefield, which creature attacked last turn, and any other differences between face-down spells or permanents. Common methods for distinguishing between face-down objects include using counters or dice to mark the different objects, or clearly placing those objects in order on the table.

That was really unambiguous, thanks! I know that this technically answers the question, but do you know is there something similar for other types of hidden information, e.g. the same scenario with looking at cards in hand instead of face down cards?


text:
What's the AP of Eldrad's Staff and Yreil's spear?
The 6th edition of 40K introduces AP for melee weapons.  Previously many melee weapons where listed as "Ignores Armor Saves".  Now they have an supposed to have Armor Penetration value just like ranged weapons.
Eldrad's weapon's rules are listed as:

...a melee weapon that wounds on a 2+ regardless of toughness and ignores armor saves

Yreil's weapon's rules are listed as:

...as a Witchblade that ignores armor saves

Nowhere in the rules are they called out as being power weapons, which according to the new edition would cause them to be classified as Unusual Power Weapons and get AP3.  They are also neither listed in the Master Rule Book appendix which is supposed to update all existing weapons for the new edition,
My inclination is to interpret them as written and say that no one can take armor saves against wounds caused by these weapons.
Is that the correct interpretation, or am I missing something in core rule book that would clarify the issue?

My understanding is that you are correct, though now that I've looked I can't find any reliable sources confirming it. Multiple forum conversations agreeing with you, yes, but nothing I'd call "reliable".
As you say, they were never categorised as "power weapons", so my position would be that unless a FAQ is released that explicitly says otherwise, these weapons should not allow armour saves.
(And since this page is the first result for most of the phrases I searched for, I suppose there should be an answer here, even if it's not 100% certain!)

The FAQ for the core rule book has been updated.  It confirms that "Does not allow armor saves" does exactly what it says.  http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m1490286a_40K_Rulebook_v1.pdf

You are correct in that neither weapon entitles a model wounded by them to a standard armour save. Invulnerable armour saves would be taken as normal.
The approach to determining this is if a weapon or a weapon's special rules are not covered in the Rule Book ("Big Yellow Book" or BYB, 6th edition) then you take the description as written in the Codex.
In the case of these two weapons:
Staff of Ulthamar
There is no mention that this is a weapon listed in the BRB, and so we use the description on p51 of the current Codex: Eldar:

"In combat it always wounds on a roll of 2+ and ignores armour saves."

The Spear of Twilight
The Codex mentions on page 53 that this is a Singing Spear and adds a further rule, ignoring armour saves, to that weapon description:

"It is a Singing Spear that ignores armour saves (see page 27)."

Referring to Page 27, the Singing Spear is a weapon that is similar to a Witchblade but note that it is not listed as a Witchblade. It has it's own weapon profile, rules and description listed in this Codex and these are not overridden by anything in the new rule book.
As a result we use the profile detailed on this page, remembering to add in the "ignores armour saves" rules mentioned in the Spear of Twilight's own description.

Isn't it a BBB for 40K? :)

Sorry, I'm not firing on all cylinders today. What is a BBB?

Big Black Book, as opposed to the Fantasy Battles book being the Big Red Book

Ahh! Heh heh. Yeah, it's sometimes called the Big Grey Book though it's not that Grey these days! ;)

Looks like the community has plumped for "Big Yellow Book" for 40k 6th edition :)


text:
Are all jenga blocks of exactly same size?
If you ever play the game it's easy to conclude that blocks dimensions vary, otherwise the occurrence of loose blocks would be symmetric/regular when the tower initially built.
However, I was unable to find any reference to that fact anywhere in internet (apart a vague mention in this paper).
Hence, the question. Are all blocks exactly equal, and if no, what are exact sizes? How many different sizes of blocks are used? And as importantly, how do you know this?

I do not believe that the block dimensions vary much, except because of manufacturing error. The Wikipedia page states that the blocks are:

Each block is three times as long as its width, and one fifth as thick as its length 1.5×2.5×7.5 cm (0.59×0.98×3.0 in).

And the official website states:

A classic Jenga game consists of 54 precision-crafted, specially finished hard wood blocks.

I disagree with your assertion that, "blocks dimensions vary, otherwise the occurrence of loose blocks would be symmetric/regular when the tower initially built." If the dimensions were the same, but the weight varied, the weight would not be evenly distributed throughout the tower. That aside, you are probably correct that the blocks are not all exactly the same size.
Only one size block is manufactured, but because machines that cut the wood have certain tolerances (probably in 10s or 100s of microns), you cannot get a perfect cut. Even if you could, the wood surface isn't flat anyway. The ridges of the grain are very deep, as can be seen in this scanning electron microscope images. Finishing the wood would make some of these differences disappear, but even that wouldn't be perfect.

The inventor of Jenga actually mentioned this fact on a podcast called How to Do Everything in August of 2015.  https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/how-to-do-everything/id420543296?mt=2&i=349678276
The trick is that the blocks are of slightly different thicknesses.

Are the blocks manufactured specifically to have different thicknesses?  Or, is there enough variability in the manufacturing process to get them to have different thicknesses?  Is this discussed?

A friend of mine was a woodworking teacher. He assigned his class to make blocks for a giant backyard jenga set. The set is nearly unplayable because the blocks are too consistent. (I guess he taught the class too well).

The Jenga inventor also appeared on a 2017 episode of "Ask Me Another" and stated it was important that the blocks varied.  I got the impression that there were loose tolerances, not that a set number of blocks were a set amount smaller and another set number were a set amount larger.

First off: nothing is "exact."  I mean literally nothing.  Even if the machine is set to be exact...it probably is... hardwood (yes, it is a compound word) will vary because it is a natural thing.  Every piece absorbs moisture at a slightly different rate and has natural variations.  Even if they were made of aluminum, nothing is exact and there will be statistical variations that could be in the 5th decimal place, but nothing is exact.  Anyway, it is a game.  That is the point.  It is meant to be slightly off.

steel blocks could be milled to tight tolerance and maintain shape but the game would be very short. wood blocks are used because of their inherent imperfections. This allows the gaps between blocks to happen that make the game what it is, FUN

It could also be as simple as the timber blocks not being perfectly strait, very slight random bowing of the timber could be enough to make them slightly different in size and reduce friction when sliding the blocks out.
Im currently making a set with 30x70x210 blocks, and running them through a thicknesser planer to get them all smooth and the same size, some of the lengths of pine are a bit bowed, so hopefully this helps randomize sizes.
ill post back once its finished, hopefully this works!

Was wondering about the same thing. I could very quickly find pieces that had a difference in thickness of half a millimeter. And that is the smallest dimension, so that's where one would expect the smallest deviations.
I think if all pieces were exactly identical, and sanded to a very fine grit, then the game would be very different. Nothing would really move. Pieces would tend to stick together.
I'm quite convinced that slightly different sizes are made and then mixed together to create each set.


text:
Is number of tokens the same in 3 player game and 4 player game?
The rules say that the number of tokens is limited to what's available, and yet there is no explanation how many tokens to use with 2, 3 and 4 players. I'm guessing all tokens are used in each case. What is the point of that rule, that the number of tokens is limited then, if it does not scale with the number of players?

See also: https://www.reddit.com/r/boardgames/comments/dvfwdu/quacks_of_quedlinburg_limited_tokens_is_that/

If that is important you should edit that into your question including quotes that explain what you are talking about. Comments are designed to be temporary and can go away at any time.

From a quick glance that seems to be talking about extra tokens from the expansion which add a 5th player which would not be accounted for in the base rules.

It just means that there is a limited amount and you can't buy as many as you want. The rule is to remind you that you should not be adding more chips to allow for more purchases if they run out. What this means is that you will have a chance to get more of them in a two player game then you would a four player game.

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


text:
How to disarm/remove a trap?
The rules (page 14) say:

A trap can also be disarmed through specific actions to remove it from the board without suffering its negative effects.

I know of a single specific action to remove a trap which is the Thief's Knack ability of the Scoundrel character class. What are some others? (Jumping over a trap, stepping into a trap or pushing an enemy into a trap, are not specific actions to disarm a trap, so they do not count)

Tinkerer's Tools - the top effect is "Disarm one adjacent trap".

There are other ways as well but not sure on etiquette on BGSE on posting things that may be considered spoilers for content not available at the start of the game

@StartPlayer I'm certainly interested in knowing them

Curious Gear will disarm all traps within range 2.
I'll leave further research to those who want spoilers :)


text:
Stamina Booster of Tinkerer, why both icons: Lost or Consumed and Cannot Recover?
It seems to me that "Cannot Recover" does everything that "Lost or Consumed" does and more. Why does this card have both icons? What "Lost or Consumed" signifies, that "Cannot Recover" does not?

If the performed action from a card contains a "Lost or Consumed" symbol in the lower right of the action field, the card is instead placed in a player’s lost pile. Lost cards can only be returned to a player’s hand during a scenario by using a special recover action.

And

Certain abilities allow a player to recover discarded or lost ability cards. This means that the player can look
through his or her discard or lost pile (or discarded or lost cards in his or her active area), select up to a number
of cards specified in the ability, and immediately return them to his or her hand. Some cards, however, cannot
be recovered or refreshed once lost. This is denoted by "Cannot Recover" the symbol. This symbol applies to the card no
matter how the card was lost or consumed

It seems that the only difference is that the card ends up in the lost pile instead of the discarded pile, but since it cannot be recovered anyway, why/when does this matter?

I'm answering my own question, because no one else cannot read my mind and without it the question is not really answerable. I would delete the question but it already has an answer.
Your confusion is stemmed from the fact that you were comparing the digital version cards (which you own) against physical game rules (which you do not have), and because the icons are different in the digital version vs physical one you mixed up "Lost or Consumed" and "Cannot Recover": you thought they were the other way around. Once you realise that, everything falls into places.

It seems to me that "Cannot Recover" does everything that "Lost or Consumed" does and more.

This is mostly true, but "Lost or Consumed" is much more frequent than "Cannot Recover". These cards go to the Lost pile, you do not get them during your short/long rest, but you still can recover them.

Why does this card have both icons? What "Lost or Consumed" signifies, that "Cannot Recover" does not?

If the card only had "Cannot Recover" and did not have "Lost or Consumed" it would go to the Discard pile, not to the Lost pile. And then you would be able to get it back during you rest, since rest is not the same as "recover". This was not intention for this cars, so it gets both icons. In fact for most (if not all) cards that have "Cannot Recover" the intention is that this ability is only used once per combat, that's why those cards also have "Lost or Consumed" icon.
It could have been possible to print just a single "Cannot Recover" icon on those cards and add a rule that those cards also should be ignored in the Discard pile during rest, but it seems it would only add confusion without providing any real benefit.

you can remove the question if you want, I don't mind having answered it. And your answer comes down to the same as I said.

@Jungkook SE does not allow (self) removing questions that have answers, I think.

I think I did it in the past on an other SE site. Maybe it's not possible anymore.

Some cards are lost or consumed when you play them. When you play a normal card it goes into you discard pile and the next round you'll get that card again.
Some card have a one time use ability. After you play that card and use the ability (top or bottom half of the card, in this case the bottom part) that has the icon the card goes into your lost pile. The cards in your lost pile cannot reappear in your hand.
When you take the resting action you can  regain the cards from your discard pile to your draw pile. By resting you put a random card from your draw pile to your lost pile.

This card lets you regain a card from your lost pile and add it to your discard pile. For doing this you have to sacrifice this card (place it in the lost pile) . When this card is in your lost pile you cannot recover it, independent of how it ended up in your lost pile .
So the  icon means that when played you have to place this card in the lost pile and the  icon means you cannot regain this card with a  ability, no matter how it ended up on the lost pile (resting, playing or other events).

Would anything be practically different if the card only had the  "Cannot Recover" icon and not the "Lost or Consumed" icon?

"This card lets you regain a card from your lost pile and add it to your discard pile. " - This I think is wrong. When you recover, you recover to your hand, not to discard pile. The rules say: "Certain abilities allow a player to recover discarded or lost ability cards. This means that the player can look through his or her discard or lost pile (or discarded or lost cards in his or her active area), select up to a number of cards specified in the ability, and immediately return them to his or her hand."


text:
Is there a rule to prevent infinite games?
It is possible for player to keep repeating the same moves. Chess has a Threefold repetition rule and  Fifty-move rule.
Are there similar rules for Hive? If no, how (in the context of tournaments) are the issues those rules are designed to address tackled in Hive? Note, that hive has something called "tournamets rules" (which prohibit placing a bee as one's first move), so I'm assumuing there are tournamets.
I found a similar question being asked here but no reasonable answer were given.

This is covered in the rules

A draw may be agreed if both players are in a position where they are
  forced to move the same two pieces over and over again, without any
  possibility of the stalemate being resolved.


text:
Consume power usage clarification
The rulebook says in the "Consume" section:

Each consume power can be used only once in a consume phase. Some powers allow multiple goods, “up to” some number, to be discarded, with each good producing an effect. Such powers must be fully used, if possible, when invoked.

Thus, a player with a tableau containing three novelty goods, New
    Vinland, and Free Trade Association, cannot consume two goods
    using FTA’s power (to consume up to 3 novelty goods for 1 VP
    and a card apiece) and then, based on the cards received, decide
    to consume the third novelty good using New Vinland’s power (to
    consume a good for two

Let's consider a slighty modified example: The player has a tableau containing two novelty goods, New Vinland, and Free Trade Association. Since FTA power cannot be fully used because the player does not have three novelty goods, the player decide to use it to consume just one novelty good. The rules above do not forbid that. Then the player uses the New Vinland power for the remaining novelty good.
If the rules intention was to forbid that, they would say instead of "Such powers must be fully used, if possible, when invoked" something to the effect "Such powers must consume as many matching goods as the player has, up to the specified number".
Did I get this right? I'd like an authorative source, please.

You got it wrong. The card itself says "discard UP TO 3 novelty goods...", which when combined with the quoted rule means that you have to discard/consume as many as possible.

Also, the quoted example says if you have three you can't [just] consume two! I get what you're trying to do, from a gameplay perspective, but you have to find another way to do it. As another player said on BGG: "you may choose the order that you use your consume powers which can result in having active consume powers and goods remaining on planets, due to the powers having a restrictive type"

No.
You are reading too much into this rule. “Fully used if possible” can also be understood as “used as much as possible”.
Now, let's assume your interpretation is the correct one. Using the boardstate you described minus the New Vinland. You could consume only one good (or even 0 by arguing that it is not more than 3), which is against the spirit of the rules (you must consume as much as possible).
So, while I do not have an authorative source, I can say that your interpretation is not the intended one.

To the extent that the app is authoritative, my 3000+ plays require you to consume as many goods as possible.

(that is, if the rule book isn't authoritative enough!)

@TheChaz2.0 the rule book is. And it says the opposite to what you are saying. I guess, it's a case of bad wording on the rulebook part. Thank you for contributing.


text:
What is the best way to learn chess strategy and tactics?
I am interested in learning chess.  I am already familiar with the rules of the game, but I am very weak when it comes to tactics and strategy.
I am afraid that if I just register at chess.com and start playing games, my ability to improve to my chess score will be limited by the fact that I won't understand the reasons for my losses.
On the other hand, I don't feel like there is anything worth doing well that you can completely learn from reading a book.  I'm also just not sure how to find the book that is right for me.  Most books seem to either be for beginners that don't know what the pieces do, or for rather advanced players whose techniques just don't apply to me yet.
Also, I don't own a Windows machine, so running Chessmaster or Fritz would be difficult, though not out of the question.

See How important is memorizing chess openings in casual play? and What are good resources or techniques to improve one's offence or finishing game?.  Different questions, but with pretty much the same answer.

Also the tutorials in Chessmaster (which is available for Mac also) are really good - that's how I started learning however many years ago.  Finally, I can't recommend chesstempo.com highly enough.

gnuchess and xboard are available for almost all Unix-based platforms, including OS X.

When I started working on my chess, I improved a lot just by playing at least one game a day with more experienced tournament players who would point out reasons why I lost afterwards.  It was definitely more efficient than just reading chess books, which I did on the side.  If there is a chess club nearby, you should definitely check it out.
I am guessing from your focus on online chess sites, books, and chess softwares that playing over the board with a human opponent is not an option.  On chess.com, you can ask if your opponent would want to discuss the game afterwards.  Even if that does not work out, just by playing alone you are already building up your collection of chess patterns.  In my case, I learned the dangers of the Nc7 fork, vulnerability of the f7-pawn, the Q+N smothered mate combination, among others just by having them inflicted on me.  After you have fallen victim, say, of the Nc7 fork several times, it will be so much harder for your next opponent to pull the same tactical trick on you.  You may even be the one to inflict the Nc7 fork in your next game.  There is no substitute for practice.
As for books, you may want to try books with lots of tactical puzzles.  For one thing, you will be actively solving problems rather than passively absorbing information.  And for another, the time you spent working on tactics will pay immediate dividends at the board.  To get started, you may want to look at Heisman's annotated list of chess books.  The link jumps straight to the section on tactics, but you should definitely check out the rest of the page as well.
I hope that helps.

At my low level I would say that in game of chess strategy is secondary one should concentrate on tactics a good site to do it is http://www.chesstempo.com/

I also am very bad at chess, but one thing that has helped me improve somewhat in both chess and Go is reviewing my own games.  After I finish, I go back over it and see, with the benefit of hindsight, what I could have done better.  This works even better if you have someone more experienced (perhaps the opponent from that game) to reveiw it with you.
Also, I agree that books are of limited help.  But readin and then playing a game and actively trying to apply what you read about does seem to help me.
With that said, I am very much a beginner myself, so take everything with a grain of salt.

One really cool way to learn chess solo is "Bobby Fischer Teaches Chess". It's and older book, but if you can find it I believe you'll find the effort worthwhile. It starts with mate in one problems and progresses to mate in 3, using a

To learn a game like chess, the very best is to have a teacher, friends to play, and maybe a chess club to play at.  a very good chess teacher can be $75/hour however, registering for USCF membership is $50/year to play rated chess games at a chess club.
I'll stick more to books, software, and websites, since that is what I have more experience with.
Currently, I'm trying to study chess myself and these articles by Dan Heisman are the best I've found on the subject.
Dan Heisman's General Book Guide, Chess Books and Prerequisites,
An Improvement Plan
Currently my study plan would be (as an advanced beginner)

Puzzles

Chess: 5334 Problems, Combinations, and Games (book)
Chess Tactics for Beginners (software)
ChessProblems.com (website)

Theory

Teach Yourself Chess (book)
Chess Mentor (software)
Chess Magnet School (website)

Play

handheld chess computer
ChessMaster (software)
Internet Chess Club or Free Internet Chess Server (internet services)

I am going to have to agree with the comments above, go to a chess site and play a few games, try to find an opponent that will explain what they did after the game is over.  On sites like chessworld.net, your opponent can see your score, and if you ask honestly what you should have done, most will tell you.
In a lot of cases when I found those willing to help, I challenged them to another game, and it involved running dialog...  Probably not fair games, but it did help to see what they were doing at the time they were doing it.


text:
How do I replace lost plastic tiles for Scrabble?
Two of the letter tiles from my Hungarian language Scrabble set are lost.  These are bright gray plastic tiles with the letters etched and painted on them.  Is there a way I can obtain replacement for just those tiles?
Obviously I'm interested only if replacement is significantly cheaper than buying a complete new set.

Try emailing Hasbro.  It is a bit hard to find where to contact customer support.  This should work:
https://hasbro-new.custhelp.com/app/ask


text:
what game is it?
I got this 2nd hand game/toy from a friend, but he also doesn't know what's the name or company that produce such games:

The rule is obvious and it's really not easy.
Is there a name for such game? Is there a company producing similar games?

You might have better luck at https://puzzling.stackexchange.com. Though I don’t know for sure if they allow identification questions, this is definitely more of a puzzle than a board game.

The concept is similar to the one used in the game Ubongo.

A similar piece can be seen here in the form of a toy that came with a comic magazine in 2001: https://www.comics.org/issue/330386/cover/4/

This is a SmartGames IQ-Puzzler or a very similar game. The SmartGames version comes with a book of puzzles which start you of with one or more pieces already in the grid, and then you have to fill the rest of the spaces. The easiest puzzles have only three or so pieces to fit, the hardest ones have just one piece already in the grid.
What you may not have realised is that the pieces can also be used to form a square-based pyramid, and there are also a number of puzzles based on completing the pyramid given a starting configuration.

thx very much! how difficult is the puzzle above?

@athos that would depend on the player ;)

@DarkCygnus I mean, just like LEGO, it has a note “4-6 years old”...


text:
Where can I find a database with a list of all magic cards?
I am going to write a program to manage my library of Magic cards and I am looking for a database file or list of all of the cards that have been released.  I know that the Gathering site is useful, but it limits the number of cards I can return in a search.  I would happily accept a spreadsheet file, database file, or even a text file.
The more information contained in the database, the better.  Having associated images would just be fantastic, but at this point I would settle for names and basic stats of the cards.

Cockatrice just scrubs Gatherer set-by-set when you set it up. Their code to do it should be open-source (you'll want to look at the oracle tool).

Note that technically you'd be breaking Wizard's terms of service if you scrape all the images from Gatherer. I'm sure you don't care about that if it's for personal use only…

I'm guessing half the fun for you will be building the program, but just in case you didn't know, if you're using Windows, the Magic the Gathering Online client can also track collections offline. You might want to check that out because it is possible to export a csv collection file.

And for those who don't take fun in programming their own tool and still need to manage their library, there are also online tools to do so. I'm using deckbox but I assume there are others as well.

Please see my comment on the other question for why I'm voting to close this one as a duplicate of it.

I think the other one is the duplicate, considering that it is 3 days old and this one is a year and a half in age.

@ChristopherRayl, Both questions are identical. Why is one closed as off-topic instead of duplicate? If it's indeed off-topic, it's off-topic for both questions.

You can grab a complete list here it's in .xls too! I have downloaded a copy but it looks to be someone's personal list and might disappear at any time. I don't have the ability to attach a file yet so download it quick!
If that is not what you want then your best bet would be Cockatrice but be aware of breaking the Gatherer ToS.

Where are the Gatherer TOS?

@ikegami http://gatherer.wizards.com/pages/content.aspx?x=mtg/gatherer/termsofuse

as an alternative, you can also get the full set of cards in JSON format - including all sets, languages, printings and detailed information - from this website: http://mtgjson.com/
This website also provided information to work with its associated site for serving images, found here: http://mtgimage.com. Unfortunately however, subsequently this website has been shut down by WotC.
this websites appears to be designed specifically for developers, with explanations of what each property in the JSON objects means.

I was playing with this over the weekend and it works quite well, there are a couple of hiccups to look out for. the "booster" attribute of each set object didn't play well with the library I used (Newtonsoft Json). And contrary to my first implementation, converted mana costs cannot be integers. Thanks unhinged!

As of march 10th, mtgimage.com was shut down and is no longer offering images for Magic the Gathering cards.

updated my answer to reflect this. shame it was taken down!

@Patters, Was it even legal? It doensn't stand a chance against MTG.

Here is it in XML and ASCII, complete from what I gather.

Appears to be actively maintained.

For people that are still searching for a program to save you set, put in trade cards and or make a wishlist. I found this awesome site that does exactly that! http://deckbox.org/.
After you have listed all of your cards, you can even see the value of your set.

I was thinking of building a similar tool to the OP. I want my collection organized by which deck each card is in, with the possibility of proxies. Does Deckbox provide this?

Sort of. You can put decklists in Deckbox, and see how many of each card is in your inventory. Unfortunately, you cannot 'tag' cards to see in which deck they are, or how many you are using across your decks.

I have not seen anyone mention this one. But MTG Studio (http://www.mtgstudio.com/) has what you are looking for. I use it to manage my collection.


text:
Computer Scrabble UI & communication protocol?
I've recently gotten into playing Scrabble and I was wondering, what's the deal with Scrabble programs? I come from the world of computer chess where chess engines are distributed independently from the user interface (UI). The engines communicate with the UI with one of two standards: the Chess Engine Communication Protocol, aka. the XBoard protocol, or the Universal Chess Interface, UCI. Now I'm wondering if Scrabble has anything like that?
Programming a simple Scrabble bot would seem like a funny exercise, but I'd rather not delve into the boring UI creation. So are there any free programs that would just display a game of Scrabble but would accept the commands from and relay them to an external program? The program should also enable the user to play against an engine. Maybe I'm using the wrong keywords or something, but Google doesn't seem to give me anything relevant.

I've also looked for such a thing, but there doesn't seem to be one. PyScrabble is a possibility but its protocol is not designed for interoperability. I ended up adding some features to a friend's web scrabble program to allow programmatic access.

The most widely used interchange format for Scrabble games is documented at
http://poslfit.com/scrabble/gcg/
It's used for example by cross-tables.com, Quackle, (Mike Wolfberg's program) WHAT, and proprietary software for webcasts of national and world championships.
The so-called .gcg (for "generic crossword game") format is a human-editable
text file with one line per move played so far in the game, with a list of
pragmata for identifying players, current rack if game in progress, etc.

Cool, thanks! Seems like it would be a good idea indeed to have a Scrabble program output its moves in the .gcg format. I'm still unsure if any of those programs can display the moves live and relay the response back, but I should be able to work that out now that I know what I'm dealing with. :)

WordBiz is a simple and efficient Scrabble playing program with a reasonnably big community.
See the I.S.C. website.

OK, thanks. So that's for playing live online games, but can that be used offline as well, for playing against an opponent (an artificial intelligence) on the same computer?

There is no I.A. as far as I remember.
An I.A. for Scrabble should not be very difficult to code.
However, I doubt that it would be very much interesting to play against it.
Being a chess player, you will probably want to play stategically and most element of strategy in Scrabble are based on things like « I do not think my opponent can find a 30+ word in 3 minutes so I will play this 15 points words and pressurized him while I think of something better with my new letters ».

But if I created that AI, would it be possible to connect that with WordBiz so that I could play against my AI? Being a programmer too, creating the AI would be an interesting challenge in itself, even if it turned out to be a lousy opponent.

There are bots on ISC, so it must be possible. But I don't know how.


text:
Are airplanes involved in defense if they are on an aircraft carrier?
In AAA, if you are defending against a sea attack, and you are defending with an aircraft carrier, do the airplanes on the carrier contribute to the battle or are they considered cargo? The rulebook doesn't seem to define a specific rule for this scenario.

The air units that are on an aircraft carrier participate in the defense, they are not considered cargo. On page 20 of the rulebook under Order of Play.

Air Units: A given air unit may participate in the sea combat or the land combat portion of the amphibious assault; it may not do both. The attacking player must declare the air units involved in the land and sea combats and cannot change their assignments later. Attacking air units, whether involved in the sea or land combat, may retreat
according to the normal rules. Defending fighters on aircraft carriers can defend only in the sea combat. Defending air units in a territory can defend only in the land combat.

And in the Appendix (page 30) under Aircraft Carrier, or (page 27) under Fighter the example image.

The Sinking of a Defending Carrier: The attacking Japanese submarine sinks the U.K. carrier, then submerges after the defenders Fire. Both the U.S. and U.K. Fighters can Fly 1 space to safety. They can land at New Zealand (a friendly territory), or on the U.S. carrier (a friendly carrier). Otherwise they are destroyed.
Fighter Defense: Whenever a carrier is attacked, its fighters (even those belonging to friendly powers) are considered to be defending in the air and can be chosen as casualties rather than the carrier. (However, a fighter can’t be chosen as a casualty from a submarine hit, because submarines can attack only sea units. See Submarines, on page 32.)

and from the online FAQ:

If my fighters are on an ally's carrier, when do they move and fight?
Your fighters move along with the carrier when it moves. They can't fly out to attack on your ally's turn, but they fight normally if the carrier's sea zone is attacked. If the carrier moves into an enemy sea zone to attack, however, your fighters can't be part of the attack but they can be taken as losses, if you agree to sacrifice them.

Depends on your version. I am playing the 1981 version where the rulebook has 31 numbered pages not including the back cover. There is a misprint on page 13 in the illustration showing where a tank can and cannot blitz (The tank cannot blitz in either illustration as there is an industrial complex preventing blitz).
On this page, (p.13), under "Aircraft Carriers: "...Fighters belonging to a friendly power on board another power's carrier (guest fighters) must remain on board as cargo in the carrier moves in this phase. (Combat Movement) They cannot take part in combat and are destroyed if the carrier is destroyed."
That seems to refer only to attacking, as on page 26, under "Aircraft Carriers" it states: "...Fighter Defense: Whenever a carrier is attacked, its fighters (even those belonging to friendly powers) are considered to be defending in the air and fight normally..."
So there you have it: All fighters on aircraft carriers DEFEND but only fighters which belong to the same power as the aircraft carrier may ATTACK.
You could also choose to have the fighters fly to another battle or location away from the battle and return to the aircraft carrier (if it is still there!) after battle resolves.


text:
Formal Format for Documenting the Game Design Process
Is there a formal format for documenting the game design process?
Before you answer with "The Game Design Document (GDD), of course!", in my opinion (and lots of people's opinions as well, I think) a GDD is used for presenting a finalized product, and not documenting the actual game design process.
What I need is a tool to aid me in the process of designing a game. It has to have some sort of categorization of ideas (e.g. in the set of elements that Greg Costikyan has proposed, it could have sections for goals, resources, challenges, etc., although it doesn't necessarily have to fit Costikyan's ideas), it has to be aimed towards the iterative design process (which means that it has to have inherent non-linear capabilities, non-existent in the GDD format) and it has to be as universal as possible (suitable for both video games or board games).
If such a tool doesn't exist, I propose to start a collaborative effort from the game designer community, working towards creating it, producing a tool that's as standard and universal as possible.
P.S. Although the formalization of the game design process has been proposed several times, the closest I could find to a formal format is this document.

Is there any reason to believe that there is a canonical process for game design?  It seems to me like asking for 'the template for writing'; there are generalizations that can be made and even documents that could be created that could help some people, but no tool is going to be one-size-fits-all.  Maybe you want something like Jesse Schell's Book Of Lenses (and the accompanying deck of cards)?

Right, but I'm not asking for a template or a canonical process. What I'm asking for is a tool of the nature of — for example — a Venn Diagram, or a Mind Map, both of which are not by any means templates or canonical tools, but they can be used as general purpose tools for writing, regardless of genre, form or style.

About the book of lenses: not quite so. It is a design framework, not a tool per se.

Maybe this won't answer your question either, but it might get us closer.

First, a short glance at Jason Bakker's "A GDD Template for the Indie Developer" will stress the need for Breaking down components, keeping it simple, lists are a great tool for knowing what you'll do (as in a To Do or shopping list). Analysis itself being key in the process of game creation.
Second, I would suggest a good look at Stone Librande's suggestion of "One Page Designs". Stressing the need to show the relationship between elements in a more visual way.

Still, I agree with Steven, no tool will ever fit all needs. So:

Lastly, I would add a key component to the process of Game Design: Document Design itself. So we keep this ever-evolving and so that every project has the right document to it. Making the document is the process itself. A living document, changing all along the project.

I happened to come across this post in my daily search for innovative game design ideas. You might want to try this from lost garden. I am curious as to what you think? The original document you posted I use for developing large quantities of game concepts, so I am not sure if it exactly ideal for describing the design process. I would be interested though in helping to create a template for documenting the game design process. If your looking for a game design document template you try this one out.


text:
Do you infect the city you are scoring?
One of the cities has the ability:

Play immediately: Draw one card for each city you are infecting.

Do you draw a card for that city?

I believe the answer is no. Is there any confirmation of this?

No, you do not.
The designer has confirmed this here.

There are a few city cards which are play immediately and refer to the number of cities you currently infect. Does that include the current city card you are in the middle of resolving? or just all the other city cards where you have cubes?

For question one: it does not include the current city card you are resolving. It has been eradicated, so no longer among the living.


text:
Handling dwindling supplies in Splendor
Splendor is a great game, but the rules were written sub-optimally.
The following quotes the rules that specify what actions a player can take on his turn:

On their turn, a player must choose to perform only one of the following four actions.

Take 3 gem tokens of different colors.
Take 2 gem tokens of the same color. This action is only possible if there are at least 4 tokens of the chosen color left when the player takes them.
Reserve 1 development card and take 1 gold token (joker).
Purchase 1 face-up development card from the middle of the table or a previously reserved one.

As written, it's not hard to get into a situation where it's impossible to perform a legal turn. I presume you can pass if you can't perform any of the actions, but there might be other options.

Can you reserve a development card if there is no gold left (taking the development card without gaining gold)?
Can you take gems if there are fewer than three colors of gems left (taking one from each of the remaining colors)?

doh! Always find the answer after posting

Note - there is a limit of ten tokens per player, to be reconciled at the end of each turn. (I'm sure you know this - just leaving it for future visitors)

Aha! From the designer's web site,

I cannot take three tokens, and the two remaining stacks are less than four tokens high. Can I take tokens anyway?
The action "take three different tokens" allows you to pick only two different tokens, or even one.

So it's yes to #2. One would imagine it's yes to #1 too.

Yes you can still reserve without being able to get a gold (some disadvantage: you get the card, but not the gold)
Yes you can still take gem tokens when there are fewer than three colors left (obviously you might get fewer than normal).

Combining these two leads to a useful money-starvation strategy (esp. in 3-player games) if there is some critical color needed for either the nobles or the middle/top row cards. Reserve up to three of the critical color-generating cards (from any rows) and leave the other player with junk in the first row and excessively expensive junk in the middle row. When you run of gold, the other players are then forced to either buy junk, pick up useless color coins, reserve without getting gold, or even gamble by reserving a random (face-down) card.
Even better if you time things so that when you do purchase the cards you've reserved and return useful coins to the supply, they are near their 10-coin limit so can't (net) pick up many coins in that turn, letting you try to get your useful money back before they can get it :) and continue the money-starvation for even more rounds (you can't do that with 4+ players, someone will pick up the useful money).
In a 3-player game, if two of you collude you can mess up the third player.
In one extreme case of a game I played, 10 of the 12 face-up cards ended up being black-producing, which was totally useless for nobles and top row.

"Even better if you time things so that when you do purchase the cards you've reserved and return useful coins to the supply, they are near their 10-coin limit so can't pick up in that turn" The rules say that a player cannot have more than 10 tokens at the end of their turn. So they can still take the useful tokens, they just have to discard some of their less useful tokens at the end of their turn.

@Acccumulation: yes, to be precise we should say "taking net 3 coins" - the point is that taking 3 coins but having to put 1 or 2 back is usually a waste of that player's turn - especially if those are colors they didn't want to take previously. Hence, this is a starvation strategy.

You said "return useful coins to the supply, they are near their 10-coin limit so can't pick up in that turn" If the tokens they have aren't useful, and you just returns useful ones to the supply, then picking up 3 tokens and putting three back is not a waste of a turn.

@Acccumulation: yes but like I said that only happens when those are colors they did want to take previously but weren't available in previous turns. And even then, picking up (say) 1 net coin is not very useful. You're right that I should edit my terminology though.

ikegami is correct - the answer to both is yes.  Taking a card to your reserve without receiving a corresponding gold is inefficient to your strategy but is definitely an option.  You can always take one each of three different colors; the rule you're mentioned simply indicates it's not legal to take two of the same color gem unless there's at least 4 in the stack at the time you take your two during your turn.

Yes you can do both.  Here's a thing being over looked i think.  If you are at your 10 coin limit, you can still reserve and get the gold (if available) or draw tokens.  You rlthen have to put tokens back to be at your ten token limit.  Also you can't reserve more than three cards

"Yes you can do both" and two unrelated comments do not amount to an answer.

@ikegami: that's a bit harsh. I believe mike wants to confirm #1 & #2 and also add a comment. The comment is a valid one, related to #2 and about as off-topic as the upvoted answer explaining the money starvation strategy. One may ignore this answer. But downvotes for factually correct answer are exaggerated, imho.

@cfi, Yes, it's technically an answer. What I meant is that it's a completely useless answer to just say "yes" and repeating the question as an answer. I was hoping he'd actually provide the basis for his answer, but it looks like he pulled it out of his thin air. /// No, the limit on the number of cards you can reserve has no bearing on either questions. The question is about what happens when you do reserve a card; it's not about when you can reserve card.

@ikegami: (A) The question (both parts) are clearly asked as yes/no questions and there's no reason that a valid answer must have anything else but a simple "yes" or "no". (B) You're overseeing the fact that mike points out that you are allowed to take three coins, then drop others to get again down to the limit of ten. And that addresses the second part of the question. Mike's point btw is that none of the other answers takes this into account. And my point is: This answer is not factually incorrect, and it is on-topic. Therefore it is imho inappropriate to downvote.

@cfi, There is not only a reason; there's a very good reason: There's no way to evaluate an answer that's just "yes" or "no". That makes them extremely poor answers. /// Re "You're overseeing the fact that mike points out that you are allowed to take three coins,  then drop others to get again down to the limit of ten.", The questions are about when there are not enough resources to take, not what happens when you take too many resources.


text:
Can you combine the Ring and the Revolver to attack?
Can you combine the Ring and the Revolver to attack? One of the heroes was attacking with a line of direct sight with the Revolver and was using the +1 die bonus from the Revolver. They also had the Ring and claimed that they could use the Ring to roll for Sanity instead of Speed while still using the +1 bonus from the Revolver and attacking with a direct line of sight from the Revolver. Is this correct? Or can one only use the Ring or the Revolver, not both?

Initially asked by @Samantha Fariss here as part of a multi-question Question that was reduced to a single question.

No. You can use the Ring or the Revolver, but not both.
The Ring reads:

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

The Revolver reads:

You can use the Revolver to attack with Speed instead of Might. [...]

If you use the Ring, you are attacking with Sanity (not Might), so you can't use the Revolver.
If you use the Revolver, you are attacking with Speed (not Might), so you can't use the Ring.
In practical terms, one can attack an opponent's mind using the Ring, or one can shoot an opponent's brains out using the Revolver, but one can't attack someone's mind with a bullet, and one can't blow someone's brains out without something physical.

They [...] claimed that they could use the Ring to roll for Sanity instead of Speed while still using the +1 bonus from the Revolver

That's outright incorrect. The Revolver's bonus dice applies specifically to Speed attacks.

Roll 1 additional die on your Speed attack roll


text:
Roll a 7, move robber AND play knight and move the robber again in the same turn
Lately while playing Catan I've been in situation of rolling a 7 and having a knight development card in my hand.
Is it legal for me to move the robber due to the 7 and then play a knight and move the robber again all in the same turn?

Yes, that is legal. You may play the knight at any time during your turn, including before rolling.

Yes you can. There is no restriction on playing a Knight card if you have already moved the Robber via a roll of '7'. From the Rulebook.

b) Playing Development Cards - At any time during your turn, you play one Development Card (on the table). That card, however, may not be a card that you bought during the same turn!
Knight (aka Soldier) Cards (red frame) - If you play a Knight Card, you must immediately move the robber. See "Rolling a '7' and Activating the Robber" above and follow steps 1 and 2.

I would add that in the Cities and Knights variant, this can be a particularly nasty tactic, since you can bounce the robber around a number of times.  In competitive games, I love to do so if I get an early metropolis (and no other cities) to deactivate my knights when the barbarians are close to landing.

It is legal. But to add to what others have said, sometimes it may be advantageous for you to play a knight card before you roll.
Let's say the robber occupies a land tile connected to one of your cities or settlements. By playing your knight card and moving the robber you get to collect any cards that the robber would have otherwise blocked, or deny your opponents any cards they may have otherwise collected.
Otherwise, if you roll first, and you roll a number that's occupied by the robber, you lose any cards that you would have otherwise collected if you played the knight card (and moved the robber) before you rolled.

Furthermore, you open up the possibility of the target hex producing for your opponents if/when you wait till after rolling. (Of course, maybe you're hoping to steal said resource with the robber, but it's better to just deprive the opponent of the opportunity, IMO)


text:
Addon for Risk with cards
I remember download a file in the emule some 15 years ago, with a lot of cards that works as an addon for Risk. For e.g., one card give you terrorism so you can attack from Irak to some region in US, or sattelite, so you can jump a region to attack another one.
Some one knows anything about it? Name, location to download, or anything?
Some similar addons will be value also.
Thanks a lot!

Have you had a look here:  (Files section)http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/181/risk

Well I didn't think it because (sorry for the elipsis) the addon was a very handwork, it was not for selling. But the link can help me to find another ones, thanks

I know of Risk AD 2210 that uses cards like invade from moon that lets you invade earth from the moon etc. Maybe it's some early variant of it?

On Cardboard Republic I found a print and play version of an out of print unofficial expansion with action cards called One World Dominion.
Though it does not have the exact cards you describe, it seems to fit the bill.

is really really near to that addon, pretty similar


text:
What happens to destroyed districts in Citadels?
In Citadels when you destroy someone's district with the warlord it isn't clear what you do with the card. Does it return to the bottom of the district deck? This is the only other place district cards seem to go, other than player's hands and being in play.

It seems Fantasy Flight Games has never officially ruled on this, even though the question has been asked multiple times since the release of the game. However, there have been discussions from players about where the district card goes.
Board Game Geek
In this forum on BGG most people seem to agree that "Discarded/destroyed cards go to the bottom of the District (draw) deck." There is one person who says that they play with a discard pile, although a discard pile is never mentioned in the official rules.
Also on BGG, a user rewrote the character cards to "prevent ambiguity." He added this line to the Warlord:

Place the destroyed district to the bottom of the District Deck face-down.

If you scroll down through the comments, nobody challenges this even though there is discussion about some of the other reworded character cards.
The third place on BGG where this sentiment can be found is here. About halfway down, user Mark Biggar notes that cards destroyed by the Warlord are "discarded" to the bottom of the District deck. There is no dissension on this thread, either.
Fantasy Flight Games Forums
The other place I could find any mention of this was on the FFG Forums. This thread is pretty bad. It has this badly worded question (emphasis mine):

If the Warlord destroys one of your districts does it go back into your hand or at the bottom of the discard pile?

This is accompanied by a comment that doesn't really address the OP's question. This doesn't seem to really help with deciding where the destroyed district goes.
Conclusion
The consensus from BGG seems to be districts destroyed by the Warlord go to the bottom of the District deck. I'd go with this as the answer to your question.

Does the District deck ever get exhausted in a normal game of Citadels?  I can't really remember it doing so, which makes me think the question may be rather academic...

@thesunneversets I've seen it happen in a 7-player game, but it isn't really that common. I suppose with the right districts in play, players may end up digging through more cards when drawing. And realistically, the Warlord isn't destroying a large amount of districts every game. So you're probably right; it is rare that recycling destroyed districts would even have a serious impact on the game.

Since the magician lets you return your hand to draw a hand of the same size, if you want one of the rare purple cards which gains you victory points equal to the number of cards in your hand, you could spend all your turns drawing 1, exchanging until you find it! Not saying its a good tactic, just that drawing an ever increasing number of cards a turn would quickly get through the deck!

@Nick if you continuously take the Magician you are bound to be murdered, robbed or worse before you can pull of that trick! :) Welcome to Citadels.

The rules/cards always say to put cards back at the bottom of the draw pile. Chances of actually seeing those cards again in a single game are extremely rare. There may be one card that lets you look through the draw pile, hence, you should be able to find any cards put back there. Since the rules never mention any other piles, that means you cannot create your own piles (and in this case, a discard pile). So the debate would be if you destroy a card, does it go to the bottom of the draw pile or the box (and out of the game completely)? And with that, the general consensus and common method of play is to put the card underneath the draw pile.


text:
cooperative game that is NOT like pandemic, forbidden island et al
The cooperative games I have played (pandemic, forbidden island, ghost story) share very similar mechanics in which players have to deal with different threats as fast as they can or they loose.
Is there any other good cooperative game without that rush-playing style? I would like to try something that allows players to use more long term and complex strategies.

Recommendation questions are off-topic per our [faq].  They don't fit well with the StackExchange format of Q&A and are better suited for a regular forum.  Thanks!

You have Sherlock Holmes Consulting Detective, in which the goal is to find the truth in the smallest number of steps. You can never lose to SHCD, you can simple have a very bad score.
In Shadows over Camelot, each quest will give you either white or black swords. The game ends when the players collected 12 swords or more and they win if more than half of them are white.
And my favourite: Les Mousquetaires du Roy (Ye King's Musketeers) is a semi-cooperative in which a player incarnates Milady, the evil spy of the Cardinal of Richelieu and all the others play Athos, Portos, Aramis, D'Artagnan and/or Tréville. Quests will reward the players but as they don't play against the game but against another player, the game isn't quite like a usual cooperative game.
The game can be a 1-vs-0 up to 5-vs-0 game, or a 1-vs-1 up to 5-vs-1 game.

Isn't SOC similar to Pandemic/Forbidden Island in the "rush-playing style." There are catapults, attacking hordes, dragons, the grail sinking into dispair...

Yes, it may be considered as such, but the fact that 1) you can give up quests if you don't mind having some black swords and 2) there might be a traitor, make it different. It's only my personal opinion, not a rule.

les mousquetaires du roy sounds quite interesting. thanks


text:
How are skill check modifiers prioritized and ordered in Arkham Horror?
Time and time again, skill checks in Arkham Horror have been made without remembering to include certain factors, such as environments and the presence of stat-modifying items.  For organizational purposes, is there a flowchart by which all the skill check modifiers can be ordered and accounted for so that none may be missed?
For example, Combat Checks can be processed in the following order:

If the monster is Dark Pharoah then the base stat is Lore
Take the base stat of Fight if not set already
Look for skills that affect base stat of Fight
Look for allies that affect base stat of Fight
Look for Mythos environments that affect base stat of Fight (e.g. Heat Wave)
Look for skills that negate Physical, Magical, or Weapon Immunity
Look for allies that negate Physical, Magical, or Weapon Immunity
Look for tradeable items that negate Physical, Magical, or Weapon Immunity
Check if the monster has Physical, Magical, or Weapon Immunity
Look for skills that negate Physical, Magical, or Weapon Resistance
Look for allies that negate Physical, Magical, or Weapon Resistance
Check if the monster has Physical, Magical, or Weapon Resistance
Look for items that passively affect combat without being equipped (e.g. Cross against Undead)
Ask the player for non-combat spells that affect stats (e.g. Voice of Ra)
Ask the player for equipped common items, unique items, or spells
For each equipped investigator card, apply relevant immunity unless negated
For each equipped investigator card, apply relevant resistance unless negated
Subtract monster's combat rating
Subtract bonus combat rating from Ancient One
Roll the skill check value
If Mandy is an investigator and her ability hasn't been exhaused then ask whether the player would like to invoke "the Mandy ability"
Check the number of successes via state of Blessedness/Cursedness
Double successes scored with 6 in case Shotgun was used
If there are no successes:
Look for skills that allow re-rolls (e.g. Marksman)
Look for allies that allow re-rolls
Look for items that allow re-rolls (e.g. Bullwhip)
If Mandy is an investigator and her ability hasn't been exhaused then ask whether the player would like to invoke "the Mandy ability"
Check the number of successes via state of Blessedness/Cursedness
Double successes scored with 6 in case Shotgun was used
Ask for clue tokens if the player wants additional dice
Add an extra die for every Fight skill
Add an extra die for every clue token if Joe is the investigator
If there are no successes:
Look for skills that allow re-rolls (e.g. if the original value was 7, and 3 clue tokens were spent, Marksman would roll 10 instead)
Look for allies that allow re-rolls
Look for items that allow re-rolls (e.g. Bullwhip)
Roll the skill check value
If Mandy is an investigator and her ability hasn't been exhaused then ask whether the player would like to invoke "the Mandy ability"
Check the number of successes via state of Blessedness/Cursedness
Double successes scored with 6 in case Shotgun was used

I don't even know whether the above flowchart covers all the cases.  And this is only for the Combat Skill Check alone.  In the Arkham Horror Wiki (http://www.arkhamhorrorwiki.com/Skill_check), Step number one for making a Skill Check involves getting the value of a skill check involving all relevant factors, but there's no mention of the order by which these relevant factors should be processed.
Are there flowcharts for other kinds of Skill Checks besides Combat (i.e. Speed, Sneak, Fight, Will, Lore, Luck, Evade, Horror, Spell)?

With all due respect to the amount of time you put in making that list, I think you may be asking the wrong question.
First of all, there's generally no fixed order or prioritization which requires a flowchart. You add up all the things that affect the modifier, and addition is commutative. If you have things that let you reroll, they can be used in any order you want. That is, the "flowchart" would be:

Add up all modifiers
Roll that many dice and see if you passed
If you failed, consider your options for re-rolling, re-roll if desired/possible, see if you passed, and repeat.

The bulk of your question, then, is just how to make sure you got the modifier right, and perhaps how to make sure you didn't forget a way you can re-roll. And I would argue that your list is not going to help you there, because your list is longer than the number of cards typically in play. It will be faster (and just as reliable) to simply look through everything in play every time a skill check is made than to consult a list like the one you're proposing.
Remember, there are relatively few global cards in play - perhaps an environment, perhaps the ancient one affects skill checks, and other things are very uncommon. Everything else is either on your investigator sheet or the little cards (items + skills + allies) right in front of you, and you can very quickly scan through those, until you start remembering that your shotgun always doubles sixes, and that your dark cloak doesn't affect luck checks.
If you want, you could try to use counters/dice/sliders to remember all the global modifiers (e.g. when the Heat Wave environment appears, set global indicators for fight to -1 and lore to +1), but that gives you yet another thing to remember to do (adjust those indicators when environments change) so honestly, you might as well just look at the environment card every time if you're having trouble remembering. Same goes for everything else - you could perhaps keep track of your current net stats, but it's easier said than done.
So, in general, just try to get all the players to keep an eye on everything, and probably someone will notice if you slip up. Keep your cards in consistent places: environments always in the same place, organize your items into combat and non-combat items. And don't worry so much - if you realize after the fact, you can probably either fix it or just let it slide.

"Remember, there are relatively few global cards in play - perhaps an environment, perhaps the ancient one affects skill checks, and other things are very uncommon."  Ugh, I knew I forgot to include something: Ancient One/Herald skill check modifiers (e.g. Lurker's gate closer)!  It's absolutely frustrating for me whenever I remember that I have forgotten about these things; it makes me feel as though my computations have come to naught.  Your comment about the rarity of global effects makes me think that I should get a list of those first, including the one that I just pointed out right now.

@FloydNavarro I'm still confused why you need a list, though - just read everything as it comes into play. If you really don't think it's something you'll remember, keep track of it some other way (with a die/counter/slider like I suggested, or just a piece of paper); otherwise you'll probably remember at least to check it. But a complete list of all possibilities will always be more work than just reading every single card in play. Trying to make such a list is probably a fool's errand.


text:
Immunities/Resistance, Red Sign of Shudde M'ell and Equipment Timing
The spell Red Sign of Shudde M'ell allows an investigator to ignore one of a monster's special abilities other than Magical Immunity, such as Magical Resistance.
I would like to know how the timing of the spell in conjunction with equipment usage affects the value of a combat check.
For instance, an investigator faces a monster of type "Witch" with the special ability Magical Resistance, armed with an Enchanted Knife (+4 combat check, magical weapon) and a Red Sign of Shudde M'ell.  First, the investigator equips the Enchanted Knife, using up one hand, and then equips the Red Sign with the other hand.
How much skill check bonus does the investigator get?  There are two possibilities:
1)  The Enchanted Knife is used against the Witch first, but only gives +2 combat check because of the resistance, so the investigator rolls the two additional dice.  Then the resistance is removed by the Red Sign, giving a total of only 2 bonus.  Since the order in which the items are equipped is important, the player should've tried to cast Red Sign first (because it can fail).
2)  Even though the Red Sign was equipped after the Enchanted Knife, the player must retroactively apply the removal of Magical Resistance against all Magical Weapons equipped in case the Red Sign was successfully cast.  After rolling the two dice for the Enchanted Knife against the magically resistant witch, the investigator can remove those two dice from the pool of rolled dice and then roll an additional four dice to take its place (since the Enchanted Knife would give +4 combat check given the absence of Magical Resistance).
The first case is easier to calculate using a spreadsheet program because more cell values become immutable.  The second one is harder because it involves adding a means to reset the current calculation and a more complicated conditional expression to evaluate all skill check value bonuses depending on the presence and subsequent negation of monster special abilities.
The tactical decisions are more pronounced when there are more hand resources to allocate, such as Marie's third hand for spells.  The player using Marie can decide how to allocate the third hand based on the resulting successes of the rolls resulting from the equipment and Red Sign used for the first two hands.
To recap: How is the Red Sign of Shudde M'ell supposed to affect the value (i.e. number of dice rolled) for a combat check based on the timing of its use?  Does it matter whether you use it first or last?  Why or why not?

There's some value in concise questions, you know...

While generally it doesn't matter, all the dice in a skill checks should be rolled at the same time. So it doesn't matter which order you use various spells and items. (The only corner case I can think of at the moment is the Lucky Cigarette case, which lets you reroll all the dice that you had in the check normally in addition to any that were added to the check due to clue token expenditure, but that's not quite the same situation). It looks like your confusion is arising from your second scenario, in which you roll dice for the skill check as you select additional items to use. You should be looking at everything that's getting used in the battle (weapons, allies, environment, injuries, combat penalty, etc.), figure out the aggregate bonus/penalty, apply that to the base state (Fight, Lore, etc.), and then roll that many dice. So the order in which items are 'applied' is irrelevant.
So the correct scenario is this:
3) If you succeeded at casting Red Sign, the Witch no longer has Magical Resistance, so the Enchanted Knife gives it's full combat bonus of +3 (The +4 is the Enchanted Blade, not the Knife). Adding in your Fight score of (as an example) 3, the Witch's Combat modifier of -3, and (for further example) Tom 'Mountain' Murphy's bonus of +2, you end with a bonus of five, so you roll five dice. Everything gets summed up and everything gets rolled all at once.

There are plenty of other things that let you reroll dice besides the cigarette case, but yes: roll all the normal dice at once.