text:
Icy Manipulator vs Jayemdae Tome?
I was watching this video of some old school magic: https://youtu.be/cEUBkHc36hE?t=911
During player A's untap phase, Player B used an Icy Manipulator to tap Player A's Jayemdae Tome.
I don't understand why this is effective. Why can't Player A use the Jayemdae Tome in response?

Player A could use Jayemdae Tome in response.  But doing so limits their options.
If I counted correctly, Player A has 7 mana sources on the field.  That means that using Jayemdae Tome would use over half their mana.  This will severely cut down their options for what they can do in their turn.  Even if everything in their hand is cheap or useless, this is happening before Player A draws their card for the turn, so they could potentially draw something useful... and then be unable to play it.
Doing so would also shut Player A out of one or more colors, so even if they have enough mana to play the card they draw, they could easily have the wrong mana to do so.
This is especially important if Player A is using a lot of reactionary spells, such as instant speed removal and counterspells, because there's a lot of advantage to be gained by forcing your opponent to play around what you might have in your hand, and that advantage is lost if your opponent knows that you can't play any cards.
Of course, it's also possible that two players are not as strategically observant as they could be, and are just forgetting that that is an option.

A card like the tome is something you want to activate at the end of your opponent's turn. Especially with a blue deck.

@Arthur. More generally, best practice is to wait add long as you possibly can without wasting resources to take any action in the game, as that leaves you with the greatest possible options and gives your opponent the least amount of information. And "The end of the opponent's turn" Is very frequently the last possible moment before you lose access to that round's mana.

Thanks for the rules clarification. Later in the game (33 minute mark), the argument to be conservative with mana is pretty weak. Since at this point player A has at least 13 mana.

Most likely, the Tome player wanted to keep mana open for his pair of Counterspells.
You are correct that the tome player could have responded to the Icy Manipulator activation with his own Tome activation. However, as you can see a few minutes later (only 2 turns per player have passed), the camera pans around to show the hand of the tome player, and we can clearly see 2 Counterspells. Using the tome would have meant he would be able to play only one of them, limiting his options. Drawing a card would have been reasonable, as it still leaves him with the option for 1 Counterspell, but he was taking no risks.


text:
Can a creature with Hexproof be affected by a spell like Sleep?
Let's suppose I have Emrakul, the Promised End in play, equipped with Swiftfoot Boots.  My opponent plays Sleep.  Does Emrakul, the Promised End get tapped or does Hexproof prevent that?

Yes, Emrakul will be tapped.
Hexproof prevents a creature from being targeted by an opponent.  Targeting is a very specific action in Magic, and only happens in three cases:

A spell or ability has the word "target" in its text.
A keyword ability defined in terms of an ability that has the word "target" in its text. (e.g. Equip)
You are casting an Aura Enchantment.

In either of those cases, you cannot choose your opponent's hexproof creature as the target.  But any effect that does not target will affect the hexproof creature just like it would any other creature.
Sleep does not target a creature, only a player, so it will affect Emrakul.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Can I Ghost Quarter to fetch basic land, while tapping my Gemstone Mine for mana using its last counter?
My Gemstone Mine has 1 counter left. I tap it, remove 1 counter to produce B. Is the sacrifice effect a triggered ability -- meaning I have time to Ghost Quarter it and fetch a basic land?

You cannot do this.
Gemstone Mine's ability is a mana ability, which means that it does not use the stack. So it cannot be responded to; by the time you could do anything after activating it, Gemstone Mine would already be in the graveyard, and could not be targeted by Ghost Quarter.

605.1. Some activated abilities and some triggered abilities are mana abilities, which are subject to special rules. Only abilities that meet either of the following two sets of criteria are mana abilities, regardless of what other effects they may generate or what timing restrictions (such as “Activate this ability only any time you could cast an instant”) they may have.

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

605.3b An activated mana ability doesn’t go on the stack, so it can’t be targeted, countered, or otherwise responded to. Rather, it resolves immediately after it is activated.

Note that also you cannot accomplish this by switching the order. If you activate Ghost Quarter's ability first, and then respond to it by using Gemstone Mine, then when Ghost Quarter tries to resolve, it will not resolve because all of its targets are now illegal.

608. Resolving Spells and Abilities

608.2b If the spell or ability specifies targets, it checks whether the targets are still legal. A target that’s no longer in the zone it was in when it was targeted is illegal. Other changes to the game state may cause a target to no longer be legal; for example, its characteristics may have changed or an effect may have changed the text of the spell. If the source of an ability has left the zone it was in, its last known information is used during this process. If all its targets, for every instance of the word “target,” are now illegal, the spell or ability doesn’t resolve. It’s removed from the stack and, if it’s a spell, put into its owner’s graveyard.

If Gemstone Mine's ability were a normal activated ability, instead of a mana ability, (if it didn't produce mana, or if it targeted something), then you would be able to do this, because you could activate Gemstone Mine's ability, then respond to it with Ghost Quarter while the ability was still on the stack.

No.  Gemstone Mine's ability is a mana ability (Rule 605.1), which means it resolves immediately and doesn't use the stack (Rule 405.6).  Because of this, there is never an opportunity to "respond" to the portion of the ability that sacrifices Gemstone Mine.  So you're forced to either produce the mana (and immediately sacrifice Gemstone Mine) or target your land with your Ghost Quarter.
Comprehensive rules references: (emphasis mine)

405.6. Some things that happen during the game don’t use the stack.
405.6c Mana abilities resolve immediately. If a mana ability both produces mana and has another effect, the mana is produced and the other effect happens immediately. If a player had priority before a mana ability was activated, that player gets priority after it resolves. (See rule 605,
“Mana Abilities.”)

Definition of mana ability:

605.1a An activated ability is a mana ability if it meets all of the following criteria: it doesn’t have a
target, it could add mana to a player’s mana pool when it resolves, and it’s not a loyalty ability.

No. The http://gatherer.wizards.com page, which Glorfindel has edited to include in your question, answers this: "Sacrificing this card when the last counter is removed is part of the effect of tapping it for mana."  If there were a carriage return between "Add one mana of any color." and "If there are no mining counters on Gemstone Mine, sacrifice it.", that would be a different matter; there would then be two separate abilities: an activated mana ability and a triggered ability. As it is, it's one block of text that is all one activated mana ability, and since it's a mana ability, it doesn't use the stack.

The text "If there are no mining counters on Gemstone Mine, sacrifice it" is not a valid ability on its own. If the "If" were instead "When", it would in fact be a triggered ability, but in that case it would be a triggered ability whether or not it is part of the activated ability.

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


text:
Can you choose the same option twice for Incendiary Command?
This card came up as a discussion.  One person was insisting you could choose the same option for Incendiary Command twice and there is no ruling from MTG.  Similar cards say you can only chose an option once. Does anyone know which is right?

You are commanded to choose two, if you choose one twice, you are not choosing two, you are choosing one, so no.

No. If you could choose the same mode more than once, the card would explicitly state that (e.g. Righteous Confluence).

700.2d If a player is allowed to choose more than one mode for a modal spell
  or ability, that player normally can’t choose the same mode more than once.
  However, a few modal spells include the instruction “You may choose the same
  mode more than once.” If a particular mode is chosen multiple times, the spell
  is treated as if that mode appeared that many times in sequence. If that mode
  requires a target, the same player or object may be chosen as the target for
  each of those modes, or different targets may be chosen.

Source.


text:
Would an enchantment placed on an opponent still take effect if they played Aegis of the Gods afterwards?
So, as I was rebuilding a vampire deck, I came across some curses and remembered a friend got Aegis of the Gods.
I understand Aegis of the Gods would stop me from playing the curse on them, but if I played the curse first would Aegis stop my curse effect from taking place, if it was played on a different turn after I played the curse?

Yes the aura cursing the player would still work on them. Just like a creature gaining shroud or hexproof after an aura is placed on them keeps the aura, players also keep any auras placed on them while they were still targetable, unless they can gain hexproof while the aura is still on the stack (Flashing out Aegis of the Gods with say Vedalken Orrery).
This is also why Witchbane Orb specifically removes curses when it comes out, if having hexproof made curses fall off, it would only need to give hexproof, the rest would happen automatically.
This is different from protection, A creature that gets say Protection from White causes all white auras to fall off (some auras specifically ignore this like Pledge of Loyalty or Spectra Ward). There is really only one card I can think of that would do this for a player, Runed Halo, which would give you protection from the specific card you name, name the curse and it falls off.

Yes, enchantments already cast and resolved still continue to take effect.
There isn't much about Curses in the Rulebook, because they operate identical to Aura's, but it doesn't take away that it is its own subtype.
Rulings clarify that:

17-10-2013    A Curse spell targets the player it will enchant like any
  other Aura spell, and a Curse stays on the battlefield like any other
  Aura. If the enchanted player gains protection from the Curse’s color
  (or any other characteristic the Curse has), the Curse will be put
  into its owner’s graveyard.

In the Comprehensive Rules it states:

303.4. Some enchantments have the subtype “Aura.” An Aura enters the battlefield attached to an object or player. What an Aura can be
  attached to is defined by its enchant keyword ability (see rule
  702.5, “Enchant”). Other effects can limit what a permanent can be enchanted by.

So Curses like Aura's target an object or player depending on what it says on the card.
Aegis of the Gods grants the player Hexproof.

702.11c “Hexproof” on a player means “You can’t be the target of spells or abilities your opponents control.”

So while Aegis of the Gods is on the battlefield you can't target that creatures controller.
But what about all the curses you already cast and resolved before Aegis of the Gods entered the battlefied?
Hexproof doesn't dispel or disenchant any enchantments. It just prevents an object or player from being targeted while hexproof is in play.

Yes, the enchantment would still continue to take effect.
Aegis of the Gods only grants the player Hexproof, and having Hexproof means only that you cannot be the target of spells or abilities that your opponents control. You can still be affected by anything that doesn’t target you.
As you already noted, an Aura is a targeted spell, so you would not be able to target your opponent with a new Aura spell.
Note also that if you find a way to put your Curse Auras onto the battlefield without casting them, then you can attach them to your opponent even if they have Hexproof.

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


text:
Does Hour of Reckoning destroy enchantments?
Hour of Reckoning says

Destroy all nontoken creatures.

Does this mean all Enchantments will be destroyed as well?

Coincidentally, similarly named card Hour of Revelation destroys all nonland permanents (including enchantments).

No, enchantments are unaffected by Hour of Reckoning, unless they're also creatures, like Nyx-Fleece Ram. (Here are a couple of other enchantment creatures.) 'Creature' and 'Enchantment' are different permanent types in Magic.

In other words, it's "(non token) creatures", not "non (token creatures)".

Any enchantments on creatures (enchant creature, enchant permanent that happens to be on a creature, or aura) would be put into the graveyard too (unless it specifically says otherwise).  For example, the enchantment creatures with Bestow that are in enchantment form on another creature, would remain in play is they are not creatures when hour of reckoning resolves.  There are also some enchant creature cards that return to your hand when they go to the graveyard from play (like Rancor).


text:
Do cards that say "all creatures" affect creatures with hexproof?
When a creature or player has hexproof and a player casts a card such as Cleansing Nova:

Choose one —

Destroy all creatures.
Destroy all artifacts and enchantments.

Do creatures with hexproof die too?

anytime I use this site I feel attacked.  I talking every time I use it or ask a question there is a problem always.

hey there, sorry to hear that :/ would you mind clarifying in what way you feel attacked? Is there something we can help you with that hasn't been answered so far?

@LoneWolf Sorry you feel that way.  As people have told you before, StackExchange is a platform that encourages editing and improving posts to provide a repository of knowledge for current and future users.  Changes that correct spelling/grammatical errors and improve the clarity of your question are the norm on this site.  If this bothers you, then StackExchange may not be the right network for you.

@LoneWolf If this is about the question being closed as a duplicate, please understand that that action does not in anyway say anything negative about you! Stack Exchange strives to keep duplicates closed so that other visitors looking up the question can find one definitive source for the answer, rather than possibly seeing different answers in different places. Many questions by many users get closed as duplicates here; it doesn't in any way mean that the users are annoyed that you asked the question.

Yes, cards with "destroy all ..." don't target the permanents they affect, so Hexproof does not protect them from being destroyed.
Generally speaking, if the word 'target' doesn't appear on the card, the spell or ability isn't targeting. Auras are an exception (see rule 114.1b), and sometimes the word 'target' is in the reminder text (e.g. the provoke ability).
(There might be more exceptions, since Magic: The Gathering is an ever evolving game.)


text:
Can creatures with summoning sickness block?
Are you able to block with a creature that has summoning sickness? My friend always has at least 1 Moaning Wall in his hand and plays it each chance he gets, even when I attack and it has summoning sickness he tells me that creatures with summoning sickness can still block creatures.

I also VTC'd this out of custom, but I don't think it's an actual dupe, since the question itself being referenced never mentions blocking, although the answer does.

You don't have to describe everything summoning sickness doesn't do for a reader to be able to derive that information from a description of what summoning sickness does.

@J.Sallé The duplicate target question does call out that the creature can still block as can be seen from this line in the answser. "Specifically, the creature cannot be declared as an attacker during your combat phase. It can still block, fight, or be put onto the battlefield attacking."

A comprehensive list of things that summoning sickness does affect also tells you every single thing it doesn't affect. It's not reasonable for an answer to list all the things it doesn't mean, as there are an unlimited number of those.

Yes, you can block with a creature affected by summoning sickness.
This is the Comprehensive Rule about "summoning sickness"; I emphasized the relevant parts in your case:

302.6. A creature’s activated ability with the tap symbol or the untap symbol in its activation cost can’t be activated unless the creature has been under its controller’s control continuously since his or her most recent turn began. A creature can’t attack unless it has been under its controller’s control continuously since his or her most recent turn began. This rule is informally called the “summoning sickness” rule.

As you can see, at no point the rule states that you cannot block with a creature affected by "summoning sickness".

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


text:
Splitting up a run containing a joker
If I have a run of 7, 8, 9, 10, J, 11, can I move the 7, 8 and 9 to begin another run, leaving the 10, joker, and 11 in a run of 3 or more?

You can't have a run that goes "10, J, 11" and you can't move the 8 and 9 without leaving the 7 orphaned.  It's unclear what you're asking here.

@BJMyers perhaps that clarification you did is worthy of an answer, as based on what you say the answer would be "no you can't because..."

Rummikub allows you to break up sets and runs to form new groupings as you wish, as long as all groupings on the board are valid at the end of the turn.  This means all sets and runs must consist of at least 3 tiles and follow the other rules for creating them.  Therefore you can always split a run into two (or more) smaller runs, provided that each of the smaller runs still has at least 3 tiles.
However, it's difficult to answer your question as written because the initial state of the tiles on the board is invalid.  A joker tile must "stand in" for another tile that would be valid in the run, so you can't have "10, J, 11" - there can't be a tile in between the 10 and 11.
If we assume that your initial state is a run of 7, 8, 9, 10, J, 12, then it is legal to pull the 7, 8, and 9 away to form a new run, leaving the 10, J, 12 as a valid run.

-1. I have played two editions of rummikub. In one rulebook there was a specific rule that "you may not split up a run containing a joker", in the other this rule didn't exist. Therefore the answer is It depends on the edition you're playing. Check your rulebook.

@AndyT That would be a great answer, provided that you can link to a version of the rulebook that contains that specific rule.

If the question wasn't closed, I would have tried exactly that. But I'm afraid that being limited to comments, I couldn't be bothered to do the research.


text:
Can devotion of just one colour satisfy a multicolored devotion condition?
If I play Athreos, God of Passage, but I only have 7 to devotion to black, does this devotion count to devotion to white and black?
Or do I need at least 1 to devotion to white to have devotion to white and black?

Devotion to either color is fine. You don't need to have devotion to both. "Devotion to A and B" just counts all mana symbols of color A and/or B in permanents you control. (Notably hybrid symbols are just counted once.)
See a Gatherer ruling found on Athreos and all the other two-color gods, emphasis added:

Your devotion to two colors is equal to the number of mana symbols that are the first color, the second color, or both colors among the mana costs of permanents you control. Specifically, a hybrid mana symbol counts only once toward your devotion to its two colors. For example, if the only nonland permanents you control are Pharika, God of Affliction and Golgari Guildmage (whose mana cost is {B/G}{B/G}), your devotion to black and green is four.

You do however have some devotion to white, from Athreos himself. As long as he's out he's giving you +1 white devotion and +1 black devotion; a god's own mana cost counts towards its own devotion. This also means Athreos actually only needs 5 white and black devotion from sources other than himself.

Devotion to A and B doesn't count A/B hybrid mana symbols twice, whereas devotion to A plus devotion to B does, so it might be worth clarifying your first paragraph to reflect that.

@DavidZ Yep, good point. Thanks for that. How's this wording sound in the first paragraph?

Yeah, that should be fine now.

@DavidZ I rephrased again actually, this way of structuring that information feels a lot better.

If you had devotion 7 black before you played Athreos, you now have devotion 8 black and devotion 1 white, since Athreos has one mana symbol of each color in his casting cost, giving one devotion to each. From the comprehensive rules(emphasis mine):

700.5. A player’s devotion to [color] is equal to the number of mana symbols of that color among the mana costs of permanents that player controls. A player’s devotion to [color 1] and [color 2] is equal to the number of mana symbols among the mana costs of permanents that player controls that are [color 1], [color 2], or both colors.

As for the hybrid gods as a whole, while you don't need devotion to be split between the two colors for them to work, they always will, there is no card in magic that looks for devotion in a color that it isn't. In the case of permanents that means it always provides at least some devotion to the colors it is looking for. Non permanents, like Acolyte's Reward have the possibility of 0 devotion, since you could play them without permanents with mana symbols of the card's color.


text:
Crucible of Worlds and Burgeoning
Crucible of Worlds says:

You may play land cards from your graveyard.

Burgeoning says:

Whenever an opponent plays a land, you may put a land card from your hand onto the battlefield.

So, if I have both on the battlefield, whenever one of my opponents plays a land, may a put a land from my graveyard onto the battlefield?
My guess is not, based on the wording of the cards.  Because Burgeoning is not allowing me to "play a land" it is having me "put a land onto the battlefield" which is a different action.
Is this interpretation correct?  (I'd rather it be the other way...)

You guessed right!  (Sorry.)  There are (at least) two reasons this combo doesn't work.
First: "Playing a land" is different than "putting a land card from your hand onto the battlefield."  They're not interchangeable.305.4  This means that the choice you can make for Burgeoning's effect is not changed by Crucible of Worlds.
Second: Crucible of Worlds doesn't affect the separation between the hand and the graveyard.  It simply allows you to take the "play a land" action with cards from an additional zone.  Since Burgeoning uses the phrase "a land card from your hand," the land that you choose cannot be in the graveyard.

305.4 Effects may also allow players to “put” lands onto the battlefield. This isn’t the same as “playing a land” and doesn’t count as a land played during the current turn.

Well, because Crucible of the Worlds says "from your graveyard", you could only use this ability if you discarded lands somehow. Burgeoning means you can put a land from your HAND onto the battlefield if your opponent plays a land, so it wouldn't count as a land per turn.


text:
Does Chance for Glory make your creature indestructible indefinitely if you skip the extra turn?
If I cast Chance for Glory, and skip the extra turn using Sundial of the Infinite, do my creatures retain their Indestructible?

Your creatures will stay indestructible and you will not lose the game if you are able to prevent the end step of the extra turn from happening.
The effect of Chance for Glory has three parts:
The first part of the effect gives the creatures you control (on the battlefield) the Indestructible ability. This is a permanent change to those objects.
The second part of the effect creates a new Turn after the current turn that the controller of this Effect will take.
The third part of the effect creates a delayed trigger. The trigger refers to the turn that was just created.

603.7b A delayed triggered ability will trigger only once—the next time its trigger event occurs— unless it has a stated duration, such
as "this turn."

If that extra turn never happens or never gets to the end step then the trigger does not fire and the effect does not happen.
http://gatherer.wizards.com/pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=452909

10/5/2018 Creatures you control gain indestructible indefinitely. If
you find a way to not lose the game during your next turn, they’ll
continue to be indestructible for as long as they remain on the
battlefield.

http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=228118

9/22/2011 If Sundial of the Infinite’s ability is activated before the
end step, any “at the beginning of the end step”-triggered abilities
won’t get the chance to trigger that turn because the end step is
skipped. Those abilities will trigger at the beginning of the end step
of the next turn. The same is true of abilities that trigger at the
beginning of other phases or steps (except upkeep).

Ending the Turn

713.1c The current phase and/or step ends. The game skips straight to the cleanup step. Skip any phases or steps between this phase or step
and the cleanup step.
713.3. Even though the turn ends, “at the beginning of the end step” triggered abilities don’t trigger because the end step is skipped.

I think it would be helpful to clarify why the part of Sundial's ruling that says "Those abilities will trigger at the beginning of the end step of the next turn" doesn't apply in this case. It is mentioned in the first paragraph, but having a more specific sentence or two after the Sundial ruling might be a good idea.

Good point. The delayed trigger refers to a specific turn, so it won’t fire for the and of any turn but that one. I’ll update the answer when I get a chance. Thanks!

So the delayed ability triggers and i can counter that ability?

Some spells and abilities are available that can counter a triggered ability:
Disallow, Stifle, Trickbind and Voidslime. Nimble Obstructionist can counter an activated or triggered ability you don't control.

Yes
This is covered explicitly in the rulings for the card, available on the Gatherer page:

Creatures you control gain indestructible indefinitely. If you find a way to not lose the game during your next turn, they’ll continue to be indestructible for as long as they remain on the battlefield.


text:
Could you use Twincast to counter Cryptic Command?
If your opponent casts Cryptic Command to tap all your creatures and draw a card, can you use Twincast to counter it and draw a card?

From the Twincast's rulings:

If the spell Twincast copies is modal (that is, it says “Choose one —” or the like), the copy will have the same mode. You can’t choose a different one.

From Comprehensive Rules (thanks ikegami):

706.2. When copying an object, the copy acquires the copiable values of the original object’s characteristics and, for an object on the stack, choices made when casting or activating it (mode, targets, the value of X, whether it was kicked, how it will affect multiple targets, and so on). [...]

(Emphasis mine.)
So, no.
Twincast has the same modes that your opponent chose. If they chose tap and draw, Twincast will also tap and draw.

I should have checked both the cards gatherer text before posting.


text:
Does Deflecting Palm cause Furnace of Rath to activate twice?
My opponent is at 12 life. There is a Furnace of Rath in play. He casts Lightning Bolt to my face and I play Deflecting Palm in response, aiming it back at his face.
Does my opponent take 12 damage and lose?

I'll let someone else answer officially, as I haven't played nearly as much lately and may be wrong.  No, he would not LOSE.  As Deflecting Palm is top of the stack it prevents the damage to you, Lightning Bolt is not doubled at this step as it would deal no damage.  Then, LB hits your opponent and is doubled, dealing him a total of six damage.

@sirjonsnow That's pretty much an answer, could you post it as such?

Your opponent will lose, providing you choose the correct order of replacement and prevention effects.

Your opponent casts Lightning Bolt.
You respond with Deflecting Palm and let it resolve.
You now have 2 replacement / prevention effects attempting to modify Lightning Bolt.
By rule 616.1

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

Since you are the affected player, you choose the order of replacement.

Option 1 - Apply Furnace's Effect First

This doubles the damage of Lightning Bolt from 3 to 6.
As per 616.1e, you now repeat the process with any applicable replacement effects

616.1e Once the chosen effect has been applied, this process is repeated (taking into account only replacement or prevention effects
  that would now be applicable) until there are no more left to apply.

The only applicable effect left is Deflecting Palm.
Now your opponent is affected by Deflecting Palm dealing 6 damage to him / her, so they would make any applicable choices for replacement effects.
The only replacement effect here is Furnace of Rath again, which doubles the damage from 6 to 12.

Option 2 - Apply Deflecting Palm First

Lightning Bolt's 3 damage is prevented.  Deflecting Palm now deals 3 damage to your opponent.  Note that at this point, Furnace of Rath's replacement effect no longer is applicable to the Lightning Bolt event, so we don't worry about it anymore.
Like above, Furnace of Rath's effect applies to Deflecting Palm's damage, doubling it to 6.

So if you do it right, your opponent loses.

I wasn't sure if the redirected damage was an additional event or not, but I have confirmed that it is (CR 615.5, "[...] the rest of the effect takes place immediately afterward")

@ikegami This answer is wrong and  murgatroid deleted answer is right. 615.5 doesn't mean that the aditional effect is not part of the original event. It just means that the original event has been broken down in two, but both are still part of the original one. Think about it this way: in Magic one-shot effects can only happen as part of a spell or ability resolving, and replacement and prevention effects don't create one-shot effects by themselves, they just modify other events but don't change the source of the events...

In this example, Lightning Bolt is still the source of all the one-shot effects that happen. If we say that Deflecting Palm's additional effect is not part of the original event, then ¿what is the source of that additional effect? The source can't be Deflecting Palm because prevention effects can't be the source of events. And if we say that the additional effect is not part of the modified event, the the source can't be Lightning Bolt. It would make no sense.

@Pablo, Re "615.5 doesn't mean that the additional effect is not part of the original event.", 615.5 explicitly says the new effect happens after the event. Do you have anything to support your claim that the rule means something other than it says? If so, you should post it as an answer. Let me know if you do!

@ikegami 615.5 says that the prevention effect takes places at the same time the original event would have happened, and the additional effect right after that. The key here is "original event". It doesn't say "modified event" because the additional effect is indeed part of the modified event. But I'll try to get some time to write a more detailed answer later today.

@Pablo, Don't discuss in the comments. (Especially if you're just going to repeat what I said: 615.5 says the additional effect happens after the original event. It can't possibly be part of the same event according to the rules.)

@ikegami I have added my own answer now. I was not repeating what you said in my previous comment. I was stressing the difference between "event", "original event" and "modified event".

Your opponent will, with correct play, take 12 damage and lose the game.
The damage doubling from Furnace of Wrath is a replacement effect, while Deflecting Palm is a prevention effect. Replacement and Prevention effects are closely related, and if, as is the case here, both apply to the same event (3 damage from Lightning Bolt), their order of application is decided by you, because you are the affected player in this case:

Interaction of Replacement and/or Prevention Effects

616.1. If two or more replacement and/or prevention effects are attempting to modify the way an event affects an object or player, the affected object’s controller (or its owner if it has no controller) or the affected player chooses one to apply, following the steps listed below. If two or more players have to make these choices at the same time, choices are made in APNAP order (see rule 101.4).
616.1a-c [none of these special steps apply]
616.1d Any of the applicable replacement and/or prevention effects may be chosen.
616.1e Once the chosen effect has been applied, this process is repeated (taking into account only replacement or prevention effects that would now be applicable) until there are no more left to apply.

Therefore, you can choose to first double the Lightning Bolt damage with Furnace, then prevent those 6 damage with Palm.
The 6 damage dealt by Palm are a new event, so Furnace will double it, resulting in 12 damage overall.

Are you sure the stack isn't resolved in order?  I can see the above being true if Deflecting Palm was an enchantment in play, but as it's an instant I would think its effect would resolve before you even look at resolving Furnace of Wrath.

Deflecting Palm merely creates a "prevention shield" that activates the next time a source would deal damage to you this turn. It doesn't matter when exactly you cast it, as long as it resolves before the Lightning Bolt. Furnace of Wrath also does not resolve, it is a static ability with a replacement effect. It does not use the stack.

616.1 does not depend on who controls the Furnace and Palm, but on who is affected by the event (ie. damaged).

Why is the opponent the only affected object of Deflecting Palm?

@RemcoGerlich The event to be replaced/prevented by multiple effects is the lightning bolt, which only affects the opponent.

@Hackworth surely the answer is the exact opposite of your conclusion: When Palm is preventing, it is acting on the damage being dealt to OP. Thus he is the affected player and thus he gets to make the decision, so he chooses to allow Furnace First.

I think @Brondahl is right - Lightning Bolt is the event that will be prevented/replaced, and it targets OP, so OP gets to make the decision, not his opponent.

@RemcoGerlich, Re "Why is the opponent the only affected object of Deflecting Palm?", Not a relevant question. The correct question is "Who or who's objects are affected by Deflecting Palm's instruction to deal damage". That's who gets to decide the order to apply replacement and preventions effects to the that instruction to deal damage.

Yes, I had the palyers reversed. Edited.

@Brondahl, The issue you raised has been addressed.

@BJ Myers, The issue you raised has been addressed.

Short answer: your opponent takes 6 damage.
Long answer:
There is one prevention effect (created by Deflecting Palm) and one replacement effect (by Furnace of Rath). Replacement effects can only be applied once to a given event (rule 614.5).
Appling Deflecting Palm or Furnace of Rath first is decide by the affected player (the player who would be damaged by Lightning Bolt original effect).
If Furnace of Rath is applied first, then Deflecting Palm is applied to the doubled damage, and Furnace of Rath can't be applied again, resulting in 6 damage.
If Deflecting Palm is applied first, then Furnace of Rath is applied later, resulting in 6 damage.
Some people have the opinion that rule 615.5 implies that the extra damage is not part of the original event:

615.5. Some prevention effects also include an additional effect, which may refer to the amount of damage that was prevented. The prevention takes place at the time the original event would have happened; the rest of the effect takes place immediately afterward.

Notice how this rule doesn't say that the rest of the effect takes places after the event. It says that it takes places immediately afterward the time the original event would have happenend. The two phrases have slightly but very important differences. I want to stress the difference between the terms "event", "original event" and "modified event".
The original event in a replacement or prevention effect doesn't necesarily takes place at the same time that the modified event. This is obvious, for example if you think about a replacement effect that replaces something with drawing cards (for example, Lich), because drawing several cards can never be done simultaneously (rule 120.2).
So, in essence, rule 615.5 says that part of the modified event takes places at the same time that the original event, and part of the modified event takes places immediately afterwards. But they are both still part of the modified event. The purpose of this rule is to establish that de additional effect takes place after other possible events that take place simultaneously with the original event that is going to be modified.
Edit: I'll add an example with other cards that hopefully will clarify this:
Player A controls Lich and Words of Worship (interactions based on these two cards are commonly used as examples to explain fine details of interaction of several replacement effects, I'm going to assume that most people with deep understanding of the rules has heard rulings about these).
Player B controls  Putrid Warrior, attacks with it, and chooses that "Each player gains 1 life" with its triggered ability.
With Putrid Warrior's ability on the stack, player A activates Words of Worship. It resolves.
When Putrid Warrior's ability resolves, Lich replacement effect is applied to it. Now the event is "player B gains 1 life, player A draws a card".
Because of rule 120.7, the card is drawn after player B gains 1 life. Or in other words, the card is drawn after the time the original event would have happened.
Now player B gains 1 life.
Now player A would draw one card, but Words of Worship replacement effect is applied, and the event becomes "player B gains five life".
Now, should Lich's replacement effect be applied again? This has been ruled time and time again as no, it should not.

The modified event replaces the original event, so if something happens after the original event, it also happens after the modified event.

@ikegami that deduction is only true if you assume that all the actions in the modified event happen at the same time that the original event, and that's not always true.

@ikegami I have added an example with other cards to better explain my point.

Why did you add that example? Why are you telling me about it? There are no additional effects from prevention effects in that example, so it has nothing to do with my comment (or the question). In the OP's scenario, an effect/event is added (615.5), but no events are added in your example. Events are merely replaced, so 614.5 applies.

@ikegami prevention and replacement effects have similar rules. So a rule about replacement effects that makes some effect take place after the original event and a rule about a prevention effects that makes some effect take place after the original event should behave the same way. I wrote the comment to you becasue you have be discussing this with me, and I personally like to be notified when something new about a conversation I have been having has been posted. Obviously that is not the case with you. Sorry for directing the reply to you, I will be more careful.

Let us continue this discussion in chat.

I have asked the question here.


text:
Platinum Emperion and Smash to Smithereens
If player A is at 3 life and has a Platinum Emperion in play, does player A lose if the big robot gets targeted by a Smash to Smithereens?

This question is already answered here: http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?32239-platinum-emperion-smash-to-smithereen

Or here: https://magicjudge.tumblr.com/post/149879963199/if-i-smash-to-smithereens-my-opponents-platinum/embed

Or here: https://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/magic-fundamentals/magic-rulings/magic-rulings-archives/478331-destroy-effects-and-state-based-actions

So: Yes. Destroy is part of the resolution, therefore the "Robot" is put into the graveyard and then the damage happens.

@Erik If a question has an answer elsewhere but not here, I think there is still value in posting it on stackexchange for two reasons.  First, forums are a really bad medium for future readers to find answers.  Second, none of the links you posted reference the rules, meaning they answer this in the specific case rather than the general case.  At its heart, this is not a question about the interaction of Platinum Emperion and Smash to Smithereens, but rather it is a question about a multi-step spell interacting with a creature with a static replacement effect.

I'd argue that OP just wanted to know about this one case/interaction, thus just could have googled the question. But yes, a full answer including the rules is better than the linked entries.

@Erik The existence of the answer to a question on another site has no bearing on whether it should be asked or answered here. It is appropriate to ask this question, and it would be appropriate to cite answers like the ones you link in an answer here if that would be helpful.

While Erik may have not made his point well, there is a point that one of the downvote criteria is "shows a lack of research effort", and I think he was just trying to point out that this question shows a lack of research effort. On the other hand, I would argue that for this site in particular, many if not most of our questions could be said to show a lack of research effort.

The owner of Platinum Emperion will lose because Smash to Smithereens is a multi-step spell.  The Emperion is destroyed before the damage is dealt:

608.2c The controller of the spell or ability follows its instructions in the order written.

The Emperion ability stops functioning as soon as it leaves the battlefield:

611.3. A continuous effect may be generated by the static ability of an object.
611.3b The effect applies at all times that the permanent generating it is on the battlefield or the object generating it is in the appropriate zone.

And, importantly, "destroy" causes the Emperion to leave the battlefield immediately (as opposed dealing it lethal damage, which would not cause it to die until after the spell had finished resolving because that is when state-based actions are next checked):

701.7a To destroy a permanent, move it from the battlefield to its owner's graveyard.


text:
Exert, untap with spell, tap and attack. Does it untap?
Say I have a Pride Sovereign, and I pay one plains, tap it and exert it.  I then cast Prepare and untap it, so I can attack.
I tap my cat, and attack.
It is now my next turn.  Does Pride Sovereign untap?  Although it has untapped since being exerted, exert says:

an exerted creature won't untap during your next untap step.

Important note.. you do NOT "pay one plains". You pay a white mana. Plains is a land card that produces a white mana when tapped, but mana and lands completely separate things in Magic.

Additional note: You choose the attacking creatures, meet requirements and abide by restrictions, then the creature taps.

It does not untap.
To exert a permanent, you choose to have it not untap during your next untap step.[CR 701.37a] Period. Its status when it was exerted is irrelevant.[1] Changes to its status after it was exerted are irrelevant. Unless the creature ceases to exist at some point before your next untap step, it won't untap during your next untap step.
Blinking the creature (e.g. using Cloudshift) shakes off the exertion, but only because the creature with which you are left is a brand new object that's never been exerted.[CR 400.7]

The complete rules regarding Exert:

701.37. Exert
701.37a To exert a permanent, you choose to have it not untap during your next untap step.
701.37b A permanent can be exerted even if it’s not tapped or has already been exerted in a turn. If you exert a permanent more than once before your next untap step, each effect causing it not to untap expires during the same untap step.
701.37c An object that isn’t on the battlefield can’t be exerted.
701.37d “You may exert [this creature] as it attacks” is an optional cost to attack (see rule 508.1g). Some objects with this static ability have a triggered ability that triggers “when you do” printed in the same paragraph. These abilities are linked. (See rule 607.2g.)

You can exert a creature will it's untapped. For example, this happens when attacking with a Battlefield Scavenger that's been given Vigilance.

I was going to say a similar thing to this but I got stumped when I thought about blinking it. glad someone cleared this up for me! :P

No, Pride Sovereign does not untap.  Untapping or retapping an exerted card does not "shake off" the exert effect.
While I have not found a ruling that covers this exact situation, there is a ruling in the Amonkhet release notes that provides some insight:

If an exerted creature is already untapped during your next untap step (most likely because it had vigilance or an effect untapped it), exert's effect preventing it from untapping expires without having done anything.

This demonstrates that untapping the card does not remove the exert effect - the "does not untap" effect still takes place, but it doesn't do anything since the card can't be untapped.
In similar fashion, retapping the card (e.g. by attacking) won't modify the exert effect either, and the card will not untap during your next untap step.


text:
How can creatures with indestructible end up in the graveyard?
How does a creature with indestructible end up in the graveyard?
I have been trying to figure this out for a little while.

Indestructible prevents the permanent from being destroyed.  This usually is caused by damage exceeding a creature's toughness, or an effect that explicitly says that it will destroy a permanent.
The main ways that a creature with indestructible will die (being put to the graveyard from the battlefield) will be:

Having its toughness reduced to zero via -X/-X effects. (Tragic Slip, Black Sun's Zenith or -1/-1 counters, including damage from a source with infect)
Being sacrificed. (Innocent Blood)
Losing indestructible and being destroyed (Hour of Devastation, Turn to Frog + destruction effect)

Other ways to deal with indestructible permanents that do not cause them to "die" include:

Exiling. (Swords to Plowshares)
Bounce. (Unsummon)
Interacting with them on the stack. (Counterspell)
Discard. (Thoughtseize)
Removal from the deck. (Memoricide)
Taking control of them. (In Bolas's Clutches)
Move them to their owner's library. (Condemn)

I would have linked to all the cards, but my current reputation won't allow it.

You can just write [mtg:] for card links.

Turning them frogs also works

Since the question calls out ending up in the graveyard, not just dying, it may be worth adding things like mill, self-mill, and discard.

The original question actually specified dying, though I am unsure that the person asking understand what that means in magic.  I tried to include ways to deal with indestructible creatures, as opposed to focusing on the graveyard itself.

Goblin Welder's current Oracle text calls for the player to sacrifice the artifact, which suggests that being exchanged or placed into the graveyard is something they've tried to eliminate from the game, though I'm not sure if that's really the case.

Might be worth mentioning that creature can temporarily lose indestructible and then die. ie with Hour of Devastation or Burn from Within

Added that to the post.  Also, I removed the Goblin Welder example for the reasons David detailed.

I would add reference to infect and wither to "Having its toughness reduced to zero" just for more clarity.

A creature with indestructible can die as a result of anything that is not damage (Lightning Bolt) and does not explicitly use the word 'destroy' (Doom Blade).
The most common ways:
Toughness reduced to less than zero.  (This is neither damage nor a 'destroy' effect.) e.g., Death Wind
The creature's controller is forced to sacrifice it.  e.g., All is Dust

And of course, they can be exiled, returned to their owner's hand, or put back into their owner's library. None of that puts them in the graveyard, but it still gets rid of them!

It can also be discarded from hand or from the library.

Damage dealt with infect is able to kill Indestructible creatures. This is because sources with infect deal damage to creatures in the form of -1/-1 counters, which eventually can reduce the creature's toughness to 0 or less.

The top answer already includes "reducing toughness to 0" -1/-1 counters and temporary -/- effects both work this way.

Welcome to the site! It is useful to mention that both Wither and Infect can cause indestructible creatures to go to the graveyard, but this answer would be a bit better suited as either an Edit to the existing answer or as a comment underneath it (You will be able to comment once you get a bit more Rep). Thanks for contributing though and hope you stick around.

I think infect/wither is worth mentioning separately.  Yes, this is a specific implementation of the Reducing Toughness category above, but both are achieved through damage, which is counter-intuitive for other cases of indestructability seemingly not caring about damage dealt.

@ryanyuyu I agree it should be mentioned, though not alone as a separate answer.

I've now included infect in the top voted answer.

Lightning Bolt is damage, and does not affect indestructible.

This is not an answer to the question asked, it looks a lot more like a comment on Affe's answer based on a misreading of what Affe said (Lightning Bolt is used as an example of what is damage and thus will not work) When you have enough rep you'll be able to leave comments on questions and answers.


text:
Do I play a hero's ability every time I draw it?
When I buy a hero and put it into my discard deck, then shuffle it and draw it in my hand in a later round, do I always have to / get to play the hero's ability?
For example, each time I draw Seer of the Forked Path, do I get to draw an additional card from my deck?

Can you clarify what other option you think there would be for how the cards work? If you couldn't play it; you wouldn't buy it...

You seem to believe this effect happens when you acquire the hero, and are asking if it happens when you play it. It's the other way around, a hero's effect triggers when it is played, not when it is acquired.
Monster effects are triggered when you defeat the monster, they happen once and the monster goes to the void.
Hero effects are triggered when the hero is played. Very few hero abilities happen when you acquire them, for example Rally occurs when you acquire a hero.
Constructs specify when their effects trigger, usually once per round, or when you play specific faction cards (like another mechana construct).

In Ascension you only ever use a hero's ability when you play the card. So in your case when you draw the Seer of the Forked Path nothing happens. However on your turn if you play that card you will draw an additional card and get the choice of banishing a card in the center row. The fact that the ability only happens when you chose to play the card is important because there are times when you do not want to activate a hero's ability because it has a drawback that you don't want to encounter.
If you look at the rules it describes what every area of the card does and for the area where the ability is it says:

What the hero does when you play it

It should be noted that constructs unlike heroes stay in play and the effect happens every turn (though some of the abilities you have to chose to activate).
As a side note cards with the ability to draw other cards are generally pretty powerful and are good ones to look to acquire.

Every turn consists of playing whatever cards from your hand that you want. There is no limit to how many cards you can play; and you never have to play a card if you don't want to. So if it is in your hand, you can choose to play it.

This doesn't really answer the question about activating the ability. Would be helpful to include a reference to the rules and what it mentions for playing cards.

@JoeW; fair enough; I hadn't even considered the idea that he may not understand that the text on the card is the things you do when you play the card.


text:
Journey to Eternity and Thrashing Brontodon
How would this interaction work?
I've got a Thrashing Brontodon out, which has the ability

{1}, Sacrifice Thrashing Brontodon: Destroy target artifact or enchantment.

I enchant it with Journey to Eternity:

When enchanted creature dies, return it to the battlefield under your control, then return Journey to Eternity to the battlefield transformed under your control.

Is it legal to use Trashing Brontodon's ability targeting the Journey to Eternity attached to itself? If so, what happens?
I'm assuming that it is legal and that the Journey to Eternity would return transformed but would love some clarity on this.

Yes, the Journey to Eternity will return to the battlefield transformed and the Thrashing Brontodon will also return to the battlefield.
The exact sequence of events is as follows:

You activate Thrashing Brontodon's ability targeting Journey to Eternity. While paying the cost, you sacrifice Thrashing Brontodon, which triggers Journey to Eternity's ability.

Journey to Eternity is no longer attached to a creature, so it is put into your graveyard as a state-based action [CR 704.5m]

Journey to Eternity's triggered ability goes on the stack on top of Thrashing Brontodon's ability.

Journey to Eternity's ability resolves, returning Thrashing Brontodon to the battlefield and returning Journey to Eternity to the battlefield transformed.

Thrashing Brontodon's ability starts to resolve, but it no longer has a legal target because the Journey to Eternity left the battlefield, so it fails to resolve [CR 608.2b]

I think it would be clearer separating out paying the cost as coming before putting Brontodon's ability on the stack, and if you explain why JtE's ability is able to find JtE after it's not on the battlefield anymore.

Paying the cost comes after putting the ability on the stack, and I'm not sure why that would make a difference here. Also, Journey to Eternity's ability can always find it in the graveyard, that's fundamental to how the ability always works, so I don't know why explaining that would help address this particular interaction.

Journey to Eternity will return the brontodon to the battlefield and then itself. The destruction of the Thrashing Brontodon will cause Journey to Eternity to leave the battlefield as a state based action, making Thrashing Brontodon's ability to destroy it fizzle. Journey to Eternity will resolve the effects of it's enchanted creature dying as normal.


text:
Lathliss, Dragon Queen + Where Ancients Tread interaction
Recently I constructed a Lathliss, Dragon Queen EDH deck, and just last night was at my LGS for some casual play.
At some point in the game I had on the battlefield a Lathliss, Dragon Queen and Where Ancients Tread, and was about to cast Scourge of Valkas.
My thought process was, if I activate Lathliss' ability to give my Dragon creatures +1/+0 then when Scourge of Valkas enters the battlefield it would enter as a 5/4, and therefore trigger Where Ancients Tread's ability.
The table seemed to conclude Lathliss' ability only applied the buff to Dragon creatures I currently controlled on the battlefield.
I'm confused, because it appears Lathliss' ability would apply to all Dragons, much the same as having Honor of the Pure on the field while casting a white creature with 2/2 would not cause Mentor of the Meek to trigger because the creature entering would actually be a 3/3, due to the added buff from Honor.
Could I have some clarification on this? Was my table right in that the interaction was not valid?

The table is correct.  Lathliss will not buff Dragons that enter the battlefield after the ability has resolved.
Lathliss' ability produces a continuous effect that buffs your Dragons until the end of the turn.  Part of generating this effect involves determining the set of objects that it will affect.  From the Comprehensive Rules (emphasis mine):

611.2c If a continuous effect generated by the resolution of a spell or ability modifies the characteristics or changes the controller of any objects, the set of objects it affects is determined when that  continuous effect begins. After that point, the set won’t change.

Since Lathliss' ability has already resolved before you play Scourge of Valkas, Scourge won't be affected by that ability.

The situation with Honor of the Pure plays out differently, because its effect is produced by a static ability.  Again from the Comprehensive Rules:

611.3a A continuous effect generated by a static ability isn’t “locked in”; it applies at any given moment to whatever its text indicates.
611.3b The effect applies at all times that the permanent generating it is on the battlefield or the object generating it is in the appropriate zone.

So Honor of the Pure will buff any white creature that enters the battlefield, as well as any creature that becomes white, or any white permanent that becomes a creature.  Conversely, if a creature somehow stops being white, it immediately loses the Honor bonus.

So Honor of the Pure's ability is considered static because Honor of the Pure is an enchantment?

So is there a way to word the ability to have it be static for the turn?

@Delfino No, enchantments can have non-static abilities as well.  You can tell that it is a static ability because it doesn't have a cost (that would make it an activated ability) or a trigger condition (that would make it a triggered ability).  More details in the comprehensive rules (112.3).

So if I get this correcly, wording like "Any amount of times per turn, you may pay {r}. If you do, all your dragons get +X/+0 this turn, where X is the amount of times this ability has been paid for." would be a static ability. Does that then also apply to dragons which are summoned after paying the X red mana?

@Simon I don't think so.  Any other time I've seen the "you may" wording it is part of a triggered ability.  A cursory Gatherer search didn't turn up anything that is worded quite that way and produces a continuous effect.

@JonTheMon You could... but it might get pretty wordy.  One way to do this would be to add a static ability that is "turned on" via an activated ability.  For instance: "{1R}: Place a dragon queen token on Lathliss, Dragon Queen" and "As long as Lathliss, Dragon Queen had a dragon queen token placed on it this turn, all Dragons you control get +1/+0."  There's probably a better way to do it... but I don't know if it's ever been done before.

Closest I can think of quickly is "Until end of turn, if you control a dragon, it gets +1/+0".  But something about it feels off.

I would word it as: "Dragons you control get +1/+0 for each firebreathing counter on Lathliss. {1R}: Place a firebreathing counter on Lathliss. Remove it at the end of the turn"

@Simon Klaver, Re "So if I get this correcly, wording like "Any amount of times per turn, you may pay {r}. If you do, [...]", That would be a continuous effect created by a special action[CR 115.2c]. That's not currently supported by the rules.

@JonTheMon, "Until end of turn, if you control a dragon, it gets +1/+0" is just a poor way of writing "Until end of turn, dragons you control get +1/+0", and it only affects the dragons that exist when the effect was created.

oo, I had overlooked @Martin Epsz's solution. I like it. I have deleted my far worse solutions. ("Remove it at the end of the turn" would be phrased "At the beginning of the end step, remove all firebreathing counters from  Lathliss.")

You cannot use Lathliss's ability to make Scourge of Valkas trigger Where Ancients Tread. The other players were correct that Lathliss's ability only applies to dragons that you control when the ability resolves.
The key difference between Lathliss's ability and the effect of Honor of the Pure is that Lathliss's ability is a one-shot ability that creates a continuous effect, and Honor of the Pure is a static ability that creates a continuous effect. That means that they are governed by these two different parts of the continuous effects rules:

611.2c If a continuous effect generated by the resolution of a spell or ability modifies the characteristics or changes the controller of any objects, the set of objects it affects is determined when that continuous effect begins. After that point, the set won’t change. (Note that this works differently than a continuous effect from a static ability.) [...]
611.3a A continuous effect generated by a static ability isn’t “locked in”; it applies at any given moment to whatever its text indicates.

I'm assuming then that the Lathliss case can also be applied to someone casing a High Tide and then afterwards playing an Island?

No, High Tide is a totally different scenario. The answer about Lathliss here is specifically about a continuous effect created by the resolution of an ability that modifies the characteristics of objects. High Tide does not do that; it creates a delayed triggered ability, which is governed by totally different rules.


text:
New Transform Rules and Archangel Avacyn
Archangel Avacyn says (in addition to other abilities): "When a non-Angel creature you control dies, transform Archangel Avacyn at the beginning of the next upkeep".
Since the triggered ability isn't the actual transform ability, but instead creates a delayed triggered ability, if you put it on the stack while another trigger wants to transform Avacyn, will she transform back? (e.g. Non-Angel died. Go to upkeep, another non-Angel dies. Will she transform back on the next upkeep?)

Please note: i have completely rewritten my answer to take the new rules update into account.

No, Avacyn will not transform again at the following upkeep.
The new rule 701.25e says

If an activated ability of a permanent tries to transform that permanent, the permanent transforms only if it hasn't transformed since the ability was put onto the stack. The same is true for triggered abilities of a permanent that aren't delayed triggered abilities. If a delayed triggered ability of a permanent tries to transform that permanent, the permanent transforms only if it hasn't transformed since that delayed triggered ability was created.

Avacyn's ability creates a delayed triggered ability, so the last clause is the relevant one. So, the situation you describe plays out like this:

A non-Angel creature dies. Archangel Avacyn's triggered ability goes on the stack.
Archangel Avacyn's triggered ability resolves, and creates a delayed triggered ability.
At the beginning of the next upkeep, the delayed triggered ability goes on the stack.
Another non-Angel creature dies. Archangel Avacyn's triggered ability goes on the stack.
Archangel Avacyn's triggered ability resolves, and creates a second delayed triggered ability.
The original delayed triggered ability resolves. Archangel Avacyn has not transformed since that delayed triggered ability was created, so Archangel Avacyn transforms into Avacyn, the Purifier.
At the beginning of the following upkeep, the second delayed triggered ability goes on the stack.
The second delayed trigger resolves. Avacyn has transformed since the second delayed triggered ability was created, so she does not transform, and remains Avacyn, the Purifier.

Do we actually have the new comp. rules text, or is this just based off of Tabak's article on the mothership?

For now, this is just from the article. I'll update it when we have the actual rules update.

So does this mean after step 8 Avacyn will be back to the white side?

if the trigger specified the exact name of the card, would that mean the second trigger would fizzle as has a different name?

No. The ability does say "transform Archangel Avacyn", and that doesn't matter. That point is why I specifically reference the cards that can flip-flop under the current rules. For example, Bloodline Keeper's ability says "Transform Bloodline Keeper", but if you activate it twice, it can transform Lord of Lineage into Bloodline Keeper. The quoted rules change simply prevents that sort of thing from happening under certain conditions.

I believe that Archangel Avacyn will only transform the one time. The reasoning behind this is that her transformed side doesn't give her the option to transform again like the werewolves have or even Arlinn Kord. Having her being able to transform back and forth due to a bunch of delayed triggers seems to go beyond the designer's intent. This would allow you to nuke the opponent's board and bolt them for every trigger.
There's also this rule: 701.25d Some triggered abilities trigger when an object “transforms into” an object identified by name. Such an ability triggers only if that object didn’t have the specified name immediately before the transform instruction and does have the specified name immediately after the transform instruction.
Since the ability tells you to transform Archangel Avacyn once she's transformed she no longer has that name and the ability won't try to transform her again.

Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.

This answer describes the correct outcome, but not for the right reason. Developer intent does not dictate the rules. Changing the name does not change what an ability affects. 701.25d is irrelevant to the question. But the new rule 701.25e does clearly indicate that Avacyn will only transform once.

My original answer was correct given the information we had at the time, and my edited answer is correct given the information that we have now. Yes, it is true that your conclusion turned out to be correct, but your reasoning is entirely incorrect, and just coincidentally resulted in a conclusion that matched information that was later released.

I had quoted 2 articles days ago, both of which supported my correct answer which you refused to acknowledge. I'd rather be right for the wrong reasons than completely wrong. Just because I don't quote chapter and verse doesn't mean that I'm wrong. I can't recite all of Newton's laws but I still know gravity works.

@LouisLopez Yes, we do prefer that answers provide (correct) explanation as well as correct answers. (See for example how to answer in the help.) We may have high standards, but that doesn't make them unfair. And above all, we ask that you always be nice.


text:
3-of-a-kind bonus in Ruk Shuk
In Ruk Shuk, can the 3-of-a-kind bonus be scored for using 3 white rocks?
And if so, do bridge rocks count as white rocks for this purpose?

Disclaimer, I've never played this but found rules online and seem fairly straight forward.
Yes the 3-of-a-kind bonus can be score with 3 white rocks.   This has bee confirmed by designer on the BGG forums here
As far I as I can tell from BGG pictures of the game, all bridge rocks are grey, not white.  Also looking at rules here the bridge rocks are not even defined by a colour and just called 'bridge rock' as opposes to 'white rock', 'blue rock' etc so don't see why a bridge rock would could towards 3 white rocks.

In the set I have, the white rocks and the bridge rocks are exactly the same colour.   I thought the 3-of-a-kind bonus for white rocks was a bit weird as sometimes it means you are better off playing a white rock than playing a blue rock on a blue double bonus location,   but on the other hand I guess you could look at it as compensation for being "unlucky" and drawing many low-scoring rocks


text:
Creature kill and resurrect effects on the stack interaction?
For example, casting Murder on a creature while Rally the Ancestors is on the stack (and would effect the creature if it was in the graveyard)?
I would think so, because the creature should die and be in the graveyard once the Murder resolves. Or, maybe it is in the process of moving to the graveyard like the murder until the stack is empty.

Spells like Rally the Ancestors or Living Death that don't target only care what is in the graveyard when they resolve.  Thus, a creature that goes to the graveyard while Rally the Ancestors is on the stack will be returned to the battlefield by Rally the Ancestors on resolution.
This is not the case for spells like Resurrection or Proclamation of Rebirth, which, due to being targeted, need the affected creature(s) to be in the graveyard when the spell is cast.


text:
How many illusions will Lightning Bolt and Wild Ricochet get rid of?
My opponent has a number of illusion creatures on the board. Let's just say they're Phantasmal Bear.
I cast a Lightning Bolt on one bear. I then respond to my own bolt with a Wild Ricochet, which gives my original bolt a new target, and copies the bolt.
Assuming my original bolt targeted Bear A, and I redirected it to Bear B, and I target Bear C with the copied bolt, are all three bears sacrificed by my opponent? When does that sacrifice have to take place?

Yes, all three bears are sacrificed, as they were all at some point the target of a spell or ability.  Because the stack is "last in, first out," spells & abilities resolve in the opposite order that they were placed on the stack; thus, the order of events after resolving Wild Ricochet is as follows:

Bears B and C are sacrificed.  The order in which this happens is decided by their controller immediately after Wild Ricochet resolves, but it doesn't have to be carried out immediately, and actions may be taken after sacrificing one and before sacrificing the other.

The copy of the Lightning Bolt tries to resolve, and it fizzles due to lack of a living target.

Bear A is sacrificed

The original Lightning Bolt tries to resolve and fizzles.

Additional spells & abilities may be cast/activated and resolved in between these steps, but (unless the Bears die earlier, or a Stifle or Time Stop or the like is involved), they can only delay the sacrifices, not eliminate them or change their order.

Two things: 1) you could change the order by targeting bear A with something else, which according to your answer would cause it to be sacrificed first. 2) Do you have a citation for them being sacrificed as the spell tries to resolve and not when the spell is announced?

True, I forgot that option.  2) I never said anything was sacrified "as" a spell tries to resolve.  The sacrifice from being targeted by a spell happens after the spell is cast and before the spell resolves.

Allow me to rephrase my followup question then: Do you have a citation for Bear A being sacrificed after Bears B and C, and not being sacrificed immediately after the original Bolt is announced, paid for, cast and goes on the stack?

You said that you "respond to [your] own bolt with a Wild Ricochet," which means that you cast the Wild Ricochet immediately after casting Lightning Bolt, without passing priority, and thus you have given Bear A's sacrifice trigger no time to resolve.  Triggered abilities don't have to be resolved immediately, after all; you can still take actions in response to them that resolve before they do.

Ah, so we're looking at... Bolt, Bear A's trigger, Ricochet, pass priority with no shenanigans on any account, Bolt redirect (B's trigger) and Bolt copy (C's trigger), B and C sac, copy fizzles because C is gone, A sac, bolt fizzles because B is gone. Is that right?

Yes, that's right.

603.1. Triggered abilities have a trigger condition and an effect. They are written as "[Trigger condition], [effect]," and begin with
  the word "when," "whenever," or "at." They can also be expressed as
  "[When/Whenever/At] [trigger event], [effect]."

The bear's ability is a triggered ability.

603.3. Once an ability has triggered, its controller puts it on the stack as an object that's not a card the next time a player would
  receive priority. See rule 116, "Timing and Priority." The ability
  becomes the topmost object on the stack. It has the text of the
  ability that created it, and no other characteristics. It remains on
  the stack until it's countered, it resolves, a rule causes it to be
  removed from the stack, or an effect moves it elsewhere.

After you cast the lightning bolt, you are a player and you get priority, bear A's sacrifice ability is put on the stack. You still have priority. You cast the ricochet.
So the stack looks like this:

Wild Ricochet
BearA Sacrifice
Lightning Bolt

Then if everyone passes, wild ricochet resolves. As it resolves you choose to target bears B and C.
Now the stack looks like this:

BearB/C Sacrifice
BearB/C Sacrifice
(copy) Lightning Bolt
BearA Sacrifice
Lightning Bolt

If all players pass priority after each ability resolves then the bears would be sacrificed in the order you see on the stack.
Between each sacrifice ability resolving, priority passes and players can add to the top of the stack.
So yes all three are sacrificed, and none of them are actually dealt any damage.

That is a good point.

I think you forgot to change the stack illustration, shouldn't there be 2 lightning bolts in place of that wild richochet since it has already resolved?

You Are Right again.

The only target you choose when casting Wild Ricochet is the spell to redirect & copy.  The targets for the redirection and copy aren't chosen until Wild Ricochet resolves, so Bears B and C aren't sacrificed until after that happens.

That is a really good point.


text:
How does Fist of Suns work with my Commander?
I am working on a deck that features Progenitus as my Commander and started looking at Fist of Suns. Besides just being good because of the large number of high cost spells in the deck, I was curious how this worked with my Commander on every cast beyond the first. And honestly, I'm not entirely sure how to word this question.
For each cast of the Commander, the mana cost is increased by 2 colorless. The Fist of Suns Oracle text says

You can't pay more than one alternative cost for a spell.

Does the additional colorless cost added after the first casting of a Commander count as alternative costs? Can I use Fist of Suns to make the cost of Progenitus WUBRG every time, or just the first time it is cast? I know that it can't be cast for WUBRG plus the additional colorless, since it seems unreasonable to combine mana costs like that.

Arowaaron wanted to share: "As a side note if you're interested in building Big Stuff tribal now with the release of Dominaria we have Jodah, Archmage Eternal which essentially acts as a Fist of Suns in the command zone."

Fist of Suns only replaces the mana cost. The mana cost is the cost written in the top-right corner of the card [CR 202.1]. You seem to think it's the total cost or the portion of the total cost payable using mana, but that's not the case.
Fist of Suns doesn't replace any additional costs or cost increases, so you still have to pay the Commander tax.
In game terms,

Fist of Suns provides an alternative cost [CR 117.9].
The Commander tax is an additional cost [CR 903.10].

total cost to cast the second time
= mana cost or alternative cost + additional cost and cost increases - cost reductions [CR 601.2e]
= alternative cost ({W}{U}{B}{R}{G}) + additional costs ({2})
= {W}{U}{B}{R}{G}{2}

I guess ultimately I was unsure of whether the extra mana constituted an alternative cost for the card as a whole or not, without thinking that it was just a cost increase. Thanks for clarifying.

Something extra is never an alternative cost. (And if it was an alternative cost, you couldn't use Fist of Suns's alternative cost.)


text:
Infinite Chain of Smog
Does Chain of Smog behave like Chain Lightning?
I mean I target an opponent, he copies the spell and targets me, then I copy the spell and target him back, etc...
More, can I target myself and copy the spell to myself and again?

Yes, Chain of Smog works that way - whoever you choose to target can copy the spell, and whoever they choose to target can copy the spell, and on and on and on. Note that this does not constitute an "Infinite Loop" as per the rules, however, as these are not mandatory actions that will repeat without intervention. Each player targeted by Chain of Smog has to choose whether or not to copy the spell or not, so the loop doesn't just run forever without intervention. Even if you target yourself, you could choose to copy the spell 1 million times, but you can't choose to copy an infinite number of times to force a draw.

Yes, Chain of Smog can be chained indefinitely between opponents, or one player can chain it on themselves indefinitely.
Any copy of Chain of Smog does the same thing as the original. That includes that the targeted player may copy the spell and choose a new target player. Since the spell requires a target player, as opposed to a target opponent, either player may also target themselves until they choose not to copy or target a different player.
Note that as long as nothing in the game cares about the number of spells that resolved, once both players are out of hand cards, further copies of Chain of Smog don't change the game state, and therefore the back-and-forth must end due to the shortcut rules:

720.3. Sometimes a loop can be fragmented, meaning that each player involved in the loop performs an independent action that results in the same game state being reached multiple times. If that happens, the active player (or, if the active player is not involved in the loop, the first player in turn order who is involved) must then make a different game choice so the loop does not continue.

That means that once both players are out of hand cards, and both players have copied the Chain while their respective opponents had no cards in hand, the active player must stop copying the Chain and do anything else.

As a small note, it's less common for something to care about the number of spells that have resolved than the number of spells that has been cast (IE storm count) and these chain spells are not cast, they are put directly onto the stack, much like spells that come off of a storm effect are not cast.

Yes, that's why I wrote resolved.

Your initial bolded statement is incorrect - there is no possible way to have Chain of Smog produce copies indefinitely. Even if it's a situation where further Chain of Smogs do change the game state, you can't just declare an infinite number of copies, you must shortcut to a well-defined, fine number of repeats. Chain of Smog can only ever be chained an arbitrarily large, but finite, number of times - never indefinitely.

@NuclearWang citation needed. Nobody is forced to propose an initial shortcut. If neither player does, and the game state does change, then the back and forth can go on indefinitely. Please provide a rules ref to prove your point, or consider withdrawing your downvote.

I suppose Slow Play rules (IPG 3.3) would only apply in a tournament, but that would dictate that someone does in fact have to propose a shortcut, and can't just keep playing out the loop. At a kitchen table game, though, I guess you're correct - someone could just keep saying "I target myself with the copy" until one player dies of old age. Either player can propose the shortcut, and I'm assuming that's preferable to death at the table, so I don't see a situation where the loop happens without the shortcut. One way or another, the loop will end (either through player choice, or player death).

So exactly what objection remains on your side to my answer?

The first sentence isn't true in general - Chain of Smog can't be chained indefinitely beyond Regular REL. Even at Regular REL, one player can't unilaterally decide to chain it on themselves indefinitely - the opponent can put a stop to that by proposing the shortcut. Both players would have to agree to enter an indefinite, but not infinite, loop. In your first sentence, only the "Chain of Smog can be chained indefinitely between opponents" part is true, and only at Regular REL. The other part, "one player can chain it on themselves indefinitely" is true only if the other player lets them.


text:
Identifying a game: Wizard Tower Defense card based game
I recall playing this one back in the 80s-90s.  You played a Wizard defending his tower from various enemies, one of whom was definitely called Lord Mort.  It was card based and multiplayer where the players could help or hinder if I recall correctly.  Similar to the way Munchkin plays.
Any idea?  Thanks!

Defending a tower reminds me of Castle Panic, but I don't remember that game having any wizards.

Castle Panic had much higher production values. :)  The game I am looking for was simple black and white line drawings and I want to say it came in a ziplock bag.


text:
How balanced are the character powers in Colt Express?
Colt Express (rules) has six player characters with different powers.  After a few plays it seems like some of the powers are significantly better than others.  I would like to know if there are any stats showing how each of the characters rank?
Obviously weaker players can gang up on the strongest to mitigate this, so maybe two player results would give the fairest comparison.  The downside of two player is that there's probably less games played (Colt Express isn't as good with two) and the rules are slightly different (each player has two characters).

Our group also feel similar. But just to get more data, can you list the order in which you rate them, so that I could see if it's the same in ours.

In our group Cheyenne and Ghost are the most popular, and no one wants to play with Tuco.

This seems to be relevant: https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/1510270/character-strength-poll

Thanks - that's really interesting!  154 votes is reasonable evidence, so maybe consider writing it up as an answer?

There is a Boardgame Geek thread here with a poll. The poll results as of the moment of writing are shown below:

It appears that many players regard Ghost and Belle to be most useful chars. Similarily no one called Tuco a most useful one. Combining with your own experience and my observations, it appears that Ghost, Belle and Cheyenne are better than Doc, Django and Taco.
However, be aware, that sometimes player preference is subjective and does not reflect the "real" balance, on the other hand, I do not think that it's possible to answer this question objectively.

If one compare the base power, we can easily conclude that Ghost and Doc got the easiest to use powers, since it works no matter what. Belle has an interesting power that needs someone close, Cheyenne Django and Tuco changes how a basic card is played. Cheyenne is, statistically, the one with the "hardest" to use power, since it only works for one card in her deck AND only for a type of loot.
Belle's power is usually considered powerful, because it makes her hardest to hit, on average, with a lot of players. On 3-4 players game, her power is harder to use, but this power can save you and punish your opponents, paving your way for success.
Ghost's power is psychological warfare at it's finest. It works for every round, it hides the first card of each round... On a game where you try to predict opponent's move, it's horrible to face. The power doesn't help you "win" by itself, with bad hands it can also do nothing, but the bluffing abilities of this power is incredible - if you can pick your character and dislike mind games, pick him, facing him is not for the fait of hearts.
Doc's power is bland. You draw one more card. Every turn. That's boring, but practical. You'll more often than not get the card you need and not be too crippled by bullet but that's it. Your opponents won't see you play differently, because you won't. You have no specific strength, no trick, it's just the cards and their stated effect. Surprisingly effective, he's never a bad choice and id perhaps the easiest character to play.
All in all, I think Ghost is the best, but depends on your group and how well you can bluff. With very large groups, I tend to go for Belle, because her power is much easier to trigger and well, it helps. Doc is the one I pick if I know people won't buy bluffs and are prone to mass shootings.
With one of the expansion pack, there is a chinese kung fu girl available which can move horizontally and vertically on the same move (well it's a bit more complex actually). She's VERY good because of this, her movements are hard to predict, and a skilled player always get where he wants, faster than anyone else. If expansions pack are included I'd vote for her.

We played with 4 players and have decided to ban Belle. She barely (I believe even never) got shot and won very easily. The group also played with more players and said it balanced her, so it may depend on the number of players, but Belle was nuts with 4.


text:
When do you enter the Mighty Mech?
In Tiny Epic Mechs when you enter the zone with the power mech, it says you "immediately take control of it". I was wondering where this falls in relation to other things that happen immediately. Specifically, mines, power up and attacking other players.

A mine could prevent you from getting the Mighty Mech as you'd lose health.
It would greatly affect a battle, whether you're in the suit or not.
Being able to heal or power up and jump into the Mighty Mech in one step would be very useful.

The order of actions I know are:
Mines -> Combat -> Turrets -> Action
Where should entering the mighty mech fall into this?

The general consensus in BGG is that entering the Mighty Mech is the first thing to do when entering a square, before any other action or check. So if otherwise allowed you could first enter inside the MM and then check for mines, combat, actions, etc.
But I could not find a written rule or clarification on the web.


text:
How many buildings can I buy per turn in Queendomino?
The instructions state you can

(Optional) Construct a building on an open red construction square.

I am assuming the convention is that you can buy one building per moved Meeple?

If you look at the rules,

You must take the following actions, in the outlined order (Note that only actions A and E are mandatory. The rest are optional):

you can see that you can play each action at most 1 times.
For action C (Building):

C - (Optional) Construct a Building:You need to have at least 1 “Town”
  square still in construction in order to construct a building, whether
  this is a square that was added to your territory during a previous
  round or the current one.

It clearly states a building, so you can only construct one for action C and because there is only one (or none) action C in your turn, you can only construct one building per turn.

ugh, what if your last play is a double red???


text:
Are Plenty Of Ammo cards discarded after using them?
A friend who recently bought Zombicide: Invader was pretty sure that you have to discard "Plenty of Ammo" cards after using their ability. He said he also checked online and found rules stating this (no idea where he found those). He stated that the word "once" in the card text was supposed to mean just that.
Is he right, though?
Do you have to discard a "Plenty of Ammo" card after using its ability?
Here is an example from Zombicide: Black Plague (but the wording is the same for all Zombicide editions, afaik)

Plenty of Ammo cards can be used once per action and are not discarded when used.
Some card types, including “Plenty Of Ammo” cards, are always in effect.

INVENTORY
Each Survivor can carry up to five pieces of Equipment but
  can only have two equipped and ready to use (one in each hand) at any
  given time. While all weapons must be in a hand slot in order to use
  them (whether to attack or to open a door), other items, such as the
  Goalie Mask, Flashlight and Plenty of Ammo cards, are always in
  effect, even while in the reserve slots.

https://www.zombicide.com/dl/rulebook-zombicide-season-1.pdf - page 9
e.g.:

Plenty of Arrows
You may re-roll all Ranged Attacks once with weapons with the Arrows
  keyword. The new result takes the place of the previous one.

This means that as long as this card is in your inventory, each Ranged Attack action using a weapon with the Arrow keyword can be re-rolled once.


text:
Are there budget replacements for Ugin and Karn removal abilities?
I am building a mono green Tron deck with a 60$ budget and looking for cheaper alternatives to replace planeswalkers listed below:

Ugin, the Spirit Dragon
Karn Liberated

I need a replacement for Ugin's -X ability because its kinda hard to deal with humans, spirits and similar creature spam decks.
I also need a replacement for Karn's -3 ability which kinda helps a lot in mirror matches or when you need to take their combo piece away without them having a chance to get it back.

I think with some clearer wording this would be a fine question. We have other well-received questions asking for alternatives to specific cards. https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/47156/is-there-a-budget-version-of-collected-company-for-this-modern-elf-deck

yeah English is not my main.....   but ill try to edit it...

This is still too broad; asking about three different cards at once puts any answer with just one or two in limbo.

so i have to ask about each card separately?

You should at least clarify what exactly the replacement cards should do. For example, for Karn Liberated, do you need a replacement for his +4 or for his -3? That is always a problem with "similar card" questions.

i think its finally both readable and clear if not correct me and ill try to do it again...

Obviously these two cards are unique in their capabilities and you should expect a decreased power level without them. However, there are cards that can fit the roles that these two planeswalkers fill even if they won't be quite as good.
World Breaker is a good choice to replace Karn as it is removal as well as a threat. It's a bit tougher to cast turn 3, but it also provides recursive removal which may help the U/W match-up.
Spot Removal
Ugin has a Lightning Bolt and Karn can exile a permanent. The following cards can help fill this role.

Spine of Ish Sah: Like "Karn, -3". Potentially recursive.
Walking Ballista: Threat + Removal
Warping Wail: Limited removal with some flexible utility.
Scour from Existence: A colorless Instant, not as good as Spine can be.
Titan's Presence: Possibly viable in Eldrazi Tron.
Brittle Effigy: Creature spot removal for 5.
Universal Solvent: Poor-mans Spine.

Mass Removal
Ugins -X can destroy multiple permanents, so we need something to cover that as well.

Oblivion Stone: Probably already in the deck, but could increase to 4.
Ratchet Bomb: Excellent against tokens, configurable destruction.
Blast Zone: Mass removal on a land, similar to Ratchet Bomb but starts at '1'.
Boompile: Fast, but random.


text:
Exchanging nearly all man in draughts (checkers)
I haven't played draughts (checkers) for a long time, but I recall that exchanging 3-5 men into kings in a single game is quite rare and performing more than 5 exchanges in one game is very rare.
Yet, I found this piece of text in Leo Tolstoy's "War and Peace":

For Kutuzov this was mathematically clear, as it is that if when playing draughts I have one man less and go on exchanging, I shall certainly lose, and therefore should not exchange. When my opponent has sixteen men and I have fourteen, I am only one eighth weaker than he, but when I have exchanged thirteen more men he will be three times as strong as I am.

What kind of exchange or game move is he writing about?
He could possibly be talking about standard man-to-king promotion, because it is not practically possible (or very, very rare) to exchange thirteen pieces into kings, nor would doing so make my opponent three times stronger than I am.

He has 14 pieces and his opponent 16. So his strength compared to his opponent is 14/16 = 7/8.
The exchange is the trade. Trade 13 pieces for 13 other pieces. So he has 14-13 = 1 and his opponent 16-13 = 3. So his opponent has three times as much pieces as he. The exchange has nothing to do with the promotion to king.
When you are behind, it is often not advantageous to trade. Unless you get a better position.

It seems that I misunderstood "exchange" with "promotion". Shame on me!

That's commonly referred as a "trade". In strategy / combat games, a trade can be applied to when you and your opponent equally lose with a move. You trade your pawn's life, for his, with the move leading to both player losing a pawn each.
If you eat a opponent's piece putting yours in a position where it'll be eaten right after, that's a trade.
Trades are advantageous to someone who is winning, as they maintain their advantage and lead the game to an early end. A losing player should avoid trades as that just puts him one piece closer to losing.
Trades are not always bad for the losing side - you can use it with a long term strategy that'll capitalize on that trade (the trade cleans a side of the board for you to turn a few Men into Kings for example). But as a short term move, trades should be avoided if you are losing.
Trades are common in games like checkers, chess, fighting games when both players punch each other at the same time, MtG when players lose creatures of approximately the same power, and so on.


text:
How are cards awarded on defeating a player in risk?
I'm playing Risk, the Hasbro game on my iPad.
How are cards awarded once someone eliminates a single player? Sometimes it's 2, sometimes it's 4.

It's possible the iPad version is using different rules, but the official rules for the classic Risk Game are as follows:

Eliminating  an  opponent.
If  during  your  turn  you  eliminate  an
  opponent  by  defeating  his  or  her  last  army  on  the  game  board,  you  win  any
  RISK  cards  that  player  has  collected.

So you get all of the cards that the opponent had on hand. This will never be more than 6 cards (which is only possible if you somehow defeated a player who had just defeated another player on their turn). It does occur BEFORE drawing a RISK card from conquering a territory this turn, as your turn hasn't ended yet.
There are two highly-relevant bullet points with regards to this:

If you gain enough risk cards to cause you to have 6 or more cards on hand as a direct result of defeating an opponent, you MUST trade the cards in immediately for reinforcements so that you have 5 or fewer cards.
If you have 5 cards as a result of defeating an opponent and then your additional card from conquering a territory puts you at 6 cards, you trade at the start of your NEXT turn.

This answer is generally good, but is version dependant. Note that other versions state that you must trade in if eliminating another player gives you 5 or more cards, to make it consistent with the normal rule for trading in if you have 5 at the start of your turn. See this excellent answer on another question.

Yeah that's what happens in the hasbro game


text:
How does this Example Endgame work in Scrabble? Playing Out Scenario
In Wikibook's Scrabble guide, they have a Scrabble/Endgame section.
In the Example Endgame Subsection, they show how a person could play out his letters, knowing through tile-tracking that the opponent has a W. They note that the opponent has only two places to play the W, as OW or WAG. The first move they play is OTIC, blocking OW. Then they go on to play three more times, leaving the opponent with W and winning the game.
How does this work? If I were the opponent and OW was used I would play WAG directly after, ending the game.
What am I missing here?

Could you summarize the information from that link here?  If the linked page ever disappears/changes, your question won't be very meaningful anymore.

Playing OTIC blocks both OW and WAG.  OTIC starting at H3 will put the 'C' on H6, blocking the opponent from playing W on I6.