Spell targets player in multiplayer game, and that player leaves. Does it still resolve? Let's say I have infinite mana, Soulfire Grand Master and Crater's Claws. I play a multiplayer game with 5 other players. I use Soulfire Grand Master last ability with infinite damage crater claws on first opponent. He doesn't wait until the spell resolve, and leave the game.

Will the spell resolve, so I can take it back to my hand and kill 4 other opponents?

No, the spell will be countered by the game rules.

If all targets of a targeted spell or ability become illegal before resolution, the spell/ability will be countered and nothing that would happen on resolution will happen.

  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. The spell or ability is countered if all its targets, for every instance of the word “target,” are now illegal. If the spell or ability is not countered, it will resolve normally. However, if any of its targets are illegal, the part of the spell or ability’s effect for which it is an illegal target can’t perform any actions on that target, make another object or player perform any actions on that target, or make that target perform any actions. If the spell or ability creates a continuous effect that affects game rules (see rule 613.10), that effect doesn’t apply to illegal targets. The effect may still determine information about illegal targets, though, and other parts of the effect for which those targets are not illegal may still affect them.

Edit

No, it does not resolve. This is a valid technique, although it may be considered unsporting in casual play because it is essentially kingmaking.

Source

104.3a A player can concede the game at any time. A player who concedes leaves the game immediately. He or she loses the game.

Old, wrong answer

Yes, it resolves.

This is for the same reason that players cannot sacrifice a creature in response to your targeting it if they have no spell or ability that can make them do so.

If your opponent, on the other hand, casts Lightning Bolt on himself and reduces his life total to 0 before your spell resolves, it will be countered.


Watchtower when someone uses a Masquerade As a reaction card, Watchtower can be revealed whenever you gain a card.

Does this apply to the card you receive from other players during a Masquerade?

No.  A passed card is not considered a gained card.

From the Intrigue rulebook:

  “Pass” – when a player passes a card to another player, he places that card face down on the table between himself and the other player. The receiving player then takes the card from the table and puts it in his hand. A passed card is not revealed to the other players. A passed card is not considered to be trashed or discarded by the player passing it and it is not considered to be gained by the player receiving it.

The only way you gain a card is if the card specifically says the word "gain" or when you spend money to buy it off of a supply pile. Anything else that results in you having a new card in your deck is not a "gain".

Edit: Total brain fart, thanks commenters!


Carcassonne city scoring If a city has two knights for one player and one knight for another, does the player with two knights get the double point bonus for that city?

When the city is completed, the player(s)[1] with the most knights in the city gets points for the city in the amount of two per tile plus two per banner[2]. No other player receives any points for that city.
For example, when completing a three-tile city without banners, the player with two knights will receive 6 points, and the player with one knight will receive none, just like if there was only one knight in the city.

In the event of a tie, each of the players tied for the most knights gets all of the points.
Half that for incomplete cities at the end of the game.

A city is complete when it is surrounded by walls and there are no gaps in the walls or the city. There can be any number of sections in a city. A player who owns a knight in a completed city scores 2 points per tile in the city (count the tiles and not the sections). Each banner in the scored city also gives the player 2 points.
What if there are more than one follower on a completed road or city? With some clever tile placements, it is possible to connect road and city sections, resulting in a road with more than one thief or a city with more than one knight. The player with the most thieves or knights scores the totality of the points. In case of a tie, the tied players each score the points.
During the final scoring, incomplete roads, cities or monasteries are scored. A player who has a follower on an incomplete road, city or monastery scores 1 point per tile. For cities, each banner is also worth only 1 point. In case of a tie, use the same rules as for completed features.

(Emphasis in original)

If by double point you mean banner or other point influence in an expansion, yes. The winner of the meeple showdown wins it all, no divisions except in case of ties.


What are good strategies against counterspell decks? I'm currently honing a white-green tokens deck for Standard tournament play. I feel like I have a good handle on my game-plan for most of the other common archetypes, but I'm really stymied playing against the counterspell-heavy blue decks.

It's not hard for a blue deck to run 4x Mana Leak, 4x Dissipate, 4x Vapor Snag, and 4x Snapcaster Mage, giving him plenty of options to counterspell or bounce literally every single spell that I try to cast. I've tried two basic options:

Go aggro. Cast spells as quickly as you can, try to exhaust his supply of counterspells, and hope that one of your plays will eventually stick. (This usually doesn't work.)
Play the waiting game. Wait for him to tap out on my end step and then sneak in a Midnight Haunting, or, more rarely, hope that he eventually taps out or runs out of cards on his turn and gives me a chance to play some creatures. (This works a little better, but is very inconsistent. It depends on Villain eventually giving me an opening, and every turn I wait is another turn where he gets a chance to draw his finishers.)

Is there another way to play against this deck?

Tactics in Play

Counterspells are powerful because they're a broad-brush answer to a lot of spells. Whatever spell type is central to your opponent's game plan, you can stop it on the stack. This versatility comes at a price, though: timing. If you've got a threat on the board, I can use Doom Blade to deal with it whenever is most convenient for me; with a Mana Leak, though, I have to cast my spell while yours is on the stack -- meaning I have to have the card in hand then and there, and the mana open to use my counter. Exploiting this weakness is the foundation of anti-counter tactics.

(Note that I'm assuming you're playing in a more "conventional" environment like Limited or Standard here. The dynamics of Legacy or Vintage are pretty different, but would require long digressions about a couple of particular cards.)

Play an aggressive early game. Most 1-drop counters are very situational, meaning they likely won't see widespread play in a control deck. So, right off the bat, you have 1-2 turns to establish an early board presence. Rush out permanents that will help you build board position or pressure your opponent's life total.

When you do this, be mindful of sweepers (like Wrath of God). A typical control-deck strategy against aggressive starts is to use just enough counters or spot removal to survive to drop a sweeper, and then clear the board and try to "take over" with raw power and card advantage. Generally speaking, early pressure is good, but disgorging your entire hand ASAP is not necessarily an optimal plan.
Exploit your opponent's limited mana in the mid-game. In the mid-game, your opponent will have enough land for counterspell mana, but you can still exploit the limitations of her mana base. Playing 1-drops and 2-drops straight into counters can put you at a mana advantage over your opponent. If you're both at 4 lands and she Dissipates a 1-drop, you still have 3 mana to pay for other spells. It helps if you have a key card that your opponent can't easily answer once it's on the battlefield: just holding enough mana open to cast your big threat creates pressure on your opponent to let your other stuff through.

Another trick is to save your instant-speed plays for your opponent's end step. This puts your opponent in a double bind: if she counters your current play, then she'll be tapped out on your turn, and you'll get to play a thing; if she doesn't, hey, you just got to play a thing!
Plan for the end-game. Your opponent has to play threats of her own to win. They're likely at the top of her curve (for a pure control deck) or at the bottom (for an aggro-control deck).

Against control or combo-control: Your opponent is using counterspells to slow down your development while she plays out lands to pay for her big stuff. Eventually she'll drop some big finisher or set up an engine that gives her ever-increasing advantage. Having an answer for it will help you avoid defeat (or at least force your opponent to wait a few more turns to play it, so she can have counter backup), but fundamentally you'll still want to win on speed.
Against aggro-control: Your opponent is trying to win on tempo. This involves setting up an early clock and then using counters and bounce spells to keep it going. Her undercosted threats become less and less powerful as the game wears on, though. Unless you can straight-up out-race her, you need to focus your efforts on stopping her clock. If you can do this, you can often grind out a win once her deck runs out of steam.

Deckbuilding Strategy

You can make deckbuilding decisions to beat counterspell-heavy decks, too.

Include counter-proof lines of attack. Even though they're highly versatile, counterspells still can't counter everything. So, just play offensive cards that are impervious to counters. Thrun, the Last Troll is a popular sideboard card for this reason, being immune to counterspells and most removal (as a regenerating 4/4 for 4, he's also awesome enough to maindeck). Cavern of Souls can make any of your creatures uncounterable. Cards like Inkmoth Nexus and Moorland Haunt allow you to play offense with your land drops even if all your spell cards are getting zapped with counters. This is probably the easiest way to deal with permission-heavy decks without spreading your deck too thin (though watch your color density).
Sideboard specific hosers. When all else fails, if you're having lots of trouble with any particular matchup, it's sensible to devote some space to it in your sideboard. Cards like Defense Grid or Vexing Shusher can restrict counterspells. Cards like Summoning Trap can punish them. Note that your hosers don't have to be focused on the counterspells themselves — if your opponent's deck is light on threats, you can disrupt them with cards like Slaughter Games; if they require lots of mana, try land destruction like Molten Rain to delay them.
Don't play midrange without disruption. "Midrange" is a term for archetypes that try to straddle the line between aggro and control. They try to beat aggro decks by being "a little bigger" and control decks by being "a little faster". The problem is that "a little faster" doesn't work all that well. Oftentimes you do beat aggro (by going "a little bigger"), but counterspells clobber your deck because you're playing most of your stuff in the midgame (when your opponent has mana for counters) but the spells in your deck generally aren't big enough that you can win the game just by getting one of them to stick. The most successful midrange-style decks typically use focused hand disruption (e.g. Thoughtseize) to clear an opponent's counters and removal.

Dosan the Falling Leaf stops all other players from meddling during your turn.


Restrictions around promoting a pawn I have tried to read the Wikipedia article but it is too confusing on what the current accepted standard is.

My questions are:

If a pawn makes it to the last row can they stay as a pawn?
If a pawn makes it to the last row can they be promoted to a piece that hasn't been removed from the board e.g. 2 queens or 3 knights on the board?

If the last question is yes, do people normally carry around multiple sets with the same pieces?

No, a Pawn must be promoted to a Knight, Bishop, Rook, or Queen.
Yes, pawn promotion isn't limited to captured pieces.
My guess is that normal people don't carry around multiple sets of pieces, probably only tournaments. Most likely tournaments keep far more queens around than other pieces since promotion is usually to a queen (99% of the time).
The Wikipedia page says this (emphasis mine):

Promotion is a chess rule describing the transformation of a pawn that reaches its eighth rank into the player's choice of a queen, knight, rook, or bishop of the same color (Just & Burg 2003:16). The new piece replaces the pawn on the same square and is part of the move. Promotion is not limited to pieces that have already been captured (Schiller 2003:18–19). Every pawn that reaches its eighth rank must be promoted.

If you want a copy of the USCF's Rulebook: The Official Rules of Chess, 5th Edition (2003) that they are referencing though, it will cost you.
The FIDE has this in their rule book.

3.7e. When a pawn reaches the rank furthest from its starting position it must be exchanged as part of the same move on the same square for a new queen, rook, bishop or knight of the same colour. The player’s choice is not restricted to pieces that have been captured previously. This exchange of a pawn for another piece is called ‘promotion’ and the effect of the new piece is immediate.
6.12 b. A player may stop the clocks only in order to seek the arbiter’s assistance, for
example when promotion has taken place and the piece required is not available.

No, yes and yes

Q1) Staying as a pawn would be inconvenient, I don't know the answer, but on computer games you can't .

Q2) Yes, or what's the point of the use

Q3) Lots of people promote pawns.


Interactions of multiple Parallel Lives If I have two Parallel Lives, and I have a Doomed Traveler that just died, how many Spirit tokens would I put into play?

Four.
For each instance of Parallel Lives (or Doubling Season) in play, double each instance of a token that would enter play.
Parallel Lives' effect is a replacement effect. It replaces "Put X creature tokens into play under your control" with "Put 2X creature tokens into play under your control."
Thus, two Parallel Lives' would quadruple tokens, three would be eight times, and four would be sixteen.  Effectively, for each token placement, replace every token with two tokens for each instance of Parallel Lives.
Appropriate comp rules:

614.5. A replacement effect doesn't invoke itself repeatedly; it gets only one opportunity to affect an event or any modified events that may replace it.
Example: A player controls two permanents, each with an ability that reads "If a creature you control would deal damage to a creature or player, it deals double that damage to that creature or player instead." A creature that normally deals 2 damage will deal 8 damage -- not just 4, and not an infinite amount.

EDIT: Relevant Oracle text mentioned by @AlexP:

9/22/2011 - If you control two Parallel Lives, then the number of tokens created is four times the original number. If you control three, then the number of tokens created is eight times the original number, and so on.

"If an [EFFECT] would put one or more tokens onto the battlefield [INSTEAD]"

This wording seems confusing. The act of doubling is an effect of the enchantment, therefore to the wording, two Parallel Lives on the field would seem to loop as one would trigger the other into infinite creatures:

The initial spell/effect has you put a creature onto the field.

Parallel Lives (A) has you put an additional token onto the field.

Parallel Lives (B) triggers the same time as (A) resulting in four.

Going by the text, it seems that it shouldn't end there.

Assuming Parallel Lives (A) would react to (B) having placed tokens

Assuming Parallel Lives (B) would react to (A) having placed a token

"Whenever" vs "If" would have made this card infinite with just the two, as that word is what typically is used to denote potential for an infinite cycle to occur.

If you need proof of the concept go buy two mirrors and put them edge to edge at a 90 degree angle and place an object at the center or place them exactly facing each other with an item in the center. This denotes "Whenever an item appears, create a duplicate of that item," but two mirrors would also catch the appearance of the mirrored appearance.

This is to say the wording didn't covey the comprehensive ruling in simple enough vocabulary/structure, so that is what most player would potentially default to in lack of comprehensive rules to refer to -going on the card text alone. It is understandable to mistake it as a continuous engine.


What are good reasons to lead dummy's first bid suit? The most obvious time is when partner has made a lead-directing double, showing strength, perhaps a tenace, in dummy's suit.

But even when partner hasn't doubled, there may be other reasons. For instance, if dummy has only a few high card points, forcing dummy to take its winners early may cause declarer "transportation" problems. If your hand lends itself well be being squeezed, hammering at dummy's high cards early may be a form of anti-squeeze defense.

If you have something obvious to do, like cash a long suit or lead partner's bid suit, you'd do that. But suppose you have scattered values and no bids by your side. What would make you lead dummy's suit? Are the reasons I listed in the last paragraph valid ones? And are there others that I have overlooked?

A couple of reasons

You have a singleton in dummy's suit.
You hold, say K8, in dummy's suit, and want declarer to commit to
    finesse in that suit/some other line (i.e. refusing the finesse), on
    the opening lead. You do this by leading the deceptive 8 (feigning
    singleton 8 or 8x). This has actually happened, with success, on real play.

The reason of cutting off dummy's communication is good, but unlikely to come up on the opening lead. Leading dummy's suit can lose a much needed tempo, especially when you are not even sure if the suit is solid etc.

Breaking up a squeeze on the opening lead? Well, if you can do that knowingly, you should play bridge for money :-) I guess it is theoretically possible, though.

One such situation is when you have four or five cards in dummy's suit (in which he probably has four). Then either declarer or your partner is likely to be short in that suit (which creates entry or other problems for declarer). If declarer has a singleton, you've just knocked out his potential entry, perhaps before he's ready to use it, and if declarer has a doubleton (less likely than not), that's still somewhat true.

If declarer is "long" in dummy's suit with three or four cards, your partner will be short, and may be able to ruff. And as Aryabhata pointed out, if you have singleton or doubleton, YOU may be the one leading for a ruff.

A time to avoid doing this is when you have exactly three cards in dummy's suit. Then there's a good chance that the cards will be divided 4-3-3-3, which is all in the declarer's favor. It goes to the general principle of the defense playing safely when they have an "average" holding (e.g. three cards in dummy's suit or the trump suit), and aggressively when they have a "feature" (four or five cards in dummy's or declarer's suit, or conversely, shortness in a non-trump suit.


Why do cards have different rarity levels in Magic: The Gathering? I've been reflecting on this concept and trying to come up with a concise answer: Why do different levels of card rarity exist in MtG? In order for this concept of different numbers of different cards existing to be beneficial to MtG, it has to do one of a few things:

Make it easier to build decks.
Make the game more strategic.
Make the game more replayable.

Here's what I've come up with so far:

The first one is probably most relevant. If a Llanowar Elf was just as common as a Shpinx of Uthuun, and both were just as common as everything else, it wouldn't make any sense because the number of decks that need Llanowars and the amount of Llanowars in each deck that uses them is much greater.
To some degree, it makes the game more replayable, in that it takes longer to see all of the cards because some of them aren't as common, but I don't really consider this a good reason in itself.
Rares tend to be more powerful than other cards, and this seems to work exactly backwards from how it should. If tons of people want a Thrun, the last troll in their decks because it's really powerful, shouldn't it be common so the people with rares don't have an advantage over the people who don't? If you're going to make some cards weaker than others, why not make more of the good ones and not the bad ones? Making powerful cards more expensive does not improve the overall game.

Are these points somewhat valid? How does some cards being produced in smaller number make Magic a better game? How would the game change for the better or worse if all cards were equally rare?

NOTE: Saying that having certain cards be rarer than others makes the game better because of the 'ooooh shiny!' factor when you do get one does nothing to make deck building and playing the game more interesting or fun. I also know that it makes Wizards and card shops tons of money, but I do not want to focus on money in the creator's pockets being the reason for their existence. :D

The main reasons for rarity are:

To allow for complex cards without overwhelming new players. Rich interactions are part of what make Magic great, but the sheer volume of rules can be overwhelming. By limiting complex cards to uncommon, rare and mythic, it reduces the amount that new players need to worry about it.
To allow for interesting limited environments as well as powerful cards for constructed. By putting limited bombs at rare or even mythic rare, it reduces the effect they have on limited format games.
To sell cards.

We're talking about how it affects the game not how it affects the company's money (profit/loss). Furthermore we're talking about how it affects gameplay not how it affects excitement of opening booster packs etc/snob appeal.

firstly let's define the attributes of common cards vs mythic cards (and all in between on that scale). common cards are simply less powerfull cards than the rares. common cards aren't less complex than mythic cards. that's just untrue. case example is the 8 mana rare/mythic rare big monster that just has high power and 2/3 abilities and nothing more. common cards tend to be just purely less effective versions of the rare. eg they worse mana cost to p/t ratios, higher mana cost for their abilities or take off less damage etc. basically putting 'power' on a number scale common cards are X powerfull, uncommon X+1, rare X+2 etc or something roughly like that. the only difference in how the good the cards are. sometimes, rarely, in a deck even a common card will be a good card in your deck - but generally most of your cards won't be commmon/uncommon. most good decks are over 100£. and so on top of tournament prices, if you change your deck twice in a year that's like buying ps3 each year.

so now that we know the rarity of cards is simply an indicator of the worth of the card in actual gameplay (ie how powerfull it is). and we know that price is proportional to the power of cards. then all that means is they're creating a meta game where the more wealth you have in real life the more power during gameplay. so if you work out and become good with computers and earn a lot of money you're now better off when building a deck in magic and thus during gameplay so basically being good at computers (or any other thing people pay you a lot of money for) = being good at magic. that's just so wrong...

if all cards were the same price however then it wouldn't work as a business etc. common cards wouldn't be bought and seeing as they cost the same to print manufacture etc it would be pure loss so that means common cards would go out and this would be bad for the game as it would mean there are less cards for peopl to tinker their decks with/general come across ideas and having many formats is fun anyway ie pure commons etc. so then they'd have to stop making as many cards per year as theirs always going to a be a scale of good cards to bad cards simply because if a card is better than another in that set then no matter how 'good' the card is it's now fundamentally as it's worse than another. this means they'd up the price of all cards. persides it's so set up anyway the mtg is with colour categories and then themes each year etc - they know what cards are good and what's filler. whereas in yugioh there's just cards that will always be around, that are great in most decks like MST, monster reborn etc. any


Erasable yet bold crayon for Empire Builder Games (e.g. Eurorails)? We have kids, so we have lots of types of crayons in the house.  Everything from airline freebie to crayola.  None of them are very satisfactory for Eurorails (and related games).  Either they are too light to see or they won't erase easily.  The original factory crayons are long since gone/lost.

What crayon do people recommend for Eurorails?

I don't think you will get a definitive answer, but probably just lots of suggestions. There has been.discussion about this question before on BGG. You are going to get a range of answers:

Crayola Washable Crayons.
China Markers.
Dry Erase Markers
Wet Erase Markers.
Standard Crayola Crayons

From BGG, one user reports that Crayola Washable Markers work well.


Running a MTG draft without actually having to buy new boosters for each player every single time? MTG drafting sounds like a really awesome way to play the game. I'd love to try it with some of my friends, but having to spent >5$ for each player every single time you want to play seems unnecessarily prohibitive.

How can I make MTG drafting work with cards I already have? The big issue I see is with the random selection of the starting cards. Do the boosters that are meant to used with drafting really contain completely random cards? How can I simulate their distribution? Should I have each starting set of 15 cards contain only cards from 1 set? How can I make sure there's a variety of cards (enough creatures, instant, and sorceries to keep things interesting) being used without destroying the randomness of selection?

I know not using boosters will take away a small part of the game, mostly the total randomness of what all the packs contain. I'm not looking for a perfect draft simulator, but as I have 3000+ cards I don't see why my group can't have >95% of the fun of drafting without having to buy new boosters every time.

There's a popular fan-made format called Cube where you create a set of cards and people pick them for their decks, either by assembling virtual "packs" by grabbing random sets of cards or (more rarely) picking them one-at-a-time from the whole set kinda like how teams draft rookie players in professional sports. Because you tailor the card pool to your group's needs, it's easy to create Cubes for unconventional formats like Commander (individual collection permitting).

If you're interested in having pack-based drafts that strongly resemble normal MTG Limited and Sealed, you can assemble your own packs from your personal collection, basically like Cube draft but with rarity. Here's a rough guide...

To my knowledge, the only thing that's truly fixed about boosters is rarity distribution (although you can get extra rares in a pack due to foils, or specialty stuff like double-faced cards or "hidden treasures"). There are some other correlations that arise due to how sheets are cut, but they're mostly at the box level rather than individual-pack level.

If you start with a fairly representative sample of a set and then construct cards with the same rarity distribution as regular MTG boosters, the laws of probability should ensure that you get a reasonable distribution of colors and card types in the vast majority of your packs (a few really skewed ones is acceptable or even desirable, just like you sometimes get really skewed "official" boosters). The easiest way to do this is just to create three big piles for commons, uncommons, and rares (/mythics) and make packs from them sight-unseen in the normal 1:3:10 ratio; you don't have to do anything special for the individual packs as long as your starting piles are at fair (e.g. if you collect certain colors much more heavily than others, make sure that bias doesn't filter into the big giant piles you've created). Ideally your big piles should be significantly bigger than the number of cards in any given draft; that way there's no guarantee that a particular card is bound to be in one of the packs.

The easiest way to create a coherent environment is to stay within a given block (set of 3-4 expansions). Playing a familiar block format will make it easier for players to evaluate cards. I don't think the extra effort that would be required to make sure your packs exactly match individual sets (like they do in "real" Limited) is really worthwhile -- if anything, I think you can have a more fun block draft if cards from the various expansions are mixed together across all three packs.

Of course, you can also vary (or just abolish) the rarity mix in order to create a very different play experience. I'm assuming other ways to alter the experience will come to you once you've tried this a few times. If you find yourselves wanting to fine-tune what goes into your card pool, look for articles on Cube drafting: the same principles folks apply to creating a Cube can be used to analyze what you're putting into the pool you draw packs from.

If you go on Amazon, you can find a box set of 1000 random cards for around $20, as well as a box of 500 basic lands (100 of each color) for around $15. Later this year (around Fall Break) I plan to host a Random Card Draft using these.
Basically, I will shuffle them, separate them all by rarity, and dole them out into "packs" with each pack containing 1 rare, 3 uncommons, and 11 commons (I realize I've got an extra common in here, but we have the cards for it). I will then have a draft using these packs.
By getting the cards in bulk, without caring for which set they are in, you can have a full 8 person draft with some pretty nice prizes for only about $5 per player.

My Prize Distribution (Using a Single Elimination Tournament):
1st Place: 256 Cards
2nd Place: 128 Cards
3rd + 4th Place: 64 Cards Each
5th + 6th + 7th + 8th: 32 Cards Each

1000 Card Link
http://www.amazon.com/Magic-Gathering-Cards-Bonus-Rares/dp/B0017H86GA

500 Land Link
http://www.amazon.com/500-Magic-Gathering-Islands-Mountains/dp/B00SG3PJGS/ref=sr_1_1?&s=toys-and-games&ie=UTF8&qid=1439325701&sr=1-1&keywords=500+basic+lands+magic

Note: I haven't actually tried this before, so I don't know how it will work. If you are concerned about the cards lacking synergy, you can create a few extra packs with 4 uncommons and 11 commons, and draft those with the 3 standard packs you created.


Do you have to have exactly 60 cards in a Magic the Gathering deck? Do you have to have exactly 60 cards in a Magic the Gathering deck? Some people I've talked to at FNM say yes, others say no.

No, not at all. You probably should keep it near the minimum since a deck of minimum size will provide more consistent results than a larger deck, but you are not obligated to do so.

For constructed events, your deck must have at least 60 cards[CR 100.2a] (plus an optional sideboard of no more than 15 cards[CR 100.4a]).
For limited (draft and sealed) events, your deck must have at least 40 cards[CR 100.2b].

Additionally all decks no matter the format must be "able to be shuffled within a reasonable time"

There are many formats that impose additional limitations. Notably,

For Commander games, your deck must have exactly 100 cards (including your Commander)[CR 903.5a].

I could quote you the rules, but Battle of Wits is much more convincing :)

Note: When this answer was originally written the side board was limited to exactly 15 cards. This has changed. I have updated this information to match current rules since it doesn't affect the answer.

It is good to have a large deck because if someone had a decking deck you would lose instantly! It is also good to have a deck of 60 cards because you have a better chance to get your good card! This is my opinion!


Good rules for combining the various expansions start tiles The river expansions, the wheel of fortune and other expansions all add their own sets of start tiles and blocks of tiles to the game.

Are there good rules for combining these starting tiles?

The details depend on which expansions you're playing with, as some have starting pieces that are mutually exclusive or have slightly different rules depending on the combination. For example, the following cover all expansions through the catapult:

Collect tiles:

Collect the following special tiles, in addition to those for the base game and any other expansions being played:

Any combination of river expansion tiles (from "The River", "The River II", or the "Mini Expansion") that includes exactly one spring, exactly one lake/end tile and, optionally a single branch and a second lake/end tile.

The count piece and all 12 Carcassonne City tiles.

Prepare tiles:

Discard the starting tile; place the assembled City in the middle of the table, with the count in the castle district of the City; place the spring next to the City with the river leading away from the City, set one lake/end tile (with a volcano, if in use) and the branch tile aside, face up, and shuffle the remaining river expansion tiles and place them face down; shuffle all other tiles in use and place them in a concealed supply (in a bag, tower dispenser, or face down piles or stacks).

Drawing tiles:

Draw tiles, beginning with the branch tile, then face down river expansion tiles, then the face up lake/end tile, then from tiles in the supply.

For a step-by-step setup and turn structure tailored to whatever specific expansions you have in mind, see http://www.sciencegames.com/carcassonne/.

The branch is not played by a player it starts in play connected following the same line as the spring with the branch being too the left or right. Then players draw tiles from the river expansion. Furthermore, you use only two lake tiles and set one of those aside doesn't have to be the volcano though it is recommended if you are playing with it. The other lake ets shuffled with the river tiles. The river is allowed to encircle the city but it is discouraged because if the tiles don't come out in the right order there is the potential it can never be completed and you risk tiles being removed from the game.


What do dusk and dawn count as in Fury of Dracula 3rd ed? In the 3rd edition, the rulebook says

  Dawn occurs before the day, and dusk occurs before the night.

Does this mean that dawn = night, and dusk = day when resolving combat?

First, what edition are you talking about? If I'm assuming third correctly, then:

  If combat is at dusk or night, Dracula resolves the “at night” effects of his combat cards.

thus dusk = night; dawn = day for combat effects.

I think the thing to keep in mind is that it's a vampire game. At dusk, Dracula is waking up and ready to feed/fight, and he's got all night to do so. At dawn, he's in a hurry to get back into his coffin before sunrise, and he's getting weaker every minute that passes, therefore he's weaker at dawn than he is at dusk.


Rock-paper-scissors type randomizers Most non-luck-free games use either open-ended randomizers (like dice, or spinners) or closed-ended randomizers (cards, chit pulls, etc).

But there is an alternative, which is simultaneous revelation of chosen selections (rock-paper-scissors).  One example of games that use this type of randomizer are games with written orders, like Diplomacy - which is so completely driven by the diplomatic factor that most people regard it as being luck-free.

Are there any games that use rock-paper-scissors type mechanics as an explicit randomizer?

Race for the Galaxy has this kind of randomness in the action selection phase, although it has a lot of luck of the draw in it as well.  A typical early game example is the explore, settle, trade relationship in the early game.  Often, you want to explore if other players trade, settle if they explore, and trade if they settle.

On the other hand, I disagree that this is not inherently lucky.  If we play Rock Paper Scissors, and I play uniformly at random, the only way that you are going to beat me is luck.  Even if we introduce a little bit of information into the game, if I am making a decision that has any randomness in it, and I certainly should be if the game can be reduced to a mixed strategy, then the game still has some luck involved.

I once wrote a gadget to google wave for Rock Paper Scissors Lizard Spock

Of course this is just the same as rock paper scissors but with more options.


What is the fastest possible game in Splendor? In the game of splendor, what is the fewest number of turns you could take to get 15 points?

EDIT: fixed violation of limit on taking 2 of same gems (Forbidden when <4 gems remaining).

First of all, @Arcanist Lupus has provided good answer with simple yet efficient approach and also provided link to cards table in the comments, so I want to thank them. But looking at the table I noticed that 4 pts. cards have better conversion rates than 5 pts. ones, and a lot of gems are lost when going straight for 5 pts. cards.

So, assuming all required cards are available, no nobles and no interference from other players, here is my solution:

Cards I'm going for: White 4 for 7 blacks; Blue 4 for 7 whites; Green 4 for 7 blues; Green 3 for 6 greens.

Steps:

+2 black
+2 black
+1 black, 1 green, 1 {any}
+1 black, 2 {any}
+1 black, 1 white, 1 green. Return 3 {any}
Claim White 4 card for 7 blacks. (1 white and 2 green remain in the stash)
+2 white
+2 white
+1 white, 1 blue, 1 green
Claim Blue 4 card for 6 whites + card. (1 blue and 3 green remain in the stash)
+2 blue
+2 blue
+1 blue, 1 green, 1 {any}. Return 1 {any}
Claim Green 4 card for 6 blues + card. (4 green remain in the stash)
+1 green, 2 {any}
Claim Green 3 card for 5 greens + card

Done. 15 points in 16 turns.

steps 3 and 4 are just about getting 2 blacks, since it's forbidden to get 2 at once at that point. Alternatively you can take golden tokens and secure couple of cards for yourself, in that case in step 15 just take 2 greens (you will have 1 less, so it would be legal move).

As a partial solution, here are some of the qualities I suspect will need to be part of such a "perfect game":

All Noble tiles claimed (since they represent a large source of points for no additional action taken).
Very few turns where chips are taken, and a turning point somewhere in the middle of the game after which no chips are taken (since every turn taking chips is a turn you aren't taking cards which gain you points).

Additionally, I suspect that the structure of the game will be something like (assuming a 2-player setup, so there are 9 points available in nobles):

Spend a few turns taking chips and acquiring cheap level 1 cards.
Get enough level 1 cards that all future purchases are free, probably earning the first noble near the end of this step.
Get 1 or 2 level 2 cards worth 2-3 points, earning the second noble.
Get a level 3 card and the third noble.

It might be possible to shortcut step 3 if you get a couple of the 1 point level 1 cards in step 2, but I don't think that there's a lot to be gained going that way (the 1 point cards are not particularly cost-effective).


Alpha, Beta, and Arabian Nights in Tournaments? With the exception of basic lands, are all Alpha, Beta, and Arabian Nights cards banned in sanctioned tournaments? Does that also include Deserts?

There is a special limitation on Alpha cards to account for their differently-cut edges. From the official Magic The Gathering Floor Rules:

102. Authorized Cards
Alpha cards (cards from the first print run of the basic set) may be used in decks  containing non-Alpha cards only
if all cards are placed in completely opaque sleeves  and only if the
sleeves could not be considered marked. If sleeves are not used, Alpha
cards may be used only in decks that consist exclusively of Alpha
cards.

There are no such restrictions on Beta or Arabian Nights cards however, which are (hopefully) less easily distinguishable by their shape from modern cards.
As rahzark's answer rightly suggests, individual cards may be restricted or banned in different tournament formats, but there's no prohibition against cards from older sets as a whole.

Desert was reprinted in Time Shifted, From the Vaults, and was made into a promo, so therefor you could turn to the newer printings of the card if you are having complications with a judge on the matter.


Can you play a Progress Card even when you get nothing from it? If I have a Progress Card for which initial preconditions do not hold, will I still be able to use it in order to discard it back to the pile? The goal is to prevent a spy from stealing it.

A few examples:

I am leading in victory points but I want to use Wedding card.
I have Irrigation but I don't have any wheat hexagons.
I have Blacksmith but I don't have any ore hexagons.

It appears the FAQ addresses this kind of situation, and the answer is no.
See question number 3 on this page of official catan FAQ:

Progress Cards: General - May I play a Progress Card if playing it has no effect?
If you know beforehand that playing the card will have no effect (e.g., the Foundry card, provided that you are not settling adjacent to a mountains hex): no.
If you have no way of knowing it (e.g., Trade Monopoly): yes.

No, you may not, is specifically says so in the FAQ

"If you know beforehand that playing the card will have no effect (e.g., the Mining card, provided that you are not settling adjacent to a mountains hex): no."

https://www.catan.com/faqs/96?page=6


How to make a small slam in bridge with less than 30 points between the partnership? The following hand came up recently in the Common Game. I would like my gentle reader let me know how you would have bid in order to reach the optimal contract (6 clubs). I know that a small slam really is possible because a few partnerships, admittedly rare, actually bid and made 6 clubs. I suspect those partnerships used the Precision Club system, or some variation thereof; but any insights that you can provide would be much appreciated.

I propose the following sequence playing a standard approach, with EW passing throughout:

1C 1D
1S     4 Spades, denying a hand suitable to rebid 1NT
   2H  4th Suit Forcing to game, suggesting dislike for NT
3C     5-card Club suit, dislikes NT also, often denies Heart control
   4C  agreeing clubs, still forcing, extras
4D     1st or 2nd round control in Diamonds
   4H  1st or 2nd round control in Hearts
6C     We have the controls, and 5C is almost always a bad result

Another possibility using Single Raise Forcing (10+ Pts)  is:

1C  2C  forcing raise, 4+ support and 13+ support points
2S      4 Spades, two suited with longer Clubs than Spades
    3H  Denies Diamond A or K, shows Heart A or K, Game Force
3S      Spade A or K and Diamond A or K or singleton denied by partner
    4H  Holding both A and K, or singleton A, of Hearts; and
        likes the Diamond and Spade controls from Opener
6C      Looks like a super fit

It is also faulty analysis to claim that NS have less than 30 points combined. The South hand is worth 16 to 17 points in a Club contract (15 HCP and either 1 point for the fifth Club or two points for the two doubletons) and the North hand is worth 16 Dummy points in a Club contract (14 HCP - 1 for the unsupported QS + 3 for the singleton Spade). This is a combined partnership strength of 32-33 points, and as the auctions above indicate that it is quite reasonable, using standard methods, to find the Club slam.

If finding reasonable slams were easy, they wouldn't be worth so much. Bridge is designed to reward those who can accurately reassess hand strength during the auction, in light of bidding by partner and the opponents.

It's possible that those partnerships used Splinter Bids, which are artificial bids that promise High Card Points a bit short of a guaranteed slam but also show shortness in the bid suit to compensate.  With a bit of distribution luck it's possible to get extra tricks via ruffs.

As discussed in the article above, specifics like splinter bids after minor openings and other slam bidding conventions come into play.  But I suspect that a splinter bid first alerted South of a favorable card distribution, with an Ace opposite a singleton spade.


What's the point of putting five face-up train cards next to the deck in Ticket to Ride? What is the point of placing 5 train cards face up next to the deck? I can't see any purpose for this apart from taking 5 cards out of the deck!

When you are taking cards on your turn, you can choose to take any of the face-up cards rather than taking one from the deck. Taking a face-up card this way lets you choose what you are getting (as long as the color you want is available).

From the rules:

  Draw Train Car Cards – The player may draw 2 Train Car cards. He may take any one of the face-up cards or he may draw the top card from the deck (this is a blind draw). If he draws a face up card, he immediately turns a replacement card face-up from the deck. He then draws his second card, either from the face up cards or from the top of the deck. (See Train Car Cards for special rules for Locomotive cards).

This is a key part of the game, so I recommend reading through the rulebook again; if you missed that you likely missed other important things.

One rule that's related (though not all versions have this, Nordic Countries doesn't):

  If a Locomotive card is one of the five face-up cards, the player who draws it may only draw one card, instead of two. If, after having drawn one card the replacement card is a Locomotive, the player cannot take it. If at any time, three of the five face-up cards are Locomotives, all five cards are immediately discarded and five new ones are turned face-up to replace them.

To summarize; if you are choosing to draw 2 train cards on your turn; you choose one at a time to draw the top card of the deck, or one of the 5 face-up cards. If you chose a face-up card, you replace it with one from the top of the deck, and then you make the choice a second time. If you choose to take a locomotive card from the face-up cards, then you can only take 1 card that turn instead of 2.

If players could not choose cards that they needed and it was left completely to the random chance of pulling the cards they needed from the deck, the game would take forever and would get frustrating. Having a few cards of known color to pick from helps speed the game along, and ensures that it is still fun to play.


How is France played in Allies and Axis Europe 1940 (Second Edition)? In Allies and Axis Europe, France's capital, Paris, typically falls on the first turn. As a result, most games do not have a player playing France alone. Instead, either the US or UK player is typically assigned to play France. Then the question is what does this person get to do with France? I'm confused by a rule that says "France will be managed as a separately controlled power, including its IPC economy," which suggests that it has an economy.

Is France played under "China rules" from Allied and Axis Pacific when it is left only with its overseas holdings? (China has lost its capital (Nanjing) and has no industrial centers but still gets to collect income from its remaining territories and gets to build infantry using this income.) China is typically played by the U.S. or one of the UK players. In that case, it would make sense to assign a player to play France from the beginning.

Or is France played under "standard" rules (its pieces stay on the board until eliminated, but it can't collect income or build new units until Paris is liberated, at which time it gets four "Free French" units on Paris)? Then wouldn't it make sense to let the liberator (UK, US or possibly Russia) play France (separately from its own pieces) instead of assigning a player early on? Because there's a possibility that Paris won't be liberated, in which case, wouldn't playing France be moot?

Yes france is moot and standard rules.  Liberation is only hope. and if original French territory is taken by axis and then taken by allies while paris is not liberated, the original French territory may belong to the ally (until paris is liberated).


Why Does Magic Use The "Paris Mulligan" Rule? In the early days, Magic had crazy, subpar mulligan rules: you could shuffle up and draw a new 7 if your hand had no lands or all lands, otherwise you were out of luck.  A long time ago the Paris Mulligan rule was introduced and it seems to have stuck.  If you don't like your hand, throw it back and draw 6.  If you don't like that one, try again drawing 5, and so on.

This seems like a pretty good rule and I didn't question it, but recently I've been playing "Duels of the Planeswalkers" on XBox (incidentally, if anyone else has that and wants to challenge me, let me know!).  The mulligan rule there is a little different.  You can throw your hand back and draw a new 7 once for free.  After that Paris rules are in force: every subsequent time you mulligan your hand size goes down by one.

It seems to me that this "lenient mulligan" rule is really good for the game.  Magic is a game with a large element of randomness from the shuffle.  Quite often players will draw a 7-card hand that's basically unplayable and have to throw it back, unless they're crazy gamblers with nothing left to lose.  If your opponent keeps and you mulligan to 6, you're at a significant disadvantage already.  If you have to mulligan to 5 or fewer, you'd better hope somebody up there likes you.

Does anyone know (or have an informed idea) why Magic retains a mulligan rule that allows unbalanced games to happen as often as they do?  It just feels like the XBox mulligan would allow players to play their decks "as they were meant to work" more often, and have to battle against long odds much less often.  What is the defence for the continued predominance in the Magic world of the Paris mulligan rule?

A few points:

"Good for the game" is drastically different if you are playing competitively or casually. Competitive Magic should encourage good deck building and make it as fair as possible to each player. Paris mulligan vs. lenient paris mulligan isn't going to drastically change the fairness between the two players at the table and adds more complexity to an otherwise already complex game.
Learning when to mulligan is actually a very useful skill in Magic. Making it easier to stomach doesn't necessarily make it a better mechanic. Designing (and testing) decks with 7, 6, 5 card hands is very important. Likewise when playing against particular decks. Some decks struggle against a 1 card advantage. Some decks shrug it off and keep pounding.
Real life Magic mulligan problems can often be solved by shuffling properly. People can get lazy in their shuffles and tournament nerves can make it worse. Take the time to adequately shuffle your deck each time you draw a hand. This is especially true after a mulligan: Simply cut-shuffling a few times will result in you drawing the exact same cards you just threw back.
When playing casually, I recommend players just draw back up to 7 after a mulligan. I would rather play against a deck's best chance than roll over someone with a 5 card start. Casual games should be fun more than fair; if the lenient paris mulligan is more fun for your play group then that is how you should play.

Truly the best solution to poor opening hands is creating a balanced "deck within a deck."

Every card that searches for other cards or draws a card(s) can be considered a subtraction from the deck count if the mana cost is low enough. The card itself, mathematically, is replaced with the card(s) it draws/searches for, thus creating the external deck. Now, the internal deck should consist of the cards you need to play, such as Mana sources (basic lands, for example) or versatile, useful cards.

Imagine, now, that you have a 60 card deck. Opening hand, you draw a fetch land. Play it and pass your turn. On your next turn, it will untap and allow you to search for a land of the appropriate color. That means the fetch has been replaced by a basic land, and a basic land has been removed from your deck, lowering your chances of drawing it. If you run 12 fetch lands (pretty high number, but this is the extreme example), 20% of your deck count has been shaved. This correlates to 1 fifth of your deck, leaving you with 48 cards left to amass. Now, 4 in 48 (1 in 12) chance of drawing any given card, as opposed to 4 in 60 (1 in 15) you would have had without the fetches, and that doesn't include all the other searchers you might fit in there. It is possible in Modern format to make a deck with 30 searchers/draw cards, 20 basic lands and 10 cards that produce various desired effects and be an efficient killer.


Bridge, when does dummy hand get laid down? Does the dummy hand lay down trump before or after the first card is played?

After the opening lead has been made by Declarer' left-hand opponent.
From Laws of Rubber Bridge (2014):

Law 41 – Opening Lead, Review, Questions
After the auction closes, presumed (see Law 54C) declarer’s LHO makes the opening lead.   After the opening lead, dummy spreads his hand in front of him on the table, face up, sorted into suits, the cards in order of rank in columns pointing lengthwise toward declarer, with trumps, if any, to dummy’s right.
....

Dummy's hand is exposed once the opening lead has been accepted and is face up.

Normally declarer's left hand opponent makes the opening lead face down and then asks their partner if they have any questions. Once all questions are answered the card is exposed - and then declarer's partner exposes his hand and becomes dummy.

Sometimes declarer;s RIGHT hand opponent makes the opening lead face up. In which case the presumed declarer is entitled to either accept the lead, remain as declarer and dummy comes down; accept the lead AND BECOME DUMMY! (and then display his hand) or refuse to accept the lead - in which case the left hand opponent has lead restrictions (the exposed card is a major penalty card) - and when they make a lead dummy goes down as normal.


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?

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.

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.


Is it better to ask a question or guess with 3 characters left in Guess Who? Say you have 3 potential characters left.

If you go with a guess, you have a 1/3 chance that turn and a 1/2 chance next turn.

If you go with a hint, you would have a 50% chance of leaving 2 left (with a 50% chance to win next turn) or a 50% chance of leaving 1 left (with a 100% chance to win next turn).

I don't know statistics well enough to figure it out from there.

EDIT: We were not aware of the rule that state if you guess incorrectly it means you instantly lose. That definitely makes it clear which you should do. We will definitely try to follow that going forward, thanks all!

My original answer assumed that there was no penalty for guessing incorrectly. This answer assumes that you are playing with the rule that incorrect guesses cause a game loss.  My original answer is provided below this one

Never guess, unless a player has only a single character left

If your opponent guesses, then your odds of winning are 50% if they have two characters left or higher if they have more.  If you guess, your odds are 50% if you have two characters left, or lower if you have more.  Therefore, there is never any benefit to guessing - the odds are always equal to or better if your opponent guesses.  This only changes if your opponent have a single character left.  At that point the odds of losing jump to 100%, and any odds are better than that, so guess.  (Also, if you only have 1 character left you should obviously guess as well)

Guess. Always guess when there are three or fewer characters left

Any question you ask is guaranteed to divide the remaining characters into a group of one and a group of two.

Guessing also divides the characters into a group of one and a group of two.

Literally the only difference is that if the character is in the group of one and you ask then you need to take an additional turn to guess, whereas if you guess and the character is in the group of one then you've already won.

Your error is in assuming that asking a question has a 50% chance of putting the character in the group of one.  It's actually 1/3, same as when you guess.

EDIT: We were not aware of the rule that state if you guess incorrectly it means you instantly lose. That definitely makes it clear which you should do. We will definitely try to follow that going forward, thanks all!

Guessing wrong lose the game: take a hint.

guessing has 1/3 to win and 2/3 to lose.
single hint: 1/3 you left with 1 charecter -> win at turn 2.
2/3 left with 2 characters -> 50/50 for a win.   So 1/3+2/3*1/2=2/3 for wining.
Two hints: 100% win. 1/3 at turn 2, 2/3 at turn 3.

If guessing wrong does not lose you the game: always take a guess.

Whether you just care about getting minimal questions on average (on expectation) or you care about getting fewer questions than your opponent.  - In both scenarios taking a guess is better.

Comparison of the number of turns on expectation:

If you guess:

got it right the first time with probability 1/3
got it right the second time with probability 1/3
got it right the third time with probability 1/3

Thus the expected number of turns is two. E(turns)=1/3*1+1/3*2+1/3*3=2

If you go with a hint

1/3 you leave 1 left, then win on the next turn.
2/3 you leave 2 left, then either win on the next turn or on the 3rd turn.

So the calculation is E(turns)=1/3*2+2/3*1/2*2+2/3*1/2*3=2.333

By comparing expected turns we get that taking guesses will find the right character faster.


When can lands be tapped? I'm completely new to Magic the Gathering. I've read the basic rulebook pretty thoroughly and have a pretty good grasp of the basic rules, but it's unclear to me as to when you can tap lands to generate mana.

First off,  mana is supposed to dry up after each phase in a turn. Can I untap my land cards and then tap them again in the next phase if I need more mana to power a spell? Or does a land card remain tapped until my next turn like everything else?

Second, the rules mention that I can play instants and activate abilities during my opponent's turn. Does that then mean that I can tap my land cards during my opponent's turn to power those spells?

Third, does my opponent's untap step for their turn only apply to their cards? Or can I untap mine as well? Not closely related to land cards, but when I can tap and untap my land cards would make a huge difference as to how I play.

Hope these questions aren't painfully obvious, but I've just started playing the game. Thanks for your time!

You can tap lands for mana at almost any time. Pretty much any time you could do anything else, anyway. Among other things, you can tap land for mana any time you want to play a spell or ability and you need mana to do so.

You can only untap a land when you untap your other cards during YOUR untap step (or if a spell or ability instructs you to untap a card). So no, you cannot untap your lands after each phase when the mana they produced goes away, or during your opponent's untap step.

So without getting into the specific details of the comprehensive rules, which would just cause confusion for beginners, what you really need to know is that you can tap a land any time you need mana, and your lands will normally only untap at the beginning of your turn.

Relevant rules from the Basic Rulebook:

Under "Casting a Spell"

  Now check what the spell’s cost is. Tap your lands to
  produce the mana necessary to pay that cost, and pay it.

Also note that mana will empty from your mana pool at the end of every step, not just at the end of each phase. Each phase is divided into multiple steps.

You can however tap a land at the beginning of your turn use the mana cast a spell then still untap it during your untapp phase. I think. I used to run a squerrel deck with a herd gnar it's a (2)g or (3)g I forget 2/2 creature that whenever a creature comes into play under your control herd gnar gets +2/+2 until end of turn. So I would use my lands at the beginning of my turn to cast instants to put out creature tokens then untap during my untap phase and cast more tokens.


Can you use the Annihilation card on a Giant Skunk that someone else is fighting? Sometimes people will try to save the Giant Skunk for when they're level 9 to fight it to prevent people from screwing them over too much at the end. However my friends and I have debated about whether or not you can use the Annihilation card to remove the Giant Skunk card from the game after someone plays it.

  Giant Skunk: They may not help you, backstab you, or use any cards either for or against you -- except for Wandering Monsters and monster enhancers.

  Annihilation: Play this card at any time to permanently remove any one card from the game. It does not go to the discard pile . . . put it back in the box and forget it. The target card must be in play when you use Annihilation on it. If an opponent had just played it, it is canceled and has no effect.

Some people say yes, others say no, and still others say it depends on the timing. Which is it?

If the Giant Skunk has just been played (via Kicking Down The Door or Looking For Trouble), then you may play Annihilation to cancel the Giant Skunk. At the time it's being played, it doesn't have all of its defensive text; Annihilation means it never existed.

Once it's in play, Annihilation won't help, because that isn't a monster enhancer or wandering monster.

So if you're going to Annihilate a Giant Skunk, be quick about it.

Source: Steve Jackson Games Forum

Don't forget about the tie breaker rule for Munchkin. "When in doubt, the owner of the game is right." So it depends on the opinion of the owner.


Why does Blood Moon remove abilities? According to the rulings on Gatherer, Blood Moon removes all abilities from nonbasic lands: a Forsaken Sanctuary will enter untapped, and will not tap for white or black.
My question, though, is—why? The rules text says only that "nonbasic lands are Mountains", which seems like it sets subtypes, but doesn't do anything about abilities.
I know that some abilities, like Forests tapping for green, are inherent to their subtype, so it makes sense that an Indatha Triome can no longer tap for green (the ability came from the Forest subtype, and it lost that). But I'm unclear on why changing a land's type removes abilities printed on the card itself.

This appears to be rule 305.7, which I got from: Gamepedia.

305.7. If an effect sets a land’s subtype to one or more of the basic land types, the land no longer has its old land type. It loses all
abilities generated from its rules text, its old land types, and any
copy effects affecting that land, and it gains the appropriate mana
ability for each new basic land type. Note that this doesn’t remove
any abilities that were granted to the land by other effects. Setting
a land’s subtype doesn’t add or remove any card types (such as
creature) or supertypes (such as basic, legendary, and snow) the land
may have. If a land gains one or more land types in addition to its
own, it keeps its land types and rules text, and it gains the new land
types and mana abilities.

Note, the old wording, on the original card in The Dark expansion uses "basic mountain."  My guess is that this rule was added after.

It makes the lands mountains. It does not provide the 'in addition to it's other types' suffix. So all the non-basics become what the rules says is a mountain which is...

From the glossary of the Comprehensive Rules (August 7, 2020—Double
Masters)
Mountain One of the five basic land types. Any land with this subtype
has the ability “{T}: Add {R}.” See rule 305.6.

Interesting it does not turn it into a basic land, the lands are non-basic mountains and will still turn on Dryad Sophisticate ability for instance.

305.6. The basic land types are Plains, Island, Swamp, Mountain, and Forest. If an object uses the words “basic land type,” it’s referring
to one of these subtypes. An object with the land card type and a
basic land type has the intrinsic ability “{T}: Add [mana symbol],”
even if the text box doesn’t actually contain that text or the object
has no text box. For Plains, [mana symbol] is {W}; for Islands, {U};
for Swamps, {B}; for Mountains, {R}; and for Forests, {G}. See rule
107.4a. See also rule 605, “Mana Abilities.”


Can you tell spymaster you know the word they gave a clue for? In a game of Codenames, Team 1 field operative guesses a wrong choice for a word. During or before their next turn they say, "oh, I know which one you meant for last code".

Would that be against the rules?

Field Operatives are only allowed to discuss the clue after their Spymaster provides it, until their team's turn is over.

Rules, P.4
"MAKING CONTACT

When the spymaster gives a clue, his or her field operatives try to figure out what it means. They can debate it amongst themselves..."

Same page:
"Number of Guesses

...Any wrong guess ends the turn immediately..."

This is reiterated and summarized on page 5:
"GAME FLOW

Spymasters take turns giving clues. After
a spymaster gives a clue, his or her team starts
guessing. Their turn ends when they guess
wrong, when they decide to stop, or when they
have made the maximum number of guesses
for that clue. Then it is the other team's turn"

Any other discussion of a previous clue, during another team's turn or on an operative's own turn prior to the new clue being read, is therefore out of scope of the rules (i.e., it's not allowed).  This conveniently addresses any clue-related discussion among the operatives, but also any directed towards the spymaster (whether or not it is acknowledged by the spymaster).  This would apply equally to basically harmless and vague discussion like "Oh, I know what you meant now" or, taken to its logical conclusion, a field operative explicitly instructing their spymaster to add 1 to the number of guesses on their new clue (effectively providing +2 potential guesses).

So if you're a field operative, unless you want to talk about getting snacks for the table when it isn't your turn or before your team's clue is read, don't say anything!

It's a party game. This happens all the time and it's part of the emotions that make it fun. As long as the spymaster keeps the "straight face", no illegal information is given. The agents are allowed to openly discuss what they think so the spymaster already knows all this. Telling people off for getting excited about the game, does not make it more fun. We had some heated discussions about illegal clues and spymasters giving hints by reaching for a certain card while the agents are still debating, but saying "oh now I know" would not upset anyone.


In Bridge, Do You Count Defensive Points In the Opponents' Suit When Making a Takeout Double? Left hand opponent opened 1 heart. Partner doubled for takeout. Right hand opponent passed. I "had to" bid 2 clubs with something like (S) xxx (H) xx (D) Jxxx (C) Jxxx.

We were doubled for penalties, and went down five, (vulnerable) after partner partner laid down:

(s) Axxx (H) Kxx (D) Kxx (C) Qxx

In defending the takeout double, partner said, "I had 12 points and four spades. That's a standard takeout double."

I said, "I need 14 points for a vulnerable takeout. I don't even consider your hand worth 12 points (even though technically that's the case), because of the 4-3-3-3 distribution." What bothered me most about the double was not the minimum point count, but the "stranded" king, and three cards in the opponents' suit.

Give partner a better distribution by changing her hand to  something like: (s) Axxxx (h)--- (d) KQxx (c) Kxxx, and I wouldn't have complained. Because all her "values" would have been OUTSIDE the opponents' suit, for offense, not defense. (FWIW, Kaplan and Rubens evaluates this hand as 15 points, and the actual hand at 11 points because of the flat distribution and stranded honors. That's true, even though the traditional Milton Work count for both hands is 12 points.)

Was partner right to make the double? Or was I right to protest it? Is vulnerability the deciding factor? In either case, why?

Nearly all American experts would not make a takeout double here, and my impression is that most Europeans would not as well.  Having 3 cards in their suit is a flaw when deciding to try and declare the hand rather than defend, and points outside their suits do matter: with only 9 points outside of their suit, your offense-to-defense ratio is low.

If opener has 6 hearts, and partner 3 or 4, your K will not take a trick on offense (it will be ruffed).  And if partner has 1 heart, the K could be useless as well.  But it will always take a trick on defense, so the heart K should be discounted slightly when considering the takeout double.  Qxx of hearts would discounted heavily because it would be useless on many hands.

There are several ways to lose by doubling here: partner has 3 hearts, partner gets you into a 4-3 minor fit, partner competes over 2H and gets you too high, partner drives to game expecting more.

Partner is still there.  He will reopen after 1H P P if he has one of the hands you want, and I would recommend playing a pre-balancing style where partner can double light after 1H P 2H... then he will protect you from having passed this hand.

In all, too many flaws: only 9 points outside their suit, poor shape, no spots, bad vulnerability.  If opponents were vulnerable that's another flaw since you might be able to get 100 or 200 by setting them.

I count on "shape" when making (or responding to) take out doubles. In the actual hand, we had seven "trumps" in clubs, versus eight "trumps" in hearts for a total of 15. Under the law of total tricks, we should be able to make about five tricks, given that the opponents had the values for game. (We actually made only three because of poor "intermediates" and finesses.)

I'll admit to "resulting" earlier, when I complained about the actual (unfortunate) result, down five, vulnerable, minus 1400. But this stricture does not apply to the theoretical result, down three, vulnerable, minus 800, which is worth more than the value of any vulnerable game. Only in favorable vulnerability (not vulnerable versus vulnerable) would it have made sense to go down three to head off an opposing game (minus 500 vs. minus 620).

With the hypothetical better hand: (s) Axxxx (h)--- (d) KQxx (c) Kxxx,there are 11 hearts for the opponents and eight clubs for us, a total of 19 trumps. (I also value this hand at 15 points (12 HCP, three for the heart void.) The opponents have the values for a small slam, meaning that we should be able to take seven tricks (19-12). In this example, we'd be risking a small penalty to try to derail a slam.

The idea of a takeout double is not just to "compete," it is to make a "profitable" sacrifice. Minus 800 against a possible 980 small slam falls into this category; minus over 1000 against a 620 game does not.


Just say No on Just Say No Is it possible to play a just say no on a just say no? Will the second just say no cancel out the previous just say no?

Yes, you can do this, and if the person playing the first "No" is also holding the third "No", they can play it against the second "No" to result in a chain with the net effect of just the original "No" negating the targeted action card for that player.

If player 1, on his (1st/2nd but not 3rd) turn plays a deal breaker on player 2 to take a set, player 2 plays a JSN to this, player 1 can play a JSN to the JSN and still take the set.


Does "on your opponent's 3rd turn" mean after 3 turns? The text of "Swords of Revealing Light" reads

After this card's activation, it remains on the battlefield, but destroy it during the End Phase of your opponent's 3rd turn.

In previous versions it has specified

This card remains on the field for 3 of your opponent's turns.

So it has been changed from that, presumably for a reason.
In my mind, my opponent's 3rd turn is not the same as 3 (of my opponent's) turns after I activate the card and would imply the card is not destroyed if I activate it on or after my opponent's 4th turn.
How should the text be interpreted?

The function of the card hasn't changed, but the wording change isn't great.
The new wording creates ambiguity in what "third turn" means, but only one interpretation makes logical sense for gameplay, even if it's the less likely meaning under the rules of English. It looks like they wanted to be more specific on when it's destroyed (the end of your opponent's turn rather than the start of yours) which was a bit unclear in the original wording. There's definitely a better middle ground between the two card wordings, one that specifies 3 turns from when it was played perhaps something like this:

After this card's activation, it remains on the battlefield for 3 of your opponent's turns, destroy it during the End Phase of your that turn.

There's no real way to know what made Konami change the wording to this unless the company tells the players, anything else is really just speculation.

It would mean after your opponent finish 3 turns. That's why it's such a good card.


What happens when a deal is passed out in Duplicate Bridge Tournaments? I understand how duplicate bridge works, but I'm still missing one small conceptual part of the scoring, being the outcome when a deal is passed out. Is the score for that hand just assumed to be 0 for both sides, making it identical to a hand that happened to have a 0 score?

What happens if some tables play the hand and score highly where others just don't play it since they all passed? Are certain measure taken in the creation of the hands to avoid deals that are likely to be passed out?

I understand how duplicate bridge works, but I'm still missing one small conceptual part of the scoring, being the outcome when a deal is passed out. Is the score for that hand just assumed to be 0 for both sides

Yes. Why would there be an exception? Passing out the hand is a perfectly valid way to play it.

  making it identical to a hand that happened to have a 0 score?

There are no other ways to have a 0 (raw) score.

  What happens if some tables play the hand and score highly where others just don't play it since they all passed?

The usual rules for converting score to matchpoints (or team IMPs, if you use those) apply.

  Are certain measure taken in the creation of the hands to avoid deals that are likely to be passed out?

No. It's not a TD's responsibility to speculate on how a hand is likely to be played before play occurs.

I disagree with all the above comments.  Duplicate Bridge is all about bidding and achieving the best possible result from a hand.  There are situations where passing (not playing a hand) is more prudent than risking a bid and going down.  So, therefore, a passed out hand in my club gets a marginally higher score than zero. On the traveler, we record 1 point in both the north/south and east/west score.  The matchpoints will then indicate that a "1 score" beats a "0 score". I know this is not the way it is done in competition but it works for us.


Learning to build multi-color decks in Magic I'm a MTG noob, and currently I've only built single-color decks. However, I want to explore the art of building decks that use cards of multiple colors.

What are the advantages of a multicolor deck? Why do people decide to build them? What goes into the process of deciding which colors and cards to combine? Do people decide to build a red-green deck and then find the best cards to use, or do they decide on the kind of cards they want and later figure that red-green would probably give the best results?
Do multicolor decks usually have an equal amount of lands and spells of each color? Or can you have one primary color and one secondary color? Which is more efficient/better and why?
How can I choose what spells of each color to add so I get color-screwed as little as possible? If all my creatures are of one color, and I don't get any land of that color, I'm in trouble. Likewise, if I have a lot of spells that require multiple mana of one color, they will be harder to cast in a multi-color deck than in a single color one.
What cards become more/less valuable in a multicolor vs. single color deck? Obviously cards that can generate mana of different colors become more valuable and cards that require lots of mana of one color become less valuable for starters. How can I take maximum advantage of cards that are better in multicolor decks and avoid those that are weaker?

The other answers have explained pretty well what the advantages of a multicolor deck are, but I think I can add something on this point:

  What goes into the process of deciding which colors and cards to combine? Do people decide to build a red-green deck and then find the best cards to use, or do they decide on the kind of cards they want and later figure that red-green would probably give the best results?

It depends on what level you play at. A beginner might very well decide to make a deck of a specific color combination, and then perhaps be guided toward a particular strategy by that choice of colors - for example, choosing to play red-green kind of pushes you toward playing a deck with strong creatures and burn spells, or blue-white would push you toward a control deck with counterspells, white removal, and a few flying creatures.

But at higher levels, people don't think that much about colors when building a deck, at least not right at the beginning - for one thing, even once you choose a color or colors, there are still many thousands of cards to pick from in those colors. Pro deck designers usually build around a specific card, or more often, a specific combination of two or three cards, which typically sets the color scheme for the deck. For example, the Exarch-Twin deck that's currently popular relies on Deceiver Exarch (blue) and Splinter Twin (red), which requires that the deck is going to be blue-red. Or Valakut decks need Primeval Titan, so they pretty much have to be green-red (unless you have access to Prismatic Omen, but that's a different story). The Tempered Steel deck from Scars of Mirrodin Block Constructed is an example of a deck whose color (white) was set by a single card - of course, that was only possible because the cards that Tempered Steel works well with happen to be colorless.

In some other cases (actually this is pretty common), you might start out with one or two cards and begin building a deck around those cards' color(s), but then you discover that the deck doesn't work very well without a certain kind of effect that you can only get in a different color. A good example of this is Pyromancer Ascension. You could, in principle, build a mono-red deck around that card, but in order to get the enchantment active, you typically need to find and cast two copies of two different cards - for example, two Lightning Bolts and two Shocks. That's not likely to happen before your opponent kills you, unless you have a way to filter through your deck looking for multiple copies of spells - and that's where blue spells like Preordain come in. This is why Ascension decks are blue-red, and in fact why a lot of different decks (like the Puresteel Paladin/equipment combo deck) like to add blue, even when you might not think it's necessary.

First, I total agree with what everyone has said and also want to add a couple more things.  Once you have decided on your 'main' cards (1,2 or 3) to build your deck around, have 2, 3 or 4 of those cards in your deck.  The same thing goes with your supporting cards, I may not put 4 of the same support card because you want them to support in ANY situation.

Second, I don't think anyone said this, Yes, the first times you play ANY deck, not pre made, is a trial and error and you may end up starting over.

Lastly, in multicolour decks, I love artifacts.


Can you use a planeswalker ability even if the planeswaker doesn't have enough loyalty? For example Tamiyo, the Moon Sage. Can I use the -8 ability even though she only has 4 loyalty? I understand it would kill her. Or would I have to get 8 loyalty first with the +1 ability?

Wizard's wording on the matter is thus:

  606.5. A loyalty ability with a negative loyalty cost can't be activated unless the permanent has at least that many loyalty counters on it

It doesn't specify how those counters get there. It could be through +X abilities, proliferate, or even cool things like Doubling Season. But they must exist on the planeswalker in order to pay the cost.

Think of it this way: No store that's selling a 5 dollar sandwich is going to accept 2.50. or a 1.00 sandwich for .50 cents. When a Planeswalker ability says "-2' do this action" you need to pay 2 loyalty, no ifs, ands, or buts. If you have 1 loyalty on the walker and you want to use the -2, no dice, you need at least 2 loyalty since the minus two is the cost of activation. So if you want to activate a minus ability but lack the funds, you need to find some way to get that loyalty up, whether it be activating a +(#) ability or blinking/flickering the walker itself to reset to base loyalty.


In Poker, what happens with the next players if paying the big blind puts a player all-in? In Texas hold'em poker, if a player doesn't have enough chips to pay the big blind, what happens if the next players want to call? Must they pay the entire big blind or not?

For example, a tournament starts and after some time, the SB/BB is 50/100 but the player who must pay the BB has only 60. Other players want to call only.

Player A (SB): mandatory bet 50 and is waiting.
Player B (BB): mandatory bet 60 chips and all-in.
Player C has more than 110 and wants to call, must they pay 100 or only 60?

Player B is considered all in and Player C must still match the full blind amount and there will just be two possible winning piles depending on who wins. If Player B wins they would win 60 chips per player that paid the big blind and the next high hand would win the rest.
pokerlistings.com

When a player's stack is less than the amount of the small blind, they are automatically considered all-in in the next hand they play, regardless of position.
If the player's stack is larger than the small blind but smaller than the big blind, they will be considered all-in in any position other than the small blind, assuming they fold for their option.
When all-in, the player can only win the amount of their stack, plus that same amount from all of the callers and blinds. If the person has less than the big blind, they can only win the portion of the blind equal to that of their stack.

WIKI poker betting

  All-in before the deal
  If a player does not have sufficient money to
  cover the ante and blinds due, that player is automatically all-in for
  the coming hand. Any money the player holds must be applied to the
  ante first, and if the full ante is covered, the remaining money is
  applied towards the blind.

After the flop this should not come up.  If you have less than a blind behind you should should bet it pre flop.  Most rooms would enforce minimum call of 1 bb.


Is Sanguine Bond + Exquisite Blood a potential game ender? If both Sanguine Bond and Exquisite Blood are in play and target player loses any life, is the game over?

Either your opponent will have to lose life or you will have to gain life to start the process. Then, yes, unless someone does something to stop it, you'll enter a loop which will win you the game.

As hinted above, there are numerous effects that can change the outcome. If an opponent controls Platinum Angel, if they cast Angel's Grace, or if you control Abyssal Persecutor, the game will enter into a loop of mandatory actions which will end the game in a draw. If an opponent has hexproof or shroud for some reason (e.g. Witchbane Orb, True Believer), Sanguine Bond won't be able to target him or her and the loop will terminate. Voidslime can end the loop (but doesn't prevent from being restarted later).

Actually, you will not win.  According to the comprehensive rules on infinite loops, if a loop contains only mandatory effects, the game ends in a draw.  Since the cards don't say may, they are mandatory.  Sorry no game winning combo here.


Any good way to add a handicap in Dominion? I play Dominion pretty regularly with one group of friends, but only occasionally with another group. This creates a pretty big experience gap between me and the second group, and I'm afraid they might lose interest in the game if I win the vast majority of the time.

What are some successful handicapping methods you have tried?  Something that still challenges me, but levels out the playing field a bit.

As an informal handicap, when I'm playing in a game like this I usually try to make myself take my 2nd strategy - instead of doing the most obvious thing on the board, I come up with something more oddball and see if I can make that work.

Another thing that's not a huge handicap but can help is letting the less experienced players choose the 10 Kingdom cards, so they can pick things that fit into their own comfortable strategies.

I use both these techniques when playing with my wife (she plays every few months while I play 3 times a week at lunch) and thought I still win a lot, she has more fun this way.

Newer or less strategic players tend to favor a higher luck to skill ratio in games.  So, if your play group doesn't mind a house rule, you could across the board have everyone reshuffle their deck every turn.  This changes the game, for sure, but it is fair.

If you want to singly handicap yourself, you need to decide if it's going to be a one time handicap or ongoing.

One-time:

Tweak starting deck (less copper/replace VPs with curses)
Skipping turns
etc.

On-going:

Everything costs you 1 extra
Per-turn action-limit
Curse every-turn
etc.


Can you interfere and help and win the game as an elf in munchkin? In the rules it says you can interfere with combat "use a one shot item to help another player by casting a potion against his foe"

My friend drew a lvl18 card and someone else helped him. I wanted to play a flaming poison potion to add +3 to their side and "help" them. Then by the wording of the rules, as an elf, do I go up a level?

According to the Munchkin FAQ under Important Note #2: Playing/Using/Switching Items During Combat:

  Playing/using a one-shot Item during a combat that aids the munchkins (and not the monsters) does not constitute "helping" in combat, as described in the rules. This means that in any given combat, any number of players can play cards to aid or hinder either side as often as they want, as long as they have the cards. Only one other player can actually join the combat as a helper, however.

So, no, this would not actually constitute "helping" in the combat to satisfy the Elf racial ability.

However, if through some other means you had actually been the helper in the combat, then yes you could have won or tied, as long as the card that allowed you to help did not specify that the level gained could not be the winning level, because according to the FAQ under Important Note #1: Reaching Level 10:

  Note also that ANY level gained as a result of killing a monster counts as the winning level.

And also from this post on the official Munchkin forum

  The level the Elf gains for helping in combat can be the winning level, because it's a level gained as the result of winning a fight.

Sure, if you own the game, since the rules state the owner of the game resolves disputes, and otherwise change the rules as they see fit; it won't be fun for the other players, however.


Help me identify this old tile stacking game A game from the 60's. Stacking plastic tiles 1-20, six of each. Can't remember how to play but stacking was definitely involved.

My grandma has this game! I wanted to buy my own!
You turn them all over and put them into piles of 10. Separate the piles according to the amount of players.
Each player takes it in turns to flip over their top tile on the pile on the right hand side. The aim is to build up six piles from 1 to 20 in the middle.
If you turn over a tile and someone has a tile a number higher or lower (e.g. you flip over a 17 and someone else has a 16 or 18) you pass your tile over to put on their tile. The first player to get rid of all their tiles wins.

We had this game as kids and used to play after tea on a Sunday. It was called tops as far as I remember. Maybe tops tiles.


The Resistance card game - "Deep Cover" Spy role question This question is probably best suited for those who have played The Resistance extensively, especially with the "Commander" and "Deep Cover" expansion roles.

Among The Resistance expansion packs, there is a role called "Deep Cover" that is unknown to the "Commander" role. This "Deep Cover" role spy wakes up with all of the other spies during the sleep phase, and all spies are known to each other. However, when the "Commander" role wakes up to look for the spies, the "Deep Cover" role does not raise his or her thumb/put his or her hand up/whatever indicator you use. So, this "Deep Cover" role is unknown to the Resistance "Commander".

My question is this: During the phase where the spies wake up and acknowledge each other, does the "Deep Cover" spy give some kind of indication that he or she is the "Deep Cover" spy? The rules are ambiguous on this point, and it has been causing some contention when our group plays.

About half of us are of the opinion that the deep cover spy indicating that he or she is the deep cover spy gives the spies an advantage, as it can reduce the possibility of playing double "fails". The other half of the group are of the opinion that the rest of the spies knowing the deep cover spy doesn't give the spies any advantage, and in some cases, can give the resistance members an advantage.

Does anyone have any insight on how this should be played?

Reveal script in the rule book is very thorough:

  Reveal Script

  The “reveal” phase at the start of the game will vary depending on
  which roles are added – see below for new scripts to use for the
  different Character cards that are included.

  “Everyone close your eyes and extend your hand into a fist in front
  of you”
  “Spies, not the Blind Spy – open your eyes and look around
  to see your fellow spies”
  “Spies close your eyes”
  “All players should have their eyes closed and hands in a fist in front of them”
  “Spies, not the Deep Cover spy – extend your thumb so the Commander
  will know you”
  “Commander, open your eyes and see the Spies”
  “Spies – put your thumbs down and re-form your hand into a fist”
  “Commander, close your eyes” “All players should have their eyes
  closed and hands in a fist in front of them”
  “Commander & False Commander – extend your thumb so that the Body Guard knows you”
  “Body Guard, open your eyes so you know the Commander & False
  Commander”
  “Commander & False Commander – put your thumbs down and
  form your hand into a fist”
  “Body Guard, close your eyes”
  “All players should have their eyes closed and hands in a fist in front
  of them”
  “Everyone open your eyes”

Just follow it exactly and you'll see that there is nothing specific Deep Cover spy has to do during step 2, and by step 5 spies already closed their eyes, so they shouldn't have this bit of information.

So other spies know that Deep Cover spy is on their team, but they don't know that he/she is Deep Cover spy.

Of course, nothing stops you from making homerules and playing it differently if you feel like it, as discussed on BGG forum for Resistance Avalon (which is the same game really)

We can be sure of this answer by analyzing some roles:

First, we need to analyze the role of a Spy who has no ability. Their behavior is: Know who the other spies are.

Now looking at Deep Cover, we see the "Unknown to Commander" ability. As such, he remains a spy and therefore knows who the other spies are, but the commander does not know who he is.

We can even compare it to another similar character, Blind Spy, which is "Unknown to Spies". This being a spy, he still knows who the other spies are, but the spies don't know who he is.

And there's still a similar third character, Deep Agent, that "Does not know Spies." This one finally loses his main spy ability and really doesn't know who the other spies are, but the spies still know who he is.

Finally, I will clarify the question about Deep Cover:

The Deep Cover know who the other spies are;
The other Spies are know who Deep Cover is;
Commander doesn't know who Deep Cover is.

I hope it is clear now :)