How is bridge for beginners taught in Taiwan or Italy today, Precision or another method? I play duplicate bridge, and have recently begun studying the Precision bidding system on my own.  Precision was invented by C.C. Wei in the 1960's with Truscott's assistance, and was used with great success by the Taiwanese and Italians at the world championship level during the late 1960s and early 1970s, respectively.

I was wondering how beginning bridge is taught these days in those countries, Taiwan and Italy.  Of course, Standard American and Two-Over-One are the main methods taught in the U.S., and, for example, our Bridge Club has yet to offer Precision Bidding lessons.

I imagine that in Taiwan and Italy Precision is taught in beginning bridge lessons, but I am having a difficult time confirming this on the internet.

Thanks for your help!

Personally, I believe in most places, novices are taught the "natural" way. i.e. when you bid a suit, you have length in that suit.

Which means they are probably first introduced to system similar to the standard american.


Does Sutured Ghoul count cards exiled by other effects, such as suspended creatures? As Sutured Ghoul says

As Sutured Ghoul enters the battlefield, exile any number of creature cards from your graveyard.
Sutured Ghoul's power is equal to the total power of the exiled cards and its toughness is equal to their total toughness.

The text says the exiled cards, so does only count on cards that are exiled by himself, or does every exiled creature counts?
The oracle does not mention any reference to this:

22/09/2011    If any of the creature cards you exile has a characteristic-defining ability that defines its power and/or toughness, that ability will apply. For example, if Dungrove Elder is exiled this way, its power and toughness while it’s in exile are equal to the number of Forests you control, and Sutured Ghoul’s power and toughness will change as the number of Forests you control changes. If the characteristic-defining ability can’t be applied (for instance, it relies on a choice made as the card enters the battlefield), then use 0.
22/09/2011    In zones other than the battlefield, Sutured Ghoul’s power and toughness are each 0.
22/09/2011    You can’t have Sutured Ghoul exile itself, even if it’s entering the battlefield from your graveyard.

It only counts cards exiled by the first ability, because they are Linked Abilities.

  Linked Abilities

    607.1. An object may have two abilities printed on it such that one of them causes actions to be taken or objects or players to be affected and the other one directly refers to those actions, objects, or players. If so, these two abilities are linked: the second refers only to actions that were taken or objects or players that were affected by the first, and not by any other ability.

    607.2a If an object has an activated or triggered ability printed on it that instructs a player to exile one or more cards and an ability printed on it that refers either to “the exiled cards” or to cards “exiled with [this object],” these abilities are linked. The second ability refers only to cards in the exile zone that were put there as a result of an instruction to exile them in the first ability.

If I may hijack this discussion of MTG for a discussion of grammar: the word "exiled" can either be an adjective, or a past participle, which is a form of a verb. As an adjective, it would mean that all cards that have the property of being exiled counts. If it's a past participle, then it's a passive voice construction, with "cards" being the recipient of the action "exile", and the implied subject would be "you". The wording strongly implies the latter interpretation, as the definite article "the" implies a level of specificity, rather than including all cards that have been exiled. The rules further support this interpretation; the phrase "you exile" is now in the active voice, clearly a verb, and in the present tense. If it were "you have exiled", or "that have been exiled", that would support the other interpretation, while "that are exiled" would be ambiguous.

A further clue is that including all exiled cards would be rather OP.


Which program to chose when designing my own cards? I am working on a prototype of a board game for which I need to design several cards. The cards will have several features like name, picture, text and some additional symbols. I am not sure which program would be the best for designing them.

First I thought about LaTeX - I have a template for generating the cards. The biggest advantage is, that when I decide to make a change in design, it is instantly applied to all the cards using this template. The disadvantage is, that making a design in TeX is a painful process and some special features are not very easy to manage in it...

Second choice would be Inkscape or similar vector-based editor. Is there some free library or model, which would make it easier to design a card from a scratch? What approach would you suggest?

Thanks for any tips!

EDIT (April 2017): I released the SVG-based software described in my original answer below for playing card design as a desktop application.  You can learn more here:

http://cardcreatr.shane.guru

Original Answer: I use custom SVG when designing playing cards.  Inkscape uses SVG as its backend format.  Coming from a web development background, I found SVG to be easier to learn than something like LaTeX.  (It's just XML.)

I have a single external CSS file and a Ruby script using the "builder" library to construct the SVGs from a database.  If you don't want to use a script to generate your SVGs, it is also possible to pass parameters to your SVG.

The most difficult aspect of SVG I have found is its compatibility with other formats.  The only SVG rendering enging I've found to do a reliably good job is Apache Batik.  You can use Batik to convert your SVGs to PDF, which of course is a widely accepted format.  "Squiggle" is an SVG viewer that runs on top of Batik so that you don't need to render your SVGs every time you make a change.

Cocktail (https://cocktail.software/) is an easy to use, layer-based layout editor, that links to google sheets for card data, and has a set editor for creating decks of cards to be exported together.  You can link multiple spreadsheets to multiple layouts based on column value, or set a single layout per spreadsheet. The layout editor is a wysiwyg, click and drag editor. It has a fantastic layout engine that supports opacity masking, alignment, auto-sizing, grouping, and grid and stack layers for laying out child elements automatically.  It supports images, svg drawings, text areas, shapes like ellipse, rectangle, regular polygon, star, and more.  For as powerful as it is, it requires no coding skill to make great layouts easily.  Be sure to check it out.
This is a software that I created.


Can older cards that refer to a player/opponent ever be used on planeswalkers? Many older cards refer to players or opponents, e.g. "deal 3 damage to target player". Can any of these be used on planeswalkers, beyond the fact that you can simply attack them with creatures?

For example:

Would my opponent discard a card if Hypnotic Specter damaged a planeswalker they control?
Would my opponent, the planeswalker, neither, or both amass poison counters from an unblocked Nafs Asp?
Can Lightning Bolt target a planeswalker?
Does Syphon Soul affect planeswalkers?
Can Oasis prevent damage to a Planeswalker?
Would Veteran Bodyguard be obligated to take damage being dealt to a planeswalker?
Can a planeswalker gain loyalty from Healing Salve?
Can Healing Salve prevent damage to a planeswalker?

Planeswalkers are not players (or opponents), and they're never treated as players (or opponents). Don't think of them as players, and you'll be a lot less likely to get confused.

There's pretty much just a single rule that make them seem a little similar to players: you can choose to attack your opponent and/or planeswalkers they control.

Along with that, many cards will let you target a player or a planeswalker, e.g. Lava Axe says "target player or planeswalker", and Lightning Strike says "any target", which includes planeswalkers. (Note that thanks to some updates to the game, some older printings of cards may not make this clear, e.g. Lava Axe used to just say "target player", and Lightning Strike used to just say "target creature or player"; always check Gatherer for the current oracle text of a card if you need to be sure.)

But that's it. None of that actually treats planeswalkers as players; it just lets something happen to them that's similar to what can happen to your opponents.

There are no similar rules for any of the things you mentioned, so the direct answer to every one of your questions is no. There is definitely not a blanket revision from "target player" to "target player or planeswalker". (A ton of things that say "player" wouldn't even make sense for planeswalkers - sure, they can take damage, but they don't have hands, libraries, graveyards, or even life!)

To address your questions in a little more detail (some things do still work, just not directly):

Hypnotic Specter - no, attacking the planeswalker won't make your opponent discard. If you want your opponent to discard, attack them, not the planeswalker.
Nafs Asp (poison counters) - no, planeswalkers can't have poison counters; if it deals damage to one it'll remove loyalty as usual. If you want to give poison counters to your opponent, attack them, not the planeswalker.
Lightning Bolt - yes, it can target a planeswalker - it now says "any target". Again, note that older printings don't mention planeswalkers, but the current oracle text is updated.
Syphon Soul - no, it doesn't deal damage to planeswalkers, just players.
Veteran Bodyguard - no, it won't protect planeswalkers, since combat damage is dealt directly to the planeswalker and Veteran Bodyguard's effect never applies.
Healing Salve (gaining loyalty) - no. It can't target planeswalkers, and planeswalkers can't gain life (only players have life).
Healing Salve (preventing damage) - no, you can't target planeswalkers with it.

Beyond oracle updates ("target player" to "target player or planeswalker" and similar), the only other way that older cards are likely to literally target a planeswalker is if they say something like "target permanent" or "target nonland permanent"; planeswalkers are permanents too, so for example Desert Twister can target and destroy planeswalkers, despite being printed in 1993!

Note: I've entirely removed sections about the planeswalker redirection rule, which existed in the past but is no more. See the revision history if you're curious.

Planeswalkers are never treated as opponents.

As to your specific questions: no, no, no, no, no, no, and no.


How to expand Love Letter to accomodate more players? Love letter was a surprise hit in my group. Everybody enjoys the fast pace and player interaction. It's just a shame that it only allows up to 4 players, because it seems like it would be better for say six players. I would have no problem buying a second copy of the game to shuffle the two decks of cards together, but I'm wondering if it would work in theory.

Has anybody got any suggestions as to how to try and increase the player limit?

If you're really up to it, you might want to buy the Love Letter Premium Edition which lets you play with up to eight players. It might be a bit different from the Love Letter you're used to though as it comes with new characters like the Assassin (which eliminates an opponent if that opponent forces you to reveal it).

It's an official game though so I you can rest assured that it's been playtested and was intended to be played with more players. I hope that helps :)

Having more than four players seems like it would be a lot more chaotic, cause they probably play tested the game and chose that number for that reason, I played a game called 7 wonders with a group of friends, and we had 7 people and the game is a 2 to 7 player game, and I will never have 7 people play it again, was supposed to be half an hour at most, it took us 1 to 2 hours, so, adding more players to Love letter might be more chaotic than you want, but give it a try, it doesn't hurt.


In bridge, what are the proper followups to a Jacoby transfer? In bridge, over a 1 NT opening, a responder might bid 2D/H with five hearts/spades asking the opener to "transfer" to 2H/S. The idea is to try to find an eight card fit, assuming that the NT bidder has three in the major.

But suppose the 1NT bidder only has two of the designated suit. Does s/he have to accept the transfer, or can one bid 2NT in this situation.

Assuming the opener accepts the transfer, is the responder (i.e. 2D/H bidder) supposed to go to 2NT to give the opener a choice of a NT or suit contract?

Well, the proper followup is what you have agreed upon.

The 'normal' responses to a transfer allow you to bid the major at the 2 level (usual completion of the transfer) or bid the major at the 3 level, which shows a maximum hand and 4 cards in the major in question (called super-accept).

Assuming your agreement is the above, bidding 2NT with doubleton in the major, instead of completing the transfer is just silly.

You partner could have 6 cards in the major and a bust hand and might have been planning to pass the 2H bid from you. With a 6-2 fit, 2H will play very well as compared to 1NT. Even with a decent 5 card suit and nothing else, 2H will likely play better than 1NT. 2NT might just be too high. This is because the trumps serve as stoppers in other suits, and also provide entries into dummy.
With partner having an invitational/game forcing hand and exactly 5 card major, you will always be able to reach 2NT or 3NT when you need to. With an invitational hand and exactly 5 cards in the major, partner will rebid 2NT, which you can then pass (or go on to 3NT if you have a maximum hand). With a game forcing hand and 5 hearts, partner will bid 3N.
You are denying partner the chance to bid 2S after transferring to hearts which can show some hand types (some people play it as 5-5 in majors etc).
Bidding 2NT is a unilateral bid. Remember that your partner is the captain. You have narrowed down your hand with your 1NT bid.

So violating the transfer to bid 2NT to show doubleton is pointless with no real gain (you will always get to deny support later), and has only downsides.

Also, from a system point of view, having 2NT show a doubleton is inefficient, as later followups will clarify that situation. You are just wasting space and getting to a bad contract/wrong siding it for no reason.

That said, some people do have followups other than 2 or 3 of the major, but those typically show 4 card support and some other feature (like doubleton/values in the suit bid).

OK.  But the other day I had 21 points and bid two-no.  Partner had ZERO points with 5 hearts, bid two diamonds.  I had 2 hearts, both little; I could have made three-no just with my own hand.  But when I answered 3 hearts (forced, I'll admit, by the whole table saying "You HAVE to accept the transfer" when I tried 3 no-trump) I went down in flames.  Is consider this a reasonable exception.


In Euchre, Can a person of the opposing team go alone if trump was ordered up by the other team? I ordered up trump from the dealer of the opposing team and the same person said they were going alone and asked for their partners best card. Is that legal in the euchre rules?

According to both the Bicycle Card Company Rules and the EuchreLinks.Com website Rulee only the person actually naming the trump denomination, termed the maker, has the option of going alone.

Playing Alone
If the player who fixes the trump suit believes it will be to his side's advantage to play without the help of his partner's cards, the player exercises this option by declaring "alone" distinctly at the time of making the trump. This player's partner then turns his cards face down and does not participate in the play.

Or

The player, who chooses the trump suit, either by accepting the up-card's suit as trump, or by naming a different suit, is called the maker. Before the play of the hand begins, the maker may announce; "Alone", in which case the maker's partner places his hand facedown and does not participate in the play.

Note that both these Rule compilations do not include your House Rule of a card being passed from maker's partner to the maker.

First it depends what euchre you are playing such as railroad, bid euchre or sometimes by house rules. In regular euchre you don't ask for your partners best but you can go alone against if those are the house rules. A similar situation is if the opponent reneges on a lone hand the maker gets his lone hand( not the usual 2 ) otherwise people would just renege, but also if the maker reneges on his lone hand the other team gets 4 points. It states quite clearly who ever reneges the opposing team gets the 4 points this makes sense to me because the rules do not say if the dealers reneges so I would assume it means who ever renges on loan hand the other team gets the point.)  Now on a go alone against its the team that gets at least 3 tricks that gets the 4 points, Remember these are house rules or different games of euchre not regular euchre but some may adopt these rules as house rules.


How can creatures with indestructible end up in the graveyard? How does a creature with indestructible end up in the graveyard?

I have been trying to figure this out for a little while.

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

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

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

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

Lightning Bolt is damage, and does not affect indestructible.


Does Double Strike mean you count as Attacking twice? Does Narset, Enlightened Master's ability trigger twice if she has double strike, since she has an ability that says "When (she) attacks"?

No.

The trigger, "Whenever ~ attacks" means "Whenever ~ is declared as an attacking creature". A creature with double strike will deal damage in the two combat damage steps, but will only be declared as an attacker once per turn. (Normally, unless some other effect is creating additional combat phases.)

Actually, it does count as attacking twice. According to the mtg wiki and some other referances, there is a first-strike attack phase and a regular attack phase. Take a look Here at the wiki. So, due to the fact that she is attacking twice, that power would be activated twice when you declare that she is attacking. If you do not believe me, take a look at some of these other questions where people have asked similar things:

Double Strike Creatures and Abilities
Triggering abilities Twice With Double Strike

Hope I helped,

-Nick


Has anyone heard of a rule called "19 back" for 0 point hands? My father in law plays a rule that I consider to be rubbish since I can find no reference to it in the rules.  I assume it's a house rule that he's tripped over somewhere, and adopted into his game.

The "19 back" rule states that if you score a 0 point hand, you move your peg 19 pips back.  In this case a 0 point hand sometimes means only the count of the cards, but usually will mean a 0 point end, that is no change in the position of the pegs whatsoever for any reason.

Has anyone else ever heard of this rule?

19-back is a not uncommon cribbage variant, but is often unpopular. I've seen it in some editions of Hoyle's Card Games; I've had 3 editions, read a fourth, and 2 of them had it. Unfortunately, my copies are not available to check exact wordings at the moment.

Typically:
If your hand scores no points in count phase, you lose 19 points. Note that this doesn't apply to the crib, only the hand, and only applies if you get to count.

Some people understand it to be:
If, during your turn, you score no points in play nor from hand during count, you lose 19 points. This applies at point of pegging the hand, before going to the crib. Again, if you don't get to count, it doesn't apply. Note that this means the dealer can't 19-back, as a dealer ALWAYS gets at least 1 point in play (either a 31, go, or last), and why this is not the usual version of 19-back.

discussion:

The naming is in part because 19 is impossible to achieve in the scoring phase. It is not uncommon for a 0-point hand to be called a "19"... since experienced cribbage players know that 19 is impossible.

Having played it, it reduces risk taking in card selection, due to the need to ensure points in scoring. Note that it also tends to reduce crib scores a bit as well, as the dealer has to make suboptimal decisions in order to keep points in hand. Also, it penalizes (pretty heavily) a "playing only hand" that fails to take one to 121+.

A playing hand being a low-point hand with strong potential to get points from by-mees or expected runs and doubles, such as AA22 (goes for the Go points) or 55AA (for getting 15's) or AAAF (F=any face; goes for the goes and pairs at high count). A Playing Only hand has no points itself, but expects to get them in play, such as A2TK or A389.

It's not something I've ever come across. Announcing the (impossible) score of nineteen when the hand is worthless is not unusual - I wonder if that's where the variant came from?


In Broadside, what is your strategy for placing the shore guns and mines during setup? I was recently reminded of the childhood naval game Broadside. As the defender, you get to place four shore guns and six mines during the setup phase, one on either side of two channels.

The channels are choke points that the attackers ships have to pass through to be able to win the game; one is close to the attacking fleet starting location and represents a direct path to the merchant ships they need to sink to win the game, while the other channel is out of their way.

The trick is that two of the guns are useless decoys, while the other two get a free shot on any ships that passes within range, and three of the mines can destroy an entire ship, while the other three are duds.

Does anyone who remembers this game ever develop a strategy for how to place these static defensive units, and if so, how did that change how you deployed your blue fleet once the game started?

I liked to put my good mines on one side of the board, and my good guns on the other side of the board. Then place my ships where their "broadsides" could cover the channels.

As I remember, the British fleet had 25 sails, the American only 20. But the guns and mines more than make up for it, for the Americans. Inevitably, the British ships lost sails to the guns. One or two would also hit a "live" mine.

This was decades ago for me but I remember that I would send a cutter through the middle where both guns would shoot. If both were there I lost 1 sail and if none I was through clear.


Are 2 2-card-swishes a valid 4-card-swish? I played my first game of Swish this evening and the other player was surprised when I asked if 2 sets of 2 card swishes are a valid 4 card swish. That is - can you pick up 2 pairs of cards that each are 2 card swishes and stack them together into a 4 card swish, so long as every ball swishes into a hoop of the same color and there is no overlapping as you visually see 4 balls in 4 hoops?

The rules don't specifically comment on this, so I am assuming yes. But given the other player's surprise, I wanted to make sure.

Of course, the same question can be extended to 2+3=5, 2+2+2=6, etc. I asked the question with 2+2=4 in order to provide a specific example.

I decided to email support at Thinkfun.com with:

  I played Swish last night for the first time and was unclear about
  something after both reading the rules multiple times and viewing your
  video:

  The question is whether a pair of 2-card-swishes constitute a valid
  4-card-swish, so long as the hoops and balls don't overlap among all 4
  cards. The rules don't comment on this situation one way or another so
  I am assuming the answer is yes (and can be extended equally to 2+3=5,
  2+2+2=6, etc., again so long as the hoops and balls don't overlap when
  you stack the subsets together.

  Another way of asking the same question is if you have what seems to
  be a valid 4 card swish per the rules, is it still valid if the 4
  cards can be rearranged into 2 sets of 2 swishes?

  I asked this question on Stack Exchange (Board and Card Games) and
  the person who answered came to the same conclusion I did - that the
  rules as literally stated indicate this is a valid swish (see link
  beneath my signature). However, this sits uneasily with me because
  2+2=4 swishes are easier to find than 4-swishes that can't be
  decomposed into 2 sets of 2. Yet the scoring system does not reward
  finding more difficult swishes.

  If you don't know the answer, can you pass this on the game creators
  to find out their intent?

Here's the answer I received:

  Below is the answer to your questions from one of our Production Team
  Members:

  The short answer for his question is no, Two 2-card Swishes do not
  “count” as a 4-card Swish. But, they do count as a legal move in the
  game, and the person who finds two 2-card Swishes still wins 4 cards,
  just as many as a person who makes a 4-card Swish. So, to answer the
  second point, at first blush this would seem not to make sense, since
  as Joe points out, the scoring system does not reward the person who
  found the more complicated Swish. This is actually done deliberately.
  The reason is that the winner is simply the player who has won the
  most cards. We tested versions where harder Swishes (higher counts)
  where worth more, but we decided on this version because it allows
  multiple players, of multiple skill levels, to play an equally
  challenging game. As in, when families play, Mom or Dad can be limited
  to 3 or higher card Swishes, whereas Jr.(s) can go for any number.
  This way, all players will be challenged, and Jr.(s) have an equal
  chance to win the game.

  We understand that for more experienced gamers, this will seem
  somewhat “off”. But this was the version that had the greater appeal,
  and we assume that people that really get into games like this can
  adjust the rules as they see fit, adding additional points for higher
  card Swish. I would suggest +1 for a 3-card Swish, +2 for 4-card, and
  so on. Keep in mind, though, that if you play this way, you have to
  keep all your Swishes separate as you win them, or else do the math in
  your head and remember it. This is another minor detail that can add
  complication, something that we try to avoid.

I interpret the answer as saying it doesn't count as a 4 card swish yet you can collect 2 2-card swishes simultaneously. It's phrased this way so that if an experienced adult is playing a kid using the variant that kids can do 2-card swishes while adults can't, then the adult is not allowed to simultaneously pick up 2 pairs for a 4 card swish, even if there is no ball/hoop overlap.

I think that while the rules basically specify a valid swish has all balls and hoops paired up, that being that there are no incomplete sets, to allow re use of a symbol should be disallowed as it also then implies that you can stack multiples of the same card as part of a "pair"

If you then have 3 or more cards with only 2 completed symbols but "all" are complete you shouldn't get the points allocated for 3 or more, while at least this doesn't break a scoring system that all in all doesn't reward skill, just deviance for circumventing a grind...

I think moving forward an unwritten rule should be that no 2 cards that have overlapping symbols of any colour can be used to form a swish. It satisfies the issue of unfair or devious use of cards, alongside the re-use being unavailable makes the 3+ swishes more impressive and gratifying.

And back on topic, if you have 2 swishes that can play as separate swishes ( but don't overlap on any symbols ) then you have just claimed 2 swishes. There is no indication of a benefit besides getting more cards quicker, while it could be interpreted that players must wait for the dealer to deal the replacement cards before stating swish again, which could mean someone else could get the pair. So in the spirit of fair play, I don't believe that you should be able to claim a 4 card swish made of 2 individual swishes.


I've massively over-sprayed my models! Help! I foolishly over-sprayed some of my Warhammer models. They are now have a thick coat that obscures some details and has cracked in places.

Can I remove this coat at all? Do I use chemicals? Do I just sand them down?

Yes, acrylic paint can be safely removed, and quite simply too. The basic process is to dunk your models in a solution of household cleaner, watered down if you like, and leave them in the bath for a few hours. The paint turns into a kind of slimy goo, which you can then scrub off with a toothbrush and toothpicks.

In the US, Simple Green All-Purpose Cleaner is the standard recommendation. In the UK, diluted Dettol (a common disinfectant), has been shown to be effective.

Somebody actually did a comparison of different cleaners for this very purpose. He actually found that oven cleaner worked best of all (easy removal after an hour), but also reported positive results with Simply Green (although interestingly, not 409, which serves a similar purpose).

Degreaser or brake fluid are other possibilities, but these are nastier and harder to assess, since they come in many variants. For safety, I'd stick to surface cleaner, or oven cleaner if you have a test model you are willing to potentially sacrifice (if you've ever cleaned an oven, you'll be well aware that oven cleaner is viscous stuff!).

Methylated spirits and so on are best avoided, as these can erode your models over time.

I used brown Dettol recently and it worked a treat.

Leave the model in there (be sure to wear gloves) for half an hour/forty minutes and then scrub off with a DRY toothbrush. Don't use water - it makes this weird gunk stuff that gets everywhere. Just scrub off with the Dettol. I recently cleaned a ridiculously over-painted model with it in no time.

Best of luck!


What happens if opponent has infinite turns, but cannot kill me because I have infinite life? Let's say I have the Heliod, Sun-Crowned + Spike Feeder combo in play, which allows me to gain an arbitrary amount of life at instant speed. Meanwhile, opponent has the Nexus of Fate combo running, which allows her to take arbitrarily many turns. She still needs to convert these turns to a win, though. She is playing Biogenic Ooze as her win condition, but in this case I have arbitrary amounts of life, so Biogenic Ooze is ineffective.

However ... she can continuously make more Oozes and attack for arbitrarily large damage. The board state is changing and so are our life totals, but she cannot kill me, and she cannot pass the turn and win by milling either since eventually I'll draw my Walking Ballista and kill her.

How would the game end?

Related: What happens in the event of a standoff in Magic? However, this doesn't seem like it falls into one of the standoff rules, since it's not a loop. As opponent attacks for ever-larger numbers, I have to respond by gaining ever-larger amounts of life.

Your opponent cannot win, and forestalls losing to Walking Ballista by looping Nexus of Fate. Therefore, you would win the game either by direct judge decision because you explain the inevitable sequence of events, or by the judge forcing your opponent to let you draw cards and eventually getting you to the Walking Ballista.

There is clearly a loop happening. Remember that "game state" is not a defined term. Even gaining and losing life does not alter the game state if it foreseeably does not decide the game at any point, as is the case in your scenario.

Case 3 of the answer to the question you linked does apply. Your opponent can propose a loop with any (finite) number of attacks, and you can counter-propose the same loop, except you first gain enough life to survive all those attacks. Then a significantly different choice has to be made, i.e. your opponent must let you take a turn. You will eventually draw your Walking Ballista and win.

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

From the tournament rules:

  The judge is the final arbiter of what constitutes a loop. A player may not 'opt-out' of shortcutting a loop, nor may they make irrelevant changes between iterations in an attempt to make it appear as though there is no loop. Once a loop has been shortcut, it may not be restarted until the game has changed in a relevant way. Proposing loops as an effort to use up time on the clock is Stalling.

The answer is that nobody has infinite anything, and you're probably going to lose.

As per the answer you linked, you can run your combo any finite number of times, which you can shortcut by stating that you'll do it some number of times, to which your opponent can either let it run or say how many loops until they intervene. Presumably they have no in-turn interruptions to apply (since their loop happens through their own turn sequence), so they'll let you stop at, for example, gaining one billion life.

After that, you end your turn, and your opponent triggers their own combo. They say that they're going to loop for some number of times (let's say one trillion), at the end of which they now have roughly 1 trillion Ooze tokens, with which they'll attack and overpower your current life total by a factor of 1000.


Why do so many people play out of turn on the last lead? Is this a common play say in bridge or some other euchre where players just randomly throw their last card in. I notice its commonly done during a lone hand but also on regular play and I have to always defend that it was my lead.

It's common in all trick-based card games; since your 'move' is forced (you have to play the only card you're still holding), you're not giving away information to your opponents (or your teammate). By just playing your card the very moment the second-to-last trick is taken, you speed up the game.

Players who do this know who is in the lead; the player who took the second-to-last trick, not the one who throws his/her card first. They assume the other players know it, too. Even more: most of the times they probably already know who is taking the last trick, which can often be deduced by remembering cards played during previous tricks. E.g. it might be clear that there is one trump card left and only one person can have it.

If it's confusing you or one of the other players, e.g. because you/they are relatively new to the card game, just ask the out-of-order-throwing players politely not to do so. Card games are a social activity and if you ask nicely, they're likely to comply.

It is not that everyone throws the last card it is usually one person doing this and with people trying to learn and older people who can't see or hear that good as well as other issues like concentration etc.

We all can't be experts or play super fast. Older folks don't like to play like that and people who are just learning don't get that way of playing until they understand better. It's ok to play like that at home but at a tournament or even regular play there are rules to follow. It may sound odd to an experienced player, but you have to remember there are new players or older players that are not on the fast track.

Most people don't play like that so when one person throws it in. I can see if some throws in the right bower or gets last trick but this is not a euchre where once you are euchred, they throw the hand in.


Cribbage and scoring 31 plus go Recognizing that I am arguing against pretty clear rules, but my buddy and I got in an argument regarding the logic behind only getting two pegs/points (Vs. 3) when you get a "go" from your partner and then place one or more cards down to eventually get to 31.

My logic (working against the rules) is that I should get 1 peg/point for my partners "go" and 2 pegs/points for reaching 31 (total of 3 points for the flurry of activity).  My argument is based on the fact that at any other time during the game when my partner says "go" I get 1 point......the only exception to this is when I place my cards down after the go and they result in a 31.  I argued with him last night that if the inventor of cribbage was alive today and I pointed out that I should get 3 points (1 for the go and 2 for hitting 31 directly) that they would say "hmmm....you are right....I missed that".

His rationale, is that when scoring 31, you are getting one point for hitting 31 exactly and 1 bonus point representing your partners' inability to play an additional card (his "go").  Hey says "whether a "go" is said or not, the go is implied when you place the last card at the end of the round to make 31....thus giving you two points when you reach 31 even when a "go" is communicated".

Any insight into how to argue either side of this scoring mess?

The official cribbage rules make this incredibly clear:

  Rule 1.6 - Definitions
  ...
  go: Called by a player who cannot play a card without exceeding the cumulative count of 31; the opponent scores one point, or two if reaching exactly 31.

In this, calling a 31 is just a special case of a go.

When you have a pair which will put you @31 IE 2 pairs of 2 that is 2 points for the pair and two points for the 31 obtained. A total of four points.


Which effect triggers first in MTG: Mage Slayer or Mystifying Maze Yesterday I played a deck with the card Mage Slayer against a deck with Mystifying Maze. I equipped a creature with Mage Slayer and attacked. My opponent reacted by exiling the equipped creature with his Mystifying Maze.

The ability of Mage Slayer triggers and resolves in the declare attackers step. Can Mystifying Maze prevent this? It can only target attacking creatures, therefor it can only be used once the attackers are declared.

What's the correct ruling in this situation?

Mystifying Maze can't prevent the Mage Slayer ability from resolving.

It helps to visualise the stack.  As you declare your attack, the Mage Slayer ability triggers and is put on the stack.  In response, your opponent activates his Mystifying Maze and puts this ability on the stack.  Everyone passes, Mystifying Maze's ability at the top of the stack resolves, the creature is exiled.  Now we get to Mage Slayer's ability, still on the stack.  The creature may currently be exiled, but the ability still resolves (and uses last known information to determine the creature's power and toughness).

There is no window to use the Mystifying Maze's ability before Mage Slayer can trigger; at any point before the trigger the creature is not yet an attacker, and is therefore an invalid target.

From what I know...

The Mage Slayer's ability will go into the stack to check the creature's power, then yout opponent youu put Mystifying Maze's ability on top so it resolves before. When Maze's ability resolves the creature will be exiled and, then when Mage Slayer resolves it will check the creature's power and it will 0 since there is no creature equipped.

In response to the negatives I received (since I can't comment).
Since Mage Slayer states:"Whenever equipped creature attacks, it deals damage equal to its power to defending player."

The creature deals damage, not Mage Slayer. So... How can a creature that has been removed from the board deal damage? It's the same as saying that if you use Prey Upon on your creature and then blinking it until next end step, it will deal damage to the opponent creature and not take any.