source
stringlengths 620
29.3k
| target
stringlengths 12
1.24k
|
|---|---|
Revealing an effect of a card after player makes their choice I'm working on designing a money management board game that features different event cards where players must make choices. The trouble I'm having is that I can't figure out how to reveal the effect of a player's choice without having the player know about the effect beforehand. For example, say you have a scenario like this: Your phone bill is due today. You can choose to: A) Pay the minimum ($30) B) Pay the full amount ($100) If the player picks choice B, then their credit will improve (+1 Credit) because they have paid the bill in full. How do I reveal the effect of the player's choice until after they have made their decision? If I wrote it as B) Pay the full amount (+1Credit) then everyone would pick Choice B because it is so obvious. Btw, this is a serious game so players should be able to learn something from it. <Q> You could borrow from the "Crossroads" idea used in Dead of Winter and <S> Gen7 - in those games there's a deck of Crossroads cards, and on your turn the player to your left draws one of them, and if its condition triggers they read it out and let you know what the choices are. <S> So you could have it that cards are drawn by the next player in turn order, and there's a part they read out, followed by a part that triggers only when the choice is made. <S> Note that there's a risk that the players will learn what the effects are unless you either have too many cards to memorise or near-duplicate cards with slightly different effects. <S> Alternatively, you can just let the player make their decision based on the full text of the card, but make it so that the decisions aren't obvious choices. <S> For example, make money a scarce resource so that while it would be nice to pay $100 to get <S> +1 <S> Credit <S> it might put you at risk of not being able to afford something else; or make it so that paying the full amount gives 0, 1 or 2 Credit based on some other factor so it isn't a uniformly good bonus. <A> You can use the backside of the card Gloomhaven does this, where the setup and query are on one side with the resolution on the other. <S> I thought Arkham Horror did as well, but it didn't <S> , it let you have everything up front and make your decision that way. <S> I swear I've seen it somewhere else, though. <S> Sentinels of the Multiverse sorta does this with the OblivAeon scions. <S> The back side is then secret from all players (which for Gloomhaven is important, as it is fully coop). <S> This also allows for multiple variants of the same setup. <S> The game also has you draw from the bottom of the deck (and as the draw is so rare, my group keeps the city and travel decks in the box) <S> so the fact that there's visible information on both sides <S> it's completely hidden. <S> (Alternatively, draw from the top, where the facing side is the setup, which doesn't give away a whole lot, depending on what the deck is used for and how often is pulled from). <S> For example in Gloomhaven you run across a rat-thing peddler offering you "a delicious meal, best you've ever had." <S> One version of the card, if you eat, you get blessed. <S> The other? <S> Cursed. <A> There are many techniques you can use to have someone not know the effect. <S> The biggest challenge you have if you do this is replay-ability. <S> Once a player knows some or all of the "hidden" effects, that player will have a massive advantage. <S> There are really only three ways to fix this: <S> Skip the hidden information. <S> Have the game create meaningful choices through tradeoffs rather than through people not knowing the outcome. <S> For example, money gives players short term advantages by letting them do more, so a player may do something disadvantageous credit-wise to do something else. <S> Use randomization. <S> This is much easier to implement, as you can then have a player draw some number of cards (usually 1) from a particular deck or roll a die to see what happens. <S> This removes some of the advantage from veteran players (they can still gain advantage by knowing the distribution of cards in the good/bad effect decks, but they won't know which card will happen next). <S> Eldritch Horror did this with double-sided cards by having several copies of each card with identical fronts but different consequences on the card backs. <S> Also, this is potentially better psychological enforcement of whatever concept <S> you're trying to teach with the game <S> (look into Intermittent Reinforcement vs Continuous Reinforcement). <S> Create a lot of content. <S> This is the angle taken by Trivial Pursuit and Betrayal at House on Hill. <S> By creating tons of different content, it's hard for a player to know what they will encounter. <S> This is really challenging for you as the game designer.
|
Using the back of the card (such as in Eldrich Horror), having another player read the card (such as Dead of Winter), or having a separate rulebook with lookups (such as Betrayal at House on Hill). There needs to be a random bad effect if a player chooses the bad option and/or a random good effect if they choose the good option.
|
How does Sundering Titan handle snow lands? My doubt is about Sundering Titan ; what happens when it enters and leaves the battlefield if there are snow lands in play? Does it destroy basic lands and snow basic lands and how much of each of them? <Q> "Snow" is a supertype. <S> If you look at Snow-Covered Plains <S> you will see that it's <S> types are "Snow Basic Land - Plains". <S> Which means that it counts as a basic land and a plains. <S> So in the case of Sundering Titan, if there was both a regular Plains card and a Snow Covered Plains out, you could only choose one of them to destroy. <S> Relevant rules <S> :From the comprehensive rules glossary Basic Land Type There are five "basic land types": Plains, Island, Swamp, Mountain, and Forest. <S> Each one has a mana ability associated with it. <S> See rule 305, "Lands." <S> And 205.4c <S> Any land with the supertype "basic" is a basic land. <S> Any land that doesn't have this supertype is a nonbasic land, even if it has a basic land type. <S> : Cards printed in sets prior to the Eighth Edition core set didn't use the word "basic" to indicate a basic land. <S> Cards from those sets with the following names are basic lands and have received errata in the Oracle card reference accordingly: <S> Forest, Island, Mountain, Plains, Swamp, Snow-Covered Forest, <S> Snow-Covered Island, Snow-Covered Mountain, Snow-Covered Plains, and Snow-Covered Swamp. <S> And from the rulings on Snow Covered Plains: “Snow” has no particular meaning or rules associated with it. <S> Also (emphasis mine) <S> Since this is a basic land , you may have any number of it in a Constructed deck in any format in which the Masters Edition II set, the Coldsnap set, or the Ice Age set is legal. <A> Yes, it can destroy both snow-covered basic lands and non-snow-covered basic lands. <S> It's up to Sundering Titan's controller; he or she must choose one land of each basic type (Plains, Island, Swamp, Mountain, Forest) (provided such a land is present on the battlefield). <A> Sundering Titan can destroy snow lands because cares about lands having a basic land type (Forest, Plains, Island, Swamp, Mountain), not about those lands having the name "Forest", "Plains", etc. <S> For each land type (Forest, Plains, Island, Swamp, Mountain), you get to choose a land that has that type to destroy. <S> Here are some examples of lands that can be chosen as a forest by Sundering Titan: <S> Forest Snow-Covered Forest Temple Garden <S> Sapseep Forest <S> Murmuring Bosk <S> Dryad Arbor <S> Any saproling creature if Life and Limb is in play
|
Snow-covered lands have basic land types, so the Titan's controller can choose them as well, but he/she can't destroy e.g. a Mountain and a Snow-covered Mountain during the same effect.
|
Can other pieces capture a threatening piece and prevent a checkmate? Total beginner here. I have a board setup that an app I'm using to learn described as a "checkmate" -- see below (the white pawn just moved below the rook and is threatening the king): If I were playing black, I know I cannot capture the pawn with the king, as I would placing my king in check. But: Why can't I use the rook or the queen (right next to the threatening pawn) to capture the pawn and get out of the check? For example: Keep the king where it is. Use the rook to capture the threatening pawn. <Q> But in this case, the king is also attacked by the rook. <S> So, you are checkmate. <A> This is called a double check . <S> You're checked by both the pawn and the rook. <S> Blocking, or capturing with a piece other than the king would only deal with one of those problems, so the only ways to deal with double check are to capture with the king (which you can't, here, because the pawn is protected) or to move the king some other way (which you can't, because both squares you could move to are covered by the bishop). <S> Double checks are very powerful, because they can only be dealt with by moving the king, and you don't have to cover much to prevent the king from being able to do that. <A> I've marked up this board a bit to show why this is checkmate, showing all the attacks that make it one. <S> Lets go through them one by one: <S> The pawn - The black king is currently in check by the white pawn on the diagonal. <S> The king would need to move away, or the pawn be taken to remove this. <S> The rook - The black king is in check because of the white rook at the bottom of the same column. <S> The king would have to move out of that column, another piece would need to block, or the rook be taken to remove that check. <S> The bishop - The black king can't move into the corner to get out of check because the white bishop is threatening that square. <S> The knight - The black king can't take the pawn to get out of check by the rook and pawn because the knight is threatening that square. <S> There's no single move here that will get the king out of check. <S> If the pawn is taken by another piece, the rook is still holding the king in check. <S> If the king moves to the corner, out of check by the rook and pawn, he is now in check by the bishop and if the king takes the pawn, moving out of check from the rook at the same time he is in check by the knight. <A> There are three ways to get out of check (including checkmate). <S> You can... <S> Run away <S> Block <S> the check <S> Capture <S> the checking piece <S> There are two checks here (pawn and rook). <S> If the king runs to either empty square, the bishop (and in one case, the rook) can capture. <S> If the king captures the pawn, the knight can capture. <S> That takes away #1. <S> You can block the rook check (with the queen or bishop) but not the pawn check. <S> That takes care of #2. <S> You can capture the pawn (with the rook or queen or king), but you can't capture the rook, so that takes care of #3. <S> So, it is checkmate. <S> If the white pawn wasn't checking, or if the white knight couldn't recapture, it wouldn't be checkmate (you could block the check or take the pawn with the king). <S> If the white rook wasn't checking, it wouldn't be checkmate (take the pawn with the rook or queen). <S> It takes both checks in this case to produce checkmate. <S> This is a rather complicated checkmate. <S> In my experience, most beginners would not be able to understand it, nor would they be able to find the move that produced it (the pawn capturing something to give check, which also produces a discovered check with the rook). <S> Don't give up on the game because the app gave you a rather nasty position. <S> Most real life chess is simpler than that. <A> For total beginners, it may be best to play chess without checks and just play to capture the king. <S> Whoever captures the king first wins, even if your king is being threatened. <S> I say this because it is difficult to understand check at first and playing until the king is dead <S> is the same as playing chess regularly, except if you were to miss a move that kills the king or someone accidentally puts themselves into check on their move. <S> In this case, there is no place the king can go or capture that won't be captured next move. <S> King takes pawn, knight takes king. <S> King moves to long black diagonal, bishop takes king, Something else attacks pawn, rook takes king. <S> Something blocks rook, pawn takes king.
|
Yes, you can capture the attacking piece with any one of your pieces, as long as you get out of the check.
|
If the only attacker is removed from combat, is a creature still counted as having attacked this turn? I'm querying an effect which specifically removes creatures from combat altogether such as Reconnaissance or Spires of Orazca . If the only attacking creature is removed from combat by an effect like this, how does this attack or lack thereof interact with things like the Raid mechanic and Curious Obsession ? Does it check "Was an attack initiated at all?" this turn or "Was an attack "successfully" made"? Does an effect like the above "prevent" an attack? I wondered this since burning the creature at any point after it has already been declared as an attacker still makes it count for "a creature attacked this turn". <Q> Declaring a creature as an attacker is a singular event that is not undone by later removing that creature from combat. <S> For example, you will get the benefits of Raid and you will not have to sacrifice Curious Obsession in a turn during which all of your at least 1 attackers have been removed from combat. <S> Note that effects like that of Spires of Orazca are not the only ways to remove a creature from combat. <S> Simply destroying or exiling a creature also remove it from combat. <S> 506.4. <S> A permanent is removed from combat if it leaves the battlefield, <S> if its controller changes, if it phases out, if an effect specifically removes it from combat, if it's a planeswalker that's being attacked and stops being a planeswalker, or if it's an attacking or blocking creature that regenerates (see rule 701.14) or stops being a creature. <S> A creature that's removed from combat stops being an attacking, blocking, blocked, and/or unblocked creature. <S> A planeswalker that's removed from combat stops being attacked. <S> Effects like Raid or the 2nd ability of Curious Obsession do not care whether or not the attacking creature(s) were in combat the whole time, or that they dealt combat damage, or anything else. <S> All that matters is that you have successfully declared at least one creature as an attacker this turn. <S> Declare Attackers Step <S> [..] <S> 508.1m <S> Any abilities that trigger on attackers being declared trigger. <S> Note that there are effects that put a creature onto the battlefield "tapped and attacking" . <S> Creatures that have been put onto the battlefield this way do count as attacking creatures, but do not count as having been declared as attackers. <S> But it would matter for abilities that require a certain number of creatures to have been declared as attackers, such as Windbrisk Heights <A> I couldn't find a definitive answer in the Comprehensive Rules , but the post explaining the mechanics from the Ixalan set says: Raid abilities also don't care about what happened to the attacking creature. <S> Maybe it survived combat, maybe it didn't. <S> Maybe it got bounced. <S> Maybe it changed controllers (that traitor!). <S> As long as you attacked with it, that's good enough for a raid ability. <S> I would think that bouncing (returning the creature to its owner's hand) would be comparable to the ability on Reconnaissance or Spires of Orazca, so this situation would count as "a creature attacked this turn". <A> Abilities like Raid check if an attack was declared. <S> This means that if a creature is removed from combat in any way after being declared as attacking, it will still meet the conditions for raid. <S> Creatures can be removed from combat in many ways, cards like Maze of Ith and Reconnaissance will untap and remove it, the creature can change controllers because of cards like Word of Seizing or Act of Aggression and no longer be attacking, or the creature could leave the battlefield, by being dealt lethal damage ( Lightning Bolt ), sacrificed ( Celestial Flare ), destroyed ( Doom Blade ), bounced to the hand ( Unsummon ) or exiled temporarily ( Ghostly Flicker ) or permanently ( Unmake ). <S> Note that it's declaring a creature as attacking that meets these conditions. <S> If a creature attacks without being declared as attacking, say when Meandering Towershell returns tapped and attacking a turn after his attack was declared, it will not meet Raid's conditions, this is also why it doesn't meet it's own conditions and exile itself every turn. <S> This is however the only thing I can think of that will be attacking when no attacks were declared, all other abilities that put creatures into play tapped and attacking require something to be declared as attacking already like Hero of Bladehold .
|
In practice this doesn't matter for Raid or Curious Obsession because all those effects have a prerequisite of an already attacking creature, which would already satisfy Raid and CO.
|
Is it okay / does it make sense for another player to join a running game of Munchkin? In a "just for fun" session of the card game Munchkin, would it be okay to join a game in progress? Of course the joining person would be in a disadvantage. Arguments against this, as far as I can think of for now: The current order of the players is disturbed by adding another player. <Q> I've played plenty of games where someone has joined mid-game, and it has worked very well them just starting as if from scratch (i.e. at level 1 and drawing the starting hand of 4 treasure, 4 doors). <S> In my experience, what tends to happen is the established players have no problem with helping them to fight monsters they can't beat, meaning they'll level up and get loot just fine without needing a level boost. <S> In terms of changing the play order, I have a feeling there's a card which influences turn order in one of the early expansion sets, something along the lines of "Player is now fighting this monster, and play continues as though this were the player's turn", effectively skipping everyone in between - although I can't find the card name or text with a cursory search. <S> Also, I wouldn't have said Munchkin is a game which particularly relied on the turn order, so I don't really see how this could be a problem. <S> In my opinion, if someone gets upset over a new player joining mid-campaign in casual play, they're probably taking Munchkin too seriously. <A> If it's "just for fun" and everyone is still having fun, then sure. <S> If someone finds their fun level jeopardized by, for example, the disruption of the play order, then either you should delay the introduction of the new player or change the mind(s) of the opposed player(s). <A> Does it make sense: That depends on how long the game has been running. <S> If you've only been around the table 1-3 times the disadvantage isn't so massive that the player has no real chance of catching up, more than that it doesn't make much sense to join games already in progress. <S> Is it <S> okay: <S> That's up to the people playing the game. <S> There's no major difference from adding a player, some things would have been different if the game had started out with 4 people instead of 3, but those are made up for by the disadvantage the new player faces by coming in late. <S> The turn order is disrupted, but the new player gets none of the benefits or detriments of having been in turn order until now. <S> The best place to add a new player to the game is immediately after the current player, so they get into the game and start their catch-up immediately. <A> Would it be okay to join a game in progress? <S> If everyone at the table is okay with it, of course. <S> Some arguments against: Player order. <S> If someone believes mixing up the player order is a game breaker, they leave too much up to chance rather than strategy. <S> It is just as likely they will be positively or neutrally affected by the new player order as negatively. <S> New player will ally with a particular player. <S> I've had people invite their friends part way through <S> and this I was apprehensive, assuming they would just assist their friend to victory. <S> Often they are even more competitive with their friend and if they are a good player will be persuaded by good arguments for coordination rather than blatantly helping their friend. <S> End-game is in sight and new player has no chance. <S> I have joined very late and still won games. <S> But if the end is only a few turns away, the new player will only be able to throw their weight for or against one of the contenders. <S> This leaves a sour taste in the loser's mind, even if they may have ultimately lost anyhow. <S> New player needs to be taught the game. <S> Best to wait until next game. <A> Inserting a new player into the turn order is far less consequential than the change in balance of power that a new player introduces. <S> Most games of Munchkin I've played come to a series of showdowns in which one player tries to win and the other players try to stop that player. <S> Players too far behind have a much higher risk of kingmaking to end the game rather than trying to win. <S> Given that, the question is whether a new player added at that point in the game has a reasonable chance of winning. <S> You may want to have them start at a level higher than one (such as the lowest level any other player is), and possibly draw a few random pieces of equipment if the game is reasonably far along.
|
I am fine teaching new players at the start of the game, having a new player come partway through upsets the flow and may detract from other's fun. I have played dozens of games where someone or multiple people have joined late, I would restrict new players only if the end-game was clearly in sight.
|
Unbreakable Formation vs. Cry of the Carnarium My opponent played Cry of the Carnarium in MTG Arena. I immediately played Unbreakable Formation after. The intended result was for my creatures to not die or get exiled, but they did. Shouldn't Unbreakable Formation resolve, granting me indestructible until end of turn? <Q> The ability Indestructible is defined in rule 702.12b : <S> A permanent with indestructible can't be destroyed. <S> Such permanents aren't destroyed by lethal damage, and they ignore the state-based action that checks for lethal damage (see rule 704.5g). <S> The rule it references, 704.5g, is part of the State-based action rules : <S> If a creature has toughness greater than 0, and the total damage marked on it is greater than or equal to its toughness, that creature has been dealt lethal damage and is destroyed. <S> Regeneration can replace this event. <S> The previous rule, 704.5f, says this: If a creature has toughness 0 or less, it's put into its owner's graveyard. <S> Regeneration can't replace this event. <S> As you can see, if a creature takes damage greater than or equal to its toughness, it is "destroyed", so Indestructible can stop it. <S> But if a creature loses all of its toughness, it is just put into the graveyard, so Indestructible doesn't do anything about that. <S> Magic Arena displays damage the same way it displays toughness loss, but they are not the same thing. <A> Indestructible does not save a creature from dying due to having 0 toughness. <S> It only prevents creatures from being destroyed. <S> 702.12. <S> Indestructible 702.12a Indestructible is a static ability. <S> 702.12b <S> A permanent with indestructible can't be destroyed. <S> Such permanents aren't destroyed by lethal damage, and they ignore the state-based action that checks for lethal damage (see rule 704.5g). <S> Dying as a result of having 0 toughness is not being destroyed. <S> A creature with 0 toughness dies because of this state-based action: <S> 704.5f <S> If a creature has toughness 0 or less, it's put into its owner's graveyard. <S> Regeneration can't replace this event. <S> Also see this definition of destroyed in the rules: 701.7. <S> Destroy <S> 701.7a <S> To destroy a permanent, move it from the battlefield to its owner's graveyard. <S> 701.7b <S> The only ways a permanent can be destroyed are as a result of an effect that uses the word "destroy" or as a result of the state-based actions that check for lethal damage (see rule 704.5g) or damage from a source with deathtouch (see rule 704.5h). <S> If a permanent is put into its owner's graveyard for any other reason, it hasn't been "destroyed." <S> Similarly, you cannot use regeneration to prevent a creature from dying this way. <A> Unbreakable Formation did make your creatures indestructible. <S> Unfortunately, that wasn't enough to save them. <S> "Indestructible" means that lethal damage and 'destroy' effects won't destroy your creatures. <S> However, if a creature had zero toughness it dies as a state-based-effect, and that isn't prevented by indestructible. <S> Cry of the Carnarium reduces the power and toughness of your creatures, dodging indestructible. <S> Arena confuses this by showing damage as if it was reducing the toughness of the creature, but in actuality the effects are distinct. <S> A 2/2 with two damage still has 2 toughness, but a 2/2 with -2/-2 has 0 toughness. <S> (Technically speaking, death by lethal damage is also a state-based-effect, but it's one that is specifically protected against by indestructible. )
|
The card Unbreakable Formation will not generally save your creatures from dying from Cry of the Carnarium, because the ability Indestructible does not save creatures from dying from toughness loss.
|
With regards to an effect that triggers when a creature attacks, how does it entering the battlefield tapped and attacking apply? Lets say I have Kaalia of the Vast on the battlefield. I attack with her, and cheat out Aurelia, the Warleader or Tyrant's Familiar . Would I get their "on attack" trigger? Or are they skipped. <Q> No, you don't get the "on attack" trigger. <S> One of the rulings on Kaalia covers this point: <S> The creature card is already tapped and attacking as it’s put onto the battlefield. <S> Any abilities that trigger when a creature becomes tapped or when a creature attacks won’t trigger for that card. <A> The reason is that being declared as an attacker is a single event that happens only once per combat, at the end of the "declare attackers" step of the combat phase. <S> It's the event that triggers Kaalia of the Vast 's ability in the first place, so by the time a creature is put on the battlefield as a result of Kaalia's ability, that point has already passed and cannot trigger the ability of Aurelia or Tyrant's Familiar. <S> Declare Attackers Step 508.1. <S> First, the active player declares attackers. <S> [..] <S> [..] <S> 508.1m <S> Any abilities that trigger on attackers being declared trigger. <S> 508.1m is when Kaalia's ability triggers. <S> It goes on the stack afterwards: 508.2. <S> Second, the active player gets priority. <S> (See rule 116, "Timing and Priority.") <S> 508.2a Abilities that trigger on a creature attacking trigger only at the point the creature is declared as an attacker. <S> 508.2b <S> Any abilities that triggered on attackers being declared or that triggered during the process described in rules 508.1 are put onto the stack before the active player gets priority; the order in which they triggered doesn't matter. <S> Kaalia's ability goes on the stack now, eventually resolves, and a creature is put on the battlefield tapped and attacking. <S> That creature never sees the end of the "declare attackers" step described in 508.1m and therefore does not trigger its own "on attack" ability. <A> "Creature attacks" is short for "declared as an attacker". <S> The creature wasn't declared as an attacker, so their triggered ability doesn't trigger.
|
No, you don't get "on attack" triggers for creatures that enter the battlefield "tapped and attacking".
|
Why is it important that the digits be all different? In standard Bulls and Cows , the digits of the chosen number must be all different. Is this rule crucial for the "playability" of the game? In other words: if I ignore this rule and allow choosing a code with some identical digits - does it make the game to hard or too easy for the guesser? <Q> As per your linked wikipedia article, a later game based on the same concept is Mastermind. <S> And from that game's Wikipedia article: Duplicates and blanks are allowed depending on player choice, so the player could even choose four code pegs of the same color or four blanks. <S> So no, it's not crucial. <A> Allowing duplicates makes the game more difficult for the guesser in two ways: As notes in other answers, there are more possible solutions (10,000 versus 5,040). <S> Each "hint" from the mastermind gives potentially less information. <S> There would be a few ways to deal with the rules, but for simplicity sake let's assume that the mastermind must answer "correct position" if the peg's colour is indeed in the same position, and each peg in the guess can only clue one peg in the solution. <S> For example, suppose the solution is WWGB. <S> Then: A guess of YYBB would get one red peg (correct colour, correct position). <S> A guess of YYBY would get one white peg (correct colour, wrong position). <S> A guess of WYYY would get one red peg, as would YWYY. <S> A guess of YYWY would get one white peg. <S> A guess of YYWW would get two white pegs. <S> A guess of YWWY would get one red peg, one white peg. <S> In standard mastermind, if you know that the first peg is white then you don't need to guess white for any other position. <S> But with duplicates allowed, you can't make that assumption - you potentially need to guess WWWW to see how many whites are in the solution, then GGGG to see how many greens, and so forth. <A> The main reason for that rule is it makes it about twice as difficult if you allow for duplicate numbers instead of not allowing <S> the. <S> Duplicates <S> Not Allowed 10 Choices for first pick 9 choices for second pick 8 choices for third pick 7 choices for fourth pick <S> Total possible choices: 5040 10 <S> * 9 <S> * 8 <S> * 7 <S> Duplicates Allowed 10 Choices for first pick 10 choices for second pick 10 choices for third pick 10 choices for fourth pick <S> Total possible choices: 10000 10 <S> * 10 <S> * 10 <S> * 10 <S> The other part where it gets tricky is how you properly annotate what numbers that they have correct and in the correct spot versus what numbers they have correct but in the wrong spot
|
It makes the game harder in that there are more possible solutions.
|
Is there a card that has opponents discard cards whenever they lose life? I was wondering whether I could create an infinite loop using Fell Specter and a card with an ability similar to or exactly like this one: Whenever an opponent loses life, that player discards a card. Does anyone know of such a card? Thank you in advance for the help! <Q> Noteable: <S> Mindcrank : " <S> Whenever an opponent loses life, that player puts that many cards from the top of their library into their graveyard." <S> Extremely close to what you requested, but it doesn't trigger Fell Specter 's ability. <S> Exquisite Blood <S> : "Whenever an opponent loses life, you gain that much life. <S> " It forms a similar combo with Sanguine Bond and Epicure of Blood instead of Fell Specter . <A> There aren't any, and there won't be any. <S> Players get priority during the draw step after the draw. <S> This means that instant speed discard has the ability to rob a player of the ability to play their sorcery speed cards before they ever get the opportunity to play them. <S> As a consequence, Wizards really hates printing instant speed discard, and hates repeatable instant speed discard even more so. <S> There's enough ways to deal damage at instant speed to make a card like the one you want to qualify as repeatable instant speed discard, so they aren't going to print it in the foreseeable future. <S> Furthermore, the Underworld Dreams effect has been printed several times, and is powerful enough that people have built competitive decks around it even without adding a loop to the deck. <S> Discard and land destruction are two of the most closely monitored deck strategies, because Wizards thinks that being unable to play your spells is the least fun position to be in, and players who aren't having fun tend to stop buying cards. <A> Closest I can think of is Lich's Mastery which is self-inflicted: <S> Whenever you lose life, for each 1 life you lost, exile a permanent you control or a card from your hand or graveyard.
|
No, as this search reveals.
|
Does Sylvok Lifestaff work with Bronze Bombshell? Suppose I use Endless Whispers to gift a Bronze Bombshell to my opponent. Do I have enough time to equip a Sylvok Lifestaff that I already have on the field to the Bronze Bombshell before the opponent sacrifices it, so that I can gain 3 life from Sylvok Lifestaff's second ability? For reference, Endless Whispers' rules text reads: 'Each creature has "When this creature dies, choose target opponent. That player puts this card from its owner's graveyard onto the battlefield under their control at the beginning of the next end step."' Bronze Bombshell has the ability: 'When a player other than Bronze Bombshell's owner controls it, that player sacrifices it. If the player does, Bronze Bombshell deals 7 damage to the player.' And Sylvok Lifestaff has the relevant ability: 'Whenever equipped creature dies, you gain 3 life.' <Q> You don't have enough time (since equipping is done 'at sorcery speed'), but it doesn't really matter; you can only equip a creature <S> you control : <S> 02.6a <S> Equip is an activated ability of Equipment cards. <S> " <S> Equip [cost]" means "[Cost]: <S> Attach this permanent to target creature you control. <S> Activate this ability only any time you could cast a sorcery." <A> No. <S> You can equip the Sylvok Lifestaff before the Bronze Bombshell dies when you control it. <S> You can gain 3 life when the Bronze Bombshell first dies, but not 6 life. <A> When Bronze Bombshell enters play under your opponent's control its ability will immediately trigger. <S> That ability will go on the stack when someone gets priority (which happens immediately after the Endless Whispers trigger finishes resolving) at which point you will have the opportunity to play spells and activate abilities before it resolves (since the sacrifice is part of the effect and not a cost, it won't happen until the ability resolves). <S> But you are limited to instants and instant speed abilities, and equipping can only be done whenever you could cast a sorcery (your turn, main phase, with nothing on the stack), and you can't equip creatures your opponent controls anyways. <A> Do I have enough time to equip a Sylvok Lifestaff that I already have on the field to the Bronze Bombshell before the opponent sacrifices it <S> Yes. <S> And that time is before your opponent gains control of Bronze Bombshell. <S> You can equip Blond Bombshell while you control it, then if it dies your opponent gains control of Blond Bombshell, while you remain the controller of Sylvok Lifestaff, and since you are the controller, you are the "you" in "you gain 3 life."
|
When an opponent gains control of Bronze Bombshell there is no chance for you to equip Sylvok Lifestaff , because you can only equip creatures you control.
|
Would "destroying" Wurmcoil Engine prevent its tokens from being created? I attacked with Wurmcoil Engine and my friend blocked with Stinkweed Imp which has the ability "Whenever Stinkweed Imp deals combat damage to a creature, destroy that creature." My friend argues that it destroys Wurmcoil Engine and does not "die" and is instead moved directly into the graveyard. I argue that the tokens will still be created because the creature hits the graveyard and no matter how it got there, it still counts as a "death" so it gets the tokens. We're still confused, what's the rule? <Q> Destroying something causes it to go to the graveyard, and "when Wurmcoil Engine dies" means "when Wurmcoil Engine is put in the graveyard from the battlefield": 701.7a To destroy a permanent, move it from the battlefield to its owner's graveyard. <S> 700.4. <S> The term dies means "is put into a graveyard from the battlefield." <S> On top of that, destroying Wurmcoil Engine is the most common cause of its tokens being created. <S> Your friend is probably thinking of "destroying" a creature as something different from "dealing it lethal damage", but dealing lethal damage to a creature literally causes that creatrue to be destroyed: 704.5g <S> If a creature has toughness greater than 0, and the total damage marked on it is greater than or equal to its toughness, that creature has been dealt lethal damage and is destroyed. <S> This rule is really important because it is why "indestructible" prevents creatures from dying to lethal damage. <S> If you want to prevent Wurmcoil Engine from creating tokens, you need to do one of the following: <S> Have Wurmcoil go somewhere other than the graveyard, such as with Path to Exile or Unsummon Remove Wurmcoil's abilities, such as with Ovinize <S> Prevent the trigger from resolving, such as with Trickbind <A> Destroying Wurmcoil Engine triggers its ability 700.4. <S> The term dies means “is put into a graveyard from the battlefield.” <S> Anything that causes a creature or planeswalker to move from the battlefield to the graveyard will trigger "dies" effects. <S> If you want to avoid the trigger you need to use a card that moves the creature to another zone instead, such as Disintegrate . <A> Wurmcoil Engine will die in this scenario, so you'll get the tokens. <S> From the Comprehensive Rules : 701.7. <S> Destroy <S> 701.7a <S> To destroy a permanent, move it from the battlefield to its owner's graveyard. <S> 700.4. <S> The term dies means "is put into a graveyard from the battlefield." <A> From the comprehensive rules: Destroy To move a permanent from the battlefield to its owner's graveyard. <S> See rule 701.7, "Destroy." <S> Dies <S> See rule 700.4. <S> So for creatures, "dies" and "is destroyed" are synonymous. <S> In fact, if you look at the version of Wurmcoil Engine from Scars of Mirrodin , it even uses "is put into a graveyard from the battlefield" rather than the shorthand "dies". <S> So you do get the tokens.
|
Destroying Wurmcoil Engine will definitely cause it to create tokens. A creature or planeswalker "dies" if it is put into a graveyard from the battlefield.
|
What combination of kingdom cards makes for the fewest number of turns to end the game? I am wondering in a 2 player game, what is the fewest number of turns each players could take to end the game. Lets assume both player are working together to make this happen and have prefect luck, so stacking your deck each shuffle is allowed. <Q> There are multiple possible ways to do this, but here is one: The Kingdom: <S> Fortress Villa Pixie <S> Pooka <S> Tracker Overlord Lurker <S> King's Court Bridge Library Travelling Fair <S> Advance <S> I'm not going to go into all of the details here, because it gets quite long and complex, but the final step is to have bought a Travelling Fair, and a Villa to return to action phase. <S> Then have a hand of: <S> King's Court, King's Court, Lurker, Lurker, Overlord Play King's Court (a) <S> Play King's Court (1) Play Lurker (1), trash Overlord from supply Play Lurker (2), gain Overlord from the trash (put it on your deck because of Travelling Fair) <S> Play Lurker (3), do anything, doesn't matter <S> Play <S> King's Court (2) Play Overlord(1) as Pixie, draw next Overlord, trash it to get the Boon Play Overlord(2) as Lurker, gain Overlord from the trash Play Overlord(3) as King's Court (a) That last step wraps back to the first... <S> you have the same hand, same card on top of your deck, same cards in the trash. <S> Except you have received a Boon. <S> With the infinite Boons, you will have received every Silver in the game from The Mountain's Gift, drawn them all into hand from The Sea's Gift, and gained all of the cards with The Earth's Gift. <S> The full details of this combo are written out in this forum post . <S> All credit goes to Mith and other f.ds members. <S> There is also a video of this combo being demonstrated on Dominion Online: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbWdV9H2SKk <S> So that particular combination requires a very convoluted setup and an extremely lucky starting hand, with the exact right Heirlooms. <S> So here's a very short game that happened in a real, regular randomized game: <S> Turn 3, draw Quarry + 4 Copper. <S> Stonemason -> <S> 2 Villas (5 times).Stonemason -> 2 Trade Route (4-5 times).Win off Museum points Empties the Villa, Stonemason, and Trade Route piles to end the game. <S> Details in this forum post . <A> While not as fast as GendoIkari's answer, using just villages, workshops and woodcutters from the base game it would be possible to have a game end very quickly. <S> Using workshops to gain a free care costing 4 or less Using woodcutter for extra treasure and an extra buy Using village to draw cards and play an extra workshop or woodcutter If both players used the effects of workshop and their treasure to only buy from these supply piles they would be able to rapidly deplete them. <A> I can get the game to end in 6.5 turns using just kingdom cards. <S> This is not as impressive as the 3 turns posted by Gendolkari (posted concurrently with this). <S> Each player does the following (unless it specifies one player or the other): <S> Turns 1 and 2: <S> buy Highway + Chapel. <S> Each deck is now 7 Copper, 3 Estates, Highway, and Chapel <S> Turn 3: <S> Play Highway and 5 coppers ( <S> 5 money, 2 buys, all cards cost 1 less). <S> Buy Highway and Pawn <S> Turn 4: <S> Use chapel to discard 3 Estates and a Copper <S> Each deck is now 6 Copper, 2 Highways, Chapel, and Pawn (and the next drawn card must be a Copper). <S> Turn 5: <S> Play 2 Highways, Pawn <S> (choosing +buy and +money), and 4 Coppers (5 money, 4 buys, all cards cost 2 less). <S> Buy Port, Bridge, and 2 Pawns. <S> Each deck is now <S> 6 Copper, 3 Pawns, 2 Highways, 2 Ports, Chapel (2 Coppers and a Chapel must be the next three cards drawn). <S> Turn 6: <S> Play 2 Copper, 2 Highways, 2 Ports, 2 Pawns (choosing +draw and +buy), and Bridge (Chapel unused; 3 money, 6 buys, all cards cost 3 less). <S> Player 1 buys 2 Ports, 2 Pawns, 2 Chapels. <S> Player 2 buys 1 Port, 2 Pawns, 3 Chapels <S> The Port and Pawn piles are now empty and the Chapel pile has only 3 left. <S> The top of each deck is 4 Coppers and a Pawn. <S> Turn 7 (player 1): <S> Play 4 Coppers and Pawn (+1 card, +1 action), draw and play 2 Highways. <S> Buy the remaining 3 Chapels. <S> The game ends from 3 empty piles.
|
You can end the game, even buying/gaining every single card in the entire supply, on turn 1!
|
Can commander tax be proliferated? Can you proliferate someone's commander tax? For example, after you send your opponent's commander to his/her zone you proliferate the commander tax and make sure it cant be cast again by making it too expensive to cast it. <Q> No. <S> Proliferate only deals with counters . <S> 701.26a <S> To proliferate means to choose any number of permanents and/or players that have a counter, then give each one additional counter of each kind that permanent or player already has. <S> The commander tax has nothing to do with a counter. <S> A counter is a physical object that is used when an effect tells you to use one. <S> 121.1. <S> A counter is a marker placed on an object or player that modifies its characteristics and/or interacts with a rule, ability, or effect. <S> Counters are not objects and have no characteristics. <S> Notably, a counter is not a token, and a token is not a counter. <S> Counters with the same name or description are interchangeable. <S> The commander tax does not use counters at all. <S> 903.8. <S> A player may cast a commander they own from the command zone. <S> A commander cast from the command zone costs an additional {2} for each previous time the player casting it has cast it from the command zone that game. <S> This additional cost is informally known as the "commander tax." <A> No; proliferate duplicates counters and only counters: 701.26a <S> and the commander tax rule does not mention counters (even though you might use the same dice/counters to keep track of the number of times): 903.8. <S> A player may cast a commander they own from the command zone. <S> A commander cast from the command zone costs an additional {2} for each previous time the player casting it has cast it from the command zone that game. <S> This additional cost is informally known as the "commander tax." <A> The number of times a player has cast their commander from the command zone is part of the game state itself. <S> It doesn't actually use counters as far as the game rules are concerned, even though players may use physical "counters" such as dice or coins to keep track. <S> The commander tax is defined in the rules (CR 903.8), and is equivalent to each commander having the following rules text: <S> You may cast this card from the command zone if you pay an additional {2} for each time you've previously cast it from the command zone this game. <S> The commander tax is an additional cost based on the number of times you've previously cast your commander from the command zone. <S> Because proliferate only affects counters (as defined by the game rules), it doesn't impact the commander tax.
|
To proliferate means to choose any number of permanents and/or players that have a counter, then give each exactly one additional counter of a kind that permanent or player already has.
|
Why doesn't WotC use established keywords on all new cards? In War of the Spark, we have the returning mechanic of proliferate. But we also have additional returning mechanics that don't use the associated keywords, namely Evolution Sage with landfall. This seems to happen a few times per set, where instead of printing the keyword they decide to explain the full mechanic on new cards. Is there a reason that WotC doesn't use established keywords with cards that use the associated mechanic? <Q> Landfall isn't an established keyword since it's not a keyword ; it doesn't have its own article in the Comprehensive Rules , rule 702. <S> Rather, it is an ability word which does nothing more than link a group of cards with a common theme/mechanic together. <S> 207.2c <S> An ability word appears in italics at the beginning of some abilities. <S> Ability words are similar to keywords in that they tie together cards that have similar functionality, but they have no special rules meaning and no individual entries in the Comprehensive Rules. <S> The ability words are addendum, battalion, bloodrush, channel, chroma, cohort, constellation, converge, council's dilemma, delirium, domain, eminence, enrage, fateful hour, ferocious, formidable, grandeur, hellbent, heroic, imprint, inspired, join forces, kinship, landfall, lieutenant, metalcraft, morbid, parley, radiance, raid, rally, revolt, spell mastery, strive, sweep, tempting offer, threshold, undergrowth, and will of the council. <S> (the list might be updated when a new set comes out) <S> Having said that, it looks like Evolution Sage is the only card in that set with landfall a landfall-like ability. <S> Having only one card with that mechanic is (apparently) not enough to return a key- or ability word from a previous block; they generally only do so for evergreen keywords like lifelink, vigilance or shroud. <A> I don't have a link right on hand, but WotC (or maybe one of its representatives like Mark Rosewater) has stated that it limits the number of keywords and ability words in a set to limit complexity, since it can confuse new players. <A> Keywords (and ability words) exist to telegraph the themes of the set <S> The primary purpose of keywords are to telegraph to players the mechanical themes of the set, and to tie those mechanics to the flavor identity of the set. <S> Looking at War of the Spark: Amass is a build-around mechanic for blue, black, and red, and provides a flavorful tie to Bolas's Eternal Army. <S> Proliferate tells players that they can mechanically build around +1/+1 counters and planeswalkers, and thematically represents the teamwork of the Ravnicans (and planeswalkers) who are teaming up to fight Bolas. <S> Giving Evolution Sage the Landfall ability word would tell players that they should mechanically care about the lands they are playing. <S> Which... isn't true? <S> The only other cards that really care about lands are Nissa and Awaken Vitu-Ghazi, both of which are rare, and not at all the theme of the set. <S> Thematically, Landfall was used in Zendikar to represent exploring new lands and discovering new mysteries. <S> Neither of which applies in WAR. <S> Ravnica is thoroughly explored already, and if anything it's being destroyed. <S> A mechanic tied to land destruction might be thematic (if a mechanical nightmare balance-wise), but landfall is a poor fit for the set. <S> Labeling Evolution Sage with landfall <S> would make comprehension slightly easier (it's easier to remember the ability when you can categorize it as "Landfall - proliferate" rather than remembering the entire thing wholesale), but this effect would be primarily seen amongst experienced players (because they have to already know what landfall is to take advantage of the label), who a) don't need the extra help because they're experienced, and b) will categorize it as "landfall-proliferate" anyways, because c) <S> the ability is extremely simple and doesn't require any memory aids.
|
Because they don't want to confuse new players.
|
UNO Stacking a Draw 4 Card instead of picking up 4 cards? Need clarification on the Draw 4 rule. - Player 1 lays down a Draw 4 Card and says the color is Red. - Player 2 does not have a Red card but has a Draw 4 Card. Can Player 2 lay down his Draw 4 Card and have Player 3 draw 8 cards? <Q> Not under the standard rules - there is no ability to respond to a Wild +4 (or a +2 for that matter). <S> If the previous player to you played one of those cards, you take the cards and <S> the turn pass. <S> "Stacking" + cards is a common house rule, but we obviously can't tell you what your house rules are. <A> From mattel.com: https://service.mattel.com/instruction_sheets/42001pr.pdf <S> Wild Draw 4 Card - <S> This card allows you to call the next color played and requires the next player to pick 4 cards from the DRAW pile and FORFEIT his/her turn. <S> Note: <S> Stacking or Progressive UNO, i.e. playing a Draw 4 card (on top of another Draw 4 card) instead of picking up 4 cards, is a house rule used by some. <A> According to official rules, if a player plays a Wild Draw 4 card on you, you can only: Draw 4 cards. <S> You may challenge that player, if you suspect that a Wild Draw 4 card has been played on you illegally (i.e. the player has a matching card). <S> The challenged playermust show you their hand. <S> If guilty, the challenged player must drawthe 4 cards instead of you. <S> However, if the challenged player is innocent, you must drawthe 4 cards PLUS an additional 2 cards (6 total). <S> Reference: https://service.mattel.com/instruction_sheets/UNO%20Basic%20IS.pdf <A> I'm guessing this question is a reference to a tweet that was viral over last few days. <S> So direct from source..... <S> If someone puts down a +4 card, you must draw 4 and your turn is skipped. <S> You can’t put down a +2 to make the next person Draw 6. <S> We know you’ve tried it. <S> #UNO pic.twitter.com/wOegca4r0h — UNO (@realUNOgame) <S> May 4, 2019
|
No, it's not valid to do so since according to the Mattel's UNO rules the next player forfeit their turn and MUST draw 4 cards from the pile.
|
When a land becomes a creature, is it untapped? A friend had the land Mobilized District on the battlefield. He was activating its ability to change this land to a 3/3 Citizen creature. When he activated this ability, he also tapped Mobilized District to add one more mana to pay the costs of this activated ability. Now, when this land becomes a creature, does this creature untap or does it stay tapped because he also tapped this land to produce an additional mana? <Q> Tapped vs untapped is one of the four categories of statuses that a permanent has. <S> Status is not affected by permanent type, and changing permanent types does not make the permanent a new object. <S> See the relevant rules: 110.1. <S> A permanent is a card or token on the battlefield. <S> A permanent remains on the battlefield indefinitely. <S> A card or token becomes a permanent as it enters the battlefield and it stops being a permanent as it’s moved to another zone by an effect or rule. <S> 110.6. <S> A permanent’s status is its physical state. <S> There are four status categories, each of which has two possible values: tapped/untapped, flipped/unflipped, face up/face down, and phased in/phased out. <S> Each permanent always has one of these values for each of these categories. <S> 110.6c <S> A permanent retains its status until a spell, ability, or turn-based action changes it, even if that status is not relevant to it. <A> Your friend will have a tapped creature, so it's not a really useful course of action. <S> The tapped/untapped state of a permanent doesn't get 'reset' somehow when the permanent type changes. <A> It remains tapped. <S> An object's type is one of its characteristics. <S> 109.3. <S> An object’s characteristics are name, mana cost, color, color indicator, card type, subtype, supertype, rules text, abilities, power, toughness, loyalty, hand modifier, and life modifier. <S> Objects can have some or all of these characteristics. <S> Any other information about an object isn’t a characteristic. <S> For example, characteristics don’t include whether a permanent is tapped, a spell’s target, an object’s owner or controller, what an Aura enchants, and so on. <S> Changing the characteristics of an object doesn't cause the object to become untapped. <S> If it did, Giant Growth would untap its target, and Savage Surge would have redundant text. <S> 110.6. <S> A permanent’s status is its physical state. <S> There are four status categories, each of which has two possible values: tapped/untapped, flipped/unflipped, face up/face down, and phased in/phased out. <S> Each permanent always has one of these values for each of these categories. <S> 110.6c <S> A permanent retains its status until a spell, ability, or turn-based action changes it, even if that status is not relevant to it. <S> Similarly, changing an object's characteristics doesn't cause it to change zones. <S> For example, it doesn't cause enters-the-battlefield and leaves-the-battlefield abilities to trigger. <A> tl;dr - <S> Some cards (e.g., 1 , 2 , 3 ) do untap lands when those lands become creatures. <S> However, these cards specify the untapping. <S> By contrast, Mobilized District doesn't state to untap. <S> As the other answers have said, a land doesn't automatically untap upon becoming a creature. <S> If a card intended the land to become untapped, it'd state it. <S> Here are a few examples of cards that specify untapping a land when it becomes a creature: <S> Koth of the Hammer has the ability: <S> +1: <S> Untap target Mountain. <S> It becomes a 4/4 red Elemental creature until end of turn. <S> It's still a land. <S> Nissa, Vital Force has the ability: <S> +1: <S> Untap target land you control. <S> Until your next turn, it becomes a 5/5 Elemental creature with haste. <S> It's still a land. <S> Nissa, Who Shakes the World has the ability: <S> +1 <S> : Put three +1/+1 counters on up to one target noncreature land you control. <S> Untap it. <S> It becomes a 0/0 Elemental creature with vigilance and haste that's still a land. <S> Note: <S> Found these cards by searching Gatherer for cards that contained the text becomes , untap , land , and creature . <S> By contrast, Mobilized District doesn't specify untapping the land when it becomes a creature.
|
The creature will still be tapped because nothing has untapped it.
|
Do you move forwards or backwards on the King's Cross Chance card? If you draw the "Take a trip to King's Cross Station" Chance card, do you move your piece forwards or backwards? The logical answer might be forwards because most Monopoly Chance cards say "advance". However, in the case of this card, it says "If you pass go"; you would always pass go when moving forwards from a Chance space to King's Cross, so what’s the use of the word "if"? Note: This is London Edition Monopoly; this space and card are the equivalent of Reading Railroad and the "Take a ride on the Reading" Chance card in standard edition. <Q> The only exception in regular monopoly is going to jail, which is usually written as "go directly to jail" to signify the difference. <S> Some older editions of monopoly had a much clearer version of this card (noting that Reading Railroad is the equivalent of King's Cross): <S> Take a ride on the Reading. <S> Advance token and if you pass Go, collect $200. <S> It is impossible to get to King's Cross/Reading Railroad from a Chance space without passing Go. <S> This card would be clearer if it said "when you pass go, collect $200" or "collect $200 for passing go". <A> Hasbro owns the copyright on Monopoly and have the final word on Monopoly rules. <S> Concerning the movement of tokens following a Chance card instruction, the answer provided to me by Hasbro's customer service is the following: <A> Movement is forward in Monopoly, so you'll always pass Go (and collect 200). <S> There is a Community Chest between Go and King's Cross Station, but this is a Chance card. <S> I think that it's printed this way to match the other 'Take a trip' cards, which all have this wording (except for the Mayfair card, when it's not possible to pass Go). <S> Introducing a third variation like 'You pass Go, collect 200.' <S> would increase the cognitive load. <A> Basically when you draw any card which tells you to go to a specific place just ignore the "if you pass Go, collect $200" and go to that place, moving forward,and if you pass Go, collect the $200. <S> This will make the instruction on the card less confusing. <S> Note <S> that if the card is "Go back 3 spaces", or "Go back to Old Kent Road/Mediterranean Avenue", then you go back and since you do not pass Go, you do not collect $200. <A> It says "If you pass Go" because it does not know where your piece is on the board and is standard text included on all movement cards except jail in order to remind the player of this rule redundantly. <S> You are moving forwards when you move to the space because there is literally no indication or mention whatsoever that one might move backwards.
|
Movement in Monopoly is always forwards (in the direction of the arrow on the Go space) unless otherwise specified (such as the "Go back three spaces card"). It says "if you pass Go" because that's the way all the other Chance cards are worded.
|
Does Awakening of Vitu-Ghazi trigger the ability of Kiora, Behemoth Beckoner? Does Awakening of Vitu-Ghazi Put nine +1/+1 counters on target land you control. It becomes a legendary 0/0 Elemental creature with haste named Vitu-Ghazi. It's still a land. trigger the ability of Kiora, Behemoth Beckoner ? Whenever a creature with power 4 or greater enters the battlefield under your control, draw a card. <Q> It's not simply a question of checking if the state of the game went from not having a creature of power 4 or greater on the battlefield to having one. <S> An object only enters the battlefield when it moves from a zone other than the battlefield (e.g. hand, graveyard, exile) to the battlefield or when it's otherwise created on the battlefield. <S> Enters the Battlefield <S> A nontoken permanent “enters the battlefield” when it’s moved onto the battlefield from another zone. <S> A token “enters the battlefield” when it’s created. <S> See rules 403.3, 603.6a, 603.6d, and 614.12. <S> Since the land in question already existed, and since the land in question was already on the battlefield, no object entered the battlefield (much less one that was a creature with power 4 or greater). <S> As such, the ability isn't triggered. <S> A ruling on Kiora, Behemoth Beckoner reminds you of this: <S> However, you can’t have a creature with power 3 or less enter the battlefield, raise its power with a spell, an activated ability, or a triggered ability, and have Kiora’s ability trigger. <A> No. <S> When an object changes type, it does not "enter the battlefield". <S> Note also that the rulings page for Kiora explicitly says: <S> However, you can’t have a creature with power 3 or less enter the battlefield, raise its power with a spell, an activated ability, or a triggered ability, and have Kiora’s ability trigger. <S> While this is not the exact situation you are describing, it is functionally equivalent. <S> In both cases, and object starts out as not "a creature with power 4 or greater" and later becomes one. <A> No, it doesn't. <S> The land you target with Awakening of Vitu-Ghazi is already on the battlefield, so it doesn't cause any enter-the-battlefield effects like Kiora's.
|
It doesn't trigger.
|
Are there any Magic cards capable of generating loops alone? My first reaction to this question was "of course not, there is no card which is able to generate such loops by itself". Such a card would be just too easy to abuse; generally speaking, one needs two cards to work together to generate a loop of actions (which can be executed an arbitrary number of times (see rule 720 for more details). Many of these combos require a third card to actually profit from the loop. But is this actually true? Or are/were* there any Magic cards capable of generating such loops alone? I don't expect the loops to win the game by themselves, of course. *: cards may have later received errata to prevent loops; I'd be interested in those cases as well. <Q> Basalt Monolith can tap and untap itself infinitely without any other cards. <S> You do need another card to get any payoff from doing that. <S> A number of cards have abilities that cost {0} and without specifically prohibiting you from activating them repeatedly. <S> Like with Basalt Monolith, they generally don't have any inherent benefit from activating them repeatedly. <S> The main payoff for that is Crackdown Construct . <S> Skyshroud Elf can tap for mana, and has an ability to pay {1} to get {R} or {W}. <S> This can be activated indefinitely, but it's even harder to find a payoff for a loop like that. <S> Lich's Mirror can do this, sort of. <S> You need other cards to set up the game state necessary, but once you have it Lich's Mirror starts and sustains the loop by itself. <S> Specifically, if a player controls but does not own Lich's Mirror, and then gets 10 poison counters somehow, Lich's Mirror will replace the state-based action with its own effect but it will not go anywhere because it is not a permanent that the ability's controller owns. <S> Then the player still has 10 poison counters so the same state-based action will apply again, and Lich's Mirror's effect will replace it again, forever. <S> This is a mandatory infinite loop and results in a draw. <A> If, for whatever reason, both players decide to keep flipping, the procedure from Game of Chaos could go on forever. <S> The joke card Mana Screw could go on forever (and presents some fascinating probability problems along the way) Frenetic Efreet can be used to flip an arbitrary number of coins (although you have to decide how many you will flip before you start flipping). <S> This can be used to (probably) win the game with Chance Encounter . <S> Beacon of Tomorrows and Nexus of Fate can give you infinite turns if you have an empty library (or get really lucky) <S> Shuko and the en-kor have abilities that can be repeatedly activated and target a creature. <S> This single-card loop can be combined with Cephalid Illusionist to mill yourself, and win through a set of other cards like Narcomeba and Dread Return (see the Cephalid Breakfast deck). <S> This single-card loop can be combined with Wake Thrasher or Mesmeric Orb (if you want to mill yourself) for profit. <S> Mist Dragon and Wandering Fumarole have other abilities that can repeatedly modify game state, though I don't know of anything beyond Crackdown Construct that can profit off of these. <S> Honorable mention: if your lands tap for more than 1 mana (or you have a land that taps for enough mana, such as Sanctum of the Sun or Nykthos, Shrine to Nyx ), <S> Palinchron can be returned to your hand and played repeatedly. <A> One such example not mentioned on the other answers is Hostage Taker , which had to be errata'd. <S> Hostage would allow to target itself which would exile itself until it left the battlefield, which would happen immediately so it would return, ETB and target itself again, and repeat. <S> It was errata'd either shortly after release or still during spoiler season if I remember correctly... <S> The rules text changes it from "target(...)" to "target another(...)" <A> If by generating loops you are talking about infinite loops, <S> then no, cards that have been accidentally created with a functionality that can be exploded to create an infinite loop by themselves alone have been given an errata to correct this issue. <S> Time vault comes to my mind. <S> It has had many oracle texts. <S> One of them was that you could untap it any number of times to give additional turns to your opponent after your current turn. <S> So you could untap it infinite times. <S> Check this link about the Time Vault history, it's quite interesting: <S> https://www.mtggoldfish.com/articles/evolution-of-magic-the-roller-coaster-called-time-vault <S> If you are really lucky, you can kill your opponent on turn 1 with it (the only card alone that can achieve this).Little piece of trivia: <S> Mana Clash was the original name that Richard Garfield PhD (the creator of MTG) wanted to use, but they changed it to Magic: The Gathering as him and his friends who helped him test the game liked it better ('The Gathering' was added to avoid copyright issues).Another user <S> describes this here: https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/a/14036
|
Aphetto Alchemist , Seeker of Skybreak , Tidewater Minion , and Basalt Monolith all have abilities that can repeatedly cause a permanent to become untapped. If by generating loops you are talking about being able to finish the game with it, then yes, there's Mana Clash.
|
Is a reasonable level of knowledge of American Football advantageous when playing Blood Bowl? The rules of Blood Bowl are fairly short and comprehensive. Although a lot of parallels can be drawn between them and the real world game Blood Bowl is based on, American Football , there is no need to know the rules to the real world game in order to know the rules of, and play, the table top version. However, I'm curious if having a reasonable level of knowledge of the tactics and strategies used in real world American Football can be used as an advantage when playing Blood Bowl? Even with my limited knowledge of the sport there are a number of similarities that spring to my mind that could potentially be transferable from the real pitch to the game one: Formations - the layout of players on the pitch Team Composition - the amount of players in a team that excel at certain skills Plays - the actions players take between touchdowns to try and score one Style - when to play defensively and when to play aggressively (This list isn't exhaustive, please do not just copy and paste it and give an example of each as an answer, especially if that answer is not backed by any evidence of the advantage it gives.) Given the large amount of competitive Blood Bowl leagues that exist, and that it has a faithful video game conversion allowing competitive play against a world wide audience, is there any evidence that supports the theory that using tactics and strategies from American Football can be used reliably and repeatedly as winning strategies in Blood Bowl? <Q> In American football you have four plays ("downs") to advance the ball 10 yards. <S> If you manage to do so, then you get another four plays to go another 10 yards (a "first down"), and so on until you either fail to make a first down in the allotted plays, or you score. <S> Almost everything about American football strategy revolves around managing down and distance. <S> Suppose, for example, that you make four yards on your first play, and five yards on the second. <S> With only one yard to go you would choose a short-yardage play that highly likely to gain the one remaining yard, even though it has virtually no chance of making a large gain. <S> Getting tackled after two yards in that situation is a huge win. <S> Blood Bowl really has no equivalent. <S> Once a team fields the ball, they pretty much have to keep advancing it until they score. <S> If the ball carrier gets knocked down, you won't get an opportunity to reset for another play; you'll just recover the ball with another player and continue advancing, or you'll lose possession to the other team. <S> (I.e., every tackle effectively results in a fumble.) <S> Therefore, in a Blood Bowl game you'll never get much of a chance to apply anything you happen to know about American football strategy because you essentially never run a play from scrimmage, and that is what football strategy is all about. <A> I think there would be some basic strategies that could probably transfer from American Football to Blood Bowl. <S> 1. <S> Protecting the weaker/faster/better-at-throwing players In Blood Bowl, as in American Football, there are differences in the physical and technical abilities of the players. <S> In Blood Bowl they're arguably more pronounced than in real life American Football. <S> The basic strategy of using your larger, stronger players to form a barrier in order to protect your weaker/faster/technical players would carry over. <S> 2. <S> Certain 'plays' Hail Mary, for example, is going to be a valid play in Blood Bowl with limited time remaining. <S> Having some knowledge of this strategy and when to use it would be helpful. <S> However, my opinion is that these similarities could be learnt from experience in Blood Bowl very quickly. <S> So my hypothesis is that, at the tournament level, it would not be beneficial to know American Football strategies. <S> You would only need to know Blood Bowl specific strategies instead. <A> Although Blood Bowl may have similarities to American Football, listing the differences will show that knowledge in the latter doesn't help the former: <S> Turn <S> Based vs Real-Time: <S> Blood Bowl is a turn based board game. <S> I'm quite certain there is no turn based version of American Football. <S> Teams are asymmetrical: <S> The teams in blood bowl have different abilities <S> "Blood" means violence: One way to win is to kill the other team. <S> That is obviously not a valid tactic in American Football.
|
Knowledge of American football strategy is not helpful in Blood Bowl because Blood Bowl lacks the rule that shapes all of American football play, namely, down and distance.
|
What happens when I sacrifice a creature when my Teysa Karlov is on the battlefield? Let’s say my commander Teysa Karlov is on the battlefield, ready for action. Then, I sacrifice Resolute Watchdog . What happens? Can I give one or two creatures indestructible ? The relevant details of Teysa and the Watchdog, respectively: If a creature dying causes a triggered ability of a permanent you control to trigger, that ability triggers an additional time. 1, Sacrifice Resolute Watchdog: Target creature you control gains indestructible until end of turn. According to my more experienced friend my creatures need to die for Teysa to work. But doesn't sacrificing count as dying too, since they go to the graveyard? Related: What exactly "triggers an additional time" in the interaction between Afterlife and Teysa Karlov? <Q> Resolute Watchdog's ability is an activated ability not <S> a triggered one, so it isn't affected by Teysa at all. <S> 602.1 . <S> Activated abilities have a cost and an effect. <S> They are written as “[Cost]: [Effect.] <S> [Activation instructions (if any).]” <S> 603.1 . <S> Triggered abilities have a trigger condition and an effect. <S> They are written as <S> “[When/Whenever/At] [trigger condition or event],[effect]. <S> [Instructions (if any).]” <S> As an addendum, sacrificing a creature (typically) counts as it dying, so your friend is wrong. <S> So sacrificing a creature could potentially cause Teysa's ability do something. <S> 700.4 . <S> The term dies means “is put into a graveyard from the battlefield.” <A> Magic the Gathering defines the word "dies' as rule 700.4 in the Comprehensive Rules: <S> 700.4 <S> The term dies means “is put into a graveyard from the battlefield.” <S> So you are correct, sacrificing a creature does meet the condition for that creature dying, as does lethal damage, destroy effects, and 0 toughness. <S> However there's a difference between an ability triggering and an ability being activated, in the case of Resolute Watchdog, you have an activated ability, those abilities are written "Cost:Effect" in this case: {1}, Sacrifice Resolute Watchdog(cost): Target creature you control gains indestructible until end of turn.(effect) <S> Triggered abilities are written a different way, they are written "When (condition), (effect)" <S> A good example from that set would be the keyword Afterlife X which is written: <S> When this creature dies(condition), create X 1/1 white and black Spirit creature tokens with flying.(effect) <S> Teysa would cause Afterlife to trigger a second time, so afterlife 2 with Teysa on the board would leave you with 4 new 1/1 spirits. <A> The rulings under the card in the link say: An ability that triggers on an event that causes a creature to die doesn’t trigger twice. <S> For example, an ability that triggers 'whenever you sacrifice a creature' triggers only once. <S> Teysa triggers when something is caused by a creature dying. <S> Sacrificing a creature is not exactly the same as that creature dying. <S> , it triggers when an effect is caused by the death itself.
|
Sacrificing causes the creature to die, but Tysa doesn't trigger when an effect is caused by something that causes a creature to die
|
How many adjacent intersections per harbor are available for trading in Catan? Each coastal area including a ship has three adjacent intersections. Are all three valid settlement positions for trading, or only the ones with jetties? <Q> I don't see what ambiguity ConMan sees. <S> HARBORS <S> Harbors allow you to trade resources more favorably. <S> In order to control a harbor, you must build a settlement on a coastal intersection✹ which borders the harbor. <S> See also “Maritime Trade”✹. <S> Rules <S> PDF <S> The harbor is on one side of the hex. <S> There are only two intersections that lie on that side. <S> See <S> this Reddit Thread , which contains a link to this image : <A> Because they are adjacent, only 1 of the 2 spaces in each harbor can ever be used in the same game. <S> The image provided by Acccumulation is very helpful, and gives the correct answer. <S> However, I would like to provide an image and rules quote from the third edition of the game, because I believe this clears up any possible ambiguity. <S> To know that the image in the other answer is correct, you have to know that a "harbor" is actually one of the stone jetties drawn on the border; not one of the ships drawn on the border. <S> In this edition (which uses the same rules for harbors as the newest editions), it is clearer that each harbor has 2 spaces; because of the 2 dotted lines connecting the resource icon to the building intersections. <S> Also, in the setup rules for placing the harbors, it says: <S> Then, place harbor hexes in the open coastal spaces between the sea hexes. <S> Each harbor hex should face the island, so that the 2 harbor corners (denoted by doted half-circles) , align with the longest row of adjoining terrain hexes. <S> This rule clarifies that the rotation of the harbor tiles is important, because only 2 of the corners of the hex actually count as harbor spaces. <S> The newer editions replaced these water and harbor hexes with a border, but the rules for harbors stayed the same. <A> So, it seems like this is one of those things where everyone understands how this works, despite it not being explicitly mentioned in the rules, and it's only when someone actually bothers to ask that we all realise that it's not there (and, indeed, there's a chance that while everyone understands what the rule means, we don't necessarily understand it in the same way). <S> I've tried to track down some older versions of the rules, but they're surprisingly hard to find, and hence I can only refer to the 5th edition rules (and the annotated 4th edition on BGG, which as far as I can tell is functionally identical). <S> As I hinted at in the above paragraph, it is not explicitly stated which way it's meant to work. <S> However , those little jetties are specifically associated with the harbours, and if you look at the examples of how harbours work the images always show the relevant settlement sitting on one of the jetties, strongly implying that you only get to use the harbour for maritime trade if your settlement sits on a jetty. <S> Additionally, if you do find a copy of 3rd edition or earlier, you'll note that rather than using the jigsaw-like border and having the jetty image to denote where the harbour is located, the ocean is in fact made up of more hexes, some of which have the harbours printed on them (and those harbours have small markers on the corners to show where the harbour affects). <S> If you're using that edition, then the fact that "intersection" is defined as the place where three hexes meet makes a lot more sense when it comes to the coastal spaces, and it also makes it much more obvious that you have to border the harbour hex to use the harbour for trading.
|
Each harbor provides exactly 2 spaces where a settlement can be built to gain access to the harbor.
|
What is the strategy called which forces opponents to discard cards? In MTG: Arena I've built a Rakdos deck with the main strategy of making my opponent discard one or more cards—each turn if I'm lucky. I'm using cards such as Burglar Rat , Fell Specter , Davriel, Rogue Shadowmage and Carnival // Carnage . Decks that let opponents put the top cards of their library into their graveyard, are often referred to as 'mill decks' or 'milling'. Is my deck a type of milling, or does it have its own term? <Q> First, I want to note that "mill" as a deck strategy name is just named after "mill", which is the common unofficial name for the action of putting cards into the graveyard from the library. <S> Following that pattern, the name of a discard strategy would just be "discard" Discard alone <S> generally isn't a strategy because it doesn't actually win you the game. <S> Once your opponent's hand is empty, they can usually play the card they draw each turn before you have a chance to make them discard it. <S> Decks built around effects like Davriel's triggered ability can be called "rack decks", after the original card with that kind of effect, The Rack , though that fits better with decks that actually play that card. <S> For example, 8-Rack is a commonly recognized name of a deck archetype that plays 8 cards with that kind of effect. <A> Is my deck a type of milling, or does it have its own term? <S> Those terms are more informal than official. <S> For example, the term "mill" historically comes from the card Millstone , which had an effect of putting cards from the library into the graveyard (as explained in this MTG article ). <S> As you see, it was an informal term that rose from such card... <S> as your deck's strategy is to discard it would follow that it is called a "Discard Deck". <A> Not really, but then making your enemy discard isn't generally a discrete strategy in MTG. <S> It helps you win by denying them options, but doesn't actually move directly towards a win condition itself like Mill (drawing from an empty deck) or aggro (lots of direct combat damage). <S> Generally discard options form part of a strategy, not the whole strategy. <S> Generally decks that focus on discard use effects that punish it, or less likely lets them benefit from it. <S> For example: Megrim : <S> Damage to punish discarding Liliana's Caress : <S> Same as Megrim but loss of life <S> The Rack : <S> Punishes players with damage for having too few cards in hand <S> Shrieking Affliction : same as The Rack but loss of life <S> Some decks that focus on discard this way also speed the game up by running added draw, cards like Howling Mine , sometimes with the extra draw forcing more discard too, with Anvil of Bogardan , making sure there are cards there to discard, since if you focus too much on discard, a player ends up with no cards in hand and is able to play the one card they draw each turn pretty consistently while your discard spells are just dead in your hand. <S> Drawing can be punished in these decks too, with cards like Underworld Dreams .
|
Some Google search ( here also here ) seem to indicate that the term used is "Discard Deck"...
|
Why is exile often an intermediate step? When card text says to place a card into exile, and then do something else with that card, what is the purpose of putting it into exile temporarily? For example, cards often either let your draw from your library into exile, or remove cards from a graveyard into exile, and then cast them from exile. Dire Fleet Daredevil for example. As someone who did not play for many years, this seems wordy and over complicated. I find myself reading such cards 2 or 3 times before mentally connecting the trigger to the end result without the seemingly pointless intermediate step of exiling cards. I assume this is a common practice now to avoid some overpowered combo or weird condition. I'd like to have a better understanding of what the rule/card designers accomplish/prevent by having exile as an intermediate step. Note, I am not asking for an explanation of what exile does in general, nor am I asking why a player would prefer to exile over destroy. <Q> If the Dire Fleet Daredevil has targeted a card, you want it to be uninteractable by the owner until you decide to cast it (assuming it wasn't removed in response to the trigger). <S> If it wasn't exiled, it could be removed from the graveyard (e.g. shuffled into library) before being cast, preventing you from casting the card. <S> It acts to remove the card from the game. <S> This is more relevant for graveyard exile than deck exile, where it's more a use-it-or-lose-it situation. <S> Even in the Daredevil scenario, if you never cast the card, it's still exiled. <S> It makes the card public information. <S> This applies more to deck exile. <S> It would be "harder" (read "near-impossible") to keep track of which card you exiled if you got to put the card into your hand. <S> Even if the card is not face-up, it's still in a separate area. <A> Dire Fleet Daredevil probably isn't the best example, since the purpose is rather straightforward. <S> The desired effect of the card is that you get to choose a card from an opponent's graveyard. <S> The card you choose can be cast until the end of turn, and if it's not cast by then, it's lost forever. <S> I can't think of a simpler way of implementing that. <S> It could read "You can put target card into your hand, and then at end of turn if it's still in your hand exile it", but that would mean that there's a special card in your hand that has a special property that has to be kept track of, and would mean that there would have to be an extra trigger at the end of turn exiling it. <S> It also means that you have a card that you don't own in your hand, and AFAIK the main game (i.e. not including the un sets) <S> doesn't allow cards you don't own in your library, hand, or graveyard. <S> Not only would this implementation be more complicated, it would also not be functionally identical. <S> As just one example of an interaction that would differ between the two situations, if the card is in your hand, your opponent can get you to discard it, but cards can't be discarded from exile. <A> It's not something from recent years; Magic's history is full of cards which remove ... from the game <S> (the old wording for 'exile'). <S> In fact, that terminology is a better indication of what's going on (Wizards of the Coast switched to 'exile' for flavor reasons, and not everybody was happy with this). <S> The cards are removed from the rest of the game in order to make it clear for every player (whether the cards are face up or face down) that they were 'set apart' for a special effect. <S> You'd lose that if they were put in somebody's hand, graveyard or the bottom of their library. <S> Because they are 'set apart', there aren't that many cards which are able to interact with all cards in the exile zone. <S> ( Pull from Eternity is one of the exceptions.) <S> That also means that it's relatively safe for combos by the owner, but also for 'hate' by the opponent (e.g. Tormod's Crypt ). <S> In your Dire Fleet Daredevil case, the opponent can't return them to their own hand, or cast them themselves if the spells have flashback.
|
Exiling a card before allowing an action does a couple things: It protects the cards from interactions until it is cast.
|
Can one block with a protection from color creature? With the upcoming prerelease I'm currently wondering about the new protection creatures. When playing a creature which gets protection from a certain color, is that creature then able to block an attacking creature with the color it is protected from? For example, if you play Blightbeetle , and the opponent attacks with a green creature, am I able/allowed to block with my Blightbeetle? The reason I'm asking is, because I'm a little confused by the text. It says "can't be targeted". Is declaring the creature as a blocker considered targeting then, or does that only include other spells and stuff? Protection from green (This creature can't be blocked, targeted, dealt damage, enchanted, or equipped by anything green.) <Q> Declaring a creature as a blocker isn't targeting; the rules don't mention the word 'target'. <S> 509.1a <S> The defending player chooses which creatures they control, if any, will block. <S> The chosen creatures must be untapped. <S> For each of the chosen creatures, the defending player chooses one creature for it to block that’s attacking that player or a planeswalker they control. <S> If you want to know what counts as being targeted (a lot of it does), you'll need to read rule 114. <S> In fact, declaring the creature with protection as a blocker is very often the right thing to do, as the creature won't receive any combat damage and thus is likely to survive. <A> Your creature having protection from green does not prevent you from blocking a green creature. <S> Attacking does not involve targeting, and in any case only requires the attacker to choose players or planeswalkers to attack, never the defending creatures. <S> That quality is usually one or more colors. <S> 702.16a Protection is a static ability, written “Protection from [quality].” <S> This quality is usually a color (as in “protection from black”) but can be any characteristic value or information. <S> [..] As for your question, targeting can only happen when someone casts a spell, activates an activated ability, or triggers a triggered ability, as specified in 114.1 a-f. <S> Nothing else in the game involves targeting. <S> In particular, attacking and blocking does not involve targeting in any way, and therefore that untargetability part of protection is irrelevant. <S> 509.1a <S> The defending player chooses which creatures they control, if any, will block. <S> The chosen creatures must be untapped. <S> For each of the chosen creatures, the defending player chooses one creature for it to block that’s attacking that player or a planeswalker they control. <A> Taken from the MTG Wiki : Protection is commonly misunderstood as complete exemption from permanents, and effects created by cards, with the specified quality. <S> However, protection is defined by a relatively narrow set of rules, which are often communicated using the mnemonic acronym DEBT. <S> The object with protection cannot be: D amaged by sources with the specified quality. <S> (All such damage is prevented.) <S> E nchanted, equipped, or fortified by permanents with the specified quality. <S> B locked by creatures with the specified quality. <S> T argeted by spells with the specified quality, or by abilities from sources of that quality. <S> So your creature can block the creature it has protection from (without taking damage), but cannot be blocked by it. <S> As for the confusion about targetting, there is following rule (emphasis mine): 114.1. <S> Some spells and abilities require their controller to choose one or more targets for them. <S> The targets are object(s) <S> and/or player(s) <S> the spell or ability will affect. <S> These targets are declared as part of the process of putting the spell or ability on the stack. <S> The targets can’t be changed except by another spell or ability that explicitly says it can do so. <S> So the action of declaring the creature to block does not involve choosing a target, only spells and abilities that use the word "target" do.
|
As you noted, a creature with protection from something can't be blocked, targeted, dealt damage, enchanted, or equipped by anything that has that "something" quality.
|
Is it ok to show my cards when I know I I’m the only one with spades left Is there any formal rule, or perhaps etiquette, that prevents me from showing my cards once I know I am the only one with spades left? I was recently playing a game and I got down to 5 spades left and knew the other players did not have any (I led with a spade and nobody else played one). I considered just notifying the other players to save us a couple of minutes but wasn’t sure if this was allowed. I also couldn’t think of any strategic advantage or disadvantage there might be to not letting the hand play out normally. <Q> That said, what you describe is a pretty common practice in friendly games, as (as you note) <S> the rest of the hand's play is foregone. <S> Note the Wiki entry 's inclusion of the TRAM section (added in 2012, with no cited sources) also includes a paragraph on penalties for doing so prematurely -- penalties ultimately derived from the fact that showing the cards in your hand before playing them is not allowed. <S> None of the rules for spades that I've found (including all of the ones cited in the wiki page for Spades) allow it. <S> Indeed I've only found one that mentions it at all, and it does so only to disallow the practice explicitly. <S> From The Spades Connection : Each hand must be played to completion rather than announcing the rest are mine to avoid potential scoring errors. <S> Cards dropped from any player's hand, (revealed to any other player) should remain face up on the table and played at the first opportunity. <A> This procedure, called Claiming or Conceding as the case may be, is common in Contract Bridge (both Rubber and Tournament). <S> However it is also error prone for beginners and can be used unethically by those morally challenged. <S> In consequence there are several Laws governing the process to protect both sides. <S> When playing casual Bridge all players typically want to play as many hands as possible, so claims and concessions are frequent. <S> I imagine your Spades group feels likewise. <S> However if your group is unfamiliar with making Claims and concessions, however, I would suggest laying out a few ground rules in advance to avoid misunderstandings and hurt feelings. <S> The following excerpts from the Laws of Rubber Bridge may assist with that. <S> You may need to make minor adjustments to compensate for the absence of a DUmmy in Spades. <S> Law 68 – Declarer’s Claim or Concession of Tricks <S> .... <S> Declarer should not make a claim or concession if there is any doubt as to the number of tricks to be won or lost. <S> Law 69 – Procedure <S> Following Declarer’s Claim or Concession <S> ... <S> declarer must ... make a comprehensive statement as to his proposed plan of play, including the order in which he will play the remaining cards. <S> Declarer’s claim or concession is allowed, and the deal is scored accordingly if both defenders agree to it. <S> .... <S> When his claim or concession is not allowed, declarer must play on, leaving his hand face up on the table. <S> .... <S> The objective of subsequent play is to achieve a result as equitable as possible to both sides, but any doubtful point must be resolved in favor of the defenders. <S> Note that the above is from the Laws of Rubber Bridge - the non-tournament variety of the game. <S> Stricter constraints apply to Duplicate (Tournament) Bridge, where a Director is available to both adjudicate as well as ensure that fairness is maintained for the players at other tables. <A> This is a common play, called: The rest are mine (TRAM) . <S> Wikipedia : <S> A common play among more experienced or skilled players is for a player who realizes that he cannot help but win all remaining tricks to simply lay down his hand and declare "the rest are mine" or similar. <S> This is known as "TRAMing", and can help speed up the game.
|
The rules (in most spades rulesets) prohibit showing your cards, yes.
|
Are there red cards that offer protection against mass token destruction? I was playing MtG with a mono red goblin deck, and someone used Virulent Plague on my tokens and they all died! Is there any way to counter this with a mono red card? <Q> Honestly, your options aren't great. <S> Enchantments are a designated weakness for Red, and as such they have basically no options for dealing with them. <S> If you search on Gatherer for mono-red cards that have "enchantment" in their rules text, you get only 20 results . <S> Of those, 3 have off-color activations, 2 destroy nonenchantments, <S> 2 are Licids (which become enchantments), 3 create enchantment creature tokens (they're from Theros), two are a split card with the enchantment destruction on the white side (Gatherer doesn't really handle split cards very well), one only cares about enchantment creatures , 4 have miscellaneous effects that don't help, and one is Warp World . <S> The only two cards that might possibly be of use to you are Aura Barbs and Enchanter's Bane . <S> Aura Barbs does a measly 2 damage to your opponent for each Virulent Plague they have (which is terrible), and Enchanter's Bane is only 3 damage a turn, which isn't really a fair trade for shutting down the rest of your deck. <S> Also, Enchanter's Bane is from a Commander deck, so <S> it's not legal in Modern, if that's what you're playing. <S> If you dig a little broader you can find some other cards that might work, such as Bearer of the Heavens or Capricious Efreet , but they tend to be expensive and/or random in effect, making them pretty useless for your purposes. <S> The other classic red solution is to simply win the game before the hoser can wreck their field, but a 3 mana enchantment comes down a little too fast for that to be really viable. <S> If Virulent Plague is a frequent participant of your local metagame, you're probably going to have to splash white or green if you want your token deck to have a prayer. <A> In addition to the options provided by Arcanist, there is Chaos Warp , which is the common answer to the question of "can red answer enchantments?". <S> It isn't standard or modern legal, however, and in general red needs to branch out to another colour to be able to interact with enchantments. <S> Colourless cards, however, are much better at answering enchantments. <S> They're not strictly mono red and are often high converted mana cost (so may not be particularly helpful in your case), but they are castable with just red mana! <S> Standard options: <S> Ugin, the Ineffable Meteor Golem <S> Outside standard options: <S> Ugin, the Spirit Dragon Karn Liberated Spine of Ish Sah <S> Ulamog, the Infinite <S> Gyre <S> There is also the other option of not destroying the enchantment, but instead making use of its effect. <S> Outpost Siege on Dragons would keep you strictly mono red, and allow you still to make use of your tokens if your opponent has a Virulent Plague in play. <S> They'll enter, die immediately, but ping something for 1 on the way out. <S> It has the advantage of being proactive, good in multiples, and you can choose Khans as a card advantage option. <S> Another option again is to pump your Goblins to be big enough to overcome the effect with the likes of Goblin Chieftain . <S> This is a card you may want to play anyway, but could itself be removed by your opponent to make their Virulent Plague effective again. <A> Partial answer (I leave the rest to you) <S> , your options are - Stop Virulent Plague from resolving in the first place. <S> This is of course ideal if you can manage it. <S> The problem is red does not have countermagic, so you'll need to add blue. <S> More seriously, countermagic does not actually win you the game, they only stop you from losing. <S> If your opponent does not draw Virulent Plague then your countermagic might not help you reduce your opponent's life to zero. <S> Discard it. <S> This is more proactive than countermagic since you can always cast discard spells. <S> However later in the game they become dead, and more importantly, they cannot stop your opponent from topdecking Virulent Plague. <S> If you go for this route I recommend reading this definitive article on how to use targeted discard. <S> Discard spells are generally black, and you'll need black mana. <S> Use an alternative win condition. <S> What this win condition is will depend on the format you're playing and what cards you have available. <S> You're looking for a card that 1) isn't tokens and 2) wins the game, preferably quickly, if unanswered. <S> It's up to you to find a replacement. <S> I suggest Chandra, Torch of Defiance as a starting point. <S> You could also use something like Glorybringer , which is of course not a goblin, but ignores Virulent Plague. <S> All three of these plans can work. <S> It's possible you want to use a mixture too, e.g. discard + alternative win condition. <S> It's up to you to explore.
|
The standard red cards used in this fashion are Legion Warboss and Goblin Rabblemaster ; however both of them rely on tokens, so you're out of luck.
|
Is there efficient token generation in Black or White? Is there any black or white cards that whenever opponent loses a life (or when I gain life) create a creature token? I'm planning a combo with Corpse Knight and Impassioned Orator . If so can you show me what set it is in. And if not can you tell me if there are any other combos I could use. <Q> I cannot think of anything that combos with them for as many iterations as you want. <S> There are a number of effects that create tokens once per turn based on gaining/losing life. <S> In standard (as both cards you mentioned are standard legal): Regal Bloodlord Resplendent Angel <S> First Response <S> In general I think they are quite careful with this effect, and restrict it to happening once per turn specifically to not enable the combo that you're seeking. <A> There are a lot of cards that cause you to gain life for a creature entering the battlefield (examples: Angelic Chorus , Answered Prayers , Auriok Champion , Essence Warden , <S> Ajani's Welcome , Soul's Attendant , Soul Warden ). <S> As a result, I seriously doubt Wizards would print a card that creates a token when you gain life. <S> See this search for things that combo directly off of life gain. <S> Meanwhile, a lot of things cause life loss, (not the least of which being damage), so Wizards tends not to print things that trigger off of life loss. <S> See this search for how few results there are. <S> So to do this, you're going to need a three card combo. <S> Let's take a "when a creature enters the battlefield, gain life" as the first combo piece. <S> Here are some options (it's pretty hard to stay within white/black on this one): Famished Paladin and Presence of Gond <S> Searing Meditation and Polyraptor / Sprouting Phytohydra <S> Well of Lost Dreams and Hoofprints of the Stag <S> Alternatively, you could just go for effects that make a bunch of tokens: <S> Commander's Authority Bitterblossom Akroan Horse Creakwood Liege Endless Ranks of the Dead <S> Storm Herd Assemble the Legion <A> PS - I will edit this later with link when I get home as currently at work. <S> The kind of strategy you are looking for is something that has been dubbed as an "aristocrat" deck. <S> The archetype relies on sacrificing your own creatures for value and is usually classified as aggressive. <S> The original deck that did this was named aristocrats because two of its sacrifice outlets were Falkenrath Aristocrat and Cartel Aristocrat . <S> There is currently an Abzan version in standard as of M20 being released. <S> Not sure how good this deck really is as I haven't tried but worth having a look at it. <S> Will post link and decklist later.
|
Outside of standard, the best I can find is: Crested Sunmare Regna, the Redeemer Angelic Accord
|
What are similar black and/or white permanents to Divine Visitation? For my Commander deck I'm looking for black and/or white permanents that have similar mechanics to Divine Visitation and Teysa Karlov , respectively: If one or more creature tokens would be created under your control, that many 4/4 white Angel creature tokens with flying and vigilance are created instead. Creature tokens you control have vigilance and lifelink. I'm looking for cards to buff my tokens, preferably enchantments but creatures will also suffice. By "buff" I mean: increase the statistics and/or add keywords to the tokens. Similar to the cards above, but the buffs may vary. As a sidenote: any tips on how I can conduct such research by myself––such as a website––is greatly appreciated. <Q> The Advanced Search on Gatherer may help a little. <S> For buffs that work when a creature enters the battlefield, search for "creature enters the battlefield under your control" . <S> E.g. <S> Cathars' Crusade : <S> Whenever a creature enters the battlefield under your control, put a +1/+1 counter on each creature you control. <S> For permanent buffs, search for "creatures you control get" or "creatures you control gain" : E.g. <S> Benalish Marshal : <S> Other creatures you control <S> get +1/+1. <A> Others have already pointed out good abilities. <S> I'll mention Requiem Angel , which states: <S> When a non-spirit dies, you put a 1/1 spirit token into play instead. <S> When your Divine Visitation is on the battlefield, this effect is replaced by creating a 4/4 flying angel token instead. <S> Since it's not a spirit, when that creature dies, Requiem Angel's ability will trigger and create a new 4/4 angel in its place. <S> With Teysa Karlov <S> out in addition to these cards, each time an angel dies your board creates two more angels. <A> The official online resource for searching cards is Oracle . <S> Gatherer is guaranteed to have the official wording of all magic cards and offers both simple and advanced filtering options. <S> 108.1. <S> Use the Oracle card reference when determining a card’s wording. <S> A card’s Oracle text can be found using the Gatherer card database at Gatherer.Wizards.com. <S> As far as your question is concerned, assuming you are asking about Standard, here are a few searches to start you off: <S> "Creatures <S> you control" "Whenever a", creature, enter, battlefield <A> There's an established Modern deck called B/W tokens . <S> It's not a top deck, but it's there. <S> Key token cards are: Lingering Souls - a powerful card, makes 4 flying tokens over two turns. <S> Spectral Procession - makes 3 tokens for 3 mana. <S> Bitterblossom - makes tokens every turn. <S> Hidden Stockpile - same as above. <S> Other payoff cards include Sorin, Solemn Visitor , Gideon, Ally of Zendikar and Zealous Persecution . <S> You could also run something like Honor of the Pure if your tokens are white (warning: too many anthem effects can mean you open a hand with no threats, in which case all your anthems are dead).
|
Intangible Virtue - buffs all tokens.
|
Can I play a first turn Simic Growth Chamber to have 3 mana available in the second turn? Using a card like Simic Growth Chamber (there are others for other colour combinations) in the first turn and a "normal" land in the second, can I have 3 mana available in the second turn? Simic Growth Chamber enters the battlefield tapped. When Simic Growth Chamber enters the battlefield, return a land you control to its owner's hand. Tap: Add {G}{U}. Can I really play this card without any land on the battlefield? <Q> No. <S> If you play Simic Growth Chamber without any other lands in play, you still must return a land you control to its owner's hand ... which happens to be the Simic Growth Chamber itself. <S> So while it is legal, it is not useful to play it the first turn. <A> If you rephrase your question to "Can I have 3 mana on turn 2 with a normal land and Simic growth chamber?" the answer is yes, but not if you played Simic Growth chamber on turn 1. <S> The concept of this lands is to have a land that sort of ramps (gets to a higher count of mana) and filters (gives you different colour options) so the drawback of it is that you lose a turn to play it <S> , it doesn't really advance you on mana per turn, but what it does it ensures that with less cards you have more available mana. <S> Now there is a deck in modern that abuses the use of this lands by using amulet of Vigor, and this is where you would be able to get to 3 mana on turn 2 with those 2 lands. <S> Turn 1, drop normal land, play amulet of vigor, turn 2 play this land, <S> trigger of the land goes on the stack, trigger from vigor goes on the stack, you choose to resolve the land trigger last, so your land untaps, you tap it for mana (and possibly the other one) and then decide which land to bounce and you have 3 mana in your mana pool. <S> A deck called Amulet Titan, uses Amulet of Vigor to get these ramp to play Azusa, Lost but Seeking which allows you to play more lands per turn, which with the right combination would allow you to cast Primeval Titan on Turn 2/3. <S> So, as per Glorfindel's answer, No is the answer, but yes it is possible. <A> Turn 1: <S> Play a Forest Cast Arboreal Grazer Use Arboreal Grazer's ability to put Simic Growth Chamber into play Return the Forest to hand <S> Turn 2: <S> Play the Forest again Et Voila, 3 mana on turn 2
|
Yes, it is possible with a card like Arboreal Grazer (I'm uncertain off the top of my head if there are any other cards that would also work)
|
What is the appropriate response to a jump rebid by responder under Standard American? Last week, I played my first session of bridge in about five years, meaning that I was "rusty," and I was also at a new club with a partner I had just met, who mentioned "Standard American." Sitting South, neither side vulnerable, and dealing, I had (s) QT94 (h) A7 (d) K764 (c) AJ6. I opened: 1D Pass 1 Heart Pass 1NT Pass 3 Hearts Pass At this point, I passed, giving my partner credit for something like (s) 53 (h) KQJT32 (d) 93 (c) Q87. That is a six card heart suit, and 6-9 points. Since we would have had 20-23 HCP and only eight hearts between us, I felt that 3 hearts was plenty, perhaps too high, unless he had seven hearts Partner actually had (s) 53 (h) KQJT3 (d) A93 (c) Q87. He said, "I had an opening hand opposite an opening hand, and you were supposed to bid four hearts with at least three hearts, and 3NT otherwise." Who was correct under Standard American bidding? (I had taken that sequence to mean an opening hand and 6-7 card suit when made only by the opener (not responder). What do other systems (than Standard American) have to say about this matter? <Q> I agree in part and disagree in part with Forget. <S> The Standard American system booklet indicates that responder's rebid of a suit at the three level is invitational, not forcing. <S> However, your hand is a maximum for your rebid, and therefore you should accept the invitation. <S> While visualizing the kinds of hands partner might have is a useful exercise, particularly for slam bidding, (a) you have to visualize a half dozen or so different hands to draw useful conclusions rather than finding just one, and <S> (b) it's probably not valuable enough to justify the energy expenditure when you're making a 3- vs 4-level decision with a run-of-the-mill balanced hand. <A> I agree with the others in that you have a maximum for your previous bidding, and should accept the invitation. <S> For me it would be a close call between 4H and 3NT. <S> The fact that your partner only had five hearts was a surprise to me. <S> My understanding of Standard American Yellow Card (as played on e.g. BBO, by the bots <S> even) methods for further describing a hand after 1D-1H-1NT is: 2H = drop, usually six bagger, but may be a fiver in a hand that judges hearts to play better than 1NT. <S> 3H = invitational with 6 hearts. <S> 2C = new minor forcing <S> (AFAIK <S> nearly everybody plays some form of checkback), primarily looking for a 3-card support, but may be some other opening hand that wants to investigate further. <S> IMO this would have been the proper rebid for your partner, and you would have shown your spades at this point (denying 3 card heart support), and partner would then close shop with 3NT. <S> This is also the route for single suited strong hands and balanced hands willing to hunt for a slam. <S> 4H = to play, no interest in any other contract. <S> 2D = drop. <S> 3D = invitational strength + 4 card support (you denied 4 hearts, so you cannot have the dreaded 4432 shape, and thus you have 4+ diamonds) <S> 2NT <S> = invitational, balanced. <S> You would accept. <S> 2S = <S> natural with 4 spades, invitational. <S> You would bid 4S. <S> A hand with 45+ majors willing to force to game would go via NMF. <S> 3C <S> = two suiter, forcing to game. <S> Promises 5 hearts, and likely to have 5 clubs also. <S> 3NT = to play, what else :-) <A> The hand you seem to think partner had is the perfect hand for a 2H call in the second round, not a 3H call. <S> You are aloowing him to have nothing extra beyond the 5th and 5th Hearts - the perfect description of a 2 Heart call at that point. <S> More generally, In Standard American jumps are strong excepting only when explicitly agreed or specific otherwise. <S> A vanilla Standard American, presumably Yellow Card , is a system designed for individual events or beginners - who lack the experience and skill to bid more complicated arrangements. <S> Further, even if you think partner's rebid is an invitational 10-11 HCP, why aren't you accepting? <S> You have a maximum 1NT rebid with a fitting honour in the trump suit, and no embarrassments in hand. <S> (I regard your hand as short only Diamond 10 for a 1NT opening, given the 4432 distribution.) <S> If partner has downgraded slightly for a weak suit like KJ9xxx you have the perfect complementary holding. <S> Just bid 3NT, denying a 3-card Heart suit.. <S> Update: <S> When you failed to specify either Check Back Stayman or New Minor Forcing after Opener's 1NT rebid - you explicitly agreed to cripple your bidding after that call, which is arguably the most common opening sequence you will encounter. <S> It would not be unusual to have two or even three such in a 26 board evening. <A> First of all, i would not bid 1NT here. <S> Your partner's response of 1H does not deny a 4-card spade suit, and if you have a 4-4 spade fit you want to find it. <S> A rebid of 1S seems to me a better bid with your hand -- <S> it more accurately describes it, and if you do in fact have a spade fit, you will find it. <S> However on the hand given your partner will not raise spades. <S> In fact a jump-rebid of 3H is the most probable 2nd bid by partner with the hand shown. <S> whether that is forcing or strongly invitation is a matter of partnership agreement -- playing with a pick-up partner with no specific discussion, I would treat it as a strong invite, showing at least an 11 point hand here. <S> With your holding I would then bid 3NT, getting to a good contract. <S> Neither checkback Stayman nor New Minor forcing can be assumed when playing with a pick-up partner without discussion. <S> Indeed I would say both should be considered OFF until they are discussed. <S> Thus you should not use either playing with a new partner if the only agreement is "American Standard". <S> Note that this does <S> NOT indicate SAYC unless "yellow card" or "SAYC" is specifically mentioned. <S> If they have been agreed, you ahve additional options, but after P 1D P 1H P 1S P 3H you know that there is no spade fit, and no heart fit unless partner has 6+ H which is possible but not promised by the 3H bid. <S> So even playing NMF I would bid 3NT on that hand after that sequence. <S> Partner can bid 4H with a 6 card suit, or do something else with values beyond those shown, although if partner had slam-invitational values, the 3H bid would be incorrect. <S> If you are playing NMF then a 2C bid looking for 3-card Heart support is a very plausible bid after 1S or 1NT. <S> As your partner did not make that bid in the given auction, it would appear that partner was not playing NMF (or not playing it well).
|
If partner doesn't have a strong preference for Hearts, meaning at least a 6 card suit, his appropriate second round call is a simple Pass.
|
I have an Ivy Lane Denizen, how does targeting work? I have an Ivy Lane Denizen , it says that he may put a +1/+1 counter on target creature whenever a creature enters the battlefield under my control. Does the counter go on Ivy Lane Denizen specifically or on the creature that just entered? Or does "target" mean I choose any creature of my choice? <Q> Cards in Magic: <S> The Gathering (at least when looking at the official Oracle wording, found on Gatherer) usually mean exactly what they say, nothing more and nothing less. <S> If you had to place the counter on the denizen, it would've said "Whenever another green creature enters the battlefield under your control, put a +1/+1 counter on Ivy League Denizen.", and if you had to put the counter on the creature that just came out, it would've said "Whenever another green creature enters the battlefield under your control, put a +1/+1 counter on that creature." <S> When an ability or spell you play uses the word "target", you are entirely free to choose a target to your liking, within any explicitly mentioned restrictions (it has to be a creature since it says "target creature", said creature can't have shroud or protection from green, etc.) <A> You can put the counter on any creature you desire. <S> So it can be Ivy Lane Denizen , creature that entered the battlefield, one of your other creatures or even one of your opponent's creatures. <S> You need to be able to target that creature, though. <A> You make this choice when you cast the spell or when the ability is activated or triggered. <S> "Target creature" means that you must choose a creature. <S> From the MTG Basic Rulebook : <S> Casting a spell <S> If the spell is an instant or sorcery and it has a target , you choose what (or who) that target is. <S> and Target <S> When you see the word “target” on a spell or ability, you have to choose one or more things for the spell or ability to affect. <S> You’ll be able to choose only certain kinds of things, such as “target red permanent” or “target creature or player.” <S> You choose the targets for a spell when you cast it, and you choose targets for an activated ability when you activate it. <S> The rules for selecting targets for a triggered ability, such as Ivy Lane Denizen's ability, work the same as for casting a spell or activating an ability. <A> Magic is a game where wording matters a lot. <S> You found two very important and common wordings in cards in this one card we are talking about. <S> Whenever another green creature enters the battlefield under your control, put a +1/+1 counter on target creature. <S> Let's dig in as this will help you understand other rulings in the future. <S> The first word that matters to you here is " <S> When" , this gives you an indication of a triggered ability, something happens when something else happens. <S> Now we know that a trigger happens, what kind of trigger is it? <S> "enters the battlefield" . <S> So now we know what will cause it to trigger, when something enters the battlefield. <S> but we need to know what the something is. <S> So the condition for this ETB (enters the battlefield) <S> trigger is "another green creature" . <S> The creature has to be green and has to be another, so it means that this won't trigger when Ivy Lane Denizen itself enters the battlefield, at least for its own triggered ability. <S> Now your question is about the targetting part of the ability. <S> There is quite a bit you can read about targetting on the comp rules <S> but in this case use the same logic as we used for the ETB side. <S> So we know what causes it to trigger, now we need to know what effect the trigger brings. <S> The trigger makes you target something. <S> The something in this is creature . <S> And what modifier condition is there for creature ? <S> None . <S> In this case, in this card, the only condition for the target is that it has to be a creature (and the target be legal). <S> if, just like the ETB it said "another" creature, then this would be the modifier for the condition. <S> Mostly, rules on MTG cards are as simply as the text in the card, there is no need for interpretation. <S> Always use the gatherer for clarification, but I would suggest trying to find the solution yourself first.
|
"Target" means that you get to choose what object is going to be affected by your spell or ability.
|
If I resurrect a previously enchanted creature, does it get its old auras back? If my enchanted creature dies, and I then bring the creature back to the battlefield does said creature come back with the same enchantment on it? <Q> ConMan's answer is very good, but it goes explaining auras, their effects and characteristics <S> but I think this rule is more important to explain the answer to your question. <S> 217.1c <S> An object that moves from one zone to another is treated as a new object. <S> Effects connected with its previous location will no longer affect it. <S> This is because every time an object moves from one zone to another, this is a new object. <S> Whether this new zone is graveyard, battlefield, exile, library or hand. <S> A good and relevant example of this is a card by the name of Animate Dead with the following text: Enchant creature card in a graveyard <S> When Animate Dead enters the battlefield, if it's on the battlefield, it loses "enchant creature card in a graveyard" and gains "enchant creature put onto the battlefield with Animate Dead." <S> Return enchanted creature card to the battlefield under your control and attach Animate Dead to it. <S> When Animate Dead leaves the battlefield, that creature's controller sacrifices it. <S> Very convoluted text for a simple, return creature to the battlefield isn't it? <S> The gatherer explains why: Animate Dead is an Aura, albeit with an unusual enchant ability. <S> You target a creature card in a graveyard when you cast it. <S> It enters the battlefield attached to that card. <S> Then it returns that card to the battlefield, and attaches itself to the card again (since the card is a new object on the battlefield). <S> Animate Dead itself never moves into a graveyard during this process. <S> As Animate Dead attaches to the creature and enters the battlefield, the creature is still theoretically in the graveyard, the effect from Animate Dead then brings the creature to the battlefield which means that as it is now a new object, Animate Dead has to attach itself to it again. <A> From the Comprehensive Rules (note that an Aura is an enchantment that attaches to another permanent): <S> 303.4c <S> If an Aura is enchanting an illegal object or player as defined by its enchant ability and other applicable effects, the object it was attached to no longer exists, or the player it was attached to has left the game, the Aura is put into its owner’s graveyard. <S> (This is a state-based action. <S> See rule 704.) <S> So when the creature leaves play and is no longer a valid target for the Aura, the Aura is put into its owners graveyard. <S> If the creature is later returned to the battlefield, the Aura has already forgotten that it was attached to the creature and does not come back. <S> The one exception to this would be if the creature regenerates : 701.14a <S> If the effect of a resolving spell or ability regenerates a permanent, it creates a replacement effect that protects the permanent the next time it would be destroyed this turn. <S> In this case, “Regenerate [permanent]” means “The next time <S> [permanent] would be destroyed this turn, instead remove all damage marked on it and tap it. <S> If it’s an attacking or blocking creature, remove it from combat.” <S> Note that regeneration causes an effect that replaces the destruction of the creature <S> , so it never actually goes to the graveyard, and hence the Aura stays attached to it. <S> EDIT: <S> As pointed out, Totem Armor is another related situation: 702.88a Totem armor is a static ability that appears on some Auras. <S> “Totem armor” means “If enchanted permanent would be destroyed, instead remove all damage marked on it and destroy this Aura.” <S> In this case, if the creature is enchanted with an Aura that has this ability, then the Aura gets destroyed instead of the creature. <S> So here the creature does not get destroyed, but the Aura does. <A> No, the creature will not be enchanted. <S> There are a variety of reasons for this, but the most basic reason is that the a resurrected card doesn't know it was ever previously enchanted. <S> And cards only do as much as they say, so <S> the resurrection spell won't enchant the creature unless it says otherwise. <S> According to the rules (my notes) 400.7. <S> An object that moves from one zone to another becomes a new object with no memory of, or relation to, its previous existence. <S> There are seven exceptions to this rule (none of the exceptions apply)
|
Answer to your question: No, it will not have any auras or equipment attached to it.
|
Golden Guardian removed before death related trigger Golden Guardian says: (2): Golden Guardian fights another target creature you control. When Golden Guardian dies this turn, return it to the Battlefield transformed under your control If an opponent targets Guardian with a kill spell, and you activate it's ability in response; it will return transformed. That's great. But if you activate it's ability to fight another creature, THEN in response your opponent kill-spells it. Does the ability fizzle or will it still revolse returning the Gaudrian to the battlefield transformed? <Q> Golden Guardian will stay dead. <S> Since the ability doesn't resolve until after Golden Guardian dies, it won't "see" the Guardian die, and therefore won't trigger. <S> There is a Gatherer ruling that states this specifically: <S> If Golden Guardian leaves the battlefield before its activated ability has resolved, it won’t be returned to the battlefield when the ability resolves. <A> If the Golden Guardian dies before its ability resolves, then the ability will effectively do nothing and the Guardian will stay dead. <S> The ability does two things: it has Golden Guardian fight the target creature, then it creates a delayed triggered ability that brings the Guardian back from the graveyard transformed when it dies. <S> If the Guardian is already dead, the fight instruction will do nothing because both creatures need to be alive to fight, and the triggered ability will be created but it will never trigger because the Guardian is already dead. <A> Golden Guardian will stay dead. <S> That part of Golden Guardian 's ability is a delayed triggered ability. <S> It won't trigger because it's only created during the resolution of the activated ability. <S> 603.7a <S> Delayed triggered abilities are created during the resolution of spells or abilities, as the result of a replacement effect being applied, or as a result of a static ability that allows a player to take an action. <S> A delayed triggered ability won’t trigger until it has actually been created, even if its trigger event occurred just beforehand. <S> Other events that happen earlier may make the trigger event impossible. <S> Example: Part of an effect reads “When this creature leaves the battlefield,” but the creature in question leaves the battlefield before the spell or ability creating the effect resolves. <S> In this case, the delayed ability never triggers. <S> Example: If an effect reads “When this creature becomes untapped” and the named creature becomes untapped before the effect resolves, the ability waits for the next time that creature untaps. <S> (Empahsis mine) <S> A ruling on Golden Guardian confirms this. <S> If Golden Guardian leaves the battlefield before its activated ability has resolved, it won’t be returned to the battlefield when the ability resolves. <S> When Golden Guardian's activated ability resolves, You are instructed to have the Golden Guardian fights another target creature. <S> Nothing happens because the Golden Guardian no longer exists. <S> [CR 701.12b] <S> You are instructed to create a delayed triggered ability. <S> [CR 201.4, 400.7] PS <S> - It doesn't fizzle, which means removed from the stack as it would resolve for complete lack of legal targets. <S> It simply doesn't get placed on the stack because it doesn't even trigger.
|
It will never trigger because the creature it references in its trigger condition no longer exists.
|
Why do player start with fighting for the corners in go? I saw that in most go games the opponents started by placing chips 3 vertices away from the corners. Both players started fighting for the centre only after half of the game had passed. Is there any particular reasoning for this? <Q> Common starting practices are to open by placing stones on a Hoshi (4-4 point) , or close to it, in order to "claim" that corner. <S> Taking control of the center is much easier if the player has a solid base or even a number of solitary stones already placed, which obviously isn't the case at the start of the game. <S> Furthermore, by trying to gain control of the center, your opponent would likely take all or most of the corners for themselves, which will eventually result in having to defend the center against all flanks. <S> In a real game, of course none of this will be this clearly separated, but those are the essentials it comes down to. <S> Generally, you're not looking to immediately engage with your opponent, but rather to define areas of advantage for yourself first. <S> Because this question, just like most questions about Go, pose a larger complexity than would be feasible to go into here, I'll leave it at that and provide a few links that are likely to be reachable in the future to read further: <S> First moves Open in the corner <S> Why don't we open at tengen <S> It should be noted that this is true for 19x19 boards - on 9x9 boards, you will much more commonly see players starting out at the Tengen (center starpoint) , or at the very least try to compete for it much earlier on, simply because there isn't as much area to gain in the corners by comparison, and approaching the same strategy as on a 19x19 board would have you run into your opponent much faster than you'd like. <A> Capturing territory around the edges of the board is simpler and quicker, because the edge forms a boundary which does not have to be constructed with stones, and which can not be attacked from "outside". <S> Once a player has a safe territory attached to the edge, it can be extended towards the center of the board. <S> It is also relevant that a border just three stones wide around the entire edge of the board contains more than half the total board area. <S> Of course a real game situation will be more complex than that simple piece of mathematics, but the general principle it demonstrates is important. <A> Because you need less stones in the corner to live than in the center. <S> And by extension, you can surround more area in the corner with the same number of stones. <S> Some figures to visualize this: Live group in the corner, <S> 6 stones: + <S> ------|.xx <S> ..|x.x.. <S> |xx... <S> |.... <S> Live group in the middle, 10 stones: ....... <S> xx.... <S> x.x...xx.x... <S> xxx....... <S> (See Smallest Group with Two Eyes on Sensei's Library.) <S> Those same 10 stones placed in the corner could cover much more points than they can in the middle: +-------| <S> .... <S> x.|.x.. <S> x.|.... <S> x.|.... <S> x.|xxxxx.|...... <A> It is plain and simple that it is much easier and more efficient to make life groups and territory in the corners than along the edges or in the centre. <S> In the corner, you need two outer walls, along the edge three, and in the center four to enclose your territory. <S> And Go is about enclosing territory, after all.
|
As the players are trying to secure as much area as they can, it makes sense to start out in a place that is easily defended, and that is something that's true for corners more than for any other location on the board at the start of the game.
|
In MTG, was there ever a five-color deck that worked well? The first pre-con I ever bought was the five-color one from I believe planeshift. I liked that deck when I was learning the game, but it didn't hold up when I actually started going to tournaments, and learned more about the game (such as the fact that you had a maximum hand size). The first deck I made myself was a massive five-color deck made up of probably around 100 cards (everyone else had their decks in card sleeves, which made me think that they too were running far more than the minimum 60). I didn't get to play during invasion block, when there were cards in type II that encouraged five-color decks. I always thought that there may have been one during tempest block due to sliver queen, but I don't know that for a fact. I did have a friend who played a five-color deck, but all I know of that he had in it was Cromat and worship. I have no idea if he had ever run the thing in tournaments though. Has there ever been a five-color deck that could be played outside of casuals? Obviously, I don't expect such a thing to be the top deck, I'm just asking if there ever was one that didn't suck because of it running too many colors? <Q> Yes. <S> Emphatically yes. <S> Some notable examples include: " The Deck " by Brian Weissman – a classic five-color control deck focused on reactive play and denial with only Serra Angel and Braingeyser as finishers; arguably the prototype for all control decks, and the strongest Magic deck of its day. <S> Many Llorwyn-era Cruel Control decks, like this one <S> — these were not as absolutely dominant as the previous examples, but Vivid lands made it reasonable to play even absurdly "greedy" combinations like putting Cloudthresher in the same deck as Cryptic Command and Cruel Ultimatum . <S> There are also numerous four-color decks that could possibly be adapted to a fifth color but don't really benefit from it much, especially in the modern day, when the Legacy/Vintage card pool is a lot deeper and "color pie" design conventions have changed a bit to make it easier to access certain effects without having to go into one specific color. <S> The reason you're stumbling is that pre-assembled multi-color decks tend to have garbage mana bases, because part of the game's business model is to force good multi-color supporting lands (which are highly desirable for a range of competitive decks) into rare/mythic slots, and preconstructed decks are limited to only including a handful of rares. <S> On top of that, some styles of cards (like Moxes and no-drawbacks ABU dual lands) are considered too powerful to print today. <S> This answer discusses some of the benefits of four- and five- color decks, as well as tricks to their mana base construction, in more detail. <A> 5c Humans is currently one of the defining decks in Modern. <S> It relies on Ancient Ziggurat , Unclaimed Territory and Cavern of Souls to generate its mana, failing which it still has Aether <S> Vial to "cast" the creatures. <S> Here's a list from the just-concluded Pro Tour. <S> This same manabase will also work for other tribal decks, most notably Slivers ( example ). <S> Slivers is less competitive compared to Humans, but it's there. <A> There are also 5 colour decks in current standard although they aren't in the very top tier of decks, the main two are Rainbow Lich and 5C Black (with many versions of 5C Black). <A> There are a lot of formats which can be played competitively. <S> If you look at slower formats like Highlander (100 card minimum, no card may occur more than once except basic lands) there's more time to build a complex manabase, and it's feasible to at least splash all five colours. <S> Here's a breakdown of his KWrgu deck by the winner of the latest Metagame Masters Highlander tournament (#MGM15; where the second-placed deck was UKwrg); in MGM#14 there were two five-colour decks in the top four, in MGM#13 there was one, and in MGM#12 there were two.
|
Jakub Slemr's 5-Color Black Weenie deck — a black-based creature aggro deck using cards of all five colors for efficient answers and disruption (and sheer card value from running most of Visions' good "ETB" creatures ); 1997 World Champshiop winner.
|
Should our 1D opening be alerted? My partner and I play a weak 1NT (12-14 HCP) and 1C can be real (5+ card) or 15-19 HCP. If we have a 5 card major, we open it. Because we have a bid promising a balanced hand with every range. This has lead to our 1D opening always promising an unbalanced hand. The Dutch (I think they are just the international) rules say that every bid which your opponents might not know the correct meaning of should be alerted. I have been alerting the bid saying "my partner promises real diamonds either 5+ or any 4441 (with 4 diamonds) and always an unbalanced hand". Is it nessecary to alert this in regular contract bridge? <Q> Rules on alerts are specified by the sponsoring organization, and may well be different for games played under different organization. <S> The ACBL Alert procedure says: The objective of the Alert system is for both pairs at the table to have equal access to all information contained in any auction. <S> In order to meet this goal, it is necessary that all players understand and practice the principles of Full Disclosure and Active Ethics. <S> Ethical bridge players will recognize the obligation to give complete explanations. <S> They will accept the fact that any such information is entirely for the benefit of the opponents, and may not be used to assist their own partnership. <S> This procedure uses the admittedly "fuzzy" terminology of "highly unusual and unexpected" as the best practical solution to simplifying the Alert Procedure. " <S> Highly unusual and unexpected" should be determined in light of historical usage rather than local geographical usage. <S> To ensure full disclosure, however, at the end of the auction and before the opening lead declarers are encouraged to volunteer to explain the auction (including available inferences) <S> In light of that, I would be inclined to alert the 1D opening. <S> Or I might ask a local director before the game if such a bid should be alerted. <S> If in doubt it is always better to alert than not. <S> Note that one should never say more than "alert" until and unless an opponent asks for an alert to be explained. <S> Offering an explanation unasked can itself be a violation. <S> In an informal game not sponsored by any organization, procedures are whatever the players agree on. <A> The ACBL Alert Chart states (line 1) <S> that: <S> Natural Calls Not Specifically Noted [with] Unusual strength, shape, etc must be alerted. <S> Both your 1C and 1D opening bids imply unusual strength and shape requirements, and so must be alerted. <S> In addition the ACBL Alert Procedures guide states: Systems that may be Fundamentally Unfamiliar to the Opponents <S> When you play a system structured along different agreements than [those described in the preceding paragraph], you should draw the opponents’ attention to your convention card before the round begins. <S> In short, if you play a system that most players would not immediately recognize ... or one the opponents may wish to discuss before the auction begins ...),you are required to pre-Alert the opponents. <S> In my opinion your 1C and 1D openings are such a system agreement, and I would expect a pre-alert along the lines of: All non-forcing openings intending to rebid 1NT or 2NT are opened with 1C. Unbalanced hands of the same ranges with no 5+ <S> Major or Club suit are opened 1D. <S> I can easily conceive of defending your 1C opening as a 15-19 NT, and competing at the 2 level with our 1NT defense. <S> This will interfere with your ability to distinguish between your 15-17 and 18-19 NT openings, and reduce your game bidding accuracy on 3NT and 4M contracts. <S> I would enjoy seeing how that works out for you and partner. <S> ;-) <S> TANSTAAFL - <S> There Ain't No Such Thing <S> As A Free Lunch. <A> The 1D bid should not be alerted. <S> The 1C bid should be announced as "May be short". <S> Note that rebids of 1N after the 1C opening should be alerted (because it's 15-17). <S> I don't know what your rebid of 1N after a 1D means, but quite possibly it should be alerted even if natural. <S> As a courtesy to your opponents, you should tell your opponents that you're playing weak NT with 1D unbalanced before the round starts, but this isn't required. <S> You are playing a fairly standard weak 1N (12-14) system; putting all your balanced hands in 1C isn't all that strange, particularly if you open 1D when you have a balanced hand with 5 diamonds.
|
The ACBL alert chart does not specifically mandate an alert for a 1D bid wqhich promises an unbalanced hand, but does require an alert for "Natural Calls Not Specifically Noted" which show "Unusual strength, shape, etc". I am adamant on the pre-alert because the very advantage that you receive from this agreement is one that the opponents may wish to mitigate by modifying their defenses for.
|
What is a good way to find information on previous ban lists? Many people say it's fun to go back and play previous formats of Yu-Gi-Oh, like the popular "Goat Format" from the mid 2000s. I have been having a hard time finding a resource to easily view every banlist since the beginning of the game (for the TCG). Is there a good website to look at that might have all this information in one place? The TCG NA website does not have easy ways to access previous banlists, which I was really surprised by. Bonus points if there's also a way to find out what the available cardpool was for these periods, though you probably could work that out yourself. <Q> Is there a good website to look at that might have all this information in one place? <S> Seems that the good ol' Wiki has a complete collection of Historical Banlists . <S> It seems very exhaustive and complete. <S> Perhaps that is a better way to see the evolution of bans of cards. <A> Other option could be: Forbidden & Limited Card List in yugioh-card.com/uk <S> There, you can check the current and previous banlists. <A> After a few months, I've found a good resource as of the January 20th TCG banlist. <S> In this reddit post, <S> user u/mtsoren882 created a google sheets spreadsheet documenting all TCG banlist changes. <S> It seems fairly exhaustive, and has been updated once since it was created in October of 2019. <S> I'm unsure how long it will be supported into the future, but as of right now this seems to be the most complete resource. <S> I like this more than the lists on the wiki, since all changes are easy to follow, and are put in order. <S> Hope this helps people in the future!
|
I also found a Historic Limited/Forbidden Chart which displays the information regarding forbidden and limited cards in a graphical way (green, yellow, red color code).
|
Can the factory card 'move' action cause combat? I've just bought Scythe and I'm looking for the rules. I'm wanting a clarification on the Factory cards. The rules tell me that these are essentially a fifth action space,and that each of them have a 'move one unit two spaces' as a bottom row action . I'm wondering about how we deal with this with the 'overlap the turns' suggestion. ie. The rules also suggest that, in order to improve game flow, that as a player is taking their bottom row action, the next player can start taking their top row action. Given that for the ordinary actions, the bottom row actions aren't going to change anything on the board (actually, not quite true, the build action will add structures to the board), this overlap doesn't matter. However, with two move actions overlapping, it would create a great deal of confusion. To clarify: Just how should the 'overlapping turns' dyanmic work? Does the factory move order result in combat and encounters? <Q> The rules also suggest that, in order to improve game flow, that as a player is taking their bottom row action, the next player can start taking their top row action. <S> "Suggest", "in order to improve" is way different from "state that it's mandatory to". <S> Feel like it's not working for you? <S> Don't do it. <S> However, with two move actions overlapping, it would create a great deal of confusion. <S> Then avoid overlapping the two moves. <S> If you get confused by a simple suggestion, then you need to know the game better. <S> To be able to improve the flow of the game in respect no normal playing, you first need to know how to play the game normally -this applies to Scythe the same way it applies to Yatzhee <S> the same it applies to Bunny Kingdom, where after a while you've played it <S> you realise you can skip an entire turn. <S> How many time have you played it already? <S> Just how should the 'overlapping turns' dynamic work? <S> The "overlapping turns" dynamic works exactly as stated in the rules: <S> in order to improve game flow, that as a player is taking their bottom row action, the next player can start taking their top row action. <S> So, while a player is taking their bottom line action, the next player can begin taking their top row action. <S> If it creates any kind of confusion, don't do it. <S> If the next player thinks he wants to wait before taking his top row action, he can wait. <S> And if the current player and the next player fail to realize something so obvious as the consequence of doing two overlapping moves and end up in a mess, then they need to play the game a few times more. <S> Or maybe trying to play something simpler. <A> Yes, any movement may cause combat, including from factory cards. <S> Regarding the simultaneous actions, Jamey Stegmaier (Scythe designer) answered a similar question on about how simultaneous actions should work with the double movement from Factory cards. <S> As part of his answer, he clarified: <S> When another player is using a Factory card for their action, the next player should not proceed to take their turn. <S> It's just the bottom-row actions printed on the board that are meant to be simultaneous. <A> While the rules do suggest that the next person can take their turn once the current player has finished their top row action, there are instances where you'll want to (or need to <S> ) wait until they've finished their turn entirely before you can take yours. <S> For example you're out of money and want to trade or bolster, and you've enlisted your Deploy Recruit, and the current player is taking the Deploy action. <S> Now of course in this situation, unless you particularly care which of their mechs <S> they're deploying you can go ahead and take the 1 coin for them deploying and start your turn. <S> This is a similar situation, if they are moving and attacking someone else you can probably get away with starting your turn (though you might want to wait and see how it shakes out). <S> Conversely if they are moving and attacking you, you'll definitely need to wait for the bottom to finish resolving before you begin your turn. <S> Keep in mind <S> this is a convention because 95% the time bottom actions won't affect the next player. <S> If it will, even if it's just because you want to see what your opponent does before you make your final decision, it's fine to wait. <S> With the factory, often you can still "start early" but it doesn't hurt to ask the factory action taker if they're going to attack you. <S> On the flipside, someone who takes the factory action usually does so for fairly decisive reasons, and rarely will you need to wait to find out if they're going to try and kick your teeth in and take all your stuff.
|
Yes, in Scythe every move order can result in a combat and encounters: it's clearly stated in the manual, by the fact that there is no text at all saying that the move from the factory must be considered different from any other move.
|
Monopoly strategy if every unowned property goes to auction immediately? My friends and I have tried playing with a house rule where every property, no matter who lands on it, immediately goes to auction for all players. We have been using a Vickrey auction so that the turns don't take forever (we all just write down a number, and the highest bid pays the second highest bid's price for the property). Obviously, without this rule in place, it is advantageous to simply buy every property you land on. But, with the auctions, each property is going for more than listed value and we quickly run out of cash. What sort of strategies should I employ with this house rule? <Q> With these rules, the optimal bid for properties you are NOT interested in <S> is $1 less than the highest bid. <S> Even if you are highly interested a property, might not want to signal that with a very high bid. <S> As Toon Krijthe points out, this becomes a guessing game of what others are willing to spend. <S> Since you say players are running out of money, you may want to not win early properties and pickup better deals later. <S> You still need to bid high to help others run out of money and to disguise your strategy. <S> How much players should be bidding can be informed via a property value calculator like those in this article . <S> As the calculators point out, key variables in estimating the value are number of players, rounds of play expected, and if the other related properties are (or will be) owned. <S> In addition to the value for your own situation, Calculate value for the player who will benefit the most from obtaining the property being auctioned. <S> This will help estimate a logical high end bid for the auction. <S> So key factors in determining your bid are: <S> * <S> Who has available cash to bid <S> * Value of property to the players in the game <S> * How aggressively/conservatively are players bidding. <S> * Plans for your available cash <A> If you can afford it, always bid at least the mortgage value - as you can immediately (although for tactical reasons one should usually wait) mortgage for that value. <S> Anytime you pick up the property for less than its mortgage value, you just flipped the property for a quick profit. <A> This kind of bidding brings elements of poker into the game. <S> Bids are blind. <S> Bidder with highest bid takes the property, pays second highest price. <S> I assume, bidders must be able to pay their bid. <S> There are several aspects: <S> Try to estimate the relative value of a property for other players. <S> Try to read the faces of other players. <S> Try to keep track of the money of other players. <S> If one player has a lot more money than the other players, it is often wise to bid high. <S> But beware, the player with the most money can use this to his or her advantage. <S> The most important strategy is willing to change. <S> With a fixed strategy, you will be predictable and that is a bad thing. <A> If, as you say "each property is going for more than listed value and we quickly run out of cash", then be the player who doesn't bid more than face value. <S> If all your opponents have run out of cash, and half the properties are still available, you can buy them at half price because no-one can outbid you. <S> Another consideration is that no-one really starts making money until they have a set. <S> You also need to bid high on any property that would complete someone else's set, to stop them getting a set. <S> If you are the only person with a set, you should be able to win.
|
Watch carefully what the other players do and adapt your strategy. A good tactic might be to save your money by only bidding high on one particular set, and bidding low to snap up bargains elsewhere.
|
When and which board game was the first to be ever invented? Which board game is the first to be ever invented, when was it invented and where? <Q> According to oldest.org , the oldest board game was Senet , invented ca. <S> 3500 BCE in Egypt. <S> Some other ancient games that are popular are Checkers (c.3000 BCE, Ancient Mesopotamia), Go (c.c.2000 BCE, Ancient China) and Chess (c.600 AD, India or China) <A> This academic paper makes a strong claim for Three Men's Morris (later to become Nine Men's Morris; the game is generalised to 'merels' in the paper); it may be that some Stone Age or Bronze Age petroglyphs were boards scratched on boulders near houses. <S> Of course, the definition of a board game is somewhat vague. <S> One petroglyph was apparently used in adjudicating 'court cases'; each side threw a stone over their shoulder and tried to hit the design, with the closer to the centre being approved by the gods, so deemed to be telling the truth. <S> This is no longer used in jurisprudence (to the best of my knowledge), but could be considered a game... <A> The oldest games that could be considered "board" games are almost certainly of the Mancala family. <S> Mancala pieces have been found throughout Africa (including Egypt) and The Middle East to dating all the way back past 6000 BCE, with the earliest potential Mancala board (Fig A) coming from ~7-6500 BCE at ʿAin Ghazal , but it's possible that two rows of divots were carved into a stone for an unrelated reason. <S> Note: <S> Fig B. below is from Qal’at al-Bahrain, and dates from ~3-3500 BCE. <S> And therein lies the main issue with dating when and where Mancala style games first developed, as a rudimentary board can be made by simply digging a number of holes in the ground, and collecting random items from the surrounding area as playing pieces (shells are a popular option). <S> The simplicity of board creation also leads to a secondary issue with dating Mancala's origins, as even when the surrounding materials can be dated, a board can easily have been carved much more recently by later occupants; an example of this is the board found on the roof of the temple of Seti I (1290–1279 BCE) in Egypt, which was most likely carved by priests using the temple roof for astronomy sometime after construction. <A> Until today experts are not sure if that was really a backgammon game or a distant relative or even a completely different game. <S> The fact is that there was a board game in ancient Persia that was at least similar to our backgammon. <S> From there, the game probably came to India and Egypt - in exchange for another time-honored game: chess. <S> Archaeologists also unearthed a backgammon-like game board in the lost Mesopotamian metropolis Ur.
|
Not to forget Backgammon which is supposed to be one of the oldest games in existence. Around 5000 years ago it appeared in the Mesopotamian area. R.C Bell, in Board Games from Many Civilizations , claimed that a Three Men's Morris board was scratched into an Egyptian temple about 1400 BC, but it is fair to say this is not universally accepted.
|
When and Why did the Catan number distribution change I've recently had to replace my 3rd Edition Catan set and the new version has a different number distribution as shown in these two images taken from the respective rule books. Is there a reason that the layout has changed? Using the 5th edition set up, we've had both nines touching, and looking at the layout below it seems possible to have a 6 and 8 together which is disallowed by the rules under variable set-up in the Almanac. These oddities never happened with the spiral A-B-C set up in the 3rd edition. <Q> Having spent a bit more time with the rule book and the internet I've come to the conclusion this is a combination of two factors. <S> The image supplied above from the 5th edition rule book is a beginner set up that has no relation to the letters on the back of the number chits. <S> It is purely a "balanced", and non-blocking starting point allowing new players to get into the game without too much trouble. <S> There's a printing error on the Chits in my copy <S> (no idea how wide spread it is). <S> The printing error has two separate sources of verification. <S> This Distribution Question include a list of the Letter to number combinations that match my older set and (really tellingly) match this image from the Almanac of the fifth edition. <S> The numbers I have are in a slightly different sequence such that one 6 is swapped with an 11 (I and P), and one 9 is swapped with a 5 (M and O). <S> Which leads to commonly paired 9s and 11s. <S> Given the image Q above, this is probably a printing error. <A> The 5th edition of Catan changed a number of cosmetic things from the 4th edition ; including a full re-editing of the rules for clarity, but there wasn't much in the way of actual rule changes. <S> The 'Variable' and 'Fully Random' set-up are essentially unchanged, with the biggest difference being the letters are now on the back of the number tokens. <S> It is worth noting that while there aren't any actual changes to the rules between the 4th and 5th editions, as you're moving from the 3rd to the 5th you'll notice two differences: You can now move the Robber to the desert <S> The 'Soldier' card is now a 'Knight' card <A> It seems to me you are confusing the premade example setups with the randomized setup. <S> The 2 pictures you show are premade setups, and both can be used to do a premade setup where the resources will flow well and are good for beginners. <S> But these setups are supposed to be used "as is" with the exact tile and number setup. <S> The premade number setup is not supposed to be used with random resource tiles as you are suggesting so a 6 or an 8 will never touch, not in the premade setups nor in the 5th edition random setups. <S> Once you have "graduated" from the pre-made setups, you can advance to the randomized setups. <S> In the randomized setups you can either shuffle the numbers either completely random or place them according to the alfabetic numbering on the back. <S> If you use the complete random setup you must indeed lookout for 8's touching 6's, which is never allowed no matter the edition version. <S> So if this happens you have to "manually" adjust the numbers. <S> With the alfabetic numbering you can't put 8's and 6's next to eachother when placed correctly. <S> Why there is a difference between the 2 example setups I don't know, but I would take it as a good thing, and try both example setups before playing randomized setups <S> , both example setups are compliant with the placement rules of the latest 5th edition. <S> Edit: Furthermore I have confirmed that the 4th edition and the 5th edition have the same alfabetic order on the back of the numbers which is the following:A=5 - B=2 - C=6 - D=3 - E=8 - F=10 - G=9 - H=12 - I=11 <S> - J=4 - K=8 - L=10 - M=9 - N=4 <S> - O=5 - P=6 <S> - Q=3 - R=11
|
The biggest change with the updated rules is the reworked setup for the non-randomized beginner game.
|
Does equipping an equipment go on the stack? Say we're in a game of MTG Commander/EDH. I already have Lightning Greaves on the battefield from the previous turn. I begin my main phase and I play my commander (Let's say it has no abilities or ETB effects for simplicity).No one responds.I then activate lightning greaves to equip it to my Commander creature. Can someone play a destroy spell like Murder in response? So does that mean Murder is on top of the stack, and my equip is at the bottom? No other responses from other players. The stack then tries to resolve. My creature is destroyed and my artifact effect cannot resolve. Thus my commander did not get Shroud. Is this correct? <Q> Equip is a regular activated ability. <S> It goes on the stack and can be responded to. <S> If it didn't resolve yet, the targeted creature is not yet equipped and does not benefit from the equipment in any way. <S> 702.6a <S> Equip is an activated ability of Equipment cards. <S> “Equip [cost]” means “[Cost]: <S> Attach this permanent to target creature you control. <S> Activate this ability only any time you could cast a sorcery.” <S> 602.2. <S> [..] <A> An opponent may target (e.g. destroy) the creature or the equipment itself. <A> Just because an activated ability cost 0 does not mean it does not use the stack. <S> It works just like any other sorcery speed activated ability, the only difference is that it cost 0. <S> The only real thing that does not use the stack is the playing of lands.
|
Yes, "equipping an equipment" is an activated ability and as such goes on the stack and can be responded to. To activate an ability is to put it onto the stack and pay its costs, so that it will eventually resolve and have its effect.
|
What is the converted mana cost of land cards? What is the converted mana cost (CMC) of land cards? Is it zero? For example, if I have lands in the graveyard, would Sun Titan be able to bring them to the battlefield? <Q> It's 0 † , so Sun Titan can bring them back. <S> This is also noted in the rulings below the card in Gatherer: <S> † : with the exception of transformed lands, as noted in @NeilMeyer's answer . <S> This situation doesn't happen in the graveyard, though. <A> One notable exception. <S> Certain double-faced cards from Ixalan block become lands when they are transformed. <S> These lands have the CMC of their front face which is often not equal to 0. <S> Adanto, the First Fort , the transformed side of Legion's Landing for instance, has a CMC of 1. <S> 711.4b <S> While a double-faced permanent’s back face is up, it has only the characteristics of its back face. <S> However, its converted mana cost is calculated using the mana cost of its front face. <S> If a permanent is copying the back face of a double-faced card (even if the card representing that copy is itself a double-faced card), the converted mana cost of that permanent is 0. <A> The converted mana cost of a land card is 0 <S> 202.3a: <S> The converted mana cost of an object with no mana cost is 0, unless that object is the back face of a double-faced permanent or is a melded permanent. <S> So yes, Sun Titan's triggered ability could bring a land to the battlefield.
|
If a card in your graveyard has no mana symbols in its upper right corner (because it’s a land card, for example), its converted mana cost is 0.
|
Is Chess with more than three players exists or would be playable? Chess board as a function of the number of players: 2 players - 8x8 square board 3 players - a special hexagonal board 4+ players - theoretically a (players * 2) gonal board. First Question: Does this gonal board exist? Is it playable (talking about practical needs, e.g. size of a field)? How would the desk look like? Second question: Would a 2+ players 3D-chess room be possible to create? <Q> Yes, chessboards for 3 players exists. <S> I have a similar to the following at home: https://www.chesshouse.com/products/3-player-medium-wood-chess-set <S> It is playable <S> and it is fun, however don't expect a really deep chess game. <S> The main tactic is to be not the one who gets ganged upon. <S> The better chess player won't win. <S> The player who can manipulate the best will win (by making the other one vulnerable to attacks or just by talking). <S> It is almost impossible to defend against two opponents. <S> For example one captures a piece and the second player captures another piece that was defending the first piece. <S> Another situation is as one attacks your king ('check') and the other one attacks your queen. <S> There are also some funny checkmates, like Scholar's mate where one person uses the bishop and the other uses the queen. <S> Be prepared for these situations, otherwise it feels very unfair. <S> By times very funny, but also very unfair :) <A> The question is a bit vague. <S> But there already is a 4 player chess .It would be possible to expand that to more players, but it's not sure if that is playable. <A> I've played it before, at my school. <S> It's set up as an 8x8 board, with 3 extra rows on each side, skipping the corners, like such: https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=https%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2F9%2F95%2FFour-handed_chess.png%2F1200px-Four-handed_chess.png&imgrefurl=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FFour-player_chess&docid=HAixsx0fsJsBPM&tbnid=aICeu9NGaThNRM%3A&vet=10ahUKEwiJw-SClsvkAhVhm-AKHQ_vBKkQMwhqKAMwAw..i&w=1200&h=1200&safe=active&bih=609&biw=1366&q=4%20player%20chess&ved=0ahUKEwiJw-SClsvkAhVhm-AKHQ_vBKkQMwhqKAMwAw&iact=mrc&uact=8 <A> To answer the first question as posed: no, the n-gonal chessboard doesn't exist for n>6 (assuming Euclidean geometry). <S> You can't tile the plane with octagons -- you end up with small empty square spaces at every other side, so the symmetry is lost. <S> Regular tilings (using regular polygons) are possible only with 3-gons (triangles), 4-gons (squares) and hexagons.
|
4 player chess does, in fact, exist.
|
Can I tap all my opponent's lands while they're casting a spell to negate it? If my opponent attempts to play Molten Disaster (along with the kicker cost which gives it split second), can I play Mind Games to tap my opponent's lands to negate Molten Disaster? <Q> Casting a spell follows this basic process: <S> The player puts the card on the stack. <S> They make all choices for that spell, including targets, additional costs, etc. <S> They pay for the spell. <S> During this process nobody is allowed to cast spells, activate abilities, or do anything at all really — the exception is that the player can activate mana abilities while casting their spell to pay for it. <S> Only after this process does any player gain priority, meaning they are allowed to cast spells and activate abilities. <S> The player who cast the spell gets priority first, then they can pass priority to the next player in turn order, and so on. <S> (For more details on casting spells and priority see <S> In plain English, how does casting spells and using creature abilities work with the stack and priority? .) <S> This means that by the time you are able to cast spells in response to your opponent casting Molten Disaster, it has already been fully paid for. <S> It is too late to tap down their lands. <S> Plus their Molten Disaster is now on the stack with split second <S> so you can't cast spells at all until it resolves! <S> If you did want to tap down their lands, they can just activate them for their mana in response anyway while your spell is still on the stack, and use that mana right afterwards. <A> No, you can't. <S> When your opponent announces that they're casting Molten Disaster, you can't do anything until the moment it's already on the stack <S> and it's paid for with mana obtained by tapping lands. <S> It doesn't really matter if it has split second or not. <S> Since Molten Disaster is a sorcery, <S> one thing <S> you could do is casting Mind Games during their upkeep (or draw step). <S> They would have to wait until the main phase before they can cast sorceries, and mana pools empty at the end of each step and phase. <S> Of course, this would assume you know they have Molten Disaster (e.g. via Telepathy ) and not enough lands to cast it otherwise. <A> Other answers have mentioned that mana abilities can be activated during the casting of the spell, and there's no time for the opponent to react in between. <S> But even if mana abilities weren't special, but worked at instant speed like almost every other ability <S> , you still couldn't prevent an opponent from casting a spell by tapping their lands in response. <S> Consider some non-mana ability that has a cost of tapping the permanent in question, e.g. Soulmender , which has "Tap: You gain 1 life." <S> Tapping Soulmender is part of the cost of that ability, and it happens immediately when the player announces the ability they are activating. <S> The cost is paid, the ability goes on the stack, and priority goes back to the same player. <S> Rule 602.2: 602.2. <S> To activate an ability is to put it onto the stack and pay its costs, so that it will eventually resolve and have its effect. <S> If the opponent casts a spell or activates an ability that taps Soulmender in response (when they get priority), it wouldn't have any effect: the cost would already have been paid when that spell/ability resolved. <S> Similarly, even if you could cast Mind Games between the opponent tapping their lands and casting the spell, the cost of tapping the lands would already have been paid once it resolved. <S> (If all mana production worked at instant speed, it would allow some other tricks, though.) <A> I'm guessing you asked specifically about a spell that has split-second because you understood split-second as: <S> You can't cast spells unless they're mana abilities. <S> You can use abilities unless they're mana abilities. <S> Where you consider Mind Games to be a "mana ability" because it taps lands. <S> But split-second actually means: <S> You can't cast spells. <S> You can't use abilities unless they're mana abilities. <S> A spell, whether it taps lands or produces mana, is not a mana ability. " <S> Mana ability" refers specifically to activated abilities and not spells. <S> A mana ability is an activated ability that produces mana in addition to its other effects. <S> See the other answers for why you can't counter a spell by tapping the lands that would be used to cast said spell.
|
No, you can't do that.
|
Can Feather bring back a spell with Jump-Start? Jump-Start is a keyword ability that allows a card to be cast from the graveyard, and then exiled afterwards. (For example, Maximize Velocity .) According to the Comprehensive Rules, the exact wording of the cast-then-exile effect is "[i]f this spell was cast using its jump-start ability, exile this card instead of putting it anywhere else any time it would leave the stack." If I cast a spell using Jump-Start while Feather, the Redeemed is in play, can I use Feather's ability to bring the card back into my hand (at the next end step) after casting it? On the one hand, both Feather's effect and Jump-Start's effect are replacements that apply when the spell leaves the stack, which makes me think I can choose which applies. On the other hand, Jump-Start's replacement exiles it instead of putting it anywhere else , not just the graveyard—so could it then replace Feather's replacement, exiling it anyway? <Q> Yes, Feather's ability can return jump-started spells to your hand. <S> Feather's effect is a replacement effect. <S> When an eligible spell would be put into your graveyard as part of its resolution, you may exile it instead and return it to your hand at the end of turn. <S> 614.1a Effects that use the word “instead” are replacement effects. <S> Most replacement effects use the word “instead” to indicate what events will be replaced with other events. <S> The exile part of jump-start spells is also a replacement effect that affects where the card goes after resolving: 702.132a Jump-start appears on some instants and sorceries. <S> It represents two static abilities: one that functions while the card is in a player’s graveyard and another <S> that functions while the card is on the stack. <S> “Jump-start” means “You may cast this card from your graveyard by discarding a card as an additional cost to cast it” and “If this spell was cast using its jump-start ability, exile this card instead of putting it anywhere else any time it would leave the stack .” <S> Casting a spell using its jump-start ability follows the rules for paying additional costs in rules 601.2b and 601.2f <S> –h. <S> Your example of Chemister's Insight is a bad one, because it wouldn't be eligible for Feather anyway, since it doesn't target a creature. <S> Maximize Velocity would be an appropriate example. <S> As you can see from cards with Jump-Start, they fit the definition of replacement effects, and the following rule applies: 616.1. <S> 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. <S> If two or more players have to make these choices at the same time, choices are made in APNAP order (see rule 101.4). <S> Therefore, you can choose to exile a jump-started with Feather <S> so it returns, or exile it through Jump-Start <S> so it won't return. <A> You can choose whether Feather, the Redeemed affects the spell or not. <S> From Gatherer rulings of Feather, the Redeemed : <S> If another replacement effect instructs you to exile an instant or sorcery spell, such as that of Dreadhorde Arcanist or the flashback keyword, you may choose to apply Feather’s replacement effect first. <S> If you do, Feather’s delayed triggered ability will return that card to your hand. <S> Note that the Flashback keyword has almost exactly the same wording as the Jump-start keyword : <S> If [the relevant ability was used], exile this card instead of putting it anywhere else any time it would leave the stack. <S> Hence, the ruling above applies to Jump-start in the same way as it applies to Flashback. <A> From Feather, the Redeemed's gather page: <S> If another replacement effect instructs you to exile an instant or sorcery spell, such as that of Dreadhorde Arcanist or the flashback keyword, you may choose to apply Feather’s replacement effect first. <S> If you do, Feather’s delayed triggered ability will return that card to your hand. <S> So now we need to determine if Jump-Start is a replacement effect. <S> From the comp rules for Jump-Start: 702.132a Jump-start appears on some instants and sorceries. <S> It represents two static abilities: one that functions while the card is in a player’s graveyard and another <S> that functions while the card is on the stack. <S> “Jump-start” means “You may cast this card from your graveyard by discarding a card as an additional cost to cast it” and <S> “If this spell was cast using its jump-start ability, exile this card instead of putting it anywhere else any time it would leave the stack.” <S> Casting a spell using its jump-start ability follows the rules for paying additional costs in rules 601.2b and 601.2f <S> –h. <S> And from the comp rules of Replacement effects: 614.1a <S> Effects that use the word “instead” are replacement effects. <S> Most replacement effects use the word “instead” to indicate what events will be replaced with other events. <S> So I would say that Jump-Start is a replacement effect since Jump-Start places the card in exile instead of the graveyard. <S> Since Jump-Start is a replacement effect and Feather's ruling states you can use it on cards that are being exiled due to replacement effects, you can use Feather's ability on the card. <S> Also, Flashback has near identical wording to Jump-Start and Feather's ruling specifically mentions that it can be used on Flashbacked cards. <S> 702.33a Flashback appears on some instants and sorceries. <S> It represents two static abilities: one that functions while the card is in a player’s graveyard and another <S> that functions while the card is on the stack. <S> “Flashback [cost]” means “You may cast this card from your graveyard by paying [cost] rather than paying its mana cost” and “If the flashback cost was paid, exile this card instead of putting it anywhere else any time it would leave the stack.” <S> Casting a spell using its flashback ability follows the rules for paying alternative costs in rules 601.2b and 601.2f <S> –h.
|
Yes you can use Feather's ability on Jump-Start casted cards.
|
What does the Scrabble board look like in foreign languages? What does the Scrabble board look like in foreign languages? I recently saw a 19x19 Scrabble board, which might be used in German, but I'm not sure. <Q> The board is the same shape in every language as far as I know What changes are letters and letter distributions: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scrabble_letter_distributions <S> Welsh is a notable one: <S> Edit: A 21x21 board apparently exists and seems to be a licensed variant of the game: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Scrabble <S> Credit: <S> Kevin Marks from San Jose, USA - Super Scrabble, CC BY 2.0 <A> There are however a number of non-core variants of scrabble that have boards with different dimensions, including Super Scrabble with a 21x21 board and Scrabble Junior with 11x11 , <S> 13x13 and 15x15 variants. <S> In addition to these official Scrabble branded variants, there are also a few non-Scrabble games like Scrabeo or Slovodel that look similar, but have different dimensions ( <S> 17x17 for Scrabeo, <S> 16x16 for Slovodel). <S> As it was in a different language it's entirely possible <S> what you saw was a competing game, rather than a Scrabble game. <A> My Aunt gifted me a Dutch Scrabble game many years ago. <S> The board was identical to the English one - but the letter mix was very very different: 20 "E"s instead of 12 and 3 "Z"s worth 2 points each rather than 1 of 10 points. <S> I suspect that you happened upon a double-board. <S> 15 <S> ^ <S> 2 = 225 and 19^2 <S> = 361 so that board had almost twice as many squares as the standard one. <S> Removing a small number of agreed letters from a double set would have made a quite playable game with a greater skill-to-luck ratio than the standard.
|
The main difference between the different language variants of Scrabble is predominantly the letter distribution and values, the board dimensions always stay the same.
|
How do two copies of Irencrag Feat interact? The recently released preview card for ELD, Irencrag Feat reads: Add seven {R}. You can only cast one more spell this turn. Would this wording allow me to play another Irencrag Feat, which would in turn allow me to play one more spell this turn? <Q> You cast the first copy, which creates a condition "Condition A" that says you can only cast one more spell <S> this turn <S> Trying to cast the second copy, you need to check existing conditions, namely "Condition A". <S> Since you haven't cast another spell this turn, you cast the second copy, which creates a condition "Condition B" that says you can only cast one more spell this turn Trying to cast another spell, you need to check existing conditions, namely "Condition A" and "Condition B". <S> You haven't cast another spell since "Condition B" has been established, but you have cast another spell since "Condition A" has. <S> This means that casting another spell would necessarily violate "Condition A", so you won't get to cast another spell this turn. <S> Keep in mind that cards like this will usually receive rulings upon or close to their release for clarification. <A> No. <S> You may not cast any other spells after the second Irencrag Feat because it would violate the restriction imposed by the first Irencrag Feat. <S> Contrary to your claim, Irencrag Feat <S> doesn't allow you to cast any additional spells. <S> Instead, each Irencrag Feat imposes a restriction, and the restriction from the second Irencrag Feat doesn't erase the restriction imposed by the first. <S> All restrictions must be obeyed. <A> No, it would not. <S> One of the Golden Rules of Magic is that "can't" trumps "can" 101.2. <S> When a rule or effect allows or directs something to happen, and another effect states that it can't happen, the "can't" effect takes precedence. <S> Example: If one effect reads "You may play an additional land this turn" and another reads "You can't play lands this turn," the effect that precludes you from playing lands wins. <S> This is a similar example. <S> Your first Irencrag Feat says that you can't cast any spells this turn after the next one you cast. <S> If you cast a second one, the first Irencrag will prevent you from playing any more cards even though the second one would allow one more card.
|
You cannot cast another spell after casting the second Irencrag Feat While I don't think the Golden Rule quoted by Arcanist Lupus in his answer necessarily applies here, simple logic will get you there:
|
In two-player games with perfect information, if both players play optimally, will the game always end in a draw? I've been running simulations of two strong agents playing Chess which always ended in a draw. Followed by this simulations, can we state that two-player perfect-information games like Go and Chess will always end in a tie when both players play optimally? <Q> Accurding to Zermelo's theorem , in finite two-player games of perfect information in which the players move alternately and no affect of chance , one of those three possibilities is true: <S> Second player can always win. <S> Both players can force a draw. <S> For example, Tic-Tac-Toe is known to have a strategy by both players that will force a draw. <S> In 4-in-a-row it is known that the first player has a winning strategy . <S> Chess haven't been solved yet <S> , I think that the conjecture is that a draw can be forced. <S> A list of solved games: <S> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solved_game <S> The field of this question is called Combinatorial game theory (CGT) see: Solving Chess <A> No - there need not always be a tie in the general case. <S> Even in games of perfect complete information there may still be a bias towards one player. <S> For example the game of nim cannot end in a tie, and depending on the starting position gives an advantage to either the first or second player - e.g. Size of heaps | Result withA <S> | B | perfect play----------------------------------1 | 1 | First player wins2 | 2 | Second player wins For the specific games you mentioned (go and chess) <S> then it is not known what the result is with perfect play. <S> For more details see the corresponding Wikipedia articles: <S> First move advantage in Chess - Solving chess <S> First move advantage in Go - Perfect Komi <A> You are missing a couple of important factors in your question that make it impossible to answer as it stands. <S> Mainly that a game with perfect information available to both players doesn't mean that it is not balanced in one players favor. <S> While it may be true that there are games out there where it is balanced between both players it is also true that there games where it is not the case it can be balanced in favor of either player (such as the second player is more likely to win which is why they go second). <S> A secondary point is that there are games where a tie or draw is not possible and if it gets to a point where nothing more can be done a player is declared the victor by default.
|
First player can always win.
|
MTG -- Search for a sorcery -- Green -- EDH I am building an EDH/Commander deck and my commander is mono green... I want a card or a combo that allows me to search my library for a sorcery card (or something similar). Do you guys know something about this? I searched on scryfall and didn't found anything relevant <Q> Interacting with sorceries is very much outside of the Green part of the color pie, so this kind of effect is going to be rare at best. <S> As a basic first search, the following Scryfall search finds every card compatible with a Green commander that has you search your library: <S> o:"search your library <S> " ci:g . <S> The o: search term specifies text in the card's text box to look for, and the ci specifies the color identity to look for. <S> This returns 241 cards, which can be reasonably looked through. <S> If a card matching your criteria doesn't show up in those search results, it doesn't exist. <S> There are a couple of common ways that cards could allow allow you to search for sorceries that suggest ways to refine that search. <S> Some cards could allow you to search specifically for sorcery cards. <S> A simple way to search for that would be to just add a search for the word "sorcery": <S> o:"search your library <S> " ci:g <S> o: <S> sorcery . <S> This search returns two cards, both of which are false positives. <S> Other cards might allow you to search for any card. <S> The phrasing for this is "Search your library for a card", so the following search would find cards like that: <S> o:"search your library for a card" ci:g . <S> This finds 14 cards; most find cards with a specific name, or names that match another name, but three cards match requested criteria: Planar Portal , Ring of Three Wishes , and Tamiyo's Journal . <S> Finally, some cards allow you to search for nonland cards, but the search for that ( o:"search your library" ci: <S> g <S> o:nonland ) finds no results. <S> Some specific Sorcery cards can be found by other search effects. <S> The few green and colorless tribal sorceries can be found by any effect that instructs you to search for cards with that specific creature subtype (such as Wirewood Herald ). <S> And the creature cards with with Adventure instants and sorceries can be found by any effect that instructs you to search for a creature, which are plentiful in green. <A> In general, green is not a color that cares about instants and sorceries. <S> Green specializes in tutoring for lands and creatures - to tutor for sorceries <S> you need either blue or black (which can tutor for anything). <S> Red might also have some, as it's second in caring about instants and sorceries, but I'm not sure. <S> There are a few specific spells that green <S> can tutor for - the Tribal spells from Lorwyn and Morningtide, which can be tutored for by using the tutor of that respective creature type. <S> But that only works for that particular subset of spells - if you need to search for any other spell you're out of luck. <S> In general, your best bet is to look for the effect you need stapled to a creature. <A> From some of the comments you've made in this question, it seems like you're building a Molimo, Maro-Sorcerer deck <S> and you're planning on using Boundless Realms as your win condition. <S> However, there are a number of cards that achieve similar results to Boundless Realms, including several that are near-functional reprints or achieve the same goal as dumping lands onto the battlefield for the purposes of your Commander. <S> (Side Note: If you aren't familiar with it, I would strongly suggest checking EDHREC when building Commanders, as it maintains a large database of Commander decks, including lists of the most popular cards for specific Commanders.) <S> EDHREC <S> has a good list of cards that are extremely popular in Molimo, and your Boundless Realms is certainly one of them, but there are a number of other options in there that you are going to want to at least consider. <S> Ranger's Path and Explosive Vegetation give you two additional lands and come out on Turn 4, allowing you to power out a Turn 5 Molimo instead of a Turn 7. <S> [mtg Traverse the Outlands] is at least a functional copy of Boudless Realms if you have Molimo on the battlefield and comes in at 2 mana cheaper. <S> Kalonian Twingrove , Ulvenwald Hydra , and Dungrove Elder are all alternate win conditions if your commander gets hit with a Pacifism or something similar. <S> Blanchwood Armor and Primal Bellow achieve effectively the same thing as Boundless Realms if you're running only basics, and Primal Bellow even has the benefit of being a combat trick, allowing you to sneak in an extra boost on your Commander after blockers are declared to pull a win out of no where. <S> There are plenty of other cards on that page that synchronize with what you're trying to accomplish with your commander (dump as many lands/forests onto the battlefield as physically possible). <S> I would recommend that you go through the rest of page yourself and take a look to see what you like.
|
Others have already said there's a distinct lack of either Sorcery tutors or generic tutors in mono-green, so you're kind of limited there.
|
Can I pay some of the cost of an activated ability lots of times to get more out of the effect? I have a goblin creature that’s ability states, tap: sacrifice a goblin: Tar Pitcher deals 2 damage to target creature or player. My question: once I tap Tar Pitcher can I sacrifice multiple goblins and deal 2 damage for each creature sacrificed this way? Or can I only sacrifice one goblin and just deal 2 damage? <Q> MTG cards are very specific in their language: it says "a goblin", so you can sacrifice a goblin, not two goblins, not three goblins. <S> If the card was designed to let you sacrifice multiple goblins, it would say {T}, sacrifice any number of goblins: <S> Tar Pitcher deals 2 damage to any target for each goblin sacrificed. <S> You may choose different targets for each one. <S> (it would also be overpowered given the ease of creating goblin tokens) <A> Just one As Philip Kendall pointed out, because the ability specifies a goblin, you only sacrifice one. <S> You can think of activated abilities like purchasing something. <S> Everything to the left of the colon is what you pay. <S> Everything to the right of the colon is what you get. <S> In this case, the cost is: {T}, Sacrifice a goblin <S> The thing you get in exchange is: Tar Pitcher deals 2 damage to target creature or player. <S> ({T} here represents the tap symbol.) <S> As with all activated abilities (unless they have some limit), you can repeat this transaction as much as you like, but each time you must pay the full cost. <S> We can see that the tap symbol serves a crucial role as part of the cost, because it limits you to only using the ability once per turn (or possibly more if you find some other way to untap Tar Pitcher): if Tar Pitcher is tapped, you can't pay the cost of tapping him again. <S> For a more clear alternative example, take Prodigal Pyromancer . <S> Its ability is {T}:Prodigal Pyromancer deals one damage to any target. <S> (Note that the game text has been updated and is different than the text on the card. <S> Tar Pitcher has been updated in the same way.) <S> Their abilities are exactly the same, except that Prodigal Pyromancer deals 1 less damage and doesn't require that you sacrifice a goblin. <S> We can clearly see how incredibly strong it would be if Prodigal Pyromancer's ability could be repeated as long as it was tapped: it could deal an unlimited amount of damage to any target! <S> Thankfully this isn't the case: the {T} cost must be paid each time, which usually means this ability will only happen once per turn. <A> You can only sacrifice one goblin and deal 2 damage each time you activate the ability. <S> 602.1. <S> Activated abilities have a cost and an effect. <S> They are written as “[Cost]: [Effect.] <S> [Activation instructions (if any).]” <S> 602.1a <S> The activation cost is everything before the colon (:). <S> 602.2. <S> To activate an ability is to put it onto the stack and pay its costs, so that it will eventually resolve and have its effect. <S> In this case, Tar Pitcher's ability's cost has two parts; tapping Tar Pitcher and sacrificing a Goblin. <S> Both parts of this cost must be paid each time the ability is activated. <S> There is nothing "special" or different about tapping that limits it to being paid only once per activation; all costs are paid only once per activation. <S> It just so happens that tapping is a cost that (normally) can only be paid once per turn.
|
You can sacrifice one and only one goblin. An ability’s activation cost must be paid by the player who is activating it.
|
Is morphing a creature effectively a cost? I'm teaching some of my friends magic, and morph seems to be a bit of an outlier mechanic. It's one of the few things that a player has a choice to do but 'doesn't use the stack'. It can make it a bit hard to describe to my new players that are just learning how the stack/abilities resolving work. Is it fair to describe morph as a cost (paid in addition to the actual morph cost), which does nothing? Effectively, rewording it as [Cost], turn this creature face up: Do nothing. Of course, once a creature is turned face up there are effects, such as a change in the creature's power and toughness, and (usually) triggered abilities, but those are only a consequence of an action happening, not a new action paid for by the morph cost. In my understanding, treating morph as a cost in this way is entirely keeping with the rules. As normal costs, it can only be done when you have priority. Similarly, it can't be responded to. (A creature sacrificed as a cost, as an analogy, cannot be responded to either.) My question is: is this a fair way of explaining the special case of Morph as a mechanic to newer players, or is there some rule or corner case that I'm missing? <Q> Turning a creature face up by paying its Morph cost is a Special Action , like playing a land. <S> Taking a special action is similar to paying a cost to cast a spell or activate an ability, in that both take effect immediately without waiting for anything on the stack to resolve, but there are also differences. <S> Players can explicitly take special actions whenever they have priority, but costs can only be paid as part of taking some other action. <S> So, any attempt to represent it as a cost would make it part of another action that does nothing except provide an opportunity to pay that cost, which is essentially backwards. <S> If Morph was represented as a cost to activate a nothing ability as described in the question, that action could not be taken while you cannot activate non-mana abilites because of cards like Overwhelming Splendor or abilities like Split second . <A> Morph has a cost, but it is not a cost. <S> It is simply an action you can take, like playing a land. <S> You can think of turning a creature face-up in the same way as playing a land... <S> playing a land has a cost of losing the land card from your hand; turning a creature face-up has whatever cost is listed next to the keyword "morph". <S> Normally the comprehensive rules are not a good way to go about learning or teaching the game, but the rules for turning a morph creature face-up are pretty simple here: <S> 702.36e <S> Any time you have priority, you may turn a face-down permanent you control with a morph ability face up. <S> This is a special action; it doesn’t use the stack (see rule 116). <S> To do this, show all players what the permanent’s morph cost would be if it were face up, pay that cost, then turn the permanent face up. <S> (If the permanent wouldn’t have a morph cost if it were face up, it can’t be turned face up this way.) <S> [...] <S> The fact that it can't be responded to and the fact that paying a cost can't be responded to are really the only 2 things that these have in common. <S> Paying a cost when activating an ability is something you do in order to do something, in this case to activate the ability. <S> The problem with looking at turning a morph card face-up as a cost is that there is no thing that you are paying the cost for. <S> Turning it face-up is generally the end goal; not a cost you are paying to get to some goal. <A> As you (and the other answers) point out, being turned face up is not part of the cost. <S> However, I do believe that is a reasonable approximation for teaching new players for the reasons you point out and one other that I can think of: <S> It is a pre-requisite to performing the action. <S> By this I mean you cannot morph an already face up creature, or pay to morph a creature multiple times in succession, just as you cannot sacrifice the same creature to multiple sacrifice a creature costs. <S> Caveat <S> The one caveat I would give is be careful how you state that, you describe it as: <S> [Cost], turn this creature face up: Do nothing. <S> When I'm helping new players learn magic, I usually re-inforce that anything with a colon is an activated ability with the cost on the left and the effect on the right. <S> Morphing not only does not use the stack, but also is not an activated ability. <S> So, for example, a static effect on the creature that says activated abilities cannot be activated (such as being detained or under the effect of Arrest ) would not prevent the creature from morphing. <S> Alternative Instead of describing being turned face up as part of the cost of morphing, you could compare it to playing a land at instant speed. <S> Both are special actions so exactly the same rules would apply, and it may be one less thing to keep track of. <A> It's similar to how you can't respond to mana abilities, as they too don't use the stack. <S> I would say explaining the cases that are independent of the stack would be the best way to show new players how these things work. <S> In reality paying a morph cost is ending a continuing effect, namely the card being face down as a result of being played morphed.
|
Morph does not use the stack, which is why it seems to be part of the cost, but it is still in fact the effect of paying the morph cost.
|
Is there a good place to find information about strategies, tricks and caveats for specific cards? Sometimes, I'm surprised when I see that a certain card is considered good. I don't get it! For example, when I first saw Skullclamp , I just saw a card that increased power by one at the cost of reducing toughness by one - not a very good deal. I didn't see why it was considered so good it was almost broken. I had to be explained that for a small cost (typically a token creature), it would draw you two cards, a very good deal in most decks. Ok, I admit that I should have spotted that one, but I have experienced the same feeling several times. I look at a card and think "why the heck is this card so expensive" or "why is everybody talking about this card, saying it will ruin Magic". Or, in my playgroup, someone will play a card and the whole gang goes "ooh, I love that card, it's so awesome", and I just nod and smile and pretend I know what they're all so excited about. Where should I go to find out why a card is considered so good by so many? Is there some database online that will explain why a card is good? I usually end up googling the card's title, and sometimes get lucky and get that aha-feeling, but not always. I would like to find a source online where I can look up a card and someone will explain the strategies they use that makes that card effective. <Q> Simply searching for the cardname + <S> the word 'combo' already gives some interesting results: Skullclamp abuse. <S> - Casual & Multiplayer Formats - <S> The Game - MTG ... <S> on MTGSalvation <S> Why is Skullclamp banned? <S> on this very site <S> What makes skullclamp such a good, highly regarded card? <S> on Reddit <S> I'm not aware of any database with this kind of information. <S> A 5/5 rating on Gatherer tells something about the competitiveness of a card, but not whether it's part of a combo. <S> Kird Ape has a 5/5 rating as well <S> but it's 'just' a Zoo staple. <A> A card's strength and playability is always relative to the other cards that exist around it. <S> A good way to determine a card's position in the game is to find decklists using that card. <S> I like to use MTGGoldFish's deck searcher tool to find decks. <S> It has definable search parameters that let you make general statements like "oh, it's a great card in modern control decks". <S> You can get more specific answers by picking a deck that uses the card and googling the deck name looking for a "deck tech" write-up or video that should explain the card's usefulness in the deck and possible synergies with other cards. <S> If that fails, you might be able to simply find videos of people playing that deck or a similar deck to give context as to what the card is doing. <A> Cards are generally not graded on their own, context is very important. <S> Since both of these are large and constantly moving targets, you won't generally find any one collection of card discussions. <S> If you want to learn about the game so you can develop your own skill of card evaluation, you can't help but do the legwork yourself. <S> Visit the official Wizards site and some of the countless existing fan sites for articles about decks and formats that interest you. <S> I don't want to give specific recommendations for fan sites since I don't really visit them myself, but Google will easily help you get started. <A> SaffronOlive once wrote an article about why certain cards are banned in Modern. <S> It's a bit old at this point (Jace / Bloodbraid / Stoneforge have been unbanned, <S> Bridge / Faithless Looting / Hogaak have been banned), but if you're wondering about some of the older cards you can find an explanation here. <S> For other formats, there's no universal resource, unfortunately. <S> You'll have to search about each individual card (or you can ask a separate question about them).
|
The strengths and weaknesses of any given card depend on the format and the meta.
|
Can I play lands from the graveyard more than once in a turn with Crucible of Worlds? So I have Crucible of Worlds out and I summon then sacrifice an Evolving Wilds from my graveyard. Can I then replay Evolving Wilds from my graveyard that turn or will it have counted as playing my one land for the turn? <Q> If you look at the Gatherer page for the Crucible, it tells you that Crucible of Worlds doesn’t change the times when you can play those land cards. <S> You can still play only one land per turn , and only during your main phase when you have priority and the stack is empty. <S> (Emphasis mine.) <S> So the lands played from the graveyard do not get a separate land-playing quota. <A> No, you cannot play the Evolving Wilds for a second time in that turn. <S> The ability on Crucible of Worlds says You may play land cards from your graveyard. <S> Playing land card this way is the same exact action as playing land card from your hand normally. <S> So the same restrictions apply and you can only take that action once per turn. <S> Once you play the Evolving Wilds from the graveyard, you can't play the same card from the graveyard again that turn, and you can't play another land from your hand that turn. <A> However, the land you get from activating <S> Evolving Wilds does not count as playing a land; <S> Evolving Wilds has you "put a land onto the battlefield". <S> That is not the same as "play a land". <A> You are still restricted by the one land per turn rule, it doesn't matter where that land is played from (note put into play is different, such as effects like Rampant Growth ) <S> This can be modified by cards that allow more land plays, <S> Fastbond , Zuran Orb and Crucible were a combo at one time to allow infinite replaying of lands that had effects when you played or sacrificed them (a combo that would probably have added Field of the Dead to it) <S> Short answer <S> , you still only get one land play a turn, from hand or from graveyard, unless you have something that changes that like Fastbond, Explore or Rites of Flourishing . <S> All Crucible does is change where 305.1 lets you play land from. <S> 305.1 <S> A player who has priority may play a land card from their hand during a main phase of their turn when the stack is empty. <S> Playing a land is a special action; it doesn’t use the stack (see rule 116). <S> Rather, the player simply puts the land onto the battlefield. <S> Since the land doesn’t go on the stack, it is never a spell, and players can’t respond to it with instants or activated abilities.
|
If you played Evolving Wilds on that same turn; that counts as your land play for the turn, and Crucible of Worlds doesn't allow you to play an extra land.
|
Can Zombify target a creature card that isn't in the graveyard? Zombify (and many similar cards like it) says: Return target creature card from your graveyard to the battlefield. As far as I can tell from the wording, the actual targeting requirement is "creature card". Does this mean that you can cast Zombify, targeting a creature card that isn't in your graveyard? Of course if you can, then when it resolves it would do nothing, because it is impossible to return a card from the graveyard if it isn't in the graveyard [101.3]. But there are plenty of reasons you might want to cast a spell that has no effect. Or is the targeting requirement is actually meant to be "target creature card from your graveyard"? This doesn't sound right to me; because if so, it should be "in your graveyard" instead of "from your graveyard" (as is used on other cards like Animate Dead . Related; if the targeting requirement is in fact "target creature card", then what actually makes a creature card in your graveyard a legal target? Rule 115.2 says: Only permanents are legal targets for spells and abilities, unless a spell or ability (a) specifies that it can target an object in another zone or a player, or (b) targets an object that can’t exist on the battlefield, such as a spell or ability. See also rule 115.4. Does Zombify actually "specify that it can target an object in another zone"? It doesn't in the targeting requirements itself. I can't find anything within the rules for targeting (115) or the rules for casting a spell (601.2c) that say that the ability a spell would have when resolving can or will affect the choice of legal targets. From a logical gameplay point of view, we can know that the card only makes sense if it allows you to target cards in your graveyard; but do the rules ever make it so that you have to look at the effect of a spell to know the set of legal targets? The rules for abilities have a related rule about when abilities apply; but they don't deal with targets: 113.6. Abilities of an instant or sorcery spell usually function only while that object is on the stack. Abilities of all other objects usually function only while that object is on the battlefield. The exceptions are as follows: The list of exceptions explain why Reassembling Skeleton 's activated ability can be activated while it is in the graveyard. Is there a rule similar to this, but dealing with what objects are legal targets? <Q> I think that the reading of 115.2 you mentioned above is just too narrow. <S> Reposting it again: <S> 115.2. <S> Only permanents are legal targets for spells and abilities, unless a spell or ability (a) specifies that it can target an object in another zone or a player, or (b) targets an object that can’t exist on the battlefield, such as a spell or ability. <S> See also rule 115.4. <S> 115.2 specifies that only permanents are legal targets for spells or abilities unless another zone is specified (or implied by the object type). <S> This implies one of two things is true: <S> It can only target creature cards that are currently permanents on the battlefield, and the card doesn't actually function at all. <S> "target [object] from [zone]" as a wording template does include a zone as part of the targeting requirements. <S> Because of how 115.2 is worded, there is not another option where it can target a creature card anywhere. <S> Either it can only target permanents, or its zone is specified (or implied by the type of object as in (b)). <S> Since the card does currently function, we have to assume that this is considered adequate language for specifying a zone as a part of targeting requirements. <A> Zombify cannot target creature cards that are not in your graveyard. <S> It seems you are confused by how "from your graveyard" and the "target creature card" interact. <S> To understand this interaction, let's look at rule <S> 109.2a: <S> 109.2a <S> If a spell or ability uses a description of an object that includes the word "card" and the name of a zone, it means a card matching that description in the stated zone. <S> This is the rule that is most relevant for this question. <S> As Zombify states the name of a zone (graveyard), the card "means" only cards in the specified zone. <A> The rules are a little ambiguous here, but rulings make it clear that you must choose a target in the graveyard. <S> For example, the card Cauldron Dance has this text: <S> Cast this spell only during combat. <S> Return target creature card from your graveyard to the battlefield. <S> That creature gains haste. <S> Return it to your hand at the beginning of the next end step. <S> You may put a creature card from your hand onto the battlefield. <S> That creature gains haste. <S> Its controller sacrifices it at the beginning of the next end step. <S> and this ruling: <S> Similarly, Foul Renewal has this text: Return target creature card from your graveyard to your hand. <S> Target creature gets -X/-X until end of turn, where X is the toughness of the card returned this way. <S> and this ruling: <S> You must target a creature card in your graveyard and a creature on the battlefield to cast Foul Renewal. <S> If the creature becomes an illegal target before Foul Renewal resolves, you’ll still return the creature card to your hand. <S> If the creature card in your graveyard becomes an illegal target, the creature on the battlefield will be unaffected as there is no “card returned this way.” <S> Similar rulings can be found on Grave Exchange and Spelltwine .
|
You must have a creature in your graveyard to cast this spell since it requires a valid target.
|
Can double-faced cards still transform if they have lost all abilities? Let's say I have a Lone Rider and I've gained enough life to trigger it. Opponent is holding a Merfolk Trickster and wants to stop Lone Rider from transforming. Can opponent use Merfolk Trickster on my end step (after Lone Rider has triggered) or must opponent cast it in the main phase before the end step? Usually removing the source of the trigger doesn't stop the trigger , but in this case, after Merfolk Trickster revolves, Lone Rider has no abilities anymore. Does an ability-less Lone Rider still "know" it can transform? <Q> A Merfolk Trickster can stop a creature from transforming itself, but only before that creature's ability triggers (or is activated, as the case may be). <S> Once an ability triggers, it exists independent of the object that created it. <S> That means that if the object changes zones or loses the ability or has its text changed in some other way, that doesn't affect the ability on the stack. <S> And "transform" is just a keyword action that is applied to a permanent. <S> The permanent doesn't "know it can transform", it just has ability whose effect includes that instruction. <S> That same keyword can be found on cards that don't themselves transform, and can be applied to permanents that don't have abilities with that keyword. <S> For example, Waxing Moon can transform Ulvenwald Captive 's back face Ulvenwald Abomination, even though Ulvenwald Abomination can't transform itself. <A> Transform is a keyword action introduced in Innistrad and means to turn a double-faced card on the back side, changing the card face that is visible. <S> https://mtg.gamepedia.com/Transform <S> So whether a card can be transformed depends on whether it's a DFC. <S> Double-faced is a referable property for a card: Moonmist's reminder text refers to double-faced cards. <S> [emhasis added] https://mtg.gamepedia.com/Double-faced_card <S> Mefolk Trickster removes all abilities , not properties . <S> Lone Rider retains its property of being a DFC, and thus can still be transformed. <S> In a somewhat similar vein, it will be able to attack: being able to attack depends on a permanent being a creature, which is a characteristic, not an ability. <S> Apart from a few exceptions (for instance, being able to tap a basic land for mana), if something isn't in the text box, it's not an ability, and will not be changed by Merfolk Trickster. <A> As you said, removing the source of an ability on the stack does not stop that ability from resolving, so if your opponent played Trickster after your Lone Rider triggered, it will still transform into It That Rides as One, which will be a 4/4 creature with no abilities, since Lone Rider//It <S> That Rides as One are still the same object, these abilities will be given back in the cleanup step when Trickster's effect ends. <S> Your opponent's last opportunity to prevent Lone Rider from transforming this way would be when you pass in Main Phase 2, intending to go to end step - they have to also pass before that happens and Lone Rider triggers. <S> Casting <S> Moonmist after Trickster was played will force Lone Rider to transform into It That Rides as One, it will again be a 4/4 with no abilities until the cleanup in the end step.
|
Even after losing the transform ability, a card can be forced to transform, as it still has a transformed back side.
|
What spells can be countered? From the Gatherer : Does this mean it can counter anything? If so, what other counter spells are there? <Q> It can counter almost anything. <S> Notable exceptions are lands (they are played, not cast) and abilities (you'll need something else, like Stifle , to counter those). <S> 112.1. <S> A spell is a card on the stack. <S> As the first step of being cast (see rule 601, “Casting Spells”), the card becomes a spell and is moved to the top of the stack from the zone it was in, which is usually its owner’s hand. <S> (See rule 405, “Stack.”) <S> A spell remains on the stack as a spell until it resolves (see rule 608, “Resolving Spells and Abilities”), is countered (see rule 701.5), or otherwise leaves the stack. <S> For more information, see section 6, “Spells, Abilities, and Effects.” <S> 305.1. <S> A player who has priority may play a land card from their hand during a main phase of their turn when the stack is empty. <S> Playing a land is a special action; it doesn’t use the stack (see rule 116). <S> Rather, the player simply puts the land onto the battlefield. <S> Since the land doesn’t go on the stack, it is never a spell, and players can’t respond to it with instants or activated abilities. <S> Some spells can't be countered because they say so on their card (like Akroma, Angel of Fury ). <S> Sometimes, the rules make it very difficult to do so (like Krosan Grip – its Split Second ability ensures you can't cast Counterspell or similar spells, but triggered abilities like the ones found on Counterbalance or Kira, Great Glass-Spinner can, under certain circumstances, still counter them). <S> There are many other counterspells out there; you can find most of them via a Gatherer search . <A> This means that it could counter a creature, sorcery, instant, planeswalker, enchantment, or artifact spell; which are all the types of things that can be cast as a spell. <S> Note that playing a land does not count as casting a spell, so it cannot counter that. <S> Lands never go on the stack and are instead put straight onto the battlefield. <S> Also abilities are not spells, so it could not counter an activated or triggered ability. <S> A card like Disallow would let you counter a spell or ability, while a card like Stifle would let you counter an ability, but not a spell. <S> Essence Scatter only allows you to counter a creature spell. <S> As you can see, cards will state specifically what they can target with the description of an object after the word "target". <S> Counterspell works on any "spell". <S> Notably, a spell is always something that is on the stack; you cannot use Counterspell, or anything like it, to do anything about a creature that is already on the battlefield. <A> First, spells are cards that have been cast but not yet resolved, every card in the game that is not land will be a spell at some point - instants, sorceries, creatures, artifacts, enchantments and planeswalkers. <S> A spell like counterspell can counter any of these unless something else prevents it from countering that spell. <S> There are other things that use the stack, abilities of cards, these can be countered, but not by this spell. <S> Cards like Abrupt Decay specifically say they can't be countered, and some cards will grant this ability to other things, like Gaea's Herald or Boseiju, Who Shelters All . <S> Cards with split second, like Extirpate , can be countered, but are hard to counter since spells can't be cast once it has been cast until it resolves. <S> There are over 300 spells in magic that are used to counter, and most of them are blue spells. <S> I won't list them all but some examples: "Hard" counters : Mana Drain , Cancel , Rewind , <S> Last Word , Cryptic Command , "Soft" counters (counter unless): Rune Snag , Mana Leak , Mana Tithe <S> Counter abilities: Stifle , Voidslime , Disallow , Tale's <S> End <S> Restricted targets: Nix , Remove Soul , Negate , <S> Red Elemental Blast <S> Other ways to remove from the stack: Summary Dismissal , Mindbreak Trap , Spell Queller , Venser, Shaper Savant
|
This can counter any spell; a spell is an object on the stack that has been cast but has not yet resolved.
|
Am I allowed to have a creature have 0 toughness, but still assign combat damage? So basically, I have this card called Metropolis Sprite , and I was wondering, after blockers are declared, right before combat, can I use the ability multiple times to make it say a 3/0 or 4/-1 and have it still do damage, but die after? <Q> No You can activate Metropolis Sprite's ability one or more times before combat damage is dealt. <S> However, after each use of the ability resolves (before damage is dealt), state based actions will be checked. <S> When this happens the game will look to see if Metropolis Sprite has more that 0 toughness. <S> If it doesn't, it will be put into the graveyard. <S> Then, combat damage will be dealt. <S> If Metropolis Sprite isn't on the battlefield at this point, it won't deal any damage. <S> Similarly, if Metropolis Sprite is at 0 toughness (perhaps from a prior use of it's ability), there won't be a moment for you to activate its ability again. <S> (IE, it's impossible to get Metropolis sprite to 4/-1 with just the creature's ability.) <A> No. <S> From rule 704 on State-Based Actions: 704.3. <S> Whenever a player would get priority (see rule 117, “Timing and Priority”), the game checks for any of the listed conditions for state-based actions, then performs all applicable state-based actions simultaneously as a single event. <S> After the ability resolves to give Metropolis Sprite 0 toughness, a check is made for state-based effects. <S> Metropolis Sprite dies to having 0 toughness is a state-based action that cannot be responded to (and as such you can't activate the ability again to make it a 4/-1) and the game doesn't continue until after it is dead. <S> Only after the Sprite is dead will it be time to assign combat damage, and it will be unable to do so as it is no longer on the battlefield. <S> If it was declared as a blocker, creatures blocked by it remain blocked and can't assign combat damage to a player unless they have trample or another ability that allows it to do so. <S> But the Sprite will not be able to assign any combat damage. <A> I just feel I should add my 2 cents just in regards to this statement. <S> Other posters have answered correctly I just want to add a little related rules knowledge. <S> can I use the ability multiple times to make it say a 3/0 or 4/-1 and have it still do damage, but die after? <S> You can, for instance, activate the ability after each time it resolves. <S> You can also keep priority and activate it as many times as you wish. <S> You just have to inform your opponent you are keeping priority and then activate away. <S> As other posters have mentioned when the sprites get to 0 toughness it is put into the graveyard as a state-based action and when this happen you cannot activate the ability in response to state-based actions, but that does not mean you cannot activate the ability any amount of times before that happens.
|
Yes, you can activate the ability as many times as you can pay the costs.
|
Is there a strategy PVP board/card game with Negative Feedback loops? Feedback loops (for those who aren't aware) (A Negative Feedback Loop is the technical term for "comeback mechanics", akin to what you experience in Mario Kart. This is when the game makes it easier for the underdog to come back, punishes those who are winning, and causes games to always feel tense despite differences in experience. In contrast, a Positive Feedback Loop is when winning encourages more winning. For example, taking one of your pieces in Chess isn't just tallying another point, but it actually makes the rest of my game easier and your game harder.) I'm a sucker for negative feedback loops... However, most of the popular PvP board/card games I've played were the opposite (Star Realms, Netrunner, MTG, Pokemon, BANG, Chess, etc), as these games encouraged uphill battles due to persistent board states. I know that some games have implemented some N.F.L. mechanics, but I haven't come across a game that uses N.F.L.s as a trend. For instance: Monopoly has a Community Chest effect that makes players pay based on the properties that they own (a N.F.L. mechanic), yet is mostly defined by your early success and provides few options for catching up. The winner is generally the winner by a huge margin. Magic The Gathering has a few mechanics that reward a player for having fewer lands or creatures, but most mechanics become stronger based on synergies and landing a "win more" solution that your opponent can't respond to/interact with. Having a strong board state makes you more resistant to loss, rewarding winners with more winning. Munchkin has several cards/monsters that change how they interact with higher/lower level players, but since gear can assist with earning more gear, and your level contributes to your overall ability to kill monsters, and several low-level monsters have some severe penalties (which will only impact those who are doing poorly), Munchkin feels mostly as a P.F.L. game (although this can be heavily mitigated based on how cutthroat your table is, as agreements/relationships can be a major factor for success at later levels). The only popular game I can think of that relies on a N.F.L. is Uno, as you start running out of options as your hand gets smaller (which can mean you end up drawing lots of cards and losing your lead). But I'm looking for something with a little more complexity and skill. The Question: Are there critically acclaimed strategic games that regularly use Negative Feedback Loops? <Q> The great granddaddy of deck-building actually does have a negative feedback loop in it: <S> In Dominion , victory points come in the form of green cards which you add to your deck [1] . <S> In every game of Dominion you will have access to three basic Victory cards - Estate, Duchy and Province - and there are others that get added as part of choosing the kingdom for a given game. <S> The basic Victory cards, and many of the others, have no playable effect, meaning that a player who jumps straight into buying them gets an initial boost in their score, but will soon find that their hands are full of junk cards that they can't use to progress the game. <S> By comparison, a player who focuses on building up a strong engine in their deck may not have any meaningful score until the 10th turn, at which point they can buy multiple Provinces to end the game and win. <S> In Power Grid, the turn order is determined based on increasing number of cities. <S> If you have more cities (and can power them), you get more money, but you also get last pick when buying resources and building new cities. <S> This can mean you get screwed out of both, putting you at a severe disadvantage. <S> This effect is actually so strong that positioning yourself correctly in turn order is an important part of the strategy of the game, and some people dislike it because it becomes such a major component of the game. <S> [1] <S> In a couple of the expansions, namely Prosperity and Empires , there are ways of acquiring victory point tokens which do not clog up your deck. <S> And in many of the expansions, there are Victory cards that can also be played as Actions or Treasures, so they're not completely useless during the game. <A> Codenames has a NFL effect in that if you've guessed a lot of your team's words, and the other team hasn't guessed many of theirs, then it's easier to guess your opponent's words (because more of the unguessed words are your opponents'). <S> Robo Rally has the explicit NFL of the lasers, but the biggest feedback loop is that if there's a clump of players, then anyone far ahead or far behind it has a large advantage. <S> In Parade, if you have the most of a particular color, then each of your cards of that color are worth only one point, rather than their face value (the winner is whoever has the lowest number of points). <S> Century: Spice Road doesn't have NFL, but at least it has very little PFL. <S> The resources in the game are trader cards, spices, and victory points. <S> And they're almost entirely in that order: trader cards get you spices, and spices get you victory points. <S> Victory points don't get you trader cards or spices, a while technically spices can get you trader cards, for the most part if someone is using spices to get trader cards to get spices to get trader cards, they're doing it wrong. <S> There is someone PFL within the spices (you may, for instance, need to first get to cinnamon to get your engine going), but not much. <A> Viral Viral is an area control game where the area that you are controlling is a human body - each player is playing as a viral infection trying to infect the person. <S> Tiebreaking in zone control is decided by current victory point totals, with the losing player winning all ties. <S> Since zones usually only have 2 or 3 pieces per player, being able to win ties can be very powerful. <S> Additionally, while controlling zones earns victory points, it also increases the research being done on you. <S> When that gets too high, medical treatment washes all of your tokens from the body, and you have to start over. <S> These two features give the game a fairly tight rubber band.
|
Another game which has a kind of negative feedback loop is Power Grid .
|
Sly Deal - Stealing a Wild Card The below is from the help section of the Monopoly Deal Sly Deal Steal a property card or a property wild card from any other player and add it to your property collection . You cannot steal a card from a full set of properties. Can also be banked as money. Bank value: 3M. Question : Can I still take the property wild card using Sly Deal if none of my property cards are displayed on the table? <Q> Yes, you can take. <S> In fact, you can rotate the Wild Card before placing a new card on the table to change its color and add your new property. <S> ;) <A> Yes, you can still steal someone's property (wild or otherwise) using Sly Deal, even if you have not yet played any of your own property cards. <S> In that case, your existing "property collection" starts with zero properties, then once you " add (the stolen card) to your property collection ", it has a size of one. <A> Excerpts from the rules for Monopoly Deal by Hasbro THE CARDS IN MORE DETAIL <S> Sly Deal <S> Steal a property from any other player and add it to your collection. <S> You cannot steal a card from a full set of properties. <S> Can also be banked as money. <S> ON YOUR TURN <S> PLAY UP TO 3 CARDS from your hand, onto the table in front of you. <S> A. PUT MONEY/ACTION CARDS INTO YOUR OWN BANK B. PUT DOWN PROPERTIES <S> INTO YOUR OWN <S> COLLECTION <S> Lay property cards down in front of you to build up your property sets. <S> (End of excerpts) <S> The rules clearly state that either of these actions mean that the cards must be played from from your hand onto the table in front of you. <S> So, either way, you must be able to place the stolen card in front of you, and not keep it in your hand.
|
As long as the card ends up in your collection by the end of your turn, you can steal it.
|
What happens if no one wants to buy a property at auction in Monopoly? I was playing with my brother and after a few turns, my brother had 0$ due to tax. Now it was my turn, and because I was in jail, I paid $50 to get out, which was all of my money. Then I rolled and landed on a property no one owned. The rules just say that the bank would sell the property to the highest bidder, which doesn't help. But you're also not allowed to do nothing, you must auction the property if you don't want to or can't pay for it . Is someone allowed to get the property for free, e.g.: "auction" for 0$? If so, who gets the property in a tie? <Q> Philip Orbanes is the renowned master of all things Monopoly. <S> He is the author of 3 books on Monopoly : <S> The Monopoly Companion: <S> The Players' Guide <S> The World’s Most Famous Game--and <S> How It Got That Way Monopoly, Money and You: How to Profit from the Game's Secrets of Success. <S> Kevin Tostado is Director of the movie Under the Boardwalk: <S> The MONOPOLY Story ,a documentary about the Monopoly national and world championships that are held around the world every four years; the movie won 4 Emmy Awards, including that for Outstanding Achievement in Documentary .Reference : http://www.monopolydocumentary.com/ <S> Kevin Tostado answered the following question : <S> How do you properly hold an auction in Monopoly? <S> Reference : https://www.quora.com/How-do-you-properly-hold-an-auction-in-Monopoly <S> "The answer can differ depending on how you interpret the rules, since it's not clearly defined within the rules that Charles Darrow wrote when he first published MONOPOLY. <S> But I'll describe how chief judge Phil Orbanes ran auctions at the 2009 US & World Championships. <S> When a player lands on an unowned property and decides that he or she does not want to purchase it at face value (either because they can't afford it, don't want it, or think they might be able to get it at a lower price), then that property immediately goes up for auction. <S> The banker conducts the auction and puts the property up for bid starting at $1 , regardless of the original face value of the property. <S> Any player, including the one who landed on it and declined to purchase it originally, can bid on the property. <S> Any player can name a price, and there is no sequential order to how bids are offered. <S> The auction continues until the banker concludes the auction with the highest bidder." <S> So, the chief judge, Philip Orbanes , at the Monopoly US & World Championship says bidding starts at $1. <A> Frame challenge: <S> I don't believe it's plausible for this to happen in any game with sane players, and so there is no need for the rules to cover it. <S> Any property, once bought, can be instantly mortgaged for half its face value. <S> It is therefore in every player's interest to buy a property in an auction for half its face value or lower. <S> If a player has no cash, then they can raise some by mortgaging another property or selling a house. <S> These both have costs: it will either cost you 10% of the property mortgage value to unmortgage it afterwards, or cost you half a house's value to sell it and then re-buy it. <S> Both of these costs should be far outweighed by the gain in buying an auction property for $1 and instantly mortgaging it. <S> There are theoretical situations in which it wouldn't make sense (e.g. mortgaging the most expensive property or a house on the most expensive side, in order to buy the cheapest property) but the chances of every player being in that situation are so remote that I suggest it has never happened: properties tend to go up for auction fairly early in the game (the chances of no-one having landed on a particular property decrease as the game goes on) when either players have <S> plenty of cash or players have plenty of unmortgaged property (cheaper properties as well as more expensive ones) available. <A> The rules say: Any player, including the one who declined the option to buy it at the printed price, may bid. <S> Bidding may start at any price. <S> However, the rules do <S> not gives any details on the specific way that the auction should be run. <S> In most standard auctions, once someone has bid $0, any other player who wishes to bid must bid more than $0. <S> Thus, the property would go to whoever bids first. <S> But what player this is will depend on how you have been running auctions in the game in general. <S> Disclaimer: this is only a partial answer because I don't believe the rules actually answer the question.
|
A player is allowed to bid $0 for the property, and thus buy it for $0 if no one outbids him.
|
Are there any board or card games known to have been designed to feature OODA loops? I am looking for any board or card games that use OODA loops as a part of their design. Specific examples of the application of each phase of the OODA loop are appreciated. The OODA loop is the cycle Observe > Orient > Decide > Act The approach explains how agility can overcome raw power in dealing with human opponents. Wiki reference: The OODA loop <Q> Observe: <S> Phase 0 - Check and adjust your possessions <S> Orient: <S> Phase 1 - Draw a card face-up from the Door Deck <S> If it's a Monster: fight it and go to Phase 3; It <S> it's a Curse: <S> apply it; <S> It <S> if's any other card: put it in your hand or play it; Decide: <S> Phase 2 - Choose either <S> "Look for Trouble" or "Loot the Room <S> " Act: A. Phase 2 <S> If you choose "Look for Trouble" then play a monster from your hand and fight it. <S> If you choose "Loot the Room" then draw a second card face-down from the Door Deck and place in your hand. <S> B. Phase 3 <S> Charity <S> : Reduce hand to at most five cards <S> One could probably make a similar case for all D&D-type games, but Munchkin is always the most fun. <S> Part of the satire that makes Munchkin work is that everything is explicit in the rules. <A> There are many wargames featuring the OODA loop (of course).For example <S> the TCS series (designed by The Gamers) features orders written in paper that must be understood by the platoon commander and they stick to them until further orders are received and understood. <S> So the player must be agile in creating a flux of orders that will keep the units in the action. <S> Some TCS titles are Black Wednesday, Bloody ridge or GD'42. <A> I would argue that most board and card games use this type of feedback loop as part of what makes them a game. <S> The player observes the game state via the pieces on the board,cards in their hand, etc. <S> Usually this state will be different fromthe previous observation due to the actions of other players or thegame mechanics. <S> The player orients themselves and their strategy relative to thisnew information. <S> Their goals may have changed, or there may be newtactics they need to consider. <S> The player decides what they will do on their turn. <S> The player acts and carries out whatever move they wish to make. <S> In fact, the best games typically facilitate the player's engagement with this type of loop. <S> They provide opportunities for many meaningful decisions, make it easy to see the current game state, provide distinct actions you can take on your turn, and even allow you to express yourself or your instincts. <S> You can apply this pattern to anything from Chess to Catan to Go Fish. <A> X-wing miniatures is a great example of a use of OODA loops in several ways. <S> Each round has a planning phase followed by a maneuver phase. <S> During the planning phase, players each assign a hidden maneuver to each unit. <S> Then, during the maneuver phase, these maneuvers are resolved sequentially, and players must make decisions when resolving the maneuvers. <S> Units need to be positioned and face the right way to be able to attack other units. <S> As a result, more agile units can frequently beat more powerful units, but only though superior flying technique. <S> Furthermore, even with similarly agile units, players must constantly integrate new information into a cycle of planning and acting. <S> In all cases, Players need to plan several turns ahead against a landscape that changes every turn, as where a unit can go and attack is always limited by it's current position and facing.
|
The phase layout for Munchkin practically is the OODA loop:
|
Whom is a player bankrupt to if a Chance card tells him to pay $50 to each player and he can't pay? If a player draws the Chance card (US standard edition) that tells him "You have been elected Chairman of the Board. Pay each player $50", and his cash is insufficient (even after he sells hotels/houses and/or trade/mortgages properties), then whom is he bankrupt to? To whom must he hand over his remaining assets? <Q> There are indeed no instructions in the official rules on how to resolve multiple payments. <S> A common mechanism in game design to handle such cases is to pay your debts in turn order . <S> You go bankrupt to the player who you cannot pay. <S> Example: <S> turn order is Alice, Bob, Charlie, Daniel and Eve. <S> It's Alice's turn <S> and she is instructed to pay $50 to each player. <S> Her entire liquid assets are $149. <S> She pays $50 to Bob and Charlie, respectively, but since she's $1 short of paying the debt to Daniel, she goes immediately bankrupt and turns all her assets to Daniel. <S> Eve gets nothing. <S> Turn order is clockwise, as indicated by the rules: THE PLAY... <S> [...] <S> After you have completed your play, the turn passes to the left. <A> My play group treat this as being bankrupt while owing the Bank. <S> The reason for this is that the player collectively owes every player $50. <S> If the whole collective cannot be payed then the player is bankrupt owing everyone. <S> There is no way to equally distribute the assets so handle the redistribution by Auction. <S> We don't pay the other players the $50. <S> The only effect is that the Bankrupt player is removed and the new auction occurs. <A> This situation occurred in a Monopoly Tournement "Phil Orbanes, who wrote The MONOPOLY Companion and is the official Judge at the World Championships provided me with this answer when it came up in tournament play a few months ago: If you cannot pay a debt to ONE player due to a card, you go bankrupt to that player and turn over all asset (std. <S> procedure here). <S> The issue then becomes: fairness. <S> How do you divide your assets as evenly as possible? <S> Procedure: after selling any houses for 1/2 price to the bank, the bank then rebuys your properties at face value if unmortaged, or for 1/2 value if mortgaged. <S> You divide the resulting cash as evenly as possible, with the player(s) to your left collecting any odd dollar(s). <S> The bank then auctions all properties it purchased to the highest bidders." <S> Source : <S> Quora.com : <S> Kevin Tostado, Director of "Under the Boardwalk: The MONOPOLY Story." <S> MonopolyDocumentary.com Conclusion. <S> The players may get a lot more than the 50$ that they were originally owed.
|
If you cannot pay a debt to TWO or MORE players (after calculating any money you could get from the bank by mortgaging and selling houses) due to a card, you go bankrupt to them all.
|
What is the 'duration' of Charmed Sleep? I have a question that relates to untapping a creature enchanted by Charmed Sleep . It says "Enchanted creature doesn't untap during its controller's untap step". Does this apply to the following controller's untap step, or for any untap step? (That is, does the enchantment last for one round or forever?) <Q> It simply states something which is true, so it will apply to all untap steps (of the creature's controller), not just the following one. <A> " Enchanted creature doesn't untap during its controller's untap step. " is a static ability. <S> 113.3d <S> Static abilities are written as statements. <S> They’re simply true. <S> Static abilities create continuous effects which are active while the permanent with the ability is on the battlefield and has the ability, or while the object with the ability is in the appropriate zone. <S> See rule 604, “Handling Static Abilities.” <S> So the rule-modifying continuous effect it creates will last until the Charmed Sleep leaves the battlefield. <A> Have a look at Crippling Chill . <S> It states (emphasis mine): Tap target creature. <S> It doesn’t untap during its controller’s next untap step . <S> Here you can see how long this effect lasts. <S> Without the "next", it simply means that whenever that player has their untap step, the enchanted creature does not untap.
|
It lasts permanently (as long as it's enchanting the creature).
|
How can I spend the mana from Lion's Eye Diamond? With this question, I would like to shed some light on the Lion's Eye Diamond card, and some of its possible uses. It is an incredible card, which in some ways is similar to the Black Lotus , but which unfortunately cannot be completely associated with it, for obvious reasons. First, it is possible to note that the Oracle card text and the original card text are noticeably different. At first glance, it would seem that the only current use for this card is the ability to use the three mana for some activated ability of the cards that are already in play. In fact, I think I can exclude the possibility of " starting to cast a spell ".With this last expression, I mean in the sense that, having chosen a spell from the hand, and with the Diamond already on the battlefield, you can cast it thus excluding it from the hand – and thus sidestepping this way the wording "discard your hand" as regards the spell you would cast with the help of the Diamond. In other words, I don't think it's possible to use this card as a mana source anymore, and with the rules associated with mana sources only: this is also because, unlike the original text, Oracle says that the ability of this card can now only be played as an instant. But even this use seems really strange to me ... Before the errata, it was a mana source , and now, even if it remains largely such, it must be used as an instant ... There remains, in my opinion, no other possibility of using this card for the activated abilities of the cards already in play. I would want to know if what is reported here is correct, and if any expert – or, who has ever played with this card – has any idea how it can be used differently from the way shown here. <Q> Lion's Eye Diamond was not errataed to make it harder to use, it was errataed to maintain its original functionality Lion's Eye Diamond is old . <S> It was printed in Mirage, which was released in 1996, only three years after Magic was first printed. <S> As such, it predates the Sixth Edition Rules, the largest rules revamp Magic has ever seen. <S> The Sixth Editions Rules restructured how a turn works, implemented the stack (replacing a previous concept of spell resolution called "batching"), and notably for our purposes, changed when you were allowed to get mana. <S> Before the Sixth Edition Rules, you had to have your mana available before you started to cast a spell. <S> But the Sixth Edition Rules created mana abilities which did not use the stack, and could be used during casting when you are asked to pay for mana (Mana Sources, like Lion's Eye Diamond's ability <S> were not what mana abilities are now. <S> They acted more like instants that produce mana). <S> The Sixth Edition Rules made it possible to use LED while a spell was already in the process of being cast, circumventing that intention. <S> So LED was given errata that required it to be cast at instant speed, returning it to its original functionality. <A> Yes, you're right <S> , you cannot use Lion's Eye Diamond to cast spells which are currently in your hand. <S> The rulings below the card even admit that it's a strange one: <S> The ability is a mana ability, so it is activated and resolves as a mana ability, but it can only be activated at times when you can cast an instant. <S> Yes, this is a bit weird. <S> Other than activated abilities, or decks who want their graveyards to be filled (e.g. for Bridge from Below , <S> another card which Gatherer admits is a bit weird.) and care less about the hand, there are some exceptions: most notably cards with Madness or Flashback . <S> In both cases, you can just activate the Diamond, causing you to discard your hand. <S> A card with Madness can be cast for its Madness cost because it's being discarded; a card with Flashback because it's now in your graveyard. <A> If you have a LED on the field and a card you want to cast in your hand, you cannot cast it using LED's mana, as Glorfindel points out. <S> However, you can still draw cards after the LED ability resolves, and use the floating mana to cast the spells. <S> You can for example pay 2U (using lands, not LED) to cast Divination from your hand, hold priority (not resolving the Divination), crack LED, discarding the rest of your hand, now let Divination resolve (if your opponent allows it of course), draw two cards, and use the three floating mana from LED to cast a spell you just drew. <S> Notably, the famous Storm deck for legacy runs the combo of Infernal Tutor with LED. <S> If you do the steps above but using the Tutor instead of Divination, the Hellbent ability will always trigger, letting you pick any card from your deck (e.g. Brain Freeze or Grapeshot if they can finish the game on spot) and cast it using LED-produced mana. <A> Glorfindel mentioned Madness and Flashback, and Mephy mentioned using it while a card draw effect is on the stack. <S> For instance, if you have Alchemist's Apprentice on the battlefield, you can sacrifice LED, then sacrifice Alchemist's Apprentice to get another card that you can cast. <S> Cast cards from your library. <S> For instance, Elsha of the Infinite allows you to cast the top card of your library. <S> Cast cards from exile. <S> For instance, you can cast Act on Impulse , sacrifice LED, then cast one of the cards you exiled with Act on Impulse. <S> I believe that you can also use it during your upkeep. <S> So you could pay upkeep costs, or you could do something like cast Slaughter Pact , then during your next upkeep sacrifice LED to pay the 2B. <S> This would let you use any Pact regardless of whether you have lands that produce the correct color of mana.
|
The intention of Lion's Eye Diamond was to force you to discard your hand before getting the mana, so that you couldn't use the mana to cast spells. There are a few more ways to use it: Have a permanent that allows you to draw cards.
|
Are there any ways to lose in a "You can't lose the game" game? Would cards like Lich's Mastery , and Door to Nothingness effect each other at all? Or Platinum Angel for that matter? <Q> In general in Magic: the Gathering, "can't beats can": 101.2. <S> When a rule or effect allows or directs something to happen, and another effect states that it can’t happen, the “can’t” effect takes precedence. <S> So Lich's Mastery and Platinum Angel prevail against Door to Nothingness. <S> To win the game, you first need to get rid of the opponent's permanent. <S> Or, in the case of Lich's Mastery, have a card that states that you win the game, like Battle of Wits . <S> Lich's Mastery has a ruling below the card in Gatherer: <S> While you can’t lose the game, your opponents can still win the game if an effect says so. <S> and that's the reason why Platinum Angel separately states "your opponents can't win the game". <A> As a supplement to Glorfindel's answer: <S> 104.3a <S> A player can concede the game at any time. <S> A player who concedes leaves the game immediately. <S> That player loses the game. <S> In other words, even if you control a "can't lose the game" effect like Lich's Mastery or Platinum Angel, you can still lose by conceding. <A> Gideon of the Trials <S> No game effect can cause you to lose the game or cause any opponent to win the game while Gideon’s emblem is in effect. <S> It doesn’t matter whether you have 0 or less life, you’re forced to draw a card while your library is empty <S> , you have ten or more poison counters, you’re at your Glorious End, your opponent casts a second Approach of the Second Sun, or so on. <S> You keep playing. <S> (2017-04-18) Other circumstances can still cause you to lose the game. <S> (2017-04-18) <S> So a Gideon of the Trials emblem functions like Platinum Angel and stops both winning and losing, both Door to Nothingness as well as Approach of the Second Sun. <S> However, Lich's Mastery doesn't stop your opponents from winning, it only prevents you from losing. <S> So even if you have a Lich's Mastery, an opponent can still win with Approach of the Second Sun. <S> This is simply because winning is different from losing.
|
You will lose a game if you concede, if you’re penalized with a Game Loss or a Match Loss during a sanctioned tournament due to a DCI rules infraction, or if your Magic Online® game clock runs out of time.
|
When can opponents react to the lifegain from the mana ability of Pristine Talisman? I have a Pristine Talisman on the board, alongside a Well of Lost Dreams . I activate the Talisman to add 1 mana and gain 1 life. Gatherer says 01.06.2011 Pristine Talisman has a mana ability. Its ability doesn’t use the stack and can’t be responded to. But is this true for the lifegain, too? Or can opponents react to the lifegain and e.g. destroy the Well before I can use the mana to draw a card? <Q> 605.3b <S> An activated mana ability doesn’t go on the stack, so it can’t be targeted, countered, or otherwise responded to. <S> Rather, it resolves immediately after it is activated. <S> (See rule 405.6c.) <S> 405.6c Mana abilities resolve immediately. <S> If a mana ability both produces mana and has another effect, the mana is produced and the other effect happens immediately. <S> If a player had priority before a mana ability was activated, that player gets priority after it resolves. <S> (See rule 605, “Mana Abilities.”) <S> Pristine Talisman's ability resolves immediately (including the life gain, which is part of the resolution), and triggers the Well's ability which goes on the stack. <S> That will be the first time your opponents can do anything, and destroying the Well is too late by then; its ability will resolve even if it is destroyed (rule 112.7a). <A> The rules define what a mana ability is (emphasis mine): 605.1. <S> Some activated abilities and some triggered abilities are mana abilities, which are subject to special rules. <S> Only abilities that meet either of the following two sets of criteria are mana abilities, regardless of what other effects they may generate or what timing restrictions (such as “Activate this ability only any time you could cast an instant”) <S> they may have. <S> 605.1a <S> An activated ability is a mana ability if it meets all of the following criteria: it doesn’t have a target, it could add mana to a player’s mana pool when it resolves, and it’s not a loyalty ability. <S> (See rule 606, “Loyalty Abilities.”) <S> So the fact that you gain life doesn't change the fact that the ability is a mana ability. <S> So it doesn't use the stack. <S> So once you activate it, the next time anyone gains priority, you have the mana, you have gained the life, and the Well has triggered and that triggered ability has been put on the stack, as detailed in <S> 605.3b <S> An activated mana ability doesn’t go on the stack, so it can’t be targeted, countered, or otherwise responded to. <S> Rather, it resolves immediately after it is activated. <S> (See rule 405.6c.) <S> and 405.6c Mana abilities resolve immediately. <S> If a mana ability both produces mana and has another effect, the mana is produced and the other effect happens immediately. <S> If a player had priority before a mana ability was activated, that player gets priority after it resolves. <S> (See rule 605, “Mana Abilities.”) <A> People can respond to the lifegain trigger and destroy the Well, but they can't stop you drawing a card. <S> When Gatherer says Pristine Talisman's ability “can't be responded to”, that means the ability is not ever on the stack to be countered by Stifle or to have people say “before that resolves...”. <S> The ability simply resolves immediately as it's activated. <S> The entire ability resolves in this way, so you'll gain life too as part of this. <S> Well of Lost Dreams will see the lifegain and its ability will be triggered. <S> When people would next gain priority, its trigger would be put on the stack. <S> (If you activated Pristine Talisman while casting a spell, it will go on the stack immediately after you're finished casting the spell. <S> Otherwise, it'll probably go on the stack immediately after you've activated Pristine Talisman.) <S> At this point players have priority and one of them can destroy the Well, <S> but it's too late: the ability is already on the stack. <S> Removing a permanent doesn't remove its abilities from the stack . <S> As the ability resolves, you can optionally pay {1} to draw a card. <A> Your opponent cannot prevent the triggered ability from entering the stack. <S> Your opponent will never have priority in between the mana ability resolving and the triggered ability triggering and entering the stack. <S> They can respond to the triggered ability of Well of Lost Dreams, but by then it is too late as the ability doesn't care if the Well still exists.
|
No, assuming you have legally activated the Talisman, your opponents do not have time to stop you from drawing a card from the Well's ability by destroying the Well.
|
Is there a Magic the Gathering card that resembles The Hanged Man Tarot card? I have been looking for any card which has artwork resembling an entity dangling upside down but with no luck. Potential ideas could be something to do with the Rakdos circus, an over-confident assassin, someone entangled by a snare or someone slacking on a job. I have tried searching in-regards to card name (e.g. bound, hang, hanged, tangled, trap, snare, etc.). Failing this, I'm also trying to look for a card that fits one or more of these properties in relation to The Hanged Man: "Pause, surrender, letting go, new perspectives". <Q> Relating partially to the overconfident assassin part of your post there is always Robber of the Rich <A> The best card I could find for "hanging upside down" was oddly enough Plummet . <S> Obviously the flavor is off, but they are tied up and upside down. <S> For other options, you might consider the Gallows at Willow Hill , which features no hanged characters in the art, but involves quite a bit of hanging in the flavor. <S> Similarly, Hanged Executioner appears to show a hanged person in the post-hanging state. <S> Finally, if you want a card that exemplifies "Pause, surrender, letting go, new perspectives", then I recommend Pacifism . <S> The original Mirage art even looks like a Tarot card, although you probably already have a card for the Fool. <A> I was rather sure that there's a Giant card that resembles what you're looking for closely, and I somewhat found some matches... <S> except none of those is serious enough for what I would assume <S> your purposes are, I'm afraid: <S> Lowland Oaf Ravenous Giant
|
Another card that might fit better is Nissa's Defeat , which seems to fit halfway on both the visual and "Pause, surrender, letting go, new perspectives" angle (although of course, Nissa would be a "hanged woman").
|
Emissary of Grudges vs. Annihilator If I have Emissary of Grudges on the battlefield and my secretly chosen player controls a creature with Annihilator which attacks me, can I activate Emissary of Grudges and choose a new target for that creature's Annihilator? <Q> No, there is no interaction. <S> Emissary of Grudges can change a target, but the Annihilator ability does not target. <S> "Target" has a specific meaning in Magic. <S> If an ability does not specifically include the word "target" somewhere, then there is no target for Emissary to change. <S> 115.10a <S> Just because an object or player is being affected by a spell or ability doesn’t make that object or player a target of that spell or ability. <S> Unless that object or player is identified by the word “target” in the text of that spell or ability, or the rule for that keyword ability, it’s not a target. <S> Annihilator does not target anything: <S> 702.85a Annihilator is a triggered ability. <S> “Annihilator N” means “Whenever this creature attacks, defending player sacrifices N permanents.” <A> Annihilator does not target a player, it just affects the defending player, which is the player that the creature attacked. <S> The full definition of Annihilator is in rule 702.85a : <S> Annihilator is a triggered ability. <S> “Annihilator N” means “Whenever this creature attacks, defending player sacrifices N permanents.” <A> Additionally to the answers already given, a card that doesn't say "target", doesn't target anything (although there are cards and abilities that "target" implicitly, for example <S> Aura spells and Equip abilities). <S> From the rules : <S> 115.1d <S> A triggered ability is targeted if it identifies something it will affect by using the phrase “target [something],” where the “something” is a phrase that describes an object and/or player. <S> The target(s) are chosen as the ability is put on the stack; see rule <S> 603.3d. <S> and especially 115.10a <S> Just because an object or player is being affected by a spell or ability doesn’t make that object or player a target of that spell or ability. <S> Unless that object or player is identified by the word “target” in the text of that spell or ability, or the rule for that keyword ability, it’s not a target.
|
No, Emissary of Grudges does not interact with Annihilator.
|
What was the first Infinite Combo in Magic: The Gathering? I started wondering when the first time an infinite combo was possible in Magic: The Gathering. I went through Alpha and, as far as I could tell, there wasn't an infinite combo available among the cards there, although there were a couple pieces to well known infinite combos. The first two cards that I noticed from Alpha were Basalt Monolith and Time Vault but I didn't notice any way to go infinite with them using just Alpha. Looking into their famous combos, the first one that I could come up with was the Basalt Monolith / Power Artifact combo that existed as far back as Antiquities, the fifth set to be released by Wizards . Are there any infinite combos that existed before this two card combo? Specifically, I'm looking for infinite combos that are legal to execute by tournament standards. So for example, using Basalt Monolith to tap and untap itself repeatedly wouldn't count as it doesn't advance the board state. <Q> According to this Reddit post, the first infinite combo was Animate Artifact , Time Vault and Instill Energy . <S> This is the first infinite combo in Magic. <A> These cards are all available in Alpha: Animate Artifact + <S> Time Vault + <S> Instill Energy <S> Time Vault Enchant Time Vault With Animate Artifact Enchant Time Vault with Instill Energy Instill Energy - {0} <S> : Untap enchanted Time Vault Time Vault - {T}: Take an Extra Turn Repeat for potentially infinite turns (the deck must support this) <A> While the loop that Aulis and Ayatollah describe is undoubtedly the best infinite combo in Alpha, it is not the only infinite combo in Alpha. <S> Step 1 <S> : Play your entire deck, until there are only 9 cards combined in your graveyard, hand, and library. <S> Step 2 <S> : Play Time Walk Step 3: <S> Play Timetwister , shuffle your graveyard and hand into your library, and draw 7 cards, including a Regrowth . <S> Step 4 <S> : Start your next turn, draw your eighth card. <S> Play Regrowth, getting back Timetwister. <S> You now have Time Walk and Timetwister in hand. <S> Step 5: <S> See Step 1 <S> I'm guessing that this one didn't see much play.
|
By animating and untapping Time Vault and then tapping it would gain the player infinite turns.
|
Uno discard and draw pile empty? So my friend had an Uno dilemma over the weekend... They ran out of discards and draw pile somehow. Then what? I'm guessing this is impossible "mathematically" or they were missing cards, but is there a solution? <Q> There's always a card on the discard pile. <S> Even when you reshuffle, you have to leave the top card of the former DISCARD pile as the start of the new DISCARD pile. <S> (That is: you always have a card there showing what needs to be matched.) <S> Even if all the other cards are in players' hands, that card is still there. <S> At this point, players can pass, but they draw nothing for doing so. <S> Eventually someone will play. <S> If no one wants to play for whatever reason, then call it a draw: there's no point to playing when no one playing wants to play. <A> I don't think the rules contemplate this. <S> If you have to draw cards until you can play, and there are no more cards to draw, I would say your turn is over, next player goes. <S> It's not like this is going to go in a loop, at least one player CAN play a card. <A> Logically this is not possible. <S> If no card can be played on top of the current card even after drawing the whole deck into hands, then logically that card could not have been played in the first place. <S> Uno reuses the Discard Pile as the Draw pile <S> Even if somehow you ended up in a situation where the top card of the Discard pile had no matches either of colour or face value left (or wilds) in the draw pile, then after the whole pile was drawn the discard pile becomes the new Draw Pile. <S> At this point all the matching colour cards and values that were used before become available. <S> The only way for this to happen would be an incomplete deck that had no wilds and included a card that was the only card of its colour and number and was the first card drawn. <S> At which point, your Uno set needs replacing not house ruling.
|
At any time during the game, if the Draw Pile becomes depleted and no one has yet won the round, take the Discard Pile, shuffle it, and turn it over to regenerate a new Draw Pile.
|
Providing the spymaster with cues for clues in Codenames Toward the end of a game of Codenames, a team might find itself with two agents left to find and five cards still uncovered — say, APPLE, BASS, CAR, DARKNESS, and ELEPHANT. (The numbers are by way of example. My question is about the general case that there are any number of correct guesses left and any number of cards left uncovered.) Would it be legal, while that team's spymaster is trying to think of a clue, for his teammate to give cues like the following? "If our words are APPLE and BASS, clue 'edible': they're both edible." "APPLE and CAR are 'self-driving'." <Q> It does not address this directly in the rules but based on my reading it is illegal and against the spirit of the game. <S> The game is wanting you to convey information from the spymaster to the operatives with a single word. <S> While it may be acceptable to take the deliberations that the operatives have after a clue is given into account having them give directions on what to say is different. <S> If you look at the Keeping A Straight Face section of the rules it goes into the intent behind how clues are given. <S> The spymaster is expected to keep a straight face. <S> Do not reach for any card while your teammates are considering the words. <S> When a teammate touches a word, consult the key card and cover the word with the card of the corresponding color. <S> When a teammate chooses a word of the correct color, you should act as though it was exactly the word <S> you meant, even if it wasn't. <S> If you are a field operative, you should focus on the table when you are making your guesses. <S> Do not make eye contact with the spymaster while you are guessing. <S> This will help you avoid nonverbal cues. <S> When your information is strictly limited to what can be conveyed with one word and one number, you are playing in the spirit of the game. <A> I can't see the rules mention anything about information from the team to the spymaster, so in general, it's not forbidden for the spymaster to listen to their team. <S> The examples you give seem to be within the rules in the sense that apples and basses are edible, so the clue would be "about the meaning of the word". <S> Then again, one could argue that after such a meta-clue is given, the clue would no longer be about the meaning of the words, but about the meta-clue. <S> In the end, it's something you need to argue within your group. <S> If that came up in a game I was playing, I'd tell people to stop trying to break the game, and would stop playing with them if that didn't work. <S> Note that in the general case, you'd have to come up with quite a large number of possible clues to suggest clues about all the possible combinations. <S> (There are ten even in this small example.) <S> You'd need to come up with ways to combine words that don't need to be combined, along with the ones that do . <S> At the same time, the spymaster can concentrate on the actual problem, so are you even sure that would help? <A> It's highly stressed in the rules that clues must be about the meaning of the words. <S> Until two seconds ago, I didn't know that Apple made self-driving cars. <S> If I were the Spymaster in your hypothetical, and I said "self-driving, 2", I'd be giving an invalid clue because the clue would have nothing to do with the meaning of the words. <S> The spies might as well have said "foo" instead of "self-driving" because they defined "self-driving" to mean "apple and car" regardless of what any of those three words mean. <S> The fact the spies created this new definition for "self-driving" doesn't go away if the Spymaster happens to know that Apple makes self-driving cars. <S> The Spymaster would ultimately be using that newly-invented —and illegal to use— definition. <S> Additionally, the rules also say that it's up to the Spymaster to think of a clue. <S> The pressure this places on the Spymaster is a fundamental part of the game. <S> To have the Spies relieve that pressure is against the spirit of the game.
|
It's not legal. If you just give hints about the obvious combinations, they've probably figured them out already, and if you're really capable of coming up with ten clues in the time it takes them to come up with one, well, either wait for your turn to be spymaster, or find smarter friends to play with.
|
Can you hide your number of cards in Uno? Can you hide your cards so other players can't see how many cards you have left? So if you don't remember to say UNO, others can't know if you had only one card left. <Q> The official rules of most games tell you what is allowed, and usually only tell you what isn't allowed when it seems that it would be possible otherwise. <S> For instance, there is no rule that says I can't add four cards to your hand whenever I feel like it. <S> (feel free to add your own ridiculous rule here) <S> Should this be allowed because the rules don't specifically prohibit it? <S> No! <S> Of course not! <S> The rules can't possibly list everything that's not allowed. <S> It's an important part of Uno that you can easily tell how many cards your opponents have so that they can be penalised for not calling "Uno" on their last card. <S> The only way they can get out of this penalty is if the other players don't say anything about this before they can play their last card. <S> Of course, if you have a house rule that says you can do this (and all the players have agreed before the game began), it is allowed. <S> However, you're not truly playing Uno anymore, just a game that's very similar to Uno. <A> While there is no rule stating that you can't hide your number of cards, it is definitely against the spirit of the game to attempt to bypass the rule that requires you to say "Uno". <S> Personally, if someone did this consistently against me I would stop playing the game with them. <A> This is not banned by the rules - and does not remove information from the game From the official rules: https://service.mattel.com/instruction_sheets/42001pr.pdf <S> There is no rule stating how a player must hold their hand. <S> The only relevant section, is that you must declare UNO when you are down to 1 card, and that if you are caught - you must draw 4 cards. <S> As such, it is "legal" to hide the cards. <S> That said, most people play UNO with friends for fun. <S> In such a setting, you would absolutely be breaking social norms - and I would be surprised if many people want to continue playing with you, as such behaviour would be considered against the spirit of the game by many. <S> However, the reason it does not matter from a game perspective - is hiding your cards does not change the game mechanics at all . <S> In UNO, players have enough knowledge at all times, to calculate the number of cards any other player is holding. <S> There are no hidden cards, or cards that are not played to the center of the table, and likewise, all players start with 7 cards - as such, by following the cards that have been played, it is always possible to track the (number of) cards somebody must be holding. <S> As such, the game does not change at all by hiding your hand on a fundamental level - but as with any attempt to rules-lawyer in a game designed to be casual fun; you will very quickly gain ill-sentiment and people will simply stop playing with you. <A> You can but it is, at best, pointless. <S> People are just going to end up calling Uno on you all the time, only for you to show that you have more than 1 card left. <S> There is a chance that people will get complacent if you do this all the time and forget to call Uno on you. <S> There is a much greater chance that you will annoy people <S> and they won't want to play with you anymore.
|
So, no, while it isn't specifically prohibited, it's not legal to hide your cards to gain an unfair advantage.
|
How does Magic handle “Type – Subtype” lines that don’t fit on the card when translated? This question links to a Russian version of Peel from Reality which has “Мгновенное заклинание” as its type line—literally, “Instant spell” rather than just “Instant” (I assume there is some Russian grammatical reason why just “Мгновенное” would be unacceptable). “Мгновенное заклинание” takes up far more horizontal space than “Instant,” which got me thinking—what does Wizards do when the translation of a type line takes up more room than the available space? I know some Magic cards have substantially longer English type lines than “Instant,” and several fill up very-nearly the entire available space (e.g. Theros’s “Legendary Enchantment Creature — God,” though I see the Russian version of that is “Легендарные Чары Существо — Бог” and fits in the available space—though it’s getting even closer to the limit there). So, does Wizards of the Coast limit type lines based on translations? Or do they accept that some translations aren’t going to fit—and if so, what do they do then? Clearly, “Мгновенное заклинание” suggests that they haven’t found as-short-or-shorter translations for everything, so this is a possible concern (not that I expect them to print a “Tribal Instant — Arcane” or anything like it any time soon, which seems like the only way “Мгновенное заклинание” itself could run into trouble). Do we have any examples where it was a real concern? <Q> Generally—they just make the font size in the type line really tiny. <S> Some good examples are the Titans from Theros Beyond Death , which are Legendary Creature — Elder Giant . <S> I've included other Giants in that search result so you can see that they just shrank down the font size a lot on Kroxa and Uro. <S> They did the same for Thryx, the blue legendary card in those results, who is an Elemental Giant. <S> Here's three white cards in Russian side by side <S> so you can see how much the font size might vary: <S> (Also the vertical alignment varies too apparently, probably for lack of attention/care rather than for any good reason. <S> Oof.) <S> That's not limited to Russian, either. <S> Here's some German cards undergoing the same treatment , where the middle one doesn't need any font size adjustment: <A> Adding onto the previous two answers, scaled down fonts are not exclusive to non-English card prints. <S> As a specific example, the card Sen Triplets is a "Legendary Artifact Creature - Human Wizard". <S> The text line is scaled down in order to fit in the text box. <S> I've added another card from the same set as a comparison. <S> Sen Triplets is probably the easiest one to see. <S> AFAIK <S> it's the only card in the game with the "Legendary" supertype, two types, and two sub-types. <S> However, there are undoubtedly other cases where the text has been scaled down. <S> To further illustrate the point, here is the type line for Sen Triplets and Sharuum the Hegemon , a creature that came out in the same block and is also a "Legendary Artifact Creature", but has the much shorter sub-type Sphinx and not "Human Wizard". <S> It seems to be very common with permanents that have the "Legendary X Y" template while also having a sub-type. <S> The 5 color cycle of "Legendary Enchantment Artifact" from the original Theros don't seem to have scaled down text because of their lack of sub-type, but "Legendary Artifact Creature" and "Legendary Enchantment Creature" seem to be full of them. <S> List of Legendary Enchantment Creatures - The Demigod Cycle from Theros Beyond Death in particular seem to have noticeably scaled down type lines, although not as noticeable as Sen Triplets. <S> List of Legendary Artifact Creatures <S> - Sen Triplets can be found here, and is the only entry in either list with two subtypes. <S> However, all of these cards seem to have type lines that have been somewhat scaled down. <S> It's probably a safe bet that, if the type line stretches all the way across the card to the set symbol, it's probably been scaled down a bit. <A> WotC aren’t above truncating words to make translations fit. <S> The Throne of Eldraine <S> instant-speed Adventures are spelled “Мгновенное — Приключение” in Russian (which still requires a smaller font). <S> This is actually acceptable grammar, as substantivized adjectives are common in Russian, as opposed to word-for-word translations like “Enchantment Creature — Human Cleric” <S> → “Чары Существо — Человек Священник” which are extremely clumsy because Russian just doesn’t work that way (noun sequences such as “noun sequence” aren’t a thing in Russian). <A> Magic has absolutely run into this issue before, Russian is probably the most common language for it, but English is not immune <S> - I have never seen it in Chinese, Japanese or Korean, due to the way much fewer, but more different characters are in those languages to represent the same ideas. <S> so they fit. <S> Most often this is a problem on creatures, as spells rarely have many types, but it has happened with spells, such as Nameless Inversion , as a Tribal Instant - Shapeshifter. <S> In Russian that spell's type is Племенное Мгновенное заклинание — <S> Имитатор too large for the text box <S> so the font size is slightly smaller. <S> This doesn't only happen on the type either - there are many examples of cards where they have needed to shrink the contents of the text box, even without flavor or reminder text, though these are fewer and farther between then they were in the early days of magic. <S> One of the worst examples of this is Dance of the Dead . <A> They scale down the font see Russian Reaper King for ExampleHowever, if you look toward unsets, you can find cards with multi-line namebox or other modification
|
When this happens the system does a few things to make the text fit, the solution Magic has always used is to change the font size and reduce kerning - making the characters smaller and closer together
|
What happens when I try to exile more cards from my library than there is in my library? If I use Golos, Tireless Pilgrim 's activated ability, which starts: Exile the top three cards of your library... when my library has 2 or fewer cards, must I draw all 3 cards (and hence lose the game attempting to draw from an empty library) or can I just exile the 2 cards which are available? <Q> You don't lose the game until you try to draw a card that doesn't exist. <S> 104.3c <S> If a player is required to draw more cards than are left in their library, they draw the remaining cards and then lose the game the next time a player would receive priority. <S> (This is a state-based action. <S> See rule 704.) <S> Since Golos exiles cards it doesn't lose you the game, but that will probably happen on your next draw step anyway. <S> You can now exile your 2 cards to Golos's ability: 609.3. <S> If an effect attempts to do something impossible, it does only as much as possible. <A> The first two answers did a good job of answering your question, but I feel like it is important to point out a misunderstanding in your question. <S> (...)must I draw all 3 cards(...) <S> Actions that remove cards from the top of your library are not necessarily drawing a card, even if the cards go into your hand. <S> It is only a card draw if it's your one card that you draw during your draw phase or a spell or ability specifically uses the phrase "draw (a/X) card(s)". <A> You don't lose the game because the cards are exiled, not drawn.
|
You exile all cards in your library (given that you have 3 cards or less in your library).
|
Two jokers in the same meld At the end of the game, I replaced a joker with a tile, then used that joker with another joker and a 10 tile to make a run of 10,11,12 to win. Is this a legitimate play? <Q> The Joker: There are two jokers in the game. <S> Each joker can be used as any tile in a set, and its number and color are that of the tile needed to complete the set. <S> On future turns, a joker can be retrieved from a set on the table by a player who can replace it during his/her turn with any tiles that can keep the set legitimate. <S> This tile can come from the table or from a player’s rack. <S> In the case of a group of three tiles, the joker can be replaced by a tile of either of the missing colors. <S> When a player retrieves a joker, the joker will once again have any value or color. <S> However, a player who retrieves a joker must play the joker on his/her current turn to make a new set, and must also use at least one tile from his/her rack on that turn (just as on any other turn). <S> A player cannot retrieve a joker before s <S> /he has played his/her initial meld. <A> According to these tournament rules, two jokers in one meld is a legal move. <S> Tournament rules <S> Either joker can be used to complete any Meld (either Set or Run). <S> Two jokers can be used in a single Meld. <A> It would depend on the rules set you're using. <S> According to the "Variations" section of the Rummikub rules on Pagat : Most rule sets do not explicitly state whether two jokers can be used in the same combination. <S> It would be unusual to want to commit both jokers in this way, but since there is no rule against it, it is reasonable to assume that it is allowed. <S> Indeed the current edition of the online rules from Lemada Light Industries Ltd. does explicitly allow it. <S> A player who puts down a combination of a three tiles of which two are jokers must clearly state whether it is meant to be a set of equal tiles or a sequence, and this will determine the tiles that are needed if a player later wants to reclaim a joker from this combination.
|
I have found no rule that prevent you from using two jokers in a single set: Most rules do not prohibit it (and therefore allow it by consequence of the rest of the rules).
|
Could I still play cards from the activated ability of Golos while the Epic effect is active? Spells cast with the keyword Epic , like Eternal Dominion prevent the player from casting other spells for the rest of the game. However, Golos, Tireless Pilgrim says: Exile the top three cards of your library. You may play them this turn without paying their mana costs. Would I be able to use Golos's activated ability and cast cards after using Eternal Dominion? <Q> Golos's ability instructs you to play a card. <S> To play a card means to play that card as a land or to cast that card as a spell. <S> [CR 701.13b] <S> Epic creates a continuous effect that says you can't cast spells for the remainder of the game. <S> [CR 702.49a] For non-lands, we have a conflict resolved by the second Golden Rule: 101.2. <S> When a rule or effect allows or directs something to happen, and another effect states that it can’t happen, the “can’t” effect takes precedence. <S> This means the restriction from Epic's continuous effect trumps all instructions to cast spells, including the permission granted by Priority (the normal way of casting spells) and effects from abilities such as Golos's. <S> If Golos's ability exiles a land, you may play it as a land (subject to the usual timing restrictions and the limit on the number of lands per turn). <S> If Golos's ability exiles a non-land, you may not play it, as that would involve casting it. <S> 101.2. <S> When a rule or effect allows or directs something to happen, and another effect states that it can’t happen, the “can’t” effect takes precedence. <S> 701.13b <S> To play a card means to play that card as a land or to cast that card as a spell, whichever is appropriate. <S> 702.49a Epic represents two spell abilities, one of which creates a delayed triggered ability. <S> “Epic” means “For the rest of the game <S> , you can’t cast spells,” and “At the beginning of each of your upkeeps for the rest of the game, copy this spell except for its epic ability. <S> If the spell has any targets, you may choose new targets for the copy.” <S> See rule 706.10. <A> Epic prevents a player from casting spells through Golos or any other means. <S> Golos allows you to cast the spells it exiles from exile, but that doesn't matter for Epic. <S> Epic prevents all spells from being cast. <S> Casting a spell from anywhere else than the hand still counts as casting, even though it rarely happens and always requires a card specifically allowing you to do so. <S> 112.1. <S> A spell is a card on the stack. <S> As the first step of being cast (see rule 601, “Casting Spells”), the card becomes a spell and is moved to the top of the stack from the zone it was in, which is usually its owner’s hand. <S> The keyword here is "usually", which means it doesn't have to be from a player's hand to count as casting. <S> So you can activate Golos's ability, the cards get exiled, but you won't be able to cast the cards it exiles. <S> Also, in case your question was more about whether Golos' ability overrides Epic by explicitely allowing you to cast spells, then no, it doesn't do that either: 101.2. <S> When a rule or effect allows or directs something to happen, and another effect states that it can’t happen, the “can’t” effect takes precedence. <A> Yes, you can activate the ability. <S> No, you cannot cast the spells you exile. <S> The Epic ability prevents you from casting any more spells from the rest of the game, regardless of how this occurs. <S> Golos's ability exiles the top three cards of your library and then allows you to cast spells without paying their mana costs for the rest of the turn; since abilities will try to do as much as they can, as a result, if it is activated after casting an Epic spell, you simply exile the top three cards of your library and nothing else happens.
|
No, you couldn't cast cards exiled by Golos's activated ability (but you could play lands exiled by the ability). Yes, you would be able to activate Golos's activated ability.
|
What house rules/modifications have you adopted to make a board game work well over webcam? During enforced isolation we're seeking social activities: what board games work well with others over webcam (ie in video chat; Skype, Jitsi, Zoom, etc.)? If you've played over webcam, was it better with one board, or multiple? Did everyone need to own the game in order for it to work? Feel free to precis house rules that make any game work well this way. Thanks. <Q> We played Monopoly with a single board. <S> It was useful to have dice, money, and property cards for the remote player at their location. <S> Locally we ghost played them - <S> they rolled remote dice, we trusted their reported roll and moved their counter on our local board. <S> We also did their money for them so local players could see it, but they duplicated that at their end. <S> When doing transactions, they picked out the money from their remote stash and showed it to the camera (the bank acted as interchange). <S> Money and property names differed in the versions we had <S> so we went through before hand to check the money <S> was "normalised" <S> (used an exchange rate of 1000). <S> Properties were named by colour Brown1 being the first space after, and Purple2 being the last space before Go. <S> Mention of a property at the local end was followed always by its list price. <S> Worked well, 2 local and 1 remote player using meet.jit.si for a 4hr game (including setup). <A> (prerequisite: for games with hidden info, you'll probably want to use the rear-facing camera on a phone, or otherwise ensure that you can't see the picture that you're broadcasting) <S> For <S> Then we just put their cards in a face down pile. <S> Flip over their top card when instructed! <S> Of course, this changes the dynamic of the game somewhat, but we rather enjoyed it. <A> During this time I'm seeing lots of different ways this is being handled:- <S> I'm arranging online games with friends through the many different sites and using any of the various chat apps to do this. <S> I won't name specifics as this isn't a recommendations site <S> but there are many options available for both. <S> I'm finding for my own design work <S> that finding people to help with play testing has been much easier right now. <S> This is probably a better solution for playing board games online rather than using a webcam as these digital platforms are designed specifically for gaming. <S> As for webcam specific you will find lots of different vloggers are live streaming games played over webcam so you will probably see ideas there. <S> But my answer to you question is that there are many better solutions for online games available than a webcam.
|
The Mind , we showed the remote player their hand, and added one card at a time, ordering them low-to-high as instructed.
|
Will any route (built without a destination ticket) be counted as points? Will any routes, built without a destination ticket, be counted as points? In other words, can you get any points if your built any segments without the appropriate destination ticket? Can you build them anywhere? <Q> You score points for EVERY route you claim, based on its length (length 1 is 1 point; length 2 is 2, 3 is 4, 4 is 7, etc), at the time that you claim it. <S> Destination cards are awarded (or penalized) at the end of the game. <A> Yes, in a few ways: Each segment gets a score immediately when you build it, the longer the segment, the greater the points. <S> This is completely independent of routes. <S> Longest route is another award during the end game, and this doesn't need to follow any of your destination routes (it usually includes at least part of some destination routes but is longer) <S> Destinations are probably the best way to earn points, since you get the points for each segment either way, and a player is not likely to win if they don't finish any destination routes, since they are a penalty if left unfinished, but they are far from the only way to score in Ticket to Ride. <A> Ticket to Ride Rules <S> OBJECT OF THE GAME ... <S> Points can be scored by: <S> • <S> Claiming a Route between two adjacent cities on the map; • <S> Successfully completing a Continuous Path of routes between two cities listed on your Destination Ticket(s); • Completing the Longest Continuous Path of routes. <S> Points are lost if you do not successfully complete the route given on the Destination Ticket(s) you kept. <S> CLAIMING ROUTES ... <S> A player may claim any open route on the board. <S> He is never required to connect to any of his previously played routes. <S> CLAIM A ROUTE ... <S> He then records his score by moving his Scoring Marker the appropriate number of spaces (see Route Scoring Table) along the Scoring Track on the board.
|
Yes, you can claim any route (as long as it's available) and you will score the appropriate number of points.
|
Catan settlements on roads Let's say I have 4 connected roads with no settlements or cities in between. Can I later go back and place a settlement in there? <Q> Yes, so long as it's not adjacent to another settlement. <S> I'll also note that it's legal for someone else to put a settlement in the middle of your road, so long as they also have a road that touches that intersection - this will cut your 4-segment road into two 2-segment roads, which can be a useful strategy for killing someone's longest road. <A> Yes you can build a settlement if: You have a settlement left in stock <S> You have the resources to build the settlement <S> There is no adjacent settlement or city <S> There is one of your roads or ships leading to the spot you want to build the settlement <S> So yes you can build one along the road. <A> Yes. <S> From the rules : Each of your settlements must connect to at least 1 of your own roads.
|
A valid location for a settlement is any spot that touches one of your roads, and is not adjacent to any other settlement.
|
Where are token creatures created from? I got a challenger deck with Sarkhan the Masterless which can create dragons. In the deck there are two dragons. Do they just count as part as your library and if you have only one you can only create one dragon (given it dies) and if you have 5 you can create 5? They also have a front and a backside. Can I only use them once? <Q> I think you're confusing tokens and token cards . <S> Tokens are game objects that are generated by various spells and permanents. <S> They are never part of your deck and indeed can not exist outside the battlefield. <S> If a token moves to, for example, the graveyard, it vanishes instantly after moving, as far as the rules are concerned. <S> When an effect tells you to create tokens, you just do it—they exist now on the battlefield and don't “come from” anywhere inside the game. <S> You can represent them with anything you want, even dice or scrap paper or a basic land with sharpie on it, but Wizards of the Coast also prints token cards you can use. <S> Token cards are cards that you can use to represent tokens. <S> While they're by no means the only way to represent tokens (see above), they are by far the most convenient way to do so, as you can use the cards to easily represent various game effects, like their tapped state or whether or not they have counters on them. <S> Token cards don't go in your deck. <S> You keep them with you while you're playing, maybe left inside your deck box. <S> When an effect instructs you to create a token you can take one of those out and put it on the battlefield to represent the token. <S> You can find token cards from various booster packs, and pre-constructed products. <S> They are not in any way tied to these products and can be used anywhere. <S> Various sites also offer custom token cards with their own artwork. <S> Some are two sided, so you can use the side you need (ie. <S> the side that represents the token that was created). <S> As far as the rules are concerned, the other side does not exist. <A> Do they just count as part as your library? <S> No, tokens are not part of your library. <S> Your library consists of cards, and a token is not a card. <S> Comprehensive rules 111.1: <S> A token is a marker used to represent any permanent that isn’t represented by a card. <S> For your next question: if you have only one you can only create one dragon (given it dies) and if you have 5 you can create 5? <S> You can create as many tokens as effects allow you to. <S> The only requirement is that it is clear to your opponent(s) how many tokens you have on the battlefield at any time and what type each of those tokens is. <S> If you run out of the official tokens, just use anything that's convenient. <S> Can I only use them once? <S> As above, you can use them as many times as effects allow you to. <A> The pieces of cardboard included with your deck that represent tokens (such as a dragon) are really just memory aids. <S> You can put them on the field to represent tokens that you make, but you're allowed to use anything to represent your tokens, as long as you and your opponent are clear what each thing is. <S> You could use flipped over cards from outside the game, sticky notes, Pokemon cards, index cards, scraps of paper, dice, etc. <S> For instance, if you are able to use Sarkhan's -3 ability five times over the course of the game, you would create 5 dragon tokens, even if you run out of dragon token cards to represent them with. <S> Some decks can spew out tens or even hundreds of tokens, and it would be impractical to require a card every time. <S> You can reuse these token cards any number of times. <S> Similarly, if you have a token card that has a 5/5 Dragon on one side and a 1/1 Servo on the other and the 5/5 Dragon side is currently being used, you aren't prevented from making Servo's. <S> You can still make a Servo, you just have to use some other object to represent it. <A> Tokens are not part of your library because tokens are not cards. <S> so you can use tokens more than once.
|
You can create as many tokens as effects allow you to
|
Is using a distinct pitch or tone in your voice for your hint legal in Codenames? I.e., "colddd" to link "blanket" and "Arctic" To link "blanket" and "Arctic", "cold" could be a clue because the Arctic has subzero temperatures and a blanket is something you put on if you are cold at night. Saying "cold" with an extension of the sound in your tone like "colddd" could help your guesser hit "blanket" better because it gives the clue that cold can be an expression of someone who is cold. Other examples include sounding out "ding" to "dingggg" if you want to hit "dent" but also "bell" and "phone" better since it might suggest to look for clues that sound like ding. <Q> I gave a similar answer to a different question here <S> But this is a different question with almost the same answer. <S> The rules here say DON'T BE <S> TOO STRICT <S> So if the word is a legal clue then there is nothing in the rule to say you can't use a certain voice. <S> I guess the balance is you couldn't use Western Film accent to say "Paris" to give a clue for "Cowboy" and "France". <S> Also its worth looking at the rules for Homonyms which say (emphasis mine). <S> Some people prefer to allow a more liberal use of homonyms. <S> You can allow knight to be a clue for night-related things <S> if that makes the game more fun for you . <S> You can apply that rule to making sounds with you clues. <S> Would saying "colddd" make the make more fun for your group? <S> If so then yes it would be fine. <S> In general if you're not sure if a clue is legal ask your self, Do the rules specially say you're not allowed to do it? <S> If the answer is no, and your group are having fun then the clue is almost certainly fine. <A> That is: it's not "only one English word without any additional hints". <S> With the extra information you're attempting to convey in the manner <S> you say the word, you're either turning it into the non-English word "colddd", or you're adding additional hints to the word "cold". <S> As some of the comments note, though, you're not really getting any extra benefit from trying to add the hint in this case, so you should probably just stick to "cold, 2" in the first place (it still means "cold"), but that's just kicking the can down the road. <S> If the way <S> you say a word matters, then that probably constitutes an "additional hint". <S> Consider a different example: clueing the two words "opera" and "monkey" by singing "gorilla" in opera form like "Figaro". <S> One word, sure, but with additional hints added in the way you pronounce it. <S> But, as always, it's up to your group how much you want to hew to the rules, as per the "golden rule" of Codenames: <S> If the opposing spymaster allows it, the clue is valid. <S> If you aren't sure, ask your opponent. <A> My interpretation of the (default) rules on homonyms is that the way you pronounce the word may be variously "colored", while staying within limits of at least occasional pronunciation of the word in the given language, and if you are requested to spell the word as per the rules on homonyms, you should spell it "c-o-l-d". <S> If you have to repeat the clue upon request, you should be trying to produce the same sound every time, as if it was the only way you can pronounce that word. <S> Dictionaries cover even standard pronunciations, not just the standard written forms of words, but dictionaries can hardly be taken as exhaustive. <S> It's better to consult with the opposing spymaster beforehand.
|
It looks like this could reasonably be considered to violate either the rule that the word must be in English ("colddd" is not in any dictionary of the English language) or the rule that your clue must be "only one word" without any additional hints.
|
Why is Tolarian Kraken worded this way? Tolarian Kraken has this ability: Whenever you draw a card, you may pay {1}. When you do, you may tap or untap target creature. So if you choose to pay {1}, this causes a separate triggered ability to happen. Sparktongue Dragon is another example of this, but pretty much every other use I can find for “when you do” is in the reminder text for Madness or Conspire. Most often, whenever a card has an optional ability like this, it says “if you do”, which makes the rest of what happens simply part of the same ability, rather than a separate triggered ability. There are a large number of cards worded this way, such as Carrion Thrash . Is there a known reason that these 2 cards are worded differently than the rest? It is a functionally different, but most of the time it would work out the same. With this wording, you don’t have to choose targets for the second ability if you don’t choose to use the effect, but most of the time that’s going to be the same as choosing a target and then not choosing to use the effect anyway. Has there been anything written about why these cards are worded this way? Or is there a more obvious explanation that I’m missing? <Q> Waiting until after the cost is paid to choose the target is the big difference here. <S> If the ability used "if you do", like on Throwing Knife , then an opponent who wanted to "save" their creature from the ability would have to do so before they even know if you are going to pay for it. <S> That gives the ability the unintentional power of forcing your opponent to react to the possibility of paying the cost, without actually paying any cost. <A> Imagine being faced with the decision to sacrifice or activate a creature simply because another player started their turn? <S> By using a delayed triggered ability, the need to make that decision is delayed until after the cost is payed. <S> "When you do, ..." is triggered ability. <S> 603.1. <S> Triggered abilities have a trigger condition and an effect. <S> They are written as <S> “[When/Whenever/At] [trigger condition or event], [effect]. <S> [Instructions (if any).]” <S> Specifically, it's a variation of delayed triggered ability called a reflexive triggered ability. <S> 603.12. <S> A resolving spell or ability may allow or instruct a player to take an action and create a triggered ability that triggers “when [a player] [does or doesn’t]” take that action or “when [something happens] this way.” <S> These reflexive triggered abilities follow the rules for delayed triggered abilities (see rule 603.7), except that they’re checked immediately after being created and trigger based on whether the trigger event or events occurred earlier during the resolution of the spell or ability that created them. <S> The ability is only created on resolution. <S> 603.7a <S> Delayed triggered abilities are created during the resolution of spells or abilities, as the result of a replacement effect being applied, or as a result of a static ability that allows a player to take an action. <S> A delayed triggered ability won’t trigger until it has actually been created, even if its trigger event occurred just beforehand. <S> Other events that happen earlier may make the trigger event impossible. <S> This has two implications. <S> First, the target is chosen when the delayed triggered ability is placed on the stack, not when Tolarian Kraken's ability is placed on the stack. <S> This is inconsequential. <S> The other, relevant implication is that this gives a chance to the players to react to the delayed triggered ability. <S> This is beneficial to the opponents of Kraken's controller since they know the cost has been paid before having to react. <S> Doing otherwise would make Tolarian Kraken an overly powerful card. <S> Imagine being faced with the decision to sacrifice or activate a creature simply because another player started their turn? <S> With the current wording, Tolarian Kraken's controller must commit to paying for the ability before forcing a response. <S> [ This is effectively the same answer as murgatroid99's, but it explains why the targets are chosen later than they would be with if . ] <A> @murgatroid99's answer is exactly correct, in my opinion, but I wanted to go deeper on illustrating his point. <S> Consider the two cards <S> Savai Thundermane and Lightning Rift : both have an ability that can somehow deal two damage to a creature when a card is cycled. <S> Now consider what happens when your opponent has these cards and you have a 2/2 creature you want to keep alive as well as a Ranger's Guile . <S> In the case where your opponent controls Savai Thundermane, they will need to actually pay the two mana in order to cause the second ability to trigger, at which point they will target your 2/2 and you can respond with the Guile to save it. <S> In the case where your opponent controls Lightning Rift, the burden is on you to act first. <S> If you want to save your creature, you must cast the Guile immediately and your opponent will not have to waste their mana. <S> If you wait until you know whether or not your opponent actually is willing to commit the mana, you no longer have any ability to respond and stop the damage. <S> Anecdotally, this situation where something may or may not happen but the opponent must act as though it will can certainly cause confusion. <S> I remember a tournament game long ago where I controlled a Cursed Scroll , my opponent controlled a Ravenous Baloth . <S> My opponent was at two life and I held five cards. <S> I activated the Scroll targeting him, he let it resolve, I wound up revealing the named card, and then he was baffled at why he could not respond by sacrificing his Baloth. <S> It seems that modern-day cards are trying to avoid these situations.
|
With the "when you do" wording, the opponent can react to your choice to pay the cost, making it more like an activated ability.
|
If no cards in discard pile, when playing swashbuckler but have 4 coffers, are you allowed to take the treasure chest? When playing the swashbuckler, if my discard pile has no cards in it, but I have at least 4 coffer tokens, can I take the treasure chest? (not sure if that only applies to the taking an additional coffer or to everything following.) <Q> No. <S> The card text is clear on the breakpoint. <S> +3 cards <S> That's one line, and then the condition-colon-effect portion: <S> If your discard pile has any cards in it: +1 <S> Coffers, then if you have at least 4 Coffers tokens, take the Treasure Chest. <S> But see also the FAQ : <S> First you draw 3 cards, then you check to see if your discard pile has any cards in it; if drawing those cards caused you to shuffle, your discard pile would be empty. <S> If your discard pile has at least one card, you get +1 Coffers, and if you then have 4 or more tokens on your Coffers, you take the Treasure Chest. <A> The actions of the Swashbuckler are: <S> You draw 3 cards <S> You check to see if your discard pile has any cards in it; if drawing those cards caused you to shuffle, your discard pile would beempty. <S> If your discard pile has at least one card, you get +1 Coffers, and if you then have 4 or more tokens on your Coffers, you take theTreasure Chest. <S> You cannot get the Treasure Chest unless your discard pile had atleast one card. <S> You need to take the treasure chest the moment you get the fourth coffer. <S> So it is not possible to get the treasure chest if you didn't get the coffer. <S> So no you wouldn't get the treasure chest if the discard pile is empty because you will not get a Coffer. <A> No; the “if your discard pile has any cards in it” applies to the rest of the text. <S> From the official FAQ : You cannot get the Treasure Chest unless your discard pile had at least one card. <A> Reading this it seems to me that would not. <S> That colon looks very much like everything that follows it is reliant on not having an empty discard pile. <S> This is also backed up by the Dominion Strategy wiki which says the same in section labeled official FAQ.
|
You cannot get the Treasure Chest unless your discard pile had at least one card.
|
Can I conduct an auction to sell my property? In Monopoly, I can sell an unimproved property (mortgaged or non-mortgaged) to another player at any agreed price. Instead of negotiating the price with individual players, can I just conduct an auction? <Q> From the rules : SELLING PROPERTY... <S> Unimproved properties, railroads and utilities (butnot buildings) may be sold to any player as a private transaction forany amount the owner can get ; however, no property can be sold toanother player if buildings are standing on any properties of thatcolor-group. <S> Any buildings so located must be sold back to the Bankbefore the owner can sell any property of that color-group. <S> Houses andhotels may be sold back to the Bank at any time for one-half the pricepaid for them. <S> All houses on one color-group must be sold one by one,evenly, in reverse of the manner in which they were erected. <S> All hotelson one color-group may be sold at once, or they may be sold one houseat a time (one hotel equals five houses), evenly, in reverse of themanner in which they were erected. <S> You can see that it can be sold to any player as a private transaction. <A> Strictly by the rules, no. <S> Auctions only occur if a player lands on an un-owned property and chooses to not buy it for its listed price. <S> However, as you say, unimproved properties can be sold to any other player for any agreed price. <S> The rules don't say how you come to agree on which player, or what price, so you could always ask the other players what they'd be willing to pay for, say, Mediterranean Avenue, and sell to the highest bidder. <S> It wouldn't be a binding deal, though, given its exclusion from the rules (so if the highest bidder isn't the player, or amount, you're looking for, you're not bound to sell to them). <A> There are several different levels on which this question can be answered. <S> First, there is no mechanism given in the rules for holding such an auction. <S> So it is not possible to hold such an auction in the game . <S> But just because you can't perform an activity as a game action doesn't mean that you can't do it. <S> There's nothing in the rules allowing you make a sandwich while you play the game, but that doesn't mean you can't do so; the making sandwich simply won't exist as something that is happening in the game. <S> So you can engage in an auction as a non-game activity you are doing while playing the game, and then engage in the in-game action of selling the property based on the auction. <S> And in fact, attempts to sell a property can naturally turn into an auction; if one player proposes to buy the property, another player will likely interrupt to offer a larger price, and so on. <S> But on a third level, auctions tend to be complicated, time consuming, and, at least to my tastes, boring affairs. <S> Depending on your playing group, they might get annoyed at you for interrupting the game and making them wait while you engage in side activities before finishing your turn.
|
There is nothing in the rules that forbid an auction. So, in conclusion: yes, but if you want to do it, you should have a discussion with the other players about what house rules they want regarding it.
|
How can I use Scavenging Ooze's abilities to save it from a Lightning Bolt? I cast Scavenging Ooze with 3 open G mana and there are three creatures in the graveyard, my opponent has open R mana and I suspect they have a Lightning Bolt in hand. If I use the Scavenging Ooze's ability to exile a creature three times gaining 3 life and putting 3 +1/+1 counters on it, what happens if they respond by targeting the Ooze with a Lightning Bolt? <Q> The way to save your Ooze is to activate the ability one time . <S> Two things can happen: your opponent casts the Lightning Bolt. <S> You respond to that by activating the ability two times; they'll resolve before the Lightning Bolt resolves, and your now 4/4 Ooze isn't killed by it. <S> Then, the first activation will resolve and you have a 5/5 Ooze (with 3 damage marked on it). <S> your opponent does nothing, and the ability resolves. <S> You have a 3/3 Ooze, and activate the ability one time. <S> The opponent could cast Lightning Bolt while the ability is on the stack, but again you activate the ability one more time, that resolves before the Lightning Bolt does, and just like the first case, you'll end up with a 5/5 Ooze with 3 damage marked on it. <S> (If they don't cast Lightning Bolt at all, which is probably the best decision for them, you can activate the ability a final time.) <A> Some "trick" not made clear in the other answer, is that you can target the same card in the graveyard multiple times before it resolves. <S> This can be done since the exiling from graveyard is not part of the cost, so until the abilities resolve the target remains in graveyard - and legal. <S> On resolving however this means only the "last" added trigger resolves, and the rest is countered since there is no legal target. <S> To visualize it (scooze = scavenging ooze): <S> situation: 2 creatures in a graveyard. <S> (say elvish mystics and deathrite shaman)action done: | stack | graveyards----------------------------------------------------------------------------------activate scavenging ooze on mystic | scooze trigger <S> | elvish mystic | | deathrite shaman----------------------------------------------------------------------------------cast firebolt (on scooze) <S> | scooze trigger | elvish mystic | firebolt | deathrite shaman----------------------------------------------------------------------------------activate scooze targeting mystic again <S> | scooze trigger <S> | elvish mystic <S> | firebolt | deathrite shaman | scooze trigger |----------------------------------------------------------------------------------activate scooze targeting shaman | scooze trigger <S> | elvish mystic | firebolt | deathrite shaman | scooze trigger | | scooze trigger |----------------------------------------------------------------------------------<priority <S> passed by everyone>----------------------------------------------------------------------------------last scooze trigger <S> resolves <S> | scooze trigger <S> | elvish mystic scooze has +1/+1 | firebolt <S> | | scooze trigger |----------------------------------------------------------------------------------next scooze trigger resolves <S> | scooze trigger | scooze has +2/+2 | firebolt |----------------------------------------------------------------------------------firebolt resolves <S> | scooze trigger | scooze has +2/+2 <S> | | and 3 damage counters: 2+2-3 = 1 | |----------------------------------------------------------------------------------first scooze trigger has no legal targets <S> | |and hence fizzles <S> | | End result is that scooze would survive with 1 "effective toughness", and 2 +1/+1 counters. <S> Next turn it would have 4 toughness. <A> If I use the Scavenging Ooze's ability to exile a creature three times <S> If you mean the same creature card (technically, when they're in the graveyard, they're creature cards, not creatures) three times, Scavenging Ooze's Gatherer page says: If the target card is an illegal target when the ability tries to resolve, it won’t resolve and none of its effects will happen. <S> No +1/+1 counter will be put on Scavenging Ooze and you won’t gain life. <S> Notably, this means that if you activate Scavenging Ooze’s ability multiple times targeting the same creature card, only the first instance of the ability to resolve will have any effect. <S> So this would not save Scavenging Ooze. <S> If you use Scavenging Ooze's ability on three different creature cards, this will not save it either. <S> The way you've worded it <S> (you use Scavenging Ooze's ability, then your opponent casts Lightning Bolt), if your opponent casts Lightning Bolt while Scavenging Ooze's ability is on the stack, the Lightning Bolt will resolve first, and so Scavenging Ooze's ability will resolve after Scavenging Ooze is already dead. <S> The Scavenging Ooze's ability will resolve first, it will gain toughness, then Lightning Bolt will resolve.
|
So to save Scavenging Ooze, you should wait until your opponent casts Lightning Bolt, then use Scavenging Ooze's ability on at least two different creature (since Scavenging Ooze starts out a 2/2, it only needs two more toughness to survive Lightning Bolt) while Lightning Bolt is on the stack.
|
What exactly is the logical relation between the links in the twelvefold chain of Pratītyasamutpāda? I'm struggling hard to make final sense of the chain of "dependent origination". In the oldest texts in Pali and Sanskrit, already, there are different explanations. The Mahānidānasutta , where the chain has just nine links, the general formula is x-paccayā y meaning through the condition of x, y (is). Now the question arises, what kind of condition this is thought to be: a sufficient condition? A necessary condition? Or both of them? The second part, states quite clearly, that if x is not there, then y is also not there, implying necessity of x for y. Now, a general rule (e.g. Majjhima Nikaya 38, 19) states: imasmiṃ sati idaṃ hoti, imassuppādā idaṃ uppajjati which translates as: If that is, this is, through arising of that, this arises This is also consistent with a parallel in the Sanskrit Catuṣpariṣatsūtra but not with the view, that we are dealing with mere necessary conditions. They need to be sufficient, for this general statement to apply. Now here things become even more complicated, since another general rule, actually a seemingly extended version of the former states (MN 79, 7, also in SN and Udana) imasmiṃ sati idaṃ hoti, imassuppādā idaṃ uppajjati; imasmiṃ asati idaṃ na hoti, imassa nirodhā idaṃ nirujjhati which now means When that is, this is, through arising of that, this arises; when that is not, this is not, with cessation of that, this ceases. implying biconditionality. How are the different versions explained? What is, in the end, the relation between the links? What can be thought to be the Buddha's original version and intention? <Q> This meaning is reflected in the name pratitya-samutpada, that is often translated as "dependent co-arising" and such. <S> Mutual implication means one of the categories serves as context for the other and the other way around. <S> Top is defined against bottom and vice verse. <S> Life is defined against death and vice verse. <S> This (upclose) is defined against That (far). <S> Subjective is defined against Objective. <S> The twelve nidanas are meant to explain the emergence of the notion of Death by implication from Birth, of Birth by implication from Identifying with Separate Being, of Identifying with Separate Being by implication from Goal-making, of Goal-making by implication from Temporal Projection, of Temporal Projection by implication from Sensation as Result, of Sensation as Result by implication from Contact, of Contact by implication from Doors onto the world, of Doors onto the world by implication from Objects, of Objects by implication from Recognition, of Recognition by implication from Imprints, of Imprints by implication from Ignorance. <A> In pratityasamutpada there are actually eleven links, as each causal link occurs between one of twelve states. <S> “ that wherein is reality (tathatā), not unreality (avitathatā), not otherness (anaññathatā), specific conditionality: [that is called dependent origination] ”, and in detail is explained as this: <S> B ecause particular states are produced by particular conditions, neither less nor more, it is called reality (suchness, tathata ). <S> B ecause <S> once the conditions have met in combination there is no non-producing, even for an instant, of the states <S> they generate, it is called not unreality (not unsuchness). <S> B ecause <S> there is no arising of one state with another state’s conditions, it is called not otherness. <S> B ecause there is a condition, or because there is a total of conditions, for these states beginning with ageing-and-death as already stated, it is called specific conditionality. <S> (Visuddhimagga) <S> So, this is both sufficient and necessary conditions. <S> But, it's important to know that pratityasamutpada is a brief explanation, almost enumeration, and not all conditions are named, only so-called representative cause and fruit . <S> The most detailed explanation of the paticcasamuppada you can read in Visuddhimagga ( pdf ). <A> According to Theravada, the actual conditionality is more complicated even than is explained by PS. <S> For a true understanding of conditionality (apart from attaining Buddhahood), a study of the Mahapatthana is probably more enlightening, intellectually speaking, since it outlines 24 types of conditionality: Hetupaccayo , ārammaṇapaccayo, adhipatipaccayo, anantarapaccayo, samanantarapaccayo, sahajātapaccayo, aññamaññapaccayo, nissayapaccayo, upanissayapaccayo, purejātapaccayo, pacchājātapaccayo, āsevanapaccayo, kammapaccayo, vipākapaccayo, āhārapaccayo, indriyapaccayo, jhānapaccayo, maggapaccayo, sampayuttapaccayo, vippayuttapaccayo, atthipaccayo, natthipaccayo, vigatapaccayo, avigatapaccayoti. <S> Reading the Paccayaniddeso, it seems clear that the type of conditionality depends on the link in question. <S> For example, rūpāyatanaṃ cakkhuviññāṇadhātuyā taṃsampayuttakānañca dhammānaṃ ārammaṇapaccayena paccayo. <S> Basically, forms share conditionality with the eye by virtue of being their object, etc. <S> I'm not an expert in Theravada Abhidhamma by any means, but it certainly doesn't seem like one can give a categorical answer or take PS as a strictly literal chain of linear causation; it seems much more an exegetical teaching meant to summarize the nature of samsara. <S> In Theravada it is further complicated by the idea of relating to three lives. <S> Read the article by P.A. Payutta for explanation of that concept (and for more insight into PS in general): http://www.abuddhistlibrary.com/Buddhism/B%20-%20Theravada/Teachers/Ven%20Payutto/Dependent%20Origination/Dependent%20Origination%20The%20Buddhist%20Law%20of%20Conditionality.htm <S> EDIT: <S> Here's a source that compares PS and Patthana: <S> http://stylomilo.com/files/mv/YMBADip/Abhi/Patthana%20naya%20-%20LTY.pdf <S> It points out the difference in style between PS and Patthana; as I said, PS is conventional and Patthana is dealing with ultimate realities. <S> It also states that Patthana: <S> examines in greater detail cause and effect, as PS does not explain how the cause becomes the effect, or the relationships between cause and effect. <S> For example, no single cause can produce an effect and a cause does not produce only a single effect. <S> Therefore, it is a collection of causes which produces a collection of effects. <S> PS looks at the chief causeand the prominent effect only Seems like the article is worth reading, but I just found it on Google, so no assurances :) <A> The conditional relation of the links of dependent origination are necessary conditions, not sufficient conditions. <S> This is clear when we compare the links in dependent origination with other teachings. <S> For example, according to the twelve links, the sixfold sense-base is a condition for the arising of contact. <S> But in many places in the Suttas it is taught that: Dependent on the eye & forms there arises consciousness at the eye. <S> The meeting of the three is contact. <S> (Similarly with the other senses) <S> which indicates that the sense base isn't sufficient because contact also depends on an object and on the arising of consciousness. <S> Also I don't see how When that is, this is, through arising of that, this arises; when that is not, this is not, with cessation of that, this ceases. <S> Implies biconditionality. <S> It sounds like straightforward necessary causation to me. <A> As I see it some of the links are bidirectional while some links like between sensations and craving (the place you can break the cycle) unidirectional. <S> If craving there should be sensations but in a liberated person thought he experiences sensations there is no craving. <A> The Pratītyasamutpāda theory can be applied for different conceptual levels of life. <S> The relation of the chain also differ accordingly. <S> Life can be defined as a physical process. <S> a mental process. <S> a hybrid of both above. <S> a conceptual phenomenon. <S> a combination of all these. <S> as three life -- past, present and future. <S> a moment of thought. <S> Etc. <S> The original meaning is not as sufficient, necessary, or bi conditions. <S> Pratītyasamutpāda is <S> ‘ THE RELATION ’ that lord Buddha use to explain the worldly phenomena.
|
As I understand, the relationship is that of mutual implication . The relation is described as " yā tatra tathatā avitathatā anaññathatā idappaccayatā "—
|
Do you have to follow a monastic lifestyle to attain enlightenment? How do the different groups/sects of Buddhism view attaining enlightenment and living a common life? In other words, do they think it is possible to be a common person and achieve enlightenment? Even for someone who has a family, friends and coworkers that aren't Buddhists? <Q> Do you have to follow a monastic lifestyle to attain enlightenment? <S> Since probably as early as Milindapanha (~100 BCE) and most certainly by the time of Vissudhimagga (~430CE), the orthodox (~Theravada) position was, you must be a monk to attain Nirvana . <S> But since you asked about Enlightenment , I should point out that Enlightenment is the goal of Mahayana, while in Theravada, the final goal is usually called Nirvana (Nibbana in Pali), not Enlightenment (Bodhi in Pali). <S> In Mahayana, Enlightenment can be attained by a layperson. <S> These are "official" positions (as much as we can talk about official positions in such a heterogeneous conglomerate of teachings as Buddhism). <S> Informally, in my own understanding, what some Mahayana schools call "Enlightenment" is what Theravada schools call mere "stream-entry". <S> Other Mahayana schools however have this notion of multiple levels (bhumi), in which what Theravada calls "stream-entry" is level 1 of 10, with Final Enlightenment counted as 11th. <S> It kinda gets complicated from "stream-entry" onward, because the boundaries of "self" no longer apply, so it is difficult to talk about Enlightenment with no subject to tie it to. <S> Anyway, from practical perspective, the point is, it is extremely difficult to make any meaningful progress towards Enlightenment/Nirvana if most of your focus is on pursuing material ends (success, wealth, entertainment, helping your relatives achieve the same). <S> In order to get pretty close to X while leading a semi-normal life, one's top priority must be spiritual practice, followed by family and everything else. <S> This basically means, squeezing study of Buddhist philosophy here and there, making meditation part of your daily routine, and, most importantly, deliberately utilizing your family & work situations as shootingrange for Dharma practice. <A> Enlightenment is entirely mental; it can be achieved any where, at any time, and under any circumstance with the right emotional commitment. <S> A monastic lifestyle only has to be followed on the emotional level; you can have vast amounts of material wealth if it does not corrupt your mind by creating any forms of obsession over that wealth. <A> My understanding of Buddhism is that you can attain enlightenment provided you devote yourself to the Four Noble Truths and Noble Eightfold Path. <S> I have met enlightened people from time to time and not all of them were monastics. <S> If you're new to Buddhism and the above concepts are unfamilar to you, there are some concise summaries of basic concepts at <S> What should everyone know about Buddhism . <A> The question is who will get enlightened, the body or the mind ? <S> The answer is obvious, the mind. <S> So when it is only the mind that gets enlightened all the external things are just auxiliary. <S> So the answer to your question is both yes <S> and no. <S> YES <S> Actions directly affect the mind. <S> So by following a monastic life your actions will be limited to only those set of activities that help in controlling the mind and getting enlightened. <S> Enlightenment will be quicker and easier because you will have to involve less in material activities. <S> NO <S> But it will be difficult to maintain a balanced mindset for a beginner this way because material actions will always be affecting his mind. <S> So if mind can not be controlled while living in samsara <S> then a monastic life should be preferred, otherwise it's not mandatory. <S> For an enlightened person it doesn't matter whether he lives in a monastery or in samsara as his mind becomes equipoised. <S> But until that state of mind is achieved a monastic life should be preferred. <A> From Anapanasati Sutta: Mindfulness of in-&-out breathing, when developed & pursued, is of great fruit, of great benefit. <S> Mindfulness of in-&-out breathing, when developed & pursued, brings the four frames of reference to their culmination. <S> The four frames of reference, when developed & pursued, bring the seven factors for awakening to their culmination. <S> The seven factors for awakening, when developed & pursued, bring clear knowing & release to their culmination. <S> Here Buddha says mindfulness alone and the affects it arouses are enough for enlightenment. <A> There is a lesser-known, non-monastic tradition in Tibetan Buddhism: <S> a Ngagpa may marry and have children. <A> Much information is covered in the other answers, hence a small clarification of what is generally belief in Sri Lanka. <S> You can become Enlightened while a house holder <S> but you have to ordinate before 7 days after becoming enlightened. <A> You may get a understanding, of what's the matter with when reading Cula-dukkhakkhandha Sutta: The Lesser Mass of Stress for example and to know of what the Buddha had to say. <S> Yes, right livelihood (livestyle), one of the factor of the Noble Eightfold path is necessary. <S> (Note: <S> this answer has not been given with the agreement to be means of trade or the purpose of trade and keep people trapped and bound. <S> How you handle it lies in your sphere, but does not excuse the deed here either.)
|
Because mind is what matters, if you can keep an ascetic attitude and mentality even when living a material life, you can certainly attain enlightenment. At first approximation, the answer is: yes in Theravada, no in Mahayana.
|
How do we sense the flow of time? According to the Abhidhamma, at each given instant there is a consciousness that arises and ceases completely before the next consciousness arises. Each consciousness is only aware of the present moment (just an instant and only that instant) and therefore cannot know about previous instants. So, how is it possible that we have a sense of the flow of time? How do we know that there was a past? <Q> Past is a conceptual construct that only seems solid in the absence of careful examination. <S> But if you look closely you will see that Past is assembled by the mind from multiple cues (as is Present by the way). <S> The experience of second-to-second flow of time is a byproduct of chitta-vrtti, the associative cycle, when each subsequent dharma (~thought) comes by association with the previous one. <S> The sense of relatedness of the two dharmas is what creates the illusion of flow. <S> Disclaimer: this answer represents my own experience and understanding and is not meant to reflect an official position or to be consistent with views of any Buddhist school. <A> Space (Akasa Pannattis) and time (Kala Pannattis) are a conceptual or perception based construct (Pannattis). <S> Since the notion of time is a perpetual construct this is not what is called an Ultimate Truth. <S> We perceive a difference on when one experience happened vs another. <S> See: Time and space: <S> The Abhidhamma perspective, Professor K. N. Jayatilleke Memorial Lecture 2003 by Y. Karunadasa. . <S> Also The Dhamma Theory by Y. Karunadasa which discusses Pannattis. <A> So, how is it possible that we have a sense of the flow of time? <S> How do we know that there was a past? <S> According to my experience (not according to doctrine), I have a sense of time in the following ways: <S> Sometimes (i.e. at some present moments) I am imperfectly remembering something from the past (a feeling, a person, a place); i.e. I'm presently conscious of a memory or imprint <S> Sometimes (i.e. at some present moments) I am planning (trying to foresee) <S> a future action or experience, e.g. "I will plan to change my regular routine in order to go to a lesson next Thursday evening because I want to repeat a previous/learned experience i.e. that I successfully went to a previous lesson on the previous Thursday" <S> I label time (a clock for the time of day, a calendar for the day of week) and therefore notice that the 'current time' changes; for example I'm writing this in the day-time, but as I was writing it the thought occurred to me "although it is visibly day-time now <S> (I see day-light) there is such a thing as night-time, when it's dark and when in the past I was outside and saw the nighttime sky with stars and moon" <S> Sometimes I see things which are in motion (e.g. a person walking or a plant blowing in the wind); my sense of sight is trained to perceive motion; and my mind has been trained to associate motion with time (a change in location over time) <S> The motion of objects (something which was in one location and is now in another location), and counting period cycles (e.g. planet's orbit, the motion of a pendulum, the ability to count ocean waves on the shore, or to count breaths, or to count foot-steps) is I think more-or-less the definition of 'time' . <A> The time flowing is a purely a mental projection. <S> But how? <S> Imagine yourself in a field, here <S> you do not have a watch <S> it is dark sun is not coming up <S> can you guess the time now? <S> This is an actual experiment to explain how humans experience time. <S> Time for humans is very easy to understand, watch a movie for 2 hours and sit down,start meditating for 2 hours. <S> You will feel like it is 4-5 or 5 1/2 hours. <S> The experiencing of the flow of time is relative to what you are experiencing now. <S> If what you are doing is exiting time is faster to your mind (Like a date with the love of your life).But if what you are doing is boring time is slower to your mind (Like school) <S> So the conclusion is the feeling of time passing by is a complete illusion of mind thinking. <S> If the mind was asleep like you do in the night you will not feel it at all. <S> (If there was no clock in your house can you say how many hours you slept last night?) <S> So what about the Past? <S> Past is not a real thing. <S> Your brain can't even fully memorize a single event. <S> What it does for this amazing magic to happen is very simple. <S> It is more like how you studied back in the school. <S> Your brain/mind remember the most important events of a memory and fill in the blanks to make the rest of the memory. <S> But you can't find a difference between the memory and the real event. <S> Because what your mind makes up is all you can remember. <S> For example try to remember the last time you went to see your grandmother. <S> Can you remember what shoes you were wearing? <S> Can you remember who you met before going there that day? <S> I guess you will not be able to. <S> Brain did not recorded those things in the permanent memory. <S> Because none of those small things were important to make the memory in the first place.
|
The passage of time is perceived by an observer thought his experience of the "world".
|
Are Vajrayana and Tibetan Buddhism the same thing? This is a hugely amateurish question, for which I apologize, but: are Vajrayana and Tibetan Buddhism the same thing? If not, how are they related? In particular, does the term "Tibetan Buddhism" refer to a specific school of Buddhist thought and practice, or does it just generically refer to any sort of Buddhism that is practiced in Tibet? Wikipedia treats the two as separate entities, but some other sources (e.g. this ) treat them as effectively the same. <Q> No they are not the same, Tibetan Buddhism is a broader concept that subsumes Tibetan Vajrayana. <S> Also, there's non-Tibetan Vajrayana, some still practiced in e.g. Japan. <S> To some degree all schools of Tibetan Buddhism, and particularly Karma Kagyu, recognize three yanas (Hinayana, Mahayana and Vajrayana) as subsequent stages on an individual's path to complete enlightenment. <S> These days many teachers tend to have their student jump straight into tantra right after Ngondro (preliminary stage of Vajrayana training), but traditionally, the student is supposed to master the foundational theory, discipline, and meditation of Hinayana before proceeding to Mahayana, then master Mahayana's practice of subverting one's ego, and attain realization of nonconceptual emptiness, and only then proceed to tantric practices of working with Yidams (generation/completion), the Vajrayana proper. <A> Vajrayana was practiced in China, Vietnam and Korea. <S> This is often called esoteric Buddhism. <S> Kukyo brought esoteric Buddhist to Japan and founded the Shingon sect. <S> In Russia (well, Kalmykia and Buryatia now) <S> Buddhism was essentially Mongolian Buddhism, which in turn came from Tibet. <S> And in the US, we have modern formulations of Vajrayana like Shambhala. <S> However, Tibetan Buddhism certain has the most mindshare, the most widespread institutional bases (monestaries and centers established all over the place), so Tibetan Buddhism is the elephant in the room when it comes Vajrayana. <A> Tibetan Buddhism is not all there is to esoteric Buddhism. <S> There is also Shingon, which I know almost nothing of, except that it exists in Japan. <S> Here is a wikipedia article , which I quote from and added some bold to Today, there are very few books on Shingon in the West and until the 1940s, not a single book on Shingon had ever been published anywhere in the world, not even in Japan. <S> Since this lineage was brought over to Japan from Tang China over 1100 years ago, its doctrines have always been closely guarded secrets, passed down orally through an initiatic chain and never written down. <S> Throughout the centuries, except for the initiated, most of the Japanese common folk knew little of its secretive doctrines and of the monks of this "Mantra School" except that besides performing the usual priestly duties of prayers, blessings and funeral rites for the public, they practiced only Mikkyō "secret teachings", in stark contrast to all other Buddhist schools, and were called upon to perform mystical rituals that were supposedly able to summon rain, improve harvests, exorcise demons, avert natural disasters, heal the sick and protect the state. <S> The most powerful ones were thought to be able to render entire armies useless. <S> Even though Tendai also incorporates esoteric teachings in its doctrines, it is still essentially an exoteric Mahayana school. <S> Some exoteric texts are venerated and studied in Shingon as they are the foundation of Mahayana philosophy but the core teachings and texts of Shingon are purely esoteric. <S> From the lack of written material, inaccessibility of its teachings to non-initiates, language barriers and the difficulty of finding qualified teachers outside Japan, Shingon is in all likelihood the most secretive and least understood school of Buddhism in the world .
|
I think it would be more accurate to say that these are all forms of Vajrayana rather than forms of Tibetan Buddhism.
|
What is the starting of Samsara? Every Buddhism believe in Eternity or Samsara . So, how can I imagine of Samsara ?. What is the starting of it ? Any suggestions would be really appreciated. <Q> According to the suttas, samsara has no beginning. <S> There are many references to this. <A> Is there a starting point to a circle? <S> Just like that, there's no starting life to Sansara. <S> But you can break this circle at 2 points. <S> Ignorance. <S> Craving. <S> That is when you attain Nibbana. <A> The answer to your question depends on how one understands the word "start." <S> Etymologically, the English word means to jump, leap up, or move or spring suddenly, thus, to arise, to come into being. <S> This can be proved logically based on the law of karma, which requires that every cause have an effect and every effect a cause. <S> Since samsara is time itself, the essence of time is the identity of cause and effect, thus, the moment, which is then extended in space as past and future to create the infinitely differentiated world that we experience. <S> However, as the illusory negation of reality samsara must inhere in the non-illusory, which is reality itself. <S> Therefore, samsara also inheres in reality, and in that sense has a logical - but not a temporal - "origin. <S> " This "start" is the principle of karma itself, which is the inherent kinetic principle in transdual reality. <S> This is necessary to explain our experience of samsara. <S> Otherwise, there would just be nothing at all. <S> This point of identity of samsara and reality is, once again, the moment. <S> This view of the cosmos remarkably presages certain theories in modern physics, especially the holographic theory of the universe. <A> Beginning of Samsara is stated by Buddha as <S> not knowable for ordinary beings. <S> Knowing rightly would be to not imagine in regard of its beginning. <S> Usually Samsara is imagined as round of re-births in the six realms, or much more detailed view as bhavacakra . <A> Your question has two parts so i will answer in the following order... <S> How to understand "Samsara" and how it works. <S> Sansara or Samsara is the word Lord Buddha picked to name a certain circle of death and life. <S> What is samsara As we Buddhists believe as long as a being lust for existence he will be born according to his Karma. <S> To this process we call "Sansara or Samsara". <S> So where is the start of samsara? <S> Even Lord Buddha was intrigued by the question and started to find a solution. <S> So Lord Buddha went back countless amount of lives and understood that the "Beginning" is very ancient the time we have in a life is not enough to look back and see that life. <S> So lord Buddha said this to the Sangha <S> "There is no point in looking for a start,it is too old and trying to find an answer <S> is a waste of time". <S> And advised that no one should try to find an answer to it (Because they will not be able to find it) <S> So my friend that question can't be answered by any being in the universe,Because if there is something out of Lord Buddha's reach it is out of anyone's reach. <S> So how does samsara work? <S> How it works is complicated <S> but i will give you a simplified version of it. <S> Samsara needs fuel like your car,As long as you give fuel to it it will keep working and you will have life after life to live. <S> Let me give an example from lord Buddha.... <S> "Karma is the paddy field,Lusting is the water,vinyana is the seed" <S> In the real world without water a seed will not grow,likewise without "Greed or lust" <S> you will not be born,without it there is no samsara <S> but as long as you have it you will have samsara and you will have to suffer in whatever karma brings you. <A> Buddhism basically deals with the present. <S> Dwelling the mind on past or future unnecessarily creates mental vexation. <S> Hence, concepts like God, origin, etc. are not dealt in Buddhism. <S> It doesn't matter why or how the samsara <S> came into existence, what matters is that samsara does exist. <S> Now when samsara exists <S> and we exist, our effort should be eradicating problems that give rise to suffering. <S> For example, because you are thinking about the origin, you are to some amount troubled by the question. <S> So as per Buddhism you should not focus your mind on such irrelevant questions as they unnecessarily create suffering. <S> However, if you are really looking for answers then you should consider studying the philosophy of other religions. <S> If you do, then you will find the answer to be God. <S> Then the question of starting point of God will arise in your mind. <S> If you look into science, it says Big Bang is the starting point. <S> But in my view, Nothing is the starting point. <S> Only that which has come to exist can have a starting point. <S> How can that which doesn't even exist have a starting point? <S> I know this sounds ambiguous, but it's hard to explain here in few words. <S> You can check the following link if you like, but my findings there is based on Vedic scriptures: http://shunyavada.com/
|
Therefore, the answer to your question is that the start of samsara is the inherently timeless and therefore eternal moment, which paradoxically is the origin of time, space, and causality that endlessly differentiates in infinitely variegated patterns. In accordance with the law of karma, the whole process of samsara itself must be self-starting. The only way to do it is to look back into your own past to find your first life.
|
Learning materials for Dependent Origination (Paṭiccasamuppāda) in Theravada Buddhism I am listening through the talks and guided meditations from the retreat at Amaravati Just One More: Dependent Origination and the Cycles of Addiction Retreat , where there are a number of references to the teachings, and using them in meditation. However, although I've found many websites referencing the Paṭiccasamuppāda, I've been unable to find study materials for learning how to practically use the teachings. Not having any teacher nearby, I have been looking online for materials. Wikipedia mentions the Twelve Nidānas , but that resource is mostly fact oriented, which is not what I am looking for. Can anyone direct me towards any online materials (website, pdf, audio, video) that help develop techniques in this area? EDIT for clarification. There are many writings on the subject, and many try to explain the concepts of dependent origination. However, this question is regarding finding practical instructions to applying the teachings in meditation . In other words, instead of focusing on acquiring some intellectual "understanding" of the teachings, I am following the "see for yourself" approach, by not taking anyone's word for granted. Instead, using the teachings to access the wisdom they describe. In essence, it's like being thirsty, and finding a sign saying "water this way ->". You have the choice to walk the path leading to the water, and drink, or study the sign, which won't leave you any less thirsty. <Q> Here's a few of resources from our tradition: http://www.aimwell.org/dependentorigination.html - a book by the Mahasi Sayadaw, one of Burma's greatest meditation teachers <S> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_llBSCXt6c - a video by me, some monk from the Internet <S> http://www.sirimangalo.org/teachings/lessons-in-practical-buddhism/practical-dependent-origination/ <S> - a written piece based on the above video. <S> You'll find a lot of stuff centring on the debate over three-life/one-life, which is terribly unhelpful, IMO. <S> Here's a piece I appreciated from one of Thailand's top scholar monks: http://www.dhammatalks.net/Books3/Payutto_Bhikkhu_Dependent_Origination.htm <S> Edit: here's something I wrote about practical application of PS: http://yuttadhammo.sirimangalo.org/2009/07/three-teachers-or-buddhist-addiction.html <A> Buddhadasa's "Practical Dependent Origination" ( http://buddhasociety.com/online-books/buddhadasa-bhikkhu-paticcasamuppada-21-2#TOC and http://www.dhammatalks.net/Books6/Bhikkhu_Buddhadasa_Paticcasamuppada.htm ) <S> a decent bibliography can be found at the end of Dhivan Thomas Jones' "New Light On The Twelve Nidanas" ( http://www.academia.edu/2593517/New_Light_on_the_Twelve_Nidanas ) <A> The best and most detailed explanation of paticcasamuppada <S> I know of is in Buddhagosa's Visuddhimagga . <S> There is an English translation by Bh. <S> Nanamoli in the book <S> The Path of Purification ( free pdf , look at chapter XVII: Dependent Origination). <A> You need to be very careful when you find teaching materials on the internet specially for Paṭiccasamuppāda. <S> It is core of Buddhism (someone had name it <S> The Theory of Everything ). <S> The problem is lot of authors had been expressed their personal perspectives than to root of Lord Buddha's teaching so you may get confused when you compare each of them, Good luck!! http://www.academia.edu/4990731/Two_Doctrines_of_Conditionality_in_Theravada_Tradition_Paticcasamuppada_and_Pathana-Naya <S> http://en.dhammadana.org/dhamma/paticca_samuppada.htm <A> Good question. <S> I still have the book to this very day, but I still haven't finished reading it. <S> Why, because I have been taking my time on it. <S> And it has been years since I first acquired it. <S> I would like to share what I experience by reading the book <S> and so hopefully you could take pieces from here <S> and there and piece them towards your solution. <S> Again, I have not finished reading it, but one thing I do know: Don't follow affixed on the words, the physical practices or forms it may mention. <S> The whole practice is supposed to be a guide, words are guides as well as forms <S> may it be bodily, mindfully or expressively, for every of these should be abandoned at the end (beginning) when one is "awoken". <S> Hence, may I suggest, if it teaches us this way as mentioned, we shall convey it to others likewise. <S> It is not about the type of incense we burn, the body must not have to be perfectly sat down with legs equally crossed, music needn't be of certain type and the most important of all - words and meanings (doctrine) <S> needn't be studied word for word when one is stuck at certain chapter / point. <S> Let it rest, come back to it later. <S> Again, all words and wordings are guides and should be abandoned eventually. <S> For Buddhism, I often find that the best teaching and learning experience is when one doesn't feel or make others feel "special" or "different" than others during the journey of teaching / learning. <S> If not, ego is therefore proven to still exist and with this as attachment, understanding is still not acquired. <S> Thanks for the question. <A> Following might be of some help as references: Dependent Arising by <S> Piya Tan essay <S> Dependent Arising by <S> Piya Tan talk on YouTube Vibhanga Sutta <S> Maha Nidana Sutta <S> Na <S> Tumha Sutta <A> From the Theravada tradition: There is a audio dhamma talk by Ven. <S> Bhikkhu Bodhi called "Dependent Origination" which can be found here . <S> Here is also some text material about Dependent Origination, also from Ven. <S> Bhikkhu Bodi: <S> Dependent Arising Dependent Arising : <S> Patticca Samuppada <S> Lastly there is an audio dhamma talk called "Dependent Origination" by Ajahn Punnadhammo which can be found here . <S> Lanka <A> Thanisarro's internet PDF called: 'Shape of Suffering' is the only publication I know of that provides a practical guided meditation through each of the conditions. <S> Buddhadasa's work is good <S> but 'Shape of Suffering' is the most practical. <S> If you follow the meditation guidance in 'Shape of Suffering', you can decide for yourself whether the explanation is true or not. <S> Most of the other interpretations are mere unverifiable meta-physical theories. <S> Regards
|
Two most interesting pieces of analysis I found are Nanavira Thera's Notes on Dhamma ( http://www.nanavira.org/notes-on-dhamma/paticcasamuppada ) and
|
Does rebirth or reincarnation occur in Buddhism? How is the concept of rebirth or reincarnation handled in Buddhism? Does it occur? Will everyone be reborn? Are people always reborn as people? <Q> Simple answers for last three questions as far as I know <S> , Does it occur ? <S> Yes it is Will everyone ? <S> Yes until someone attain Nibbana always as people ? <S> No, it can be any(animals/human etc) <S> But the first question is too broad to answer. <S> You can find more details in this article about recantation. <S> Simple explanation for recantation as according to that article, Reincarnation is not a simple physical birth of a person; for instance, John being reborn as a cat in the next life. <S> In this case John possesses an immortal soul which transforms to the form of a cat after his death. <S> This cycle is repeated over and over again. <S> Or if he is lucky, he will be reborn as a human being. <A> How is the concept of rebirth or reincarnation handled in Buddhism? <S> Does it occur? <S> Will everyone be reborn? <S> Are people always reborn as people? <S> Strictly speaking there is no reincarnation in Buddhism, but rebirth is. ' <S> Reincarnation' imply idea that some constant Soul incarnates into being, which 'rebirth' does not imply. <S> Moreover, Buddhist teaching deny existence of such constant Soul. <S> After death, new being is born, who causally related to past being and carry on actions of past births. <A> Disclaimer : My answer to this will be non-exhaustive. <S> My answer will be scoped as close to that of the question as possible. <S> (General). <S> I will also answer your question (which is actually 4) piece by piece. <S> You asked: Does reincarnation/rebirth occur in Buddhism? <S> Yes it does. <S> The concept of rebirth and reincarnation in Buddhism is complex and can differ slightly or largely from tradition to tradition however. <S> You asked: Will everyone be reborn? <S> Every sentient being (people, animals, etc) is in a cycle of rebirth. <S> They will all be reborn after death. <S> The only exclusion to this will depend on the tradition. <S> Most traditions, in a general sense, state that one may leave the cycle of rebirth if they attain enlightenment or nirvana. <S> This is only possible when you are a human, though. <S> You asked: <S> Are people always reborn as people? <S> The answer is no. <S> Please see next section of this answer for elaboration. <S> You asked: <S> How is rebirth/reincarnation handled in Buddhism? <S> In Buddhism, there exists the concept of Samsara . <S> This is the continuous cycle of rebirth throughout six different realms. <S> These realms include the realm of Gods, Titans, Hungry Ghosts, Hell, Animals, and Humans. <S> One may be considered more preferable to another, for example Gods to Hell, yet all are imperfect and involve some level of suffering. <S> Depending on past lives and karma, one will move from realm to realm during each rebirth. <S> The Human realm is generally considered to be the best because it is the only one in which one may obtain enlightenment and exit from this wheel of Samsara and therefore end the cycle of rebirth and suffering. <S> For more information, you may find this article to be useful. <S> Side Note: <S> My professor of Eastern Religions once told me that being in this cycle of rebirth can be a great source of anxiety, hence one source of motivation to exit from it.
|
Everyone, except who attained final Nirvana, rebirths in almost any place in the Cosmos depending on his/her past actions (karma).
|
What is the purpose of using a wand to hit a monk in Zen meditation? I have seen Zen monks in meditation, usually with one monk supervising. The monk supervising usually carries a wand of some sort. Every once in a while he would rest the wand on the shoulder of one of the monks and then respectfully hit his shoulder. It did not seem very forceful yet I found this confusing because to me it seemed as if it may be a method of harm or violence. I would like clarification on this practie. Why does the supervising monk do this to the meditating monks? <Q> It is said that drowsiness comes from stiffness, from meditator trying to artificially restrict their micro-movements and to severely narrow their scope of attention. <S> While right concentration is said to feel open and flexible, with body actively balancing in meditation posture and attention wide open (but not engaged nor scattered). <S> When supervising monk sees somebody nodding, he reminds meditator of the need to expand their awareness, by gently "massaging" the shoulder with the stick :) <A> During a weekend retreat I attended at a Zen monastery, the explanation I heard was that the sensation provides a point of focus for meditation. <S> At this monastery (or at least at this retreat, which was for beginners), receiving a hit from the wand was voluntary; I don't think they used it to wake up participants. <S> Other sources (including other answers to this question) have suggested that waking up a dozing meditator is another use. <A> It's a remedy for sleepiness. <S> Nothing special. <S> It's a little pat on the back to keep you awake.
|
Supposedly it is used to help meditator fight drowsiness.
|
What is the difference between rebirth and reincarnation? In my readings of Buddhist commentary there is a distinction drawn between rebirth and reincarnation. But to me it is unclear what is the difference between rebirth and reincarnation--the explanations are rather abstruse. Is there a simple one-sentence explanation of this difference? <Q> Reincarnation implies a soul that takes a body; rebirth does not, so it is preferred. <S> Note that neither term has a widely used cognate in the Pali texts, perhaps because the concept of "re-" anything implies the continuation of an entity. <S> Buddhism tends to talk about birth and death in a more linear fashion; rather than being reborn, it's "being born again" (e.g. dukkhā jāti punappunaṃ). <S> Further, the focus in Buddhism is on individual mind states and ultimate reality rather than the conceptual reality of birth and death, so it's not really a core teaching. <S> Death is a concept; at the moment of a being's death, one body/mind experience ceases and the next one arises, just as it did through the entire life. <A> The Buddhist Pali word ' birth ' (' jati ') refers to the arising of the self-view of ' a being ' (' satta '). <S> And what is birth? <S> The birth of the various beings into the various orders of beings... <S> SN 12.2 'A being,' lord. ' <S> A being'. <S> To what extent is one said to be 'a being'? <S> Any desire, passion, delight or craving for form... feeling... <S> perception... <S> fabrications... <S> consciousness: when one is caught up there, tied up there <S> , one is said to be 'a being.' <S> SN 23.3 <S> Why now do you assume 'a being'? <S> Have you grasped a view? <S> Just as with an assemblage of parts, the word 'chariot' is used, when the aggregates are present, there is the verbal convention of 'a being.' <S> SN 5.10 <S> The many different Pali words translated as 're-birth' essentially refer to the re-arising or re-formation of the self-view of 'a being' due to kamma (action). <S> For example, under the influence of self-view, a person undertakes a financial scam & celebrates when they become or are ' re-born ' financially wealthy. <S> Then, when they are imprisoned for fraud, the same person is re-born as a prisoner in a jail & are unhappy. <S> In summary, despite the different interpretations, ' rebirth ' is always a doctrine of ' moral efficacy '. <S> Where as ' reincarnation ' is always a metaphysical doctrine of the soul or some other mental substance entering a new physical body. <S> A Buddhist can believe in moral ' rebirth ' but not believe in ' reincarnation ' (life after death). <A> A soul is the five aggregates minus physical form. <S> Rebirth is like lighting one candle with another candle. <S> The stream of consciousness, a.k.a life force, continues from one existence to another but the remainder of the five aggregates; form, perception, sensations and mental formations (which would stay together during a reincarnation of a soul); dissipate. <A> Rebirth is when a soul leaves the body in the state of ignorance and then again gets a new body in ignorance. <S> Reincarnation is when soul leaves the body in full knowledge and such souls reincarnate only to fulfill a some mission or purpose in life.
|
Reincarnation involves a soul that transmigrates.
|
Is it harmful to the Buddha when we request he or she to continue teaching instead of entering parinirvana? One of the ten things that Bodhisattva Samathabhadra says that a person on the Bodhisattva path should do is to request the Buddhas to continuing teaching instead of entering parinirvana. Given that a Buddha is fully compassionate and omniscient, he or she would want to teach if doing so is beneficial to sentient beings and would also be aware whether teaching is indeed beneficial to sentient beings. For example, the historical Shakayumni Buddha wanted to enter parinirvana because some of his sangha was becoming complaent that they would always have the Thus Come One as their teacher. As such, it would seem that a Buddha would be able to decide well the timing of his parinirvana. Given the above, I wonder how would it is appropriate for one learning to walk on the Bodhisattva path to request the Buddhas to continuing teaching. Is such an action for the benefit of the practioner to generate a wish of englightment and to take refuge in the Buddha? Does a Buddha need to enter parinirvana at a certain time, otherwise it would become harmful to him or herself or to the community at large? Is a Buddha unable to stay longer to teach if practitioners do not make requests? (Sorry that I am unable to phrase a precise question, but I hope I conveyed my gist and my confusion clearly enough.) <Q> As I pointed out in my answer to "are earthworms our mothers?" <S> these kind of questions often assume incorrect frame of reference. <S> The idea is to create a mental context in which A) the teacher feels motivated to continue teaching because he sees the teaching is in demand, B) <S> the students stay aware of the fact that existence of the teaching in this world depends solely on Buddha and then generations of teachers passing it to one another, and now to the students, and C) <S> the student clearly realizes that the teacher could very well leave this place but is instead making effort to stay and teach solely out of compassion for the students. <S> When this context is established the teaching can happen effectively, because both the sides will engage actively and with no resistance. <S> Granted <S> these are entry-level practices, but they are very important to establish as foundation. <S> Otherwise what happens if you skip straight to advanced teaching, the student may get as arrogant as to metaphorically grab the teacher by the hair and swing around. <S> Needless to say, it hurts the student first and foremost. <A> I'm not sure I understand your question(s) <S> fully; however, since you seem to be coming from a Mahayana background, do remember that the Lotus Sutra reveals Buddha's entering parinirvana is merely an expedient device . <S> He merely appears to enter parinirvana to "motivate" people, as it were. <S> According to that Sutra, which claims to be the ultimate and true teaching of the Mahayana, the Buddha doesn't enter parinirvana but instead eternally abides in this world. <A> All Buddhas are masculine. <S> No, it is not harmful to invite the Buddha. <S> In fact, the Buddha mentioned several times that a person who has perfected Sathara Iddipada can live the maximum life span of a human at that time. <S> It was about 120 years back then. <S> So he could've stayed another 40 years had he been invited. <S> Venerable Ananda had several opportunities to invite the Buddha. <S> But it's said that Mara(the evil god) prevented him every time.
|
The reason we request Buddha (or our local teacher as Buddha's substitute) to continue teaching instead of entering parinirvana, is not because it can literally make Buddha (or teacher) change their mind and stay.
|
Does studying mathematics or science lead to a practitioner of Buddhism acquiring wrong philosophical views and mental afflictions? Among the steps needed to attain enlightenment, a practitioner of Buddhism needs to abandon the wrong philosophical views that they acquired due to either wrong teaching or wrong study. In this sense, a practitioner that is less educated need only remove his or her sense of self or ego and the afflictions due to his or her present body. However, a practitioner that is educated would also have to remove the philosophical views acquired through wrong learning. As paradigms in science have historically been replaced by new paradigms a la Kuhn, this means that science is necessarily a wrong view. For instance, a person living in Newton's time would have studied the absoluteness of time and space, but that view was displaced by Einstein's relativistic paradigm. Whatever science we are learning now, whether it be quantum physics or evolution or species, given the historical record, would be a wrong view and replaced by a more correct paradigm in the future. Even mathematics have proven to be contradictory through history. At first, set theorists believed in unlimited comprehension till Russell's paradox showed the need for bounded comprehension, in the fateful saga of Russel and Whitehead's Principia Mathematica . Pythagoras's theorem was thought to be unconditionally true, but now it is true in only one of the three absolute geometries and physicists now believe our world to be non-Euclidean, in which Pythagoras's theorem fails. After one is reborn in another world, the physics or mathematics of that world would likely be very different, and one's body would also likely be very different. This probably indicates the impermanent nature of the science and mathematics of our current society. Are you also of the opinion that the learning mathematics and science causes a person to acquire wrong views? Would this lead one further away from enlightenment? <Q> If you are looking for enlightenment you should be concerned of not being attached to these studies, or averse to what you disagree. <S> The same fits to Buddhism itself, you should't become absorbed, or obsessed, to the Dharma. <S> All philosophies are mental phenomena, <S> they aren't either good or bad in themselves . <S> But they can hinder your search for enlightenment if you are too concerned about them. <S> Math and science share a side of problem elaboration and solving. <S> So it would contradict Buddhism if you enjoy or think it is meaningful to be worried about all those problems. <S> Over-thinking about anything and having a heavy attitude over theories or facts are opposite to the practice of meditation. <S> The point of meditation is to not being absorbed to mental elaborations. <S> So there is no sense to think all over a sitting session. <S> Then this extends to daily life, there is no sense to have a sharp and clear mind when meditating and daydream in the rest of the time . <S> For short, the point isn't what phenomena you engage, but it's how you engage to phenomena. <S> If you can elaborate on any philosophy in a detached way it wouldn't be a problem at all. <S> So the practice would be to think while being present and aware . <S> (yes, this one is quite paradoxical) <A> But a side effect of study can often be a sense of pride based on the false conviction that one now knows everything there is to know about the way the world operates. <S> This could be a serious barrier for entry into Buddhism and a source of misinterpretation of what Buddhism is actually about. <A> Mathematics, science, logic fall to the field of perception. <S> If you conceptualize things and hold on to them as reality then this can be a hindrance. <S> You have to try to see things as they are without the clouding of perception. <S> Initially perceptions will be strong, but when perceptions arise you should try to be equanimous without clinging or reacting to the sensations associated with the perception <S> and it's trigger. <S> With this your perception weakens, and ultimately when you realize some form of sainthood, it ceases momentarily. <A> If you are a Tantric Buddhist, you could use Mathematics and Science AS a path to enlightenment. <S> Also, the word 'wrong' is not relative to some 'right' which is known to Buddhists. <S> The Eightfold path is a conjecture that "seems to work ok", but the Buddha himself said there were innumerable paths besides it. <S> So, this question could be answered in many ways, from many different viewpoints. <S> It all depends on how you have decided to practice. <S> Buddhism is too large a viewpoint to answer this question.. <S> you need to narrow it to what vehicle, and even flavor, of Buddhism as it is practiced in the world to get a meaningful answer. <S> EDIT: <S> It seems that many here are pointing out that studying a difficult subject outside of Buddhism can lead to pride or distraction or attachment. <S> I agree. <S> The broad point I am trying to make is that this is not any different than being prideful in anything, and does not in itself constitute a danger to your path, any more than being prideful in your appearance, strength, or taste in wine would be. <S> In this way, there is no difference between Math and Literature, or between Physics and Dharma Studies. <S> Thus, I maintain that there is no area of knowledge that will lead you to being more prone to pride, as long as you maintain your path while learning it . <A> The world is full of ideas. <S> The ideas themselves do not cause wrong view. <S> The solution is not ignorance. <S> Opening one's mind to them, or education, is the opposite of ignorance. <S> The Mind and Life Institute is a living example of doing so by one of Buddhism's most advanced practitioners - the Dalai Lama. <A> To be short and to the point, no. <S> It is my understanding that Pure Desire is the absolute teaching of Buddhism. <S> So, as long as you don't get the feeling that you must due to the desire, you should still reach nirvana based on this issue.
|
Study of mathematics or science in and of itself is orthogonal to practice of Buddha-Dharma.
|
Why should we worship statues of Lord Buddha? Why should we worship Lord Buddha statues with flowers, lights and food, even when we know Lord Buddha is not alive and does not exist? Did Lord Buddha instruct us to do so or is there any other reason? <Q> I am not sure we should worship statues itself as that would be some sort of idolatry. <S> Buddhists worship Buddha, and statue or other image <S> is just symbol , something that bring into our memory good qualities of Buddha. <S> It's mindfulness of Buddha. <S> Statue is a symbol, and symbol is communication which states about its subject, Buddha in our case. <S> Thus, showing respect before statue should be directed to Buddha as Jewel, and not to statue. <S> Mindfulness and respect to the Saint and Teacher is good action. <S> Btw, Buddha is not disappeared, he stated that he will remain in his Teaching (Dharma). <A> Thanissaro says in many places that the act of respect develops hand-in-hand with learning the path: <S> In their eyes, the religious attitude of respect is needed for any philosophical understanding to grow . <S> And as far as they're concerned, there's no conflict between the two. <S> In fact, they're mutually reinforcing. <S> Opening the Door to the Dhamma <S> : Respect in Buddhist Thought & Practice <S> The veneration of statues with flowers and so on should be a natural expression of your development of the path. <S> The act of putting flowers next to a statue doesn't save anyone or develop anything, but it's an expression of your faith that what the Buddha taught is really worth learning: <S> Respect is the attitude you develop toward the things that matter in life. <A> No one should worship any Statue, in death bed Lord Buddha says not to build any statue of him. <S> More over <S> He had been saying this all his life that his path is the path of practice not worship. <S> Now comes your Question why should we worship him ? <S> Once a king denied to worship a statue, then swami vivekananda asked him to spit on one his fathers portrait, as a result kind was angry. <S> So we should always keep in mind that the most important thing is to focus our minds, some may need help to keep it focused maybe some statue and some may need breathing techniques, some doesn't need anything, they just sit totally blank, As everything came out of nothing, nothingness is god, <S> having a controlled & focused mind in nothing is all we need to do. <A> The true Buddha is the Eternal Buddha revealed in the Lotus Sutra. <S> It is not a normal human being. <S> A scroll with written characters is better. <S> A Sutra (text) is more similar to the true Buddha-body than a statue of Siddharta Gautama. <S> The true Buddha-body cannot be expressed or depicted so it expediently reveals itself in ways that are understandable to our feeble minds - such as "infinite buddha" (amitabha) etc. <S> Since the true buddha is formless, it cannot be depicted or potrayed. <S> But since it compassionately discloses itself to ignorant beings, it allows to be depicted in such a way. <S> It's simply a useful device. <S> It's dangerous though, because someone might cling to that body and believe a Buddha's body can decay, break or die. <S> That's not possible according to the Nirvana Sutra - the Buddha's body is permanent & eternal. <S> - <S> To answer your question: what we really worship is the Buddha-nature that is present in every sentient and even insentient being. <S> It's in you & me too. <A> Buddha is a Sanskrit word meaning knowledge. <S> Thus a statue of Buddha is a personification of knowledge. <S> Buddhists do not pray to Knowledge (Buddha statue). <S> They venerate knowledge because 'knowledge is power'; they pursuit knowledge. <S> Theists hope to get power by praying. <S> Teaching of Lord Buddha (Budda is a statue) is for practice, diligent strenous practice, to get knowledge. <S> See definition of Buddha and Buddhism in Oxford Dictionaries. <A> Lets say the Buddha was alive today and you offered Dana to the Buddha. <S> But what if the Buddha does not accept it? <S> Will you still not get the merits for your good intentions and the effort you put into preparing the Dana for the Buddha? <S> It's about the quality of your thoughts throughout the time you spent on it. <A> No one worshiping Buddha in India, We just ignite candle only . <S> And so if we gonna experiencing just observe you'll see Buddha's statue, his face there's en lighted spirit, you'll not find with other gods, only Buddha's eyes are closed and peaceful spirit on face. <S> Peaceful atmosphere you'll feel. <S> Worshiping means bribe from devotee and want praise through chants; but we don't have to worship Buddha to achieve peace. <S> He just beyond concept of god and religion. <S> You can meditate next Buddha's statue. <A> There is also no reason I have to. <S> Plus there also is the same reason you don't have to either. <S> Since you have free will, you can choose to do so however. <A> The Buddha never asked to be worshiped, he only asked that we use the Dhamma and Vinaya as a guide to cessation. <S> Respect and veneration of the Buddha are wonderful, in that they engender a respect for their Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha, but valuing the Buddha as anything more than a teacher will likely lead to attachment and stress/suffering. <S> The Buddha shined a lamp onto an individual path, one without an idol - where the cessation of stress/suffering is realisable in the here and now, generally with him as a guide. <S> In the Kalama Sutta he denies the absolute validity of all speculation, no matter what this speculation is grounded in, rather asking each one of us to search out and find out the knowledge found in the Dhamma for ourselves!
|
The statue serves as a tool for remembrance, but it's actually an inferior symbol, because it depicts the bodily form of the Buddha. There is no reason we have to.
|
Are there any differences in karma? Is there a difference in karma of giving someone $ 1 and giving someone $ 1000, or its same for anything given? and Is there a difference in karma of killing a small animal (like mosquito or small fish) and killing an big animal (like a cow or an elephant), or the karma is same for all killings ? If there is a difference what makes the difference? <Q> The difference will always be the mental state of the person performing the action. <S> As Sakka, king of the devas of Tavatimsa says in the Vimanavatthu: <S> "Natthi citte pasannamhi, appikā nāma dakkhiṇā; Tathāgate vā sambuddhe, atha vā tassa sāvake"ti. <S> (vi. <S> va. 804); There is not, when the mind is confident, such a thing as a small gift, <S> In regards to a Tathagata, fully enlightened Buddha or, furthermore, his disciples. <S> Giving to the Buddha is considered to be of greater merit, not because of the benefit to the Buddha, but because of the ability to inspire faith and confidence in the giver. <S> As for killing, the mental state involved in killing large animals is generally more intense; also the sense of the weight of the act is greater, so <S> the mind will be more strongly affected by it. <S> Killing virtuous people, parents, etc. is even worse, because it sets one squarely against virtue. <S> But there is no hard and fast rule here either; if you obsess over killing a single mosquito buzzing over you at night, you may cultivate more unwholesomeness than a single act of killing a larger animal. <S> Furthermore, karma isn't a single act of killing; it may be cultivated every moment; every thought concerning a moral or immoral act is karmically potent, so it's imprecise to ask if x or y is good or bad, better or worse, since karma is only a single thought moment at a time, and thus the potency depends upon the nature of the individual mind states. <A> If you kill a frog out of cruelty, that's a much worse karma than when you kill a snake to protect someone. <A> Yes, there are. <S> It is not same as giving someone $1 and giving someone $1000. <S> Similarly it is not same as killing a small animal and killing a big animal. <S> Of course the action is the same, but the resulting emotion or the experience created in the object that is acted upon is not same. <S> Hence, the magnitude of karma varies. <S> If you give a man $1 he may not feel that happy or grateful to you, but if you give him $1000 then he will feel more grateful and happy. <S> He will feel indebted to you and this will create a stronger karmic link. <S> For real life scenario just think which person will like to help you more, the one you gave $1 or the one you gave $1000? <S> What makes the difference? <S> The experience of the emotion created in their mind through your action. <S> Hence, if you give a person $1 who is starving without food will create more positive karma than if you give $1000 to a rich person like a millionaire. <S> The developed the consciousness and self identification of an animal is, the more suffering it is likely to feel at its death. <S> For example, a mosquito will hardly think of its family and children while dying compared to a mammal animal like an elephant or a human. <S> Since apart from physical pain mental suffering and experience of the object also matters, the more the animal feels the combined pain, the greater the karma involved will be. <A> Even the earthly law (as in courts) doesn't operate this literally. <S> And the Karmic law is a whole lot wiser. <S> It's a mistake to think of the Karmic law as a tit for tat. <S> The intention as well as the state of the doer matters. <S> The same action may have a different Karmic consequence based on the state of the doers. <S> Giving $1 to someone may be a very hard thing for a poor man to do while Giving $1,000 to someone <S> may be a very easy thing for a rich man to do. <S> Additionally, one may be giving with the intention of sating their ego - to feel good about oneself - while the other may be doing it due to genuine goodwill. <S> Many more such factors would be taken into account by the Karmic law. <A> Karma is determined by: intensity of ones own volition, and mental state of the recipient (which acts like an amplifier) <S> Killing a insect may not be as harmful as killing a person as the insert has a lower mental state. <S> If you give to a pious person and non pious person then the Karma from giving to the pious person is more. <S> If you give a small sum with a strong volition it will give better results than giving a large sum with a weak volition.
|
Giving is dependent on one's state of mind while giving; the amount is intrinsically inconsequential (though obviously a poor person will feel more strongly about giving $1000 than giving $1). Yes, there is a difference, and it is in the intent of the action. Similarly, when you kill small animals like a mosquito the resulting effect is less because the suffering they feel is less. So, yes, there is a difference.
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.