text:
Do creatures with Defender have summoning sickness?
Say I put down 2 Fog Banks during my turn, and once my turn ends would I be able to block creatures with trample, and cancel the effects of trample? Meaning that Fog Bank doesn't get destroyed, and no trample damage gets dealt to me?

That last question about trample damage is answered in the Rulings section of the Gatherer page of Fog bank, which you yourself linked to. OTOH, summoning sickness has nothing to do with it.

Regarding summoning sickness, see "How are those creatures affected?" in What is “summoning sickness” and how does it affect my creatures? Regarding trample, see: How does trample interact with damage prevention effects and indestructible blockers?

Creatures with defender have summoning sickness, there's no exception for them.
But that doesn't affect how Fog Bank interacts with creatures with trample. Yes, if you play Fog Bank it will be able to block the next (opponent's) turn, but when a creature with trample is blocked by Fog Bank, it only needs to assign 2 damage (Fog Bank's toughness) to Fog Bank, and the rest will still 'trample over' to you.

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

Note that that rule doesn't say anything about blocking.

510.1c: " When checking for assigned lethal damage, take into account damage already marked on the creature and damage from other creatures that’s being assigned during the same combat damage step, but not any abilities or effects that might change the amount of damage that’s actually dealt."


text:
Color Protection Attacking Creature vs hexproof Blocking Creature
Let's says I'm blocking with a Hitchclaw Recluse (a green spider with reach that is a 1/4) and I have cast the instant Woodcutter's Grit which targets the Hitchclaw recluse giving it +3/+3 + hexproof. So now it's a 4/7 hexproof reach spider blocking a Coast Watcher, a bird soldier with flying and protection from green and my opponent had cast Inspired Charge in retaliation.

I don't see a question here.

Hitchclaw Recluse can't block Coast Watcher, even though it has reach.
One of the qualities offered by protection from green is that the creature can't be blocked by green creatures. Hexproof doesn't matter; the spider isn't being targeted by Coast Watcher. So the other instants cast don't matter.

Since I put hexproof on my green spider wouldn't that effect the protection from Green since it makes it so it can not be a targeted by the Spells or abilities and protection from Green would be in ability of that card ?

@Zatch Ironhammer, Protection from Green is an ability, but it doesn't target. 702.11b “Hexproof” on a permanent means “This permanent can’t be the target of spells or abilities your opponents control.” 702.16b A permanent or player with protection can’t be targeted by spells with the stated quality and can’t be targeted by abilities from a source with the stated quality.

@ZatchIronhammer See this question for more info on what it means to "target" something: Which spells or abilities are affected by things that care about targeting?

If, somehow, Hitchclaw Recluse did block Coast Watcher (perhaps because Hitchclaw Recluse had its color changed when blockers were declared and then had its color changed again back to green before damage was dealt): when damage is dealt, Hitchclaw Recluse would be dealt 3 damage (Coast Watcher is a 3/2), and Coast Watcher would be dealt 0 damage (protection from green means it can't be dealt damage by green sources). Barring any other actions, both creatures would survive.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Buffs During Combat
If an opponent plays a card like Elvish Archdruid that gives other elf creatures they controls +1/+1 and they declare the Elvish Archdruid and another Elf creature as attackers, when I go to block them, if I block the Elvish Archdruid first and it dies, does the other Elf creature keep its buff when I go to block it on the same Combat Phase?

You do not block any creature "first". You assign all of your blockers simultaneously, and all the damage is assigned simultaneously. So when the other Elf is blocked, it still has its +1/+1. However, damage stays for the rest of the turn, so the other Elf would eventually die. The order of events would be:

You declare blockers against the Elvish Archdruid and the other Elf.
The Elvish Archdruid and the other Elf both receive damage. At this point, the other Elf still has the +1/+1, so it survives, while the Archdruid dies.
The next time state-based actions are checked, the other Elf will no longer have its +1/+1, but it will still have its damage, so it will die.

For most purposes, the set of deaths will be the same result as if you had been able to block Archdruid "first", but there are some differences. For one, while the other Elf gets the same damage, and the same final toughness, in both scenarios, if you were able to kill the Archdruid before the Elf's combat resolves (which could be done with First Strike), then the other Elf would have its power reduced during its damage assignment, so while its fate would be the same, the creatures blocking it would take one less damage. And one might be able to come up with a scenario where both dying from the initial SBA after damage assignment would differ from the Elf dying from a later SBA.

It's not just "for most purposes". The archdruid did die first. Players just aren't allowed to play anything between the two deaths, as rechecking state-based actions is the very next thing that happens. If you, for instance, manage to give the archdruid an ability like "whenever another creature dies", it will not see the other elf dying. If they died simultaneously, the ability would have seen the other elf.

@Arthur I was responding to the OP talking about them blocking Archdruid first. I'll clarify. As for the hypothetical of the Archdruid having "whenever another creature dies", I had thoughts along those lines, but between the OP's actual conception (the Archduke is blocked and dies "first", and the other Elf is blocked and dies "later") versus the actual sequence (the Archduke dies immediately from damage assignment, while the other Elf dies later from SBA), the Archduke doesn't see another creature dying in either scenario.

@Acccumulation Fair enough. Also, just to clarify, the Archdruid also dies as an SBA. You haven't mentioned that explicitly. "dies immediately from damage assignment" isn't really a thing; combat damage happens, and then SBA are checked, and then creatures that would die from assigned damage actually die.

This answer isn't technically correct. Static buffs aren't checked and applied each time state-based actions are checked; instead, they apply as long as they are "in play". The only reason that time will be identical in this case is because the Archfruid doesn't die before SBAs are checked (unlike your second bullet point suggests). So, to clarify: Creatures are dealt damage; they might be put into the graveyard by the respective SBA (at which point the buff vanishes). If SBAs had an effect, they are repeated and might cause additional creatures that now have 0 toughness to die.

@Arthur For a concrete example of the difference, suppose the other elf is Elvish Warrior and you have a Sultai Flayer on the field. The fact that the Archdruid and Warrior don't die simultaneously means Sultai Flayer doesn't trigger.

When the Elvish Archdruid dies, elf creatures your opponent controls don't get that +1/+1 bonus anymore. If then any elf creatures your opponent controls has more damage assigned to them than their toughness is (or equal to), they'll die as well. Combat damage is applied simultaneously to every creature.

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


text:
If you have multiple planeswalkers, how many of their loyalty abilities can you use in a single turn?
Let’s say I played Ajani, Caller of the Pride and then played Ajani, Wise  Counselor. Would I be able to use Caller of the Pride's -8 ability to give me, say, 20 creatures and then use Wise Counselor's +2 ability in order to gain life for each creature on the field? Would I be able to do that in the same turn or would I have to use one wait a turn then play the other?

Aren't they both Legendary Ajanis and can't be used at the same time?

@Malady, no, that was the old rule (see 306.4 in the Comprehensive Rules)

306.5d Each planeswalker has a number of loyalty abilities, which are activated abilities with loyalty symbols in their costs. Loyalty abilities follow special rules: A player may activate a loyalty ability of a permanent they control any time they have priority and the stack is empty during a main phase of their turn, but only if none of that permanent’s loyalty abilities have been activated that turn. See rule 606, “Loyalty Abilities.”

The rules only say something about not activating a single planeswalker's loyalty abilities twice in a turn, not about a hard limit of one loyalty ability activation per player. Therefore, you can use one Ajani's ability first and then the other's ability in the same turn.

And to answer the literal question, it's possible to set up combos with arbitrarily large number of Planeswalker loyalty abilities used. For instance, if you have Aminatou, the Fateshifter and Spark Double, you can use the -1 ability on each other as many times as you want to. With Sorin, Lord of Innistrad, two Doubling Seasons, and a Spark Double, you could use Sorin's ultimate as many times as you want.


text:
What happens to the target of Oko, Thief of Crowns' second ability when it is put in the graveyard?
An artifact or creature becomes a 3/3 green Elk creature due to Oko, Thief of Crowns' second ability. What happens to that artifact or creature when it is put into the graveyard? Does it remain a 3/3 green Elk creature? Or does it revert back to it's original state once in the graveyard?
For example, Death's Shadow is turned into a 3/3 green Elk creature. For the purposes of using Unearth, when in the graveyard does it remain as a 3/3 green Elk creature, or does it revert back to being 'Death's Shadow'?

It will become a Death's Shadow again. Whenever an object changes zones, e.g. when it goes from the battlefield to the graveyard, it gets completely 'reset':

400.7. An object that moves from one zone to another becomes a new object with no memory of, or relation to, its previous existence.

The rules list nine exceptions to this, but your situation is not one of them.


text:
Optimal way to win at Damath

As you can see, this is an example of a DaMath board with Integers.
See this Wikipedia article about DaMath with its rules.
Is there any optimal way to win if you are the first or second player? Like a set of moves or strategies to keep in mind of when playing this game? Or an opening trap to score high and make your opponent get negative points?

A partial answer: since Damath is a two-player game of complete information and no randomness, Zermelo's Theorem says that one of the following is true:

There is a dominant strategy for 1st player.
There is a dominant strategy for 2nd player.
There are strategies for both players that guarantee they don't lose, i.e. perfect play results in a draw (like Tic-Tac-Toe).

As far as I can tell, no one has yet determined which of these three is true. Checkers (aka Draughts or Dama, the game Damath is based on) was 'solved' in 2007 with the aid of computers: two perfect players will always draw. Thus I would assume that modern computers are powerful enough to 'solve' Damath as well, but I don't know what the result would be.

I would say to try and capture high scoring pieces on addition and multiplication squares and capture negative pieces on minus and division squares. If you are to loose a piece if it had a positive score try to make the operand division or subtraction and if you are to loose a negative piece make the operand multiplication or addition.
This would maximize your score and minimize your opponents score.


text:
What happens if an attacking creature is blocked by a creature with equal power and toughness?
What happens if you block an attacking creature with a creature that has equal power and toughness as the attacking creature? Do they both die or bounce off each other?

It will depend on their actual power and toughness. If their power is higher than or equal to their toughness (two 2/1 creatures or two 1/1 creatures blocking each other) they'll both die; if the toughness is higher (two 1/2 creatures) they'll both survive.
That's the story for vanilla creatures (i.e. without abilities); some abilities, like First strike and Deathtouch, might influence the outcome.

OK, thank you. Couldn't find the answer anywhere. Was watching tournaments and was like (huh?) When two creature bounced off eachother.

Note that damage from sources other than combat can also affect this answer. Suppose in Glorfindel's example with 1/2 creatures, one of them had taken 1 point of damage from something before combat damage. (Perhaps due to a Goblin Arsonist). In that case, one of the 1/2 creatures will die (the one that was previously dealt 1 damage) and the other will survive.

A combat isn't "won" or "lost". In fact, creatures aren't really directly compared at all in combat. Each creature deals damage equal to its power to the other creature, and then, if they have received damage equal to or greater than their toughness (including damage from other sources earlier in the turn), or any damage at all from a creature with deathtouch, they are destroyed.

greater than or equal to their toughness is not the only way damage can be lethal - see deathtouch.


text:
When a trigger requires you to sacrifice something, can you sacrifice said something using something else?
Let's say Glacial Chasm enters the battlefield under my control. The card states that when it comes into play I must sacrifice a land. Can I in response to its ETB ability sacrifice a land using say Zuran Orb? When Glacial Chasm entered, a land was sacrificed. Is this allowed, and more to the point: is Glacial Chasm's ETB requirement met in this scenario?

Most instances* of "enter the battlefield" denote triggered abilities, so they go on the stack and you can respond on them before they resolve, e.g. by activating another ability which can be played at instant speed, such as Zuran Orb's.
However, the land you sacrifice for Zuran Orb (even if it's Glacial Chasm itself) does not count for Glacial Chasm's enter the battlefield ability. So you'll have to sacrifice another land (unless you don't have any).
*: some cards have "As [card name] enters the battlefield"; those are replacement effects and don't go on the stack. Those never involve sacrifices, though.

Thanks for clearing it up. The only thing is... say if someone targeted a land with say stripmine to destroy it. Could I in response sac the land to, for the sake of continuity, zuran orb. I presume so, since u can sac in response to a creature being targeted by a spell. Stripmine being an activated ability and not a spell however... does it change?

Yes, you can sacrifice your land to Zuran Orb in response to Strip Mine. The difference here is that Strip Mine's ability destroying the land is the effect rather than the cost.


text:
What happens when each player has to draw a card with no cards left in their library?
So I was wondering, if all players had no cards in their library and you cast a card like Skyscribing that makes everyone draw a card, does this make the game a draw  or is there a draw order and one person wins?
I think it has the same order as resolving like Living Death but I would like to get this cleared.

You are right about the draw order, but it doesn't actually make a difference since the game checks if players tried to draw from an empty deck all at once.

It's a draw.
A player does not lose immediately when drawing a card from an empty library:

704.5b If a player attempted to draw a card from a library with no cards in it since the last time state-based actions were checked, that player loses the game.

State-based actions are not checked until after Skyscribing resolves completely:

704.3. 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.
117.2e Resolving spells and abilities may instruct players to make choices or take actions, or may allow players to activate mana abilities. Even if a player is doing so, no player has priority while a spell or ability is resolving. See rule 608, “Resolving Spells and Abilities.”

State-based actions will make all players lose the game, and 104.4 applies in that situation:

104.4. There are several ways for the game to be a draw.
104.4a If all the players remaining in a game lose simultaneously, the game is a draw.

So it's a draw. (Unless one of the players has an effect akin to Obstinate Familiar, in which case they win the game as the only surviving player.)

"(Unless one of the players has an effect akin to Obstinate Familiar, in which case they win the game as the only surviving player.)" Well, may win the game. Giving the wording of Obstinate Familiar, not losing is optional :)


text:
Good set for building several casual level decks
I want to build several decks for casual playing. My plan is to choose a set, buy 6-7 of each common, 3 of each uncommon, maybe some cheap rares, a stack of basic lands plus whatever tokens I need and use this to build a deck for each single colour and for each pair of colours. As I have never played Magic a lot, I don't know the sets so choosing the set to build this from is hard for me.
I am looking for the following:

coherent theme (I was thinking about Modern Horizons but cards from all over the place drove me off it)
good availability (easy to buy, not very expensive, a lot of bulk rares)
possibility to build 15 decks (mono and two colours) of similar power and playing differently, with all major Magic deck archetypes represented

Which set would you recommend for this?

Core sets like M20 are pretty much built for this kind of "introductory" play, although if you want to represent EVERYTHING magic has to offer you might need to bleed across multiple core sets.
I'll also say that core sets tend not to have very much multi-colour support - Return to Ravnica springs to mind as a set that explicitly encourages dual-coloured deck building, if you're willing to branch out even further.

Core Sets utterly fail the "coherent theme" test, with Magic Origins being a partial exception.

M20 also had a lot of multicolour support, since it had all 10 of the life-gain taplands that could show up in the basic slot, Evolving Wilds at common, Scuttlemutt at uncommon and the 5 enemy-coloured temples at rare. Three-colour decks were very playable!

Not sure if you are aware of this, but on Ebay you can buy a playset (4 of each) of all commons and uncommons of most any recent set as one purchase.  Price various depending on the set.  This will be much more economical than buying individual cards.

Yes, I know this and plan to get cards this way, although most likely via Cardmarket, not Ebay as it seems European traders use this website more and I definitely don't want to pay overseas shipping costs and risk getting cards stuck at customs.


text:
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.

I suggest looking at the edits I have recently made to this question and some others that you asked, and using them to help improve your questions before you post them. In particular, we strongly prefer titles that contain the actual question in short, and not just a mention of the broad topic. And writing longer questions in paragraphs with blank lines in between helps readers follow along with what you are saying.

As for the blank lines,ok I will take this into account. But,as for the titles...well,I should note that Murgatroid and some of you here at Stack Exchange particularly like "question-marked titled questions". Ok,then I'll do as you like.

However,please allow me to point out that,in general,a more exhaustive summary of a given question is obtained avoiding to bring back the parts with question-marks,which repeat what is already in the body,and constitute only its end.It would be better to focus titles on the general theme,also because,f. e.in the case of this question,we are not only talking about how we can spend mana,but also about other things:about all the card in general(TextChanges).But I understand that it is important for you to avoid duplication,so reporting the question-marked parts in titles it is strongly preferred.

This isn't about duplicates. The point of the title is to communicate what the question is asking to people who see it on the front page or in a search, so that they can tell whether they can answer it, or whether it will have the answers they are looking for. Summarizing the question like I did is the best way to do that.

Yes, I will do as it is strongly recommended. I just wanted to say that reading the word "title" - expecially for a "new contributor" - can automatically make him think he has to give a general idea of the proposed topic with that question, much more than it suggests to have to write the "heart"(the part with the question mark) of the question as a "title". But, once you know what is required with the "title", then things will be done in the required way.

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.  It was printed in Mirage, which was released in 1996, only three years after Magic was first printed.  As such, it predates the Sixth Edition Rules, the largest rules revamp Magic has ever seen.  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.
Before the Sixth Edition Rules, you had to have your mana available before you started to cast a spell.  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 were not what mana abilities are now.  They acted more like instants that produce 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.  The Sixth Edition Rules made it possible to use LED while a spell was already in the process of being cast, circumventing that intention.  So LED was given errata that required it to be cast at instant speed, returning it to its original functionality.

Thanks Lupus,finally you can give an excellent answer! Until now, you have limited yourself to criticizing them,immediately marking them as inadequate,or reading them as duplicates of other pre-existing questions(f.e. see the question about Abzan Priest and its text,which in my opinion,and other users too,is ambiguous).Despite these things -which do not concern this question of course- your answer is the best here.I particularly like the part where you say:-The 6th Edition Rules made it possible to use LED while a spell was already in the process of being cast,circumventing that intention ".

This is exactly the basis of the fact that it made me think about the possibility of using the LED to cast spells from your hand before having to discard them due to the ability of the LED. Today this is no longer possible ...... but the errata entered to deal with this situation can really put beginners in difficulty ... and not only beginners!

Just a small criticism: the fact that LED is old doesn't mean anything: Ancestral Recall is an old card too...Although, yes, it's true: Lupus meant that LED is a card that has had to pass all the checks due to the numerous changes that the game has undergone over the years.

@Massimiliano good to know that 100+ answers is considered "limiting myself to criticizing them"

Do you rate my questions good? I do not know this since now..., how could I? 100+ means that? If so, excuse me. Ok, after all I'm only telling silly things...really thank you!

Yes, you're right, you cannot use Lion's Eye Diamond to cast spells which are currently in your hand. The rulings below the card even admit that it's a strange one:

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. Yes, this is a bit weird.

Other than activated abilities, or decks who want their graveyards to be filled (e.g. for Bridge from Below, 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. In both cases, you can just activate the Diamond, causing you to discard your hand. 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.

Yes, cards with Madness and Flashback abilities are now available to cast...this is really great, and clever. Needless to say that... it hadn't occurred to my mind!! ... I no longer need to demonstrate my lack of intelligence in this game! But perhaps it is more the fact that, given the times in which you have literally managed to "turn the rules of this game like a sock" in my eyes, then I always prefer to turn to you for any "special solutions", or even apparently simple uses of hard or trivial cards.

Interestingly enough, both Lion's Eye Diamond and Bridge from Below seem to be the only cards in Gatherer with a Yes, this is weird comment.

Re "you cannot use Lion's Eye Diamond to cast spells from your hand", You can; you are merely unlikely to have any cards in your hand. For example, if you have the means to draw cards in the same step/phase as you cast LED, you will have cards in your hand to cast, and nothing stops LED's mana from being used for those. For example, you could cast a spell that causes you to draw cards and use LED in response to it. For example, you could use a card that causes one's mana pool not to drain at the end of steps/phases.

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.
However, you can still draw cards after the LED ability resolves, and use the floating mana to cast the spells. 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.
Notably, the famous Storm deck for legacy runs the combo of Infernal Tutor with LED. 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.

Glorfindel mentioned Madness and Flashback, and Mephy mentioned using it while a card draw effect is on the stack. There are a few more ways to use it:
Have a permanent that allows you to draw cards. 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.
Cast cards from your library. For instance, Elsha of the Infinite allows you to cast the top card of your library.
Cast cards from exile. For instance, you can cast Act on Impulse, sacrifice LED, then cast one of the cards you exiled with Act on Impulse.
I believe that you can also use it during your upkeep. 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. This would let you use any Pact regardless of whether you have lands that produce the correct color of mana.

Of course... the controller of LED is able to use it in lots of ways...there's no doubt about it. Really thank you all, because this is exactly what i'm expecting from experts: talking about some of the several possible interactions  with this really interesting card.

Okay, you're all right.                                                                                But I keep wondering ... what would happen, then, if I ... ehm, I.. ... would cast a  ....
LED ZEPPELIN instead? As they say,too ... :-"If you can clarify, please do!" ...    ..........
And here my question is: in which song do they say it? Answers are accepted!


text:
What happens when target of an activated ability becomes illegal (in this particular situation)?
I have a Hunting Kavu, and the opponent attacks with a Craw Wurm.
I decide to use the Kavu's activated ability, in order to exile both creatures.
But, in response to this, the opponent casts a Jump on the Wurm, which obtains flying this way.
My question is then as follows: since the target of Kavu's activated ability has become illegal, what happens to both creatures?

The Wurm remains on the battlefield, while the Kavu goes to exile anyway;
Both creatures remain on the battlefield.

It's 2: both creatures remain on the battlefield.
Hunting Kavu's ability has only one target, the attacking creature. It's not a target itself. Since the ability does no longer have any valid targets, it doesn't resolve:

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

So the Hunting Kavu will survive as well.

So I wonder: if Hunting Kavu had an illegal target, but had a legal one too, could his ability resolve? I think the answer is yes, because a line in rule 628.2b states:"If all its targets, for every instance of the word “target,” are now illegal, the spell or ability doesn’t resolve. It’s removed from the stack and, if it’s a spell, put into its owner’s graveyard. Otherwise, the spell or ability will resolve normally". Well, if at least one target (among the many predicted by a given spell) is legal, then I think the ability will resolve.


text:
Possible way to counter or sidestep split-second spells (like Trickbind) in a particular situation
I have on the battlefield Will-o'-the-Wisp, and my opponent (it is his turn now) is going to attack in his combat step with his flying Air Elemental.  I have to face this 4/4 creature and, in normal situations, I should not feel afraid of it. But I know – or I imagine that – my opponent has in his hand a Trickbind. The question is: may I sidestep this split second spell, by activating the regeneration ability of Will-o'-the-Wisp two times, in order to make sure it will survive the combat phase? In other words, I activate regeneration (B) one time, and then, retaining priority, I activate regeneration one more time (B again), sending to the stack two activations of the same ability.

Let us continue this discussion in chat.

Yes, you can do this.
After you activate an ability or cast a spell, you retain priority. If you activate the same ability again, the best your opponent can do is counter one of the two abilities on the stack (unless he has more than one Trickbind!) The other one will resolve and give you regeneration.
This works because although Trickbind prevents further activations of the same ability; with this method you are never trying to activate the ability after Trickbind resolves.

Ok, the first part of the answer sounds good. But I have some problem with the second. Let's imagine opponent has two trickbinds on his hands.It is correct to say that: the first trickbind counters the first regen; then, since it is resolved, the stack is filled with the second regen only - but no trickbinds - and the opponent can NOW cast another Trickbind to counter the second regen too. It is correct?

That’s correct.

Also note in competitive play if you want to do this it needs to be done the way it's described in the question: tap two swamps and say "I activate Will o the wisp twice retaining priority".  Waiting to see if your opponent starts to reach for an island and then saying "Wait I still have priority activating again!" is explicitly forbidden ;)

Absolutely correct. I agree with Affe's  prohibition.

Much more than this,the ban Affe refers to,i think it should be formalized in the game in an even more"stiffy"way.Let me explain: how could someone specify that a player has unequivocally passed the priority,thus avoiding that a player can "cheat" by observing if the other"moves his hands"towards his lands to throw something?Perhaps,it is sufficient to say it verbally,at least in very delicate cases such as those concerning"fast"cards(such as trickbind),in fact;or like this:-"Ok, I'm passing priority!".Or,is anyone able to indicate another way of indicating this decisive passage of priority?

sorry, but I think it is a question of decisive importance for the goodness of the game, as a whole ...

Yes, that would work. After activating the regeneration ability, you get priority:

117.3c If a player has priority when they cast a spell, activate an ability, or take a special action, that player receives priority afterward.

so you can activate it again. Trickbind does not counter any (other) abilities of the permanent already on the stack.

Really great. I' m waiting for other possible answers before accepting it, but I know it is a good one.

This answer does not cover the "sidestepping a split second spell" part of the question, but it does answer the "Possible way to counter" part of the question.
You can flip over a face down creature in response to a Split Second spell. So for example, if you had a Stratus Dancer face down on the field, you could flip it face up in response to counter the Split Second spell, protecting your Will-o'-the-Wisp, but that would be a bit excessive.

702.36e Any time you have priority, you may turn a face-down permanent you control with a morph ability face up. This is a special action; it doesn’t use the stack (see rule 116).
116.1 Special actions are actions a player may take when they have priority that don’t use the stack.
116.2b Turning a face-down creature face up is a special action. A player can take this action any time they have priority.

Split Second does not stop you from doing anything, it just prevents you from casting spells and activating abilities that are not mana abilities.

"The reason this behavior exists, is it prohibits your opponent from smoking your morphling with a lightning bolt when you declare you wish to unmorph. It makes morphing more useful." (Source: How can a Morph ability counter split second spells? Answer)

That's precisely what I am wondering, after the good answers I received. Using the Voidmage Apprentice - for example - is correct with reference to the rules of the game, but makes one doubt the goodness of the game with respect to the morph ability.In fact, since the latter has a cost,in my opinion it should be considered as an activated ability. But I know morph ability is NOT an activated ability. I only think morph ability SHOULD be an activated ability. this way it is possible to sidestep lots of things...but, ok... the rules allow it.

Another way to counter Trickbind may be Kheru spellsnatcher morph ability, too.

Yeah, it is an odd interaction, though I personally am glad it is in. Morph would be even worse than how it already is if it was a normal activation.

Here then is that my main intent-for which I also had "set a bounty",but without yet knowing its proper functioning mode well-is taking place.A lot of evidence is being gathered to clearly define the difference between"split-second spells"and "uncountering spells",which must be carefully distinguished,especially for novice players.My proposal to"set a bounty"to find more possible cases in which this can be seen well was rejected,because I am still a beginner,too:the many options of its operation prevented me from clarifying that my goal was precisely this.


text:
Is it possible to play a land card when the stack is filled up?
Is it possible to play a land card when the stack is filled with unresolved spells and effects waiting to do their work? It may be useful since MTG came out with his new (at those times...) Landfall ability (Zendikar, if I remember well...). So, I question this because some years ago I was trying to counter a spell, but my opponent played a land card – to let some landfall ability to trigger, and get some advantages  from this – and at the end of this stack he finally cast his spell. I lost the game some turns later.
All I’m asking is already described above, but I ask it once again: Is it possible to play a land card when the stack is filled up?

Note there is no limit to the Stack. It can be empty or non-empty, but filled implies nothing else can be added which is simply not true.

Is it possible to play a land card when the stack is filled with unresolved spells and effects waiting to do their work?

No.

305.1. 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.

Exception: Abilities that instruct a player to play a card or play a land. These functions even if though the stack isn't empty.

@ikegami There are lots of spells/abilities that have a player "put a land onto the battlefield", but that is not the same as "playing a land". I can't think of anything that causes you to "play a land" directly. They're functionally equivalent for landfall/enter the battlefield effects, but very importantly different since you can only "play" one land per turn, barring other effects.

Another super weird niche exception is that Dryad Arbor can be played when the stack is not empty if you have Teferi, Mage of Zhalfir out or cast Scout's Warning first.  For newer cards they changed the template to "cast as though they have Flash" to prevent these kinds of oddities.

@Nuclear Wang, Re "I can't think of anything that causes you to "play a land" directly.", I don't know if any spell/abilities allows you to play a land exclusively, but there definitely some that allow you to play a land directly. See my answer for an example.

No, not usually.

Both the rules (via a mechanism called Priority) and abilities (including spells) instruct you to play a land.
The normal way to play lands is through the permission given by priority. A player is only given permission to do this when the stack is empty during a main phase of their turn.[CR 117.1, 117.1c, 116.2a]
But priority is not the only thing that instructs you to play lands. There are spells and abilities (such as Brilliant Ultimatum) that instruct a player to play a card. The stack isn't empty when these spells and abilities have you play a card, and this is of no consequence.[CR 608.2c]

117.1. Unless a spell or ability is instructing a player to take an action, which player can take actions at any given time is determined by a system of priority. The player with priority may cast spells, activate abilities, and take special actions.
117.1c A player may take some special actions any time they have priority. A player may take other special actions during their main phase any time they have priority and the stack is empty. See rule 116, “Special Actions.”
116.2a Playing a land is a special action. To play a land, a player puts that land onto the battlefield from the zone it was in (usually that player’s hand). By default, a player can take this action only once during each of their turns. A player can take this action any time they have priority and the stack is empty during a main phase of their turn. See rule 305, “Lands.”
608.2c The controller of the spell or ability follows its instructions in the order written. [...]

Note: Don't confuse continuous effects (e.g. from static abilities) that modify the permission given from priority for an instruction to play a land. For example, "You may play the top card of your library if it’s a land card." simply modifies from where you can play a land when you have priority.

Well ikigami, all these situations you described are exceptions, but they could occur. So you gave good complementary instructions about the whole situation. Next time you'll get an award, really thank you.

@Massimiliano, Nonsense. You can only play a land when instructed to play a land, and there two time and only two times when MTG does that. No exceptions. My answer identifies those times and specifies whether the stack needs to be empty or not at the times. (It doesn't for the first time, and it can't be for the second time.)

@Massimiliano, In fact, there is at least one exception to the rules which contradict the answer (but not when you can play a land), but neither answer mention it. See CALEB F's comment on the other answer for the exception.

"No exceptions"; and, some line later...."there is at least one exception to the rules" ...you can read by yourself, Ikegami, your answers are good, but you want to understand everything, and sometimes disorient the reader too.

Sorry, I try to keep my English simple enough for you to understand, but I  guess it's not always possible. There is no contradiction in what I said. There are no exceptions to "You can only play a land when instructed to play a land, and there two time and only two times when MTG does that.". There is an exception to the rules whether the stack needs to be empty or not

sooner or later, other exceptions to the rule will come ...

Re "and sometimes disorient the reader too", While I'm excellent at keeping answers simple, MTG is quite complicated. Sometimes, it's complicated to give the right answer. (The other answer is wrong. The stack doesn't necessarily need to be empty to play a land.)

Re "sooner or later, other exceptions to the rule will come", Yes, that's why our answers stick to the rules and tend to avoid mention cards that override the rules unless it's particularly relevant. And it's why I didn't mentioned any of the exceptions in my answer. It would just complicate things for nothing

Let us continue this discussion in chat.


text:
Does Cabal Paladin's ability trigger when playing an artifact land?
If I have a Cabal Paladin onto the battlefield, and I play an artifact land, such as Seat of the Synod, does the Cabal Paladin's ability trigger?

No, it doesn't trigger. Lands are played but not 'cast'. There is a ruling below the card in Gatherer which explicitly states so:

Lands are never cast, so abilities that trigger “whenever you cast a historic spell” won’t trigger if you play a legendary land. They also won’t trigger if a card on the battlefield transforms into a legendary land, as the Ixalan and Rivals of Ixalan double-faced cards do.

Yes. Moreover - I only realized it now - on Seat of theSynod there is also explicitly written: "this isn't a spell" ...! however...thanks, Glorfinder.

All of this starts from the idea of bringing together cards from Mirrodin and cards from Dominaria in a single deck. The former are characterized by the ability "Affinity for artifacts ", which links very well with Dominaria's concept of" historic spell ". Too bad that Mirrodin was characterized by "Artifact Lands" too, which then were rightly and forever banned. Basically, it is right: an "artifact land" seems to me ..just a contradiction in terms !! Thus, the bond doesn't always work well, because artifact lands don't count as historic spells.


text:
Diplomacy - failed attack
Right now I'm the game master and we discuss the following scenario:

Greece is empty
all troops move at the same time
Austrian fleet:  Ionian Sea - Greece
Osmanian fleet: Aegean Sea - Greece
Italian fleet: East Mediterranean - Aegean Sea

So the result is that Greece stays empty but what happens to the Aegean Sea?
In my opinion the Osmanian fleet gets defeated in Greece and comes back to the Aegean Sea but there is the Italian fleet waiting.

We have
Austria
  F Ion-Gre
Turkey
  F Aeg-Gre
Italy
  F EMa-Aeg
F Ion-Gre bounces with F Aeg-Gre because both have strength 1 so nobody wins.   As a result the fleets never leave their spaces and thus F Aeg stays at Aeg.
So F EMa-Aeg attacks an occupied space. Both have strength 1 so both stay at their spaces with the end result that nothing changes.

All units move at the same time, but units only leave their current location if their move is successful. In this case, F Aeg - Gre bounces, therefore there is still a fleet in Aegean Sea, therefore the Italian fleet trying to move into Aegean Sea would require at least 1 offensive support.
Note that units who are moving away cannot be supported defensively, but theoretically someone else could try to enter the same space (e.g. F Con S Smy - Aeg), thereby blocking a supported attack (e.g. F Ion S Eme - Aeg).
When in doubt, try using an open source adjudicator such as Realpolitik: http://realpolitik.sourceforge.net/


text:
In Ticket to Ride, when completing a route do you replace the cards you used with new ones?
In Ticket to Ride, when completing a route do you replace the cards you used with new ones?

No. Drawing cards, both for destinations and trains, is a separate action. Finishing a route gets you points, but you need to replenish your hand manually.
The rule book says nothing about drawing cards in the section on claiming a route, if you were meant to draw cards, it would be here:

Claim a Route – The player may claim a route on the board by playing a set of Train Car cards that match the color and length of the route and
  then placing one of his colored trains on each space of this route. 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.

Or a little later on in the section about claiming routes:

Claiming Routes
To claim a route, a player must play a set of cards equal to the number of spaces in the route. A set of cards must be of the same type. Most routes require a specific type of set. For example a Blue route must be claimed using blue-colored Passenger Car cards. Some routes – those that are Gray colored – can be claimed using a set of cards of any one color.
When a route is claimed, the player places one of his plastic trains in each of the spaces of the route. All the cards in the set used to claim the route are then discarded.
A player may claim any open route on the board. He is never required to
  connect to any of his previously played routes. A player may only claim
  a maximum of one route, hence connect two adjacent cities, never more,
  on his turn.
Some cities are connected by Double-Routes. One player cannot claim
  both routes to the same cities.

The only way to draw cards is by taking the Draw Train Car Cards action for your turn instead of the Claim a Route action:

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


text:
Are there names for the different types of adjacency in a square grid?

See the image. How do you call the blue cells in relation to the black cell?
I've seen "orthogonally adjacent" for the first picture and "diagonally adjacent" for the second picture, but that leaves a void for the third picture (other than "orthogonally or diagonally adjacent", which is really long-winded).
If I were feeling inventive, I could make up "edge-adjacent", "corner-adjacent", and "edge- or corner-adjacent". That last one's still long-winded, but less so. The problem is, well (a) it's long-winded, and (b) "corner-adjacent" is a bit ambiguous. Technically, even the edge-adjacent cells share a corner with the black cell! So it might refer to the third picture.
(If I could enforce nomenclature, I would actually make people say "edge-adjacent" for the first, "corner-adjacent" for the third, and leave a void for the second (we don't need it anyway).)
Another option I can make up is "weakly adjacent" and "strongly adjacent", but again it's not clear if "weakly adjacent" refers to the second picture or the third.
So, what are the names for these types of adjacency? I mean this both in the "What's the official name" sense and "What would you call them" sense. I'm most interested in a name for the third picture; you can leave a void for the second picture for all I care. An example usage would be "The king can attack all [name] squares."
(I'm asking this in the board games forum because it seems like it'd important for talking about game rules.)
(Notice, by the way, that the Wikipedia page on Minesweeper just gives up, leaving the words "neighboring" and "adjacent" ambiguous.)

One possible solution is to say "at least corner-adjacent" (or "at least weakly adjacent") for the third picture. Still long-winded - fewer letters than "edge- or corner-adjacent" but the same number of syllables.

Ooh - someone suggested "omni-adjacent" for the third picture. I like that. So (1) orthogonal(ly) adjacent, (2) diagonal(ly) adjacent, and (3) omni-adjacent.

Adjacent Orthogonally/Diagonally and Surrounding are the most direct/simple and clear ways to describe the three cases. Anything else is just description over terms (or require you to specify the definitions of the terms you'll be using anyhow, which is the same).

If you really need all three and need to distinguish between them a lot, you could define "+-adjacent", "x-adjacent" and "✷-adjacent" (or, as StartPlayer suggests, just 'surrounding').

I would write “vertically or horizontally adjacent” for the situation in your first sketch. (This is language that ikkachu mentioned in a comment to one of the answers.) Of course, if the game board is typically printed as a grid of diamond shapes with diagonal lines, this won’t be clear, so wording and a picture is best.

Orthadjacent, diagadjacent, and omnijacent.

@jl6 brb, naming my son Omnijason

Also anadjacent for “not adjacent”. @Akiva - one for your daughter too!

orthogonal, diagonal and octagonal neighbors

A common way to describe this in game rules is surrounded or 'surrounding spaces`.
As an example from the rules of Carcassonne

A monastery is completed when it is surrounded by 8 tiles. Each of the
  monastery’s tiles (the 8 surrounding tiles and the one with the
  monastery itself) is worth 1 point.

Even so, note that Carcassonne specifies the "8 surrounding spaces", to distinguish it from games like Go where a piece is considered surrounded by only the four orthogonal adjacencies.

Not a board game but I noticed after I read this that Marvel's Puzzle Quest also uses surround.  Reminded me of this=)

In mathematics, specifically in the field of cellular automata, picture one is known as the "Von Neumann Neighborhood" and picture three is known as the "Moore neighborhood" or the "Conway neighborhood" (referring to Conway's Game of Life ).  (Sometimes these terms include the center cell as part of the neighborhood, i.e. the center cell is considered to be in its own neighborhood.)  Unfortunately there isn't a named term for picture two.
For even more math jargon, you can say that picture one has all cells at a Manhattan Distance of 1, and picture three has all cells at a Chebyshev distance of 1.  Again there's no short way to describe picture two.

If you are involving metrics, Euclidian distance equal to root of 2 is what describes the second image. Constant 1-norm for the first, contant 2-norm for the second and constant ∞-norm for the third.

The cells in picture two could be said to have a "Manhattan−Chebyshev distance" of 1, but you have to use a minus sign instead of a hyphen.

For the third situation, a term I see quite frequently (perhaps because I'm a chess player) is that the blue squares are a King's move away from the black one. This is similar to your "a King can attack all squares" but it's shorter and can be used as a compound modifier.

The term is also used by variants sudoku, kings move constraint, knights move constraint. And you can also have a bishop and a rook constraint to complete the set.

@ToonKrijthe Bishop and rook would refer to the entire row and column or diagonals, because they can move more than one space at a time.

@ToonKrijthe Rook constraint doesn't make sense to me because that's already part of normal Sudoku rules.

@GendoIkari point but I mentioned it for completeness.

This may depend a bit on the context, and if you can define the phrases used beforehand, or if you need to use something that's immediately clear to everyone.
If we think about, say, writing the rules of a game, the easiest case would be where all parts of the game only care about one sort of adjacency. Then you could mention at the very start of the rules that when you say "adjacent", you mean something laying in the four orthogonally neighboring squares and there would be  no need for the qualifier later. That would also be a good place to post a describing image. (Or the eight orthogonally or diagonally adjacent squares, or rarely, just the diagonally adjacent ones.)
If you have different cases, then "orthogonally adjacent", "diagonally adjacent" and "orthogonally or diagonally adjacent" would likely be the phrases easiest to understand.
If you mostly mean all eight adjacent squares, then you might avoid the awkward long phrase by just saying "adjacent" in that case, and reserve the qualifiers to the exceptional cases. This may also warrant some introductory explanation.
(For example, the Freeciv wiki seems to mostly use this custom, though I didn't check if they have a proper definition. It's a computer game, not a board game but the concepts are the same.)

You could also use "the eight surrounding/adjacent squares" and "the four surrounding/adjacent/connected" squares, if you only need one of the two cases with just four squares in question. That may also require a definition somewhere in the rules, but should be clear enough.
Those of a somewhat technically-oriented mind might like the phrases "8-connected squares" or "8-neighborhood", and the similar "4-connected squares" or "4-neighborhood", where the latter two would always mean the four orthogonally connected squares. But these are usually written with the number as a digit, and that may be at risk of mistyping, or at least suspicions of mistyping more than the written out words.

For the "one step orthogonally and one diagonally away" case, calling it a knight's move seems to be rather common, it's used even by go players. (There's also the concept of "a large knight's move", which is two steps orthogonally and one diagonally. (The step is large, not the knight.)). But I haven't seen the reference to "a king's move" that often, and probably wouldn't use it, unless it would be helpful to also refer to other chess pieces.

I considered asking this on english.SE, as it's not related to only board games, but there actually already was a similar question: What word describes something that can move orthogonally and diagonally?.
The highest-voted answer there suggests the word octilinear for all eight directions, but at least to my non-native English eye, it appears somewhat technical. The simple contracted combination orthodiagonally is also mentioned there.

"Orthogonal" is how I've seen "adjacent but not diagonal" referred to, but rarely. And even when it's used I believe it comes with a more simplistic explanation since it's not commonly used.

@CaptainMan, "orthogonally" seemed immediately familiar to me, but you're right in that it might also often be written out as "vertically or horizontally". Amusingly, the first google hit I got for "orthogonally adjacent", was a question on BGG asking what it means.

That's actually pretty funny :) The main reason I say to explain it somewhere in the rules is because apart from them needing to be very clear, but there may be younger players who don't know what it means (depending on the audience).

Catering for younger players who might not know words such as "orthogonal" or "adjacent" is fair enough. But a picture is worth a thousand words. Refer to a diagram and use the words (e.g. "orthogonally adjacent"). Then the reader will learn the words, and just the words will be enough after you used them the first time.

@RosieF In fact, I wrote a bunch of drafts of this question before finally deciding to get out markers and a piece of paper

Simply "adjacent" can naturally be used to mean a square is either "diagonally adjacent" or "directly adjacent".
Another phrase, if it's mentioned before that distance is counted as 1 per straight or diagonal move, would be to say "within one square" or "one square away" or "one distant".

Your first para is a good warning. "Adjacent to" literally means "lying next to". Only four squares lie next to a specific square. So using "adjacent" also for those four squares that touch it at a corner is to use the word a bit loosely. And you can't rely on readers guessing that that's what you mean. So that makes "adjacent" on its own ambiguous. So you should be more specific.

directly adjacent, diagonally adjacent, and all squares adjacent, respectively.

Adjacent Orthogonally or diagonally adjacent; share at least one common vertex; has a Chebyshev distance of 1
Orthogonally adjacent, neighboring Share an edge (or two common vertices); has a Manhattan distance of 1
Diagonally adjacent Share exactly one common vertex; has a Chebyshev distance of 1 but a Manhattan distance of 2
– chaosatthesky.wordpress.com

You could describe the first example as 'sharing an edge', and the third example as 'sharing a corner'. If you need the second example, you could call it 'sharing a corner but not an edge'.

For the second, I think you mean "sharing a corner but not an edge". And for the third, I'd want more than just "sharing a corner", which definitely suggests the second to me.

The first one is called Von Neumann Neighbohood, the second one is Rotated Von Neumann Neighbohood and the third one is Moore Neighbohood.

Where do these names come from? (What was Von Neumann doing?)

I've seen neighbouring squares  used to refer to all eight.
It's as much an issue of writing as of terminology though, and you need to be sure to introduce your terms clearly as in technical writing.  In the case of writing rules, you may wish to recap at points where you feel people may jump in.
I'd use "the eight neighbouring squares" or "all eight neighbouring squares", "the four adjacent squares", which you could even expand as "the four adjacent squares north, south, east, and west of the starting square" and "the four diagonal neighbours".  Yes adjacent means "next to", but we often think in terms of NSEW rather than left/right/up/down and a neighbour to the N is just as much a next door neighbour as one to the W.  Later you can refer to "all neighbours", "diagonal neighbours", and "adjacent squares".
Of course, this doesn't lead to a choice of 3 simple adjectives to apply to one noun, but in rules given as prose that may even be a good thing; it would be a disadvantage in a table but there you could use a graphical approach (four/eight headed arrows), or a column "neighbour" with "diagonal"/"adjacent"/"all".  The arrows are also useful as a shorthand (if of course it's about moves/attacks/similar interactions).  Unfortunately suitable arrows don't seem to exist as unicode symbols, so here's a sketch.


text:
Is Simic Ascendancy triggered by Awakening of Vitu-Ghazi?
Does Awakening of Vitu-Ghazi trigger the ability of Simic Ascendancy?
Awakening of Vitu-Ghazi says:

Put nine +1/+1 counters on target land you control. It becomes a legendary 0/0 Elemental creature with haste named Vitu-Ghazi.

So either the land gets the +1/+1 counters and afterwards becomes a creature.
Or it becomes a creature and then receives the +1/+1 counters.
To me the last assumption seems correct because it is irritating to me to be able to put +1/+1 counters on a land.

It was probably done that way to avoid the situation where you temporarily have a 0/0 creature. It wouldn't be a problem because SBAs aren't checked during the resolution of a spell, but it would confuse some people.

@ikegami well amass does exactly do this. Create a 0/0 token and then put +1/+1 counters on it.

Amass was probably done that way to keep the text short. It avoids an entire "otherwise" clause.

The two actions (adding counters and the permanent type change) are two different steps of the same spell. That means they're executed separately:

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

There's no rule prohibiting +1/+1 counters on a non-creature permanent. For example, the land Llanowar Reborn enters the battlefield with a +1/+1 counter.
So unfortunately Simic Ascendancy wouldn't trigger, as the counters are put on the land while it's not a creature yet.
Simic Ascendancy would trigger if the land was already also a creature prior to the spell resolving: for example, casting Awakening a second time on the same animated land, or casting it on a land that was animated by Nissa, Who Shakes the World.

damn. thanks for clarification, I thought I was on something there ☺

@bautista however if you animate it first with Nissa, then cast awakening, it does work...

And of course, there's always Dryad Arbor

@ike but unfortunately not standard legal


text:
On-attack triggers and removal for attacking or tapped creatures
My opponent controls creatures with on-attack triggers (e.g. Ulamog, the Infinity Gyre with its Annihilator trigger or Edgar Markov with its buff trigger).
I have in my hand instant-speed removal that is concerned with (or targets) attacking or tapped creatures (e.g. Settle the Wreckage or Seal Away).
My opponent attacks me with said creature(s). I think it goes as follows:

my opponent declares attacks
the creatures become "tapped" and "attacking", at the same time the on-attack triggers enter the stack
Case 1: I cast Settle the Wreckage, nothing else happens, the creatures are exiled and their triggers leave the stack, everything else resolves.
Case 2: I cast Seal Away, nothing else happens, the targeted creature is exiled, its triggers leave the stack, everything else resolves.

Is that correct? Or do the on-attack triggers somehow come together with the attack before I get priority?

their triggers leave the stack

That's where your reasoning goes wrong. Once an ability is on the stack, it's 'separated' from the original object:

112.7a Once activated or triggered, an ability exists on the stack independently of its source. Destruction or removal of the source after that time won't affect the ability. Note that some abilities cause a source to do something (for example, "Prodigal Pyromancer deals 1 damage to target creature or player") rather than the ability doing anything directly. In these cases, any activated or triggered ability that references information about the source because the effect needs to be divided checks that information when the ability is put onto the stack. Otherwise, it will check that information when it resolves. In both instances, if the source is no longer in the zone it's expected to be in at that time, its last known information is used. The source can still perform the action even though it no longer exists.

(Emphasis mine)
Removing the source of the ability does not help countering the ability or removing it from the stack. You'd have to remove the player (see rule 800.4a) for something like this to happen. Of course, you can counter the abilities with cards like Stifle because you do get priority before they resolve.


text:
Checking target legality (esp for removal)
When an opponent targets a creature and I give it hexproof in response (e.g. with Dive Down) it becomes an illegal target for the spell or ability.
This is because target legality for the spell is checked once when putting it on the stack (usually when casting or activating it) and once when it would resolve. Correct?
Then why does the same not work for a spell that cares about power or toughness (e.g. Smite the Monstrous). Why can I not change the power in response to Smite the Monstrous being cast (with some sort of buff effect, e.g. Giant Growth) and make it an illegal target?
Am I wrong in some assumption?

Changing the P/T only works if the new P/T is not valid. Smite the Monstrous cares about a minimum power, Giant Growth will push it deeper into legal target territory.

You can change the power of the creature targeted by Smite the Monstrous to make it an illegal target. However, a buff effect like Giant Growth won't help there because Smite the Monstrous targets a creature with "power 4 or greater"; if a creature is already a valid target when the spell was cast, increasing its power with Giant Growth won't change that. You would need to decrease its power to less than 4 to make the target illegal. Befuddle, for example, would do it if the creature starts out with power 7 or less.

This is because target legality for the spell is checked once when putting it on the stack (usually when casting or activating it) and once when it would resolve. Correct?

Yes.

601.2. To cast a spell is to take it from where it is (usually the hand), put it on the stack, and pay its costs, so that it will eventually resolve and have its effect. Casting a spell includes proposal of the spell (rules 601.2a–d) and determination and payment of costs (rules 601.2f–h). To cast a spell, a player follows the steps listed below, in order. A player must be legally allowed to cast the spell to begin this process (see rule 601.3). If a player is unable to comply with the requirements of a step listed below while performing that step, the casting of the spell is illegal ; the game returns to the moment before the casting of that spell was proposed (see rule 725, “Handling Illegal Actions”).
601.2c The player announces their choice of an appropriate object or player for each target the spell requires.

(similar rules exist for activating abilities) and later:

Resolving Spells and Abilities

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

Then why does the same not work for a spell that cares about power or toughness

That spell works exactly the same way. You can definitely make the creature an illegal target by decreasing its power below 4 (see the emphasis above). However, Giant Growth won't help, since it increases power; you'll need something like Ovinize instead.

Assuming the creature isn't too huge, I wonder if [mtg:Chain to Memory] might be a better parallel (to make it clear that removing all abilities has nothing to do with the situation).

Giant Growth will work to prevent destruction by spells like Reave Soul, Vanquish the Weak, or the first level of Elspeth's Nightmare. This is because these spells target a creature with power X or less, so making the creature bigger makes it an illegal target. Your example of Smite the Monstrous (or other spells and abilities like it, such as Chop Down, General Kudro of Drannith or Legion's Judgment) care about a creature being power X or greater, so a 4/4 creature after Giant Growth will be a 7/7 creature, which is still 4 or greater and a legal target. For a spell like Smite the Monstrous you need to make the creature power lower to change legality, using something like Chilling Trap or Chain to Memory.


text:
Looking to identify an unusual type of solitaire
I went to college in the 1980s and someone there showed me an unusual way to play solitaire that I've played ever since. This game uses one standard deck of cards [no jokers].
Two rows of cards are dealt into stacks, each stack having 4 cards, and the cards are all face down. The top row is for cards numbered 2 through 8 and the bottom row is for cards numbered 9 and 10 and the jack, king, and queen face cards. The last stack the ace stack and this is placed to the bottom left of the two rows. Play starts with the ace stack; the first card on the stack is turned over and then place under the corresponding stack, i.e.; if a 2 is turned over this card is placed under the 2 stack an the first card on the 2 stack is turned over. The game is won when the last card turned over is the fourth ace.
Any help with the name of this variant is appreciated; I've been playing this game for decades and have no idea what to call it!

This sounds like it's equivalent to Clock Patience, but with a less space-consuming layout and using the aces as the starter pile rather than the kings.  I've also seen it referred to as "Travellers".


text:
Controller change mechanics
How do abilities work when card controller changes?
Playing MTGA I saw these:
Taking control of Rekindling Phoenix and having it die creates the egg for the new controller, which makes sense to me.
But taking control of a creature with Rogue's Gloves and damaging opponent lets HIM draw a bonus card, not the creature's current controller.
Is that a bug in MTGA or some strange rule?

These are both correct. You see a difference because the abilities are on different permanents.
When you take control of an opponent's creature that is equipped with Rogue's Gloves, the Rogue's Gloves stays attached to the creature but the equipment itself is still controlled by the opponent, and the triggered ability is on the equipment. So, when the creature deals combat damage to the opponent, the opponent controls the Gloves' triggered ability and they get to draw the card.

301.5d An Equipment’s controller is separate from the equipped creature’s controller; the two need not be the same. Changing control of the creature doesn’t change control of the Equipment, and vice versa. Only the Equipment’s controller can activate its abilities. However, if the Equipment grants an ability to the equipped creature (with “gains” or “has”), the equipped creature’s controller is the only one who can activate that ability.

Note the difference between the wording on Rogue's Gloves and Curious Obsession - if you were to gain control of a creature with Curious Obsession attached you would draw the card instead of your opponent.

Thank you both. The Curious Obsession hint is spot on, I think that's the main thing that confused me, seeing it behave one way then Rogue's Gloves in the opposite way. The Equipment ability vs the Equipment-granted Creature ability is an important distinction I didn't realize.

@Allure  Curious Obsession grants the ability to the creature, while the Rogue's Gloves keep the ability for itself, merely being triggered by the creature.


text:
If my opponent casts Ultimate Price on my Phantasmal Bear, can I save it by casting Snap or Curfew?
I attack with Phantasmal Bear. My opponent responds by casting Ultimate Price and targets my bear. Can I save my creature by casting Snap or Curfew? If I had a regular creature, I know that Curfew would be able to save because I would just return it to my hand and my opponents Ultimate Price would have an illegal target and fizzle out. But, I'm supposed to sacrifice Phantasmal Bear when it becomes targeted. So I'm just very confused on whether my bear will lose the target when I cast Curfew or automatically die because it was previously targeted. (I know now most illusions don't have that ability, but my whole deck has creatures with that ability so its very important)

Can you clean up your question to focus on what you are asking and less back story please. It is hard to understand what you are asking.

Just so you know, most illusion creatures do not in fact have that ability, so you should probably quote the exact ability you are talking about.

You can save your Phantasmal Bear with Curfew, but not with Snap.
The "illusion ability" is a triggered ability, and once it triggers it goes on the stack on top of whatever spell or ability triggered it. So, after your opponent casts the Ultimate Price, the triggered ability goes on the stack and then you have the opportunity to respond. If you respond by casting Curfew, you can choose to put the Phantasmal Bear into your hand, which will save it from both its own ability and the removal spell. If you instead respond with Snap, Snap itself targets the creature, so the illusion ability will trigger again and go onto the stack on top of Snap, and you will have to sacrifice the creature before Snap resolves.

Thank you so much. Still confused about the Snap part though because why would it matter if the creature got targeted twice?

Which part of my explanation of why that happens is not clear to you?

Every time the bear is targeted its ability will trigger, even if a copy of that ability is already on the stack.

@user27103 The important distinction between Snap and Curfew is that Snap targets, and would hence put another trigger on the stack (Phantasmal bear's triggered ability), whereas Curfew does not target (and hence does not put another trigger on the stack, and therefore Curfew resolves before the triggers resolve).


text:
Monopoly deal rent
If I rent someone for a large amount of money, but they have no money, or properties, and all they have is a full set, can I take the set as payment?

There is nothing that prevents properties in a monopoly from being used to pay for rent, but the decision belongs to the paying player.

You can pay with cards from your bank, properties, or a combination of both. You choose how to play - not the player you're paying!

The Sly Deal and Forced Deal cards have exceptions for properties in a set; rent does not have this exception.  So, if a player must pay you rent and all they have are properties in sets, they must pay you using property from those sets.

Yes you can take ANYTHING from the enemy players, if they don't have enough cash.
The game really reflects real life scenarios. Where anything can happens, even losing property to opponents.
Hope this answers your question.


text:
What does BREAD stand for while drafting?
I was just reading What are good strategies for booster drafts?, but as a new player I'm not familiar with a lot of jargon. The accepted answer mentions that BREAD is important when drafting:

"BREAD" is key, but there is another technique that helps a lot in most Limited formats:

Could someone explain what is meant by BREAD in this context?

The answer to this question, is the second voted answer in the linked to question.  Wanted to vote to close, but couldn't find a decent reason.

@John Mark it as a duplicate for that reason, I think. I think the answer would have been better as an edit on the existing question (see my edit to link the text 'BREAD' in the top answer to the answer you recommended).
This isn't a criticism of this question, which is very good! It's just unfortunate that the top answer on the question linked depended on you knowing that an older answer exists.

@deworde What I understand from my experience at RPG.SE: "duplicate answers aren't the same as duplicate questions". Especially for the sake of future querents, I think there's a difference about asking strategies or terminology within those strategies.

@deworde But of course if this community thinks differently, I don't mind having the Q get closed as duplicate of course ;)

I think it's more that the only possible answer to this question exists on the linked question.

Doesn't make it bad, though, just makes it so it's better to update the existing answer to better inform users like you in the first place.

@deworde Yes that edit is very helpful!

It's an acronym telling you which cards you should pick. Cards fall in one of five categories, and you should (usually) pick the card from topmost category (B > R > E > A > D) which is still left in the pack.
In a nutshell:

Bombs, powerful cards that win a game if unanswered. These can be something that generate an advantage every turn (e.g. The Immortal Sun), planeswalkers, or simply overly-large creatures for the mana cost (e.g. Lyra Dawnbringer).
Removal, cards which destroy/exile/damage creatures (said bombs, but of course they can be used earlier in the game as well).
Evasion, creatures with special abilities (e.g. flying) which make them harder to block.
Aggro, smaller creatures which give you early presence on the board and make sure you can play a card almost every turn.
Duds, cards you don't want in your main deck but might be useful in the sideboard.

Googling for magic draft bread gives some articles which explain everything in detail, including examples for each category in the current expansions.

Heh, my last draft was probably before those even existed ...

@Allure except from the last extension, where some Planewalkers can be uncommon, and not "as good" as the older ones.


text:
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.

I suspect the confusion here comes from the fact that often are used to keep track of commander tax in the same way as they would keep track of counters. On the table they look the same but are different from a rules perspective.

No.
Proliferate only deals with counters.

701.26a 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.

The commander tax has nothing to do with a counter. A counter is a physical object that is used when an effect tells you to use one.

121.1. A counter is a marker placed on an object or player that modifies its characteristics and/or interacts with a rule, ability, or effect. Counters are not objects and have no characteristics. Notably, a counter is not a token, and a token is not a counter. Counters with the same name or description are interchangeable.

The commander tax does not use counters at all.

903.8. A player may cast a commander they own from the command zone. 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. This additional cost is informally known as the "commander tax."

Counters are often used to mark things that are not technically counters for the sake of convenience (e.g. you may use a dice to count prowess triggers in a complicated stack for example), and I certainly do this for Commander Tax. However I'm constantly telling certain players in my playgroup to not use counters to represent the damage boost from e.g. Stromkirk Captain, because it introduces confusion with actual +1/+1 counters.

@Soulus101 It's tricky because the word "counter" can mean "any object you use to keep track of stuff", but when used in the rulebook, it has a more specific meaning. Similar to how a "token card" is a "card" in terms of general English usage, but it is not a "card" in Magic rules.

Yup, hence my insistence that people not use convenience-counters in the same location as rulebook-counters. It's a balance between doing the maths right and keeping track of board state vs. rules violations.

No; proliferate duplicates counters and only counters:

701.26a 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.

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. A player may cast a commander they own from the command zone. 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. This additional cost is informally known as the "commander tax."

The number of times a player has cast their commander from the command zone is part of the game state itself. 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. The commander tax is defined in the rules (CR 903.8), and is equivalent to each commander having the following rules text:

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.

The commander tax is an additional cost based on the number of times you've previously cast your commander from the command zone. Because proliferate only affects counters (as defined by the game rules), it doesn't impact the commander tax.


text:
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?

I would just like to add that a very basic question does not make a question bad. Even if this rules knowledge is a thing that most players know there still may be players that are unaware and having a canonical answer here might still prove useful.

I'd like to add that people might forget such a rule; it happened to me that an opponent said "nope" when I said "azor's gateway trigger". Yes, a land exiled by gateway counts as a "0-CMC" card, which is indeed different than 1-,2-,3-... cmc cards.

As long as "Converted Mana Cost" and "Mana Cost" are different, and we have Modern staples featuring lands with converted mana costs (Azcanta) and cards with CMC but not a mana cost (Ancestral Recall), this actually isn't something I would necessarily classify under basic knowledge.

It's 0†, so Sun Titan can bring them back.
This is also noted in the rulings below the card in Gatherer:

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.

†: with the exception of transformed lands, as noted in @NeilMeyer's answer. This situation doesn't happen in the graveyard, though.

One notable exception.
Certain double-faced cards from Ixalan block become lands when they are transformed. These lands have the CMC of their front face which is often not equal to 0.
Adanto, the First Fort, the transformed side of Legion's Landing for instance, has a CMC of 1.

711.4b While a double-faced permanent’s back face is up, it has only the characteristics of its back face. However, its converted mana cost
  is calculated using the mana cost of its front face. 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.

The converted mana cost of a land card is 0

202.3a: 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.

So yes, Sun Titan's triggered ability could bring a land to the battlefield.


text:
When does Dreadhorde Arcanist check it's power when resolving the trigger in this situation?
Dreadhorde Arcanist lets you recast a instant or sorcery spell from your graveyard for free when it attacks.
Now I had this situation come up:
I had two Arcanists on the field. In the main phase I buffed one of them with Collision // Colossus (+4/+2) which costs 2 mana. When I attacked I got two trigger for both the abilities. I used the trigger of the now 5/5 Arcanist to cast Collision // Colossus again and wanted to buff the 1/3 Arcanist with it, while it's trigger was still on the stack.
Sadly, the enemy conceded, so I didn't see how Arena would have handled it.
In this situation, would my second Arcanist trigger resolve with 5 power, or with 1?
Thank you.

Note that  Collision // Colossus has a converted mana cost of 4, not 2. So if Dreadhorde Arcanist had 3 power when it attacked; you would not be able to cast Colossus with its ability.

You would only be able to cast a spell with a converted mana cost of 1.
This is confirmed by the rulings on Dreadhorde Arcanist:

The instant or sorcery card you target must have converted mana cost less than or equal to Dreadhorde Arcanist’s power immediately after Dreadhorde Arcanist has attacked. Any other abilities that trigger when creatures you control attack won’t have resolved yet.

This is because you must choose targets when you put the ability on the stack, before it resolves, and at the time you are choosing targets, Dreadhorde Arcanist still has a power of 1. You will be placing both triggered abilities on the stack before either one of them resolves.

603.3. Once an ability has triggered, its controller puts it on the stack as an object that's not a card the next time a player would receive priority.

Note that targets are checked for legality again when a spell or ability resolves, so Dreadhorde Arcanist must still have a high enough power to cast the chosen spell when its ability resolves. If the Arcanist's power were lowered after its ability was put on the stack, this could cause its ability to fizzle (not resolve).

608.2b If the spell or ability specifies targets, it checks whether the targets are still legal. [...] If all its targets, for every instance of the word "target," are now illegal, the spell or ability doesn't resolve. It's removed from the stack and, if it's a spell, put into its owner's graveyard.

I think it's it's a it's a bit misleading to say that the number can't be changed once the ability is on the stack. What can't be changed is the target, which is chosen when the ability goes on the stack and is restricted based on the power.

@murgatroid99 Thanks, I missed that the reason the ruling worked was because it was targeted.

If you chose the spell at resolution, the number wouldn't be locked in; it would be evaluated at resolution.

Is it worth noting that it does check the power on resolution as well, in case the power is reduced after the trigger is on the stack?

@JonTheMon thats the part that confused me the most, because it gives some credences to checking the power only when it resolves.

For anyone interested, the Situation came up again in MtGA, and yes it works like this answer says. (Not that I trust MtGA to have every rule interaction right :P)

@Lichtbringer Well, it checks it twice. Once when it goes on the stack, then again as it is resolving.


text:
Can I use a fetch land to shuffle my deck while the opponent has Ashiok, Dream Render in play?
Ashiok, Dream Render prevents the opponent from searching their library. This neutralizes cards like the fetch lands (like Polluted Delta). Would the land's controller still be allowed to activate it in order to shuffle their deck, without searching for the land?

Yes, you can still activate the Delta's ability in order to shuffle your library, according to one of the rulings under the card in Gatherer:

If an effect says “Search your library . . . then shuffle your library,” your opponents shuffle their libraries even though they can’t search.

Note that the Polluted Delta says "Search your library" and not the very similar "You may search your library" like Civic Wayfinder; in that case, choosing to shuffle is not possible.

If an effect says “You may search your library . . . If you do, shuffle your library” or “You may search your library . . . then shuffle your library,” your opponents can’t choose to search, so they won’t shuffle.

Yes, you may sacrifice it to shuffle your library.
Polluted Delta's text says:

Search your library for an Island or Swamp card, put it onto the battlefield, then shuffle your library.

And Ashiok has an additional ruling of:

If an effect says “Search your library . . . then shuffle your library,” your opponents shuffle their libraries even though they can’t search.


text:
Can "loss of life" abilities be triggered by combat and/or direct damage?
When taking combat or direct damage, this is not the same as loss of life, right? Yes, your life total goes down. But some cards have activated abilities when "loss of life" happens. For example, if I get dealt combat damage, this would not trigger a "loss of life" ability, correct?

Damage dealt to a player (usually) causes loss of life:

119.3a Damage dealt to a player by a source without infect causes that player to lose that much life.

So an opponent taking damage from something does trigger the ability on, say Exquisite Blood.
Note that the reverse is not true.  Direct loss of life (such as from Kaervek's Spite) is not damage and cannot be prevented as such (such as by Circle of Protection: Black).

I'm not sure to which card you're referring, but consider the wording of Archfiend of Despair:

At the beginning of each end step, each opponent loses life equal to the life that player lost this turn. (Damage causes loss of life.)

So combat damage and direct damage do cause loss of life. One of the main differences is that there are several cards preventing combat and/or direct damage, but only very few prevent loss of life (usually worded as 'your life total can't change').


text:
Captive Audience vs. Teferi's Time Twist
In a MTG Arena match, my opponent played Captive Audience on me, which I exiled/blinked using Teferi's Time Twist. I expected CA to return under the opponent's control, but it entered on my side.
The relevant wording on Captive Audience:

Captive Audience enters the battlefield under the control of an opponent of your choice. ...

and on Teferi's Time Twist:

Exile target permanent you control. Return that card to the battlefield under its owner's control at the beginning of the next end step. (...)

What do the rules say about this kind of interaction?

That ability on Captive Audience is a replacement effect that modifies how it enters the battlefield. Effects like this are described in the replacement effects section of the rules:

614.1d Continuous effects that read “[This permanent] enters the battlefield . . .” or “[Objects] enter the battlefield . . .” are replacement effects.
614.12. Some replacement effects modify how a permanent enters the battlefield. (See rules 614.1c–d.) [...]

When you exiled it and then brought it back, it would have entered the battlefield under the control of its owner, your opponent, but the replacement effect modified that so that it entered the battlefield under your control instead.

One thing I think is missing from this answer and a key source of OP's confusion: it would be natural to read Time Twist's "Return that card to the battlefield under its owner's control" as also creating the same kind of replacement effect as Captive Audience creates. Then we would have two competing effects, and rule 616 would come into play to resolve the conflict. Am I understanding correctly though that Time Twist is not creating a replacement effect? (Instead, it could almost be thought of as a parenthetical rules reminder, since owner's control is the default way objects enter?)

It's not a replacement effect, it's just the original effect that's being replaced. And yes, that's the default; but saying it explicitly resolves the potential ambiguity that the player being instructed to put the object onto the battlefield is not necessarily the same player under whose control it enters. Also, even if that was a replacement effect, and the order was decided in accordance with rule 616, the owner would be the one choosing the order (because of that default) so they would still probably put it onto the battlefield under OP's control.

@Benjamin Cosman, Re "Am I understanding correctly though that Time Twist is not creating a replacement effect?", Correct. The instruction is question is "return", an alias for "move". "Move" is a one-shot effect, not a continuous effect. As such, the effect doesn't match the criteria to be a replacement effect under 614.1d or any other rule.


text:
Do 'destroy' effects count as damage?
Does The Wanderer's static ability prevent 'destroy' or 'exile' effects from working? In a recent game, I had it out and my opponent tried to cast Doom Blade on a creature. I argued that it shouldn't work, and he said it should have.

Damage is one of the ways a creature can be destroyed, but it's not the only way. The Wanderer only prevents (non-combat) damage, not other "destroy" effects like Doom Blade.

701.7. Destroy
701.7a To destroy a permanent, move it from the battlefield to its owner’s graveyard.
701.7b 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). If a permanent is put into its owner’s graveyard for any other reason, it hasn’t been “destroyed.”

Since the question is about what counts as damage, not what counts as being destroyed; it would be helpful to list the ways damage can happen. Unfortunately there doesn’t seem to be a simple rule as straightforward as 701.7b, except for damage instead of destroy.


text:
Does drawing multiple cards count individually?
Say if I have the emblem of Teferi, Hero of Dominaria (Whenever you draw a card, you may exile target permanent) out, and cast Brainstorm (Draw three cards, then put two cards from your hand on top of your library in any order). How many times does the emblem trigger?

120.2. Cards may only be drawn one at a time. If a player is instructed to draw multiple cards, that player performs that many individual card draws.

So Brainstorm causes three card draws, and three triggers of Teferi's emblem, so you get to exile three permanents. Neat!