text:
Can I make a planeswalker harder to attack by making it a creature with flying?
So a weird combo popped into my head. If I use Memnarch to turn Nicol Bolas, the Arisen into an artifact, then use March of the Machines to turn him into Artifact Creature Planeswalker and tap Dragon Blood to put a +1/+1 counter on him and I have a Sapphire Drake on the field, is he still a legitimate target?
Since, you know, you can’t attack something with flying?
I know at the very least that only creatures with flying and reach will be able to block him. But other than that, this is rather puzzeling.

Why would you think "you can't attack something with flying"? You can attack something that is a player or a planeswalker, that's it.

Please answer questions in actual answers, not as a comment meant for clarification.

Note that this specific action wouldn't work because Nicol Bolas would be put into the graveyard after March of the Machines resolved, because state based actions are checked before Dragon's Blood (which would be next on the stack) resolves.

@EvanM That is incorrect. As of the Shadows over Innistrad block, the rules were changed so that the back face of a double-faced card inherits the CMC from the front face. So it would have >0 toughness and it would not die.

If you DO want to protect yourself from non-flying creatures, I recommend digging up a Magus of the Moat or it's predecessors Moat and Island Sanctuary

I think @Indomitable Spirit,with the expression:"Since, you know,you can't attack something with flying?",which is actually incorrect,simply meant that if the PW you own has,in some weird way,granted the flying ability,then,when a player decides to attack that PW,then he could not do it if the attacking creature does not have the flying ability:since,being "flying",the PW would sidestep the attack of a non-flying creature(as in ordinary attacks,but in the opposite order).But I believe this procedure is unable to pass the most experienced players' checkings.Attacking PW is different than combat

This doesn't work. The rule “you can’t attack something with flying” doesn't exist. It doesn't exist because you don't attack creatures: you just announce creatures as attacking a player or planeswalker, and then the defending player assigns blockers.
Flying only controls what can be declared as a blocker of that creature, and nothing else. Here's the rules on what flying means:

702.9b A creature with flying can't be blocked except by creatures with flying and/or reach. A creature with flying can block a creature with or without flying.

Meanwhile the procedure for attacking remains unchanged:

You declare which creatures will be attacking.
You choose which opponents or opponents' planeswalkers they will attack.

No mention of flying. I can declare a creature as attacking your planeswalker if it's also a creature with flying, because I'm attacking that planeswalker under the rules for attacking planeswalkers. That it's a creature and has flying simply isn't factored into this process.
Your intuition around flying is in a reasonable place, but flying doesn't actually do anything for you here.
You do get to have Bolas as both a flying creature (that can attack!) and a planeswalker though, and that can be handy. However he'll be more vulnerable to removal: many more burn and removal spells can now target him. Also, any damage dealt to him, such as in combat or by burn spells, will result in him both losing loyalty counters and having damage marked on him. From the rules on Planeswalkers:

306.8. Damage dealt to a planeswalker results in that many loyalty counters being removed from it.

Since he's both a planeswalker and creature, and creatures may still attack him, we also run into a rare fun situation mentioned in the rulings for Gideon, Champion of Justice: he can block on his own behalf, even versus creatures declared attacking him as a planeswalker. Let's quote that ruling but swap mentions of Gideon for Bolas:

[Say Nicol Bolas, the Arisen is also a creature.] You may have any of your creatures attack [Nicol Bolas] (since he’s still a planeswalker). Then [Nicol Bolas] may block (since he’s a creature). He may block any eligible attacking creature, including one that’s attacking him! During combat, he behaves as an attacked planeswalker and/or a blocking creature, as appropriate. For example, he deals combat damage to any creatures he’s blocking, but he doesn’t deal combat damage to any unblocked creatures that are attacking him.

The steps to making Nicol Bolas a 4/4 "legendary artifact creature planeswalker" with a +1/+1 counter work fine, and you are correct that only creatures with flying and reach can block him if you attacked.
This is where it gets a little tricky, from knowledge there are no rules around attacking a planeswalker with flying, so I would suggest he can still be attacked by any creature.
on the flip side you could declare the same attacked planeswalker as his own blocker and potentially remove a creature from your opponent, be warned though if Nicol has either 0 loyalty or 5 damage marked on him he will be destroyed.

There are no rules around attacking a planeswalker with flying because flying is an ability that the permanent has as a creature, and being attacked is something that happens to the permanent as a planeswalker. That the creature and the planeswalker happen to be the same permanent is irrelevant; as far as being attacked is concerned, the permanent is acting as a planewalker, and flying doesn't apply. Having flying doesn't affect how a planeswalker, as a planeswalker, interacts with other objects, any more that having +1/+1 counters, haste, vigilance, etc. does.

thanks @Acccumulation, I thought that was the case, but wasn't sure


text:
Hexproof in response?
If I have a card out like Animar, Soul of Elements and my opponent cast a Murder and targets Animar, would I be able to morph my Mistfire Weaver and give Animar hexproof in response so that he doesn't die, or does he still die?

@BJMyers That answers the "in response" part, but not the "hexproof" part.

I agree with Arthur, the stack is only half the answer here. Hexproof as a means to fizzle targeted spells has to do with casting spells.

Umm Animar is an illegal target for Murder, black or white spells cannot target Animar.

@Andrew the first answer adresses this.

So this is really a question about how the stack works.  First, to ansewer your question, Animar, Soul of Elements has protection from Black, so Murder can't be cast targeting Animar, unless Animar somehow lost protection from black.
Ruling:

702.16. Protection
702.16a Protection is a static ability, written “Protection from [quality].” This quality is usually a color (as in “protection from black”) but can be any characteristic value or information. If the quality happens to be a card name, it is treated as such only if the protection ability specifies that the quality is a name. If the quality is a card type, subtype, or supertype, the ability applies to sources that are permanents with that card type, subtype, or supertype and to any sources not
  on the battlefield that are of that card type, subtype, or supertype. This is an exception to rule 109.2.
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.

But let's assume the person who cast Murder picked a valid target and then you turned Mistfire Weaver face up.  Stack is first in, last out.  So Murder goes on the stack targeting a valid creature.  Mistfire Weaver gets turned face up triggering it's ability and goes on the stack targeting the same creature (if the creature has protection from blue, then Mistfire's ability can't target the same creature).  Mistfire's ability resolves first (top of the stack, first out) giving the creature hexproof.  Then Murder tries to resolve, but sees it no longer has any legal targets and leaves the stack without doing anything.

Love the technical accuracy with this, since of course the actual flip is a stackless action.

A slight clarification to generalize your statement: Murder sees all of its targets (in this case just the one) as invalid and fizzles. Relevant when targeting multiple things and only one gets hexproof.

Any spell with the word "target" has two checks, one on cast and one on resolution.
This means if you have a spell with the wording as follows:
"Destroy target non-artifact creature" (go for the throat) it makes 1 check on cast (with multiple conditions), whether it is a valid target, which means it does not have protection, does not have shroud, does not have hexproof AND is a non-artifact creature (because the card makes it so). If all this checks are ok, you can put the spell on the stack. If the conditions are not met you CAN'T cast the spell. So this first check is done by the player and enforced by the rules even before casting really.
It will then when the stack is empty and it is resolving, whether the conditions of the spell apply, it checks for the same things as before.
One slightly different example is Fatal Push, as the wording is "if the creature converted mana cost is 2" this part is only checked on resolution and not on cast as it is not a condition of the target, but of the killing. Look at the different wording between them and it will make sense.
Answering your question, if something gains hexproof, murder will just fizzle.

source: Stack Exchange

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

sort: votes


text:
Multiple instances of Modular
Arcbound Mouser has Modular 1, with an additional Modular 1 given to it by Blaster, Combat DJ, so it enters with 2 counters. The rules state that each instance of Modular resolves separately. Does this mean that, when the Mouser dies, it gets two triggers to move two counters to other artifact creatures?

Each instance of modular causes the targeted creature(s) to get the full amount of counters. In your case, you can choose one target artifact creature twice and give it four +1/+1 counters total, or two creatures for two +1/+1 counters each.
Modular allows you to put the dead creature's counters on a target creature.

702.43a Modular represents both a static ability and a triggered ability. “Modular N” means “This permanent enters the battlefield with N +1/+1 counters on it” and “When this permanent is put into a graveyard from the battlefield, you may put a +1/+1 counter on target artifact creature for each +1/+1 counter on this permanent.”

Putting counters on a creature is not the same as moving them. Moving counters only works once, whereas putting them does not remove the counters from the source and can thus be done multiple times.

122.5. If an effect says to “move” a counter, it means to remove that counter from the object it’s currently on and put it onto a second object. If either of these actions isn’t possible, it’s not possible to move a counter, and no counter is removed from or put onto anything. This may occur if the first and second objects are the same object; if the first object doesn’t have the appropriate kind of counter on it; if the second object can’t have counters put onto it; or if either object is no longer in the correct zone.

122.8. If a triggered ability instructs a player to put one object’s counters on another object and that ability’s trigger condition or effect checks that the object with those counters left the battlefield, the player doesn’t move counters from one object to the other. Rather, the player puts the same number of each kind of counter the first object had onto the second object.

So when the Mouser dies with two +1/+1 counters on it and two instances of modular, both instances of modular trigger on death. You may choose two different legal targets, or the same target twice, and each instances gives its target two +1/+1 counters.

Thank you, so this works the same way as (and simultaneously with) The Ozolith as well then. Thanks for the thorough response!

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


text:
Sower of Discord, Gideon's Sacrifice and Stuffy Doll
In a 3-player game, P1 (20 life) has Sower of Discord down, with P2 (12 Life) and P3 (12 Life) the named players. P2 has Stuffy Doll on the board, naming P3.
P1 attempts to deal 3 damage to P2 (say with a Lightning Bolt), but P2 in response casts Gideon's Sacrifice, choosing Stuffy Doll as the creature to take the damage.
Is this an infinite loop or does it ever terminate?

Player 2 and player 3 will each lose 3 life.

Lightning bolt tries to deal 3 damage to player 2 and gets redirected to Stuffy Doll.
Lightning bolt resolves dealing 3 damage to Stuffy Doll.
Stuffy Doll's trigger goes on the stack to deal 3 damage to player 3.
Trigger resolves, player 3 takes 3 damage and loses 3 life (now down to 9 life).
Sower's ability sees the damage and it's trigger goes on the stack to make player 2 lose 3 life (note that it is loss of life, not damage).
Gideon's Sacrifice will not do anything to Sower's trigger (Gideon's Sacrifice looks for damage, not loss of life).  Therefore, the trigger will resolve and player 2 will lose 3 life.

There is no infinite loop here because the loss of life that comes from Sower can't be redirected with Gideon's Sacrifice.  (Remember, damage causes loss of life, but loss of life does not count as damage.)

Of course! Not sure how I missed that!


text:
Yidris and Thran Temporal Gateway
If I'm using Yidris, Maelstrom Wielder and I have Thran Temporal Gateway on the field, and I deal combat damage to a player with Yidris. Will using Thran Temporal Gateway's ability allow Yidris' s ability to trigger, because Thran Temporal Gateway doesn't use the text cast?

Permanents put onto the battlefield via Thran Temporal Gateway are not cast and do not cascade.
Casting a spell has a specific meaning - in short, it means putting the spell on the stack, selecting targets, and paying its mana and other costs. That is what's necessary to trigger cascade. After you cast a spell, it can eventually resolve and have its effect; permanent spells that resolve also result in that permanent being put on the battlefield.
Thran Temporal Gateway bypasses the casting process. The permanent card in your hand never becomes a spell and is instead directly put on the battlefield as a permanent, as Gateway's ability resolves. That means that the spell casting event for that card doesn't happen, the card doesn't get cascade from Yidris, and even if the card had cascade originally, it would not trigger.


text:
Can 0 or negative power creatures deal direct damage?
If I have a creature that has 0 or negative power and it has a Viridian Longbow attached to it, does it still deal 1 damage because of the effect the equipment gives it, or does it not because of the negative or 0 power?

Magic: the Gathering cards usually mean exactly what they say, nothing more and nothing less.
The power of a creature is only relevant when

Dealing combat damage
An effect explicitly mentions the power of that creature (albeit maybe hidden behind keywords, like "fight")

The ability granted by Viridian Longbow doesn't mention the power of the equipped creature, so therefore it doesn't care. One damage is dealt regardless.

By comparison, something like Aerie Ouphes specifically says it "deals damage equal to its power", so reducing its power to 0 would prevent the damage from being dealt.

Might be worth noting that Longbow is giving the creature an ability, so you can tap and deal 1 damage anytime you could cast an instant. This is different from attacking with a creature, where you tap it as part of declaring attackers for combat.


text:
Why can cards like Frost Breath tap creatures that are already tapped, but Teferi, Hero of Dominaria can’t untap lands that are already untapped?

609.3. If an effect attempts to do something impossible, it does only as much as possible.

Because of this rule, I would expect Frost Breath to not work on creatures that are tapped. Why is it possible to tap a tapped creature, but it’s impossible to untap an untapped land with e.g. Teferi, Hero of Dominaria? This seems to be a contradiction to me. Can someone explain why it’s not? Thanks!

Re "Why is it possible to tap a tapped creature", It's not possible. That's why basic lands can't produce mana when they're already tapped. And if there were an ability that said "tap or untap ", you'd be force to toggle 's tap status. What makes you think it's possible to tap something that's already tapped?

Maybe you're wondering why FB can target tapped creatures. It's because the targeting instruction is "target creatures", not "target untapped creatures".

The main difference between those cards is that Frost Breath targets the permanents and Teferi's ability does not.
Frost Breath's text says

Tap up to two target creatures. Those creatures don't untap during their controller's next untap step.

The targets are chosen when you cast the spell, and since it just says "target creature", you can choose any creature, even a tapped one. Once the spell resolves, it tries to tap those specific creatures. If it can't, it just moves on to the next instruction.
Teferi's ability, on the other hand, does not target. It just says

Draw a card. At the beginning of the next end step, untap two lands.

This effect just tries to untap any two lands, so you have to choose lands that can actually be untapped. This effect still follows the quoted rule 609.3; if there is only one tapped land on the battlefield when the ability resolves, you untap just that land.
You have to choose tapped lands because rule 701.20b says

To untap a permanent, rotate it back to the upright position from a sideways position. Only tapped permanents can be untapped.

and in part of the description of the process of resolving a spell or ability, rule 608.2d says

If an effect of a spell or ability offers any choices other than choices already made as part of casting the spell, activating the ability, or otherwise putting the spell or ability on the stack, the player announces these while applying the effect. The player can’t choose an option that’s illegal or impossible [...]

It is impossible to untap a permanent that is already untapped, so you can't choose to do so.

Maybe a new question, but what rule says how Teferi works here? It's not clear from just the wording that "untap two lands" requires you to choose two tapped lands.

I added a rule quotation. Does that answer your question?

Is there a rules that explains the process of making a choice in a case like this? How do we know that "untap two lands" requires you to choose two lands that can be untapped? The rules are very specific about the process of choosing targets, for example.

Or is it just a matter of using the rules of English to interpret "untap two lands" as "choose two lands that can be untapped. Untap them".

Some of the same issues come up with Assault Suit. If you control a creature with Assault Suit, and an effect says "each player sacrifices a creature", you can't choose that creature and then say "oh well, I can't sacrifice it, so I guess I sacrifice nothing". If a game instructs you to take an action on an object of your choice, you have to choose an object on which you are actually allowed to take that action.

@GendoIkari The rules exists at least in part because untapping (can be) a cost, so allowing untaps of untapped permanents would give break those cards.

It's specifically not "choose two lands and untap them" (which is how it might be worded to allow untapped lands); it's "carry out the action of untapping two lands".

I think the comparison to simply paying a cost helped clear it up for me. I was just over-complicating it.

@Samthere there are effects which work that other way, most commonly with sacrificing, I believe. Cataclysm is one variation (technically it says to choose which cards not to sacrifice, but in practice it's the same thing: you're putting your permanents into two piles according to some rule, then sacrificing everything in one of the piles; it's just a matter of which pile is easier to describe).


text:
MTG Graveyard casting with 'X' costs
I play a Goblin Dark-Dwellers and its ability targets a Tempt with Vengeance. From what I read I would assume it would be legal and I may cast it from the graveyard, but I may choose X to be 2 as its cast since I choose the value of X when I cast it. Or would it rather see the card when it is in the graveyard as a 0 and force me to play it out with X being 0?
My friends tell me that it would be a 0 but I insist that when it allows me to cast I may choose for it to be 0, 1 or 2 (as long as the CMC is less than 3 overall). Is this wrong of me to believe or is it correct?

The answers are correct, but just to clarify a bit: Being in the graveyard isn't even part of the reason. The only reason X must be zero is because you are casting "without paying its mana cost".

Your comment only applies to Marcu's answer; Hackworth's only mentions the graveyard when they confirm TvG is a valid target for the Dwellers' ability.

@KamilDrakari What ikegami said, and also your comment is technically wrong - as 107.3b states, X is zero because you may cast it without paying its mana or alternative costs, and X isn't defined in the rules text. If the X of TwV was defined and would, for example, equal 2, you could cast it with the Dwellers effect and with X = 2.

You may cast Tempt with Vengeance with the Dwellers, but X has to be zero.
The converted mana cost (CMC) of an object is the total amount of mana in its mana cost, and X counts as zero outside the stack. When you determine the CMC of Tempt with Vengenace for the Dwellers, TwV is in the graveyard and has a CMC of 1.

202.3. The converted mana cost of an object is a number equal to the total amount of mana in its mana cost, regardless of color.
202.3d When calculating the converted mana cost of an object with an {X} in its mana cost, X is treated as 0 while the object is not on the stack, and X is treated as the number chosen for it while the object is on the stack.

So when the Dwellers' ability resolves, you do get to cast TwV. You get to choose a value for X, but the X isn't defined in the rules text, so X has to be chosen as zero.

107.3b If a player is casting a spell that has an {X} in its mana cost, the value of X isn’t defined by the text of that spell, and an effect lets that player cast that spell while paying neither its mana cost nor an alternative cost that includes X, then the only legal choice for X is 0. This doesn’t apply to effects that only reduce a cost, even if they reduce it to zero. See rule 601, “Casting Spells.”

Therefore, X has to zero when you cast TwV with the Dwellers' or similar effects.

X will be zero

When Goblin Dark-Dwellers enters the battlefield, you may cast target instant or sorcery card with converted mana cost 3 or less from your graveyard without paying its mana cost. If that card would be put into your graveyard this turn, exile it instead.

You are casting it from your graveyard, but you don't pay its mana cost. In that case, zero must be chosen for X.
from Goblin Dark-Dwellers on Gatherer

1/22/2016: If the instant or sorcery card has {X} in its mana cost, you must choose 0 as its value.

It would be worth emphasizing, I think, that {X} has to be zero because you’re not paying its mana cost, not because you’re casting it from the graveyard. If you were casting it from the graveyard but actually paying the cost, you could choose some other {X}. (At least, IIRC.)


text:
Destroying Odric, Master Tactician in response to declared attackers
Alright, so we were playing a game and confusion was brought up.
Player 1 Attacks with 5 creatures as well as Odric, Master Tactician. When doing so, Odric's ability kicks in saying P1 could choose which creatures block, and who they block. In this phase, when P1 declared which of his monsters were attacking, and P2 played Bright Reprisal, which states "Destroy target attacking creature. Draw a card." P2 used that card to destroy Odric. So with that being said, would Odric's ability still be in effect?

Even though the answer is the same, aren't the questions asking different things? The proposed duplicate is asking specifically about bouncing a creature, not destroying it.

@SocioMatt In the end it is still about the creature leaving the battlefield and it doesn't matter where it goes to.

As a minor pedantic note, since declaring attackers and blockers does not use the stack, you can't 'respond' to either. Responding to an action is meant to interrupt that action, so your effect happens first, by the time you get priority, attackers have been declared and this process cannot be interrupted.

Abilities written as "Whenever X, Y" are triggered abilities, they go onto the stack when the trigger condition, in this case "Whenever Odric, Master Tactician and at least three other creatures attack" is met, the ability's effect, in this case "you choose which creatures block this combat and how those creatures block" is put on the stack.
Once an ability is on the stack, changes to the board itself don't affect that ability, it is going to resolve unless countered. So unless you Stifle the ability, removing the Odric, no matter where he goes, be that to hand, exile, graveyard or even flickered back to the board, will not stop his ability from resolving. The only change to boardstate that can affect a spell or ability on the stack is if that ability is no longer legal, say removing all targets, causing the spell or ability to fizzle (be put in the graveyard as it would resolve).

Note that this would be different if the ability said "whenever Odric attacks, if Odric and at least the other creatures are attacking, then ..."  An "if"-clause like that in a triggered ability is checked both at trigger time and at resolution, and it would therefore do nothing of Odric is removed while the ability is on stack.

@Arthur is absolutely right, an intervening if would force the check on resolution as well as the trigger. I didn't include it here because it's not relevant to the case, but it's worth knowing.

If I had a creature that granted hexproof to all of my other creatures, planeswalkers, and myself, would his ability go through then?

Odric's ability doesn't target, so it is unaffected by hexproof.

Since it is a triggered ability and not a global effect, player 1 still gets to decide, how/if players 2 blocks. Same goes for the other Odric who shares the abilities of your creatures.


text:
Do I get to play a planeswalker's ability when I transform the card?
Assume that I played an ability of Garruk Relentless and I successfully transformed him, do I get to play his transformed ability or do I have to wait for the next turn?

Gatherer says that

You can’t activate a loyalty ability of Garruk Relentless and later that turn after he transforms activate a loyalty ability of Garruk, the Veil-Cursed.

So you can't. The actual rule in play here is 606.3:

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 no player has previously activated a loyalty ability of that permanent that turn.

(Emphasis mine.) Transforming a permanent does not make it into a new object, by rule 711.12:

When a double-faced permanent transforms, it doesn’t become a new object. Any effects that applied to that permanent will continue to apply to it after it transforms.

Therefore, if you have already played one of the loyalty abilities of Garruk Relentless this turn, then after he transforms into Garruk, the Veil-Cursed he is still the same permanent so the rules forbid you from activating any of his loyalty abilities.

it may be worth noting that effects like Oath of Teferi and The Chain Veil will allow them to get around the once per turn restriction

@MartinGlennon Of course. The first Magic Golden Rule (101.1) says "Whenever a card’s text directly contradicts these rules, the card takes precedence. The card overrides only the rule that applies to that specific situation." With the exception that no card may stop a player from conceding, no rule is technically above being overridden by cards. That being said, from a design perspective, I believe there are quite a lot of rules that no card will ever override.

Also of note (since the question title is about all transforming planeswalkers, not just Garruk), you can activate loyalty abilities of planeswalkers that were another card type on the other side, like "Jace, Vryn's Prodigy," on the same turn you flip them.

@chif-ii There are two reasons for that. One is that untransformed, "Jace, Vryn's Prodigy" doesn't have any loyalty abilities to activate, so there is no problem in the first place. The other is that he is exled, and then returned to the battlefield transformed into a planeswalker, which makes him, for the purposes of the game, an entirely new object with no relation to the original creature (other than in flavor); Jace (Vryn's Prodigy) will, for instance, lose any auras while Garruk (Relentless) keeps his through the transformation.


text:
Scarab God VS Meren of Clan Nel Toth
After my opponent chose a target creature card for Meren of Clan Nel Toth, am I able to activate The Scarab God's abilty to prevent the chosen card to return to my opponent's hand/the battlefield?
I'm assuming I can, but just want to be sure.

Do you mean to exile the card that your opponent is trying to return to the battlefield with Meren?

Yes. That's what I meant

Yes. Meren's ability targets the card it returns (by explicitly using the word "target"), meaning that it is chosen as the triggered ability is put on the stack. While it is on the stack, you are allowed to activate Scarab God's ability and target the same card. This will put the Scarab God's ability on top of Meren's ability on the stack.
Assuming no other interference, the Scarab God's ability will resolve first, exiling the creature card. Then, when Meren's ability resolves, it will be unable to find its target and the ability will therefore be removed from the stack without resolving (I have personally always used the word "fizzle" for this non-resolution, but I don't know how prevalent it is, and it's not part of the official rules).

Note that if Meren's ability hadn't said "target", all you would be able to do would be to blindly exile creature cards you think your opponent wants to revive in the hopes of ruining their immediate plans, but that wouldn't stop your opponent from reviving something. The only way you could stop that would be to exile all creature cards in your opponent's graveyard, provided you have the mana.

"and the ability will therefore be countered." is incorrect. This rule was updated somewhat recently.

@Gendolkari You're right. Fixed it.

To the best of my knowledge, "Fizzle" is pretty commonly used. And with the rules change; the terminology hasn't changed, only the proper definition of "Fizzle" has changed.

Yes, you can do that.
Meren's ability goes on the stack at the beginning of your opponent's end step, and your opponent has to choose a creature card at that point. In response, you can activate the Scarab God's ability and target the same card. The Scarab God's ability will also go on the stack, above Meren's ability.
If nobody does anything else, the Scarab God's ability will resolve first because it's the top-most object on the stack, and will exile the card. Next, Meren's ability tries to resolve, but the card chosen for Meren is no longer in the zone it's expected to be. Since all targets of Meren's ability have become illegal, it does not resolve but is removed from the stack without doing anything.


text:
Meteor Golem killing planeswalkers
Meteor Golem's ability is "When Meteor Golem enter the battlefield destroy target nonland permanent".  Does Meteor Golems ability affect planewalkers, which count as players and not really creatures?

You may be confused by the "planeswalker redirection" rule that allowed the controller of a spell or ability that targeted a player to be redirected to a planeswalker that player controls. This has recently been removed in favor of rewording the spells/abilities themselves to let them target planeswalkers. In any case planeswalkers were always counted as permanents and not players.

Yes, Meteor Golem can target and destroy a planeswalker on the battlefield. The player is a "planeswalker" only in lore terms. As far as game mechanics are concerned, "planeswalker" has a defined meaning, and a planeswalker object is not a player and vice versa.
A planeswalker in the mechanical sense is a type of object, a game entity that interacts with players and other objects:

102.1. A player is one of the people in the game. [..]
109.1. An object is an ability on the stack, a card, a copy of a card, a token, a spell, a permanent, or an emblem.

A planeswalker is not a creature, as you already noted, but its own permanent type alongside creatures and others:

110.4. There are five permanent types: artifact, creature, enchantment, land, and planeswalker.

Therefore, if Meteor Golem can destroy a non-land permanent, then that does include a planeswalker on the battlefield.


text:
Sakashima's Student and Stinkdrinker Bandit
I play a rogue tribal deck that features Stinkdrinker Bandit. I plan on putting Sakashima's Student in.
When an unblocked Rogue I control attacks, I'd switch it with Sakashima's Student and have it copy a StrinkDrinker Bandit on the board. Say, I also have other attackers that are unblocked. Does Sakashima's Student's copied ability of Stinkdrinker Bandit apply to the other unblocked attackers as well as itself?

No, the Ninjutsu'd Stinkdrinker Bandit's ability will not trigger.
Stinkdrinker Bandit's ability is a triggered ability. When the defending player has decided on his blockers, it triggers for every Rogue that is now unblocked. It will not trigger again during the current combat phase.
If you want to Ninjutsu your Stinkdrinker Bandit with Sakashima's Student, you can only do so after blockers have already been declared because of Ninjutsu's  timing restrictions: An unblocked creature is any attacking creature that, after the blockers have been declared, has not been assigned a blocker. By that time, it's too late for the copied Stinkdrinker Bandit to trigger his ability.
For your combo to work, Stinkdrinker Bandit's ability would have to be a static ability and read something like "Attacking and unblocked Rogues you control get +2/+1". In that case, it wouldn't matter when the Stinkdrinker Bandit would enter the battlefield, as long as it's before the end of combat.

No, Sakashima's Student will enter the battlefield after it's too late for its copied ability to trigger.
Stinkdrinker Bandit's ability triggers when blockers are declared, but Sakashima's Student's Ninjutsu ability can only be activated after blockers have already been declared (since a creature only becomes blocked or unblocked after blockers have been declared).

508.3d An ability that reads “Whenever [a creature] attacks and isn’t blocked, . . .” triggers during the declare blockers step, not the declare attackers step. See rule 509.5g.
509.5g An ability that reads “Whenever [a creature] attacks and isn’t blocked, . . .” triggers if no creatures are declared as blockers for that creature. It will trigger even if the creature was never declared as an attacker (for example, if it entered the battlefield attacking). It won’t trigger if the attacking creature is blocked and then all its blockers are removed from combat.
509.1h An attacking creature with one or more creatures declared as blockers for it becomes a blocked creature; one with no creatures declared as blockers for it becomes an unblocked creature. This remains unchanged until the creature is removed from combat, an effect says that it becomes blocked or unblocked, or the combat phase ends, whichever comes first. A creature remains blocked even if all the creatures blocking it are removed from combat.

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


text:
To whom do I return stolen cards?
With Molten Primordial I've taken a creature from opponent 2, which had been previously taken from and is owned by opponent 1. When I lose control of it at end of turn to which opponent does it go?

That depends on exactly how player 2 got control of that creature. Please clarify in your question.

It was with Empress Galina. Mind explaining how a different card would result in a difference?

@Hackworth A variation like that can simply be addressed in an answer. A question like this doesn't need to be narrowed that much.

Control-changing effects work in a system of layers, with the latest one being active. When the currently active effect expires, the previous effect takes over. In your case, where player 2 gained control via Empress Galina, the creature would return to player 2.
The rules governing the interaction of continuous effects are, in part, as follows:

Interaction of Continuous Effects

613.1. The values of an object’s characteristics are determined by starting with the actual object. For a card, that means the values of the characteristics printed on that card. For a token or a copy of a spell or card, that means the values of the characteristics defined by the effect that created it. Then all applicable continuous effects are applied in a series of layers in the following order:
613.1b Layer 2: Control-changing effects are applied.
613.2. Within layers 1–6, apply effects from characteristic-defining abilities first (see rule 604.3), then all other effects in timestamp order (see rule 613.6). [..]
613.6. Within a layer or sublayer, determining which order effects are applied in is usually done using a timestamp system. An effect with an earlier timestamp is applied before an effect with a later timestamp.

The timestamp reflects the order in which an object entered the battlefield or the ability that created the effect resolved. The effect of your Molten Primordial would have the latest timestamp, as far as control-changing effects on the creature are concerned. That's why it is applied last and overrides all other control-changing effects.
That means that previous control-changing effects are still on that creature if they didn't expire yet, they are just all overridden by the latest one. That means that if player 2's control-changing effect is still active by the time the turn and Molten Primordial's effect ends, player 2's effect takes over and the creature switches to player 2's control. If player 2's control-changing effect also has ended by that time, player 1 gets control back, because that's the default.

In most cases, the creature goes back to whichever player controlled it before you, but that can change depending on how that player gained control of the creature.
The key idea to understanding how this works is that control-changing effects in Magic are continuous effects. If two players have an effect that lets them take control of the same creature, then both exist at the same time, and whichever was created later determines which player ends up controlling the creature. These effects can also have durations, including the one on Molten Primordial, which lasts "until end of turn". When it ends, you just look at what other control change effects still exist, if any, and use them to determine which player ends up controlling the creature. In the scenario you describe, there are two main possibilities:

Opponent 2's control change effect still exists after the Molten Primordial's effect ends. This includes effects that last forever, like from Empress Galina. In this case, control goes back to opponent 2.
Opponent 2's control change effect ends at the same time as or before the Molten Primordial's effect ends. This would generally apply if they had used their own effect that lasts until end of turn, like Word of Seizing. In that case, there would be no remaining control change effects, so control would go back to opponent 1.


text:
Death Mask Duplicant Imprint of Platinum Angel
Does the imprint ability of Death-Mask Duplicant allow me to copy the ability of the Platinum Angel in the graveyard not the flying , the one where I cannot lose?

No. Death-Mask Duplicant only allows you to copy the effects that are explicitly listed on it - flying, fear, first strike, double strike, haste, trample, and all forms of landwalk and protection. Exiling Platinum Angel would only give the duplicant flying.

Can you provide the rulings that support your answer?

I'm not sure there are any relevant rulings here; it's simply the actual text on the card.

No, Death-Mask Duplicant does not copy any abilities.
It has an ability that can grant it other abilities, and those other abilities are listed in the text: Flying, fear, first strike, double strike, haste, landwalk, protection, and trample. The abilities of the imprinted card are not copied or given to Death-Mask Duplicant. Rather Death-Mask Duplicant conditionally has the listed abilities.


text:
Can an Instant spell be played during upkeep to interrupt a triggered ability?
BACKGROUND:
I played a Saga Rite of Belzenlok.  When the saga fully resolves you end up with four 0/1 Cleric creature tokens and a 6/6 black Demon creature with flying and trample.  At the beginning of my next upkeep I have to sacrifice a creature or the Demon token creature deals 6 damage to me. “At the beginning of your upkeep, sacrifice another creature.  If you can’t, this creature deals 6 damage to you.”
At the beginning of my up keep I specified that I was sacrificing one of the 0/1 Cleric token creatures.  My opponent played an instant spell (Shock) killing the 0/1 Cleric token.  He then claimed that I revived 6 damage from the token Demon since I did not sacrifice a creature.
QUESTION:
Can an Instant spell be played during upkeep to interrupt a triggered ability?
If so, in the situation described above, do I receive the 6 damage as my opponent claims?

You can't interrupt spells and abilities; you can cast in response to one of them, which means after it's been placed on the stack, but before it resolves.

Is it possible to rename/reword this question? The answer, as it turns out, has nothing to do with interrupting abilities during upkeep, and more to do with priority during spell/ability resolution. As such, the solution to the specific problem is not the answer to the question.

The sacrifice ability of the Demon token is not targeted, so you don't target the creature as the ability goes on the stack. You only choose the creature at resolution, during which no player can play other spells or abilities.
As you already quoted, the sacrifice ability reads:

At the beginning of your upkeep, sacrifice another creature. If you can’t, this creature deals 6 damage to you.

That means the beginning of the upkeep step is the trigger that puts the ability on the stack. Since it doesn't include the word "target", you don't get to choose anything at that point. Your opponent is then free to respond to the ability and kill any creature before it resolves. When the ability does get to resolve though, no player gains priority during the resolution, and you choose one of the remaining creatures to sacrifice, if any remain.

114.1a An instant or sorcery spell is targeted if its spell ability identifies something it will affect by using the phrase "target [something]," where the "something" is a phrase that describes an object and/or player. The target(s) are chosen as the spell is cast; see rule 601.2c.
116.1. 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.
116.2e 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.

I think there’s an issue of gameplay communication here. By “I specified that I was sacrificing...” it is implied that he was acting as though priority had been passed and the ability had resolved. I think the answer should talk some about he proper way to communicate that you are passing priority during upkeep. I would think that specifying what you are sacrificing would be a form of proposing a shortcut.


text:
Can you tap land for mana without using it, specifically I am playing with Omnath, Locust of mana
So I play with Omnath, Locus of Mana, and I've been looking in the rules, but I can't find anything that explicitly forbids generating mana without using it. But there is nothing explicitly allowing it either.
Also can someone definitively tell me if I can tap land in a similar fashion during my opponents turn? I'd like to use it in combination with Seedborn Muse. It has a lot of potential but I wanna make sure what I am planning is legal.

Consider this: how would you expect Omnath to do anything useful if you couldn't tap mana without intending to spend it on something?

Possible duplicate of What does "float mana" typically mean?

Not sure if this is a dupe. The question boils down to "when can I activate mana abilities?", not "what is float mana?"

Possible duplicate of What is the difference between lands and mana?.  The answer does explain "The reason for the mana pool is that it allows a player to hold mana that they are not spending right away."

Duplicate closures shouldn't be to questions that merely might imply the answer buried somewhere unobvious in one answer if you know where to look and how to understand and interpret it. We're dealing with newbies here; answers should be obviously available. This question is fine and I don't think it's a duplicate of anything we've got.

I miss the days of Mana Burn! Once upon a time if you didn't spend all the mana you'd created by the end of a phase you took damage as it drained away. I even had a deck that lands tap for 4 or 8 or more mana so unless you had X cost spells you'd have to be very careful about casting to avoid taking damage.

You may activate mana abilities (for example the mana abilities of lands) whenever you may activate other, non-mana abilities, in addition to when you pay a mana cost.
Most mana-generating permanents, including most lands, have an ability that says something along the lines of "Cost: Add mana", where "cost" is usually the Tap cost. Those are mana abilities:

605.1a An activated ability is a mana ability if it meets all of the following criteria: it doesn't require a target (see rule 114.6), it could add mana to a player's mana pool when it resolves, and it's not a loyalty ability.

Activated mana abilities are a special case of activated abilities. You can activate a mana ability whenever you could activate a regular ability:

605.3. Activating an activated mana ability follows the rules for activating any other activated ability (see rule 602.2), with the following exceptions:

One key difference between mana abilities and regular activated abilities is that you can activate mana abilities whenever you have to pay a mana cost.
In a nutshell, you may tap lands etc. for mana whenever you could cast spells and activate abilities, including during your opponent's turn.

Tapping lands for mana whenever you have priority was and is legal. Earlier (way back) there was a rule about "mana burn" which punished you for having "floating" (i.e. un-spent) mana at the end of a turn (edit: or phase) in the form of damage. This rule was changed and now you can have any excess of mana at any given time without a punishment (if not for a special circumstance).
This means that you could tap all your lands whenever you have priority (i.e. you could cast an instant spell) and have it build up over time if you do not spend it to cast something.

Mana burn was definitely there when I was young and Magic was just arrived... Some 25  years ago I think, I feel old now

I think mana burn happened at the ends of phases, not just turns. The mana still disappears in the modern rules, but it doesn't burn you as it goes.

Ah and does mana also disappear at the end of phases? (If not for something like Omnath)

@tehfurbolg From rule 106.4: "Each player’s mana pool empties at the end of each step and phase, and the player is said to lose this mana."

Huh, thanks! I believe I have never played it like this. Although I'd say this is rarely relevant without some special mana shenanigans.

@tehfurbolg There are various situations where it's important. For instance, there are cards that force your opponent to tap all their lands.


text:
Does Mutate count as an alternative cost?
I have Jodah, Archmage Eternal on the battlefield:

You may pay {W}{U}{B}{R}{G} rather than pay the mana cost for spells that you cast.

I want to Mutate Nethroi, Apex of Death onto, let's say, a dragon. Nethroi states:

Mutate {4}{G/W}{B}{B} (If you cast this spell for its mutate cost, put it over or under target non-Human creature you own. They mutate into the creature on top plus all abilities from under it.)

In the rulings I find:

(2018-04-27) Jodah’s ability is an alternative cost to cast a spell. You can’t combine this with other alternative costs, such as flashback. You can pay additional costs, such as kicker, in addition to this alternative cost.

Can the Mutate cost be paid by Jodah's ability? In other words, does Mutate count as an alternative cost?

@quetzalcoatl that's because the set hasn't been published yet.

Yes, the Mutate cost is an alternative cost. No, you can't pay WUBRG for Mutate through Jodah, and that is because both are alternative costs.
A spell's mana cost is only what's printed in the upper right corner of the card, nothing else. In particular, an alternative cost is not a mana cost.

202.1. A card’s mana cost is indicated by mana symbols near the top of the card. (See rule 107.4.) On most cards, these symbols are printed in the upper right corner.

The alternative cost granted by Jodah is independent of the Mutate alternative cost; alternative costs are an alternative only to the spell's mana cost, not to other alternative costs. You have to choose between paying the mana cost or one of the alternative costs. Only the associated effects, if any, of the cost you chose to pay actually happen.

118.9. Some spells have alternative costs. An alternative cost is a cost listed in a spell’s text, or applied to it from another effect, that its controller may pay rather than paying the spell’s mana cost. [..]
601.2b [..]  If the spell has alternative or additional costs that will be paid as it’s being cast such as buyback or kicker costs (see rules 118.8 and 118.9), the player announces their intentions to pay any or all of those costs (see rule 601.2f). A player can’t apply two alternative methods of casting or two alternative costs to a single spell. [..]

So if you control Jodah and cast Nethroi, you can choose between paying Nethroi's mana cost of 2WBG, Jodah's alternative cost of WUBRG, or Nethroi's Mutate alternative cost of 4(G/W)BB. You get to Mutate if and only if you paid the Mutate cost.


text:
Vorinclex, does my opponents land untap if they were tapped before i summoned him?
If I summon Vorinclex, Voice of Hunger and my opponent already had lands tapped before hand, do they untap on his turn or do they stay tapped?

Whenever an opponent taps a land for mana, that land doesn't untap
  during its controller's next untap step.

This is a triggered ability. If your opponent already had tapped lands before you played Vorinclex, his ability will not trigger. Conversely if your opponent taps lands while Vorinclex is in play, and Vorinclex then leaves play, Vorinclex's ability will have already triggered and your opponent's lands will not untap during your opponent's next untap phase.

So for example, the opponent could tap three swamps in response to you playing Vorinclex, wait for Vorinclex to resolve, then use the 3 mana to Murder it and avoid the ability altogether.


text:
Can one block with a protection from color creature?
With the upcoming prerelease I'm currently wondering about the new protection creatures. When playing a creature which gets protection from a certain color, is that creature then able to block an attacking creature with the color it is protected from?
For example, if you play Blightbeetle, and the opponent attacks with a green creature, am I able/allowed to block with my Blightbeetle?
The reason I'm asking is, because I'm a little confused by the text. It says "can't be targeted". Is declaring the creature as a blocker considered targeting then, or does that only include other spells and stuff?

Protection from green (This creature can't be blocked, targeted, dealt damage, enchanted, or equipped by anything green.)

Please note that an "opponent" is a player, and players don't have colors. Only objects, such as creatures, can have colors. Calling a creature an opponent is confusing.

For details on what "targeting" matters, see this question. It uses Hexproof for most examples, but protection would work the same in terms of not being able to be targeted by.

"the new protection creatures"? - Has there been a period without protection being in new sets? (Haven't played for a while myself)

@JollyJoker Yes. They retired the ability for a while on complexity grounds, but it seems it's back again.

Declaring a creature as a blocker isn't targeting; the rules don't mention the word 'target'.

509.1a The defending player chooses which creatures they control, if any, will block. The chosen creatures must be untapped. For each of the chosen creatures, the defending player chooses one creature for it to block that’s attacking that player or a planeswalker they control.

If you want to know what counts as being targeted (a lot of it does), you'll need to read rule 114.

In fact, declaring the creature with protection as a blocker is very often the right thing to do, as the creature won't receive any combat damage and thus is likely to survive.

Your creature having protection from green does not prevent you from blocking a green creature. Attacking does not involve targeting, and in any case only requires the attacker to choose players or planeswalkers to attack, never the defending creatures.
As you noted, a creature with protection from something can't be blocked, targeted, dealt damage, enchanted, or equipped by anything that has that "something" quality. That quality is usually one or more colors.

702.16a Protection is a static ability, written “Protection from [quality].” This quality is usually a color (as in “protection from black”) but can be any characteristic value or information. [..]

As for your question, targeting can only happen when someone casts a spell, activates an activated ability, or triggers a triggered ability, as specified in 114.1 a-f. Nothing else in the game involves targeting. In particular, attacking and blocking does not involve targeting in any way, and therefore that untargetability part of protection is irrelevant.

509.1a The defending player chooses which creatures they control, if any, will block. The chosen creatures must be untapped. For each of the chosen creatures, the defending player chooses one creature for it to block that’s attacking that player or a planeswalker they control.

Taken from the MTG Wiki:

Protection is commonly misunderstood as complete exemption from permanents, and effects created by cards, with the specified quality. However, protection is defined by a relatively narrow set of rules, which are often communicated using the mnemonic acronym DEBT. The object with protection cannot be:

Damaged by sources with the specified quality. (All such damage is prevented.)
Enchanted, equipped, or fortified by permanents with the specified quality.
Blocked by creatures with the specified quality.
Targeted by spells with the specified quality, or by abilities from sources of that quality.

So your creature can block the creature it has protection from (without taking damage), but cannot be blocked by it.
As for the confusion about targetting, there is following rule (emphasis mine):

114.1. Some spells and abilities require their controller to choose one or more targets for them. The targets are object(s) and/or player(s) the spell or ability will affect. These targets are declared as part of the process of putting the spell or ability on the stack. The targets can’t be changed except by another spell or ability that explicitly says it can do so.

So the action of declaring the creature to block does not involve choosing a target, only spells and abilities that use the word "target" do.


text:
Does an enchantment ability that gives -1/-1 to opponent creatures resolve before other abilities can be used on a 1/1 entering the battlefield
So I control an Ethereal Absolution that gives all opponents creatures -1/-1.  On my opponents turn he sacrifices a creature to create two 1/1 white token spirits.  He then wants to sacrifice these using an ability on another card (Teysa Orzhov Scion).
My question is does the enchantment resolve first and remove the 1/1 tokens, e.g. as completion of them entering the battle field, and, before his ability can be triggered, or as he is the active player he gets to decide the order?

Could you give us the name of the enchantment please? It might matter for the answer.

@Hackworth, edited question t put card in question in.

Your opponent cannot sacrifice them before they die. The -1/-1 ability is a static ability. It is always in effect, does not use the stack, and will kill off all */1 creatures before anyone can interact with them.
A static ability such as "Creatures your opponents control get -1/-1." is always in effect:

604.1. Static abilities do something all the time rather than being activated or triggered. They are written as statements, and they’re simply true.

That means creatures this applies to enter the battlefield with the -1/-1 effect. The game never sees a 1/1 creature, it enters as a 0/0. As soon as the spell or effect that put that creature on the battlefield has resolved, the game checks for state-based actions (A set of rules that is checked almost all the time), because the active player would gain priority (the right to take actions).

116.3b The active player receives priority after a spell or ability (other than a mana ability) resolves.
116.5. Each time a player would get priority, the game first performs all applicable state-based actions as a single event (see rule 704, “State-Based Actions”),[..]
704.5. The state-based actions are as follows:
704.5f If a creature has toughness 0 or less, it’s put into its owner’s graveyard. Regeneration can’t replace this event.

This will cause creatures that have abilities that trigger when other creatures die to still fire right?

Yes it does, it's a regular creature death.

@JoeW if you want you can search for the modern deck that uses dredgevine and bridge from below to see this "interaction".


text:
Is Famished Paladin and Resplendent Mentor a legal infinite life combo?
I know I couldn't use these in a Standard game but is it legal for a casual game?
If I control both Resplendent Mentor and Famished Paladin can I gain as much life as I want as long as no spells are cast that affect these two cards?
I know that combos that play off each other and have no end are not legal because the game can't continue, but does this combo work and is it valid?

"I know that combos that play off each other and have no end are not legal because the game can't continue" It's not clear what you mean by this; but it doesn't sound correct. There are plenty of combos that allow for an arbitrary large number of things to happen, and they are perfectly allowed within the rules.

@GendoIkari I believe that what they are getting at is that a loop that consists entirely of mandatory acts forces a draw. They're not "not legal" per se, but they do prevent a win.

Yes, that works. Congratulations for finding two cards that work so well together. It's not legal in Standard but it is in other formats (e.g. Modern). There are no rules for which cards are allowed in casual games, it's just what you agree on with your opponent(s).
Note that you can't gain infinite life, as stated in the title; you can gain as much life as you want. E.g. you can declare that you want to execute the loop (tapping the Paladin with the ability it gained from the Mentor) one million times, and you end up with one million extra life. If your opponent has an 'infinite' damage loop, they'll be able to execute theirs for a larger amount than one million and still kill you. They'd be advised to kill your creatures first, otherwise you can respond to their loop iteration with another activation of the Paladin's life-gaining ability.

Your last sentence is not correct. If a player has an "infinite" damage combo against the other player's Mentor/Paladin combo, that player also only has an "arbitrarily large but finite" amount of damage, to which the other player can respond with the same amount of life gain. If a player proposes a "1 million damage" shortcut, the other player can alway respond with a counter-proposal of "whenever you do a point of damage, I make a point of life".

In that case, a fragmented loop as per 720.3 would occur, and each player could only activate their respective combo once.

Thank you I have a white and black deck built around these two cards and Epicure of blood. It seems pretty powerful and as far as I can tell it is.                        Here is a link to Epicure of Blood. https://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=447231


text:
Contaminated Ground vs. Blink of an Eye
I have a tough ruling I need some help with: On my opponent's turn he played Contaminated Ground on my Island. I tapped that Island for blue mana in response. I then wanted to let the stack resolve and cast Blink of an Eye on Contaminated Ground before the end of the step. Rule 500.2 is what makes me believe this is possible. His sense is that after we both pass priority, the step ends and I won't have the mana to cast the spell. What's the actual ruling here?

Yes, you will be able to cast Blink of an Eye in that sequence. The current step/phase does end when both players pass in succession, but whenever a spell or ability resolves, both players again receive priority, starting with the active player.
The stack resolves one object at a time. After each resolution, there is a new round of priority that each player has to pass before the next object resolves or, when the stack is empty, the step/phase ends. Rule 500.2 also mentions this.

116.3b The active player receives priority after a spell or ability (other than a mana ability) resolves.
116.3c If a player has priority when they cast a spell, activate an ability, or take a special action, that player receives priority afterward.
500.2. A phase or step in which players receive priority ends when the stack is empty and all players pass in succession. Simply having the stack become empty doesn’t cause such a phase or step to end; all players have to pass in succession with the stack empty. Because of this, each player gets a chance to add new things to the stack before that phase or step ends.

So the sequence of play is:

Your opponent casts Contaminated Ground and retains priority because of 116.3c.
Opponent passes, and you tap the island for mana; this action doesn't use stack because it's a mana ability. Then you pass.
Contaminated Ground resolves and turns your tapped Island into a Swamp. You have {U} in your mana pool. Your opponent receives priority because of 116.3b
Your opponent passes priority to you. You play Blink of an Eye targeting Contaminated Ground. You retain priority because of 116.3c
Both players pass, Blink resolves, and your opponent gains priority.
Your opponent could for example cast Contaminated Ground again, or pass priority.
When both players pass with the stack empty, the game advances to the next step/phase.

Nitpick: The opponent receives priority again before Contaminated Ground resolves because players have not passed in succession

"your opponent passes priority to you", they don't they have priority until they decide to put something else on the stack or pass to a different phase. If they cast something else, they will pass priority then (after putting spell/ability on the stack). If they announce they want to move to another phase (saying things like "Your turn", moving creatures into a combat position or attempting to discard a card if they hold more than 7 cards in hand (during cleanup) are all signs that they have decided to move phases, by shortcut) at that stage you can announce that you cast during current phase

@fireshark519 I can't really follow your argument, you are mixing up too many things. "They don't they have priority until they decide to put something else on the stack or pass to a different phase" That is false, 116.3b states that the active player (opponent in this case) gets priority whenever a spell or ability (Contaminated Ground in this case) resolves. If the player with priority takes a special action or plays a spell/ability, that player will retain priority (113.3c). Only passing priority can make you lose priority.

@Hackworth sorry I missed this "Your opponent receives priority because of 116.3b". I was arguing that "opponent passes priority" doesn't make sense, they only pass priority after putting something on the stack and before resolving whatever is on the stack. Priority passing is always a nightmare in mtg...


text:
Instants vs planeswalker abilities
Can you use an instant such as Sarkhan's Catharsis to kill a Planeswalker before they can use an ability?

Please add some clarification about when during the game you are asking about. Do you mean when a player has first played a Planeswalker, and you want to use an instant before that player has a chance to activate any of the new Planeswalker's abilities?

Yeah I mean when they first play a planeswalker, I’m kind of new to magic the gathering but I mean in the main phase if that’s the clarification your looking for


text:
Chandra exiles a card, I play it, it gets exiled again
I exiled a creature card with Chandra, Fire Artisan. I then played it, and it got countered by a card that put it back into exile. Can I play it again?

No, you can't play it again.
It's necessary to understand that everything in the game is only an imaginary game object. Objects are the things that players actually play with. Cards only represent objects; they serve as a reminder that there is an object and what its base properties are.
Whenever an object leaves a game zone (such as exile), it ceases to exist. If that object was represented by a card, a new object is instead created in the zone it moved to. Those new objects have no relation to their previous existence.
That means the object you exiled with Chandra is different from the one you cast and was countered, and different yet again from the exiled object put there by the counter. That means you can not cast it again with Chandra, because it's a different object to the one Chandra exiled.

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.

There are a few exceptions to this rule, but none apply here.

No, you cannot play the card from exile, because it wasn't exiled by Chandra.
The you can play the card this turn clause only applies when the card is exiled by that ability. If the card goes to the exile zone for any other reason, you may not play it.


text:
If Pitiless Pontiff sacrifices Piru, the Volatile, does it get indestructible?
If Pitiless Pontiff sacrifices Piru, the Volatile, does it get indestructible before getting killed by Piru?

No, Pitiless Pontiff would die to Piru's damage.
When you activate an ability, the process has a certain order: In a nutshell, you start by putting the ability on the stack as the top-most object. Then you make all necessary choices such as selecting modes, targets, etc. Finally you determine and pay all costs, which includes sacrificing Piru.
Now the Pontiff's ability has been activated but not yet resolved. Piru's triggered ability goes on the stack as the new top-most object. Because of the Last In, First Out order of resolving the stack, Piru's trigger resolves first, dealing 7 damage to the Pontiff. The Pontiff's ability is still on the stack and has not yet resolved,  leaving the Pontiff vulnerable. By the time the Pontiff's ability resolves, the Pontiff has already died.

602.2. To activate an ability is to put it onto the stack and pay its costs, so that it will eventually resolve and have its effect. [..]

602.2a The player announces that they are activating the ability. [..] That ability is created on the stack as an object that’s not a card. It becomes the topmost object on the stack.

The Pontiff's ability goes on the stack here.

602.2b The remainder of the process for activating an ability is identical to the process for casting a spell listed in rules 601.2b–i. [..]

601.2h The player pays the total cost. [..]

You sacrifice Piru here.

601.2i Once the steps described in 601.2a–h are completed, effects that modify the characteristics of the spell as it’s cast are applied, then the spell becomes cast. Any abilities that trigger when a spell is cast or put onto the stack trigger at this time. If the spell’s controller had priority before casting it, they get priority.

After the ability has been activated, players get a round of priority, and triggered abilities waiting to enter the stack do so now.

603.2. Whenever a game event or game state matches a triggered ability’s trigger event, that ability automatically triggers. The ability doesn’t do anything at this point.

Piru's ability triggers as soon as you sacrifice it to pay for the Pontiff's ability, but doesn't enter the stack yet.

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.

As mentioned above, players get rounds of priority after the Pontiff's ability has finished activating, and Piru's ability goes on the stack now, ultimately causing it to resolve before the Pontiff's ability.

No, the Pitiless Pontiff would die before it gains indestructible.
Pitiless Pontiff's ability says this:

{1}, Sacrifice another creature: Pitiless Pontiff gains deathtouch and indestructible until end of turn.

This is an activated ability. The cost is "{1}, Sacrifice another creature", and the effect is the rest. After you pay the cost to activate an ability, other things can happen before the ability resolves and the effect happens. In this particular case, Piru has an ability that triggers when it dies, so if you sacrifice it this way, that triggered ability will go on the stack on top of the activated ability, and that triggered ability will resolve first.


text:
Can I make Vitu-Ghazi Indestructible with Nissa's Emblem?
If I used a Nissa, Who Shakes the World -8 Emblem in conjunction with an Awakening of Vitu-Ghazi, could I make Vitu-Ghazi indestructible in a sense that a creature is indestructible?

Yes, after you -8 Nissa, lands you control have indestructible, including the land animated by Awakening of Vitu Ghazi. It does not matter what other types, if any, your lands have.
Nissa's effect says that "Lands you control have indestructible". "Land" is shortcut for "land permanents". Therefore, every permanent you control that is a land has indestructible, and indestructible extends to the whole permanent, not just the land part of it. A permanent is a land if it has the land type, and that's all the Nissa effect cares about. It does not care whether or not that land is also a creature. Awakening of Vitu Ghazi states that the permanent retains its land type, so it will be affected by Nissa's -8.

109.2. If a spell or ability uses a description of an object that includes a card type or subtype, but doesn’t include the word “card,” “spell,” “source,” or “scheme,” it means a permanent of that card type or subtype on the battlefield.
300.2. Some objects have more than one card type (for example, an artifact creature). Such objects combine the aspects of each of those card types, and are subject to spells and abilities that affect either or all of those card types.


text:
Does Dovescape counter Enchantment Creatures?
I am really curious, does Dovescape counter enchantment creatures (such as Archetype of Aggression), or because they are also a creature, bypass it due to "noncreature spells" being part of it?

Expanding on Erik's correct answer.

205.2b Some objects have more than one card type (for example, an artifact creature). Such objects satisfy the criteria for any effect that applies to any of their card types.

Dovescape checks as a spell is being cast that that spell lacks the creature type. A spell with both enchantment and creature fulfills both types, so is not non-creature. (It is both fully a creature spell, and fully an enchantment spell)
Also good to note: a very similar case is called out specifically in Bestow's ruling:

702.102c The check for whether a spell can legally be cast happens after its controller has chosen whether to pay its bestow cost; see rule 601.2e.
  Example: Aether Storm is an enchantment with the ability “Creature spells can’t be cast.” This effect doesn’t stop a creature card with bestow from being cast for its bestow cost because the spell is an Aura enchantment spell, not an enchantment creature spell, when the game checks whether the spell is illegal.

Basically, "non-creature" means "not (card has creature type)", not "card has (not creature type)".

Enchantment creatures have both types: enchantment and creature. Therefore when being cast they are not countered by Dovescape, since they are part creature.

This is different if you cast an enchantment creature for its bestow cost.

702.102 Bestow
702.102a [...] "If you chose to pay this spell's bestow cost, it becomes an Aura enchantment and gains enchant creature. [...]"

So Dovescape would counter an enchantment creature cast as an aura.

would the bestow creature become a critter after being countered?

Nope, if the spell is countered, then it won't enter the battlefield. Why would it be otherwise?


text:
Can my opponent tap lands for mana when I have Sen Triplets on the battlefield?
I have been wracking my brain, trying to come up with interesting ways to use Piracy.

UU, Sorcery
Until end of turn, you may tap lands you don't control for mana. Spend this mana only to cast spells.

With Sen Triplets in play, target opponent can't activate abilities of their permanents:

This turn, that player can’t cast spells or activate abilities and plays with their hand revealed.

Since tapping a land for mana is an activated ability (activation cost is T:), then does this mean that the opponent can't tap their lands?
If so, can I then cast Piracy to use their lands to generate mana in addition to my own, safe in the knowledge that when I pass priority, the opponent won't just tap their lands?
Bonus: Further, if I have Strionic Resonator in play, then could I do so to multiple opponents in a multiplayer game, by copying the Triplets' triggered ability?

I removed the "bonus bonus" questions, as they weren't really questions, and strayed too far from the original question. Please consider asking a new question, or several, about those interactions.

Surprised to see a way to make piracy work post mana burn removal.

Yes, activated mana abilities are regular activated abilities as far as Sen Triplets are concerned, and the chosen opponent(s) can't activate them. You can copy Sen Triplets' ability with Strionic Resonator, and you can choose another opponent with the copy, allowing you to tap lands from all chosen opponents with Piracy.

605.1. Some activated abilities and some triggered abilities are mana abilities, which are subject to special rules.

605.3. Activating an activated mana ability follows the rules for activating any other activated ability (see rule 602.2) [..]

As soon as Sen Triplets' ability has resolved, your opponent can't tap lands or activate any other mana ability, and if you cast Piracy later that turn, you can be sure that the opponent can't tap their lands in response. They could, of course, tap their lands and other mana-producing permanents in response to the Sen Triplets ability on the stack, especially if they know you are running Piracy.
Sen Triplets' ability is a triggered ability, so it can be copied by Strionic Resonator, and you can choose another opponent for the copy.

603.1. Triggered abilities have a trigger condition and an effect. They are written as “[When/Whenever/At] [trigger condition or event], [effect]. [Instructions (if any).]”

Is there a way to tap the lands, before my opponents can tap them?
For example piracy resolves and no one tapped their lands. As the player with priority can i tap all lands, before my opponents are able to tap them?
If i play something like "untap all lands" Am I the first player which can tap all lands?


text:
MTG: creature and enchantment triggered to opposite effects
The situation is my Mortus Strider has been enchanted with Unholy Indenture.
The creature has

when it dies, return it to his owner’s hand

The enchantment says

When enchanted creature dies, return that card to the battlefield under your control with a +1/+1 counter on it.

Who gets the creature? Me or my rival?
Does the creature ability trigger before or after enchantment?

I have reopened this question. The original linked duplicate was asked and answered given the information that the triggered abilities are happening on a specific player's turn. In the situation in this question, the triggered abilities can happen on any player's turn, so the original linked duplicate does not fully address it.

Thanks, I did understand the similarity, but the key point was not cleared by the other question’s responses (in my opinion, if it does I may not be able to understand why)

As explained in my previous comment, this question is not a duplicate of Triggered abilities from multiple players. Whose resolves first?. Reopening again.

Let us continue this discussion in chat.

This question should be left open and https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/22688/triggered-abilities-from-multiple-players-whose-resolves-first should be closed as a duplicate of this question, as this is more general and that more specific in the timing of the triggers.

Assuming you control both the Mortus Strider and the Unholy Indenture, you get to choose which ability will resolve first. If your opponent controls the Unholy Indenture, it depends on whose turn it is.
The position of spells and abilities on the stack decide the order in which they resolve. Players can only cast one spell at a time, so their order is never in question. However, multiple abilities can trigger at the same time. When that happens, there are rules how to determine their position on the stack:

603.3b If multiple abilities have triggered since the last time a player received priority, each player, in APNAP order, puts triggered abilities they control on the stack in any order they choose. [..]

"APNAP" means "active player, non-active player". The "active" player is the one whose turn it is. If multiple players make a choice at the same time, the active player makes the first choice, followed by all others in turn order.
Therefore, assuming you control both the Mortus Strider and the Unholy Indenture, you get to choose the order of these abilities on the stack. You put the ability you want to resolve first on top of the stack.
If you control only one of those two and your opponent controls the other, then the order depends on whose turn it is. If it's your turn, you put the ability of the object you control on the stack first, and your opponent's ability second. Therefore, your opponent's ability will resolve first. If it's your opponent's turn, the opposite happens.

Thanks! Very clear answer. It happened to be me playing Blue/black against a newbie with my black deck, and I am not that knowledgeable in blue myself, nor much time playing mtg. But we got a couple decks for the quarantine and we are playing a lot. It sure will happen again, and now we know how to solve it.

The answer is: It depends who's turn it was and who controlled what. For the purposes of this I assume different players control the aura and the creature (the question implies that but is not explicit) We'll say Player A controls the creature and Player B controls the aura.
These are triggered abilities, both triggering at the same time from the same event. When that happens these triggers are put onto the stack in AP/NAP(Active player/non-active player) order according to the Comprehensive Rules:

603.3b If multiple abilities have triggered since the last time a player received priority, each player, in APNAP order, puts triggered abilities they control on the stack in any order they choose. (See rule 101.4.) Then the game once again checks for and resolves state-based actions until none are performed, then abilities that triggered during this process go on the stack. This process repeats until no new state-based actions are performed and no abilities trigger. Then the appropriate player gets priority.

Spells and abilities on the stack resolve in reverse order to how they were put on the stack. That gives two possibilities:

If it is Player A's turn or a player before Player A but after Player B in multiplayer

Player A's Mortus Strider's ability goes on the stack first as they are the first player in AP/NAP order.
Player B's Unholy Indenture's ability goes on the stack second.
The stack starts to resolve, hitting Player B's Unholy Indenture first. This returns Mortus Stider to the battlefield under Player B's control with a +1/+1 counter.
Player A's Mortus Stider's ability is reached on the stack and tries to resolve, but the connected card is not found in the graveyard and thus can't be moved from that zone, so it fails.

If it is Player B's turn or a player before Player B but after Player A in multiplayer

Player B's Unholy Indenture's ability goes on the stack first as they are the first player in AP/NAP order.
Player A's Mortus Strider's ability goes on the stack second.
The stack starts to resolve, hitting Player A's Mortus Stider first. This returns Mortus Stider to Player A's hand.
Player B's Unholy Indenture's ability is reached on the stack and tries to resolve, but the connected card is not found in the graveyard and thus can't be moved from that zone, so it fails.

If both the aura and the creature were controlled by the same player, it would be that player's choice which order their triggers are put on the stack, likely the Strider first and the Indenture second, so the last one put on the stack would resolve and all other triggers would fail.

Indeed, it was not the same player who had both the creature and the aura.
We decided to abstain from allowing that move until we got an answer, as neither of us had any idea how to solve the situation, so your hypotheticals will cover all grounds. Thanks a million!


text:
What happens if you lose "half your life" if you have less than zero life?
I was looking at the card Unstoppable Slasher (which has "If this deals combat damage to a player, that player loses half their life, rounded up").
What would happen if, say, an opponent dealt damage by Unstoppable Slasher already had -7 life ( but still alivethanks to a Platinum Angel)?  Would the player gain 4 life?

This question is similar to: How does doubling of life work when you are at negative life?. If you believe it’s different, please [edit] the question, make it clear how it’s different and/or how the answers on that question are not helpful for your problem.

Doubling negative life does work differently than losing negative life. My answer explains the difference.

@murgatroid99 true, but the answer from the proposed duplicate cites the same rule and highlights the part that would be used to reason about that difference. In the SE model as I understand it, this is a reason to broaden the wording of the original question so that it can serve as a proper duplicate (perhaps something like "how do life gain and loss effects work...").

It's still a different question, with a different answer. The fact that the answers to the two questions are in the same place does not make them duplicates.

@KarlKnechtel I don't think that's true, about broadening the original question. In fact, I'd say it's more consistent with the SE model that you don't fundamentally change questions or answers after they're posted. Fixing typos, clarifying wording, that sort of thing is fine, but not broadening a question's scope. (Occasionally exceptions can be made if the question was kind of bad originally, can be improved a lot by a major edit, and the edit doesn't render any existing answer invalid.)

The player loses 0 life, so they still have -7 life.
Rule 107.1b says

Most of the time, the Magic game uses only positive numbers and zero. You can't choose a negative number, deal negative damage, gain negative life, and so on. However, it's possible for a game value, such as a creature's power, to be less than zero. If a calculation or comparison needs to use a negative value, it does so. If a calculation that would determine the result of an effect yields a negative number, zero is used instead, unless that effect doubles or sets to a specific value a player's life total or the power and/or toughness of a creature or creature card.

In this case, the player has -7 life, so half their life rounded up is -3. That is the result of the calculation to determine how much life the player loses. Since that number is negative, 0 is used instead, so the player loses 0 life, remaining at -7.

remains the question whether halving a negative amount of life would mean getting to -10 from -7 or to -3. My gut feeling tells me you should get to -10. End result is still 0 but this is potentially important if a healing effect is also applied during the same calculation.

The answer is that you go to -7. That is the conclusion that applying the rules results in. I don't understand the distinction you're trying to make where some other answer would need to be considered, but if you can point to a card or interaction where that would be relevant I can address that.

As I said, it might make a difference if some healing effect or something else that would increase the health to over 0 depending on actual value was in effect. Edge case certainly. Not sure what that would be, but say you have an effect that adds 4 life, you're at -7 and now a card is played that changes that to -3. End result would be +1 and you survive. If that card instead either keeps you at -7 or worse puts you at -10 you die.

If the player had -3 life instead of -7, the effect in question would still cause them to lose 0 life, leaving their life total unchanged. That is true for any negative life total because the rule in question is independent of the specific value. The fact that some other effect could change the life total to a different negative value before the effect in question resolves is immaterial to that conclusion.

@jwenting: due to that potential ambiguity, any card that overrode the general rule of clamping effect damage to a minimum of zero would hopefully be worded in a way that makes it clear what exactly it does for that case.


text:
Activating Golos during another player’s turn
Golos, Tireless Pilgrim's ability can be activated during another players turn, but does doing so allow you to still play the cards if it is not your turn? The ability text says you may play those cards “this turn”.
I am assuming that you would not be able to play anything other than any revealed instants unless the revealed card has “flash” or some other card gives those revealed cards flash (e.g. Teferi or Leyline of Anticipation).  Is that correct?
Similarly, because it is not my turn, is playing a revealed land card from Golos forbidden?

All normal casting restrictions apply for cards exiled with Golos during another player's turn.
You may play instants and cards with flash. You may not play lands. The phrase "You may play them this turn" only lifts the restriction that you can normally only play cards from your hand.

Gatherer often answers rules questions about cards with special effects directly. In this case, it says

Golos’s last ability doesn’t change when you can play the exiled cards. For example, if you exile a sorcery card, you can cast it only during your main phase when the stack is empty. If you exile a land card, you can play it only during your main phase and only if you have an available land play remaining.

Which is to say, if you activate him on your opponent's turn, you can only cast exiled instants and cards with flash, just as with regular cards from your hand.


text:
Golos, Tireless Pilgrim and cards with cycling
If I use Golos, Tireless Pilgrim's activated ability and hit a card with cycling, can I cycle it? And if so I assume I can't do so for free?

No, you can't cycle cards exiled with Golos.
As Golos says, you exile the top three cards of your library and then you may play them without paying their mana costs. Cycling requires the card to be in your hand rather than anywhere else, and "exile" is its own zone.

702.28a Cycling is an activated ability that functions only while the card with cycling is in a player’s hand. “Cycling [cost]” means “[Cost], Discard this card: Draw a card.”

Also, "playing" a card, as Golos allows you to, means casting it as a spell or playing it as a land, whichever fits:

701.13b To play a card means to play that card as a land or to cast that card as a spell, whichever is appropriate.

As you correctly noted, cycling a card means activating its cycling ability, not playing it as a spell, so you would have to pay the cycling costs even if you could play the card from your hand without paying its mana cost.

And "discard" means "move a card from your hand to the graveyard" (unless it has madness, in which there's some extra stuff of exiling it first), so you can't discard a card in exile.


text:
servant of the scale during a board wipe
Would you be able to, as Servant of the Scale dies, pass on x amount of counters to Fertilid and then activate his ability multiple times before Fertilid is then killed by the board wipe, or would they both die at the same time?

All creatures die at the same time from a board wipe, and you could not resolve any abilities while the board wipe is resolving.
Servant of the Scale triggers as it dies, but the ability only enters the stack after the board wipe has finished resolving.

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.

The active player gets priority (the right to cast spells and activate abilities) after a spell has resolved:

117.3b The active player receives priority after a spell or ability (other than a mana ability) resolves.

By that time, all creatures have already died.
Also, you could not activate Fertilid's ability during the board wipe, for the same reason you don't get the Servant trigger during the board wipe's resolution, because you need priority to do that.

You could, however, activate Fertilid's ability in response to the other player casting the board wipe, before it resolves.

That wasn't the question though