No, you won't be able to play another land in that example. In the current rules, you determine whether or not you can play a land by comparing how many land plays the game currently says you have to how many you've already played this turn. If the Dryad is gone, you've already made a land play, and there isn't anything else giving you additional plays, then that's it.

Keep in mind that playing lands doesn't use the stack and the active player gets priority again after a spell resolving, so if you want to go land-Dryad-land or Dryad-land-land, there's no opportunity for an opponent to "respond" by killing your Dryad before you play your second land. If you do something else in-between the Dryad and that second land, however, then the opponent will be able to respond with something.

Some previous versions of the rules allowed you to specify which "drop" you were using as you played each land, but it allowed for unintuitive situations where a player could use the additional drop, blink the object that was giving it, and then use its additional drop again. It was an odd and somewhat complicated rules quirk that was smoothed out when the rules for land plays were revised to the current version.

Yes, it still triggers. The declare blockers step of combat only gets skipped if there were no creatures declared as attackers or put onto the battlefield attacking. Otherwise, it always happens, even if it is impossible for any blockers to be declared. If Master of Cruelties is attacking then there will definitely be a declare blockers step and its last ability will trigger if it doesn't get blocked.

Bblackboltt: An answer to your question has been up for a while. Since there don't seem to be any follow-ups or corrections that need to be made, I marked it as the "Accepted answer" so this topic can move out of the list of unanswered questions. In the future you can take care of this yourself using the "Mark as Answer" button on the response that you feel is the most helpful answer to your question.

danielgonmar: You need to use double square brackets around the card's name to make the link work - Nine Lives, Resourceful Defense

To answer your question, since Resourceful Defense only moves counters between things you control, the same player has to control both Nine Lives and the Defense in order to use the Defense to move counters off of Nine Lives. If they're controlled by different players, which might be the situation in the original question where things are being moved around with Harmless Offering, then it won't work.

Also, it's much better to post a new question as its own topic rather than respond to a very old one. With the way this site works, adding a new post to a Rules Q&A discussion doesn't move the topic to the top of the list. This topic is about 4 years old, so the only reason I was aware of your comment is because the site auto-subscribed me for notifications on this topic after I originally posted in it. If you had happened to post in a topic where the only people involved in the discussion were no longer active users then no one would have seen your question.

joaka: An answer to your question has been up for a while. Since there don't seem to be any follow-ups or corrections that need to be made, I marked it as the "Accepted answer" so this topic can move out of the list of unanswered questions. In the future you can take care of this yourself using the "Mark as Answer" button on the response that you feel is the most helpful answer to your question.

Yes, it happens twice in this example. When Delney makes something trigger an additional time, the additional trigger is created at the same time as the original one. It doesn't wait for the original trigger to resolve first.

You found the correct current rules. Each player is allowed to have one. Your buddies are thinking of an older version of the rules that only allowed one between all players. The change to the current rules that allows each player to have one happened with the Magic 2014 core set.

Grenthox: An answer to your question has been up for a while. Since there don't seem to be any follow-ups or corrections that need to be made, I marked it as the "Accepted answer" so this topic can move out of the list of unanswered questions. In the future you can take care of this yourself using the "Mark as Answer" button on the response that you feel is the most helpful answer to your question.

I try to avoid marking my own responses when I do this but in this case it was the only option.

You can make different choices. Choices like modes, targets, and a specific distribution of something, like the damage from Arc Lightning for example, are made when the spell is first cast and are locked in for all copies. Any other choices are made as the spell resolves, so that means the decisions get made separately for the original and each of the copies.

This is a bit difficult to figure out, but my interpretation is that Khârn will still deal damage back to the Cyclops. The way I'm reading the rules about resolving spells and abilities (608, specifically 608.2b), they seem to indicate the last check on a target's legality is right before the spell/ability starts resolving.

There aren't any specific comments addressing what to do if one instruction in the resolving spell/ability somehow manages to change an object's characteristics in a way that seems to make it an "illegal" target before other instructions are carried out. But if the legality determination can't change during resolution then the resolving spell/ability can still continue acting on anything that was a legal target when it started. This might be something worth taking to an MtG Judge Reddit/Discord, and I'd be interested to see what their answers and reasoning are.

I should have gone back and re-read Gidgetimer's comment before writing all that. If you're asking me whether it's okay to do what you're doing, yeah it's probably fine but see if you can get a second opinion.

I only really pay attention to the Rules Q&A area of the site and maybe peek at a few decks here and there. I don't have much of any idea of what goes on in the Forums, but I will give my 2 cents and hopefully Caerwyn will chime in as well.

The way the forums are laid out and described isn't the clearest. Notice the "Commander (EDH)" subforum also has a link to a "Deck Help" subforum next to it. The way I remember (I've been on this site too long), the original intent was to have format discussion in one area and deck discussion in another area so the topics wouldn't crowd each other out of the list of discussion threads as they appear when people enter the subforum. The "NO DECKLISTS" instruction is for the format subforum and Deck Help is specifically for sharing and discussing deck lists. I think.

Maybe what you're doing could also fit in the "Challenges and Articles" subforum.

CloudKillerJay: Since it's clear you got a satisfactory answer to your question and there don't seem to be any follow-ups or corrections that need to be made, I marked it as the "Accepted answer" so this topic can move out of the list of unanswered questions. In the future you can take care of this yourself using the "Mark as Answer" button on the response that you feel is the most helpful answer to your question.

Yes, that works. In the detailed rules for suspend, "play" means "play it if it's a land and cast it if it's a spell". Since you're casting the spell, Caetus gives it convoke and Kasla will trigger from that. Just in case this is also a question: you don't actually need to tap any creatures for convoke to get a trigger from Kasla. The fact that a spell has the convoke ability is enough.

No, Hissing Miasma won't trigger Gonti, Canny Acquisitor. Hissing Miasma doesn't cause any creatures to deal combat damage to anyone. The Miasma, itself, causes a player to lose life.

indieinside: An answer to your question has been up for a while. Since there don't seem to be any follow-ups or corrections that need to be made, I marked it as the "Accepted answer" so this topic can move out of the list of unanswered questions. In the future you can take care of this yourself using the "Mark as Answer" button on the response that you feel is the most helpful answer to your question.

Creative thought, but no, this doesn't work. To "cast" something is to move it from wherever it is to the stack, make all the necessary choices, pay all the costs etc. In this example the copy of the "when the last counter is removed, cast this" trigger will resolve first and will cast Search for Tomorrow. However, when the original trigger starts to resolve, the object it's trying to act on (the suspended card in exile) is gone and it won't be able to do anything.

No, Hissing Miasma doesn't target. An effect only has a target if it specifically uses the word "target", either in the text on the card or packed into the full rules for a keyword ability (e.g. Equip).

Are these the cards you meant to ask about? I'm just getting a funny feeling since you ask about an "interaction" but they don't seem to have anything to do with each other.

This topic has been moved to the Modern discussion forum.