Mind's Desire, Island, and the Golden Rule of Magic

[LotusHead]

Whenever there are two rules which contradict in that one says "you may not do X" and one says "you may do X" the "you may not do x" rule always wins.

Where is this in the rules, exactly?  I'm not questioning it's credibility, I'm just sincerely wondering if this rule actually exists.

I was assuming here:

103. The Magic Golden Rules

103.1. 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. The only exception is that a player can concede the game at any time (see rule 102.3a).

103.2. When a rule or effect says something can happen and another effect says it can’t, the “can’t” effect wins. For example, if one effect reads “You may play an additional land this turn” and another reads “You can’t play land cards this turn,” the effect that keeps you from playing lands wins out. Note that adding abilities to objects and removing abilities from objects don’t fall under this rule. See rule 407, “Adding and Removing Abilities.”

[bomholmm]

103.2. When a rule or effect says something can happen and another effect says it can't, the "can't" effect wins. For example, if one effect reads "You may play an additional land this turn" and another reads "You can't play land cards this turn," the effect that keeps you from playing lands wins out. Note that adding abilities to objects and removing abilities from objects don't fall under this rule. See rule 407, "Adding and Removing Abilities."

[Evenpence]

How does that rule apply to Fastbond then?  If there is a specific rule that states that we may only play one land per turn, and fastbond says otherwise, wouldn't the specific rule that states that we may only play one land per turn override Fastbond?

I mean, if that's the same logic behind the Mind's Desire ruling that you cannot play lands off Mind's Desire, then Fastbond wouldn't work.

[diopter]

How does that rule apply to Fastbond then?  If there is a specific rule that states that we may only play one land per turn, and fastbond says otherwise, wouldn't the specific rule that states that we may only play one land per turn override Fastbond?

I mean, if that's the same logic behind the Mind's Desire ruling that you cannot play lands off Mind's Desire, then Fastbond wouldn't work.

I don't know for sure myself, but somebody earlier in this thread said that there are special rules in place that handle the permission of multiple lands played per turn.

[Evenpence]

We should change it.  I want to be able to play multiple lands off Mind's Desire.  It's more fitting with the card too.  After all, it gives me all that my mind desires. 

Seriously though, what are these other rules?  They have special rules devoted to Fastbond, Exploration, and Azusa Lost-Butt-Seeking?  Like, those actual cards are in the rules?

I don't understand all this.

[andrewpate]

It's actually simpler than you're making it, Colby.  It still holds that "can't" trumps "can."  It's just that the rule isn't that you can't play more than one land each turn.  It's that you can't play more than one land each turn unless something lets you play additional lands.  The full text of 212.6b:

212.6b A player may play only one land card during each of his or her own turns. Effects may allow the playing of additional lands; playing an additional land in this way doesn’t prevent a player from taking the normal action of playing a land. Players can’t begin to play a land that an effect prohibits from being played. As a player plays a land, he or she announces whether he or she is using the once-per-turn action of playing a land. If not, he or she specifies which effect is allowing the additional land play. Effects may also allow you to “put” lands into play. This isn’t the same as “playing a land” and doesn’t count as the player’s one land played during his or her turn.

Note that there also follows the restriction on playing lands when you are prohibited to do so (as in 103.2), with Worms of the Earth still working even if you have Fastbond in play.  These portions of the rule were simply omitted earlier.

[Anusien]

Whenever there are two rules which contradict in that one says "you may not do X" and one says "you may do X" the "you may not do x" rule always wins.

Where is this in the rules, exactly?  I'm not questioning it's credibility, I'm just sincerely wondering if this rule actually exists.

No offense, but have you actually read the rules?  It's right there in the beginning, right after, "If a card contradicts the rules, the card wins".

103.2. When a rule or effect says something can happen and another effect says it can’t, the “can’t” effect wins. For example, if one effect reads “You may play an additional land this turn” and another reads “You can’t play land cards this turn,” the effect that keeps you from playing lands wins out. Note that adding abilities to objects and removing abilities from objects don’t fall under this rule. See rule 407, “Adding and Removing Abilities.”

[Demonic Attorney]

I think this thread has served its purpose.  Asked, answered, and locked.[/color]