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

[The Atog Lord]

I believe that you can play all the lands you want off Mind's Desire. Consider each of the items I mention below, and you will see my logic. My logic may be wrong, but if it is, please let me know how. I am not a judge.

1.
First, note the new rules about playing cards without mana costs.
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgcom/feature/362
The new rules states, "a nonexistent mana cost can’t be paid."
There is no longer, however, any rule precluding a card without a mana cost from being played.

2.
Consider a Basic Island. This card has no mana cost, and therefore is included in the rules wording given above.

3. Consider the Golden Rule of Magic
" Whenever a card’s text directly contradicts these rules, the card takes precedence."

4. Consider Mind's Desire.
"Shuffle your library. Then remove the top card of your library from the game. Until end of turn, you may play that card without paying its mana cost."

Put this all together, and what do we get? I believe we get a situation in which, should I reveal four Island off Mind's Desire, I may play all of them. Let me explain.

Imagine that I am in my main phase, and that I have already played a Swamp this turn. Now suppose that an Island is removed from the game through Mind's Desire. Since I have already played a land this turn, I would normally be unable to play a second land because there is a rule stating that a player may play only one land per turn. However, regarding this removed Island, Mind's Desire states that I "may play that card without paying its mana cost."

Mind's Desire, then, specifically says that I "may play that card." This conflicts with the rule that only one land may be played each turn; however, recall the Golden Rule noted above. While a rule states that I may not play that Island, a card specifically states that I may, without paying its mana cost.

Therefore, I believe that I should be able to play the Island from the Removed from Game zone.

[Sextiger]

I'm not sure if the new rules changed anything but the Scourge FAQ on Mind's Desire states

From the Official Scourge FAQ:

Mind's Desire

    * The cards are removed from the game face up.

    * Any removed cards that you don't play this turn remain removed from the game.

    * You can play any or all of the removed cards over the course of the turn, but this effect doesn't let you play spells or lands you couldn't normally play. For example, you can't play a removed land if you've already played a land this turn.

    * Additional costs of the removed cards must still be paid.

    * You can't play a removed creature card with morph face down.

    * Playing a removed nonland card counts as playing a spell, so a storm card played later in the turn will count that spell. Playing a land never counts as playing a spell.

Unless this is secretly changed somewhere, the "can't" ruling should override anything else.

[andrewpate]

1.
First, note the new rules about playing cards without mana costs.

From the Official Scourge FAQ:
...
Unless this is secretly changed somewhere, the "can't" ruling should override anything else.

Rich was specifically saying that he thinks the rules have changed.  I'm far from the rules guru level necessary for me to want to address this question, but if he is correct, it is certainly a change, albeit not a "secret" one, since it comes from an interpretation of the new rules.

If this turns out to be correct, it is certainly a loophole similar to post-6th Waylay or the Duplicant with two different powers and toughnesses.  It will no doubt be repaired immediately.  It is an interesting question, though.

[Anusien]

It seems really great, but it doesn't work that way.  This isn't a case of the golden rule letting a card override the rules.  If this worked that way, every card that said "Play a land" would let you play all the lands in your hand, which is clearly not true.  If the rules did work this way, they would have worked since Mind's Desire was printed.  The only change in the way Mind's Desire interacts was to change the way spells with no mana cost work with Mind's Desire.  Since you don't play spells the same way you play lands, it's not a relevant change for analyzing Desire + land drops.

[13:02] <Leecifer> If you can tell from the card that the R&D specifically knew it would be breaking a specific rule, almost every single time, based on its text, it's probably Golden Rule.  If not, then it almost certainly isn't.
[13:03] <Leecifer> Saying Mind's Desire lets you play any number of lands is equivalent to saying it also says you can play spells with illegal targets because it overrides the targeting rules because the card says you can play it.

It sounds really good Rich, but unfortunately it doesn't work.  I had to get it explained why though.

[The Atog Lord]

Interesting. I realized that the Judges might say it doesn't work, but I wanted to understand why.

The judge you mentioned said it doesn't work because it would be like playing a spell which lacks valid targets. However, these aren't quite the same thing.
According to the Comprehensive Rules, if I cast terror when there is no valid target, I actually do cast the terror. Terror even changes zones onto the Stack. However, having cast Terror, the rules of the game see that there is no valid target for Terror and the game is right away backed up to the point before the Terror was cast. In other words, by the rules of the game, I may in fact cast Terror even without a valid target; but if I do so the game is backed up to before I cast it. There is a separate set of tournament floor rules which provide penalties for casting spells which I know will roll back the game state in this manner.

In other words, by the rules of the game, I "may" cast a targetless terror flipped off Mind's Desire. Howeover, the game will simply keep looping back to the point just before I did this, and the DCI floor rules will give me penalties for trying.

In this way, casting a targetless Terror is quite different from playing a land which Mind's Desire says that I "may" play. In the Terror case, by the non-tournament rules I may play it, but nothing will happen and time will revery itself. By the rules of the game, once I play the land, as Mind's Desire says that I may, it simply comes into play.

Thus the two situations are different.

[LotusHead]

Three reasons why a card would have no mana.

It was a horrible mistake! (See the Alpha Cyclopean Tomb.)
It was a land, and they have their own rules about how to play them.
It was Evermind.

I let this thread slide for half a day or so, but the 2nd point seems to be terribly relevent.

Land's aren't spells.

Seat of the Synod doesn't get countered by Chalice for 0 or even {}.

Fastbond makes multiple Land Drops easy, (As do Exploration and certain Elves/Spells)

Mind's Desire lets you play cards that got RFG's due to its resolution, but  gives no special provisions for playing lands.

The "can't play more than 1 land" rule trumps the "can play cards" ability by default, unless the card re-writes the rules (The Golden Rule: except for Time Vault )

If you flip 4 lands off Mind's Desire, you can play them for free, unless you can't play them.  An Unholy Strength Aura couldn't be played if there was no legal Target (say, your average Control Drain Mirror), and Land's can't be played unless you can play them.  You have to be "allowed" to play cards under Mind's Desire just like Mind's Desire with Trinisphere in play.  Land's aren't spells, they are free, but like rule 2 above, lands have their own baggage.

I have spoken.

LotusHead

[The Atog Lord]

Fastbond States
"You may play as many lands as you choose on your turn."

Regarding a second Island, both Fastbond and Mind's Desire state that I "may" play the Island. I'm not sure I see how they differ.

Land's aren't spells.

I never claimed them to be.

The "can't play more than 1 land" rule trumps the "can play cards" ability by default, unless the card re-writes the rules

My contention, of course, is that Mind's Desire does just this.

An Island which has been removed from the game may not normally be played.
An Island may not normally be played if there has already been a Swamp played that turn.

When Mind's Desire states "Until end of turn, you may play that card without paying its mana cost,"
why should the second clause permit the Island to be played despite its being in the Removed from Game zone, but not permit it to be played despite a land already having been played?
In other words, such an Island removed from the game has two conditions placed upon it, preventing it from being played. Why should the "you may play that card" of Mind's Desire remove only one of those two conditions?

[Anusien]

Look back to the first part of the quote from LeeSharpe (Leecifer that day on IRC).  He argues that this isn't a case of the Golden Rule applying.  The Golden Rule only comes into account if the card specifically contradicts the rules, not just in a general sense.  To restate:

13:02] <Leecifer> If you can tell from the card that the R&D specifically knew it would be breaking a specific rule, almost every single time, based on its text, it's probably Golden Rule.  If not, then it almost certainly isn't.

Also, we all know that this interaction didn't work when it first came out, and the rules for playing lands haven't changed since then, only the way Mind's Desire interacts with spells with no casting cost.  There's no way that the change affects Mind's Desire's interaction with lands.

Also, here's the way it works.  Mind's Desire affects a change in the rules, but not rule 212.6

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.

Mind's Desire {4UU} |Sorcery| Shuffle your library. Then remove the top card of your library from the game. Until end of turn, you may play that card without paying its mana cost. (If it has X in its mana cost, X is 0.) / Storm (When you play this spell, copy it for each spell played before it this turn.)

What Mind's Desire does is let you play cards from a zone other than your hand.  Normally you can only play spells from your hand.  Mind's Desire overrides the rules that govern how you play a card (409) and says, "These cards that are removed from game?  You can play them."  This is similar to the "You can play that card" ability on things like Muse Vessel.

Muse Vessel |Artifact| 3, T: Target player removes a card in his or her hand from the game. Play this ability only any time you could play a sorcery. / 1: Choose a card removed from the game with Muse Vessel. You may play that card this turn.

The reason the Golden Rule doesn't apply is because Mind's Desire only affects how you play spells.  It says, "You can play these cards, and if it's a spell, you don't have to pay its mana cost."  Since you still play the spells normally by putting them on the stack, paying additional costs and so forth, they are subject to normal restrictions.  Mind's Desire does not let you play extra spells through Arcane Laboratory/Rule of Law, and it doesn't let you play additional lands.

[Matt]

If Mind's Desire worked this way, wouldn't Crucible of Worlds also work this way?

[parallax]

If Mind's Desire worked this way, wouldn't Crucible of Worlds also work this way?

If Mind's Desire worked this way, a card that read "You may play cards from your hand." would be insanely broken.

[Godder]

Future Sight suddenly gets busted in half too...

[ChemEng]

I had similar lines of reasoning for Limited Resources and Encroach when they were printed. For record:

Limited Resources
Enchantment
W
When Limited Resources comes into play, each player chooses five lands he or she controls and sacrifices the rest.
Players can’t play lands if there are ten or more lands in play.

I first read this and my jaw dropped. What happened if a player didnt have 5 lands? They certainly couldnt meet the first ability (each player chooses fives lands he or she controls). So they would move to the second one. ARMAGEDDON FOR W BABY! Actually, Im still not certain why this doesnt work. ::shrug::

Also:

Encroach
Sorcery
B
Target player reveals his or her hand. Choose a nonbasic land card from it. That player discards that card.

I know what a basic land card is. So a nonbasic land card would be everything else? Hrrmmm... A super Duress!!! Except not. Thats what I get for reading WAY too much into the way cards are worded I suppose.

[LotusHead]

What Mind's Desire does is let you play cards from a zone other than your hand.  Normally you can only play spells from your hand.  Mind's Desire overrides the rules that govern how you play a card (409) and says, "These cards that are removed from game?  You can play them."  This is similar to the "You can play that card" ability on things like Muse Vessel.

I was thinking of Yawgmoth's Will.  You can play cards from Graveyard is similar to you can play cards that are RFG'd from Mind's Desire.

I would imagine the rules/arguments would be the same/similar.

@ TheAtogLord: bringing up ridiculous arguments like these are GOOD for TMD users.  It allows us to flesh out what we really know about the rules, and have a context to break things down for noob opponents/new Vintage players.  I've been up on the rules for about three years, and I still have a hard time wrapping my head around the fact that my opponent can block my Elf with a Prodigal Sorceror, Tim deals its one poiint of combat damage, tap to kill my Birds of Paradise, then be sacrificed to Ashnod's Altar for 2 mana!

'

[BigMac]

This is a question about minds desire but a slightly different one.

* Additional costs of the removed cards must still be paid.

Lotus Bloom
Suspend 3- 0(Rather than play this card from your hand, pay 0 and remove it from the game with three time counters on it. At the beginning of your upkeep, remove a time counter. When the last is removed, play it without paying its mana cost.)

Now is suspend an additional cost or can Lotus bloom be played from a desire in a way you can use it right away and be towards your spellcount on during the turn.

[Anusien]

This is a question about minds desire but a slightly different one.

* Additional costs of the removed cards must still be paid.

Lotus Bloom
Suspend 3- 0(Rather than play this card from your hand, pay 0 and remove it from the game with three time counters on it. At the beginning of your upkeep, remove a time counter. When the last is removed, play it without paying its mana cost.)

Now is suspend an additional cost or can Lotus bloom be played from a desire in a way you can use it right away and be towards your spellcount on during the turn.

Suspend is a different way to play the spell.  If you read the article Rich Shay links to at the top of the page, I think it explains that the Suspend cards are the reason for the change.  Before what would happen is Desire would flip Lotus BLoom, and since you can't play spells with no mana cost it gets removed from game forever.  Now, you flip Lotus Bloom and the game says, "Oh look, you can play this without paying its mana cost" (which is good since you can't pay {}), and you can put it on the stack if you want.

Suspend isn't a cost, but a different way to play the spell (similar to Madness).  Suspend has 3 parts.  #1) Anytime you have priority and could normally play the spell, you can RFG it with X time counters.
#2) During your upkeep, remove a time counter if it is suspended (a card is suspended if it is RFG with any time counters).
#3) When you remove the last counter, play it without paying its mana cost (do you see the similarity between this and Desire?)

[pink]

Mind's desire lets you play the revealed cards without paying the mana cost.  The keyword is "play".  The basic rules say that you can only "play" 1 land per turn.  The mind's desire only changes how you pay for the cards that you play,  not whether or not you can play them.

It would be the same as if you casted a mind's desire,  and then your opponent somehow put an arcane laboratory into play before the desire resolved.  you would not be able to play the spells,  because you could only play 1 spell per turn.

[The Atog Lord]

Pink, that's just my point.
Normally, you may only play one land per turn.
However, there is now a card (Mind's Desire) explicitly saying that you "may" play the card.
You are right that this is similar to the Arcane Lab situation which you describe. However, in this case, I don't understand why you could not play the revealed cards off Mind's Desire despite the Arcane Lab. You have two conflicting cards, and Mind's Desire has a more recent timestamp. This seems like a GravitySphere/Levitation situation to me.

Note that this entire matter is the result of a change of wording. Mind's Desire's original wording clearly specified that you could play the revealed card "as though it were in your hand." When this was the case, you could clearly play only one land per turn off Mind's Desire, because you played the cards as though they were in your hand.

Now, the wording has been changed to what is quoted above. And while perhaps not deliberate on WotC's part, I believe that this has lead to a change in the card's function. This is why older rulings on Mind's Desire and land are no longer valid, and further why I have brought this up in the first place.

[Mr. Nightmare]

Rich, just out of curiosity, If you were to play the four Islands off Mind's Desire, are you under the impression that your opponent could counterspell them?

[Anusien]

This isn't a time stamp thing.  Pink's analysis is correct, Mind's Desire has a Yawgmoth's Will type effect.  Mind's Desire changes how you play the cards, not whether there is a restriction.  For example, you wouldn't think that Mind's Desire lets you play Tinker without any artifacts in play, would you?  Similarly, Mind's Desire won't let you play a land if you have played your land for the turn.

Arcane Laboratory isn't a time stamp issue.

Arcane Laboratory {2U} |Enchantment| Each player can't play more than one spell each turn.

Mind's Desire {4UU} |Sorcery| Shuffle your library. Then remove the top card of your library from the game. Until end of turn, you may play that card without paying its mana cost. (If it has X in its mana cost, X is 0.) / Storm (When you play this spell, copy it for each spell played before it this turn.)

Here's how they interact.  You play N spells in a turn, and then play Mind's Desire.  Your opponent responds to Storm with Quicken, Show & Tell, dropping Arcane Laboratory.  Storm resolves and copies Mind's Desire N times, since these copies aren't played but put directly on the stack, they are not affected by Lab.  Mind's Desire and the copies resolve, and N + 1 spells are removed from game.  They are still affected by Mind's Desire (I believe this is a static ability/effect) such that you can play them without paying their mana cost.
Now here's the real interaction.  Mind's Desire says, "You can play these spells without paying their mana cost."  In this case, Mind's Desire just lets you play spells from another zone.  Arcane Laboratory says, "Have you played a spell this turn?  If so, you can't play another."  So why can't you play these spells with Lab out?
1) Arcane Laboratory is a can't effect, Mind's Desire is a can.  Negatives trump positives
2) Here's the meat of the discussion.  Mind's Desire only affects the zone you can play the spells in and whether or not you have to pay a mana cost.  It doesn't give you carte blanche to play spells regardless of whether you have appropriate targets, and it certainly doesn't let you play multiple lands.  None of the "play a card/land" effects do.  Yawgmoth's Will similarly doesn't let you do them.  The "play that card" clause only does one thing, it lets you play those cards from the RFG zone if you normally could.
Imagine a hypothetical card:

Mind's Desire 2.0: Reveal your hand and choose a card in it.  You may play that card without paying its mana cost.

According to your outlook, would that card let you play a second land?  What about this:?

Mind's Desire 3.0: Reveal your hand and choose a card in it.  You may add mana to your mana pool equal to that card's casting cost.

[The Atog Lord]

"You can play these spells without paying their mana cost."  In this case, Mind's Desire just lets you play spells from another zone.

This is exactly the point with which I am contending.
I realize that the intent of Mind's Desire is to only allow cards to be played from other Zones.
And the original wording is quite clear on this.
However, other than interpreting how the card "feels" like it should function, I'm not sure why there is this restriction on what Mind's Desire allows you to do.
If we simply look at the wording of Mind's Desire, I fail to see what about that wording means it applies only to Zones and not to other restrictions.
I have above already detailed why the matter of target selection is qutie different from the land-per-turn rule.

Mind's Desire only affects the zone you can play the spells in and whether or not you have to pay a mana cost.

Again, this is where I'm not quite seeing it. I don't understand how the wording of Mind's Desire actually says this. It reads quite differently, and mentions nothing per se of zones.

Quote

Mind's Desire 2.0: Reveal your hand and choose a card in it.  You may play that card without paying its mana cost.

According to your outlook, would that card let you play a second land?

Yes.

Rich, just out of curiosity, If you were to play the four Islands off Mind's Desire, are you under the impression that your opponent could counterspell them?

No. Counterspell targets a spell only, and these are not spells. Further, playing a land does not use the stack, and so these couldn't be targetted on the stack anyways.

[Mr. Nightmare]

Rich, just out of curiosity, If you were to play the four Islands off Mind's Desire, are you under the impression that your opponent could counterspell them?

No. Counterspell targets a spell only, and these are not spells. Further, playing a land does not use the stack, and so these couldn't be targetted on the stack anyways.

Bingo.  Relavent text bolded.  As they are not spell, you cannot play them without paying their mana cost, because "playing" a land is not actually playing a spell, it's a special action that does not use the stack.

[andrewpate]

That's not really a logical progression.  You play both spells and lands, and while lands do not have mana costs to pay, they can be played without paying their mana cost, which is {}.  Rich is contending that a land has not only the samce CMC, but the same mana cost as Evermind, Lotus Bloom, etc.  Therefore, if Mind's Desire allows you to play Living End (which it does), it should also allow you to play Island.  That's the argument.

[The Atog Lord]

Andrew,
My argument has started as the one you mention.
However, over the course of this discussion (which I think has been excellent) it has evolved a bit.

At this point, it has in some ways become even more simple.
Mind's Desire says explicitly that I "may" play the Island which I removed. The rules of the game state that I may not play it.
However, I am taking the "may play" clause from Mind's Desire to be allowing me to play that Island this turn, since Mind's Desire is explicity stating that I have permission to play that Island.
Thus, I believe, Mind's Desire is granting me permission to play the Island.

One may argue that Mind's Desire only says I may play the Island because one may not normally play an Island in the RFG Zone.
This is clearly how the old wording of Mind's Desire worked, since it explicitly says that I may play it "as though" from my hand.
However, the wording of Mind's Desire has been changed, and therein lies this entire argument.
There is now nothing on the text of Mind's Desire which indicates that its "may" applies to permission to play a land from the RFG zone, but does not apply to playing a land beyond the first.

[Machinus]

Here's how I interpret lands with desire:

Desire says you can play a card without paying it's casting cost. Lands don't have a casting cost, so this text is irrelevant.

So, until end of turn, you "may" play those lands. The "may" includes your choice of whether or not to play them as well as all of the other restrictions that apply, such as the effect of Arcane Lab. The intent of Desire is to allow you to play X spells for free, not to supercede all of the other rules in the game. Desire doesn't get around every other effect that interacts with playing spells, such as Sphere of Resistance, so any restrictions on lands clearly matter as well.

[Anusien]

Sent this out to MTGRULES-L:

Let me preface this question by saying I know the answer mechanically.  The answer is no, but I'm having trouble finding the proper analysis for
why this is the case.  Here is the question.  I play an Island as my land for the turn, and then I play Mind's Desire.  Mind's Desire flips over another Island.  Can I play this Island?

Now, I know the answer to the question is "No" but I'm having trouble figuring out exactly why.  Mind's Desire says "You may play that card."  My interpretation of that is that Mind's Desire only applies the Golden Rule in overriding which zone cards can move from the stack to, but a more generous interpretation would be to say that Mind's Desire ignores that sort of restriction.  This generous interpretation would argue that 212.6b's restrictions on only playing one land per turn and effects that let you play multiple lands count Mind's Desire's "You may play that card." clause.

In other words, how is Fastbond's "You may play as many lands as you choose" different from Mind's Desire's "You may play that card".  Doesn't the golden rule apply to both?

Mind's Desire {4UU} |Sorcery| Shuffle your library. Then remove the top card of your library from the game. Until end of turn, you may play that card without paying its mana cost. (If it has X in its mana cost, X is 0.) / Storm (When you play this spell, copy it for each spell played before it this turn.)

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.

Fastbond |Enchantment| You may play as many lands as you choose onyour turn. / Whenever you play a land other than the first land of the turn, Fastbond deals 1 damage to you.

[Matt]

An EVEN BETTER question:

In a sanctioned match, you play Mind's Desire and flip over Whup Ass. According to Rich, you should be able to play it. YES OR NO

[The Atog Lord]

Alright, we have the answer.
Much thanks to everyone in #mtgjudge, especially Lee Sharpe for explaining this to me.

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.

There is no rule explicitly preventing you from playing cards from the RFG Zone in general.
There is simply a rule that does let you play cards from your hand.

There is, however, a rule explicitly preventing you from playing more than one land per turn.

Therefore, when you "may play" the island,
there is no explicit rule preventing you from playing it from the RFG zone.
Therefore you may.
There is, however, an explicit rule preventing you from playing a second land,
unless a card explicitly specifies that you may play an "addiitonal" land.
Therefore you may not play this as a second land.

[Clariax]

To clarify a bit more on what The Atog Lord said, which is correct, it's a common misconception about the rules that they tell you when you can and can't[/u] do everything.  For example, the rules tell you that you can play a sorcery during your main phase when you have priority and the stack is empty.  However nowhere in the rules does it say that you cannot play a sorcery during your upkeep. 

Why then can't you play a sorcery during your upkeep?  Because there's nothing which says you can.  The rules also don't tell you that you can't draw 5 extra cards just because you feel like it, and they don't tell you that you can't pick up your opponent's deck and look through it whenever you like, but we all know you can't.  There's no way the rules could possibly cover all the millions of things that you generally can't do.

Now, toss in a suspend trigger telling you to play a sorcery on your upkeep, and then you do have something telling you can (and must) play that sorcery.  And, because the rules don't say you can't do so, you now can.  The same goes with playing cards from the RFG zone (i.e. Mind's Desire) or from your graveyard (Yawgmoth's Will).

Playing lands, however, is an exception to this.  The rules specifically state that you can't play more than one land.

212.6b. A player may play only one land card during each of his or her own turns....

(There's more to that rule, covering effects like fastbond and exploration, but it's not relevant to this discussion, so not quoted here)
So there is in the rules a "can't" preventing us from playing more than one land, which steps in and overrides anything like Mind's Desire which might point to 4 lands and tell you that you can play them.

Alright, we have the answer.
Much thanks to everyone in #mtgjudge, especially Lee Sharpe for explaining this to me.

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.

There is no rule explicitly preventing you from playing cards from the RFG Zone in general.
There is simply a rule that does let you play cards from your hand.

There is, however, a rule explicitly preventing you from playing more than one land per turn.

Therefore, when you "may play" the island,
there is no explicit rule preventing you from playing it from the RFG zone.
Therefore you may.
There is, however, an explicit rule preventing you from playing a second land,
unless a card explicitly specifies that you may play an "addiitonal" land.
Therefore you may not play this as a second land.

[parallax]

So then, will Mind's Desire allow you to play Sorceries when the stack is not empty? There is no rule saying you can't. And Mind's Desire says you can play the spell until end of turn. Can I play it during my end phase?

[Evenpence]

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.