No, in order for a card to be suspended it must be exiled, have the suspend ability, and have at least one time counter on it. Since the Durkwood Baloth doesn't have a time counter on it, it isn't a suspended card. So it wouldn't be a legal target for Jhoira's ability.
Based on the ruling on this card it leads me to believe that you can choose the same permanent for Mist of Salvation. I know that if it gives you a definitive number of permanents then you'd have to choose that many, however the way MoS is worded it doesn't seem to give an actual number, nor does it say choose different permanents (like I've seen for other cards). This leads me to believe that if you have 5 cards in the graveyard and 3 permanents you can choose the same one multiple times, then untap those permanents.
Just to clarify, Daretti's ability will be countered as stated above and none of its effects will occur. Since sacrificing an artifact is part of it's effect, artifact X won't be sacrificed anyways.
No you can't. Auras that enter the battlefield this way will have to be attached to a permanent it can legally enchant as it enters the battlefield. At that point the Brago is not currently on the battlefield so it can't be attached to him.
By mana rocks do you mean lands? If so then what you are hoping to do isn't possible. Sydri, Galvanic Genius's ability would make them into 0/0 creatures, and state based actions would put each one in the graveyard before you'd have a chance to target it with the Cauldron.
The reason why Alms Collector's effect is applied first is due to a rules change that happened a little while ago. Here are the relevant rules:
From the MTG comprehensive rulebook:
120.2a An instruction to draw multiple cards can be modified by replacement effects that refer to the number of cards drawn. This modification occurs before considering any of the individual card draws. See rule 616.1f.
616.1f While following the steps in 616.1a–d, one replacement or prevention effect may apply to an event, and another may apply to an event contained within the first event. In this case, the second effect can’t be chosen until after the first effect has been chosen.
Okay let me start with the second part first before I tackle #4. You have to remember judges are not robots, we are people just like the players. Also the level of experience for judges can also vary, many judges at these large events may be doing that for the very first time. So the fact that a judge chooses not to give a warning could be inexperience, laziness, they could be in the middle of another task, or simply a judgement call that they deemed would be better customer service to not give a penalty. I'll admit at the end of the day of a long event I'll be tired, the players will be tired, and I may let a couple of things slide in the top 8 that I wouldn't in swiss (though only to a point, and only if caught right away). As a player I generally don't worry about whether the judge issues a warning or not, I may ask them if my opponent is getting one, but I'd go no further than that unless I really think my opponent is cheating, or doing something really wrong (in which case I'd appeal). So to answer your question, what do you do if you feel your opponent should get a penalty and the judge doesn't give one, well you can appeal to the head judge, unless it's the head judge that took the call in which case you'll have accept the ruling.
As for #4 there are several things to look at, but it really comes down to the fact that it would be nitpicking to give a penalty for something like that. First off there is no way the player could gain an advantage by acting early like that. Second it's not unreasonable that the player is short cutting and basically asking for priority to cast his spell, you can of course decline the shortcut and say you want to do something first (for example activating a PW ability before he can do that). Either way he'll get to respond at some point before your new spells/abilities have a chance to resolve.
Remember judges want players to leave a tournament with a good experience, and nitpicking penalties is probably going to make players upset. For example if a player exiles a card from the graveyard face down, well that is against the rules unless the effect states to do that, but I wouldn't write a penalty for that because there is no advantage gained (both players know what the card is since it was in a public zone). What I would do is educate the player and explain that cards are always exiled face up unless stated otherwise. That player would then leave with a better experience.
1) Yes it's a warning for the infraction "Game Play Error - Game Rules Violation". A backup is possible, but there is a clause in the IPG that allows the judge to simply have the player state what the blocking order is at that point.
2) No warning, no infraction. First it's possible the player had the trigger and choose to keep the card on top, but even if they missed (which they probably did) then it's up to the opponent if they want to have the trigger and if not the game continues. Do note that if you notice your opponent missing one of their triggers, you don't have to call attention to it (this only applies to triggers though, nothing else).
3) It's a warning for the same as #1. If it just occurred the judge will most likely back it up. There may be some investigation on this one if the judge believes the player is cheating.
4) No warning, in fact I don't think I would even call judge on this one unless the player is having an understanding issue. The fact is the player is going to get a chance to cast the spell and acting early like that is really to your advantage. If you want to act before him then just tell the player to hold on you want to take an action first, but either way they'll get a chance to cast their removal spell.
5) This one is a tricky. It's very possible the player remembered the trigger and is drawing and then writing down the life loss and energy loss. However I would definitely call a judge in this case because it's possible the player could draw the card first to see what they would get and then decide whether they want another. Either way I think it needs to be determined what step it's in and whether the player may be cheating. If not, no infraction.
Cooperate puts a copy of the spell on the stack, the spell will have the same targets as the original spell. You can change those targets to new targets, however since you only have 1 creature card in your graveyard you can only change one of the targets. If you do so your copy will resolve, but since only one of those targets is legal it will exile the creature card from your graveyard giving you a single 4/4 zombie token. Your opponents Hour will then resolve exiling his 4 creature cards and getting 4 tokens.
1) There is no maximum turn length. However you are expected to play at a reasonable pace, as long as you do so and advance the board state you are fine. If you start a loop and you know the number of times you want to do this loop then you can shortcut this to speed things up.
2) This is sounding quite a bit like stalling. If you are intentionally playing slow with the intent to eat up time that would be unsporting conduct - stalling. This results in you being disqualified from the event. This is really boarder line, because if you are playing at a reasonable pace and taking legal game actions that advance the board state you technically aren't doing anything wrong. I would advise you not to do this.
The token would still be exiled. Unlike sacrifice effects, where only the player who controls the permanent can sacrifice it, exiling is not subject to those rules. So when the delayed trigger resolves and it has you exile the token, it will do so no matter who controls it at the time.
You'll also have the one Village Cannibal that didn't attack on the battlefield too. That one will have triggered 3 times and will have 3 +1/+1 counters on it when the triggers resolve.
There is no choice to be made here. Drover of the Mighty's first ability is a static ability and does not use the stack, where as Raging Swordtooth's ability is a triggered ability that does use the stack. The moment a Dinosaur enters the battlefield the Drover gets the +2/+2, so before Raging Swordtooth's ability is even put on the stack the Drover is already a 3/3. So the Drover will be 3/3 when 1 damage is dealt to it and will live.
For #2: The tokens would indeed buff the original Nacatl that has Alpha Status attached to it before blockers are declared. Do note that the buffs would go away when the tokens are exiled, and that is before damage is removed. So if it has lethal damage marked on it at that point it would be destroyed.
Just to clarify for question #2, if the player choose to put the commander into the command zone then Tomb of the Dusk Rose would not be able to put it onto the battlefield. That ability looks for an exiled card, which the commander at that point and time is not.
Based on the ruling on this card it leads me to believe that you can choose the same permanent for Mist of Salvation. I know that if it gives you a definitive number of permanents then you'd have to choose that many, however the way MoS is worded it doesn't seem to give an actual number, nor does it say choose different permanents (like I've seen for other cards). This leads me to believe that if you have 5 cards in the graveyard and 3 permanents you can choose the same one multiple times, then untap those permanents.
As for #4 there are several things to look at, but it really comes down to the fact that it would be nitpicking to give a penalty for something like that. First off there is no way the player could gain an advantage by acting early like that. Second it's not unreasonable that the player is short cutting and basically asking for priority to cast his spell, you can of course decline the shortcut and say you want to do something first (for example activating a PW ability before he can do that). Either way he'll get to respond at some point before your new spells/abilities have a chance to resolve.
Remember judges want players to leave a tournament with a good experience, and nitpicking penalties is probably going to make players upset. For example if a player exiles a card from the graveyard face down, well that is against the rules unless the effect states to do that, but I wouldn't write a penalty for that because there is no advantage gained (both players know what the card is since it was in a public zone). What I would do is educate the player and explain that cards are always exiled face up unless stated otherwise. That player would then leave with a better experience.
2) No warning, no infraction. First it's possible the player had the trigger and choose to keep the card on top, but even if they missed (which they probably did) then it's up to the opponent if they want to have the trigger and if not the game continues. Do note that if you notice your opponent missing one of their triggers, you don't have to call attention to it (this only applies to triggers though, nothing else).
3) It's a warning for the same as #1. If it just occurred the judge will most likely back it up. There may be some investigation on this one if the judge believes the player is cheating.
4) No warning, in fact I don't think I would even call judge on this one unless the player is having an understanding issue. The fact is the player is going to get a chance to cast the spell and acting early like that is really to your advantage. If you want to act before him then just tell the player to hold on you want to take an action first, but either way they'll get a chance to cast their removal spell.
5) This one is a tricky. It's very possible the player remembered the trigger and is drawing and then writing down the life loss and energy loss. However I would definitely call a judge in this case because it's possible the player could draw the card first to see what they would get and then decide whether they want another. Either way I think it needs to be determined what step it's in and whether the player may be cheating. If not, no infraction.
2) This is sounding quite a bit like stalling. If you are intentionally playing slow with the intent to eat up time that would be unsporting conduct - stalling. This results in you being disqualified from the event. This is really boarder line, because if you are playing at a reasonable pace and taking legal game actions that advance the board state you technically aren't doing anything wrong. I would advise you not to do this.
[c]Crafty Cutpurse[/c] = Crafty Cutpurse
Kari Zev, Skyship Raider
The token would still be exiled. Unlike sacrifice effects, where only the player who controls the permanent can sacrifice it, exiling is not subject to those rules. So when the delayed trigger resolves and it has you exile the token, it will do so no matter who controls it at the time.