I just typed this up for a question in a PM, so I figured I'd paste it here:
When two replacement effects try to modify the same event, the controller of the affected permanent, ability, or spell chooses which applies, but that's not significant until you add additional players. In a two player game, they wash out. You go to draw a card. Mine replaces that with me drawing, which yours then replaces with you drawing.
It gets ugly in a multiplayer game when B and C both have one and A tries to draw. Since it's my draw that's being replaced, I choose B's replacement to replace it, but then C's replaces that when B tries to draw. Effectively, the player without one gets to pick who draws "his" card(s).
idk what you just said! but i love that they printed this card. i love punishing players for drawing a ridic amount of cards. could be an easy budget replacement for Consecrated Sphinx also
It gets ugly in a multiplayer game when B and C both have one and A tries to draw. Since it's my draw that's being replaced, I choose B's replacement to replace it, but then C's replaces that when B tries to draw. Effectively, the player without one gets to pick who draws "his" card(s).
To those (like me) who were wondering why this happens and APNAP doesn't decide for player A:
Quote from comp rules »
616.1. If two or more replacement and/or prevention effects are attempting to modify the way an event affects an object or player, the affected object's controller (or its owner if it has no controller) or the affected player chooses one to apply, following the steps listed below. If two or more players have to make these choices at the same time, choices are made in APNAP order (see rule 101.4).
Your most common Commander applications are going to be with Windfall and Time Spiral and the like drawing you somewhere around 20 cards with this guy out. Plagiarize is sick and he is even sicker.
Because it's only one player making the choice, SuperSonik: The original controller. The "two or more players" bit is for when multiple things happen at once; say two players drop in duders off a Show and Tell while two Gather Specimens are in effect, for example.
So in a 3 player game, if all 3 players have a Notion thief then the game is a draw because you never resolve who draws?
I wish this was Mirko for many reasons. Legend rule will fix weird game states with multiple of these out. Also Mirko would have been cool as hell, instead of a 2/4 for 5....
Not a draw; Player A casts Divination (I know, just bear with me) then chooses whether player B or C gets to replace the draw. Let's say he or she chooses B.
B then gets to choose whether player A or C gets to replace that draw. Let's say he or she chooses C.
Then, finally, C's gets replaced by A. A draws. This doesn't get replaced because, unlike triggered abilities, replacement abilities don't really "see" an event and do something; rather, they replace it entirely. They can only replace an event once (614.5) so you don't get infinite loops with them.
Then we do the same replacement dance with Divination's second draw.
This is going to become a huge cluster of confusion come bigger games with 4-6 players, when each one has one on the field. Just plain confusing. Either way, I think I'll pick up one for my Lazav deck. Playing Windfall or Whispering Madness will just be silly.
My only worry about playing this guy is if someone gets a Sphinx out against him, since that just means I'm gonna deck myself out pretty damn fast.
Other than that I like him, and will probably try him out in Lazav. He can carry swords as well as any other non-evasive creature, and my group likes extra card draw effects. And if nothing else I'm running Time Spiral and Whispering Madness.
At least this isn't as stupid as Consecrated Sphinx, which LITERALLY ends the game when two of them drop.
I really wish people would learn the meaning of literally. The game MIGHT end, but you may not have enough mana to do something, or the key part of a combo could get countered.
If people are sick of reading about stuff just stop taking part. You have 100% control over what you read. Simic Ascendancy isn't going to get banned just because you didn't tell someone to shut up on the internet.
My lazav deck loves whispering madness. This guy and laboratory maniac might need to find a home in that deck. Hilarity will ensue in my draw heavy environment!
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
**** this site. I'd delete this account but that doesn't seem to be an option. The mods here are ******* useless ********s who ban people for simple ass normal words. **** them and **** this site.
So in a 3 player game, if all 3 players have a Notion thief then the game is a draw because you never resolve who draws?
I wish this was Mirko for many reasons. Legend rule will fix weird game states with multiple of these out. Also Mirko would have been cool as hell, instead of a 2/4 for 5....
Indeed this card feels much more like a mind drinker.
I really wish people would learn the meaning of literally. The game MIGHT end, but you may not have enough mana to do something, or the key part of a combo could get countered.
Apart from being overly anal about the obviously questionable definition of literal, I don't think you would argue that the game ends when one let alone TWO people resolve Enter the Infinite, whether or not someone wins that turn. The "game" has still devolved to such a state that it has ended, and I feel that the issue should be addressed more.
At least this isn't as stupid as Consecrated Sphinx, which LITERALLY ends the game when two of them drop.
You mean the two players choose to end the game since they are may abilities.
I hate this card's very existence. It's a consecrated sphinx for good players. Not only does it shut down sphinx, it promotes good counter play to recurring insight and tooth and nailing for regal force and avenger of zendikar. It shuts down most draw strategies... I like it!
My only worry about playing this guy is if someone gets a Sphinx out against him, since that just means I'm gonna deck myself out pretty damn fast.
it's a may ability... he can choose not to draw... and you wont draw.... it basically nullifies sphinxes ability. Or makes it so that your opponent can just feed you cards.
I agree. We should all only play g/x decks because they are the most objectively fun and anyone who disagrees does not know the truth about EDH. Everyone should just play their decks because interaction beyond high fiving about how many land are in play is unfun and equivalent to casting Stasis while kicking puppies. I for one will never play with anyone who casts tutors, removal spells, blue cards, things I arbitrarily decide I don't like but will probably cast myself later.
it's a may ability... he can choose not to draw... and you wont draw.... it basically nullifies sphinxes ability. Or makes it so that your opponent can just feed you cards.
Why would he choose not to draw when he can deck you with his sphinx and your thief and your thief is basically shutting down his sphinx.
it's a may ability... he can choose not to draw... and you wont draw.... it basically nullifies sphinxes ability. Or makes it so that your opponent can just feed you cards.
The Sphinx is may, but the Notion Thief is not. There's no way he wouldn't choose to keep drawing, because it will actually make you keep drawing until you deck yourself and lose.
I repeat: Notion Thief does not shut down C Sphinx. It makes C Sphinx kill you.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"[Screw] you and the green you ramped in on." - My EDH battle cry. If I had one. Which I don't.
The Sphinx is may, but the Notion Thief is not. There's no way he wouldn't choose to keep drawing, because it will actually make you keep drawing until you deck yourself and lose.
I repeat: Notion Thief does not shut down C Sphinx. It makes C Sphinx kill you.
And that's what Laboratory Maniac is for, with helpful friends like Teferi, Alchemist's Refuge, or Winding Canyons.
The Sphinx is may, but the Notion Thief is not. There's no way he wouldn't choose to keep drawing, because it will actually make you keep drawing until you deck yourself and lose.
I repeat: Notion Thief does not shut down C Sphinx. It makes C Sphinx kill you.
...That's awesome! This is also the nail in sphinx's coffin.
I agree. We should all only play g/x decks because they are the most objectively fun and anyone who disagrees does not know the truth about EDH. Everyone should just play their decks because interaction beyond high fiving about how many land are in play is unfun and equivalent to casting Stasis while kicking puppies. I for one will never play with anyone who casts tutors, removal spells, blue cards, things I arbitrarily decide I don't like but will probably cast myself later.
Not sure how this would be batty? Obviously, I'm quite the casual player and may not fully understand the complexity of this card, but I see it play out as follows:
Player A motions to draw.
Player B and Player C have Notion Thief out and motions to draw instead of Player A.
Now Player B must motion to draw from Player C and Player C must motion to draw from Player B.
This creates an infinite loop that cannot be broken outside of instant speed removal and the net result is Player B and Player C deck themselves.
Not sure how this would be batty? Obviously, I'm quite the casual player and may not fully understand the complexity of this card, but I see it play out as follows:
Player A motions to draw.
Player B and Player C have Notion Thief out and motions to draw instead of Player A.
Now Player B must motion to draw from Player C and Player C must motion to draw from Player B.
This creates an infinite loop that cannot be broken outside of instant speed removal and the net result is Player B and Player C deck themselves.
Player A wins.
Replacement effects do NOT go infinite.
Players B and C have NTs, player A does not. Player A casts Deep Analysis.
Player B and Player C's replacement effects both kick in, player A chooses which replacement effect applies to his/her draw (lets assume s/he chooses player B). Player B would draw but player C's replacement effect kicks in and Player C draws. Since Player B's replacement effect already kicked in (remember this is the Deep Analysis draw being passed around), it does NOT kick in again...Player C gets the cards.
It's good for politics but designed to not break games.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I think EDH would be more fun for the majority of participants if players just showed eachother their decks rather than actually playing games out."
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
When two replacement effects try to modify the same event, the controller of the affected permanent, ability, or spell chooses which applies, but that's not significant until you add additional players. In a two player game, they wash out. You go to draw a card. Mine replaces that with me drawing, which yours then replaces with you drawing.
It gets ugly in a multiplayer game when B and C both have one and A tries to draw. Since it's my draw that's being replaced, I choose B's replacement to replace it, but then C's replaces that when B tries to draw. Effectively, the player without one gets to pick who draws "his" card(s).
That card is going to be batty in Commander.
To those (like me) who were wondering why this happens and APNAP doesn't decide for player A:
Your most common Commander applications are going to be with Windfall and Time Spiral and the like drawing you somewhere around 20 cards with this guy out. Plagiarize is sick and he is even sicker.
:symu::symr: Melek WheelStorm
:symw::symg: Trostani Enchantress (updated 6/5)
:symg::symr::symu: Unexpected Results.dec
Thada Adel Stax WIP
I wish this was Mirko for many reasons. Legend rule will fix weird game states with multiple of these out. Also Mirko would have been cool as hell, instead of a 2/4 for 5....
GX Tron XG
UR Phoenix RU
GG Freyalise High Tide GG
UR Parun Counterspells RU
BB Yawgmoth Token Storm BB
WB Pestilence BW
B then gets to choose whether player A or C gets to replace that draw. Let's say he or she chooses C.
Then, finally, C's gets replaced by A. A draws. This doesn't get replaced because, unlike triggered abilities, replacement abilities don't really "see" an event and do something; rather, they replace it entirely. They can only replace an event once (614.5) so you don't get infinite loops with them.
Then we do the same replacement dance with Divination's second draw.
EDH:1 vs 1
Talrand, Sky Summoner Retired.
EDH Multiplayer
Drana. Kalastria Bloodchief
Talrand, Sky Summoner
My Blog -
Tips to Writing
Tips for Freelance Magic Writing
RUG Intet, the Dreamer
WBG Karador, Ghost Chieftain
WRG Mayael the Anima
UUU Jalira, Master Polymorphist
BBB Sherei, Shizo's Caretaker
GGG Yeva, Nature's Herald
GGG Ezuri, the Renegade Leader
Constructing: Karn, Silver Golem - Ephara, God of the Polis
Other than that I like him, and will probably try him out in Lazav. He can carry swords as well as any other non-evasive creature, and my group likes extra card draw effects. And if nothing else I'm running Time Spiral and Whispering Madness.
UBBreya's Toybox (Competitive, Combo)WR
RGodzilla, King of the MonstersG
-Retired Decks-
UBLazav, Dimir Mastermind (Competitive, UB Voltron/Control)UB
"Knowledge is such a burden. Release it. Release all your fears to me."
—Ashiok, Nightmare Weaver
Indeed this card feels much more like a mind drinker.
Apart from being overly anal about the obviously questionable definition of literal, I don't think you would argue that the game ends when one let alone TWO people resolve Enter the Infinite, whether or not someone wins that turn. The "game" has still devolved to such a state that it has ended, and I feel that the issue should be addressed more.
GX Tron XG
UR Phoenix RU
GG Freyalise High Tide GG
UR Parun Counterspells RU
BB Yawgmoth Token Storm BB
WB Pestilence BW
You mean the two players choose to end the game since they are may abilities.
I hate this card's very existence. It's a consecrated sphinx for good players. Not only does it shut down sphinx, it promotes good counter play to recurring insight and tooth and nailing for regal force and avenger of zendikar. It shuts down most draw strategies... I like it!
it's a may ability... he can choose not to draw... and you wont draw.... it basically nullifies sphinxes ability. Or makes it so that your opponent can just feed you cards.
Why would he choose not to draw when he can deck you with his sphinx and your thief and your thief is basically shutting down his sphinx.
The Sphinx is may, but the Notion Thief is not. There's no way he wouldn't choose to keep drawing, because it will actually make you keep drawing until you deck yourself and lose.
I repeat: Notion Thief does not shut down C Sphinx. It makes C Sphinx kill you.
Pristaxcontrombmodruu!
And that's what Laboratory Maniac is for, with helpful friends like Teferi, Alchemist's Refuge, or Winding Canyons.
Beating Face with Bane
Beatrice, the Golden Witch
...That's awesome! This is also the nail in sphinx's coffin.
I can't wait to run this guy!
How do you figure? You run C-Sphinx, I run N-Thief...I run the risk of decking, and some how that gets Sphinx banned? Why?
Player A motions to draw.
Player B and Player C have Notion Thief out and motions to draw instead of Player A.
Now Player B must motion to draw from Player C and Player C must motion to draw from Player B.
This creates an infinite loop that cannot be broken outside of instant speed removal and the net result is Player B and Player C deck themselves.
Player A wins.
| B Erebos, God of VampiresB | GYeva SmashG | RBosh ArtifactsR | GURAnimar +1 BeatsGUR | RBVial's Secret Hot SauceRB | UBRNekusar, Draw if you DareUBR | RGBDarigaaz'z DragonsRGB | GBSlimeFEETGB | UBOn-Hit LazavUB | URBrudiclad's Artificer InventionsUR | GUBMuldrotha's ElementalsGUB | WUGKestia's EnchantmentsWUG | GUTatyova - Draw, Land, Go!GU | WGArahbo's EquipmentWG | BUWVarina's ZOMBIE HORDESBUW | WLyra's Angelic SalvationW | WBChurch of TeysaWB | UAzami...WizardsU
Replacement effects do NOT go infinite.
Players B and C have NTs, player A does not. Player A casts Deep Analysis.
Player B and Player C's replacement effects both kick in, player A chooses which replacement effect applies to his/her draw (lets assume s/he chooses player B). Player B would draw but player C's replacement effect kicks in and Player C draws. Since Player B's replacement effect already kicked in (remember this is the Deep Analysis draw being passed around), it does NOT kick in again...Player C gets the cards.
It's good for politics but designed to not break games.