Zap being used in that situation would be the most amazing thing ever and I'm ashamed to admit I never once thought of it.
Zap was involved in the example that was used, but not by itself. (You would still both lose, ending in a draw.)
The example given was a single elimination round of a tournament in which time was called and turns were complete. Since there can be no draw, the first life total change ends the game, with the higher life winning. If you Zap an opponent while you have an empty library, you would both win (by having a higher life total) and lose (drawing from an empty library).
It's basically a "cover-all" in case such a situation comes up.
I just had a quick question regarding Coalition victory. Lets say you were at 1 life, and cast a coalition victory that would win you the game. While it's resolving, you use a pain land to drop down to 0. Would you both win and lose, or would you win before sba's are checked?
I just had a quick question regarding Coalition victory. Lets say you were at 1 life, and cast a coalition victory that would win you the game. While it's resolving, you use a pain land to drop down to 0. Would you both win and lose, or would you win before sba's are checked?
you can't do anything while a spell or ability is resolving. if you pain land yourself down to 0 in response to the coalition victory, then you lose the game before coalition victory resolves. Likewise, if you manage to cast coalition victory at instant speed in response to a damage trigger (you cannot respond to the pain-land damage since it is a mana ability) you will win before whatever causes you to lose resolves.
I know that this card is from un-land, but I think The Cheese Stands Alone could be covered by this, via some incredibly complicated chain of events. The way it's worded, it doesn't use a triggered event, and thus can apply during the resolution of a spell. Alternatively, for actual magic it may be errata'd to become a "When [conditions are met]..." triggered event, in which case it might not be covered by this rule.
I know that this card is from un-land, but I think The Cheese Stands Alone could be covered by this, via some incredibly complicated chain of events. The way it's worded, it doesn't use a triggered event, and thus can apply during the resolution of a spell. Alternatively, for actual magic it may be errata'd to become a "When [conditions are met]..." triggered event, in which case it might not be covered by this rule.
but how would you get it into play without winning? or to do whatever causes you to lose the game without causing cheese to end the game?
The one-on-one game bits, so we all have the official rules to work from:
104. Winning and Losing
104.1. A game ends immediately when a player wins or when the game is a draw.
104.2. There are several ways to win the game.
104.2a A player still in the game wins the game if all of that player’s opponents have left the game. This happens immediately and overrides all effects that would prevent that player from winning the game.
104.2b An effect may state that a player wins the game.
104.3. There are several ways to lose the game.
104.3a A player can concede the game at any time. A player who concedes leaves the game immediately. He or she loses the game.
104.3b If a player’s life total is 0 or less, he or she loses the game the next time a player would receive priority. (This is a state-based action. See rule 704.)
104.3c If a player is required to draw more cards than are left in his or her library, he or she draws the remaining cards, and then loses the game the next time a player would receive priority. (This is a state-based action. See rule 704.)
104.3d If a player has ten or more poison counters, he or she loses the game the next time a player would receive priority. (This is a state-based action. See rule 704.)
104.3e An effect may state that a player loses the game.
104.3f If a player would both win and lose the game simultaneously, he or she loses the game.
104.5. If a player loses the game, he or she leaves the game. If the game is a draw for a player, he or she leaves the game.
Looking at 104.2, the two ways of winning are:
a) your opponent first losing, and
b) an effect, which of course goes onto the stack and happens on its own
Thefore the only way to win and lose simultaneously is an effect that causes 104.2b at the same time it causes you to lose. This is because to "win" through 104.2a at the same time you lose is actually a case of both of you losing at the same time, which triggers the tie rules before you can get to winning via 104.2a.
An instant that read "You win the game, and gain 10 poison counters" would cause you to win and lose at the same time, since it satisfies the 104.2b criterion for winning, and the 104.3d criterion for losing at the exact same moment. No such card, or anything like it, exists of course.
I though that maybe proliferating a Darksteel Reactor to 20 tokens and your own poison counters to 10 with the same effect might work, but then I realized Darksteel Reactor's ability allowing you to win the game, even though it says "When...", is a triggered effect that goes onto the stack - you'd get 10 poison counters and lose the game at the same time the effect triggers, so you'd lose before you could win.
An instant that read "You win the game, and gain 10 poison counters" would cause you to win and lose at the same time, since it satisfies the 104.2b criterion for winning, and the 104.3d criterion for losing at the exact same moment.
Incorrect. You'd win during the resolution of that spell. The loss wouldn't happen until the state-based action check that happens after the spell is done resolving, but that SBA check never happens because you've already won the game.
The only ways a player could simultaneously win and lose are as follows:
1) Two state-based actions apply at the same time, one which makes a player lose and one which makes the same player win. No state-based actions exist that make a player win.
2) A spell or ability resolves whose instructions say that a player simultaneously wins and loses the game. No such spell or ability exists.
3) A replacement effect (or series of replacement effects) modifies a resolving spell or ability such that a player simultaneously wins and loses the game. No replacement effects exist that modify any event into a game loss or game win.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Level 2 Magic Judge
Please use card tags when you're asking a question about specific cards: [c]Serra Angel[/c] -> Serra Angel.
Couldn't you be at 2 life, while your opponent is at 0 with a Platinum Angel in play, the char to lose and win when states are checked? You have 0 life, your opponent had 0 and now has lost due to PA being dead. Or does char not deal the damage simultaneously?
No, then you both lose. It's not "I win and I lose," it's "both players lose, so game's a draw."
There is seriously NO WAY to invoke this rule. There used to be, it wasn't deleted when that way vanished, so now it's still there but cannot possibly be invoked with any combination of existing cards.
"Sufficiently advanced experience is indistinguishable from clairvoyance." -Carsten
"Ah those eyes, those horrible creepy eyes!" -Chaosof99
DCI Level 3 Judge & TO "I do not consider myself a hero. I know only what the Vec teach:
justice must always be served and corruption must always be opposed."
Go read! I am one of the three authors of Cranial Insertion.
But seriously, if you can't remember "Woapalanne", just call me Eli.
As mentioned earlier, here is how it could happen:
In overtime of single elimination tournaments after turns have been completed, an additional state based action is added that causes a player to win the game if his life total rises (and lose if it lowers). In the event that during the super overtime of a single elimination round a player would both attempt to draw a card from his empty library and game life within the resolution of a spell (Example: words of wisdom and a spell that draws him 2 cards) this would come up. The state based actions checked upon the end of resolution would indicate that he would win the game for gaining life, and he would lose the game for trying to draw a card. In this event, the player who both lose by mil and win due to higher life total would lose the game.
Single elimination tournaments are relatively rare these days, and while going to turns happens fairly often, things in which you both mil yourself and cause yourself to gain life/your opponent lose life are fairly rare in tournament environments.
No, then you both lose. It's not "I win and I lose," it's "both players lose, so game's a draw."
There is seriously NO WAY to invoke this rule. There used to be, it wasn't deleted when that way vanished, so now it's still there but cannot possibly be invoked with any combination of existing cards.
We can play around with un- cards and try though, can't we?
What if you control nothing but The Cheese Stands Alone and a Platinum Angel and have 0 life, and your opponent Doom Blades your angel? Can the ambiguous wording on the cheese make this invoke the rule in srs business un- drafts?
Incorrect. You'd win during the resolution of that spell. The loss wouldn't happen until the state-based action check that happens after the spell is done resolving, but that SBA check never happens because you've already won the game.
Good point. I've re-read rule 704.3, which states that SBAs are checked only when a player would get priority - which would be after the spell resolves, not during, at which point you've already won the game.
As mentioned earlier, here is how it could happen:
In overtime of single elimination tournaments after turns have been completed, an additional state based action is added that causes a player to win the game if his life total rises (and lose if it lowers). In the event that during the super overtime of a single elimination round a player would both attempt to draw a card from his empty library and game life within the resolution of a spell (Example: words of wisdom and a spell that draws him 2 cards) this would come up. The state based actions checked upon the end of resolution would indicate that he would win the game for gaining life, and he would lose the game for trying to draw a card. In this event, the player who both lose by mil and win due to higher life total would lose the game.
Single elimination tournaments are relatively rare these days, and while going to turns happens fairly often, things in which you both mil yourself and cause yourself to gain life/your opponent lose life are fairly rare in tournament environments.
Interesting idea, but I just checked the official DCI rules and they don't allow for simultaneous win/lose by the same player. Specifically, the player with the lower life total loses. Gaining life doesn't make you win, it simply makes your opponent lose.
DCI rule 2.5: "In single-elimination rounds, matches may not end in a draw. If all players have equal game wins, the player with the highest life total wins the current game. In the event all players have equal life totals (or are between games and the game wins are tied), the game/match continues with an additional state-based action: if a player does not have the highest life total, he or she loses the game."
So CarstenHaese's point still stands - you yourself can lose the game due to drawing more cards than are in your library, and your opponent can simultaneously lose by having less life than you... but that's a lose/lose situation, not the same player winning and losing at the same time. (At which point I think an additional game is played, since the rule states "the game/match continues" and the first person to have less life than an opponent loses.)
We can play around with un- cards and try though, can't we?
What if you control nothing but The Cheese Stands Alone and a Platinum Angel and have 0 life, and your opponent Doom Blades your angel? Can the ambiguous wording on the cheese make this invoke the rule in srs business un- drafts?
The effect from the Cheese would go on the stack first - before which you'd lose the game due to having no life. Therefore, no win/lose, just lose. (Although technically, it looks like the Cheese should read "When you..." instead of "If you..." to fully comply with rule 603. But perhaps WotC haven't bothered with errata for un- cards.)
The effect from the Cheese would go on the stack first - before which you'd lose the game due to having no life. Therefore, no win/lose, just lose. (Although technically, it looks like the Cheese should read "When you..." instead of "If you..." to fully comply with rule 603. But perhaps WotC haven't bothered with errata for un- cards.)
They don't change the wording for Unsets, cheese never has an ability go on the stack.
Zap was involved in the example that was used, but not by itself. (You would still both lose, ending in a draw.)
The example given was a single elimination round of a tournament in which time was called and turns were complete. Since there can be no draw, the first life total change ends the game, with the higher life winning. If you Zap an opponent while you have an empty library, you would both win (by having a higher life total) and lose (drawing from an empty library).
It's basically a "cover-all" in case such a situation comes up.
That's exactly what I said. I'd never thought of drawing a game with Zap before.
you can't do anything while a spell or ability is resolving. if you pain land yourself down to 0 in response to the coalition victory, then you lose the game before coalition victory resolves. Likewise, if you manage to cast coalition victory at instant speed in response to a damage trigger (you cannot respond to the pain-land damage since it is a mana ability) you will win before whatever causes you to lose resolves.
but how would you get it into play without winning? or to do whatever causes you to lose the game without causing cheese to end the game?
104. Winning and Losing
104.1. A game ends immediately when a player wins or when the game is a draw.
104.2. There are several ways to win the game.
104.2a A player still in the game wins the game if all of that player’s opponents have left the game. This happens immediately and overrides all effects that would prevent that player from winning the game.
104.2b An effect may state that a player wins the game.
104.3. There are several ways to lose the game.
104.3a A player can concede the game at any time. A player who concedes leaves the game immediately. He or she loses the game.
104.3b If a player’s life total is 0 or less, he or she loses the game the next time a player would receive priority. (This is a state-based action. See rule 704.)
104.3c If a player is required to draw more cards than are left in his or her library, he or she draws the remaining cards, and then loses the game the next time a player would receive priority. (This is a state-based action. See rule 704.)
104.3d If a player has ten or more poison counters, he or she loses the game the next time a player would receive priority. (This is a state-based action. See rule 704.)
104.3e An effect may state that a player loses the game.
104.3f If a player would both win and lose the game simultaneously, he or she loses the game.
104.5. If a player loses the game, he or she leaves the game. If the game is a draw for a player, he or she leaves the game.
Looking at 104.2, the two ways of winning are:
a) your opponent first losing, and
b) an effect, which of course goes onto the stack and happens on its own
Thefore the only way to win and lose simultaneously is an effect that causes 104.2b at the same time it causes you to lose. This is because to "win" through 104.2a at the same time you lose is actually a case of both of you losing at the same time, which triggers the tie rules before you can get to winning via 104.2a.
An instant that read "You win the game, and gain 10 poison counters" would cause you to win and lose at the same time, since it satisfies the 104.2b criterion for winning, and the 104.3d criterion for losing at the exact same moment. No such card, or anything like it, exists of course.
I though that maybe proliferating a Darksteel Reactor to 20 tokens and your own poison counters to 10 with the same effect might work, but then I realized Darksteel Reactor's ability allowing you to win the game, even though it says "When...", is a triggered effect that goes onto the stack - you'd get 10 poison counters and lose the game at the same time the effect triggers, so you'd lose before you could win.
Incorrect. You'd win during the resolution of that spell. The loss wouldn't happen until the state-based action check that happens after the spell is done resolving, but that SBA check never happens because you've already won the game.
The only ways a player could simultaneously win and lose are as follows:
1) Two state-based actions apply at the same time, one which makes a player lose and one which makes the same player win. No state-based actions exist that make a player win.
2) A spell or ability resolves whose instructions say that a player simultaneously wins and loses the game. No such spell or ability exists.
3) A replacement effect (or series of replacement effects) modifies a resolving spell or ability such that a player simultaneously wins and loses the game. No replacement effects exist that modify any event into a game loss or game win.
Please use card tags when you're asking a question about specific cards: [c]Serra Angel[/c] -> Serra Angel.
There is seriously NO WAY to invoke this rule. There used to be, it wasn't deleted when that way vanished, so now it's still there but cannot possibly be invoked with any combination of existing cards.
"Sufficiently advanced experience is indistinguishable from clairvoyance." -Carsten
"Ah those eyes, those horrible creepy eyes!" -Chaosof99
DCI Level 3 Judge & TO
"I do not consider myself a hero. I know only what the Vec teach:
justice must always be served and corruption must always be opposed."
Go read! I am one of the three authors of Cranial Insertion.
But seriously, if you can't remember "Woapalanne", just call me Eli.
In overtime of single elimination tournaments after turns have been completed, an additional state based action is added that causes a player to win the game if his life total rises (and lose if it lowers). In the event that during the super overtime of a single elimination round a player would both attempt to draw a card from his empty library and game life within the resolution of a spell (Example: words of wisdom and a spell that draws him 2 cards) this would come up. The state based actions checked upon the end of resolution would indicate that he would win the game for gaining life, and he would lose the game for trying to draw a card. In this event, the player who both lose by mil and win due to higher life total would lose the game.
Single elimination tournaments are relatively rare these days, and while going to turns happens fairly often, things in which you both mil yourself and cause yourself to gain life/your opponent lose life are fairly rare in tournament environments.
Legacy:WUBG Jace Rock
Trade thread
Sig by: heroes of the plane studios
We can play around with un- cards and try though, can't we?
What if you control nothing but The Cheese Stands Alone and a Platinum Angel and have 0 life, and your opponent Doom Blades your angel? Can the ambiguous wording on the cheese make this invoke the rule in srs business un- drafts?
Good point. I've re-read rule 704.3, which states that SBAs are checked only when a player would get priority - which would be after the spell resolves, not during, at which point you've already won the game.
Interesting idea, but I just checked the official DCI rules and they don't allow for simultaneous win/lose by the same player. Specifically, the player with the lower life total loses. Gaining life doesn't make you win, it simply makes your opponent lose.
DCI rule 2.5:
"In single-elimination rounds, matches may not end in a draw. If all players have equal game wins, the player with the highest life total wins the current game. In the event all players have equal life totals (or are between games and the game wins are tied), the game/match continues with an additional state-based action: if a player does not have the highest life total, he or she loses the game."
So CarstenHaese's point still stands - you yourself can lose the game due to drawing more cards than are in your library, and your opponent can simultaneously lose by having less life than you... but that's a lose/lose situation, not the same player winning and losing at the same time. (At which point I think an additional game is played, since the rule states "the game/match continues" and the first person to have less life than an opponent loses.)
The effect from the Cheese would go on the stack first - before which you'd lose the game due to having no life. Therefore, no win/lose, just lose. (Although technically, it looks like the Cheese should read "When you..." instead of "If you..." to fully comply with rule 603. But perhaps WotC haven't bothered with errata for un- cards.)
Triple-post merged.
-Memnarch
They don't change the wording for Unsets, cheese never has an ability go on the stack.
Closed.
[GTC] Gatecrash Patch for MWS (249/249)