You are just wrong. This specific ruling was made for this exact situation.
"It is considered the same game state because nothing relevant changed. Despite elements about the game being technically different, these elements are having no impact on the game, and the players are not doing anything different, so the active player must yield. This is the official stance." Actual quote from judge. Drawing the card from OP doesn't constituent as a game state change.
MTR 4.4 (Loops) states differently (as Villawhatever already said):
Loops may span multiple turns if a game state is not meaningfully changing. Note that drawing cards other than the ones being used to sustain the loop is a meaningful change.
.
The opponent, on their turn, will draw a card not involved in the loop which, according to the rules, is a meaningful change. If Player A draws their card and discards Nexus, then Player B gets to take their turn, draw a card, and do whatever they want to do. There is an end state to this game state in that Player B will eventually draw themselves out. There is no reason to believe that the Nexus player *must* stop as they are doing nothing to hinder their opponent from playing or taking their turn. Their opponent gets to take their turns as normal (contrary to the "normal" Nexus loop) and they get opportunities to deal with player A trying to simply stay alive.
To be clear, the situation provided on Reddit also included Lich's Mastery which changes the answer as that does create an "infinite" loop with neither player able to end the game. Since Mastery requires no choices and Nexus does, the Nexus player needs to make a different choice. Mastery is not present here and thus the answer is different.
This is why I mentioned your gamestate. If you are being slowly milled out by the opponent taking turns then that is a viable wincon for them. They are allowed to keep looping until you draw your deck and loss. They can even short cut this action. So your mill deck really needs a way to stop this kind of stuff.
Continuing the trend of "you have no idea what you're talking about": the MTR I quoted was literally published alongside and includes changes mentioned in the blog post you just linked to. That's... how that blog works.
Please stop spouting patently incorrect things. You don't have an understanding of policy, and that's okay, because the vast majority of people on this forum don't.
But please stop pretending your incorrect interpretation of, well, everything involved in the process is a valid source of anything. This thread has a disgusting amount of incorrect information from people who don't know what they're talking about.
Wow, youre a wound up dik huh? Smoke a joint or something. I misunderstood the rules. I'm sorry lol
I obviously mixed up the talks of the teferi tuck vs nexus and just milling them with nexus. *shrug*
Flame warning issued. "They flamed first" is not an excuse. -MadMage
MTR 4.4 (Loops) states differently (as Villawhatever already said):
Loops may span multiple turns if a game state is not meaningfully changing. Note that drawing cards other than the ones being used to sustain the loop is a meaningful change.
.
The opponent, on their turn, will draw a card not involved in the loop which, according to the rules, is a meaningful change.
Recall that the scenario in comment 8 involves the opponent having only a Nexus of Fate card in their library. The loop discussed in that scenario involves discarding that card to the library in one turn and re-drawing it in the next, so that that card is arguably "being used to sustain the loop" within the meaning of M.T.R. 4.4.
MTR 4.4 (Loops) states differently (as Villawhatever already said):
Loops may span multiple turns if a game state is not meaningfully changing. Note that drawing cards other than the ones being used to sustain the loop is a meaningful change.
.
The opponent, on their turn, will draw a card not involved in the loop which, according to the rules, is a meaningful change.
Recall that the scenario in comment 8 involves the opponent having only a Nexus of Fate card in their library. The loop discussed in that scenario involves discarding that card to the library in one turn and re-drawing it in the next, so that that card is arguably "being used to sustain the loop".
Loops that span multiple turns takes into account both players. WizardMN use of "opponent" is in reference to the player not discarding nexus. The comment 8 "opponent" is the one discarding nexus
To restate it more clearly:
Player A: 8 lands in play. No other permanents in play. 7 cards in hand. Library has 25 cards in it.
Player B: zero permanents in play. 7 cards in hand. Library has 1 card in it. It is a Nexus of Fate.
Player B draws nexus, ends his turn, and on cleanup, discards nexus, which becomes his library again.
Player A draws a card, library goes to 24 cards. This is not part of the loop, so it is deemed meaningful change.
Here player B cannot keep discarding nexus, because player A does nothing, and cant do anything to change the game state, so Player B MUST do something to advance the game state, which means discarding something else.
EDIT:
Now what if both players are in the same situation, where they both have 7 cards, no permanents in play, and nexus is the last card in the library. Now if both players continue to pass the turn and discard nexus, that is a loop and someone has to break it. Here, I'm not sure who has to...
EDIT:
Now what if both players are in the same situation, where they both have 7 cards, no permanents in play, and nexus is the last card in the library. Now if both players continue to pass the turn and discard nexus, that is a loop and someone has to break it. Here, I'm not sure who has to...
If no player wants to break the loop in this scenario, the game will end in a draw.
Quote from MTR 4.4 »
Loops may span multiple turns if a game state is not meaningfully changing. Note that drawing cards other than the ones being used to sustain the loop is a meaningful change. If two or more players are involved in maintaining a loop across turns, each player chooses a number of iterations to perform, or announces their intent to continue indefinitely. If all players choose to continue indefinitely, the game is a draw. Otherwise, the game advances through the lowest number of iterations chosen and the player who chose that number receives priority at the point they stop taking an action to sustain the loop.
As long as a player can do something that will result in the other player drawing till they dont have a library, can be speed up a lot.
Once its clear that the one player with the Nexus will do nothing else than draw and discard the same Nexus over and over again, its on the opponent to do something against it, and if they cant, they will quickly draw till they are decked out and lose.
Pretty simple, no loop that needs to be broken, as the game just naturally ends as a player can actually die and keeps drawing new random cards from the library, till they are convinced they cant win anymore.
----
It becomes a loop the moment BOTH players have a Nexus and cant die and will at some point sit and just repeat the same action, or do tiny differences that are just meaningless (like tap a lot, attack with a 0 power creature and all that kind of stuff).
At that point its a loop that needs to be broken as the game does TRULY not advance, its stuck at it is.
Some loops cannot be broken at all, as there is no choice that allows it to end (like the player would have a hand limit of 0 for whatever reason and so they cant even make the choice to not discard the Nexus).
----
In the end if you can demonstrate a loop, you can also shortcut it, as the opponent agrees (and why shouldnt they, till it matters to do something different).
If they are wasting time in their loop doing nothing, its slow-play or downright stalling for the time-out, not a viable option (even if players will do it to some degree as they might opt to "bluff" in some way, but that also has limits).
----
Loops that involve one player doing literally nothing else than doing the same stuff over and over again each turn and simply forcing the opponent to die as they also cant do anything, but draw a card each turn ; thats a viable win option, even if its a very slow and tedious way to win (and for everyone involved its very recommended to use shortcuts if its very clear for everyone thats whats happening over and over again).
It becomes a loop the moment BOTH players have a Nexus and cant die and will at some point sit and just repeat the same action, or do tiny differences that are just meaningless (like tap a lot, attack with a 0 power creature and all that kind of stuff).
At that point its a loop that needs to be broken as the game does TRULY not advance, its stuck at it is.
Actually this is only true if they loop is contained to a single turn; if a loop spans multiple turns and is sustained by both players then they can decide to do this indefinitely, then the game becomes a draw.
If two or more players are involved in maintaining a loop across turns, each player chooses a number of iterations to perform, or announces their intent to continue indefinitely. If all players choose to continue indefinitely, the game is a draw.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The opponent, on their turn, will draw a card not involved in the loop which, according to the rules, is a meaningful change. If Player A draws their card and discards Nexus, then Player B gets to take their turn, draw a card, and do whatever they want to do. There is an end state to this game state in that Player B will eventually draw themselves out. There is no reason to believe that the Nexus player *must* stop as they are doing nothing to hinder their opponent from playing or taking their turn. Their opponent gets to take their turns as normal (contrary to the "normal" Nexus loop) and they get opportunities to deal with player A trying to simply stay alive.
To be clear, the situation provided on Reddit also included Lich's Mastery which changes the answer as that does create an "infinite" loop with neither player able to end the game. Since Mastery requires no choices and Nexus does, the Nexus player needs to make a different choice. Mastery is not present here and thus the answer is different.
I obviously mixed up the talks of the teferi tuck vs nexus and just milling them with nexus. *shrug*
Flame warning issued. "They flamed first" is not an excuse. -MadMage
Recall that the scenario in comment 8 involves the opponent having only a Nexus of Fate card in their library. The loop discussed in that scenario involves discarding that card to the library in one turn and re-drawing it in the next, so that that card is arguably "being used to sustain the loop" within the meaning of M.T.R. 4.4.EDIT: Struck out after comment 32 was posted.
To restate it more clearly:
Player A: 8 lands in play. No other permanents in play. 7 cards in hand. Library has 25 cards in it.
Player B: zero permanents in play. 7 cards in hand. Library has 1 card in it. It is a Nexus of Fate.
Player B draws nexus, ends his turn, and on cleanup, discards nexus, which becomes his library again.
Player A draws a card, library goes to 24 cards. This is not part of the loop, so it is deemed meaningful change.
The scenario that i assume brought up this topic/confusion is the reddit thread linked earlier https://www.reddit.com/r/magicTCG/comments/al5jp3/question_about_nexus_of_fate_loop_rules/
In this scenario:
Player A: no permanents other than lich's mastery, no cards left in library or hand
Player B: zero permanents in play. 7 cards in hand. Library has 1 card in it. It is a Nexus of Fate.
Here player B cannot keep discarding nexus, because player A does nothing, and cant do anything to change the game state, so Player B MUST do something to advance the game state, which means discarding something else.
EDIT:
Now what if both players are in the same situation, where they both have 7 cards, no permanents in play, and nexus is the last card in the library. Now if both players continue to pass the turn and discard nexus, that is a loop and someone has to break it. Here, I'm not sure who has to...
Once its clear that the one player with the Nexus will do nothing else than draw and discard the same Nexus over and over again, its on the opponent to do something against it, and if they cant, they will quickly draw till they are decked out and lose.
Pretty simple, no loop that needs to be broken, as the game just naturally ends as a player can actually die and keeps drawing new random cards from the library, till they are convinced they cant win anymore.
----
It becomes a loop the moment BOTH players have a Nexus and cant die and will at some point sit and just repeat the same action, or do tiny differences that are just meaningless (like tap a lot, attack with a 0 power creature and all that kind of stuff).
At that point its a loop that needs to be broken as the game does TRULY not advance, its stuck at it is.
Some loops cannot be broken at all, as there is no choice that allows it to end (like the player would have a hand limit of 0 for whatever reason and so they cant even make the choice to not discard the Nexus).
----
In the end if you can demonstrate a loop, you can also shortcut it, as the opponent agrees (and why shouldnt they, till it matters to do something different).
If they are wasting time in their loop doing nothing, its slow-play or downright stalling for the time-out, not a viable option (even if players will do it to some degree as they might opt to "bluff" in some way, but that also has limits).
----
Loops that involve one player doing literally nothing else than doing the same stuff over and over again each turn and simply forcing the opponent to die as they also cant do anything, but draw a card each turn ; thats a viable win option, even if its a very slow and tedious way to win (and for everyone involved its very recommended to use shortcuts if its very clear for everyone thats whats happening over and over again).
WUBRG#BlackLotusMatterWUBRG
👮👮👮 #BlueLivesMatter 👮👮👮