If a player is just discarding a card and passing the turn, either Nexus of Fate specifically or otherwise doing nothing until they reduce their library to only Nexus of Fate via this process of draw, discard, pass turn - am I able to call a judge to stop this tactic, and when can I do so?
I sought out and received an answer from a Level 2 judge in person:
If you feel that the player can make a play that isn't discarding Nexus, you can call a judge to confirm this.
My follow up question:
Would that include the judge requiring them to discard another card and losing the game because they are unable to draw a card for their turn?
Their response:
Correct. An exception would be if they could move the game forward, like attacking with a 1/1, and then use the Nexus discard to stay in the game.
Can I get clarification on what exactly the ruling is for loops with Nexus of Fate. Does discarding it count as a loop?
Thanks!
EDIT: So, I think the answer is - the Nexus of Fate can be discarded to prevent yourself from decking. Get your Unmoored Ego's ready!
If a player has created a Loop involving their choices and this loop does not progress the game state then they are forced to make a different choice. In your scenario, while you haven't mentioned whats going on your side of the field the opponent has in fact set up a loop involving their choice to discard nexus of fate. It is not legal to continue a loop that has no effect on the game state.
In your scenario, while you haven't mentioned whats going on your side of the field
Thanks, as I thought. For this hypothetical scenario, let's say I have 8 lands in play, a hand of 7 cards, and 25 cards in my library. My turn would consist of drawing my card, playing my land as able, and passing back the turn.
In a two-player game in a sanctioned tournament, in general, if a player takes extra turn after extra turn due to Nexus of Fate spells during their turns, and the opponent has no way to end that loop (if a judge decides it is one), then the loop has to be shortcut if possible, and "[a] player may not 'opt-out' of shortcutting [the] loop, nor may they make irrelevant changes between iterations in an attempt to make it appear as though there is no loop" (M.T.R. 4.4, especially the fifth paragraph; see also C.R. 720.2a), and after the loop is taken, it may generally not be continued (M.T.R. 4.4; see also C.R. 720.2c, 720.3). Also, in such tournaments, "[p]roposing loops" (whether they involve Nexus of Fate or otherwise) "in an effort to use time on the clock is Stalling" (M.T.R. 4.4). (In games outside of tournaments, taking extra turn after extra turn this way may be considered a "fragmented" loop, since it "results in the same game state being reached multiple times" [C.R. 720.3].)
Appreciate that info. I already seem to have managed to convince them that casting the Nexus of Fate repeatedly turn after turn (and doing nothing else) was not going to be allowed, but they still insisted that simply drawing a Nexus of Fate, discarding it and passing the turn (to repeat this same process again next turn of theirs) was still allowed -- which was my main question.
The end result is the same. You are doing nothing on your turn, that is not allowed and a judge will advise you to do something else which changes the game state.
Wait, for what I understood:
1) your opponent discards nexus of fate and passes;
2) you take your turn as normal;
3) opponent draws nexus and discards it and passes.
Right?
If that's the case, you playing your turn and drawing a card are actually advancing the game state, so there is no loop involved and the game state slowly progresses as you thin out your library. If you don't have any answers to your opponent you will lose the game eventually.
It would be a different matter if you were left without a library,no cards in hand (or no ways to play them) and some way to not lose the game like Lich's Mastery. At that point, if you have literally no way to interact with your opponent your opponent must break the loop because otherwise the game state will never progress.
you playing your turn and drawing a card are actually advancing the game state, so there is no loop involved and the game state slowly progresses as you thin out your library. If you don't have any answers to your opponent you will lose the game eventually.
If a player has created a Loop involving their choices and this loop does not progress the game state then they are forced to make a different choice. In your scenario, while you haven't mentioned whats going on your side of the field the opponent has in fact set up a loop involving their choice to discard nexus of fate. It is not legal to continue a loop that has no effect on the game state.
I *am* advancing the game state, my opponent is not -- thus the opponent must do something other than choose to discard the Nexus of Fate and pass the turn.
But the "loop" IS advancing the game state. After one cycle of the loop the game state is different from before, thus the loop IS advancing the game state.
I was very clear. The opponent does nothing but discard their Nexus of Fate, which is the only card left to draw in their library once the replacement effect shuffles it back into their library. I take my turn as normal. They repeat the same process as before.
This clearly seems to fall under the "Fragmented Loop" section of the rules (results in the same game state being reached multiple times" [C.R. 720.3]), which state that they cannot continue to perform this action as it does not progress the game. I am progressing the game, they are not. Thus, they must choose some other course of action.
I think you are misunderstanding a 'loop'. Him discarding a nexus for his turn and not playing anything isn't a loop. It is like playing control draw-go. He is advancing the game state, as every turn the game progresses.
Is he discarding the nexus to a full hand or a spell that forces him to do so or is he casting nexus each turn taking endless turns without interaction?
If he is taking endless turns without interaction that's a loop and not allowed. If he is discarding it to a full hand or another source, and it is his only card and in turn you draw but can't get through his defenses, that isn't a loop. SO I think clarity on BOTH sides of the field and exactly what is being done with nexus is required.
I think you are misunderstanding a 'loop'. Him discarding a nexus for his turn and not playing anything isn't a loop. It is like playing control draw-go. He is advancing the game state, as every turn the game progresses.
Is he discarding the nexus to a full hand or a spell that forces him to do so or is he casting nexus each turn taking endless turns without interaction?
If he is taking endless turns without interaction that's a loop and not allowed. If he is discarding it to a full hand or another source, and it is his only card and in turn you draw but can't get through his defenses, that isn't a loop. SO I think clarity on BOTH sides of the field and exactly what is being done with nexus is required.
I believe I have been abundantly clear on this matter, so I don't see how there can be any confusion, but to satisfy your concern that somehow I have not been clear about this:
I have 8 lands in play. No other permanents in play. I have 7 cards in hand. My library has 25 cards in it.
My opponent has zero permanents in play. They have 7 cards in hand. Their library has 1 card in it. It is a Nexus of Fate.
It is their turn. They draw their card for the turn. They pass priority and move to end step. They discard to hand size, discarding Nexus of Fate. Nexus of Fate replacement ability causes it to become the only card in their library again and it is my turn. I draw my card, play my land if able, pass the turn. The opponent again draws their card, the Nexus of Fate, passes and moves to end step and discards Nexus of Fate again.
At this point, the opponent is not taking any actions to progress the game state. They have other options of cards to discard but choose to discard the Nexus of Fate to avoid having to draw a card with no cards in their library.
If I call a Judge over at this point. What happens?
Can whoever answers this question from this point forward please cite their DCI Judge level, and relevant MTR and CR sections for why their ruling would be such.
I'm sorry but it has already been answered. By you actually. You advanced the game state by drawing and playing the land. Your actions alone advance the game state. That is literally what most people will interpret advancing the game state means.
The opponent choosing to discard Nexus is absolutely no different than if the player was using Necropotence instead. The same rules apply.
[The opponent has] other options of cards to discard but choose(s) to discard the Nexus of Fate to avoid having to draw a card with no cards in their library.
Assuming this occurs in a sanctioned tournament:
Note that M.T.R. 4.4, eighth paragraph, says: "Some loops are sustained by choices rather than actions. ... If the choice [required to stop continuing a loop] involves hidden information", such as choosing to discard a card other than Nexus of Fate in this scenario, "a judge may be needed to determine whether any choice is available that will not continue the loop." Note that I am not a Magic judge, but whether someone is a judge is irrelevant to whether their answer is correct.
I agree you need not be a judge to have a firm understanding of the rules (I am not a judge either) but since there seems to be a few people who have not understood the reasons given as to why this is a choice that cannot continue to be made,
I was hoping something more 'official' would quell their doubt,but I do certainly appreciate your efforts as well
That link has a pretty good convo (rule 720.3) going on about it, involving an actual judge, that actually talks about using nexus by discarding it instead of casting it. Choosing to discard nexus to get the card to draw is now a 'choice loop' and can't be done more then 1-2 times. That was changed with this new set as I read. Seems like there will be a lot of instances where people can argue gamestate changes though. Like if they had a teferi emblem but had no more legal targets cause you started discarding lands instead of playing them to force a loop stop, you could yourself get called for stalling it seems.
In you specific instance, he cannot continue to choose to discard nexus if he has any other choice in hand. I say this referencing the judges discussion on that forum.
4x nexus and 3x Blightsteel colossus would be a lose for you tho.
I get it, its a frustrating rule to explain. Especially since the hidden zone wasn't enforceable before. Definitely is now. Nexus is the specific card that caused the rule change! If you send them to that rule, it pretty much explains how making a choice to discard is now an enforceable loop break point.
Goodness, but there's a lot of bad information in this thread.
The end result is the same. You are doing nothing on your turn, that is not allowed and a judge will advise you to do something else which changes the game state.
This isn't correct.
For everybody quoting 720.3, did you read it first?
720.3. Sometimes a loop can be fragmented, meaning that each player involved in the loop performs an independent action that results in the same game state being reached multiple times.
The game state is advancing because OP is, at least, drawing a card. This is explicitly called out as a "meaningful change" in the game state (MTR 4.4).
If both players are caught up in choices that keep the game in the same state, then we can look at hands and say "okay, you have another thing to discard, stop discarding Nexus." Nexus player is under no obligations to stop doing the thing while the game state is still changing.
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.
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.
Would quoting the exact line instead of quoting the section help you understand?
Quote from MTR 4.4 »
Note that drawing cards other than the ones being used to sustain the loop is a meaningful change.
Are you sure? Are you sure the thing you're saying is correct when I just specifically quoted a thing from the tournament documents saying you aren't?
Not-Nexus player is drawing a card that is not involved in the loop. This is a meaningful game state change. A single player taking a single action in between game state changes is not a loop. This is only up for debate with people who have literally no idea what they are talking about.
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.
Where are you seeing this quote? Drawing cards is absolutely a change in game state. In fact the standard decks from last season abused this rule by running only Teferi as a wincondition. Eventually they would just tuck their own teferi every turn until the opponent decked themselves.
If a player is just discarding a card and passing the turn, either Nexus of Fate specifically or otherwise doing nothing until they reduce their library to only Nexus of Fate via this process of draw, discard, pass turn - am I able to call a judge to stop this tactic, and when can I do so?
I sought out and received an answer from a Level 2 judge in person:
If you feel that the player can make a play that isn't discarding Nexus, you can call a judge to confirm this.
My follow up question:
Would that include the judge requiring them to discard another card and losing the game because they are unable to draw a card for their turn?
Their response:
Correct. An exception would be if they could move the game forward, like attacking with a 1/1, and then use the Nexus discard to stay in the game.
Can I get clarification on what exactly the ruling is for loops with Nexus of Fate. Does discarding it count as a loop?
Thanks!
EDIT: So, I think the answer is - the Nexus of Fate can be discarded to prevent yourself from decking. Get your Unmoored Ego's ready!
Thanks, as I thought. For this hypothetical scenario, let's say I have 8 lands in play, a hand of 7 cards, and 25 cards in my library. My turn would consist of drawing my card, playing my land as able, and passing back the turn.
(In games outside of tournaments, taking extra turn after extra turn this way may be considered a "fragmented" loop, since it "results in the same game state being reached multiple times" [C.R. 720.3].)See also this thread.
EDIT: Struck out certain text after comment 30 was posted.
EDIT (May 7): Correctness edit.
The end result is the same. You are doing nothing on your turn, that is not allowed and a judge will advise you to do something else which changes the game state.
1) your opponent discards nexus of fate and passes;
2) you take your turn as normal;
3) opponent draws nexus and discards it and passes.
Right?
If that's the case, you playing your turn and drawing a card are actually advancing the game state, so there is no loop involved and the game state slowly progresses as you thin out your library. If you don't have any answers to your opponent you will lose the game eventually.
It would be a different matter if you were left without a library,no cards in hand (or no ways to play them) and some way to not lose the game like Lich's Mastery. At that point, if you have literally no way to interact with your opponent your opponent must break the loop because otherwise the game state will never progress.
but...
I *am* advancing the game state, my opponent is not -- thus the opponent must do something other than choose to discard the Nexus of Fate and pass the turn.
This clearly seems to fall under the "Fragmented Loop" section of the rules (results in the same game state being reached multiple times" [C.R. 720.3]), which state that they cannot continue to perform this action as it does not progress the game. I am progressing the game, they are not. Thus, they must choose some other course of action.
No hard feelings I hope.
Is he discarding the nexus to a full hand or a spell that forces him to do so or is he casting nexus each turn taking endless turns without interaction?
If he is taking endless turns without interaction that's a loop and not allowed. If he is discarding it to a full hand or another source, and it is his only card and in turn you draw but can't get through his defenses, that isn't a loop. SO I think clarity on BOTH sides of the field and exactly what is being done with nexus is required.
I believe I have been abundantly clear on this matter, so I don't see how there can be any confusion, but to satisfy your concern that somehow I have not been clear about this:
I have 8 lands in play. No other permanents in play. I have 7 cards in hand. My library has 25 cards in it.
My opponent has zero permanents in play. They have 7 cards in hand. Their library has 1 card in it. It is a Nexus of Fate.
It is their turn. They draw their card for the turn. They pass priority and move to end step. They discard to hand size, discarding Nexus of Fate. Nexus of Fate replacement ability causes it to become the only card in their library again and it is my turn. I draw my card, play my land if able, pass the turn. The opponent again draws their card, the Nexus of Fate, passes and moves to end step and discards Nexus of Fate again.
At this point, the opponent is not taking any actions to progress the game state. They have other options of cards to discard but choose to discard the Nexus of Fate to avoid having to draw a card with no cards in their library.
If I call a Judge over at this point. What happens?
Can whoever answers this question from this point forward please cite their DCI Judge level, and relevant MTR and CR sections for why their ruling would be such.
The opponent choosing to discard Nexus is absolutely no different than if the player was using Necropotence instead. The same rules apply.
Assuming this occurs in a sanctioned tournament:
Note that M.T.R. 4.4, eighth paragraph, says: "Some loops are sustained by choices rather than actions. ... If the choice [required to stop continuing a loop] involves hidden information", such as choosing to discard a card other than Nexus of Fate in this scenario, "a judge may be needed to determine whether any choice is available that will not continue the loop." Note that I am not a Magic judge, but whether someone is a judge is irrelevant to whether their answer is correct.
I agree you need not be a judge to have a firm understanding of the rules (I am not a judge either) but since there seems to be a few people who have not understood the reasons given as to why this is a choice that cannot continue to be made,
I was hoping something more 'official' would quell their doubt,but I do certainly appreciate your efforts as well
That link has a pretty good convo (rule 720.3) going on about it, involving an actual judge, that actually talks about using nexus by discarding it instead of casting it. Choosing to discard nexus to get the card to draw is now a 'choice loop' and can't be done more then 1-2 times. That was changed with this new set as I read. Seems like there will be a lot of instances where people can argue gamestate changes though. Like if they had a teferi emblem but had no more legal targets cause you started discarding lands instead of playing them to force a loop stop, you could yourself get called for stalling it seems.
In you specific instance, he cannot continue to choose to discard nexus if he has any other choice in hand. I say this referencing the judges discussion on that forum.
4x nexus and 3x Blightsteel colossus would be a lose for you tho.
Just frustrated since I thought my explanation in my original post was clear about the situation.
This isn't correct.
For everybody quoting 720.3, did you read it first?
The game state is advancing because OP is, at least, drawing a card. This is explicitly called out as a "meaningful change" in the game state (MTR 4.4).
If both players are caught up in choices that keep the game in the same state, then we can look at hands and say "okay, you have another thing to discard, stop discarding Nexus." Nexus player is under no obligations to stop doing the thing while the game state is still changing.
"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.
Are you sure? Are you sure the thing you're saying is correct when I just specifically quoted a thing from the tournament documents saying you aren't?
Not-Nexus player is drawing a card that is not involved in the loop. This is a meaningful game state change. A single player taking a single action in between game state changes is not a loop. This is only up for debate with people who have literally no idea what they are talking about.
Where are you seeing this quote? Drawing cards is absolutely a change in game state. In fact the standard decks from last season abused this rule by running only Teferi as a wincondition. Eventually they would just tuck their own teferi every turn until the opponent decked themselves.
https://blogs.magicjudges.org/telliott/2019/01/21/policy-changes-for-ravnica-allegiance/