Chains of Mephistopheles
-
@gkraigher So... decking? Yes?
-
@Topical_Island said:
@ApolloGod If a player has say, 7 cards in hand, wouldn't they discard and then draw cards in sets of three (after an ancestral) and never run out of cards in hand?
No, each individual draw is a unique action that requires a replacement effect. So you don't discard 3 cards first before drawing three. You do each one individually.
-
No, there is no infinite loop that will deck your opponent.
You will have to deck them individually. And even you have 8 copies of Chains of Mepistopheles in play, they will still only mill 1 card.
-
Ok, so I have 3 cards in hand and you have 2 chains on the table and cast ancestral recall targeting me.
AR resolves and I go to draw 3 cards.
Ancestral Recall: U Instant Target player draws 3 cards
Chains of Mephistopheles 1B enchantmentIf a player would draw a card except the first one he or she draws in his or her draw step each turn, that player discards a card instead. If the player discards a card this way, he or she draws a card. If the player doesn't discard a card this way, he or she puts the top card of his or her library into his or her graveyard.
The discard then draw and the mill effect of chains are both replacement effects. This means as soon as somebody's hand is emptied and t hey cannot discard, their draw is replaced with a mill. Once that happens there is no longer an draw for the other chains to replace. So you don't mill them out. You just discard away their hand and mill once for each draw they can't discard for. Still a powerful affect but not instant game win.
-
It would work like this:
discard a card to chains #1, then discard a card to chains #2, then draw a card. (2 cards in hand)
discard a card to chains #1, then discard a card to chains #2, then draw a card. (1 cards in hand)
discard a card to chains #1 ,then mill 1 cardYou have 0 cards in hand and have milled 1 card.
If they had 2 cards in hand, it would work like this:
draw #1: discard a card to chains #1, then discard a card to chains #2, then draw a card. (1 cards in hand)
draw #2: discard a card to chains #1 ,then mill 1 card
draw#3: mill 1 card -
I think the part of the multiple chains interatction that often gets overlooked, and causes confusion, is that Chains of Mephistopheles reads "draw a card" on it.
-
Ok... I think I got this. Multiple Chains in play will cause a player'd entire hand to be discarded, eventually, and then a card milled off the top... if someone plays some drawing effect. The real world application of this would now be that all card drawing is turned off completely. (With one Chains in play, it is possible for people to save up cards in hand, and then discard the cards to draw.) Have I got this now?
Two Chains makes the game total topdeck mode (Barring cards that draw cards without the word draw... Dig, Dark Confidant, Mind's Desire)... Oh, Two Chains... I smell a deck name.
-
Drawing isn't shut off unless the player is hellbent.
You can still discard cards to draw cards. But it makes effects like Brainstorm especially bad, as the caster would have to discard 3 cards and then put two more cards on top of their library.
-
@gkraigher Wow, I'm confused. A player has two cards in hand. There are two Chains in play. That player casts Treasure Cruise... Now what?
-
If they had 2 cards in hand, it would work like this:
draw #1: discard a card to chains #1, then discard a card to chains #2, then draw a card. (1 cards in hand)
draw #2: discard a card to chains #1 ,then mill 1 card
draw#3: mill 1 cardnet effect, discard 3 cards, draw 1 card, and mill 2 cards. 0 cards in hand afterward. (I mentioned that you discarded 3 cards for effects like Madness)
-
@gkraigher I don't think I agree with this since the draw from the second chains is missing.
-
which one are you referring to?
If you are referring to the last one, on draw #2 you get hellbent inbetween chains #1 and chains #2 so the effect switches from discard draw to mill. You never draw a card because Chains #2 takes its replacement effect on the draw from Chains #1 draw.
-
@gkraigher Why doesn't the draw a card function of the second chains, trigger the first chains again... and back and forth?
-
Because the action that is being replaced is still the drawing of the origional card.
It doesn't loop, two chains reads like this:
If a player would draw a card except the first one he or she draws in his or her draw step each turn, that player discards a card instead. If the player discards a card this way, he or she {If a player would draw a card except the first one he or she draws in his or her draw step each turn, that player discards a card instead. If the player discards a card this way, he or she draws a card. If the player doesn't discard a card this way, he or she puts the top card of his or her library into his or her graveyard.} If the player doesn't discard a card this way, he or she puts the top card of his or her library into his or her graveyard.
-
@gkraigher Right. Now I understand. Recursion was an excellent way to explain it.
-
So, what's the correct number of Chains if your only draw spell is Ancestral and you run 3 Dack? I'm thinking between one and three.
-
-
I played a grixis thief chain's deck in a daily and went 1-3. It was fun though. I avoided card draw and played with things like slight of hand and impulse which I think was a mistake as my opponents ancestral and preordains looked really good when chain's wasn't out. I think if you are going to invest 2 mana and a card in an enchantment I think you'd be better off with oath or sylvan....
-
@AmbivalentDuck sorry only just saw this - I played 2 chains.
-
Chains has traditionally seen play in things like 5C Shops without much of a draw engine as an enchantment-based spoiler to Gush and Brainstorm decks. I think it's best in places like that.
