last edited by Guest
@MaximumCDawg - 614.7. If a replacement effect would replace an event, but that event never happens, the replacement effect simply doesn’t do anything. From: http://mtgsalvation.gamepedia.com/Replacement_effect
This came up with the interaction between Containment Priest and Grafdigger's Cage, and MTGO handled it incorrectly (and I thought MTGO might have been right for a change).
Is there a general ruling or part of the Comp Rules somewhere that explains that replacement effects are replied before "can't" effects -- or vice verca?
Not that I'm aware of and that is why I'm wondering. The way the ruling is worded, a judge could reasonably state that since leovold disallows the last 2 draws of ancestral recall, the replacement effect from notion thief doesn't apply and I would get to draw 2 cards in my scenario. In plain English that is exactly what the ruling states. Like I said, I have a feeling that is not the intent and not what they had in mind with that ruling. But barring some other rule we haven't considered if a judge encountered this situation and stated that my opponent draws 1 and I draw 2 he could point to this as his justification and have the backing he needs.
It doesn't have really anything to do with what the rules are saying, but instead the issue lies with what you think is going on. Again, Leovold only disallows your opponent's draws. Notion Thief only replaces (in this circumstance) your draws. The actual mechanism for this is:
- Ancestral Recall begins resolving
- Cards are drawn one at a time. With the first draw, Leovold doesn't care that you are about to draw a card because it doesn't apply to you. Notion Thief sees that you are about to draw a card and replaces it with your opponent drawing the card. The opponent draws that card since (I am assuming) it is the first card the opponent would draw this turn.
- With the second and third draw, Leovold doesn't apply initially because he only cares if your opponent would draw more than one card. Notion Thief cares and will replace your draws with your opponent drawing those cards. At this point, Leovold sees the opponent attempting to draw too many cards and then those draws (by the opponent) will be ignored.
- The final result is your opponent drawing 1 or 0 cards depending on how many he had previously drawn that turn.
This is entirely consistent with the rules that are cited because the draw that are being replaced are your draws, not the opponent's, and Leovold is only preventing your opponent's card draws after the replacement effect has occurred.
If you want an example of when rule 614.7 would apply, consider this scenario:
Player A controls both Notion Thief and Leovold.
Player B targets himself with Ancestral Recall.
In this circumstance, the outcome depends entirely on whether or not Player B has already drawn a card this turn. If he has, Leovold will disallow the draws off of Ancestral Recall and these draws cannot be replaced by Notion Thief. Player A will draw zero cards. If Player B has not drawn a card, the Leovold will allow the first draw, which gets replaced by Notion Thief. On the second draw, Player B still hasn't drawn a card (that card draw was replaced by Notion Thief), so the second draw is allowed by Leovold and replaced by Notion Thief. Same with the final draw with the net result being Player A drawing three cards.