It meets every requirement in 716.2. You have been told this multiple times, including by multiple L3+ judges. If you want to discuss it further, take it up on the judge forums. I apologize for not cutting this off earlier. This is a forum for rules questions, and the question has been extensively and repeatedly answered. Enough.
Probably because all of the phrasings you're referring to are legal. "Cast Petals 410,758 times, with the result being [these cards] on top, and the rest left in their initial order." is fine. Sorting them by some other deterministic criteria is also fine.Edit: A couple of different phrasings have passed around, so please provide a verbatim description of the shortcut that makes it legal under those rules.
See above if you want "the description in question". It does sufficiently specify intermediate gamestates. Your opponent using an effect to know the order of their deck and you not knowing is not unfair.
You don't know the arrangement. Your opponent does.As the opponent, I would want to cast a spell at a specific arrangement of the deck. The example I used above was "I want to counter PoI at the point in the loop when the largest number of lands are on top of his deck".
Last edited by cdr; 09-07-2015 at 05:19 PM.
“It's possible. But it involves... {checks archives} Nature's Revolt, Opalescence, two Unstable Shapeshifters (one of which started as a Doppelganger), a Tide, an animated land, a creature with Fading, a Silver Wyvern, some way to get a creature into play in response to stuff, some way to get a land into play in response to stuff (a different land from the animated land), and one heck of a Rube Goldberg timing diagram.”
-David DeLaney
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)