Progenitus and grind stone

[The Colonel]

So quick question about this interaction. If the painter stone is online and the opponent hits me with it but I have a single progenitus in the deck does it create an infinite loop? If it does, can I choose to draw out the whole match by continuing to attempt to resolve stone's ability? I say this because I feel this is a bad match up and would rather take a match draw than a match loss.

[Julian23]

If you have 1 Progenitus, you end up with a library of just 1 Progenitus and the rest in the graveyard.

If you have 2 Progenitus, do not just "decide" to play out the loop, but are forced to and the game ends in a draw.

It becomes slightly more interesting when Rest in Peace is involved as there are two replacement effects in place and since it's your Progenitus, you get to decide which one applies. However in the 2 Progenitus scenario, you will eventually have to decide to apply the Rest in Peace effect to eventually brake the loop.

[The Colonel]

I see. Thanks a lot for the explanation, but I also want to know if I can take a match draw or, if it's because it's only game 1, if the judge will come over and force the game 1 draw and make me go to game 2?

[Julian23]

I'm not sure I'm exactly understanding what you're saying.

No action except for the round time running out can ever cause the match the end in a draw.

Whether or not a game ends in a draw is also not dependant on a judge coming walking by or not. The moment it becomes apparent that you have 2 Progenitus with no way to otherwise remove them (e.g. Rest in Peace), the game immediately ends in a draw and you shuffle up for the next one. Even if it's game3, if there still is time on the clock, you then shuffle up for game4. I have once even seen a game 5 but those are rare.

[The Colonel]

I was wondering if I could sit there for the entire hour shuffling 2 progenitus in my deck during game 1. I think this is a bad match up for me and would rather have the match go 0-0-1 as opposed to me losing the match.

[apple713]

I was wondering if I could sit there for the entire hour shuffling 2 progenitus in my deck during game 1. I think this is a bad match up for me and would rather have the match go 0-0-1 as opposed to me losing the match.

no you cannot waste an hour doing that. the game result is an immediate draw and you move to the next game.

[Julian23]

If the "legality" of what you are doing is dependant on whether or not a judge catches you doing it, you might want to reconsider what you are doing

In fact, what you are suggesting is not only Slow Play (=Warning) but Stalling. If you try that in a tournament setting, you will be disqualified.

Tournament Error — Slow Play
Definition
A player takes longer than is reasonably required to complete game actions. If a judge believes a player is
intentionally playing slowly to take advantage of a time limit, the infraction is Unsporting Conduct — Stalling

Unsporting Conduct — Stalling
Definition
A player intentionally plays slowly in order to take advantage of the time limit. If the slow play is not intentional,
please refer to Tournament Error — Slow Play instead

[apple713]

If the "legality" of what you are doing is dependant on whether or not a judge catches you doing it, you might want to reconsider what you are doing

In fact, what you are suggesting is not only Slow Play (=Warning) but Stalling. If you try that in a tournament setting, you will be disqualified.

additionally, someone playing grindstone combo will Immediately call a judge because they know what is suppose to happen. If it comes to that you could be penalized as julian pointed out.

[The Colonel]

Okay, perfect. Thanks for clearing that up for me guys.

[rufus]

....
It becomes slightly more interesting when Rest in Peace is involved as there are two replacement effects in place and since it's your Progenitus, you get to decide which one applies. However in the 2 Progenitus scenario, you will eventually have to decide to apply the Rest in Peace effect to eventually brake the loop.

The loop only involves progenitus and grindstone. I'm not sure you can force a player to use the RIP replacement ability instead of the grindstone one.

[apple713]

The loop only involves progenitus and grindstone. I'm not sure you can force a player to use the RIP replacement ability instead of the grindstone one.

if there is an option for a player to break an infinite loop, they are forced to make that choice.

[rufus]

if there is an option for a player to break an infinite loop, they are forced to make that choice.

In the general case, that's not true unless the rules on the Wizards web site are out of date.

716.4. If a loop contains only mandatory actions, the game is a draw. (See rules 104.4b and 104.4f.)
716.5. No player can be forced to perform an action that would end a loop other than actions called for by objects involved in the loop.
Example:
A player controls Seal of Cleansing, an enchantment that reads, “Sacrifice Seal of Cleansing: Destroy target artifact or enchantment.” A mandatory loop that involves an artifact begins. The player is not forced to sacrifice Seal of Cleansing to destroy the artifact and end the loop.
716.6. If a loop contains an effect that says “[A] unless [B] ,” where [A] and [B] are each actions, no player can be forced to perform [B] to break the loop. If no player chooses to perform [B], the loop will continue as though [A] were mandatory.

Now, when there is only 2x Progenitus left in the library, then there's a loop of mandatory actions involving just the 2x Progenitus and the Grindstone. The example in 716.5 isn't particularly clarifying, but why should he have to involve RIP at all?

[cdr]

There's a difference between making a choice within the loop and taking an action outside of it. If you can make a different choice (such as applying replacement effects in a different order) in a loop to end the loop, you are required to do so. You are not required to take an action that's not already involved in the loop, such as activating an ability or playing a spell.

716.5. No player can be forced to perform an action that would end a loop other than actions called for by objects involved in the loop.

The replacement effects are part of the loop.

[Technics]

There's a difference between making a choice within the loop and taking an action outside of it. If you can make a different choice (such as applying replacement effects in a different order) in a loop to end the loop, you are required to do so. You are not required to take an action that's not already involved in the loop, such as activating an ability or playing a spell.

716.5. No player can be forced to perform an action that would end a loop other than actions called for by objects involved in the loop.

The replacement effects are part of the loop.

Similar to chess players are required to advance the gamestate when possible. If you have two options avaliable (shuffle progen or remove it to RiP) you are free to choose either. However once choosing one option is shown to lead to an infinate loop you will be required to advance the gamestate and make a new choice. Failure to do so is Stalling and can result in a DQ.

[cdr]

And things like triggers, SBAs, or replacement effects that are occurring within the loop are part of the loop, even if they're doing nothing in the order you're presently applying them. Only introducing something new and voluntary (a spell, an activated ability, unmorphing, etc) is outside the loop.

[rufus]

And things like triggers, SBAs, or replacement effects that are occurring within the loop are part of the loop, even if they're doing nothing in the order you're presently applying them. Only introducing something new and voluntary (a spell, an activated ability, unmorphing, etc) is outside the loop.

I understand that the rules can't cover every imaginable case, but that seems a bit vague.

Let's suppose that there's an Oblivion Ring loop, and one player has a Channel effect active. Does that player have to channel themselves to death to end the loop? I expect that the answer is no, but I don't understand what the distinction is between that and this case.

[Julian23]

Because it's an activated ability. It's also in no way part of the loop.

[rufus]

Because it's an activated ability. It's also in no way part of the loop.

Channel is not an activated ability. Here's the oracle text:

Until end of turn, any time you could activate a mana ability, you may pay 1 life. If you do, add to your mana pool.

[Julian23]

You're right, it's actually a Special Action. It's still unrelated to the loop.

[rufus]

You're right, it's actually a Special Action. It's still unrelated to the loop.

But that's my question: The channel ability goes on and off line during the loop, why doesn't that make it part of the loop?