Infinite Life and Lim Dul's Vault

[Maveric78f]

Sorry for this new lame question.

Let's say I gained 1 gazillion life earlier in the game and that I intend to play Lim-Dûl's Vault. I should be able to order my whole library if my library has a number of cards that is not a multiple of 5. However, as we are supposed to keep tracking my exact life, we cannot use such shortcuts as allow me to order my library as I want. Thus, I would have to repeat the manipulation of my library quite a long time to obtain what I want, which can be a problem in a tournament and could be considered as a way to stall the game. How can it be ruled out for the best of all?

[herbig]

That's interesting. A gazillion life is not infinite, so you could die before you can set your deck the way you want it. On the other hand, doing so manually, you could die before you can set the deck the way you want it. There should be a way to calculate the maximum amount of life you would have to pay, but I don't know what a judge would say.

[cdr]

This fails the criteria for a shortcut - I'm not sure it's predictable and it's definitely based on a conditional action.


713.2a. At any point in the game, the player with priority may suggest a shortcut by describing a sequence of game choices, for all players, that may be legally taken based on the current game state and the predictable results of the sequence of choices. This sequence may be a non-repetitive series of choices, a loop that repeats a specified number of times, multiple loops, or nested loops, and may even cross multiple turns. It can't include conditional actions, where the outcome of a game event determines the next action a player takes. The ending point of this sequence must be a place where a player has priority, though it need not be the player proposing the shortcut.

You would not be allowed to continue resolving Lim Dul's Vault as long as you like - you would be subject to normal Slow Play penalties, not stalling. Unless you were using it with the intent to stall, of course.

[UrDraco]

This problem reminds me a lot about trying to deck someone with gaeas blessing in there deck using an infinite mill strategy. I saw someone in a tournament argue that they could keep milling thier opponent until gaea's blessing was the very last card. I can't remember why it was important for blessing to be the last card, but what I do remember is that the judge said they could not make this shortcut.

I don't think this question really needs to be answered though. If you have a googolplex of life, and can easily put whatever card in your deck on the top of your library, then how have you not already won the game?

[Maveric78f]

This problem reminds me a lot about trying to deck someone with gaeas blessing in there deck using an infinite mill strategy. I saw someone in a tournament argue that they could keep milling thier opponent until gaea's blessing was the very last card. I can't remember why it was important for blessing to be the last card, but what I do remember is that the judge said they could not make this shortcut.

Lol. I'm your man with this kind of questions (as cdr said "for drama reference").
http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?15368-Infinite-mill

[cdr]

Once again, just to be clear, per the rules this is not acceptable as a shortcut and is not allowed. I deleted some posts that talked about mathematical models, which is interesting but not relevant to the rule.

Stacking your deck like this is conditional - "if these cards are like this, I'll stack the next cards like this". You might be able to put an upper bound on repetitions, but it's not predictable.

If you somehow knew the exact order of your deck, and from this were able to describe the exact sequence and number of repetitions, then you might have a shortcut.

See Maveric's link for a past example, especially the end of the thread.

[Julian23]

If you somehow knew the exact order of your deck, and from this were able to describe the exact sequence and number of repetitions, then you might have a shortcut.

You do know the exact order of your deck after some repetitions. According to your definition this makes the situation eligible for a shortcut.

[jrsthethird]

You can't stack your entire deck, but you can pick any 5 cards and put them on top.

So if you're going to do this just cut the shit and play Doomsday instead. You even get the bonus of being able to pick out of your yard.

[cdr]

You do know the exact order of your deck after some repetitions. According to your definition this makes the situation eligible for a shortcut.

Sure, if you can:

a) perform enough repetitions to know the order of your deck without running into Slow Play
b) describe the exact number and sequence of repetitions you are going to perform

Then, like I said, you might have a shortcut. I find this unlikely. For a sufficiently small deck it might be feasible, but at that point I don't know how much you'd be saving over just doing it manually.


You can't stack your entire deck, but you can pick any 5 cards and put them on top.

So if you're going to do this just cut the shit and play Doomsday instead. You even get the bonus of being able to pick out of your yard.

How is putting 5 cards on top different than stacking your entire deck? I don't see that being possible either.

[jrsthethird]

You can't stack your entire deck. You can search your deck to find any 5 cards with this method, but after you pick a top 5 you like you have to shuffle the rest.

[cdr]

You can't stack your entire deck. You can search your deck to find any 5 cards with this method, but after you pick a top 5 you like you have to shuffle the rest.

Ah, you're pointing out a problem with what Lim-dul's Vault actually does.

And again, to be clear, since it's not possible within the rules, you can't search your deck to find any 5 cards and put them on top either.