New Posts For Thread: Winning and Losinghttp://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29603187/Winning_and_LosingThe rules state that if a player would win and lose the game simultaneously, that player loses the game. However, there seems to be a small loophole. I've quoted the rules below and bolded the relevant parts for this scenario.Rule 104.2. (Winning theThanks for the explanation!http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29603187/Winning_and_Losing?post_id=527553263#527553263Thanks for the explanation!Fri, 28 Dec 2012 13:09:02 -0600The word "instead" does indeed signal a replacement effect (though there are also replacement effects that lack the word). And that's why the ability does use the word 'instead'. "If damage would be dealt to you, exile that many cards from your gravhttp://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29603187/Winning_and_Losing?post_id=527552885#527552885The word "instead" does indeed signal a replacement effect (though there are also replacement effects that lack the word). And that's why the ability does use the word 'instead'. "If damage would be dealt to you, exile that many cards from your gravFri, 28 Dec 2012 12:55:39 -0600If you're talking about the 3rd ability on Nefarious Lich , then you're correct. However, i'm guessing you're talking about the first ability, in which case you're incorrect.The loss of the game due to failure to exhttp://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29603187/Winning_and_Losing?post_id=527552385#527552385If you're talking about the 3rd ability on Nefarious Lich , then you're correct. However, i'm guessing you're talking about the first ability, in which case you're incorrect.The loss of the game due to failure to exFri, 28 Dec 2012 12:35:41 -0600Now that I think about it, the Lich's replacement effect results in a set of sequential events. So even if you could replace other actions with winning, you'd win before you'd lose with lich. This means that even Nefarious Lich is probably not an opthttp://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29603187/Winning_and_Losing?post_id=527534681#527534681Now that I think about it, the Lich's replacement effect results in a set of sequential events. So even if you could replace other actions with winning, you'd win before you'd lose with lich. This means that even Nefarious Lich is probably not an optThu, 27 Dec 2012 17:57:40 -0600If you're talking about the 3rd ability on Nefarious Lich , then you're correct. However, i'm guessing you're talking about the first ability, in which case you're incorrect.The loss of the game due to failure to exhttp://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75842/29603187/Winning_and_Losing?post_id=527532859#527532859If you're talking about the 3rd ability on Nefarious Lich , then you're correct. However, i'm guessing you're talking about the first ability, in which case you're incorrect.The loss of the game due to failure to exThu, 27 Dec 2012 16:23:09 -0600