If someone casts Prosperity with X being 100 and one player has 50 cards and the other has 60, does the one with 50 cards lose first since he runs out first or do you wait until the spell resolves and it ends up to be a tie?

  • 7
    This question does not show any research effort. The first Google result for "prosperity mtg" has a ruling that says "10/4/2004 If both players run out of cards during this effect, the game is a draw."
    – Rainbolt
    Feb 14, 2016 at 21:06
  • I realize that now, but thanks for pointing out my stupidity and yours or lack there of, SENPAI
    – eric
    Feb 14, 2016 at 23:57
  • 5
    We have a lot of questions here that are answered by Gatherer rulings. I don't think "no research effort" is a great way to respond - sure, it's pretty easy to find the answer if you realize Gatherer rulings exist, but a lot of people don't know to look there, and the rulings don't include full explanations. Seems better to just give a complete answer and link to gatherer so the OP learns to look there.
    – Cascabel
    Feb 15, 2016 at 12:13
  • 1
    @Jefromi Suggesting that the author Google the card name with "mtg" tacked on is a useful suggestion, and would have led the author to the Gatherer (without prior knowledge that the Gatherer exists). Perhaps I could have phrased my suggestion a bit "nicer", but I don't think it warranted the response that I got.
    – Rainbolt
    Feb 15, 2016 at 14:20
  • 3
    Possible duplicate of Not enough cards for both players when casting Wheel of Fortune
    – Autar
    Feb 18, 2016 at 11:05

1 Answer 1


It will be a draw, both players lose at the same time.

MtG uses a system of state-based actions This is a sort of clean-up system that checks the game state almost continuously.

  1. State-Based Actions

704.1. State-based actions are game actions that happen automatically whenever certain conditions (listed below) are met. State-based actions don’t use the stack.

704.3. Whenever a player would get priority (see rule 116, “Timing and Priority”), the game checks for any of the listed conditions for state-based actions, then performs all applicable state-based actions simultaneously as a single event.

Priority is the game's term for who has the right to take actions. Generally, whenever something happens such as a spell is cast or resolves, or steps/phases change, the active player (the player whose turn it is) gets priority. Only the player with priority may cast spells, activate abilities, etc. The player with priority may also pass priority, giving it to the next player in turn order. This continues until all players have passed priority in succession and the stack is empty, then the current step or phase ends. This is how the game progresses.

Before a player gets priority, however, state-based actions are checked.

116.3b The active player receives priority after a spell or ability (other than a mana ability) resolves.

State-based actions are not checked while a spell resolves, only immediately after it has resolved:

704.4. Unlike triggered abilities, state-based actions pay no attention to what happens during the resolution of a spell or ability.

Therefore in your case it is not important which player had more cards in his library. Both players lose at the same time because they attempted to draw a card from an empty library:

704.5. The state-based actions are as follows:

704.5b If a player attempted to draw a card from a library with no cards in it since the last time state-based actions were checked, he or she loses the game.

  • 6
    It should also note that the card in question has a ruling on it that clearly stated that the game is a draw in the situation described. While you may consider it redundant I think it is a helpful point to make it easier to understand. 10/4/2004 If both players run out of cards during this effect, the game is a draw.
    – Joe W
    Feb 14, 2016 at 16:46
  • 3
    I don't only consider it redundant, it objectively is, because I wrote the same thing already: "Both players lose at the same time because they attempted to draw a card from an empty library". Both players lose at the same time means it's a draw, they attempted to draw a card from an empty library means they ran out of library cards while drawing. There's no additional value to adding the ruling.
    – Hackworth
    Feb 14, 2016 at 16:53
  • 5
    I understand that but the rules can get confusing which is why they issue rulings on cards and there is no reason not to include the ruling on a card when it was the card asked about in the question.
    – Joe W
    Feb 14, 2016 at 16:55
  • @JoeW Yes, there is a reason not to add the ruling. I structure most of my answers in the "Bold TL;DR as the first line, followed by rules and/or other references for why and how" schema. The ruling in question would clearly belong to the TL;DR section because it's nothing but a conclusion, but my TL;DR already says the same thing. Making an answer and especially the TL;DR section longer than necessary makes the answer worse overall.
    – Hackworth
    Feb 15, 2016 at 15:23
  • 2
    The question is answered directly, in the bold first sentence. Is it really useful to write the answer, then write it again phrased differently in a blockquote? The ruling contains the same information as the answer.
    – murgatroid99
    Feb 16, 2016 at 23:00

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .