Multiple Memory Jar Hands in the Same Turn - or, The Real Reason I Hate Welder

[Revvik]

In a turn where multiple Memory Jar activations occur, which hand set aside is kept at the end of the turn?
Or should I just not care, since by then I've lost beyond all hope?

[Polynomial P]

The original hand, set aside by the original memory jar activation is put in hand at the end of the turn.

You resolve each memory jar discard trigger in reverse order, starting with your current hand. You have a chance to cast instants after each of the memory jar hands have been put back into your hand, before discarding to the next effect. This ends with the hand you originally had before the memory jar wackyness.

[Jacob Orlove]

That's wrong. All Jar triggers would go on the stack at the same time, so their controller (the player who activated Jar) chooses the order. Basically, you get back whichever set of hands he wants, so keep careful track of which hand is which!

[Lunk]

I'm fairly certain that's wrong, Poly.  From SCG ask the judge:
Q: If I use Memory Jar several times in one turn (through the use of Goblin Welders), is it possible to stack the Jars' triggered effects in such a way that I keep one of the hands drawn from the Jar at the end of the turn instead of my original hand?

A: Yes. At end of turn, you'll control multiple abilities that trigger at the same time, so you can stack them in the order that you choose. Note that you can't look at the face-down cards, so you'll have to remember which pile is which.

Basically, you (assuming you're the one controlling the Jars) can keep whichever hand you want and give your opponent the corresponding hand from that Jar activation, but you have to do it without looking at the facedown cards.

[edit]: Jacob beat me to it.

Also, a follow up: If the situation is switched around so both players are using a Jar on the same turn, rather than one person using multiple Jars, you'll end up keeping whichever hand was set aside by the active player's Jar, correct?

[Revvik]

So if my opponent (controller of the Jar) decides to keep the hand set aside by his second Jar activation, I would have to do the same?  That is both ridiculous and neat rolled into one.  Thanks.

[Polynomial P]

Whoops. I've had an incorrect ruling then. That really sucks.

[Limbo]

Just to add a little more info:

Suppose you and your opponent both crack multiple Jars in one turn, due to welder shenenigans or whatnot, then the stuff above is combined with the APNAP rule (Active Player - Non Active Player). Then all the triggers for the active player are stacked first, then the non-active players triggers are put on top. So the active player basically decides which cards you all will use to start the new turn.

[Komatteru]

So if my opponent (controller of the Jar) decides to keep the hand set aside by his second Jar activation, I would have to do the same?  That is both ridiculous and neat rolled into one.  Thanks.

Yes.  You need to make sure you mark which hand is which.  You get back whatever hand number your opponent gets back.

[vartemis]

I am still a little confused about this.  Mind you it is monday morning.  Does the Jar only care about the hand it was used to draw? Would this work?


Oracle wording:
tap, Sacrifice Memory Jar: Each player removes his or her hand from the game face down, and draws seven cards. At end of turn, each player discards his or her hand and returns to his or her hand each card he or she removed from the game this way.
using welders and artifacts you manage to pop off 3 memory jar activations.

original hand(1)(2)(3)

at the end of turn can you stack it like this?

1,2,3?

1 resolves.  You cant discard your hand because its removed from the game with jar 2.  You then return your original starting hand because it was removed with this jar.

2 resolves. You cant discard your hand because its removed from the game with jar 3.  You then return your jar 1 because it was removed with this jar.

3 resolves. You discard your hand.  You then return your jar 2 because it was removed with this jar.

I just realized this would work for my opponent too, giving them a bigger hand... but would it work anyways?

perhaps i need another coffee.

j

[Limbo]

The end of turn trigger from Memory Jar does not state "discard any cards you have drawn from this memory jar activation" it just says "discard your hand". The trigger does not care what cards or how many you are holding, it just makes you discard them all, and then get back the hand that was set aside. This is excluding the situation where your hand includes a Beta Signed Crimped PSA10-graded Black Lotus, in which case you are indeed allowed to hold on to your hand, and just add the other ones.

[vartemis]

The end of turn trigger from Memory Jar does not state "discard any cards you have drawn from this memory jar activation" it just says "discard your hand". The trigger does not care what cards or how many you are holding, it just makes you discard them all, and then get back the hand that was set aside. This is excluding the situation where your hand includes a Beta Signed Crimped PSA10-graded Black Lotus, in which case you are indeed allowed to hold on to your hand, and just add the other ones.

"At end of turn, each player discards his or her hand and returns to his or her hand each card he or she removed from the game this way."

If thats the case, then how come all the cards removed from the game arent returned during the first resolution of a jar, regardless of what jar activation removed them?  Or does it not care about the current hand or how you got it, but it does keep track of which jar removed which hand?  It just seems, based upon the wording and previous answer, that this is what would happen with multiple jars...

stack any number of jar resolutions.  first one goes off, you discard your current hand and "return to his or her hand each card he or she removed from the game this way."  then another resolution goes off and I lose everything.

oh, i bought another coffee

j

[Limbo]

The part of the discarding regards the cards you have in your hand at the point where the trigger resolves. The part of returning cards regards the cards set aside for that jar only. So suppose you have activated 3 jars in one turn, called A, B and C and you decide to stack them at the end of turn in the order B C A (so A resolves first, C second and B third) this is what happens:

- Trigger A starts resolving, so you first discard your current hand, then your cards set aside for the first activation of jar are returned. End trigger A.
- Before trigger C starts resolving, there is time to play instants and stuff.
- Trigger C starts resolving, so you first discard your current hand, then your cards set aside for the third activation of jar are returned. End trigger C.
- Before trigger B starts resolving, there is time to play instants and stuff.
- Trigger B starts resolving, so you first discard your current hand, then your cards set aside for the second activation of jar are returned. End trigger B.

The key to all this is the "this way" part in the returning of the cards.

Hope this clears it up.

[Jacob Orlove]

They key is that "cards removed this way" means "cards removed by this specific use of this specific ability". It doesn't mean "cards removed by cards named memory jar" or even "cards removed by this memory jar in other ways". It ONLY means the hand you set aside as part of the resolution of that specific memory jar activation.