<p><strong>You <em>can</em> "fail to find" a card, but only while explicitly <em>searching</em> someone's library or hand. In the case of Inquisition of Kozilek, you are not "searching" the zone, so you must choose a card if a valid choice is available.</strong></p>

<p>Per the comp rules, "fail to find" is specific to <em>searching</em> a hidden zone:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>701.18b If a player is searching a hidden zone for cards with a stated quality, such as a card with a certain card type or color, that player isn’t required to find some or all of those cards even if they’re present in that zone.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>While the hand is still considered a hidden zone even when it is revealed (CR 400.2: "Library and hand are hidden zones, even if all the cards in one such zone happen to be revealed"), Inquisition of Kozilek's instructions say to <em>choose</em> a card from it, not <em>search</em> for one. Thus, you must follow the normal rules: which is to carry out as much of the actions as possible.</p>

<hr>

<p>So, you may still be wondering: <em>why</em> doesn't this rule come with a "fail to find" clause?</p>

<p>The simplest explanation is that it's part of the underlying logic of the Magic comp rules &mdash; to minimize actions that players can't "double-check" using public information. (Consider the difference between <a class="mtg-autocard" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer" href="http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Search/Default.aspx?name=%2b%5bVampiric%20Tutor%5d">Vampiric Tutor</a> and <a class="mtg-autocard" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer" href="http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Search/Default.aspx?name=%2b%5bMystical%20Tutor%5d">Mystical Tutor</a>, for instance. What purpose does the extra "reveal" clause serve?)</p>

<p>Adding "fail to find" to the rules for searching guarantees that your search will result in a valid game state without forcing you to prove there are no valid choices by <em>revealing your entire library</em>.</p>

<p>Inquisition of Kozilek doesn't need a "fail to find" rule because it says "reveal" &mdash; all players get to see the targeted players' hand and verify whether there are any suitable cards in it.</p>

<p>If a discard spell said "Look at target layer's hand" instead of "Reveal," the rules manager would probably insist they include a "may" clause, like <a class="mtg-autocard" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer" href="http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Search/Default.aspx?name=%2b%5bVendilion%20Clique%5d">Vendilion Clique</a>.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2013-04-25T23:12:53.033Z
2018-08-10T19:28:35.147Z
2018-08-10T19:28:35.147Z
Alex P
<p>If I cast <a class="mtg-autocard" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer" href="https://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Inquisition%20of%20Kozilek">Inquisition of Kozilek</a>, and my only target is a <a class="mtg-autocard" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer" href="https://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Loxodon%20Smiter">Loxodon Smiter</a>, do I have to make my opponent discard the <a class="mtg-autocard" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer" href="https://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Loxodon%20Smiter">Loxodon Smiter</a>, or can I &quot;fail to find&quot; just as I would if i were searching my library?</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-04-26T19:44:44.583Z
Sucks that this may have happened to you. :P. Forces to help opponent to win.
wesdfgfgd
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-01-28T00:15:11.857Z
@wesdfgfgd: But it's *so* satisfying when it happens to your opponent. There's something great about forcing your opponent into a corner with their own evil targeted discard spell.
Tikhon Jelvis
<magic-the-gathering>
Can you fail to find a card in someone's hand?
Sam I am says Reinstate Monica
# Can you fail to find a card in someone's hand?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2013-04-25)

If I cast [Inquisition of Kozilek](https://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Inquisition%20of%20Kozilek), and my only target is a [Loxodon Smiter](https://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Loxodon%20Smiter), do I have to make my opponent discard the [Loxodon Smiter](https://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Loxodon%20Smiter), or can I "fail to find" just as I would if i were searching my library?

**Tags:** magic-the-gathering

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Sucks that this may have happened to you. :P. Forces to help opponent to win.  
> **username_2**: @username_1: But it's *so* satisfying when it happens to your opponent. There's something great about forcing your opponent into a corner with their own evil targeted discard spell.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_3 on 2013-04-25. Score: 26 | Accepted answer

**You *can* "fail to find" a card, but only while explicitly *searching* someone's library or hand. In the case of Inquisition of Kozilek, you are not "searching" the zone, so you must choose a card if a valid choice is available.**

Per the comp rules, "fail to find" is specific to *searching* a hidden zone:

> 701.18b If a player is searching a hidden zone for cards with a stated quality, such as a card with a certain card type or color, that player isn’t required to find some or all of those cards even if they’re present in that zone.

While the hand is still considered a hidden zone even when it is revealed (CR 400.2: "Library and hand are hidden zones, even if all the cards in one such zone happen to be revealed"), Inquisition of Kozilek's instructions say to *choose* a card from it, not *search* for one. Thus, you must follow the normal rules: which is to carry out as much of the actions as possible.

---

So, you may still be wondering: *why* doesn't this rule come with a "fail to find" clause?

The simplest explanation is that it's part of the underlying logic of the Magic comp rules — to minimize actions that players can't "double-check" using public information. (Consider the difference between [Vampiric Tutor](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Search/Default.aspx?name=%2b%5bVampiric%20Tutor%5d) and [Mystical Tutor](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Search/Default.aspx?name=%2b%5bMystical%20Tutor%5d), for instance. What purpose does the extra "reveal" clause serve?)

Adding "fail to find" to the rules for searching guarantees that your search will result in a valid game state without forcing you to prove there are no valid choices by *revealing your entire library*.

Inquisition of Kozilek doesn't need a "fail to find" rule because it says "reveal" — all players get to see the targeted players' hand and verify whether there are any suitable cards in it.

If a discard spell said "Look at target layer's hand" instead of "Reveal," the rules manager would probably insist they include a "may" clause, like [Vendilion Clique](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Search/Default.aspx?name=%2b%5bVendilion%20Clique%5d).


---

