Subtitle: 3 people lose in a 1v1 game.
One ruling on Lich's Mirror states:
10/1/2008: If all the players remaining in a game would lose simultaneously but one of them controls Lich's Mirror, that player does what Lich's Mirror says instead of losing, and everyone else loses. As a result, the controller of Lich's Mirror wins the game because all of his or her opponents have lost. (If Lich's Mirror weren't in the picture, then the game would be a draw.)
Does this still apply in the following situation?
Alfred has an empty library, an empty graveyard, owns 5 permanents on board, one of which is a
Lich's Mirror he controls, and has
Zap in hand. Nancy is at 1 life and neither owns nor controls any relevant permanents. Alfred casts Zap targeting Nancy.
When State-Based Actions are checked, Alfred would lose from attempting to draw from an empty library since SBA's were last checked, and Nancy would lose from having 0 or less life. Alfred carries out the replacement effect of Lich's Mirror, replacing his game loss with shuffling the 5 permanents he owns, the Zap in his graveyard, and his empty hand into his library, then draws six cards and cannot draw the seventh card which doesn't exist, and will lose the game when SBA's are next checked.
So: Does Nancy lose before SBA's are next checked, or will the game end in a draw because she can't lose until SBA's get checked again?