Should we allow a player to Mulligan?
This means to discard his first hand, at the start of the game, in order to draw a new starting hand.
Mulligan
- TorbenBeta
- Posts:122
- Joined:Fri Aug 13, 2010 19:33
- Location:Germany Niedersachsen/Lower Saxony
Re: Mulligan
This is basically a thing for bigger decks, when no "cool" things are available at start.
Here, significant amount of cards will go into RPs and will never be "played", so it will be needed rarely to change whole new hand right at start. But its fair to allow this, I think.
Here, significant amount of cards will go into RPs and will never be "played", so it will be needed rarely to change whole new hand right at start. But its fair to allow this, I think.
I'm the filthy bastard you wish you never met.
Re: Mulligan
One free Mulligan. Each one thats done after that will force the player to draw one less card.
1. You draw x cards, you look at them, you decode to do a mulligan.
2. You draw x cards.
3. Let's say you are still not happy. You mulligan again but draw x-1.
4. Let's say you are still not happy. You mulligan again but draw x-1-1.
And so on...
1. You draw x cards, you look at them, you decode to do a mulligan.
2. You draw x cards.
3. Let's say you are still not happy. You mulligan again but draw x-1.
4. Let's say you are still not happy. You mulligan again but draw x-1-1.
And so on...
Re: Mulligan
This could pose a problem with Undead (?) decks, if they featured resurrection type cards. In those cases, it would be an advantage to have lots of cards in the discard - more options to choose from. Perhaps Mulligan'd cards should be removed from the game (sent to Oblivion).snowdrop wrote:One free Mulligan. Each one thats done after that will force the player to draw one less card.
1. You draw x cards, you look at them, you decode to do a mulligan.
2. You draw x cards.
3. Let's say you are still not happy. You mulligan again but draw x-1.
4. Let's say you are still not happy. You mulligan again but draw x-1-1.
And so on...
Re: Mulligan
Yes, it would. Good thing is Mulligan doesn't discard the cards into graveyard: They are put back in draw deck and deck is then re-shuffled. It makes it very very hard to exploit the mulligan in any way at all.pennomi wrote:This could pose a problem with Undead (?) decks, if they featured resurrection type cards. In those cases, it would be an advantage to have lots of cards in the discard...
- TorbenBeta
- Posts:122
- Joined:Fri Aug 13, 2010 19:33
- Location:Germany Niedersachsen/Lower Saxony
Re: Mulligan
Is the option to Mulligan hereby accepted and addable to the ORC?
I would write it this way:
The player may in his first turn, reshuffle his hand back into his deck and draw a new hand.
This is called a Mulligan. He may do this as often as he wants, but each time it decreases by one. On his first Mulligan he draws 7 cards. On his second Mulligan he draws 7-1=6 cards. On his third Mulligan he draws 7-1-1=5 cards and so on.
I based it on the notion that a game starts with 7 hand cards.
I would write it this way:
The player may in his first turn, reshuffle his hand back into his deck and draw a new hand.
This is called a Mulligan. He may do this as often as he wants, but each time it decreases by one. On his first Mulligan he draws 7 cards. On his second Mulligan he draws 7-1=6 cards. On his third Mulligan he draws 7-1-1=5 cards and so on.
I based it on the notion that a game starts with 7 hand cards.
Re: Mulligan
Added.
I'm playing with the notion of only allowing only one single Mulligan, and letting the player keep one of the cards he/she drew, showing it to all other players, and reshuffling the rest of the hand and then drawing 6 new cards... but let's not try that out for now.
I'm playing with the notion of only allowing only one single Mulligan, and letting the player keep one of the cards he/she drew, showing it to all other players, and reshuffling the rest of the hand and then drawing 6 new cards... but let's not try that out for now.