Jump to content

An unfair rule


  • Please log in to reply

21 January 2019 - 06:09 PM

#1

sladecap

    Rookie Trainer

  • sladecap

Can someone explain to me the fairness behind opponent getting a free draw if you draw no basic pokemon at the start of the game? because I just don't see it. Is it because you see what's in your deck? there are many cards that search so you're gonna see your deck anyways so what's the point? One card can make a difference and giving your opponent a free draw is just unfair, especially when your starting hand can make it or break it for the rest of the game. So for the cost of seeing 7 out of 47 cards in your deck your opponent gets a card and sees what you are playing? seems silly to me.

 

Also I don't see this rule in the handbook. Why is it not in there? is this a rule only for online? 


Edited by sladecap, 21 January 2019 - 06:18 PM.

  • 0

21 January 2019 - 06:31 PM

#2

Felidae_

    Elite Trainer

  • Felidae_

First things first, this rule is in the official rulebook that you can find on the Pokemon homepage. It might be omitted from older physical rule books / small booklets that are part of some starter decks, but rest assured it's a rule that is been applied both in the physical nad the digital version of the game.

 

The biggest argument in favour of the rule is simply to avoid players from constructing decks with so few Basic Pokemon that it would forever to start the game. In a tournament setting with a fixed time limit, shuffling forever before the game even starts is mildly annoying to say the least.

It also prevents players from constructing decks that hit a certain basic Pokemon with 100% accuracy every time.

 

In essence it forces decks to be constructed after a certain template, unless you want to risk giving the opponent a huge advantage.

 

Now, those scenarios on top are obviously corner cases and we've all been in a scenario were we didn't hit a basic, despite running 10 of them. Most of the time drawing one extra card isn't that big of a deal and the impact it has on the game is neglectable by all means. If you fae this situation on a frequent basis it's a good idea to go over the deck and check if your basic count is to light.

 

Last but not least, you are not really seeing what's in your deck, as you'll place your prize cards after you took your mulligan.


The shadows of the abyss are like the petals of a monstrous flower that shall blossom within the skull and expand the mind beyond what any man can bear, but whether it decays under the earth or above on green fields, or out to sea or in the very air, all shall come to revelation, and to revel, in the knowledge of the strangling fruit - and the hand of the sinner shall rejoice, for there is no sin in shadow or in light that the seeds of the dead cannot forgive...

 

  • 1

21 January 2019 - 06:33 PM

#3

GR0

    Senior Trainer

  • GR0

It's in the handbook, look for the word "mulligan". Also, the rule exists to punish decks with too few Basic Pokemon, though I do agree the rule is unnecessarily punishing for those with simply bad luck. Though the rule can be fun as well: I once played a deck with just 1 Basic Pokemon and actually once faced a game where my opponent didn't pay attention to how many cards they'd draw and drew their entire deck thanks to me having to mulligan an incredible amount.


  • 1

21 January 2019 - 08:12 PM

#4

SuperStone

    Elite Trainer

  • SuperStone

Personally, I like how MTG handles mulligans better.  There, mulligans are always voluntary, and you can take multiple- but after the first, each mulligan you take, you draw one fewer cards.  Obviously, there have to be mandatory mulligans in pokemon, and for the gamestyle drawing up is probably better than cutting down.  But I do wish you could chose to reshuffle at the beginning.


The truth waits for no one.  That which you refuse to see, TPCi, slips past you.  The chat function was never your problem, yet through your blindness, you have made it one.

  • 0

21 January 2019 - 10:28 PM

#5

Otakutron

    Veteran Trainer

  • Otakutron

Personally, I like how MTG handles mulligans better.  There, mulligans are always voluntary, and you can take multiple- but after the first, each mulligan you take, you draw one fewer cards.  Obviously, there have to be mandatory mulligans in pokemon, and for the gamestyle drawing up is probably better than cutting down.  But I do wish you could chose to reshuffle at the beginning.

 

I don't think an optional mulligan can actually work in Pokémon, due to the differences in how the games work and typical cardpools.  It is much easier to obtain powerful combos you can play T1 in Pokémon, including those capable of mitigating shrinking your own opening draw.  Seems like a nightmare working out whether optional or mandatory mulligans resolve first.

 

Your opponent drawing a card is a very minor benefit; it is annoying you can build a deck well and your opponent receives this benefit due to your own "bad luck", but if we really want a way to deal with that, try to convince the powers-that-be who design the cards to create a new mechanic for the TCG: Starter Pokémon that automatically make themselves your opening Active!


If you do not have Private Messages enabled, it really limits you in discussing the Pokémon TCG. ;)

  • 0

22 January 2019 - 04:05 PM

#6

SuperStone

    Elite Trainer

  • SuperStone

I don't think an optional mulligan can actually work in Pokémon, due to the differences in how the games work and typical cardpools.  It is much easier to obtain powerful combos you can play T1 in Pokémon, including those capable of mitigating shrinking your own opening draw.  Seems like a nightmare working out whether optional or mandatory mulligans resolve first.

I'm not really sure what you're saying here.  Which would resolve first?  I mean, why wouldn't they resolve at the same time?


The truth waits for no one.  That which you refuse to see, TPCi, slips past you.  The chat function was never your problem, yet through your blindness, you have made it one.

  • 0

22 January 2019 - 10:13 PM

#7

Otakutron

    Veteran Trainer

  • Otakutron

I'm not really sure what you're saying here.  Which would resolve first?  I mean, why wouldn't they resolve at the same time?

 

They can't, can they?  As a reminder, this was about a Magic: The Gathering style optional mulligan being added in... which I take to include the same penalty (shuffle your hand back into your deck, draw a new one that is one card smaller).  Either we end up with something way to forgiving for an optional mulligan, or way too punishing.

 

If you allow someone to play down their opening Active Pokémon before shuffling away and redrawing the rest of their opening hand, that ain't a mulligan.  I'll refer to it as a mini-mulligan when I come back to it, but onto the problems of trying to resolve the optional and mandatory mulligans.

 

If the mandatory mulligans are resolved first then... what happens if someone's optional mulligan results in an opening hand with no Pokémon?   There are ways to handle this by adding even more rules... but were adding even more rules.

 

If the Optional happens first, and the -1 card penalty per attempt applies to the mandatory mulligan as well, we get to a point where a lot of time is lost as that player gets down to a small hand with low odds of getting an opening Pokémon... maybe even just trying to topdeck one because they're down to one-card hand! @_@  It might be funny, but for tournament play that much of a time sink is a problem.  It makes the optional mulligan far too risky.

 

If the Optional happens first but the -1 card penalty per attempt is waved if the player has to take a mandatory mulligan, players are free to try for that perfect opening hand, and if they whiff, they just have to take their hand down to one card (via Optional mulligans) and hope to whiff on a Pokémon, forcing a mandatory mulligan that resets them to a seven card hand (even if they're finally stuck with one as soon as it hits a basic).

 

If we allow a "mini-mulligan", that just doesn't lend itself well to the nature of the Pokémon TCG.  Decks that can afford to run more Oranguru (SUM) and easily "consumed" Item cards (like Nest Ball) can a serioous edge, milking the mini-mulligan because they'll just draw/search with what few cards they get on a "bad" hand, while a good hand lets them get a great setup!  No, I don't mean there is a 50-50 chance of one or the other, I just mean decks which can conform to this are getting a disproportionate reward relative to the risk.

 

Yes, yes... I may have missed some obvious solution; let me know if I did.


If you do not have Private Messages enabled, it really limits you in discussing the Pokémon TCG. ;)

  • 1

22 January 2019 - 10:53 PM

#8

RobRatt

    Elite Trainer

  • RobRatt

Also I don't see this rule in the handbook. Why is it not in there? is this a rule only for online? 

The mulligan rule has been part of the real-world game for 20 years now.  It's not Online only.  Keep in mind, that if you're playing with a buddy, just for fun, drawing an additional card for each Mulligan is optional.  Although the rule makes perfect sense in a competitive atmosphere, to prevent shenanigans and to improve deck building, nothing prevents you from "taking it easy" on a friend.

 

And yes, it's always been In the standard TCG Rule Book, usually found in the Advanced Rules toward the back.

 

Spoiler


Edited by RobRatt, 22 January 2019 - 10:54 PM.

  • 1

22 January 2019 - 11:32 PM

#9

Princess_Aurora

    Veteran Trainer

  • Princess_Aurora
If I had the option to reshuffle the brick that I'm using as a deck when I start, then I'd invariably end up with a T1 Sylveon-GX and a very dead opponent...

Edited by Princess_Aurora, 22 January 2019 - 11:32 PM.

Friendship is magic!

  • 2

23 January 2019 - 12:56 AM

#10

SuperStone

    Elite Trainer

  • SuperStone

snip

Yeah, if we made it hand-size reduction it'd get pretty crazy.  I just meant your opponent would get an extra card like any other mulligan.  There would have to be some sort of restriction on how many times you can do it, though, and there would be some trouble with getting mandatory mulls after voluntary ones.  Still, it would decrease the number of losses by the hand of Chance by so much I think some version of it would be worth the sweat.

 

 

If I had the option to reshuffle the brick that I'm using as a deck when I start, then I'd invariably end up with a T1 Sylveon-GX and a very dead opponent...

If a player can get a combo sometimes, and it isn't gamebreaking, I don't think there should be a problem with letting them get it- letting them actually play the game instead of just sitting there- more often.  And yes, we'd obviously need some sort of restriction so people don't spend ten minutes exchanging hands with Luck until they get the perfect one :P, but I don't see disruption decks as a reason choice mulligans couldn't work.


Edited by SuperStone, 23 January 2019 - 12:57 AM.

The truth waits for no one.  That which you refuse to see, TPCi, slips past you.  The chat function was never your problem, yet through your blindness, you have made it one.

  • 0

23 January 2019 - 02:37 PM

#11

Otakutron

    Veteran Trainer

  • Otakutron

Yeah, if we made it hand-size reduction it'd get pretty crazy.  I just meant your opponent would get an extra card like any other mulligan.  There would have to be some sort of restriction on how many times you can do it, though, and there would be some trouble with getting mandatory mulls after voluntary ones.  Still, it would decrease the number of losses by the hand of Chance by so much I think some version of it would be worth the sweat.
 
 
If a player can get a combo sometimes, and it isn't gamebreaking, I don't think there should be a problem with letting them get it- letting them actually play the game instead of just sitting there- more often.  And yes, we'd obviously need some sort of restriction so people don't spend ten minutes exchanging hands with Luck until they get the perfect one :P, but I don't see disruption decks as a reason choice mulligans couldn't work.

How about Copycat?  Judge?  Marshadow (SLG)?

 

Even as a penalty for mandatory mulligans, there are several things that make me question the penalty for them being the other player gets to draw one card.  Not because it is too harsh, but because it is too lenient or inconsequential.

 

Institute an optional mulligan based on this and the following facets can cause problems:

  • Cards that reward you for your opponent having a large (or larger than yours) hand size.
  • Cards that penalize your opponet for having a large (or larger than yours) hand size.
  • Cards that force your opponent to shuffle-and-draw

Even if someone was trying to intentionally take advantage of them, I realize it wouldn't be completely broken.  Your opponent might whiff on the card or combo they need to mitigate the mulligan penalty, or maybe you draw a lot of Pokémon you're able to immediately Bench (and your opponent doesn't have counters for that...), so other things like Copycat are not a problem.

 

Then again, going waaay back, sometimes your opponent could whiff on Imposter Oak's Revenge after playing multiple copies of Erika.  For those who don't already know and don't want to look up the combo, I'll explain briefly.  Erika let you draw three cards, then your opponent could draw up to three cards.  Imposter Oak's Revenge requires you discard a card, then your opponent has to shuffle their hand into their deck and draw four cards.  Both cards predate terms like "Item" (they were just called "normal Trainers" back then) and the entire Supporter mechanic... so your opponent might play four Erika in one turn (up to eight thanks to Item Finder), but ultimately leave you with a smaller hand than when you started. XP


If you do not have Private Messages enabled, it really limits you in discussing the Pokémon TCG. ;)

  • 0

23 January 2019 - 07:00 PM

#12

settlers25

    Expert Trainer

  • settlers25
Back when unlimited was a thing, i was running a deck with 2 basic pokemon + 2 Legend pokemon.

I added the card Hugh. Always fun to play when your opponent have 12-16 cards in hand. That force opponents to discard cards. Until there are 5 card in hand.

It was a dunkey deck, with 85% win

Edited by settlers25, 23 January 2019 - 07:14 PM.

- 100% Perfect Complete, 42 set completed. BETA Tester from 2011 -- Total Game played: 21.835.- Perfect Complete: HeartGold & SoulSilver -> Evolution (Foil & Non foil)- Black & White Noble Victories

- I have put my account to sleep again... I will return a day...

  • 1