Author Topic: What if we changed the hard hand limit to 12 instead of 16?  (Read 543 times)

Offline jbeers285

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3367
  • bravo
    • -
    • Northeast Region
+1
So this idea has been floating around my mind after my brother Jerome presented the idea.

Here is how it would work.

1. Hand size at turn end remains 8
2. Maximum hand size is 12
3. Abilities that increase or decrease hand size effective both hard cap and turn end cap

So if you play increase hand size by one, you may hold 9 at turn end and you have a higher hard cap of 13.

Or

If an opponent reduces your hand size you can have 7 at the end of turn and 11 as a hard cap.


Why?
This would greatly limit the impact of defensive drawing abilities, it adds a dimension to the game that doesn’t impact play in a direct way.
• It adds value to cards like Angelic News, Loaves and Fish etc.
• It limits massive pop draws like, TToD, Damsel, Lying Prophet etc.
• It generates more space for creative card design in future sets.
• It could open the door to a 1-4 card Mulligan in the opening draw.

Thoughts?
« Last Edit: July 24, 2020, 10:49:08 AM by jbeers285 »
JMM is a modern day prophet

Offline Bobbert

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1761
  • The player formerly known as Thomas Hunter
    • -
    • North Central Region
Re: What if we changed the hard hand limit to 12 instead of 16?
« Reply #1 on: July 24, 2020, 12:13:40 PM »
+1
I like it at first glance. Maybe I'll see about testing it for a few games. Helping solve massive resource swings would go a long way toward evening the playing field for decks that aren't 100% about "get everything out as fast as possible."
ANB is good. Change my mind.

Offline Sean

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3852
    • -
    • East Central Region
Re: What if we changed the hard hand limit to 12 instead of 16?
« Reply #2 on: July 24, 2020, 12:28:52 PM »
0
I don't understand how this would affect whether a mulligan could, should, or would be added to the rules.  What is the logic behind that part?

My biggest qualm with this is that it affects the "hard" cap.  By doing so, it isn't a hard cap anymore.  I think a hard cap is a good thing (and maybe a hard forced minimum eventually as well)  I do think though that there are some ways to adjust to still have a hard cap as well as incorporate the idea you pose of changing what I guess I'll call the "current" cap, if that makes sense.
May you prosper greatly!
Daniel 4:1b

Offline The Schaefer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 506
    • -
    • South Central Region
Re: What if we changed the hard hand limit to 12 instead of 16?
« Reply #3 on: July 24, 2020, 02:23:50 PM »
0
I'm in favor of this potential change. Massive resource swings due to large draw abilities are excessive. I think finding that sweet spot of what that max should be is key though. (I think somewhere around 11 or 12 more than likely) I think many potential strategies (particularly in T2) just aren't as viable due to being unable to keep up resource wise with decks like throne variants. Draw/search is so essential that it kind of a limitation for strategies too since you must be able to keep up resource wise or just never have a chance.

Offline CaydenJ

  • New Member
  • *
  • Posts: 10
    • -
    • Northeast Region
Re: What if we changed the hard hand limit to 12 instead of 16?
« Reply #4 on: July 24, 2020, 02:34:59 PM »
0
 I think that it would be a good idea but it would have to be experimented on.

Offline Watchman

  • Tournament Host
  • *****
  • Posts: 2293
  • Your Turn Games Owner
    • -
    • Southeast Region
    • Your Turn Games
Re: What if we changed the hard hand limit to 12 instead of 16?
« Reply #5 on: July 24, 2020, 07:36:25 PM »
0
I'm more in favor of just limiting the amount one can draw per ability.
Need Redemption? Visit Your Turn Games today!

Offline Red

  • Tournament Host
  • *****
  • Posts: 4682
  • It takes time to build the boat.
    • LFG
    • Southeast Region
Re: What if we changed the hard hand limit to 12 instead of 16?
« Reply #6 on: July 24, 2020, 07:46:47 PM »
0
I'm in the "we banned samuel so what's the big deal" category.
Ironman 2016 and 2018 Winner.
3rd T1-2P 2018, 3rd T2-2P 2019
I survived the Flood twice.

Offline jbeers285

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3367
  • bravo
    • -
    • Northeast Region
Re: What if we changed the hard hand limit to 12 instead of 16?
« Reply #7 on: July 24, 2020, 09:42:35 PM »
0
@Red - The big deal is a rescue where I can get a D9 before throne triggers right now. With a slight modification it’s a D10 before throne triggers.

The mulligan would just be for increasing consistency since less draw abuse will be in the game.  Not a must, just a potential idea.
« Last Edit: July 24, 2020, 09:44:38 PM by jbeers285 »
JMM is a modern day prophet

Offline Red Wing

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2339
  • Set rotation shill
    • -
    • North Central Region
Re: What if we changed the hard hand limit to 12 instead of 16?
« Reply #8 on: July 24, 2020, 10:27:05 PM »
+1
@Red - The big deal is a rescue where I can get a D9 before throne triggers right now. With a slight modification it’s a D10 before throne triggers.

The mulligan would just be for increasing consistency since less draw abuse will be in the game.  Not a must, just a potential idea.
Set rotation solves this, and many other problems.

It's very possible that a lower hand limit or some kind of draw limit is correct. However, if the problem is centered around a relatively small number of draw X cards, I think we would be better off addressing that problem more directly. Bans are also an option, but rotation would eliminate a significant amount of busted cards. Generally, these kind of rule changes seem arbitrary and I think they can end up limiting card design.
« Last Edit: July 25, 2020, 09:43:09 AM by Red Wing »
Kansas City Discord: discord.gg/2ypYg6m

Offline jbeers285

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3367
  • bravo
    • -
    • Northeast Region
Re: What if we changed the hard hand limit to 12 instead of 16?
« Reply #9 on: July 25, 2020, 08:29:12 AM »
0
This is bigger then a couple draw cards, I simply noted a couple of the most overwhelming draw cards.  The biggest thing a 12 limit does is stop ridiculous pop off turns, unless a deck is built to gain resources that are played down instead of held (Different cards seeing play is usually a good thing).  This limit forces cards into play sooner which creates a larger player interaction aspect.

Set rotation looks like it fixes things but players will find ways to be consistently acquiring resources at an exponential clip.  Endless Treasures, Hannah, Territory Class draw abilities (just naming a few) will continue to be super fast engines that hit hand limit often, especially when combined with defensive card acquisition. Just because I can get a consistent +6-12 with a couple older cards doesn’t mean I can’t get the same with new ones.  It just looks different. It’s an easy and quite frankly relatively lazy build for me with Throne now. The tools are so obvious, that doesn’t mean there aren’t other ways to be banging off crazy speed every turn.

How would you see a hard cap change limiting design in any way?
« Last Edit: July 25, 2020, 08:35:52 AM by jbeers285 »
JMM is a modern day prophet

Offline Red Wing

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2339
  • Set rotation shill
    • -
    • North Central Region
Re: What if we changed the hard hand limit to 12 instead of 16?
« Reply #10 on: July 25, 2020, 10:38:43 AM »
0
I agree that there are some absolutely busted consistency cards from recent sets like Endless Treasures. This is pretty much inevitable because new cards have to be powerful enough to play over the older cards. Which is why I have supported set rotation for at least three years now. 12 card limit could nerf some Hypocrisy combos which actually might be a good thing.
« Last Edit: July 25, 2020, 11:46:13 AM by Red Wing »
Kansas City Discord: discord.gg/2ypYg6m

Offline Sean

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3852
    • -
    • East Central Region
Re: What if we changed the hard hand limit to 12 instead of 16?
« Reply #11 on: July 25, 2020, 01:20:38 PM »
0
Instead of changing the hand limit, would it make sense to establish a draw limit?

I'm thinking, "Each player may draw a maximum of 6 cards per turn."  3 cards from draw phase would count towards the maximum so that way the defending player has a chance to draw the same amount as the attacker if they have the cards to do it.  6 may be too high or too low but I figure that's a good starting point and would prevent the 'pop off' turns.

The risky part of changing or punishing drawing with rules is that it stands to slow the game down due to LS drought.  Redemption has a very unique process for achieving the win condition that many other card games do not have.  I'm not familiar with many other games but the ones I am simply have a point system that you either have to get to or decrease your opponent so they can easily play with drawing however they need to.  But with Redemption, LSs have to be drawn (mostly) in order for a player to be able to win and reducing the opportunity for drawing makes that harder.
May you prosper greatly!
Daniel 4:1b

Offline The Schaefer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 506
    • -
    • South Central Region
Re: What if we changed the hard hand limit to 12 instead of 16?
« Reply #12 on: July 25, 2020, 07:00:32 PM »
0
I dont think we could institute a draw limit just due to cards like A new Beginning, love at first sight, and Mayhem. There are probably a few others as well.

Changing the hand limit I think is the only feasible rule change to fix pop off turns of excessive drawing/searching.

Set Rotation does help solve many problems but if any legacy format is to exist which likely will those formats will still have the same problem and there is nothing to say that a similar problem won't occur in the newer format.

So while there may be some small limitations on design space it probably would be good to lower the hand limit which should increase diversity among cards/decks by allowing more non speed cards to potentially be played while not outright eliminating the importance of resource gaining cards. Resource management becomes all the more important.

But there would definitely have to be some testing to see if the payoff is worth the change.

Offline Red Wing

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2339
  • Set rotation shill
    • -
    • North Central Region
Re: What if we changed the hard hand limit to 12 instead of 16?
« Reply #13 on: July 25, 2020, 07:39:40 PM »
0
Set Rotation does help solve many problems but if any legacy format is to exist which likely will those formats will still have the same problem and there is nothing to say that a similar problem won't occur in the newer format.
We already have a legacy format it's called booster draft. But yeah a draw limit seems to just break a lot of things.
Kansas City Discord: discord.gg/2ypYg6m