Mulligan Charade - Who Shows First?

[AyameHikaru]

I suppose it depends on how good you are at calculating percentages, and what the situation is in your hand.

Say I'm playing Donphan/Machamp. My opening hand is Machop, Machamp, Phanpy, Phanpy, and three trainers (We'll say Palmers and 2 Ebelt).

Obviously, if I can get a T1 Machamp, it'll be smooth sailing. However, for that start to work, I need 2 cards, a F energy and a rare candy. Assuming my opponent doesn't mulligan and I don't topdeck something draw-related, that's impossible. The smart thing would be to play Phanpy active and keep Machop on the bench until it's a Machamp.

However, if my opponent does mulligan BEFORE I set my Active down, it's a whole new ball game. Now, I'll be drawing 2 cards, making a T1 Machamp possible. So now I've got to decide if I want to risk not getting the cards I want or play it safe and start with Phanpy until I get Machop set up. A previously impossible play is now very possible, and my strategy might change because of it.

As to Ditto's points, I'd have to agree that your opponent mulliganing is 99% an advantageous circumstance. Unless you run a deck you burn through super fast and that one card causes you to deck out, drawing a card usually helps.

The cases it doesn't help:

1. You deck out often (Solution: Don't draw or hope you run enough recovery cards)
2. Your opponent plays Gengar and you're worried about Poltergiest (Solution: You'd possibly/probably see some related cards like Looker's, Alph Lithograph, Noctowl Promo, or even Gengars in the mulligan hand, so you can evaluate how easily you'll be able to get rid of Trainers)
3. You've got an Uxie in your hand (Solution: You'd draw the cards anyway. Getting it a bit earlier doesn't make much difference, unless it's a basic you can lay down, in which case it helps because you get deeper into your deck with Uxie.)
4. You've got something out with a search-your-deck-evolve attack, and you don't want to risk drawing the card (This one MIGHT be a slight problem. However, if it's something that drawing one would be disaster, there's obviously only 1/2 in your deck, so the chances of drawing it out of a full deck are minimal.)
5. ????? Any other cases?

So, outside of those circumstances, that extra card can help get your ultimate god hand. How is it not advantageous???

 

[LennonsDad]

Well, I'm not even close to a high level player, but I do take games relatively seriously and I've been fascinated with the differences between "acceptable" and frowned upon plays and styles in Pokemon versus other games (I'm a 15+ year Magic player, an active poker player and a lifetime Risk/Monopoly etc shark). Regardless of which particular point the "it is info" side is arguing, I think everyone has to at least acknowledge there is a potential for advantage (Personally, I think the decision about your active and the percentage of donk/preventing donk is the bigger one than the +1 card to math). I would never have suspected someone of putting down a non-basic in the active position, and I would never do that and probably give anyone who did that to me the frowning of a lifetime, but I respect the question of where the line is.

I'm seeing a few quotes of the exact rules, but I'm unsure if I missed the answer to this question: What occurs first, the die roll to determine active player or you placement of basic Pokemon? If the die roll occurs first, then it seems to me you have a simple answer: Active player first. Period. You're the person who the fictional chess clock is on when the game opens, you do first. In Magic (and I recognize that the phrase "In Magic" can create some gut reactions around here ), the mulligan rule is:

1 - Active Player announces a Mulligan or a keep.
2 - Non Active Player announces.
3 - Resolve those Mulligans, if any.
4 - Active Player again announces if Mulligan.
5 - Non Active Player announces again (because in Magic it's a choice, not a forced scenario, the Non Active can later choose to Mulligan).

If the die roll is supposed to occur after ... well, IMO that is where you are looking at a rules change. Clearly players feel there needs to be an order here, and that's the way the decision is made at the table randomly.

(Aside: Even at league, I'm amused at the players who just sit there and stare because they don't want to roll, they want to call it. I would think that physically being in control of the die is the only minimal advantage you can have here. I have no problem picking up the die, or calling it. If neither player wants to pick up the die, the randomization of who creates the randomization is just out of their hands. Judge comes over and rolls a die, or if the computer program that creates the slips does not have consistency to which order it puts the names, bottom name rolls the die. Or instead of evens/odds, each person rolls and high roll goes first. There's always tie breakers, but the level of semantics at this point is laughable.)

 

[AyameHikaru]

Unfortunately in Pokemon the die isn't rolled until AFTER the placement, since there are quite a few cards that benefit from going first or second particularly. Otherwise I agree with you.

Order is:
Place active pokemon/bench if desired
(Draw for mulligan) <--- Thar be the problem, mateys!
Place bench if desired
Flip coin for first player
Begin game.

Once the coin is flipped setup is over, and you can't place any more cards.

 

[waynegg]

I want to note that the highlighted section of your comments Keith. At hand is the question of what sort of advantage is the game supposed to give? Knowlege of your opponent's hand? Check. An extra card? Check. More intelligence on which of several cards in your hand to start? Mmmm. Probably not, but that's exactly what some players are using it for now.

Just follow the steps outlined by PokePop and problem solved. It's really the best you can hope for.

The solution to this has been given.
Declare your Mulligan, but don't show it, until the Active has been set.
This can be dealt with within the current rules.

This way, the only knowledge your opponent would have is the fact that you have no basics in your hand to start with. Stick to your guns and don't show them your hand until after they have set their active basic.

 

[Jeremy Badeaux]

I didn't even see this topic until it was four pages long, so please bare with me.

What I've been seeing so far:
Players: What does everybody think of doing mulligans this way?

Judges: That's pretty obviously against the rules.

Players: This rule should be changed because it gives an unfair advantage.

Judges: How is the extra card an unfair advantage?
NOTE: At this point, Pokepop notes that he is a member of the rules team, so it might be a good ideal to try to convince him that the rules need to be changed.

Players: It has to be, because we've already been doing that thing you said is illegal, but it can't be illegal, because we have won some events. Prove that a mulligan was meant to benefit the opponent (even though we have proven nothing to back our claims).

Judges: Are you asking us to prove that the mulligan rules that have always given a benefit to the opponent (since base set anyways) were an intentional advantage?


A lot of people consider me to be one of those people who always side with the players and against the judges, so this may blow their mind. lol

No matter how many times you say the rulebook does not prohibit what you are doing, that doesn't make it true (that and the fact that people have already quoted the part of the rulebook that specifically prohibits it).

The best part is that even if you could somehow find a way to justify it enough to avoid a dubious actions penalty, you would still get other penalties.

Before I left this game in 2006, I never saw any of this gamesmanship/rampant semantics.
I never saw people scheming to see just how far they could take, "bluffing" without getting penalized and I certainly never saw people trying to justify intentionally misrepresenting the state of the game for the sole purpose of forcing the opponent to make choices based on false information.

The mulligan was obviously meant to be an advantage for the opponent (shown by the drawing of a card) and the rulebooks are written in a way to facilitate gameplay without a separate judge, so you show your hand to prove a lack of basics.

Out of curiosity xcfrisco, when you were working those numbers, did you include the possibility of specific cards being in the prizes, or is the 17% just if nothing that you need is prized?
I'm just curious about the specifics, because if the realistic number is even lower than 17%, I don't exactly see the gigantic problem that some people are claiming.

I may have skimmed over something, so please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but has anybody said why Pokepop's method wouldn't work (aside from just arguing that having to announce a mulligan IAW the rules that have existed for the last 11 1/2 years has suddenly become a bad rule)?

 

[Rogue Archetype]

When you play a game, you just learn the rules and play by them.

The rule says to place a basic/fossil in the active position (and those are the only ones acceptable there).

Doing anything other than what's supposed to be done warrants a penalty.

If you want to bluff, play poker.

But, don't play POKEMON and complain that it's not Poker!

REMEMBER: Pokemon TCG's mechanics are SUPPOSED to be there as something that a JUNIOR PLAYER can master. This is a child's game that, consequently, may be enjoyed by all ages. It's a SIMPLE game that tries to maintain its simplicity so KIDS can follow along and have FUN.

FAIR = FUN

SIMPLE = FUN

Complicated and convoluted does NOT = fun for most.

Let's all just pick up a rulebook, ACCEPT the rules, and play the game.

If you want different rules, you've failed to learn how to play the game properly.

RA

 

[SLOW DECK]

I just got back to this thread.

I feel like Cassandra with this thread.

The Cassandra metaphor (variously labelled the Cassandra 'syndrome', 'complex', 'phenomenon', 'predicament', 'dilemma', or 'curse'), is a term applied in situations in which valid warnings or concerns are dismissed or disbelieved

The term originates in Greek mythology. Cassandra was a daughter of Priam, the King of Troy. Struck by her beauty, Apollo provided her with the gift of prophecy, but when Cassandra refused Apollo's romantic advances, he placed a curse ensuring that nobody would believe her warnings. Cassandra was left with the knowledge of future events, but could neither alter these events nor convince others of the validity of her predictions.

.

Three Prize Penalties at top 16 of nats. I wonder if that guy gave up the game. If I was called a cheat, and I didn't think something I was doing was cheating, I would have just walked away, permanently. (yes, that is allot of pride in me) I stopped doing the false card because of this thread, not because I thought I was wrong in doing it.

I think the weight of the player population on this thread cleary endorses a need to imrpove and clarify a Mulligan Phase. I still think the by allowing one player to place a false starter as they wait for the other player to decide on a basic, is the very honorable and EFFICIENT way of doing this. Nothing verbal, very important aspect of the MECHANIC to think about as we WORLDS multi-lingual event is starting. But again, this would need to be formally if not formally adopted as a Mulligan phase mechanic. I understood back in Feburary that the judges frowned upon it, so I stopped. I am glad that PokePop recognizes the mulligan phase issue and will put it for review.

By simply explicity allowing this false card if you are going to declare a mulligan, everyone knows that the card my opponent has played is either his starter, or he will be declaring a mulligan once I put my card out.

Starter or a False card for mulligan mechanic, seems fair to everyone, regardless what side you are on the mulligan hand in a given game. It follows the golden rule, (do onto others, as you would want done on to you), it is efficient (IE no waiting to see who shows first), and requires no VERBAL discussion.

 

[AyameHikaru]

I like the idea of the false basic as a future change, but for now I'd still rule it under 'dubious actions.' ^^

But I agree, the fact that so many players are weighing in on this seriously means I think the loopholes need to be tightened, if not closed completely. I would agree with either the playing down of the false basic or the "I have a mulligan, I'll show when you set up" as acceptable views, as long as a CLEAR ruling is made about it. The first erases most of the percieved advantage, the second keeps that advantage intact in a lesser form.

 

[DonphanAtoZ]

Pokemon could easily fix this by making a player with a mulligan immediately show their hand to their opponent. If both had mulligans, it wouldn't be an issue. As for the "fake" starting Pokemon, that should most definitely not be allowed. You are allowed to place a Pokemon in the active spot. Not trainers( excluding fossils) or energy.

 

[xcfrisco]

Out of curiosity xcfrisco, when you were working those numbers, did you include the possibility of specific cards being in the prizes, or is the 17% just if nothing that you need is prized?

I'm just curious about the specifics, because if the realistic number is even lower than 17%, I don't exactly see the gigantic problem that some people are claiming.

I didn't take into account specific cards being prized cause it would make the math harder, lol (and obviously worsen your odds of getting your desired card).


In a somewhat optimal scenario, where you have 8 cards left in the deck that will allow to get the donk and none of them are prized (magically), you're looking at a 17% chance of drawing into said needed "donk" card.


Lol, for all you poker pros out there, a similar situation occurs when playing texas holdem when you have 4 cards to a flush and there's one card left for the deal to reveal (the river). Assuming no other players have cards of the suit of the flush you are chasing (a reasonable assumption when playing heads-up), and assuming the dealer haven't burnt away any cards of your suit, the odds of you getting the flush are around 19%.


I dont know about you guys, but I can never seem to river my much needed 5th card for a flush whenever I play poker. With my luck being so bad, and my odds of getting this "fantastic" donk start in pokemon being lower (with the scenario I've outlined), I wouldn't chase for the donk either :tongue:


Some people are bigger risk takers than me though :lightning::lightning:

 

[Jeremy Badeaux]

Three Prize Penalties at top 16 of nats. I wonder if that guy gave up the game. If I was called a cheat, and I didn't think something I was doing was cheating, I would have just walked away, permanently. (yes, that is allot of pride in me) I stopped doing the false card because of this thread, not because I thought I was wrong in doing it.

I'm not trying to single you out, but I do feel the need to point out the flaw in your argument.

If somebody has made it to top 16 at Nats, it is very reasonable for the judging staff to expect that person to know what the rulebook says you can place in the active spot.

When the rulebook has always said that you can't do something, and a person who is good enough to make it top 16 at Nats does it, you lose the ability to argue that the player is too inexperienced to know what they are doing.
It would be like having the #1 ranked player in the world stack his deck and complain that he shouldn't have been punished because he was #1 ranked.
Wrong is wrong and whining about somebody getting punished for breaking the rules isn't going to make it any less wrong.

 

[toxictaipan]

Why should this be allowed for mulligans if it's not allowed for the coin flip? Flipping a coin before the starting basic Pokemon have been decide is not allowed because the outcome of that coin flip has the possibility to directly influence which starter you chose. At least in this situation, both players gain the same advantage. Everything stays fair.

I know the mulligan is supposed to be slightly disadvantageous for the person who got the mulligan, but come on, just how much of a disadvantage is it supposed to be/is fair? The advantage between drawing an extra card and making a game changing decision is huuuge. I don't think your opponent getting to see your mulligan hand is supposed to be an advantage for them. It's there so that you can't draw into a crap hand, falsely claim a mulligan, and draw again in hopes of something better.


If the rules allow me to conceal my hand when I mulligan until my opponent has chosen their starting Pokemon in order to not influence their choice, yet the rules just turn around and allow that to happen for something else totally beyond my control? What?

 

[PokePop]

Three Prize Penalties at top 16 of nats. I wonder if that guy gave up the game. If I was called a cheat, and I didn't think something I was doing was cheating, I would have just walked away, permanently. (yes, that is allot of pride in me)

Note this.
This is VERY important for players to realize.

If the judges or POP were "calling him a cheat", then the penalty given would not have been a Multi Prize Penalty.

It would have been at the least a DQ from the event and quite possibly a ban from the game for some period of time (given the high level at which the misplay happened).

Players need to get over thinking that judges are calling players liars or cheats when they give a penalty.
The penalty was given based on a broken game state.
That is a fact.
There is no additional penalty added on for the player's intent, in this case.

Note that in the earlier discussion of this thread, the penalties mentioned were GL and DQ.
Giving him a Multi-Prize Penatly was a gift.
It may not seem like it to the player or to you, but it was.

 

[Rogue Archetype]

Note this.

Players need to get over thinking that judges are calling players liars or cheats when they give a penalty.
The penalty was given based on a broken game state.
That is a fact.
There is no additional penalty added on for the player's intent, in this case.

Quoted so I can issue a heartfelt "AMEN!"

Judges are, for the most part, there to facilitate the enjoyment of the game by helping players play their game without getting "hung up" or "stuck" over some sort of disagreement or misunderstanding. When it comes down to it alot of situations can be allieviated with a simple "if it's alright with you and it's alright with you, then it's alright with me" approach.

However, just blatently doing something because you don't AGREE with a rule that's in place is not a good look.

You ever hear someone ask about a rule and then respond with "well, that's just stupid" ?

Dude, if you're called on something it's not because we are waiting in the wings just READY TO POUNCE!!! c'mon....

BTW - None of my rhetoric is aimed at SlowDeck. That's my peoples :thumb: ; I'm just droppin' a couple of pennies into the jar.

 

[Lawman]

I just got back to this thread.

I feel like Cassandra with this thread.
.

Three Prize Penalties at top 16 of nats. I wonder if that guy gave up the game. If I was called a cheat, and I didn't think something I was doing was cheating, I would have just walked away, permanently. (yes, that is allot of pride in me) I stopped doing the false card because of this thread, not because I thought I was wrong in doing it.

I think the weight of the player population on this thread cleary endorses a need to imrpove and clarify a Mulligan Phase. I still think the by allowing one player to place a false starter as they wait for the other player to decide on a basic, is the very honorable and EFFICIENT way of doing this. Nothing verbal, very important aspect of the MECHANIC to think about as we WORLDS multi-lingual event is starting. But again, this would need to be formally if not formally adopted as a Mulligan phase mechanic. I understood back in Feburary that the judges frowned upon it, so I stopped. I am glad that PokePop recognizes the mulligan phase issue and will put it for review.

By simply explicity allowing this false card if you are going to declare a mulligan, everyone knows that the card my opponent has played is either his starter, or he will be declaring a mulligan once I put my card out.

Starter or a False card for mulligan mechanic, seems fair to everyone, regardless what side you are on the mulligan hand in a given game. It follows the golden rule, (do onto others, as you would want done on to you), it is efficient (IE no waiting to see who shows first), and requires no VERBAL discussion.

You want to quote the "golden rule" when you are playing the FALSE BASIC?? Come on....you are better than that. The very rules we have grown up with have given the non mulligan player an extra card. That is an advantage! The revealing of the hand is meant to keep in check any possible cheaters that want to flush away the crap hand. We keep the game clean this way. Why push the envelope by changing the mechanic now??

Basically, you are trying to scale back an advantage that has been there for a looooong time. I can imagine the player that waits to flip and reveal and then sees the oppo with the false active. Now, the oppo knows what your starter is and how to play around it, if given a decent starting hand. That is a broken game state. And it would be created by changing this rule. I can see JRs have difficulty with doing a "false active" ploy. This is a KIDS game. It isnt that hard to just tell your oppo "I have a mulligan". Really....is it???

Keith

 

[macchamp]

If we both have mulligans I always wait till they show me no matter how awkward it gets

 

[LennonsDad]

Unfortunately in Pokemon the die isn't rolled until AFTER the placement, since there are quite a few cards that benefit from going first or second particularly. Otherwise I agree with you.

Order is:
Place active pokemon/bench if desired
(Draw for mulligan) <--- Thar be the problem, mateys!
Place bench if desired
Flip coin for first player
Begin game.

Once the coin is flipped setup is over, and you can't place any more cards.

So bottom line to me is that there is a hole in the rules. People need to stop shouting "JUST FOLLOW THE RULES!" from the mountaintops in the name of fun. There is NO rule for who puts cards down first and apparently, there needs to be.

 

[SLOW DECK]

So bottom line to me is that there is a hole in the rules. People need to stop shouting "JUST FOLLOW THE RULES!" from the mountaintops in the name of fun. There is NO rule for who puts cards down first and apparently, there needs to be.

Thanks Lennon. When I started this thread in February, that was always the issue. Yes, there has been some nasty insults being thrown around here. Shouted or stated. I am for a fair play.

Quote:
1-1
Well, I knew I was close to that guaranteed invite, so I was gonna play my heart out this game
Game 3, both of us were reallllly on edge at the start of this game, so much so in fact, that neither of us wanted to put out our basic first. Personally I was worried about an Ambipom donk, with my lone basic in hand being a Garchomp, so I figured if he put out his basics first I would have a better chance of him not starting with an Ambipom if he had it in his hand. He laid his only basic, so I put down my Garchomp and began setting my prizes when he flipped his ‘basic’ over, which was actually an electric energy. ????????????????. I just looked at the board in disbelief then looked to the judge to see what would happen. She looked kind of surprised too and verified what had just happened then she went to some other judges to ask for a ruling. No one at the table was really sure of what the penalty was, and the judges deliberated for about 10 minutes. They came back and talked about some stuff, and issued a triple prize penalty. Wow. I went pretty surprised about it, but apparently it was some spirit of the game issue and it was severe.

I made this thread in February. Unfortunately, as I read what happened in Nats top 16. The person who REFUSED to put down a Basic, was rewarded. REWARDED. And someone who put down a FALSE basic was penalized harshly. The intent is clearly laid out here. I submit the person with the worst intent wasn't the one who laid out the false mulligan. I have made it to top 16 at Nat Jeremy, I had no clue that what I was doing was wrong in the eyes of judges, until I made this thread.

I am going PRIVATE on the other stuff that I had to say. Regardless of my position that i have taken here on this thread. Judges are Coolest, and I definitely respect what they are doing.

 

[NoPoke]

LennonsDad: I disagree with your assertion that there is a hole in the rules. At this moment in time the rules permit more than one correct way to setup. I would call that flexibility rather than a hole. The rules do not allow for a false basic to be placed to indicate a muligan.

SLOW DECK, The post you quote does not say that the player refused to place down a basic. Neither reluctance not preference should be escalated to refusal.

Placing a false basic is not wrong "in the eyes of the judges", it is wrong by the rule book. It is a lie, a deception, as such it is an action that is guaranteed to pick up a penalty at some point.





-----

Rules hole vs flexibility. I view the intent of the rules as being to get the setup job done rather than to prescribe a very specific way of setting up. I am not arguing that the rules could not be improved or clarified or that some of the flexibility may be unintended

 

[Ditto]

Rules hole vs flexibility. I view the intent of the rules as being to get the setup job done rather than to prescribe a very specific way of setting up. I am not arguing that the rules could not be improved or clarified or that some of the flexibility may be unintended

Rules should not be flexible.

Players should be flexible, penalties should be flexible, but rules should not. Rules should be so rigid that a computer could follow them. There should be no thinking when it comes to rules, just the direct action of following them. Rules are the building blocks of the game, they need to be solid and sturdy or else the game's foundation falls apart.

Can you imagine if an attack was ruled to do two different things and it was just left up to the players to decide which way to go each time the attack was used? That would be ridiculous.

As players and judges we can decide when common practice can be more relaxed (multiple searches at one time for instance) but there should still be a very rigid and unforgiving "correct" way to perform the actions that is clearly spelled out.

If we say it's OK to announce a mulligan before or after the opponent lays a basic down then I as the mulliganing player have the right to not announce until after the opponent lays down while the opponent also has the right to not lay down until a mulligan is announced. Why would either player willingly give an extra advantage to their opponent in that situation?

There needs to be a rigid set of procedures laid out step by step for setting up.