Introducing the Paris Mulligan System into Pokemon
- Thread starter LegendaryLugia
- Start date
- Status
I believe a better way to remove the problem of poor starts is to remove the win condition regarding having no Pokemon left in play at the end of your opponent's turn. If that condition is turned into a 1 prize penalty, then it still gives the player who has a bad start a chance to get back into the game.
Elite_4_Allen
New Member
How?
If you put cards you didn't want on the bottom, how would it benifit you to get them back?
Aron Figaro
New Member
Jazzbie, what? That statement made no sense.
The easiest solution is to draw 1 less, but redraw that hand (and your opponent draws one) if there are no pokemon in it. That allows for both Paris and forced mulligans.
Otherwise...fix the core rules that are causing the problem and don't worry about the setup format.
The easiest solution is to draw 1 less, but redraw that hand (and your opponent draws one) if there are no pokemon in it. That allows for both Paris and forced mulligans.
Otherwise...fix the core rules that are causing the problem and don't worry about the setup format.
NoPoke
Active Member
"Paris" (optional) mulligans are a good idea in a game where you can have a bad hand leading to a loss and where having a good hand doesn't guarantee victory. Pokemon has been that way in the past and maybe will be again in the future, right now though the game has a large amount of T1 victories and an optional mulligan will more than likely make them more frequent.
So if we were to get an optional mulligan it would probably have to have giving the choice of who goes first to the opponent as one of its costs. Optional mulligans are a very significant change and I expect would have to be introduced by Japan first. (FWIW Magic didn't always have an optional mulligan. Can you guess where it was first introduced?
)
I'd much rather see the reintroduction of draws and a move to match play in the swiss than adding an optional mulligan to pokemon tcg.
So if we were to get an optional mulligan it would probably have to have giving the choice of who goes first to the opponent as one of its costs. Optional mulligans are a very significant change and I expect would have to be introduced by Japan first. (FWIW Magic didn't always have an optional mulligan. Can you guess where it was first introduced?
)I'd much rather see the reintroduction of draws and a move to match play in the swiss than adding an optional mulligan to pokemon tcg.
Optional mulligans are a very significant change and I expect would have to be introduced by Japan first. (FWIW Magic didn't always have an optional mulligan. Can you guess where it was first introduced?
Yes, the '97 LA Pro Tour.
DonphanAtoZ
New Member
I wouldn't really like the paris system. Consistency would be less important, and donks would happen more.
NoPoke
Active Member
That was a test tournament wasn't it? The second of a pair?? With the unintended introduction being at Pro tour Paris. All before my time so I can easily be wrong. [ I blame the children for my involvement in tcgs which started sometime in 2000 with a pokemon theme deck]
I'm glad to see you guys keeping an active presence on the boards, it really helps the players feel like they are actually being listened to. A lot of different changes are always suggested by players, some are good, some are bad, but all are at least worth consideration. Personally I think some type of "optional mulligan," could have merit in pokemon, but only towards fixing the bigger, more obvious problem of games that last only a few turns. I think discussion about that, or the idea of not immediately losing the game if you have no pokemon in play will have to wait until after the rule changes with Black and White, and seeing the way things go from there. That will be the BEST time for productive discussion because worlds is the best time for P!P staff to be able to speak with the "powers that be" from japan about the current state of the game.
The reality of the situation is that I'm not a designer of this game, so anything I say that isn't pure factual can really be construed as implied intention or criticism of them. This greatly reduces what I can and can't say in an open forum like this. This is why I stick to math posts for the most part.
That being said, Paris mulligan would either be incomprehensible or overcomplicated to try to implement in this game due to its starting requirements.
That being said, I have an idea for one (look at my previous TCG credits...) that could plausibly work.
That being said, the first person to ask me "hey where's that mulligan at?" loses all future games. Actually, that's not very fair...everyone to ask me that will suffer the same fate.
Thats pretty much the idea no matter what PIP must keep force mulligans at 7 cards due to the rules of how pokemon is played. But there could be some sort of optional mulligan as others have suggested. Problem is its going to hard to pass this since pokemons mulligan is pretty well defined. I think we should wait and see what rotates and then see how bad FTK's are in the game. I still think instead of changing the mulligan system if FTK's is still bad create more bench fill up cards.
Last edited:
ChaosJim
Member
Some people are making assumptions about Sableye and BW rules coexisting. This is a perfect storm of awful that we're not likely to see. Discussions about whether or not a rules change should happen might include such things, but shouldn't revolve around them.
I think the Paris Mulligan system would be interesting in our game, but truth be told I'm confused why everyone feels the need for players to reveal the hand they mulligan away. If I want to throw away my optional mulligan on a hand I'd be forced to mulligan, isn't that my prerogative?
Placing your entire hand on the bottom at the beginning of the match, and drawing a new hand was the optional mulligan rule for VS System. I like it more for Pokémon than the Paris mulligan, though it admittedly isn't a perfect fit. VS isn't Pokémon though, and as with any proposed change to the rules it would need to undergo serious testing for unlimited, modified, and sealed. There is a strong bias against changing the status quo without good reason, and I'm not sure people would be compelled to change it with information only slightly better than what is available.
I think the Paris Mulligan system would be interesting in our game, but truth be told I'm confused why everyone feels the need for players to reveal the hand they mulligan away. If I want to throw away my optional mulligan on a hand I'd be forced to mulligan, isn't that my prerogative?
Placing your entire hand on the bottom at the beginning of the match, and drawing a new hand was the optional mulligan rule for VS System. I like it more for Pokémon than the Paris mulligan, though it admittedly isn't a perfect fit. VS isn't Pokémon though, and as with any proposed change to the rules it would need to undergo serious testing for unlimited, modified, and sealed. There is a strong bias against changing the status quo without good reason, and I'm not sure people would be compelled to change it with information only slightly better than what is available.
Okaaay...
-MtG trading card game uses the paris mulligan. Many players will do it multiple times until they have a winning hand to dominate the game, even if their deck is not balanced well.
-Donking, a.k.a the one-turn kills in Pokemon, do not happen in Magic often. So paris mulligan in Pokemon could have players finding their 'donking' hand instantly.
Derp.
ChaosJim
Member
I never observed players in Magic dropping to incredibly low numbers of cards in hand to get a dominating hand during my time playing Magic (1995-2005). Usually they exchanged unplayable hands for a chance at playable hands.
GodBlessAmerica
New Member
Magic doesn't have the incredibly fast draw power that pokemon has. In magic you have to be conscious of what you could open with if you draw 1 less card. Can you deal with 4 lands, a 5 drop spell, a jace, and a negate? What if you draw 6 lands on the mulligan though?
In pokemon it would be more like
"Eh, I don't feel like starting with a spiritomb and a collector. I want a BTS and a gloom to go with it. So what if I draw 1 less card when I can just collector for uxie and draw up to a regular starting hand."
Maybe once we have a format like HGSS-on this won't be as much of a problem and we'll be able to handle this kind of system, but until that happens we can't let pokemon get Mulligans. If anything I am more for Best of 3 in swiss while keeping the time 30 minutes + 3.
In pokemon it would be more like
"Eh, I don't feel like starting with a spiritomb and a collector. I want a BTS and a gloom to go with it. So what if I draw 1 less card when I can just collector for uxie and draw up to a regular starting hand."
Maybe once we have a format like HGSS-on this won't be as much of a problem and we'll be able to handle this kind of system, but until that happens we can't let pokemon get Mulligans. If anything I am more for Best of 3 in swiss while keeping the time 30 minutes + 3.
Your local MTG players must be horrible, then, because this NEVER happens. Mulligans in MTG are generally reserved for unplayable hands (way too much/too little mana, or too few low-cost cards).
There are too many variables in MTG to make mulliganing for a power hand viable at all. Sure some people might risk it but they'll never break even on their tournament record...
A one-time optional mulligan, in theory, is good. Opening hand-crap is a negative aspect because it creates an unbalanced game-start.
I don't buy the argument that because donk decks are "possibly" made better with optional mulligans, that optional mulligans are therefore bad for the game. That's like saying that because people use guns to kill people, that guns are bad for society.
The only bad thing about mulligans in that they don't always solve the hand-crap problem. In fact, you COULD end up with an even-worse hand.
I like a one-time optional mulligan (draw 6 instead of 7), but that's where I'd stop.
I don't buy the argument that because donk decks are "possibly" made better with optional mulligans, that optional mulligans are therefore bad for the game. That's like saying that because people use guns to kill people, that guns are bad for society.
The only bad thing about mulligans in that they don't always solve the hand-crap problem. In fact, you COULD end up with an even-worse hand.
I like a one-time optional mulligan (draw 6 instead of 7), but that's where I'd stop.
- Status