meldorable asked: While I can see how the maximum hand size rule may not be completely pulling its weight in all formats, in multiplayer formats like Commander and other formats that have access to semi-degenerate card draw, it seems like it could be very necessary to keep players from pulling way ahead until they've found a spellbook, venser's journal or reliquary tower.
Let me stress that I’ve merely said removing maximum hand size is a topic we’ve talked about. We are not currently doing it.
henriettaenrica said:
@Sarroth: Never assume something is easy to learn, no matter how obvious it is. At face value, maximum hand size is a simple rule, but I can’t count the number of times I’ve had somebody tell me to discard down to 7 the moment I drew a bunch of cards, and even argue with me…
sarroth said:
@MaRo: I understand that you’re not currently doing it, but I don’t understand why it would be the highest on the list for possibilities to remove it, as it’s way more important to the game than something like manaburn and is easier to learn.
rzage said:
wereoctopus: It’s just Commander is a well-known broken format. I love playing it too but if players want to ruin it they can. Max hand size isn’t keeping unfun decks away, restraint is.
idyllical said:
I dont see why anyone is worried that no max hand size will make card draw better (even commander style thirty cards in hand hijinks). If your primary problem is that you just have too many cards, you are winning anyway.
limitedwish likes this
mcsleuthburger said:
But if you are against removing maximum hand size, you should let R&D know. They won’t blatantly go against something that everybody wants to keep.
wereoctopus said:
rzage, your other arguments for removing the hand size rule are good, but that analogy is fairly weak.
wifeysays said:
if you got rid of hand size, maro and team would be EVEN BETTER!
markrosewater posted this
