Don't know if anybody knows of it, but there was a recent new card game release called Ashes: Rise of Phoenixborn or something. Pretty interesting and fresh concept, but what catched my interest the most is that they don't draw opening hand, they look through their deck and assemble their opening hand with only one rule: no dublicates in the opening hand.

I must say I find that concept extremely interesting and I immediately applied it to the our beloved LotR LCG and behan to think what consequences that might bring...

Yeah, "THE GAME WILL BECOME TOO EASY" is the first things that comes to mind. But... there is one thing that bugging me: it could enable the type of decks that otherwise would be not viable or otherwise to inconsistent to play. The type of decks that depends on a one or couple specific cards that are required for the deck to start going. Also, what it could do is open up more space that was previously filled with the duplicates of stuff you wanted to see in your opening hand.

So, what do you guys think?

UPDATE: The conclusion that fully fixed hand is too much, however having some fixed cards in your opening hand at a decent expense is another story:

Before drawing their opening hands, players have an option to search their deck for up to 3 different (meaning no duplicates) cards and add to their opening hand, but for each that card they would draw 1 less card to their opening hand. This would mean that various opening hands might look like this:

6 random cards

1 fixed card + 4 random cards

2 fixed cards + 2 random cards

3 fixed cards

Note: Mulliganing resets only the random part of the opening hand.

I am for fixed opening hand!This is a way to make the game less random and more strategic!

Hmm, I think it could lead to some very different decks yes, but I also think it would probably do more harm than good.

Journey down the Anduin wouldn't be the same challenge at all and thats just core set.

I also think it would make a lot of cards redundant or less useful in terms of card draw. Those cards that let you fetch things from your deck wouldnt be needed as much as well as simple additional draw cards. I think it would be a shame to lose these cards effectiveness and the mechanics surrounding them.

Gandalf, sneack attack, steward of gondor and born aloft would mean three straight turns of Gandalf from the very start, which could really devastate some quests that rely on a quick ambush.

So interesting new deck builds yes, but I think at too bigger price for the collateral damage

It is a interesting concept to be sure, but I'm guessing this Ashes: Phoenix something game is a pvp game?

In a pvp enviroment this is a turbo boost right at the start of the game on both sides. Not a bad idea at all.

But in a co-op game? More specifically in LotR, this will make the players way too strong.

The 1st few rounds are critical. If you then have some cards in your hands you just picked, alot of the tension (& fun with it) would fly out of the window.

Also, I really like taking card by card from my deck and only then knowing what I'm getting.

It's always a surprise, and then you'll have to work with what you get.

So no, I'm not going to try, and while I think it's not a bad idea for pvp games, it won't be for a co-op game.

Now, with the points "against" presented here, what if...

Before drawing their opening hands, players have an option to search their deck for up to 3 different cards and add to their opening hand, but for each that card they would draw 1 less card to their opening hand? This would mean that various opening hands might look like this:

6 random cards

1 fixed card + 4 random cards

2 fixed cards + 2 random cards

3 fixed cards

Note: Mulliganing resets only the random part of the opening hand.

Would it be more fair, less harmful for the game flow and mechanics, etc.?

We let me just share this:

in a few quests i got to the point of frustration(Three trials, Dol Guldur), when not being able to win after 10-20 tries. It was usually streaks of small marginal things but I lost. But of course the many games were a good school to understand the quest, and to know what kind of opening hands just possibly did not stand a chance. So what I did, I allowed myself a bit of laxness and would allow multiple mulligans. Also with Dol Guldur certain setups just made it impossible to win, not to mention that my goal was to win with core set cards.

But a fixed hand? That seems too easy.

For some very thematic combo decks I would allow 2-3 mulligans.

BUT another gamemechanical way could be game text. Like - Setup: include this card in your opening hand. Draw one less card. or something....

There are definitely players who aren't great at deck building (like me) who would probably like the idea of not worrying about the chances of a particular card being drawn in x number of rounds.

That said, I would be sad to lose the excitement of seeing Black Arrow in my starting hand while playing JDtA. Certainly there are countless strategies to deal with Hill Trolls these days, but I would be too tempted to go get the BA every time!

What if you could take as many mulligans as you wanted, but after your free one you would draw one fewer card each time?

Ex:

6 Cards

Mulligan

6 Cards

Mulligan

5 Cards

Mulligan

4 Cards

(If you were really that desperate you could continue)

I like this concept a lot. Especially since it's something that reduces unnecessary randomness. All these "if only I had Steward/Light of Valinor/Nenya" situations don't need to happen anymore. That said, it needs to be built into the game by design. If I remember correctly, Ashes has much smaller decks and hand sizes. 7 cards of your choice is definitely too many. One card per player or one card per hero would be great though. How about a dedicated card for your hero? Beregond always gets his shield, Leadergorn the Sword that was broken, Galadriel and Elrond their rings? That would add an interesting aspect to hero design.

I'd expect this to become quite common in future card games, it's one of those ideas that are so simple they seem obvious in hindsight.

Opening hand is 6 cards, 7th one you draw during your first resource phase.

I swear, I was thinking this exact same topic (also prompted by ashes and my own limited play time with LoTR). It's amazing to see this thread because I really was truly imagining the same ideas.

The thought I had was that any fixed card gives up another card. so, exactly like someone posted above (3 fixed cards, 2 fixed and 2 random, 1 fixed and 4 random, or 6 random).

I also thought that both for balance reasons AND thematic ones, the fixed cards could only be uniques. This sort of fits well in two ways. One, no sneak attack shenanigans and two, it feels thematic, like "Glorfindel is never without his trusty steed"

Yes, it certainly makes the game ever so slightly easier. BUT, you can make far more thematic decks. You need far fewer copies of certain uniques because you fix them in your hand! I hate having 3x Stewart of Gondor in my deck simply to increase the chances of it in my opening hand. That feels odd and wrong.

Anyhow, I love the idea and I love that other people are feeling similar. I'm trying to just suss through if there's any other problems, but otherwise, this might be how I play for a while.

I am against this opening hand method for Lotr LCG because:

1. Combo decks would dominate. Combos would be set up so easily the encounter deck could never catch up. Imagine having Steward, Blood of Numenor, Gondorian Fire, a couple of threat reduction cards and Light of Valinor in your starting hand with Boromir. Madness.

2. Lots of cards would be redundant, including most card draw, most emergency cards like feint and strong, upfront heroes like Beorn buy the player time to set up the combo, etc.

3. The game's mulligan rule is already too powerful. Its not the game mechanics that are at fault if one's decks sucks.

4. It goes against the spirit of randomness that is inherent in all cardgames and seems more like a boardgame rule. Even the best decks some times go awry, thats normal. Luck of the draw should apply on the starting hand as well.

5. The game is too mature to have these kind of sweping changes in its core mechanics, thoufh seeing an ability like this in a player card, e.g. a hero would be prety cool.

6. There are practically never dead cards in one's deck. A mere 50 card deck is small enough already with the current draw options.

7. You can just houserule it. If you prefer playing non-optimal decks or you are not much of a deck builder and you find the regular mulligan rule too punishing then by all means do it, this is a co op game so its all good. Just have fun, I mean I also regularly take a 2nd mulligan myself. But there is no need to break the game for others too.

The suggestion posted above about using the new MTG mulligan rule (mulligan as many times as needed but draw 1 card less every time, also look at the top card of your deck after each mulligan) sounds better, but I am no designer and can't foresee what consequences it could have for the game.

Now, with the points "against" presented here, what if...

Before drawing their opening hands, players have an option to search their deck for up to 3 different cards and add to their opening hand, but for each that card they would draw 1 less card to their opening hand? This would mean that various opening hands might look like this:

6 random cards

1 fixed card + 4 random cards

2 fixed cards + 2 random cards

3 fixed cards

Note: Mulliganing resets only the random part of the opening hand.

Would it be more fair, less harmful for the game flow and mechanics, etc.?

It is very harmful because players are encouraged to mulligan since the fixed starting card effect is so powerful. The smaller starting hand penalty is negated by extra card draw allowed from not being forced to have duplicates in your hand. If you are sure to get Steward turn one, a huge benefit by itself, then you can afford only one copy of it in your deck, which leaves you with space for 2 other cards of your choice, like Deep Knowledge for example. Then you can accelerate the pace by which you go through your own deck quite significantly.

Useless duplicate cards are part of the game btw and taken into account by the designers. It's not wrong or odd, it's quite normal for a deck building game.

I would argue here with you, FetaCheese.

1) Combo decks already dominate everything, this will be no change. The point is to make less powerful and more thematic deck viable. Also, read my suggestion in the middle of the thread, I'm now speaking from it's perspective.

2) With the change I suggested, they won't.

3) No, it is not. It is a much needed emergency that may even turn things worse. It's not about decks that "suck". Bad deck won't last even with 10 fixed opening hands card, but the game is extremely punishing and unloads on player from the get go, so most of the time the player is either powerdecking or playing easy mode if he wants to win, I'm silent about the nightmare. Once again, there are numerous decks that require that one or two things in their opening hands to work well, and will simply crumble without it. Fending them off just because they "suck" is just mean.

4) This is just a matter of teste, I'm not going to argue about that, however you mentioned "all cardgames", while I use Ashes as an example, which has a completely fixed setup hand.

5) I'm not trying to convince the designers to errata or stuff, I'm just theorycrafting.

6) And there are spheres and setups that have limited draw access or don't have one at all. This kinda of rule would enable them. Especially when draw is kept mostly in the Lore.

7) Break game for others? Did I broke the game for others by posting this thoerycrafting thread?

I was thinking this very same topic a while ago. To put it shortly, I would like to have something like this, maybe not a whole hand of your choosing, but in the end I think it's clear it will never happen. Most of the times when I play solo I just mulligan till I get one of the key cards I play first turn. It would be great if we could choose 2 or 3 cards in our starting hand so that we can include more cards in the deck instead of useless copies of cards you want to get as quickly as possible. But as I said, this will never happen unless they make a 2nd edition of this game and evaluate this proposal.

There's lots of quests where your deck has to be operating at full strength turn 1 to even have a chance against. I'm all for anything that makes the game less about random draw and more about strategy. Good idea.

There's lots of quests where your deck has to be operating at full strength turn 1 to even have a chance against. I'm all for anything that makes the game less about random draw and more about strategy. Good idea.

This, exactly.

Card draw still matters in the game. You need more events and allies to play all the time. drawing more than one a turn still matters and getting the right ones when you need them matter. Tutoring for the right card still matters.

Here's my proposal and I think it matches John Constantine's idea for the variant.

For your opening hand, you can fix 1-3 cards. For each card you fix, you draw one less random card in your opening hand. Fixed cards must be unique cards.

Even getting to fix a single card is interesting and opens up deck design, I think. When you build a deck, you'd be thinking, "What is my turn 1 card?"

It becomes an interesting decision, sort of along the same vector as picking your heroes.

I would say harmful: easier to get the broken combos going.

I would say harmful: easier to get the broken combos going.

See, I call that a lack of perspective. The only thing you mention is that it would make something that is already avialable easier. But, from what I've seen, those broken combos usually have no problems in setting themselves up without any houserules. However, what else it does is enables lesser class of decks which is extremely questionable or even unplayable otherwise, the point you entirely miss for some reason.

Spirit hero

10 threat cost

2W 3A 1D

4 hit points

Setup Action: Discard 2 cards from your hand to search your deck for a card and add it to your hand. (Limit 3 times per game.)

Thoughts?

I think it is too late in the game's evolution for a rule change like this, but as a thought exercise I think that a fixed opening hand is a interesting idea.

The variant that has been described where you get one less random card for each fixed card in your opening hand sounds like a good way to balance things out.

I can imagine a quest built around this mechanic, where the setup on the first quest card let players search their deck for X cards to add to their opening hand.

I can also imagine a fixed opening hand working similarly to the game's official Easy Mode, so that players struggling against a scenario could fix their opening hand to make the scenario easier without removing gold border cards per Easy Mode.

a bit complicated but with one card, could the mechanic be phrased less complicated?

neutral event

Making precautions

no cost ( - )

setup: play after quest setup but before drawing starting hand.

search your deck for X cards before drawing your starting hand. Limit X cannot be more than 3. Put Making precautions out of play.

For each card drawn this way your starting hand is less by 2X cards.

Then draw your starting hand.

You cannot mulligan when drawing your starting hand this way.

Limit one per deck.

or could be possible: limit can be used once per 5 games

Getting cards like Steward of Gondor, Light of Valinor, Vilya, Nenya, or Gondorian Shield in the opening hand makes a huge difference IMO, especially in solo. That should have been Easy Mode I think, or maybe "You can start with one attachment of cost 2 or less in play".

If you're running 3 copies of a card, drawing 6 and then 7 cards, your chances of drawing any given card is like 57%. There are so many quests where that basically means my deck will lose, through no fault of my own, 43% of the time. And before there are shouts of "BUILD YOUR DECK BETTER!" we all know the most powerful decks revolve around some key cards. This is always one of the biggest hangups when I introduce people to this game. We set up, draw our cards, and lose turn one. When they ask why, I say "Well, we didn't draw our key cards, so we never stood a chance." It's part of the game, and I sincerely doubt it'll ever change, but I like the idea a lot.