The London Mulligan

[Francisco Pires]

It was confirmed that the London Mulligan is going to be implemented in legacy.
Source: https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/news/london-mulligan-2019-06-03?fbclid=IwAR3CFlHAnVvJLSNzeSgJweK9kYo24DDZpta2NCOqbFxOrpnGL5w8Ba3BVgQ

What are your thoughts? I'm afraid it will kill fast combo decks because it's going to be easier to search for hate.

[Asthereal]

It was confirmed that the London Mulligan is going to be implemented in legacy.
Source: https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/news/london-mulligan-2019-06-03?fbclid=IwAR3CFlHAnVvJLSNzeSgJweK9kYo24DDZpta2NCOqbFxOrpnGL5w8Ba3BVgQ

What are your thoughts? I'm afraid it will kill fast combo decks because it's going to be easier to search for hate.
Also works the other way, making it easier for combo decks to find their combo.
And as this rule also helps pre-board, I'd say this might benefit combo more than non-combo.

But regardless of whether this helps an archetype, I think this is a very good rule.
It reduces the worst part of MtG: the games where to just mull into a loss.
To me, that takes so much fun out of the game.

This rule will help tremendously in making post-mulligan games better.
You can still mull and get hopeless cards only, but the chances are much better to draw into playable stuff.

[H]

Well, it's a little later than some of us thought, but I think it is good for the game overall.

I don't think it is going to change the metagame paradigm all that much. Some all-in Chalice decks likely do better, which means some mid-range decks that can cope with that likely do better, and fast combo is likely a little better too. Even as someone who doesn't like combo decks, I don't see this shift as something negative for the format. Just means it's something to prepare for.

Also, this is likely what many people have been dreaming of, because I do see it partly as an actual stealth nerf to Cantrips.

[Michael Keller]

It was confirmed that the London Mulligan is going to be implemented in legacy.
Source: https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/news/london-mulligan-2019-06-03?fbclid=IwAR3CFlHAnVvJLSNzeSgJweK9kYo24DDZpta2NCOqbFxOrpnGL5w8Ba3BVgQ

What are your thoughts? I'm afraid it will kill fast combo decks because it's going to be easier to search for hate.

I think it'll do the opposite.

[pettdan]

I think, still think since I heard of this mulligan version, that it will make chalice decks better, which will make fair non-blue decks better, which will make combo and fair blue decks better, going full circle thus increasing the amount of decks that can be played competitively. If show and tell becomes too good, I doubt it, some card may be banned. Hopefully not griselbrand, because that ruins some archetypes of decks, otoh griselbrand seems like overly good so maybe that'd be ok.

And agree that reducing the amount of non-games is great in itself.

Important quote about their evaluation of Legacy through MTGO:


One characteristic of Legacy is that there are very efficient one-for-one answers to most threats, which has the effect of making raw card quantity important. That in turn means choosing to mulligan aggressively to a particular card or combo is more of a cost, and so we weren't seeing that strategy be very successful.

[Mr. Safety]

For reference, the wording of the comp rules change:


103.4. Each player draws a number of cards equal to their starting hand size, which is normally seven. (Some effects can modify a player's starting hand size.) A player who is dissatisfied with their initial hand may take a mulligan. First, the starting player declares whether they will take a mulligan. Then each other player in turn order does the same. Once each player has made a declaration, all players who decided to take mulligans do so at the same time. To take a mulligan, a player shuffles the cards in their hand back into their library, draws a new hand of cards equal to their starting hand size, then puts a number of those cards equal to the number of times that player has taken a mulligan on the bottom of their library in any order. Once a player chooses not to take a mulligan, the remaining cards become that player's opening hand, and that player may not take any further mulligans. This process is then repeated until no player takes a mulligan. A player can take mulligans until their opening hand would be zero cards.

[Smuggo]

Hmmmm... a bit concerned about the effect this will have on Legacy but I guess Wizards have the data. At least there should be less non-games though feels like it will help combo overall.

[Michael Keller]

I highly doubt they know how it'll affect Legacy. Their reasoning is anecdotal, at best. I mean, they literally just printed Timetwister and are going forward with this rule change. Who knows what the hell will happen.

[mistercakes]

this really benefits decks (all decks) in terms of shaving a land off, and helps the decks that already are a bit low in lands.

[Mr. Safety]

While I think it will be great for combo players I also realize they just infused a pile of new cards into eternal formats with Modern Horizons. We have effectively 4 more copies of Force of Will and Force of Vigor available, along with the pre-existing Leylines, that all allow you to interact with degenerate things even while on the play.

Things still need to shake out but I feel that overall it allows broken things to happen a little more consistently while also giving more tools to fight those same broken things. I think it will be a net-gain, especially in terms of how powerful the respective formats will feel (mostly Modern and Legacy, Vintage already seems to be pretty degenerate.)

[Ronald Deuce]

Time to sleeve up All Spells again.

I guess I should be happy.

[Bithlord]

It was confirmed that the London Mulligan is going to be implemented in legacy.
Source: https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/news/london-mulligan-2019-06-03?fbclid=IwAR3CFlHAnVvJLSNzeSgJweK9kYo24DDZpta2NCOqbFxOrpnGL5w8Ba3BVgQ

What are your thoughts? I'm afraid it will kill fast combo decks because it's going to be easier to search for hate.

Pretty much any deck with a hard counter in their sideboard gets way better odds.

But, at the same time if you DONT have the hard counter, the odds of the combo deck go up a ton since they can find their stuff better.

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

It was confirmed that the London Mulligan is going to be implemented in legacy.
Source: https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/news/london-mulligan-2019-06-03?fbclid=IwAR3CFlHAnVvJLSNzeSgJweK9kYo24DDZpta2NCOqbFxOrpnGL5w8Ba3BVgQ

What are your thoughts? I'm afraid it will kill fast combo decks because it's going to be easier to search for hate.

Not just legacy but all competitive formats!

I'm not sure I mind it at all but I do mind having to wait so long. Kinda like how I'm mad that I have to wait two weeks to play Modern because even when I own the reprints. I already sleeved up the Carrion Feeders, WotC!

[Ronald Deuce]

Pretty much any deck with a hard counter in their sideboard gets way better odds.

But, at the same time if you DONT have the hard counter, the odds of the combo deck go up a ton since they can find their stuff better.

Chancellor of the Annex's time to shine has come.

[Megadeus]

I think, still think since I heard of this mulligan version, that it will make chalice decks better, which will make fair non-blue decks better, which will make combo and fair blue decks better, going full circle thus increasing the amount of decks that can be played competitively. If show and tell becomes too good, I doubt it, some card may be banned. Hopefully not griselbrand, because that ruins some archetypes of decks, otoh griselbrand seems like overly good so maybe that'd be ok.

And agree that reducing the amount of non-games is great in itself.

Important quote about their evaluation of Legacy through MTGO:
What exactly does Griselbrand add to the game? I think of all of the games he's resolved against me o may have had 1 interesting game

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

What exactly does Griselbrand add to the game? I think of all of the games he's resolved against me o may have had 1 interesting game

The only time Grisselbrand was exciting was when I forgot he had lifelink and for a brief moment I thought my opponent killed himself paying the 7.

[H]

The only time Grisselbrand was exciting was when I forgot he had lifelink and for a brief moment I thought my opponent killed himself paying the 7.

Nah, got you beat, it was exciting when I won a game vs. Reaimator after my opponent got him into play, going to 4, and then swings in with the Iona that was locking me out. See, I had a Mirran Crusader in play.

I ended up winning game 3 on a mull to 3 as well, Plains, Vial, Spirit o' da' Lab. First draw was StP. Good times.

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

Nah

As the expert on my emotions I have to disagree with you on what I was feeling at the time.

[H]

As the expert on my emotions I have to disagree with you on what I was feeling at the time.

Incorrect, I am indeed a better authority on what you are feeling at any given time, :wink:

[Megadeus]

I think the only time Griselbrand is ever interesting is when the opponent is actually a moron and just kills themselves by drawing too many cards and but realizing they are dead on board

[Mr. Safety]

Chancellor of the Annex's time to shine has come.

Game 1 decks (Dredge, Reanimator, Belcher, Oops All Spells) all have a window of opportunity to push their luck. The bad news: opponents have better odds g2-3 to find hate. The good news: you also get better odds of finding your anti-hate, provided you have something that will swing the game in your favor. I know for my deck of choice (Turbo Depths) having access to Force of Vigor is massive.

[H]

I think the only time Griselbrand is ever interesting is when the opponent is actually a moron and just kills themselves by drawing too many cards and but realizing they are dead on board

I actually really don't mind Griselbrand at all. It's a stupid-ass card, but so are almost every card that is worth playing in Legacy. I'd rather have stupid-ass highly powerful cards to play then stupid-ass low-power cards any day.

[mistercakes]

Are people forgetting that this was actually implemented on mtgo?

[pettdan]

What exactly does Griselbrand add to the game? I think of all of the games he's resolved against me o may have had 1 interesting game

I just love to play Bizarro Stormy, a non-linear (it's not Tin-Fins, contrary to popular belief) combo deck that can be very powerful and flexible but nowhere near broken. Many games go to time[edit: or well, meant until late in rounds, not time necessarily] there is usually a lot of fighting back and forth, so it's not usually uninteresting games allthough it has those raw power wins too. Griselbrand may be a bit overpowered in SnT, though.. Ah, I'll save that discussion for another thread. ;)

[ScottW]

It seems fine and a positive they considered the MTGO data for eternal formats. I played through that period of implementation and basically agree.

[SpatulaOfTheAges]

It's just a much better version of the game to play with the London Mulligan, as it reduces *unnecessary* variance. If it pushes any cards over the edge in meta-game dominance, it would only be because those cards were ban list time bombs already; LED, Ancient Tomb, and Griselbrand seem like the only real candidates. The London Mulligan trial on MTGO was mostly the same meta-game, except for the Sunday of Niagra when there was an absurd amount of Reanimator in the top 32 of the Challenge. But since Niagra was drawing off many control players, that's hard to evaluate.

So; good for the game, even if it does contribute to some bannings in the long-term.

[LOLWut]

Who knows what the next-level effect of the effects will be, but aside from decreasing shitty non-hand games via an extra decision and less variance, seeing as this increases odds of finding key cards, hate cards, and anti-hate cards, I feel that: a.) Decks like Chalice decks will get better, as there's a key card, but fewer opponents mull to anti-Chalice cards compared to other match-ups, e.g. anti-graveyard combo cards b.) Manaless Dredge takes a hit as opponents can better mull to graveyard hate, and Manaless does not want to mull to anti-hate. Probably balanced out by the new additions of Force of Vigor/Negation. Oh and c.) a bit of a boost for non-Brainstorm decks, maybe, getting some of that ability to unmulligan at the beginning of the game.

[Fox]

Issue is more that Ancient Tomb is made exploit/parasitize the going first mechanic. (The same can be said of Chancellor and to a lesser degree Leylines)

Exploiting game structural imbalance to an even greater degree on the back of London mull will set Tomb on the plodding path to getting [rightfully] banned.

[niv]

Are people forgetting that this was actually implemented on mtgo?

i think so. i heard a bunch from several grinders that it wasn't really all that bad (meaning that grizdaddy and chalice didnt run over the entire format while it was around)

i'm sure it'll be fine. as an aside, the next several months in legacy will be real interesting with this mull change and all the new playable cards that will/have come into the format with the last 2 sets.

[Megadeus]

Brainstorm has been 70% of the format for years now. I think tomb is fairly safe. Or I'd hope at least. Tomb decks aren't even particularly good so I'm not sure why it would warrant a ban.

[non-inflammable]

'm not sure why it would warrant a ban.

because it enables that hateful turn 1 chalice... i usually don't want to mulligan but i'm gonna love the london mull.
my LGS used the london mull for about a month while it was on MTGO but switched back to paris mull for the past whatever.

the london mull enables every non-BS deck a better (mull) hand; notice the only people complaining?

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

Ban brainstorm, chalice, and sanctum prelate, imo.

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

Issue is more that Ancient Tomb is made exploit/parasitize the going first mechanic. (The same can be said of Chancellor and to a lesser degree Leylines)

Exploiting game structural imbalance to an even greater degree on the back of London mull will set Tomb on the plodding path to getting [rightfully] banned.

This is a very good argument for the banning of all turn one plays that are good.

[Fox]

This is a very good argument for the banning of all turn one plays that are good.

Take for instance Git Probe -> Sea -> Therapy, lose 2 cards on turn 0 (a play pattern made intolerable by Grixis Delver). This is of course far more abusive than Tomb/Chalice b/c it doesn't just inflame first player advantage, it also destroys the only compensatory mechanism of being second player.

There is a very real difference between a good turn 1 play and a first player exploit. Exploits will most often exacerbate mana disparities and/or CA. Tomb is concerning b/c the things it powers out translate loosely to second player loses their first turn; i.e. first player gets to begin the game by taking two turns.

The London mull will add consistency to the worst offenders. Overall the change will generally result in more real games of magic, but the exact opposite will be true in cases involving cards like Tomb/Chancellor/random Leyline/etc...

For clarity I will simplify the analogy to chess. Pieces having different movement rules, amounts, point values is not the same as taking extra turns. If you could name one move in chess that exacerbates first player advantage more than any other, it would be moving two pieces with 1 move [castle]. Magic is not chess, and when you see a castle analog, we need to remember that the other side does not get access to the same double move.

[bruizar]

If anything I believe vintage dredge is almost dead because of this rule. The only fighting chance it has now is with the printing of Force of Vigor, but otherwise it is at the mercy of a 95% turn 0 Leyline of the Void.

The same is true for other decks in other formats.

[Dice_Box]

There is a very real difference between a good turn 1 play and a first player exploit. Exploits will most often exacerbate mana disparities and/or CA. Tomb is concerning b/c the things it powers out translate loosely to second player loses their first turn; i.e. first player gets to begin the game by taking two turns.

The London mull will add consistency to the worst offenders. Overall the change will generally result in more real games of magic, but the exact opposite will be true in cases involving cards like Tomb/Chancellor/random Leyline/etc...

For clarity I will simplify the analogy to chess. Pieces having different movement rules, amounts, point values is not the same as taking extra turns. If you could name one move in chess that exacerbates first player advantage more than any other, it would be moving two pieces with 1 move [castle]. Magic is not chess, and when you see a castle analog, we need to remember that the other side does not get access to the same double move.
Kind of, but not really. Playing with Sol Lands structurally changes how you build your deck. While it rewards strong openings it punishes you by increasing variance and restricting your options for in game advancement. You also often have little else should your opening gambit be denied.

In the chess analogy, it would be like I sometimes get to move twice, but the pay off is every few turns my Rooks, Bishops and Queen can only move 3 spaces. Sure, it is ok sometimes, but it's going to really hamper me over the length of a tournament.

[Fallen_Empire]

If your deck can't beat a turn 1 chalice is it a real deck? Blue has access to 8 force's now. The only reason chalice is good is because people are too greedy to build a proper deck. There are like 20k cards in magic, maybe people should run two drops. Should we ban blood moon too because people who choose not to run basics feel sad? Welcome to legacy, if you don't like degeneracy what are you doing here? There are like only 3 engines in legacy: mox diamond, brainstorm and sol lands. Do we really want to knock out a pillar of the format because ancient tomb is "oppressive"?

[Ronald Deuce]

If your deck can't beat a turn 1 chalice is it a real deck?

I'll disregard everything else you wrote because [EDIT: a) asked and answered, and b)] conservatively that'd encompass around half of the field—more if Force- or Daze-containing decks don't start with one of those cards in hand.

I pretty much can't lose to Lands with any of the decks I play regularly except Dredge; does that mean Lands is a bad deck?

And is this thread gonna turn into the B/R thread like all the others?

[Echelon]

Man if Chalice decks ever become a thing just run something w/ 4 Abrupt Decay and mayhaps 4 Assassin's Trophy. If Chalice becomes a thing the meta might change, so what? Is that really a bad thing? I mean, before all this people were complaining the format was stale.

[mistercakes]

Karn kills chalice :)

[Lava Snacks]

What do you think are the odds of this not being permanent or semi-permanent? What I mean is, I haven't been paying super close attention, and do you get the vibe that this might be undone in a couple years like the scry mulligan, or does it feel more permanent?

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

Karn kills chalice :)

When he's not playing his own!

[Mr. Safety]

What do you think are the odds of this not being permanent or semi-permanent? What I mean is, I haven't been paying super close attention, and do you get the vibe that this might be undone in a couple years like the scry mulligan, or does it feel more permanent?

The only improvement at this point would be to go back to the very beginning and get a free new 7 if you had all lands/no lands. I don't see that happening. I think this is going to be the mulligan format for a very long time, if not for the remainder of the game's existence.

[Michael Keller]

The only improvement at this point would be to go back to the very beginning and get a free new 7 if you had all lands/no lands.

As someone who played Manaless for an extended period of time, that would be an incredible improvement in my eyes for that archetype, for sure.

[Mr. Safety]

As someone who played Manaless for an extended period of time, that would be an incredible improvement in my eyes for that archetype, for sure.

Too good? I jest...

I feel like a deck like Manaless Dredge has enough variance built-in, moments where it's absurd and others where it crashes. I don't think it would happen, but getting a free mulligan with zero lands would be about the best next upgrade. I can't help but think that Lands would benefit as well from having all lands a higher portion of the time than other decks (but ironically might not mulligan 7 lands, depending on the mix.)

Honestly, I'm just glad WotC seems to be moving & shaking rather than sitting on its hands. Onwards and upwards.

[Megadeus]

Too good? I jest...

I feel like a deck like Manaless Dredge has enough variance built-in, moments where it's absurd and others where it crashes. I don't think it would happen, but getting a free mulligan with zero lands would be about the best next upgrade. I can't help but think that Lands would benefit as well from having all lands a higher portion of the time than other decks (but ironically might not mulligan 7 lands, depending on the mix.)

Honestly, I'm just glad WotC seems to be moving & shaking rather than sitting on its hands. Onwards and upwards.
I mean in theory manaless could essentially just continue to Mulligan until they literally have a perfect hand. You could probably also do the same with a landless Belcher deck.

[Mr. Safety]

I mean in theory manaless could essentially just continue to Mulligan until they literally have a perfect hand. You could probably also do the same with a landless Belcher deck.

Good point, likely a deal breaker. I suppose it could be limited to *one* free mulligan if no lands/all lands, which gives these decks in particular an edge, but their overall inconsistency in the face of hate will only elevate them to tier 2 (in my opinion.)

It's just spitballing, I love the new mulligan rule, I don't feel like they didn't go far enough or anything like that. Hell, I loved the Vancouver mulligan; it was such an improvement over the Paris mulligan.

[mistercakes]

I mean in theory manaless could essentially just continue to Mulligan until they literally have a perfect hand. You could probably also do the same with a landless Belcher deck.

The old mull rule was 1 mulligan.