In light of last night's ban list update announcement, the mods decided it would be in the site's best interest to move discussion of the mulligan rule from the ban list to a dedicated thread. Use this thread to talk about anything pertaining to the mulligan rule. What mulligan does your group use? Which do you prefer? What are the pros and cons of each? Is one easier to abuse? What sort of probabilities do they give your opening hand? And so on.
Use this thread to discuss ONLY the mulligan rule. Individual cards should be kept in the ban list (in other words, no one cares about getting Sol Ring in your opening hand or how broken that is). If you want to point out how one style makes it easier to dig for a certain card, we will all know what card you're talking about so don't even bother saying a particular card.
Remember, the point of this thread is to give as much productive and useful information to the RC for their final decision on the fate of the offfical mulligan, so please keep the discussion friendly and don't attack each other. kthxbai
My play group uses the one free mulligan rule. and then you get to scry 1 of you keep less than 7 cards like with the new mulligan rule in BFZ. Seems to work out pretty well for us. I have been pushing for the adding of the rule that if you get zero land's in your hand you can reveal and get another free mulligan I think that would be an ok rule what do you guys think ?
We do one free mulligan and then go down a card unless you reveal 0,1,6,7 lands, in which case you get another free one.
Not sure there would be any advantage to adding the scry to this, but we could try it I guess. One thing I do plan on introducing is "exiling" the hand you are mulling away until you are ready to go instead of shuffling it back in right away, mostly to save time.
Edit: Just thought I should add that I feel very strongly that the official mulligan rule should make hand sculpting difficult while making it as easy as possible to find a "playable" hand. I am not someone who is particularly on-board with recent RC changes/lack of changes or super invested in "the spirit of EDH", but it just blows my mind that they have left Partial Paris in place for this long considering their vision and goals.
I saw mention of the Vancouver mulligan or something. Although I am not familiar with that type of mulligan, I am starting to lose favor for the Partial Paris. In my opinion it makes it a little too easy to keep your sol ring and land and pitch the other 4-5 other cards just to keep those cards and get new. I have played that way almost as long as I have played commander, probably 7-8 years. But next time I host a game night, I will probably institute standard full mulligan rules in order to prevent hand sculpting. So I am for a mulligan change because I feel hand sculpting is a little too easy to accomplish, even if it is just keeping a skullclamp or sol ring or whatever and dump the rest. I think full mulligans are viable and people can just do a quick shuffle. It only takes an extra 30 seconds to quickly shuffle and draw, not a large amount of time to slow things down.
The gist of the Vancuver mulligan is that its the 60 card magic mulligan. This means that it is the all or nothing mulligan instead of a partial. Because we are multiplayer if we moved to the Vancuver we would also inherit the one free for multiplayer as we would no longer be using an optional replacement mulligan system. The Vancuver mulligan is specifically the new system that has the scry one if your hand size is less than 7 when you finish your mulligan.
Personally I would be fine with testing the system. I honestly dont think its even that bad considering you get one free mulligan for multiplayer. The decrease in deck consistency due to larger decks should be less noticeable with a free mulligan and the scry one is an added kicker that might make the Partial Paris mulligan system unnecessary. Personally I dont really mind either way. I like the strategy involved in Partial Paris as I think it has a lot of understanding your deck as well as your opposition in your opening mulligan. At the same time, when it comes to fishing for cards, I understand the reasons to consider moving to the Vancuver system. As a whole, it would make fast decks slow down some which seems like a positive impact in a lot of ways.
To fuel discussion, here are some resources that might be useful references. One is an article talking about how much value a Scry is actually worth (and I touch on the Vancouver mulligan also), one is an article by another gentleman that tackles scrying (scry lands in particular) from a different angle, and the last one is a spreadsheet I made that lets you calculate combo percentages using Multiplayer and Partial Paris mulligans. Haven't added the Vancouver mulligan to that calculator yet.
Personally, I support the decision to move to the Vancouver mulligan. I do not think Partial Paris is the boogeyman it is commonly believed to be, but I also think the safety net it provides is unnecessary compared to even the regular Multiplayer mulligan, and it comes at the expense of rules complexity. If "Banned As A Commander" is too much complexity, understanding the nuances of the Partial Paris is definitely too much complexity.
Mods, let me know if this counts as solicitation because that is not my goal here.
EDIT: Fixed some permissions with Google Docs; you should be able to edit the input values on the calculator now.
Mods, let me know if this counts as solicitation because that is not my goal here.
Its on topic discussion for the topic. You are fine.
I agree that Partial Paris is a problem in a very narrow portion of the meta. That said, it is significantly more powerful than Vancuver. In a lot of cases though I can think of situations where I start sculpting a hand with Partial Paris though rather than needing a mulligan.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I have officially moved to MTGNexus. I just wanted to let people know as my response time to salvation decks being bumped is very hit or miss.
I'm personally not sure why the two mulligan options even need to interact. The Scry 1 on the Vancouver mulligan is there to offset the difference between those of unequal hand sizes... this is equally important in Multiplayer/EDH games, regardless of how you ended up at the lower hand count.
In part it's to ensure that players have a better chance of hitting land in non-PP situations, but even in PP, if you person goes to 5, but the other players managed to keep at 7, I think the Scry 1 would be an acceptable method to introduce to offset the hand-size difference.
Partial Paris plus Scry 1 is too much card selection to begin the game. We tried this the past few weeks and it just ended up created more "bomby" early board states and not adding anything interactive to the game. I would prefer tat either we go to standard mulligan with Scry 1 or keep Partial Paris, but not both.
Failing either of those, using "Gis" with revelation of non-three-land hands would be idea. In other words, if you do not have three lands in hand to start, reveal, exile and draw seven. This would allow a certain amount of gaming the system, but standard "Don't be a dick" protocols apply.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The "Crazy One", playing casual magic and occasionally dipping his toes into regular play since 1994.
Currently focusing on Pre-Modern (Mono-Black Discard Control) and Modern (Azorious Control, Temur Rhinos).
Find me at the Wizard's Tower in Ottawa every second Saturday afternoons.
At my store we have always used the full mulligan (first one free), exiling your hand in between and then shuffling at the end. We adopted the scry pretty much as soon as it was announced, so like two months now. I've always liked this mulligan and counted myself in the "PP is the reason you have such a problem with The Card Which Must Not Be Named" camp. But over in the BL thread dosu had some really good stats and I started messing around with PP. What he claimed and I saw for myself is that when I'm intentionality digging for one particular card in my opening hand, I actually WANT the full mulligan (presuming I exile that hand and draw a new one) because combining that with the free mulligan I get to dig deeper into my deck to find that one card. The downside to this is that my other six cards I draw could be total crap. PP draws a lot of hate because if you are lucky enough to draw that one card, you can hold it and anything else you like, and safely chuck the rest. So even if you go down to six on your first mull, keeping 3-4 good cards and throwing away the chaff probably makes sense. The downside is that using PP you have a better chance of not getting a great mull hand than you are a wonderful to sculpt one. So the risk with PP is any mulligan at all sets you back a card. Is that worth the risk over free mulligans and digging deeper? I don't know.
I think that if I were playing very competitively and my deck had a lot of T1 mana rocks in it, PP would let me abuse them more and sculpt a more explosive hand. But the RC is less concerned about them, and is more concerned with the average player who just wants a 3-4 land opening hand to actually play. PP helps them out, and also prevents them from sculpting too much, because if you mulligan more than once you've got a large battle ahead of you. We definitely do NOT want to give PP added hassistance with a free scry.
My group remains pretty happy with our mull rule, at least judging by no one griping about it. I'd like some actual game time with PP, but I am less certain that it is as bad anymore.
Oh, the other reason I thought so poorly about PP is I see users all the time who justify smaller manabases on it.
From my experience, the biggest problem with PP is that many playgroups don't realise that, under the recomended rules, you're not meant to get a free one....
100% in favor of killing partial paris and using scry mulligan. We seriously improved our group by getting rid of partial paris, which caused games to be way too fast and consistent.
I thought this over a bit. As it stands, I am more or less indifferent on which mulligan system we use. I think both systems are fine and most of the issues with PP come from people using it incorrectly or playing high enough end magic that sculpting is enough of an issue. I think there will be a small increase in players having unplayable hands as in my experience in PP the infrequency in just getting complete trash mulligans seems to be something under 5% of hands. I suspect that moving to the Vancouver mulligan system might increase my feeling of getting totally screwed but I dont feel like there will be a large increase. Overall I feel there will be a decrease in quality of opening hands but thats because PP is a really amazing system.
Overall, I feel that the change if they make it will be small. I feel like its not a big deal if they do it and its the sort of rule that is easy to decide in person what sort of mulligan system you want to use as it does not actually have much of any impact on deck design and game play. I think it could be removed but at the same time according to the rules as it stands Partial Paris is an optional system anyways so I feel any change here would be minimal.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I have officially moved to MTGNexus. I just wanted to let people know as my response time to salvation decks being bumped is very hit or miss.
My playgroups and LGS use two different mulligan rules and I honestly like both of them quite a bit more than Vancouver and PP.
LGS: Draw 10 shuffle 3 back. it is a simple as that gets. You draw 10 cards and shuffle 3 back in. The only way you get to redo this is if you reveal only 0 or 1 land. Often times this helps combo decks a bit too much but for my LGS there are very few combo decks and I am one of the main combo players so there is that but I honestly really dislike this mulligan as it feels too much like hand sculpting but I still enjoy it when we use it.
Playgroup: Draw 7 and you may shuffle 1 card away for a basic land if you so choose. If you want to mulligan you go down to 6 and may repeat the process. I honestly really like this mulligan a lot more as the primary combo player as it cuts my win rate down a bit but honestly I feel that this mulligan rule is one of the more honest and fair mulligans as it prevents hand sculpting but allows you to hit your land drops a bit more.
What are your thoughts on my playgroups and LGS mulligan rules?
At my store we have always used the full mulligan (first one free), exiling your hand in between and then shuffling at the end. We adopted the scry pretty much as soon as it was announced, so like two months now.
We started shifting (from partial paris, first free) to this once the scry was announced. I play at a shop with a pretty large player base, so it takes some time to spread, but the people I play with most often have all adopted it. I haven't heard any complaints about losing the partial paris and it's been a lot quicker at the start of the game. I also haven't noticed anyone getting more or less mana screwed than normal using this system.
Overall, I don't think it makes that much of a difference. Anyone who really wants to open with a specific card is going to have a lot of digging power either way.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
[Pr]Jaya | Estrid | A rotating cast of decks built out of my box.
I'm in favor of a First-Free Full Exile Vancouver Mulligan. As complicated as the name sounds, the process is a lot simpler.
"You may exile your starting hand and draw the same number of cards. You may then repeat this process but draw 1 less card each time. When you are done with mulligans, shuffle all exiled cards into your library. Then, if your opening hand has fewer cards than your starting hand, you may scry 1."
The folks I play with use the partial Paris plus the first-one-free multiplayer option. This encourages low land counts. I know players who do fine running 31-32 land in decks that want a lot of mana.
One question: will WotC be updating the multiplayer (e.g. 2HG) mulligan rules with the scry as well? Or are they leaving that as "one free mulligan"?
EDIT: NVM, comprehensive rules wouldn't require a further update. If they change rule 103.b to the Vancouver rule then that affects 1v1 and multiplayer.
From my experience, the biggest problem with PP is that many playgroups don't realise that, under the recomended rules, you're not meant to get a free one....
This is worth pointing out. It seems obvious but in my experience a lot of times everyone just kind of assumes the first mulligan is free.
My playgroup simply operates on the free multiplayer mulligan followed by Vancouver mulligans. It worked well for us before the Vancouver rule was introduced, but now it works even better.
I'm a fan of bringing the Vancouver Mulligan over. Duel Commander also officially started using it so having consistency across most of the game is very nice.
I am indifferent about it. My playgroup still uses a one PP mulligan rule. Other playgroups have their own rule. As long as a group of people can at least agree how to mulligan, I am fine with most ideas.
There's a lot that goes into a Mulligan "rule" in EDH and I think at the moment it's too much.
1. Being able to keep some cards in your hand and throwing others back.
2. Keeping your throwbacks separate until you're done mulliganing.
3. Taking a free mulligan.
4. Revealing 0-land hands (or one, or six, or seven, or...) to take another free one (????).
None of these rules individually is bad, but when you see all of them together it is absolutely too much hand sculpting and card selection.
Here's my personal opinion. It's not really based on anything objective, so disregard it if you want.
I'm kind of sick of the "keep a land and a good card, ship the rest" style of mulliganing. There really isn't any decision making required, especially with the multiplayer one-free rule. You begin the mulliganing process by getting an immediately better hand, for absolutely free. That's too good.
I'd prefer to do away with Partial Paris. Mulligan decisions should be hard - there should be risk involved. You should make your mulligan decisions based on "is this hand playable or not?" not based on "does this hand have <combo card or sol ring>?"
With traditional mulligans I like the one free multiplayer rule. It helps prevent people getting screwed over. It's all-upside, but it's nice and not egregious with a regular mulligan.
The additional scry one probably doesn't do as much alongside the one-free rule, but if other formats are adding it I think we should too, for consistency, and in the event someone gets unlucky enough to not have a playable hand in their opener or one free, it's nice that they get a leg up.
It'd be interesting to add the "exile your hand between mulligans" to the traditional rule but I think that's just more confusing and not necessary.
Personally I think that shipping hands based on the number of land you have is silly. Basically every other part of the mulligan rule exists to help you out of those situations. Being able to ship one- or six- land hands is just extra silly.
EDIT: I think the Partial Paris rule is in line with the toolboxy, singleton vision of EDH and it probably doesn't cause problems outside of the "competitive" crowd, but I think that realistically speaking a regular mulligan with Vancouver and one free would be perfectly fair for fair decks and (though I can't support this with data) might reduce the perceived prevalence of some cards people consider problematic. I think if there's anywhere that the rules could make a concession to the "casual versus competitive" debate, it would be in the mulligan rule.
Partial Paris is a bit abusable. It's fairly easy to sculpt your hand with Partial Paris, and everyone knows that guy that abuses the hell out of it to get that edge to win more often. It seems like there's a lot of people that don't like it because of this. Granted, you can't just sculpt a perfect hand, but it seemed too often than people in my last group started with certain cards too often.
I really like the partial paris. In a 99-card singleton, I find that there's always those few cards that I never seem to draw. Partial Paris let's me keep those cards when I do start with them while not having to keep the rest of my potentially bad hand. While I do think that this is pro alone is worth the cons, I do think something needs to change.
I think a modified Vancouver mulligan would probably be better. I've always thought that the pitched cards from the partial paris could be shuffled back in pre-draw to help prevent hand sculpting even if only by a small margin.
This popped up over on the official site in their mulligan thread:
Quote from papa_funk »
Quote from Sid the Chicken »
In all seriousness, "There is no way Commander adopts Vancouver Mulligan" and "We believe that the Vancouver mulligan might fill many of the same roles as Partial Paris while alleviating some of those downsides. We'll be making our final decision on whether to switch in the next cycle" are very different stances to take. "No way" vs. "Possible".
You missed the followup: Commander won't adopt the Vancouver mulligan. The Vancouver mulligan shuffles in between. We might well adopt it with a "don't shuffle until the end" recommendation. That's not technically a Vancouver mulligan
Use this thread to discuss ONLY the mulligan rule. Individual cards should be kept in the ban list (in other words, no one cares about getting Sol Ring in your opening hand or how broken that is). If you want to point out how one style makes it easier to dig for a certain card, we will all know what card you're talking about so don't even bother saying a particular card.
Remember, the point of this thread is to give as much productive and useful information to the RC for their final decision on the fate of the offfical mulligan, so please keep the discussion friendly and don't attack each other. kthxbai
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
Not sure there would be any advantage to adding the scry to this, but we could try it I guess. One thing I do plan on introducing is "exiling" the hand you are mulling away until you are ready to go instead of shuffling it back in right away, mostly to save time.
Edit: Just thought I should add that I feel very strongly that the official mulligan rule should make hand sculpting difficult while making it as easy as possible to find a "playable" hand. I am not someone who is particularly on-board with recent RC changes/lack of changes or super invested in "the spirit of EDH", but it just blows my mind that they have left Partial Paris in place for this long considering their vision and goals.
UGUPrime Speaker Seamonster RampUGU
WUGDerevi Does NothingWUG
RRRFeldon's Lovely LadiesRRR
The gist of the Vancuver mulligan is that its the 60 card magic mulligan. This means that it is the all or nothing mulligan instead of a partial. Because we are multiplayer if we moved to the Vancuver we would also inherit the one free for multiplayer as we would no longer be using an optional replacement mulligan system. The Vancuver mulligan is specifically the new system that has the scry one if your hand size is less than 7 when you finish your mulligan.
Personally I would be fine with testing the system. I honestly dont think its even that bad considering you get one free mulligan for multiplayer. The decrease in deck consistency due to larger decks should be less noticeable with a free mulligan and the scry one is an added kicker that might make the Partial Paris mulligan system unnecessary. Personally I dont really mind either way. I like the strategy involved in Partial Paris as I think it has a lot of understanding your deck as well as your opposition in your opening mulligan. At the same time, when it comes to fishing for cards, I understand the reasons to consider moving to the Vancuver system. As a whole, it would make fast decks slow down some which seems like a positive impact in a lot of ways.
Signature by Inkfox Aesthetics by Xen
[Modern] Allies
A Closer Look at the Scry Mechanic
by Donovan Gray
It's My Land Drop and I'll Scry if I Want To
by Travis Allen
Opening Hand Combo Calculator
by Donovan Gray
Personally, I support the decision to move to the Vancouver mulligan. I do not think Partial Paris is the boogeyman it is commonly believed to be, but I also think the safety net it provides is unnecessary compared to even the regular Multiplayer mulligan, and it comes at the expense of rules complexity. If "Banned As A Commander" is too much complexity, understanding the nuances of the Partial Paris is definitely too much complexity.
Mods, let me know if this counts as solicitation because that is not my goal here.
EDIT: Fixed some permissions with Google Docs; you should be able to edit the input values on the calculator now.
Draft my Mono-Blue Cube!
lichess.org | chess.com
Its on topic discussion for the topic. You are fine.
I agree that Partial Paris is a problem in a very narrow portion of the meta. That said, it is significantly more powerful than Vancuver. In a lot of cases though I can think of situations where I start sculpting a hand with Partial Paris though rather than needing a mulligan.
Signature by Inkfox Aesthetics by Xen
[Modern] Allies
In part it's to ensure that players have a better chance of hitting land in non-PP situations, but even in PP, if you person goes to 5, but the other players managed to keep at 7, I think the Scry 1 would be an acceptable method to introduce to offset the hand-size difference.
Retired EDH - Tibor and Lumia | [PR]Nemata |Ramirez dePietro | [C]Edric | Riku | Jenara | Lazav | Heliod | Daxos | Roon | Kozilek
Failing either of those, using "Gis" with revelation of non-three-land hands would be idea. In other words, if you do not have three lands in hand to start, reveal, exile and draw seven. This would allow a certain amount of gaming the system, but standard "Don't be a dick" protocols apply.
Currently focusing on Pre-Modern (Mono-Black Discard Control) and Modern (Azorious Control, Temur Rhinos).
Find me at the Wizard's Tower in Ottawa every second Saturday afternoons.
I think that if I were playing very competitively and my deck had a lot of T1 mana rocks in it, PP would let me abuse them more and sculpt a more explosive hand. But the RC is less concerned about them, and is more concerned with the average player who just wants a 3-4 land opening hand to actually play. PP helps them out, and also prevents them from sculpting too much, because if you mulligan more than once you've got a large battle ahead of you. We definitely do NOT want to give PP added hassistance with a free scry.
My group remains pretty happy with our mull rule, at least judging by no one griping about it. I'd like some actual game time with PP, but I am less certain that it is as bad anymore.
Oh, the other reason I thought so poorly about PP is I see users all the time who justify smaller manabases on it.
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
Overall, I feel that the change if they make it will be small. I feel like its not a big deal if they do it and its the sort of rule that is easy to decide in person what sort of mulligan system you want to use as it does not actually have much of any impact on deck design and game play. I think it could be removed but at the same time according to the rules as it stands Partial Paris is an optional system anyways so I feel any change here would be minimal.
Signature by Inkfox Aesthetics by Xen
[Modern] Allies
LGS: Draw 10 shuffle 3 back. it is a simple as that gets. You draw 10 cards and shuffle 3 back in. The only way you get to redo this is if you reveal only 0 or 1 land. Often times this helps combo decks a bit too much but for my LGS there are very few combo decks and I am one of the main combo players so there is that but I honestly really dislike this mulligan as it feels too much like hand sculpting but I still enjoy it when we use it.
Playgroup: Draw 7 and you may shuffle 1 card away for a basic land if you so choose. If you want to mulligan you go down to 6 and may repeat the process. I honestly really like this mulligan a lot more as the primary combo player as it cuts my win rate down a bit but honestly I feel that this mulligan rule is one of the more honest and fair mulligans as it prevents hand sculpting but allows you to hit your land drops a bit more.
What are your thoughts on my playgroups and LGS mulligan rules?
Overall, I don't think it makes that much of a difference. Anyone who really wants to open with a specific card is going to have a lot of digging power either way.
"You may exile your starting hand and draw the same number of cards. You may then repeat this process but draw 1 less card each time. When you are done with mulligans, shuffle all exiled cards into your library. Then, if your opening hand has fewer cards than your starting hand, you may scry 1."
EDIT: NVM, comprehensive rules wouldn't require a further update. If they change rule 103.b to the Vancouver rule then that affects 1v1 and multiplayer.
This is worth pointing out. It seems obvious but in my experience a lot of times everyone just kind of assumes the first mulligan is free.
Draft my Mono-Blue Cube!
lichess.org | chess.com
Overall, I think it's a positive.
GX Tron XG
UR Phoenix RU
GG Freyalise High Tide GG
UR Parun Counterspells RU
BB Yawgmoth Token Storm BB
WB Pestilence BW
Keep brewing.
1. Being able to keep some cards in your hand and throwing others back.
2. Keeping your throwbacks separate until you're done mulliganing.
3. Taking a free mulligan.
4. Revealing 0-land hands (or one, or six, or seven, or...) to take another free one (????).
None of these rules individually is bad, but when you see all of them together it is absolutely too much hand sculpting and card selection.
Here's my personal opinion. It's not really based on anything objective, so disregard it if you want.
I'm kind of sick of the "keep a land and a good card, ship the rest" style of mulliganing. There really isn't any decision making required, especially with the multiplayer one-free rule. You begin the mulliganing process by getting an immediately better hand, for absolutely free. That's too good.
I'd prefer to do away with Partial Paris. Mulligan decisions should be hard - there should be risk involved. You should make your mulligan decisions based on "is this hand playable or not?" not based on "does this hand have <combo card or sol ring>?"
With traditional mulligans I like the one free multiplayer rule. It helps prevent people getting screwed over. It's all-upside, but it's nice and not egregious with a regular mulligan.
The additional scry one probably doesn't do as much alongside the one-free rule, but if other formats are adding it I think we should too, for consistency, and in the event someone gets unlucky enough to not have a playable hand in their opener or one free, it's nice that they get a leg up.
It'd be interesting to add the "exile your hand between mulligans" to the traditional rule but I think that's just more confusing and not necessary.
Personally I think that shipping hands based on the number of land you have is silly. Basically every other part of the mulligan rule exists to help you out of those situations. Being able to ship one- or six- land hands is just extra silly.
EDIT: I think the Partial Paris rule is in line with the toolboxy, singleton vision of EDH and it probably doesn't cause problems outside of the "competitive" crowd, but I think that realistically speaking a regular mulligan with Vancouver and one free would be perfectly fair for fair decks and (though I can't support this with data) might reduce the perceived prevalence of some cards people consider problematic. I think if there's anywhere that the rules could make a concession to the "casual versus competitive" debate, it would be in the mulligan rule.
Draft my Peasant Cube.
I really like the partial paris. In a 99-card singleton, I find that there's always those few cards that I never seem to draw. Partial Paris let's me keep those cards when I do start with them while not having to keep the rest of my potentially bad hand. While I do think that this is pro alone is worth the cons, I do think something needs to change.
I think a modified Vancouver mulligan would probably be better. I've always thought that the pitched cards from the partial paris could be shuffled back in pre-draw to help prevent hand sculpting even if only by a small margin.
WBG Karador, Ghost Chieftain
B Toshiro Umezawa
BG Pharika, God of Affliction - Necromancy and Politics
WWW The Church of Heliod
WBR Zurgo, Helmsmasher
RG Wort, the Raidmother
UBR Jeleva, Nephalia's Scourge
UG Vorel of the Hull Clade
Misc. EDH Stuff: Commander Cube | Zombies (Horde)
Resources:Commander Rulings FAQ | Commander Deckbuilding Guide
Follow me on Twitter! @cryogen_mtg