You literally said "Even if it takes 5 mins to find an acceptable hand." In my experience it takes around 5 minutes to use the normal mulligan method if you're shuffling enough and at least one player goes to 6 (which is typical in a pod of 4). If you're doing a couple hands in under a minute I suspect *you* might be the one cheating and not shuffling sufficiently. Pro players often take over a minute to mulligan in tournaments with 60 cards that are way easier to shuffle; it takes time to make good decisions and then properly randomize a deck.
I do think the mulligan rule could use some work - pretty much across the entire format. I think most players agree that the progressive changes in mulliganning over the years have been a plus
* transitioning from the original crappy "all or no land" mulligan
* transitioning to one free for multiplayer and always drawing a card
* transitioning to a scry if you go below opening handsize
I see no reason for the false dilemma you're posing (either I like all the rules of Magic or I dislike the game and should play something else).
I'm not sure if you are trying to fit as many fallacies into one statement as possible but you're also arguing against a straw man (e.g. claiming that my position is that the official rules of magic suck as opposed to a single rule sucks).
Please take my advice and try to dial back your rhetoric a little. This isn't a fight where you've got to own me with your sweet internet pwnage skills.
Accusing people of cheating, calling them sad, etc., has no real place in this kind of opinion based discussion.
Using any other mulligan other than the official mulligan is cheating. If you feel the need to cheat in a game that promotes social games you must be a very sad person. The "it saves time" excuse is total bs. It doesn't take long to shuffle up and draw a new hand. Even if it takes 5 mins to find an acceptable hand what does it matter when games can go for several hours?
Holy crap this is why I stopped frequenting the rules forum. This is a seriously bonkers thing to say man. Op is a sad person for wanting to save 5+ minutes every game? In my group games would last 40 minutes typically sometimes less.
I want you to go stand in front of a mirror and read this post out loud and try to imagine how it might come across to another person.
Anyway, I've had three different Mulligan systems:
Standard
Set aside draw seven reduce by one after the free ine
standard but don't reduce the count and don't abuse it.
The default system sucks and causes a lot of nongames which is exaggerated when playing some players are playing with lower powered decks.
My favorite is the set aside method but it overly rewards low land count combo decks which is a bummer. If your play group doesn't abuse it it's pretty fun.
I do think the mulligan rule could use some work - pretty much across the entire format. I think most players agree that the progressive changes in mulliganning over the years have been a plus
* transitioning from the original crappy "all or no land" mulligan
* transitioning to one free for multiplayer and always drawing a card
* transitioning to a scry if you go below opening handsize
I see no reason for the false dilemma you're posing (either I like all the rules of Magic or I dislike the game and should play something else).
I'm not sure if you are trying to fit as many fallacies into one statement as possible but you're also arguing against a straw man (e.g. claiming that my position is that the official rules of magic suck as opposed to a single rule sucks).
Please take my advice and try to dial back your rhetoric a little. This isn't a fight where you've got to own me with your sweet internet pwnage skills.
Accusing people of cheating, calling them sad, etc., has no real place in this kind of opinion based discussion.
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall
Holy crap this is why I stopped frequenting the rules forum. This is a seriously bonkers thing to say man. Op is a sad person for wanting to save 5+ minutes every game? In my group games would last 40 minutes typically sometimes less.
I want you to go stand in front of a mirror and read this post out loud and try to imagine how it might come across to another person.
Anyway, I've had three different Mulligan systems:
Standard
Set aside draw seven reduce by one after the free ine
standard but don't reduce the count and don't abuse it.
The default system sucks and causes a lot of nongames which is exaggerated when playing some players are playing with lower powered decks.
My favorite is the set aside method but it overly rewards low land count combo decks which is a bummer. If your play group doesn't abuse it it's pretty fun.
Second favorite is just letting people stay at 7.
UW Ephara Hatebears [Primer], GB Gitrog Lands, BRU Inalla Combo-Control, URG Maelstrom Wanderer Landfall