If you mulliganed to four, and saw a hand of four lands...

38 posts / 0 new
Last post
Would you keep it?

Obviously the answer varies depending on what you're playing and what lands they are (assume they give you all of your colours and none of them have any relevant abilities beyond making mana). But in general, would you do it? If your anwer is that you don't have a general answer, can you give some explanation as to when you would vs wouldn't?

Obviously it's a fairly irrelevant question all told*, but I just ran into this situation and I realized that it was a situation that I'd never encountered out thought about before. I ended up keeping it, with the logic that having mulled to four I was depending pretty heavily on good topdecks anyway, and I'd rather be sure I'd be able to cast them, especially as I was playing a three-colour deck. I'm not at all certain that was correct, and I tend to think that at five cards it's still right to throw away an all-lander, so I'm interested in other perspectives on this.

* Assuming 24 lands it'll happen ~3% of the time you mull to four, which hopefully you aren't doing very often to begin with.
blah blah metal lyrics
In the majority of decks, I'd probably keep it. If your curve was low enough you could be resonably lkely to get a 1- or 2-drop and the lands to cast them, a mulligan might be worth it. More often than not, though, if I mulligan to 3, chances are too high that I get nothing I can reasonably hope to play before I die. Chancing the topdeck is far form an ideal situation, but at least with 36/56 cards left in your deck being non-lands, you'll probably get something usable soon.
Rules Nut Advisor
I'd keep. I mean, what are the chances of a great 3 card hand? Low. At least here you have a (probably) better chance of drawing non-lands. You have 56 cards in the deck, and probably only 18 or so of them are lands. Those are good odds.

139359831 wrote:
That is a lovely painting of Richard Garfield. It really brings out his feminine side.
I'd keep it most of the time.
Basically, the only times I wouldn't are matchups where specific cards (GY hate, Force of Will, Mindbreak Trap, etc.) are necessary in the opener. 

Sig
Disclaimers
My initial responses to rules questions are usually just answers. If you want an explanation as to why, say so. Just because it says I'm there, I'm not necessarily there. I leave my browser open so I don't have to reload ~30 tabs. Anyone who wants to text duel me through either PM or chat can just PM me with a format (and a time if playing through chat). I don't play standard.
# Card Blind Hall of Fame
3CB
3CB #1 (1/30/11): Won by silasw, with Mishra's Factory, Orzhov Basilica, Vindicate. 3CB #2 (2/13/11): Won by Vektor480, with Mishra's Workshop, Ensnaring Bridge, Scalding Tongs 3CB #3(2/20/11): Joint win between defuse, with Saprazzan Skerry, Scalding Tongs, Energy Field; and Mown, with The Tabernacle at Pendrell Vale, Inkmoth Nexus, Sheltered Valley 3CB #4(3/13/11): Won by Mown, with Keldon Megaliths, The Tabernacle at Pendrell Vale, Boros Garrison 3CB #5(3/20/11): Won by silasw, with Black Lotus, Channel, Emrakul, the Aeons Torn
5CB
5CB 1 (3/6/11): Won by Maraxus-of-Keld, with Tropical Island, Thallid, Nether Spirit, Daze, Foil
quotes
56819178 wrote:
So, how would I use a card that has a large in the top half and "sui?l? -- pu?? ?is?q" across the middle?
57031358 wrote:
99113151 wrote:
Winning is not important if: 1. You win by a blowout. 2. You pay billions of dollars in cards to win. If you like wasting money just to win one game, while you could have saved it to lose a few and end up winning more in the future, then it is fine by me.
what? do you ceremonially light your deck on fire after a win?
57169958 wrote:
Or did no one notice Transmogrifying Licid before. (And by not notice, I mean covered their ears and shouted LA LA LA LA )
57193048 wrote:
57169958 wrote:
Hmmm... I think the most awkward situation at the moment is simply the Myr Welder / Equipment / Licid / Aura craziness, but I'm pretty sure he's aware of it.
If the most awkward thing going on right now involves Licids, I declare victory.
56287226 wrote:
We regret to inform you of Trevor Kidd's untimely demise in an unfortunate accident involving a mysteriously blown breaker box and a photophobic creature of unknown origin at his home near Renton, Washington. We at the Wizards Community apologize for any inconvenience or delay, and assure you we'll be preparing a replacement to assume his duties as soon as we finish warming up the cloning vats.
[02:47:46] It doesn't merely "come out of suspend" - you take the last time counter off, and then suspend triggers and say "now cast that! CAST IT NOOOOOW!" [02:47:49] Because suspend has no indoors voice
[10:11:33] !opalescence [10:11:33] Opalescence {2WW} |Enchantment| Each other non-Aura enchantment is a creature with power and toughness each equal to its converted mana cost. It's still an enchantment. · Reserved,UD-R,Vin,Leg,Cla,USBC [10:11:51] *sigh* [10:12:10] Otecko: Do you have a question about Opalescence? [10:12:17] sure [10:12:23] $10 on humility interaction [10:12:25] :P [10:12:29] :D [10:12:47] humility + opalescence put into play by replenish
Ego
58325628 wrote:
Mage is awesome, BTW.
56967858 wrote:
Dear Mage24365, You are totally awesome. Thank you so much. I hope you are able to dine in Paradise without kicking the bucket to actually get there, and that every dollar you ever make magically becomes two more.
58158398 wrote:
56761258 wrote:
I don't think there are any cards like that. There are things that prevent you from activating activated abilities, things that increase their cost, and things that counter them, but I don't think anything triggers from them specifically. There are things that trigger from targeting, so that might be relevant, but I can't think of anything that triggers from targeting a player. I'm almost positive there's nothing that triggers from damage being prevented.
Rings of Brighthearth; Dormant Gomazoa; Samite Ministration.
56761258 wrote:
Well played.

 

I'd weep quietly to myself and keep. If I've gotten that far there's a very good chance I've somehow seriously screwed up shuffling my deck. Some days it just seems like no matter how you shuffle or what method you use the lands just keep clumping. 
Immature College Student (Also a Rules Advisor)
I experienced this before and conceded the game in Round 2. I still won the match because of good Round 1 and 3s.

Mafia Game Slots:

1. Open

2. Hundred Acres (Dead Town)

3. Open

4. Open

5. Open

6. Open

I'd keep it. At the very least I'd have a beautiful view of a landscape before I died.
Grin and keep. Psychowarfare.
Show
Obligatory and Preliminary Smiley Reservoir: IMAGE(http://rsescape.net/forum/Smileys/RSE%20emotes/Wee.png)IMAGE(http://rsescape.net/forum/Smileys/RSE%20emotes/Dancing%20AIM.gif)IMAGE(http://rsescape.net/forum/Smileys/RSE%20emotes/rawr.gif)IMAGE(http://rsescape.net/forum/Smileys/RSE%20emotes/ghgh.png)IMAGE(http://rsescape.net/forum/Smileys/RSE%20emotes/%5D%5D.gif)IMAGE(http://rsescape.net/forum/Smileys/RSE%20emotes/luv.gif)IMAGE(http://rsescape.net/forum/Smileys/RSE%20emotes/circle.png)IMAGE(http://www.the-gladiatorz.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/sly.png)IMAGE(http://www.the-gladiatorz.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/turtle.gif)IMAGE(http://www.the-gladiatorz.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/jade.png)IMAGE(http://www.the-gladiatorz.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/proud.gif)IMAGE(http://www.the-gladiatorz.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/wilson.gif)IMAGE(http://www.the-gladiatorz.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/ohmy.gif)IMAGE(http://i.imgur.com/pcXQL.gif)IMAGE(http://www.the-gladiatorz.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/blushing.png)IMAGE(http://www.the-gladiatorz.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/proud.png)
You keep, no question.  As you said, if you topdeck something useful, at least you'll be able to play it.
141434757 wrote:
Thread is so legit it's unbelievable, lol. Though I'm interested in knowing what gain there is to fish here. No, foreign prince, I will not invest in your grand profitable banking corporation.
I generally try not to mulligan past five, but if I found myself in this situation I'd keep. And most likely, I'd be messed up either way.
Thank you Blitzschnell for the awesome banner!
I've been meaning to post a question about mulligans on this forum for a while, but I keep forgetting.  I'm going to piggyback here in the hopes that I'll be forgiven.

How often do you guys mulligan in play (casual or competitive)—and how low will you go on average?  Are mulligans fairly common occurrences in your experiences, or more the exception to the norm?  Personally, I hate starting at an automatic disadvantage; I'll typically favor a long shot with a sketchy hand (within limits, of course) over the even longer shot of drawing fewer cards while hoping for better options.

To whom it may concern: it's getting really old, being unable to see the top half of anything autocarded in the first post of each thread. Fixplz,kthx.
I'd mull to three. I don't keep hands that do nothing.
I generally try not to mulligan past five


I generally try not to mulligan past seven. You know, when there's a choice about it. It is true, admittedly, that any five-card hand with both land and spells is typically keepable. In this case my five was a no-lander.

How often do you guys mulligan in play (casual or competitive)—and how low will you go on average?


As low as it takes to get a hand I can win the game with. Obviously the lower I am the more conservative I am will mulling -- hence this thread, in which I ponder keeping a hand with no spells which I would virtually never do at five or above.

I'd mull to three. I don't keep hands that do nothing.


See, normally I wouldn't either. But what are the chances that a three-card hand does do something? You've got a ~22% chance to get no lands if you're playing 24, and even if you get a land, what if you don't have a one-drop? What if it's the wrong colour? I mean, that's the central problem of this whole thread, really: you don't want to keep a hand that does nothing, but is it actually worse than an average three-card hand?
blah blah metal lyrics
4 lands is a keeper.

3DH4LIF3

In Casual I allow infinite free mulligans but people are trusted to keep decent hands and not just go for amazing hands.

Mafia Game Slots:

1. Open

2. Hundred Acres (Dead Town)

3. Open

4. Open

5. Open

6. Open



I'd mull to three. I don't keep hands that do nothing.


See, normally I wouldn't either. But what are the chances that a three-card hand does do something? You've got a ~22% chance to get no lands if you're playing 24, and even if you get a land, what if you don't have a one-drop? What if it's the wrong colour? I mean, that's the central problem of this whole thread, really: you don't want to keep a hand that does nothing, but is it actually worse than an average three-card hand?



Ultimately it's a very difficult question to answer because the answer relies heavily on the deck in question. A majority of the decks I play have a very low curve so I feel comfortable in choosing 3 random cards over 4 lands when playing them. I feel that the odds of getting 1+ lands and a 1-drop in a 3 card hand are greater than top-decking a 1-drop. 3 random cards would allow me the possibility of casting something on the play. A 4 land hand is a guaranteed do-nothing on the play.  
I have only been doing sealed and drafts online in the past recent years, and in rare cases when I did mulligan to 4 cards due to previous zero/one land hands, I would actually be not so disappointed with an all-land hand.

So yeah, keep.
If I could play my entire deck off that four land.
Yes, keep.

If not, probably keep. There's a reason I mulled to four in the first place!
Always right, 102% of the time.
it depends on a couple factors. the more lands I run, the more likely I am to toss it, because I'm less likely to get no lands if I mull, whereas if I don't I'm more likely to get flooded. also, the aggressiveness of the deck I'm playing against is a big factor. if I think I can fight my way back if I don't have gas for a couple turns then I'm more likely to keep. whereas if I expect to untap turn 3 facing down multiple two-power threats, I'm more likely to ship it in the hopes of getting something. and obviously, the aggressiveness of my deck is a factor there as well. also, whether I'm on the play or draw is relevant, although it's not clear how. really, I'm just better off if I'm on the draw. I can take more risks if I am. 

 

120.6. Some effects replace card draws.

 

why are you here when NGA exists and is just better

I mean if you mull to 3 you might as well concede unless you are running some super aggressive deck. I think most people would keep 4 lands unless they conceded.
True post count: 9,900 Thanks Wotc for not counting archived posts. If I post without capital letters than means I'm posting from my phone. For some reason it hates typing capital letters. Go_Texans on MTGO. Texans 12-4 Wildcard: W Texans 19 Bengals 13 Divisional: L Texans 28 Patriots 41 Another awesome season!
I have a deck which can play every single card in it with . And it wins more than you'd think (although it's not standard anymore. Hmmmmmmn) So yes keep with that deck.

My other deck is blood artist tokens and unless I had all swamps, I would keep as well.
[*c]Island[*/c] minus the * = Island Really. You need to know this.
Also
We are the Izzet Some think we are scattered after the disappearance of Niv-Mizzet He is connected to us by the firemind He has formulated a master plan Before, we were just experimenters, looked down upon Now we have a greater purpose This bit is random And so is this Yeah
I mostly draft, where even a 7-card all land hand is at least worth thinking about keeping (I'd probably send it back, but I wouldn't be happy about it). Constructed? It entirely depends upon the deck.

But a 4-card all land hand? That's dicey. I'd probably keep it, but I also freely admit that when it comes to constructed play I am far from a master of the subtle art of the Mulligan.

Scope my YouTube channel!

Here's a shout out for Scholars' Books & Games in Bridgewater, MA, and for Paladin's Place in Darmstadt, Hessen, Germany where I was stationed for two years. Support your FLGS!

Attacking the darkness since 1987, turning creatures sideways since 1994.

Man up and keep it.
IMAGE(http://images.community.wizards.com/community.wizards.com/user/blitzschnell/c1b8574f03c7cff35d72311f1208599a.jpg?v=90000)
I wanna know what you threw away from your 7, 6, and 5 cards.
I've kept no land with Birds but I admit it takes balls, and sometimes you topdeck forest, sometimes you wish you went to six.
I've only gone to 4 a few times and I've always kept.
Keep. Seriously, most people underestimate how many lands they need anyway.
139359831 wrote:
Clever deduction Watson! Maybe you can explain why Supergirl is trying to kill me.
---- Autocard is your friend. Lightning Bolt = Lightning Bolt
Four lands is a snap keep.  The hand does something: it plays lands.  That, at least, gives you the chance to play something when you draw it.  Most likely, the hand I mulliganed at five did nothing, not capable of playing lands or spells.

I mean if you mull to 3 you might as well concede unless you are running some super aggressive deck. I think most people would keep 4 lands unless they conceded.




Conceding instead of playing it out?  Is that you brad nelson?
If it's game 1 and you decide that a mulligan to 3 is an auto-scoop, at least keep going down to 0 so you get a better opportunity to see what deck your opponent is playing.
Only if I was running blue, then I could have 1-2 islands out and look like I'm considering a counterspell.  I've been victim to the strategy, and I've used it once or twice to success.
If we get to pick decks dibs on lands.deck
Show
Obligatory and Preliminary Smiley Reservoir: IMAGE(http://rsescape.net/forum/Smileys/RSE%20emotes/Wee.png)IMAGE(http://rsescape.net/forum/Smileys/RSE%20emotes/Dancing%20AIM.gif)IMAGE(http://rsescape.net/forum/Smileys/RSE%20emotes/rawr.gif)IMAGE(http://rsescape.net/forum/Smileys/RSE%20emotes/ghgh.png)IMAGE(http://rsescape.net/forum/Smileys/RSE%20emotes/%5D%5D.gif)IMAGE(http://rsescape.net/forum/Smileys/RSE%20emotes/luv.gif)IMAGE(http://rsescape.net/forum/Smileys/RSE%20emotes/circle.png)IMAGE(http://www.the-gladiatorz.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/sly.png)IMAGE(http://www.the-gladiatorz.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/turtle.gif)IMAGE(http://www.the-gladiatorz.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/jade.png)IMAGE(http://www.the-gladiatorz.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/proud.gif)IMAGE(http://www.the-gladiatorz.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/wilson.gif)IMAGE(http://www.the-gladiatorz.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/ohmy.gif)IMAGE(http://i.imgur.com/pcXQL.gif)IMAGE(http://www.the-gladiatorz.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/blushing.png)IMAGE(http://www.the-gladiatorz.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/proud.png)
I wanna know what you threw away from your 7, 6, and 5 cards.


IIRC: hand with nothing cheaper than four, one-lander without a one-drop, no-lander.
blah blah metal lyrics
I'd keep and pray for my Faithless Looting.
Hello I'm trying to build a kor deck for my stepson does anyone have any suggestions or combos I should use?  Thanks
 
I'd likely scoop. It depends on the context and what is being played, I guess. If your opponent kept their first hand you have to be houdini to pull a win out of your ass starting with less than 5 cards. Having nothing to play on top of that is damning.
Okay fair enough 
I'd likely scoop. It depends on the context and what is being played, I guess. If your opponent kept their first hand you have to be houdini to pull a win out of your ass starting with less than 5 cards. Having nothing to play on top of that is damning.


Never tell me the odds!

(I did go on to lose that game, but it was a lot closer than you might think.)
blah blah metal lyrics
I'd likely scoop. It depends on the context and what is being played, I guess. If your opponent kept their first hand you have to be houdini to pull a win out of your ass starting with less than 5 cards. Having nothing to play on top of that is damning.


in discussions like this, I find it's best to assume you're in game 3. that way the question is simply "what's the best way to win this game right here?"

 

120.6. Some effects replace card draws.

 

why are you here when NGA exists and is just better

4 lands is a snap keep for a mull to 4.  You would never mull to 3 in this scenario, because it's basically not possible to get a better hand than that 4 carder. 4 lands is better than 2 lands and one spell, and is obviously better than 3 lands.



Only exception I can think of is if you're playing some hyper aggressive constructed deck, but if that's the case you're dead no matter what because of your mulligans, so it's pretty much a moot point.  In limited, a 4 lander gives you a reasonable chance of success as long as you draw very few lands the rest of the game.
Sign In to post comments