I wonder if anyone would ever choose anything other than a 5 card starter deck? Perfect opening draw + the fastest possible cycling-in of Teched cards seems like a combination that would be hard to pass up, especially in an environment where your opponent would be doing the same.
1 Like
I expect diverging too far from 10 cards in either direction would punish the player doing so, and if that’s the case, I don’t see a need to enforce a size range via the rules. If it gets to be a problem, a size limit is might be necessary, but I’d like to try being lenient on the size to start with and tighten the reins only if necessary. I expect players will generally want at least 6 cards designated as worker fodder / counters to specific threats their build would otherwise be weak against, plus some number of core cards intended to be used throughout the game, but the exact number of each may not always add up to 10.
My first thought was that a 5 card starting deck would be ideal, but when I actually imagined how I’d play that, I spotted some problems. You’re going to want to worker a card on turn 1, and you don’t tech new cards into your deck until turn 2, which means you wouldn’t be able to draw 5 cards at the end of turn 1, and if you actually played a card from your hand, you’d be reducing your hand size even further. I’m not sure there’s a build that would gain enough advantage by starting so small that it would justify that disadvantage in hand size, but if there is, I’d like to see it.
3 Likes
I already thought of a beautiful way to break this.
Take a my deck, for instance [Future]/Peace/Blood.
Remove purple spells, remove Plasmodium+Tinkerer.
5 Cards left. Battle Suits, Fading Argonaut, Neo Plexus, Nullcraft, Hardened Mox.
Add Tenderfoot+Building Inspector.
Now you have everything you could ever need to accelerate into the Peace game plan immediately, while also having 1 drops.
Turn one, worker+card, you draw back to 5 and have no cards in deck or discard.
Turn two, you worker+card again, even if the card you played died, you’re drawing 5/6 cards in your cycle. If your card didn’t die, you guarantee your tech 1s.
Turn three, if you’re building your tech 2 that turn, you get to almost guarantee your tech 2s on turn four.
Basically, consistency is through the roof. Reduces draw variance by a lot.
2 Likes
So the question is, if consistency is up for both players, is that a problem or a feature of the variant?
I agree that seven is probably the optimum size for consistency, but that also means having fewer options… and in the case of the Peace engine specifically, a smaller deck size means Flagstone Garrisons provide less value, as you’ll run out of card draws sooner.
I think it just means the outcome is determined more by skill and less by luck.
Would the consistency affect player 1 more than player 2? Consistency’s nice for aggression.
1 Like
@Nekoatl how about we try it? I’ll always prefer to play something over talk about it 
I’ll commit to 3 sets of 6-game series (3 games P1, 3 on P2) where we try out a build, discuss it afterwards, and pick a new build after each set. That should take roughly until CAFS starts.
I think the first thing I’m going to try is a paired down Black Starter with Bloom and Tenderfoot added (maybe also Wither), in my Nightmare deck.
What have you got in mind?
1 Like
Sure, I’m game. I guess I’ll start with a Blue/Neutral hybrid for Finesse/Peace/Truth to see how it compares to what I’ve been playing recently.
1 Like
Anyone care to try this custom starter against me? I am going to see if I can make something really broken…
Proposed Broken Starter
Anarchy/Strength/Growth
Timely Messenger
Mad Man
Makeshift Rambaster
Bloodrage Ogre
Bombaster
Nullcraft
Reputable Newsman
Grappling Hook
Safe Attacking
Possible additional cards
Young Treant
Verdant Tree
Bloom
Charge
Fading Argonaut
1 Like
Let me finish my series again neko and I’ll try, @zhavier, if you don’t have a taker in the meantime
Are you still interested in giving this a try? My series with FrozenStorm ground to a halt when the tournament started up, and I still have strategies I want to experiment with.
1 Like
Sure! I will look at my thoughts and figure out if I want to change this starter at all.
Well, I figured between being a participant and a judge, you were too busy, but it’s your turn when you have time: [Custom] Nekoatl Demonology/Growth/Strength vs FrozenStorm Demonology/Necromancy/Finesse - #19 by Nekoatl
1 Like
I’ll get to that 
I’m fine testing that as well if you wish
1 Like
At this point, I feel like these variant rules are a success, but I would only recommend them for players who are already fairly comfortable with Codex overall, as both designing a starter for yourself and deciding how to react to your opponent’s starter extend Codex’s already lengthy learning curve. But for veterans with any interest in this game mode, I recommend trying it at least once.
3 Likes
I agree, the analysis of what your opponent could do gets pretty complicated when the starter is screwy. I do think it is possible to create very powerful and very weak starters this way, but it was fun to try.
3 Likes