Now I also wanted to mention if we had the option to make 40 rune bgs and here's why. I sometimes make 2 bgs of the same theme because I have more than enough of those runes to use. So just by the fact that it would be more fun to use those extra runes you really want to use it makes it better. I could use some fading recollection, drain vitality, purefire, retribution, fireblast or superiority which are great spells but I also need stuff like Maddening Echoes, Shatter, Demolish, Sacrifice etc. in my bg. So I NEVER have room for maybe 10-20 runes. I always see meta bgs using champs from different themes just because we need that specific option. I would prefer if we could choose the two things we need than choosing a champion from another theme that completes the requirements. I hate the fact that the better bgs aren't fully themed and it takes away the fun of it. I would like to add another rune just so I can maintain the purity of the theme.
Well I think it stops draw wins or one bg's runes combination takes advantage because I didn't have that specific rune I needed. Maybe 34.
It also more then likely would increase the length of games, removes tactics and just make bgs stuffed of all kind of stuff. Leave it at 30.
You won't need demolish or sac. 30 seems a nice tough call. I remember 20 and that was worse. Ever played a la Mage Wars, with all runes revealed turn one? Proper wizard spell book duel.
Why play if every thing had a counter to everything! This game is alot about skills, tactics and building a prober bg. You will have pro´s and you will have con´s.
Because it's all about predicting instead of knowing he has no way to counter it because that theme doesn't support it.
truthfully I wouldnt mind a larger battlegroup,, I play mtgo also,,, they dont have deck limits,,they do have a min..60.. , one would think the more cards you put in yer bg the stronger your deck would be ,, not so,, like pox,, magic has themes and such as well,,, so the idea is the more cards u put in,, the more watered down yer deck will be,, giving u less chance to get yer staple runes on the field because the % of them being drawn is reduced everyime u add another rune,, in affect adding another layer of stagety,,,to big to small? when I play a guy wit like 89 cards. (u can tell how many cards yer opponent has) im like ok I got this...but if I see 60 -62 cards im a little leary,, a disciplined player.. but better or not. there hellafun.
I get it takes a but more time to think what should I use but sometimes it's obvious to cleanse instead of sacrificing or retribution. 3 Runes should be revealed per turn. I wouldn't have any problem having all the runes revealed from the start.
You might want to check out the physical boardgame MAGE WARS. It's just like Pox with actual books of spells (= runes such as creatures, equipment, damage spells, etc) All available from turn one. No limit to number of spells. Rather a limit to overall cost of total spells in book. Simple spell is 1 point, powerful is 5. Spells out of 'theme' cost double. E.g. Nature, fire. Neat concepts.
Mtg has a limit of 4 cards of any uniqye card + you take 16 to 24 land cards. So basically u have 40 spots for 10 different cards. Pox hosts 30 spots for 15 different runes. Making a bg that counters everything is very hard but thats what meta runes are for. They do it all. Themed bgs most likely cover a lot and are good at it. But you might run into counters.
thats if u play a 60 cards deck wich u dont have to... individual cards have limits of course, , but not your entire deck.
