Everything becomes highlander? Talk about a big FW buff. To the main question: I think this can be an effective way of balancing powerful runes. It wouldn't work in the other direction, however. Being able to play 15 of a bad rune is not a new selling point. For power runes, though, I like the singleton rule, both for its simplicity and effect.
I had thought in the past that a value being placed on certain runes and having a cap for the BG would be interesting. However, people aren't too fond of you limiting anything they can do. Even for balance sake.
It does nothing to adress the power of said runes. They are still powerful when they show up, but now your deck is more inconsistent. It just makes everything more swingy and luck based. "Whoever draws their powerful rune first wins." Please no. As BP said, it also adds an extra restriction to deckbuilding, which I don't like. That's not to say restrictions in general are inherently bad. I just think this one is.
It would actually lower diversity, a there would be less variations of decks. Player has to make less choices when building deck, as he can not choose to occupy 2 slots with his favourite champ. For instance, if ST has 14 top Champs and all have limit 1, u include all 14. If u have option to include 2, u ciukd make one deck with 7 of them, Another deck with the other 7 etc. So deck variation will be much less and game will be more predictible in end game, but more random during early game.
Why is everyone answering the OP as if it asked if ALL runes should be deck limit 1? That is not how I read the OP. Maybe I'm missing something...
many who oppose the idea don't do it for gameplay reasons. they just don't want to see the value of their expensive runes go down. hurray for trading.
shattered nerves (35 nora)- target opposing champion will loose all their ap in the next turn and take 2 damage for every ap lost( max 14 damage ) and is paralyzed 3
