Question regarding "working as intended" for Deathrattle returning to full hand

Play Mode Discussion
04/22/2017 05:54 AMPosted by Barnabas
There is no such thing as an 11 card hand, ever.


Except that there is, unless it got patched. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PRKsptFhrDg

The best part? It is all about deathrattles and bounce effects! By some bizarre quirk of the rules being able to cast Shadow Madness on a card in your opponent's hand
04/22/2017 05:54 AMPosted by Barnabas
This is 100% your arbitrary desire to want minion returning effects to first transform those minions into cards before attempting to return to hand and not an objective debate about what is and isn't logical.


I think this is the main problem with OP's argument - thinking that minions on board are something different than cards representing them when it isn't.

Minion cards played on the board do not magically become some other entity. They're still cards played on the board, just changed visually for the aesthetic pleasantry; minions could've remained as cards while on the field, it would change nothing except that the game would look different. The game even shows you its "card form" whenever you put cursor on the minion, together with the modified attack and health on it and even crossed out card text if silenced, and all buffs and deathrattles listed below it.

Also, unlike other card games, Hearthstone strictly enforces 10 card hand limit at any point. Yu-Gi-Oh, for example (I'm using it since I'm most familiar with its rules, compared to Magic and other card games I've played), has a 6 card hand limit (Infinite Cards continuous spell breaks that rule a long as it's active), but it is enforced only when a player's own turn ends, at which they have to discard surplus cards (of their choosing) to the graveyard. Hearthstone simply destroys a card whenever it tried to reach a hand if a hand has 10 cards.

So, a card is destroyed (sent to graveyard/discard pile, whatever you want) whenever it tries to enter full hand, no matter the source. A minion card affected by bounce effect (Sap, for example) tries to enter the hand from field; it cannot, thus is destroyed. Minion was destroyed while being on field, thus its deathrattle triggers.
04/22/2017 06:15 AMPosted by SquidLips
That still doesn't solve the problem with Blizzard not having an official rulebook anywhere. How is your observation that "cards are still cards" any more valid than mine?


Because it's an observation, based on how the game actually works, not an expectation like yours.

Deathrattles triggering when a card is destroyed when being attempted to be returned to a full hand should have been a clue.

They even make this clear in the animation. If you Vanish a big board, only the cards that return to hand actually move off the board. The rest just sit there and blow up.
04/21/2017 06:22 PMPosted by SquidLips
Instead sorting out the logic and rules of their own game, Blizzard simply chooses to destroy the minion.

You seem to be under the impression that minions are only destroyed in this case because Blizzard couldn't figure out how to make it do something else.

Blizzard doesn't want bounce effects to erase Deathrattles.

It isn't a bug. It isn't a paradox. It's a choice.

You can disagree with them for balance reasons, and that's perfectly reasonable, but acting like this behavior is the result of broken game logic is missing the point entirely.
It's a silly thing to get all bent out of shape about. HS is not MtG or any other card game, it's HS.

The common theme that both sides of the argument at least can agree on is the need for a list of rules and card interactions. So I did a quick Google search..

http://hearthstone.gamepedia.com/Advanced_rulebook

Seems pretty decent.
Plus there's a lot of references in the 'New Player Guides' section of the forums.
Didn't see this link posted there unless I missed it. But I'm sure there's useful information one can find if they bother to do a little digging.
Thanks for keeping the conversation rolling, everyone. Even those who have been downvoting my posts and voicing their disagreement.

I'll try to list some things that leads me to say this is a patchwork (albeit one that is "working as intended," as in, it is a design choice that Blizzard made, one that many of you were quick to note that I disagree with.)


  • Blizzard designed all the rules.
  • In the rules, they decided to assign a 10-card hand limit.
  • They also decided to create cards that return cards to hand.
  • This resulted in a situation where the design of the 10-card hand limit and the design of the cards that return cards to hand are in conflict.
  • (To state the above more specifically: A card cannot return to hand if there is no space for it.)
  • A fix had to be made to reconcile the two.
  • The fix they came up with was to have the cards be destroyed from play instead of returning to hand.


However, think about this as though you were the designer. That is, forget the way that it actually works, and ask: "Am I satisfied with this solution? Does it work as it intuitively should? If you weren't already dictated by Blizzard what 'solution' you should accept, would you still defend this solution?"

These were the questions that I asked myself. And I was not satisfied. It doesn't seem intuitive to me. Intuitively, if a card says that it returns a card to hand, it should do just that: not something else (not destroy the card).

My point is that the existence of this conflict requires a fix. Put yourself in the shoes of the designer. What is the solution you decide? Do you decide to continue and strictly enforce the rule of 10-card hands, or do you choose to strictly enforce the card design that returns cards to hand? Since both cannot occur, one of these has to be altered. Blizzard chose to alter how the card works in this special case, changing it from a return-to-hand to a destroy. I can't accept that as a reasonable outcome of this sort of interaction, and frankly, I'm surprised that so many people don't see the lazy design here.

Pretend that you are the designer. Pretend that there is no fix yet for the stated conflict between hand size and return-to-hand. You have essentially an infinite number of ways that you can try and reconcile this. Keep in mind that at any point, you, as the designer, can change how the hand limits work and how the card itself works given any number of special cases. Heck, you can even remove the card if it is too problematic with other rules that you really wish to keep unchanged.

Just a note for context: I've played Hearthstone since beta. I have been playing it consistently since then. I'm quite aware of how the game works, and I have never actually been affected by deathrattle cards returning to a full hand. My argument here is not about whether or not I want it to work differently. It is about wishing for a consistency in the way that the game works, which this particular rule seems to violate. (I also have played Magic for nearly 20 years, and have dabbled with Yi-Gi-Oh on occasion. And I have designed a few card-based games to play with friends, as well as custom cards for various other card-based games.)

EDIT: As for minions remaining cards, I remember some years ago hearing/reading somewhere that they actually don't. The only source I could find was this one: http://hearthstone.gamepedia.com/Minion#Summoning. Namely the line "Successfully playing a minion card will transform the card into the minion itself, which will then appear upon the battleground represented by a portrait." The word transform signifies that it changes from being a card to being another entity. I know this is just from a Wiki and not from official game sources, but as a quick search, this is the only thing I could find. Another entry in the Wiki regarding returning to hand (http://hearthstone.gamepedia.com/Return_to_hand) states "The target returns to its original card form, complete with mana cost, and becomes part of the player's hand." This again is phrased as there being a transformation in the type of object it is.
04/21/2017 07:00 PMPosted by Wyman

I've heard other confusions similar to this, like how buffed damaged minions don't keep all the damage received after they lose their buffs. That got me when I first started, but quickly learned that's how this works in this game.

The only thing I actually do wish for though is a decently thorough list of all the interesting interactions this game possesses, as there are many!
:-)


Yeah, that's also one that I had to learn, but I came to accept the reasoning presented there, as it does make sense and uses consistent logic (just a different one than I had expected). That is: minions have health, they don't have damage; so if a boon is removed, the health is maintained, not the amount of damage dealt to it.

I agree that some sort of basic rule book would have been nice of Blizzard to provide, even if just as a reference.
If your hand has ten cards in it, cards attempting to move to your hand are destroyed instead.

That this triggers deathrattles is unexpected, but logical: the minion never enters the hand, so it is still in play when destroyed, so it's deathrattle triggers.

This rule has nothing to do with power level. It is because there isn't an elegant way to move a minion to a full hand, then move it to the graveyard. The Sap animation is already kind of long, because it needs to establish visually what's going on and where the minion is in your hand and how it got there. For this case, we'd have to play the Sap animation, then immediately do something to the temporary 11th card. Is it shown being discarded? What if it's Silverware Golem? What about the Warlock quest? Is it shown being burnt instead? If so, does it fly out of your hand in a way that doesn't make it look like it was discarded? How long does all this animation take? Can we even render 11 cards in hand on mobile?

And the kicker: what if this was caused by Vanish, and your hand has seven temporary cards, not one?

Instead, we have the current rule. It is startling when you learn it, but we think it is cleaner than the alternatives.
04/22/2017 11:07 PMPosted by Max McCall
If your hand has ten cards in it, cards attempting to move to your hand are destroyed instead.

That this triggers deathrattles is unexpected, but logical: the minion never enters the hand, so it is still in play when destroyed, so it's deathrattle triggers.

This rule has nothing to do with power level. It is because there isn't an elegant way to move a minion to a full hand, then move it to the graveyard. The Sap animation is already kind of long, because it needs to establish visually what's going on and where the minion is in your hand and how it got there. For this case, we'd have to play the Sap animation, then immediately do something to the temporary 11th card. Is it shown being discarded? What if it's Silverware Golem? What about the Warlock quest? Is it shown being burnt instead? If so, does it fly out of your hand in a way that doesn't make it look like it was discarded? How long does all this animation take? Can we even render 11 cards in hand on mobile?

And the kicker: what if this was caused by Vanish, and your hand has seven temporary cards, not one?

Instead, we have the current rule. It is startling when you learn it, but we think it is cleaner than the alternatives.

I think that fits nicely with my earlier statements (assumptions).

Thanks anyway.
Okay so much bad programmers are playing this game.
To update card's state to "InHand" the card should be in the hand...That's the right logic. You can't update state first and then do the action. This is WRONG.

So why is it working like this:
Card state is "OnBoard", something happens and the card is being returned to the hand. But the function a good programmer would use is something like "AddCardToHand", so you can reuse that function in drawing and some other mechanics.

AddCardToHand(cardToBeAdded){
card = cardToBeAdded
if(HandIsFull)
Discard(card);
else{
hand.add(card);
card.state = "InHand"
}
}
Discard(card){
switch(card.state){
case InDeck: MoveToTheAbyss();
break;
case InHand:..
break;
case InAbyss:..
break;
case OnBoard: MoveToGraveyard(); /*MoveToGraveyard should check if it's spell, minion, has deathrattles and etc. Then change its state to "InGrave" and add it to a list "DeadMinions" */
...
}
04/22/2017 11:07 PMPosted by Max McCall
If your hand has ten cards in it, cards attempting to move to your hand are destroyed instead.

That this triggers deathrattles is unexpected, but logical: the minion never enters the hand, so it is still in play when destroyed, so it's deathrattle triggers.

This rule has nothing to do with power level. It is because there isn't an elegant way to move a minion to a full hand, then move it to the graveyard. The Sap animation is already kind of long, because it needs to establish visually what's going on and where the minion is in your hand and how it got there. For this case, we'd have to play the Sap animation, then immediately do something to the temporary 11th card. Is it shown being discarded? What if it's Silverware Golem? What about the Warlock quest? Is it shown being burnt instead? If so, does it fly out of your hand in a way that doesn't make it look like it was discarded? How long does all this animation take? Can we even render 11 cards in hand on mobile?

And the kicker: what if this was caused by Vanish, and your hand has seven temporary cards, not one?

Instead, we have the current rule. It is startling when you learn it, but we think it is cleaner than the alternatives.


Oh my god a blue post. I never thought I would see a unico.. I mean blizzard staff member post again in my life. And about game feedback no less, maybe things are looking up now?
04/21/2017 04:58 PMPosted by Vizionarius
04/21/2017 04:53 PMPosted by KnightSaber
Hearthstone has a continuous check on handsize, 10 at any time.
If I draw a deathrattle minion with 10 cards in hand, it is destroyed. It looks at last known position of card (in deck) and does not trigger deathrattle.
If a card (with deathrattle) is returned to my hand from play, and I have 10 cards in hand already, it looks at last known position (in play), and triggers deathrattle on destruction.


I understand what happens. I just disagree with the design. I don't think it's logical to have it check last known position. I feel it would make more sense to have card be destroyed from the zone that puts the limit on its existence. Since the hand is the limiting zone, then the card should be destroyed as a card in hand.


When you have ten cards in hand and draw a card from your deck, does that card go into your hand and then get destroyed? No. It does not, it is simply destroyed. So what you are saying makes no logical sense.
04/23/2017 02:01 AMPosted by CaladynusOD
<span class="truncated">...</span>

I understand what happens. I just disagree with the design. I don't think it's logical to have it check last known position. I feel it would make more sense to have card be destroyed from the zone that puts the limit on its existence. Since the hand is the limiting zone, then the card should be destroyed as a card in hand.


When you have ten cards in hand and draw a card from your deck, does that card go into your hand and then get destroyed? No. It does not, it is simply destroyed. So what you are saying makes no logical sense.

That's exactly what I said, you maroon.

[edit] wait, were you talking to that other guy? You included my post in the quote.
NVM.
So i think we all understand how this works now, especially after the blizzard post, (Thx Max McCall btw) but still this doesnt make it right.
The fact that the minion never enters the hand doesnt mean its still in play when destroyed. It leaves the table then tries to enter your hand and while it cants then gets destroyed. Therefore its effect its similar like when you draw and your hand is full. In Hs this is not considered as discard, so it shouldnt count for warlock quest for example but its still wrong to be considered as a minion that gets destroyed. To be more specific what gets destroyed is the card not the minion.
So i understand thing like the animations problems but still i consider wrong creating rules that simply fit the animations rather than rules that make sense.
04/22/2017 10:26 PMPosted by Vizionarius
My point is that the existence of this conflict requires a fix. Put yourself in the shoes of the designer. What is the solution you decide? Do you decide to continue and strictly enforce the rule of 10-card hands, or do you choose to strictly enforce the card design that returns cards to hand? Since both cannot occur, one of these has to be altered. Blizzard chose to alter how the card works in this special case, changing it from a return-to-hand to a destroy. I can't accept that as a reasonable outcome of this sort of interaction, and frankly, I'm surprised that so many people don't see the lazy design here.


This is all based on your subjective opinion. There is no right or wrong (as Frozenwind pointed out, there are a myriad of potential solutions, all with their own merits), so I'm not sure why you continue typing up the same argument again and again. We get it, you don't agree with the solution that is implemented, that's fine. You are entitled to that opinion.

The bottom line is this: Regardless of what you think the solution SHOULD be, the current solution is a logically sound solution that the designer of the card game decided on. Whether or not you think it's reasonable is your opinion, and judging by the voting in this thread, I'd say you're in the minority. There's also no reason to belittle those who disagree with you.
04/22/2017 11:07 PMPosted by Max McCall
Can we even render 11 cards in hand on mobile?


For such a long-winded answer, I narrowed it down to the only part devs care about.
...

When you have ten cards in hand and draw a card from your deck, does that card go into your hand and then get destroyed? No. It does not, it is simply destroyed. So what you are saying makes no logical sense.

That's exactly what I said, you maroon.

[edit] wait, were you talking to that other guy? You included my post in the quote.
NVM.


I didn't include your post. Your post was there because the guy I quoted had quoted you, lol. My response was to Viz, not you.
04/23/2017 06:31 AMPosted by Elementality
04/22/2017 10:26 PMPosted by Vizionarius
My point is that the existence of this conflict requires a fix. Put yourself in the shoes of the designer. What is the solution you decide? Do you decide to continue and strictly enforce the rule of 10-card hands, or do you choose to strictly enforce the card design that returns cards to hand? Since both cannot occur, one of these has to be altered. Blizzard chose to alter how the card works in this special case, changing it from a return-to-hand to a destroy. I can't accept that as a reasonable outcome of this sort of interaction, and frankly, I'm surprised that so many people don't see the lazy design here.


This is all based on your subjective opinion. There is no right or wrong (as Frozenwind pointed out, there are a myriad of potential solutions, all with their own merits), so I'm not sure why you continue typing up the same argument again and again. We get it, you don't agree with the solution that is implemented, that's fine. You are entitled to that opinion.

The bottom line is this: Regardless of what you think the solution SHOULD be, the current solution is a logically sound solution that the designer of the card game decided on. Whether or not you think it's reasonable is your opinion, and judging by the voting in this thread, I'd say you're in the minority. There's also no reason to belittle those who disagree with you.


Very well put, Elementary. I completely agree with you.
04/22/2017 11:07 PMPosted by Max McCall
If your hand has ten cards in it, cards attempting to move to your hand are destroyed instead.

That this triggers deathrattles is unexpected, but logical: the minion never enters the hand, so it is still in play when destroyed, so it's deathrattle triggers.

This rule has nothing to do with power level. It is because there isn't an elegant way to move a minion to a full hand, then move it to the graveyard. The Sap animation is already kind of long, because it needs to establish visually what's going on and where the minion is in your hand and how it got there. For this case, we'd have to play the Sap animation, then immediately do something to the temporary 11th card. Is it shown being discarded? What if it's Silverware Golem? What about the Warlock quest? Is it shown being burnt instead? If so, does it fly out of your hand in a way that doesn't make it look like it was discarded? How long does all this animation take? Can we even render 11 cards in hand on mobile?

And the kicker: what if this was caused by Vanish, and your hand has seven temporary cards, not one?

Instead, we have the current rule. It is startling when you learn it, but we think it is cleaner than the alternatives.


Thanks for your response, Max. I had not considered the animation times when thinking of this, which I guess does add an extra complexity to it. I appreciate your acknowledgment that this is in fact an "unexpected" and "startling" interaction, and that "there isn't an elegant way" to solve this. And yeah, I accept that the way deathrattle interacts with the rule "If your hand has ten cards in it, cards attempting to move to your hand are destroyed instead" is indeed logical. I just don't believe that the rule itself is logical (or at the very least, it seems to work inconsistently when compared to other similar rules like overdrawing, and I think inconsistencies or nonparallel behavior between various rules is actually a design flaw).

I guess I was intuitively expecting this to work like how overdrawing works, where the card just "fades away." It seems inconsistent that returning cards to a full hand does not work the same way as drawing cards to a full hand, as in both cases the full hand rule is the cause of the removal of the card from game.

I can't argue with what the design team thinks is "cleaner than the alternatives"; I can only voice my reaction to the rule, which I have done here. I realize that the team has new things to worry about, and going back to re-evaluate some "less elegant" design solutions is likely not a priority. Thanks again for hearing me out and taking the time to respond.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum