Not So Random - A Guide to RNG
Author: Andrew ‘The Water Boiler’ Klawitter
“Without randomness, it ceases to be a game, and instead becomes just an elaborate puzzle for you to solve.”
Intro to Randomness 101
Any card game that you encounter will be a game based on the odds or probability of a specific occurrence, and the strategy involved is the maneuvering of your particular position to have the greatest possible odds of winning.
The advent of a customizable deck, that is predetermined by each player before the beginning of the game, is what gives customizable card games (CCG for short) a specific skillset requirement for players to master. This deck building phase is completed by each player, separately, before the start of the 2-player-portion of the game. It is one of the most important aspects in mitigating randomness, seeing as players decide which pieces they will be playing with, prior to the perceived beginning of a “game”.
This deck building phase is where a lot of the skill in a CCG is focused. (By-and-large, one of the positive attractions provided in the arena.) But because this portion of the game has a separate feel to it, players disassociate the choice of hero and cards included in their deck as having a large impact on the game’s outcome. Instead of considering this factor, they can become entrenched in the thought process of losing based on “random” aspects that occurred within the individual match, the 2-player-portion of playing.
That random factor that you are experiencing is present in numerous games throughout history, all of which are incredibly fun to play and experience. For instance, when you play a game of Risk, you roll the dice to see who will end up losing armies. More appropriately, when you roll dice in Backgammon, and then are tasked with deciding on the best course of action for you to utilize the die roll. This later example of Backgammon can be extrapolated into the CCG space.
There is a random factor included, in order to reward the players who can best incorporate that randomness into their gameplay effectively. This encourages skill in adaptation of strategy, rather than following a pre-determined simple flowchart of decision making. This randomization increases the permutations of that flowchart, thus adding a layer of complexity that cannot be achieved with static non-random events. One of the primary factors governing replayability of a CCG is the appeal of non-repetition given by these random elements of gameplay.
The games that are the most complex have a larger flowchart of decisionmaking. The complexity benefits players who can visualize and understand all those permutations and ramifications of a single action, understanding that action’s impact on the game as a whole.
Where such a system fails is evident when you have a single random event, causing a negative outcome, ending up becoming your primary focus. Instead of narrowing in, and crying ‘nerf’ on a specific card’s perceived random impact on the game as a whole, you should evaluate how your gameplay came to such an event, that this becomes your focalpoint.
Basic Random Concepts
Deck designers tend to consider the random factors involved in drawing cards, mulligans, and the importance of a crystal cost curve in the deckbuilding phase. These topics were briliantly discussed in the article RNG and the role of skill.
Also commonly blamed, during the course of a match, is the word “random” that appears on cards themselves. But these cards all exist for a reason, and it is more than just for the ‘fun’ factor.
Random Damage
Non-targeted damage is an excellent example of where the random mechanic shines. The main purpose of non-targeted damage is to be able to deal with an opponent’s stealth minions. Because you are not allowed to targeting them, the randomization mechanic gives you a solid means to contend with a stealthed minion at a low crystal cost. Examples of this type of card is the Mad Bomber, Multi-shot, Cleave, Forked Lightning, and Arcane Missiles.
The relatively low crystal cost on these spells is a factor of their randomness. They are aggressively costed below what a similar effect would be, if it was targeted. Yet by some skill in playing them, by limiting their potential targets, you can achieve a significant impact with an undercosted damage effect. (This also provides a very dynamic play decision against Hunter, Warrior, or Shaman opponents, where you have to weigh the risk/reward potentials of leaving exactly two minions on the board.)
These cards also provide hidden enjoyment for those who are looking to “solve” a cards negative side effects. The negative impact of a Mad Bomber possibly hitting your own units can be turned into a positive when paired with a card such as the Acolyte of Pain. Turning those missed shots into additional cards for later use.
Random Discards
Similarly, cards like Soulfire, Succubus and Doomguard can be mitigated by choosing when to draw cards, and in what order you play them. Understanding that when your hand contains no other cards except a Succubus, the downside is negated. But the tradeoff is in time waited. For it is likely not to be played on turn 2, where a 4/3 creature will have the highest impact. Knowing when an early Succubus is the correct play, even though it costs you a random card, and when to hold the Succubus for a free ‘final’ minion is part of the strategic decisions that are governed by this card’s battlecry text.
Random Opponents
Alternatively, if you are a betting man (or woman), Priests actually rely on an opponent’s ability to design decks. Cards like Mind Visions, Mind Games, and Thoughtsteal all have limits based on the strength of your opponent’s deck. The better your opponent, the more powerful these cards become. And yes, when against an inexperienced deckbuilder, you could end up with some pretty insignificant, or wacky, cards. This actually provides a very solid balance to these cards, since the relative strength of these will remain akin to that of your opponent’s deck.
Random Legends
There are four in this category, and all are quite highly played. Due to their legendary status, difficult obtainability, and high board impact effects, these are the most notable culprits of misplaced rage.
The first of the effects can be controlled by the player opposing Sylvanas Windrunner. The strength of this card comes from an unconscious desire to negate her deathrattle text entirely. As a board must be devoid of any remaining minions, upon resolution of her deathrattle text, to prevent any minion’s change in allegiance. This effectively allows her to force an opponent into making some suboptimal decisions, or risk losing their prized fighter. In playing cards like Novice Engineer, and other creatures with effects that have already been utilized, you can increase the chances of keeping a significant board threat, and passing over a measly 1 / 1 instead.
Of Frogs and Sheep, the strength of the Tinkmaster Overspark is in allowing non-Mage, or non-Shaman players access to a Polymorph effect. Effectively removing an opponent’s significant threat, and turns it into a Devilsaur or a Squirrel. But it does take a little skill to know when he should institute his Hex. So much so, that there is a whole article about this guy, which is worth a read. An in depth analysis of Tinkmaster Overspark, and when and how to use him in your decks, instead of just “rolling the dice”.
Ragnaros the Firelord has a bullseye on his back. (Or is it on your back?) The strength in this Big Game critter lies in the fact that it is somewhat difficult to kill efficiently. It generally takes multiple cards, in combination, to remove this gigantic 8 / 8 minion, and that’s after he’s already done some damage. Not to mention that attempts at silencing this minion just turn it into one of the Giants, allowing the 8 damage to now become targeted. Very similar in a way to both King Krush or Pyroblast, this guy has a huge effect on the turn he appears, and yet is costed slightly lower, due to his randomness. There are many ways to think about it, but the randomness is ultimately controlled by how many creatures remain on the board. And by removing all the low health minions, a player will ensure that this blast will end up targeting something worth destroying. Therein lies the power of this minion in the hands of an intelligent player.
But remember, playing against Ragnaros is simple, just respond by targeting it with your Tinkmaster Overspark!
Nat Pagle is also a very commonly used card competitively, giving its owner a 50% chance to draw a card at the end of their turn. Given it’s low mana cost and high health (2 mana for an 0/4), Nat Pagle often forces your opponent to waste precious removal spells in an attempt to stop you from gaining and maintaining a card advantage.
Final Note
Don’t let yourself get bogged down by individual cards or single game events. Expand that focus away from singular events, and look more at the big picture. If you find yourself getting frustrated, change your class, switch from constructed to arena play, or go read the latest metagame report (to glean what others might have come up with as interesting deck designs). Perhaps even taking a break to build a snowman. Remember, this is a game, it’s meant to be fun!
Some of the most exciting and memorable moments in hearthstone can come from these random cards and their uncertainty. When doing research for writing these articles, in my games played during the last article “Opening Moves”, an opponent began with an oppening move of Innervate into Alarm-O-Bot. This peaked my interest. Since I did not have the appropriate counter-card in my hand, that Alarm-o-bot promptly switched places with Ragnaros at the start of the Druid’s second turn! While I’m sure this does not occur with great regularity, the fact that a Druid can power out a turn two Ragnaros is certainly an exciting and interesting concept! (I apologize in advance to everyone who, having not read this article, now has to deal with a ton of druid opponents powering out super-large creatures off turn one alarm-o-bots. And thus quit the game in rage, heading outside to create a giant snowman in the shape of an alarm-o-bot, for the sole purpose of a stress outlet.)
Which of the random cards is your favorite? Have you taken the time to design decks around some of the more obscure ‘random’ hearthstone cards, in hopes to exploit their randomness in an entirely strategic capacity? or do you prefer to cry out “Yolo Bomber!” and watch the little barrels fly? Let me know in the comments section below!
SIMILAR ARTICLES
This is as well written a defense to on card RNG effects as we are likely to be seen, but it’s still not convincing.
Firstly, there are an awful lot of good players, better than the author of the article, saying that certain on card RNG effects are too game swinging. It is not the disagreement with them that I am criticizing here, but rather the author’s willingness to sweep that side of the argument away as purely the complaining of new players when in fact it mainly comes from those with established names and reputations in the community.
Secondly, there is a fundamental difference between the RNG effect as it occurs before decision making, and as it occurs after decision making. A card with a static effect (e.g. shadow word: pain) is randomly added to your hand at the start of the turn, but its effect is the same every time you play it. And despite that, Magic and WoW:TCG and even HS have shown the ability to do a lot of unique, creative and complicated things with those cards WITHOUT adding the necessity of having to pray for a certain effect. Hearthstone as a game already has a low level of interactivity compared to those two games because it lacks phases and a stack, or the ability to interact with your opponent on their turn. Having RNG on a card, especially one that takes up an entire turn, means that you make your own play and have no ability to direct the turn towards the game state that is favorable towards you. That is why when it comes to issues of skill discrimination and tournament play, these cards draw the ire of high level players.
If the author believes that the only viable way to play Hearthstone is by spamming a ton of games on ladder such that the variance works its way out, he needs to understand that most games become successful on the backs of good players who inspire the people that stick around, and that new players who do need to hear that its better focus on improving their own game than to complain, come and go based on how well the community that intends to stick around carries the game. And if he believes that playing tournament games, where format is often best of 3 single elimination, and even when it’s not rarely features a long best of series with the same two decks, is at all the same as playing on the ladder where you can play an entire tournament’s worth of matches in a single sitting, he is simply wrong.
Additionally, few people honestly wish to sit around and play through the variance. In poker, this is considered acceptable because that comes from a single hand which lasts about as long as the first 3 turns in a game of hearthstone. Individual hearthstone games are long enough that simply losing one to an argent squire getting turned into a devilsaur on turn 3 can represent a significant portion of one’s time they are able to devote to the game.
Which brings me to the final issue that gets waxed over here, which is that the justification for having these cards in the game is fairly weak. Randomness is only inherently fun if winning is not your primary objective. As soon as it becomes so, it is far more fun to have a game that acts predictably and allows the better player to win. Yes card draw is RNG, and yes you can mitigate it through deck building and cantrips, and this does not seem to be particularly different than on card RNG, but again the difference is WHEN the randomness occurs. If it occurs before decision making, at least you have a response to it the vast majority of the time. If you get your card turned into a squirrel, and the next turn you have 1 line to win which is to play your tink and pray for a 5/5, when you don’t get the 5/5 you get to scoop. Only now, instead of having known at the start of the turn and scooping and saying “well I lost this one” one of the two of you is going to be yelling “TINKMASTER IS SO FUCKING STUPID” at your screen.
And even then, fun should not get in the way of viability. Even if we accepted that Tinkmaster and Pagle were fun (which frankly, is a discussion and not a given despite what the on card RNG people like to purport), surely they could be given fun effects that were less ridiculous.
I was never much of a magic player but when I was in highschool the card Dragonstorm was my very favorite. Dragonstorm, in my opinion, is still way more fun than any card in HS, and it has the same effect every time you play it (ie it’s not a coinflip or random). In fact, as far as “fun” hearthstone cards go, I think Onyxia, Malygos, Prophet Velen, Nozdormu (if he worked) and Archmage Antonidas are all WAY WAY WAY more fun than Tinkmaster or Pagle.
When there is money on the line, seeing a game go to who wins the tinkmaster coinflip is excruciating, not fun or exciting. And you don’t have to be the one playing for it either.
Randomness before decisions. It’s very simple. And in the end, that is where the game will go, because that’s where all the other TCGs went. And you are free to argue that the way things are now is better, and you will still on the wrong side of this game’s history.
Extremely well written analysis there Trashcanmagic. I agree - the key distinction is between randomness that occurs before you make your decisions, and randomness that occurs afterwards. The latter kind is arguably already too prevalent in Hearthstone as it is — but by far the most problematic are Tinkmaster and Pagle. Here’s to hoping that Blizzard takes another look at these two cards in particular, and that they can manage a balance between casual “randomness” that can be “fun”, and at the same time improving the competitive viability of this game — if that’s even a goal of theirs at all.
This is a wonderful read! The ability to leverage potential RNG in your favor is an element of skill in Hearthstone that is rarely in other card games I’ve played. If you can successfully set up a scenario where the target Ragnaros hits doesn’t matter, well done! I think you should be greatly rewarded for your efforts — and that sort of mindset applies across the board, as far as I’m concerned n__n
While I would agree to certain assumptions like “you can minimize the RNG influence in the deck construction process”, i have to agree with Trashcanmagic.
For me this is not about Ladder Play or anything - there the variance of coinflips will even out after a few dozend games - yet if you want to take HS to a level with serious competitions such as Magic or other great Card Games, cards that force coinflips are just not acceptable. While I can agree that the random factor of certain cards such as Lightning Storm is acceptable, since it’s basically a 2 damage board “clear” that may do a bit more on some targets, some other cards are more of a problem. (Lightning Storm will even out the variance with a higher chance even in a best of 3 since it hits multiple targets per cast and the spell is likely to be casted multiple times per series)
I can even agree with things like Arcane Missiles, Mad Bomber or Holy Wrath, although i don’t like those cards for the RNG reason (10 years Magic will show at that point), since they are also likely to balace out and since it’s important to know when to play them. Hell i don’t even think that Ragnaros needs to be changed - yes i would like to see him beeing changed, but in the end he is not that bad, since he won’t come out early and since his usefullness is again heavily depending on the board situation. So yes I would not mind seeing those cards getting changed since i don’t like increased RNG in those situations, but i don’t think that those cards are really an extreme problem.
The Problem with the two usually called cards - Nat Paggle and Tinkmaster - is more severe. Both cards will most likely not be able to even out variance since Tinkmaster will usually get a maximum of 2 flips per game (if played by both players) and Paggle is kind of simillar to that - granted that he will often get more flips, but usually it’s far from evening out - especially since you have to take into account that in many situations Paggle needs to be removed asap without sacrificing to many cards.
The Problem that comes into play here is that his effect can be produced by various other methods that don’t involve RNG at all. One possibility would be to change him to a marker based creature - one marker per turn, remove two, draw a card or anything along those lines.
There’s a big big difference between spending seven turns planning to make your Ragnaros hit the right target, and turn 1 Argent turn 2 Coin TMO RNGG!
I object to:-
I have no objection at all to asking Blizzard to examine the impact of random early-game tempo swings.
I think that Pagle is reasonably safe to ban in tournaments in the meantime - along with the obvious Nozdormu!
I suspect TMO plays such an important a part in the lategame of control-vs-control that banning him would too severely warp the metagame compared to ladder.
You’re making this about something it’s not; and fundamentally that does not change or even challenge the validity of the argument regarding these cards.
Imagine two M:TG states:
1. game with random effect cards
2. game without random effect cards
and consider our current HS state versus one where all on card RNG was taken away:
a. the current game with random effect cards
b. a new state without those effect
it is possible that a. is less random than 2., but if 2. is a BETTER state than 1. it is entirely possible, and probably likely, that a state b. of HS would be better than state a.
Does this make it clear why your argument is quite literally irrelevant to the conversation? You can use examples from other games without the conversation having to be about relative states of each game. That is why League of Legends and DotA constantly trade ideas that push both towards being better games but they have not all of a sudden grown exactly like each other.
Also, I find this;
to be absolutely laughable. The person who plays better deserves to win, and it better happen damn near every time (even in a card game, which is why it’s not EVERY time), or you won’t have a tournament. You won’t have serious players. And a 1v1 multiplayer game cannot survive on casuals alone.
I think that there is a lot of things that you are overlooking with this statement. Playing very well and building a deck very well are two very different things. there are poor and favorable match-ups for each class based on the current meta. I can play very well, but lose to my bad match-up. I can also play very well, and lose because I have poor draws. I would agree with your statement if we were playing chess, because there you have a 16 card deck, and you draw all of it at the start of the game. Card games are so very different, because of the inherent randomness of card draw and the differences between all of the decks.
Moving on, over the past couple of days, these arguments have been raging on and on, but it seems that the arguments boil down to Nat Pagle and Tinkmaster Overspark, because these are the cards that people feel hurt the most in the early game, and a little about Ragnaros. Most people then sprinkle a little RNG is bad, and should be removed to their argument as well. I really haven’t seen many people complaining that the RNG on Animal Companion or the Shaman Hero Power is ruining the game. I would like to thank tAcHy for actually bringing up some other cards as well. I think that we agree that these cards are fine, because they are not really an extreme case.
There absolutely is a reason that these cards are in the game. They have a very effective Mana cost and they mostly have situational value. You are trading the certainty of the play and the ability to use them in any situation for the Mana cost. If you could pick the effect, then the card cost gets ridiculously high. Imagine a Tinkmaster that let you pick what you wanted to get, a Squirrel or a Devilsaur. That card would cost 6 Mana, or more. Or maybe a Nat that drew a card every turn. That would more than likely be a 4 cost card. Some people would like this, because now there is less of a random factor in the game. Like I said, though, the arguments boil down to these two cards, because they are a little overpowered in a some people’s eyes.
I want to talk about other cards, though. Knife Juggler, for instance has a random knife effect when played. This can outright kill opposing minions in the early game. Is it overpowered? Probably not. Is Animal Companion or Mad bomber ruining the game for people, because they have a random effect? No. These cards get a cheaper cost, and are still played in some decks, because they can have good effects. On an even larger note, is playing one of these cards determining the winner of a high level tournament? I would say, probably not. There are too many other factors involved in the course or a game to say that one card outright wins you the game.
I don’t see the RNG in this game as a terrible thing. I have agreed with most people that in general I do not like a lot of cards with random effects, because I cannot control the outcome. I, however, accept the fact that these cards are in the game, and like most player will continue to use the best ones that fill a niche in decks. Need card draw in a Warrior or a Hunter? Well, you might want to run Nat. Need a Hex in a Warrior or a Rogue? Well, you might want to run Tinkmaster. Need a great finisher in Pally? You could run Ysera or Ragnaros. Need an early game way to deal with Worgen Infiltrators or Blood Imps? You should run Knife Juggler or Mad Bomber. Need board clear in a Shaman? looks like you are going to run Lightning Storm. I could go on and on. These cards fill that niche use, and all have a random effect.
It’s absoloutely relevant to the conversation. Your claim is that Hearthstone is “too random” to be competitively viable. Magic is competitively viable. If Hearthstone is less random than Magic (and if the stats I’ve seen so far pan out, then the evidence suggests that this is true), then Hearthstone cannot be “too random” to be competitively viable.
I understand your objection that maybe it would be better if it was less random, but if “less random” is always preferable, then you should play a game that doesn’t involve drawing cards from a random deck.
No, it’s really not.
Look, LoL has lower skill discrimination than DotA 2 AND significantly worse players even at the top yet one of those games is crushing the others on viewership numbers and it’s not DotA. Is LoL competitively unviable? No. Could it be changed to better differentiate skill, and in the process be made a better game? Absolutely.
If I didnt think HS had a chance or was even reasonable as it is, why would I bother posting about it? Why argue to make changes that I think will make it better if I think it has no ability to be anything more than a coin flip?
And no, just because you say your point is relevant doesnt make it so.
Ok. So what’s your claim? You keep changing it so often that I can’t keep track.
That Hearthstone with less variance would be a better game?
If so, how much variance is tolerable? Is it only about before-decisions and after-decisions?
If you were forced to play a 60-card deck of 1-ofs with no mulligan but could never draw during your turn and there were no on-card RNG effects, would that be better or worse?
Your inability to discern what I have said, quite plainly and consistently, is your problem and not mine.
“The person who plays better deserves to win, and it better happen damn near every time … or you won’t have a tournament“
“it’s whether these random effect cards are affecting tournament viability“
“people expect to win when they play better than their opponent, and that’s more true in other card games than it is in HS right now.”
“wizards took coin flips out of magic for a reason”
Those are just from the past couple of days. It sounds an awful lot to me like you’re claiming that Hearthstone is more random than Magic, and that it’s too random to support a competitive tournament scene.
Then when I addressed your claim, you change it and claim that my reasoning is irrelevant. This is what? The third time you’ve done it?
So come on, what’s your claim?
nope nope nope.
all Im saying, and all Ive ever said other than your third example where I overstated things a bit, is that the game at a high level would be better, specifically in the area of skill discrimination, without on card RNG effects.
viability is a spectrum and I am truly sorry that this concept is too subtle for you to understand.
oh and your posts are irrelevant because in order to talk about what you’re talking about you are operating on this assumption that all of these really weak equivalencies you are drawing hold and the do only in your own mind.
So you *didn’t* say that it isn’t predictable enough for competitive play, and that other card games are more skill discriminating? Like you said in those quotes? O.o
I think you’re trolling. Good day, sir.
Isn’t managing the RNG factor an element of skill? I would argue that the better players in Hearthstone are able to plan for the possibility of RNG rolling against them, and to not count too heavily on RNG working for them. I would say that being able to do this is an element of skill. Why is that particular skill less valuable than the other skills used?
Would you not argue that better Magic players are more skillful at dealing with bad draws?
Hearthstone has eliminated much of the variance in draws. There is no penalty for replacing your starting hand, your mana ramp is automatic, and your deck is smaller which resolves in more reliable draws. I really don’t think Hearthstone would be all that interesting to play at the highest levels with all the random card elements gone.
At the highest levels, players generally know what is in their opponent’s decks. Since the draw variance is so significantly reduced, you can make a decent guess as to what options your opponent might have in their hand at any given time (this is much harder in Magic). I think that you’d see play turn into a very calculated game, more like Chess or Backgammon than a CCG.
I will agree that too much randomness hurts the competitive nature of the game. I just don’t think Hearthstone is anywhere near that level. Pagle and Tink are perhaps too swingy. But Animal Companion? Master Swordsmith? Mad Bomber? Are these cards really hurting the game? I really don’t think they are.