Innate should increase starting hand size

[Paranoia]

Simply put, it is a tad bit inane that some Cards actaully become worse when Upgraded because they become Innate and the Starting hand suffers. Not to mention that a hand of 5 can not really support more than one or two Innates anyway unless there is high variance in Innate Cards.

Let us take an example: Silent.
Infinite Blades becomes actually worse when Upgraded. Because one, optimally, wants many of these, yet Upgrading them means that one is simply brutally killed by turn 1 retaliation. Why, exactly, is one punished for upgrading a Card, of all things?
Backstab has similar issue: it sits in starting hand, and, at higher ascensions, is simply insufficient at killing anything, even weak enemies, meaning that not only does anything tough punish taking it at all, at that point even normal enemies will just cause damage at one for the insolence.


Suggestion:
Innate Cards should be in turn 1 hand in excess of the normal hand size, until 10 Cards in hand, after which they replace normal hand Cards.

Result?
Upgrading Infinite Blades is not nearly as much explicitly worse than the unupgraded version. Though, against any enemy that hurts on turn 1, meaning that one can't play them all, one still is occasionally worse off due having to reshuffle the Deck before they show up again. But, as said, at least the situation improves.
And Backstab simply ceases to be a high Ascension suicide.
Hell, even After Image+ is improved when against enemies who burst on turn 1 too much to afford one the luxury of its mild Block increase and has bigger effect due bigger initial hand size.


And it is not just about Silent:
Brutality as Innate is♥♥♥♥♥♥poor as is, especially due replacing immediately offensive and defensive Cards.
...Okay, Defect's Innates are actually decent. But it would be nice if one actually had something to play when one had Boot Sequence for free.


Tldr: Why are Innate Cards often worse than if they just were not?

[Berik Xardas]

That bugged me too for some cards, but I'm not sure if that would Innate too strong. Would need research, maybe testing that in beta could be a thing.
Also, did you know that if you have more than 5 innate/bottled card, that those actually do increase your starting hand size? With 10 innates, you really draw 10 cards.

[Paranoia]

Originally posted by Berik Xardas:

Also, did you know that if you have more than 5 innate/bottled card, that those actually do increase your starting hand size? With 10 innates, you really draw 10 cards.

Indeed, I did. Which is partially why I think that is the wrong way around:
As is, it replaces starting hand five cards first five cards, and increases hand size later;
Whereas I would prefer if it increased starting hand size first five cards, and replaced it later.

Different order, big impact. :b

[[OGM]Okocedion]

I think it should be case by case, some of them should increase starting hand size, like backstab, some shouldn't. I'm happy with image+, it is a very good card to have in the starting hand, even not augmenting hand size. Also, the innate curse would be much less of a curse.

So my counter proposal is adding a new property for cards: Innate+, would increase starting hand size by 1 in addition to being innate. Then, fine tune for each innate card if they need Innate+ or not. It also gives a new interesting way to improve cards when upgrading: Backstab could be innate, backstab+ could be innate+ :)

[pop pop]

Innate should not increase your starting hand size.

When you upgrade a card to be innate, its good for you (after image is obvious example). So you know what you are putting in your starting hand.

If you take a crad that already says innate, you also know what you are taking since you want to have this effect early in every fight (backstab or boot sequence).

Brutality as an innate card is great if you have more sustain than boiling blood or if you have synergistic relics. Card draw is useful but you should never take brutality in any slow tempo deck.

Innate is a realy strong property because you no longer have to hope for rng in terms of what you draw. You want your demon form on turn 1 and not on turn 5. Thats why bottled tornado is realy strong. In some cases later draw of essential card might result in your death.

also
If you got more than 5 innate cards, you are going to draw them all.

[Paranoia]

Originally posted by pop pop:

When you upgrade a card to be innate, its good for you (after image is obvious example). So you know what you are putting in your starting hand.

If you take a crad that already says innate, you also know what you are taking since you want to have this effect early in every fight (backstab or boot sequence).

It is almost like you ignored all the points made in the opening post in order to state the obvious.

Backstab is seldom taken exactly because having it makes one's starting hand worse in most cases. It was exactly the point: it is not taken, because it makes starting hand worse.
Infinite Blades simply sucks hard as an Innate. One wants many of them, most of the time, yet having them in starting hand just gets one killed with extreme prejudice. Hell, Frozen Egg in itself kills any attempt at Shiv run, since it'll automatically Upgrade Infinite Blades.

Just answer one question: why would an Upgrade have the possibility to make a Card worse than it was? No other Card becomes even conditionally worse when Upgraded, why would these?

[Zu]

[TL,DR stuff]
-----------------
I think ma boi Paranormal Dogo is exaggerating a bit here. I've had times where I upgraded infinite blades to get the kunai train rolling faster, or after image to compensate for lacking footworks, or machine learning to reach other powers faster.

And like, when would you ever overload on innate cards so hard that you feel bad about it anyway? Ran into the 8x3 man and got sad that 2/7 turn 1 slots were taken by backstabs which would've been tremendously useful against cultists, big orb's sentry friend, slavers, gremlin minions, birbs, parasite's shroom friend, and forcing redhead priest to heal in the very same act where you got shafted by this snek plant?
--------------
[Stuff over]


Idk, if they really needed a slight buff, I'd give the player the option to mulligan innate cards back into your draw pile and get something more desirable.

[pop pop]

I thibk powers that become innate on upgrade follow the simple logic of "you want powers to be played asap".
Its not that infinite blades is worse on upgrade. Infinite blades is countered by a lot of foes anyways. Its a problem in design and not in upgrade itself imo.

[Berik Xardas]

I forgot to mention that as well that if this is ever gonna be a thing, Writhe should be reworked then, because with increased handsize, it's gonna be even less punishing than an Injury, and for quick combats it won't be punishing at all.

[|UDG| Maybe Your Doom]

I didn't really read into any of the comments here, but I agree they should increase your hand size.

[Player 2]

Most of the cards used as examples of bad innates only gain innate on upgrade.

Which means, like many things in this game its about making critical deckbuilding decisions. You dont NEED to upgrade every card. Cards that the upgrade only grants innate, should be upgraded sparringly to give your deck consistency without crippling it.

If you're screwing over your deck with innate cards, its because you're making bad deck building and card upgrade choices.

[Paranoia]

Originally posted by Player 2:

If you're screwing over your deck with innate cards, its because you're making bad deck building and card upgrade choices.

Unless Back-Stab is supposed to be a gotcha trap option about 90% of the time, this rings hollow.
Besides, as said, I do not have the trouble of upgrading/taking those Cards. Because, as said, 90% of the time Upgrading/taking them is an actual detriment. Hence the whole topic: Upgrading/taking them is an actual detriment too often, it is trivial to see that it hinders one more than advances most of the time. Which is not really an "Upgrade", now is it? :b

[Zu]

I still don't know why you think backstab is so bad btw. Like, what exactly punishes you for dealing 11-22 for 0 on turn 1 and losing 1-2 hand slots? The rng gods because you couldn't kill a darkling and would've therefore preferred to draw footwork instead?

(Reiterating part of my previous list because you haven't given concrete examples at all.)
I sure like ma backstabs against thieves, cultists, bear & co., shellboi n rat, sentry n orB, smol shapes, reptomancer (even if I don't play it on turn 1), transient (see reptomancer), orb walkers, jaw worms, and even the aforementioned darklings if I have relevant turn 1 relics.

Idk, feels like the age-old argument that overloading on escape plans is bad due to chosen, snecko, slug, and not picking potentially more suitable cards at the time.

And again, when do you ever have so many innate cards that they actually become a problem? Exactly when you have frozen egg so it upgrades all the infinite blades you pick up so you can't defend yourself on turn 1 against 8x3 man? So what? If you did this to yourself because you wanted to go hypermode with kunai shuriken, you only win the rest of the run in a breeze.

[Player 2]

Pretty much every one of these cards is a neat little pro/con.

The powers let you consitently set up your long game in the first turn, at the risk of not having any flexibility or defense turn 1, if you over do it.

On the flipside, backstab allows for huge burst damage and ending non-elite/boss fights in the opening turn, at the cost of being on the back foot against anything that can shrug it off.

[mondsemmel]

I like that Innate has a drawback. That's a feature, not a bug.

[RolldUpTrips]

I don't like this idea. When you make something innate it's a big decision with consequences. Tougher decisions = better game