A player from my area visited another local store he wasn't familiar with tonight. He went to play in a sanctioned draft, and apparently the store has a house rule, which is the first mulligan, no matter the format, is free. This feels wrong to me. Is this big enough to matter? Or just let it go?

Edited Patrick Nelson (Oct. 7, 2015 10:30:28 PM)

For me, it's a big deal.
It's a sanctioned format, which is reported by the WER to wizards, scores there can help a pesron get to nationals.
Because it's a sanctioned format, it should follow all of the regular play rules at the Regular REL, if it was a casual event(and not a senctioned one) then they can take 100000 free mulligans if they wish.

Originally posted by David Shor:

Because it's a sanctioned format, it should follow all of the regular play rules at the Regular REL, if it was a casual event(and not a senctioned one) then they can take 100000 free mulligans if they wish.

I totally agree with David. :)

Edited Jacopo Strati (Oct. 8, 2015 05:09:57 AM)

It gets interesting with the changes that Wizards made with the organized play announcement from, I believe, pro tour KTK, that stores could sanction any format for FNM, including create your own. It could be possible that this store's format was create your own: draft with friendly mulligan. I don't know if it being at FNM or not matters or if I'm just misunderstanding the announcement but I feel this is okay as long as everyone in the store knows what is happening beforehand.

If create your own format does cover make your own mtr, sure, but I thought format meant deck construction and game play changes.

I don't know how the store schedules it. If they do it as a casual 1 pwp event for fnm, they can build their own format. But if they use 1x, they need to stick to one of stock formats and rule sets. From what I understand, this store has always done it this way (free mulligan).

I don't think it's reasonable to think that Create Your Own Format allows
stores to rewrite the MTR. That's a very slippery slope. One particularly
egregious example that some store owners might actually do is “Standard
with no IDs.” I don't think it's crazy to think that that's a thing TOs
might try to do, and it's something we don't want to let them do. We've
had discussions in this forum about how doing things of that nature are
expressly disallowed, and this suggestion seems to fall under that same
reasoning.