To preface things: my exposure to deckbuilding games is very limited, as in 3~4 games of Puzzle Strike and Thunderstone, so it's entirely possible that my statements are inaccurate. That's one of the reasons I'm writing this, in fact, to see if I'm missing something. So, the standard deckbuilder mechanics seem to result in a lot of randomness. You discard everything at the end of a turn, and with hand sizes being relatively small compared to your (usually ever-increasing) deck, the chances of getting what you want in your hand is rather low. Maybe that's what the game is: make the most out of what you draw, and build your deck so good draws are more likely. And that's fine. But! I like combos, and there's not much room for them here. If you don't draw your whole combo in a single turn, it means you've wasted the cards you DID draw, as you won't see those again until you go through the rest of your deck. Traditional MtG-like games also have luck of the draw, but there you have control over the cards you do keep, so mitigating randomness becomes a choice you can take. So why don't deckbuilder games give you more control over the randomness? Would that have some unintended, negative consequences for the gameplay, perhaps? PS has features like this, with the piggy banks - but it's on a chip, so you essentially need a combo (pig + whatever you want to keep) to set up a combo. Thunderstone adds two standard actions, where you can destroy one card in your hand, or keep any number of them for the next turn, which I think are really cool additions. More games should have that. Then again, as I said in the beginning, it's also possible that the solution to my woes would be to suck less at deckbuilding.