MTG Salvation

Quote from cryogen »

I was hoping for 1000 cards.

I honestly could have kept going, but I didn't want to torture you all with a longer card list.

Quote from Sheldon »

I honestly could have kept going, but I didn't want to torture you all with a longer card list.

I think you made your point quite clearly about what types of cards were more of a priority to you.

Not sure if this has come up much, but right now #1 on my would-ban list is probably expropriate. The card simply has no fun or fair use and it's basically always a game win. I'd much rather play against coalition victory - at least coalition victory can be countered via removal or strip mine or whatever. And at least if it resolves it wins quickly.

Stuff like ad nauseum etc are only played by people trying to break the game, but expropriate is popular with basically everyone and it's always a festival of misery when it gets played. First you have to convince the rest of the table that yes, they SHOULD give up their permanent, and then you have to wait for permanents to be chosen, and then you have to explain that no, they can't sac the permanent in response, and then you have to sit through another eternally long turn, and then you all lose anyway because the card is stupid and essentially can't be interacted with outside of counterspells.

Quote from DirkGently »

snip

Maybe you should make a thread up for it. I know of one local playgroup that actually banned Expropriate in house, so you're certainly not alone.

You know, if Expropriate didn't self-exile, I'd agree with you. But as is, it's still 9 mana, which is a lot, for what amounts to Time Warp + Blatant Thievery. A simple Homeward Path is already enough to mess it up, and if the Expropriating player picks the Path to steal, chances are you still have a lot better stuff laying around.

I don't think cards should be banned on the merit of "people make the wrong choice". You're absolutely right that nobody should ever vote money. But a lack of game rules regarding the sacrificing thing should never be a reason for banishment of a card either. Come across it once and you should know better.

Now if it didn't self exile, thus promoting re-use with various of blue's tricks, then it'd be a different case. As is, I have a lot more hatred for ol' Time Warp because that one actually gets chained for wins. Expropriate is a large swing but is reliant on board position far more than many, many other wincons.

Quote from DirkGently »

Not sure if this has come up much, but right now #1 on my would-ban list is probably expropriate. The card simply has no fun or fair use and it's basically always a game win. I'd much rather play against coalition victory - at least coalition victory can be countered via removal or strip mine or whatever. And at least if it resolves it wins quickly.

Stuff like ad nauseum etc are only played by people trying to break the game, but expropriate is popular with basically everyone and it's always a festival of misery when it gets played. First you have to convince the rest of the table that yes, they SHOULD give up their permanent, and then you have to wait for permanents to be chosen, and then you have to explain that no, they can't sac the permanent in response, and then you have to sit through another eternally long turn, and then you all lose anyway because the card is stupid and essentially can't be interacted with outside of counterspells.

What you are describing is a personal problem with extra turns. This card is basically blue's Insurrection. When your argument is "the card is stupid," it's not a problem with the card.

Never seen it played. It's a cool card, but at 9 mana spells literally win the game so I'm not sure I really care.

So playing with Paradox Engine in Edgar Markov Vampire Value Town has seen me begin the "so, thoughts on the power level of x card and do you think it should be banned or is it fine and what is the reasoning of your argument?" at my local game shop in regards to the aforementioned P-Engine.

I've gone back and read over the last 5 or so pages back and did see a little discussion about it. The greatest argument for not banning I have heard is that it has a 5 cmc, requires a deck to be built around and can be dealt with in most situations (except there's this thing called I bury you in the stack, but I digress).

I'm not sure I agree with the "requires your deck to be built around it" argument so I would like to hear others thoughts as to how it stands right now. Is it on the RC radar? Have they had discussions about it? What are their thoughts about the card and how it interacts with the EDH format environment that it currently exists in?

Quote from theCreecH »

So playing with Paradox Engine in Edgar Markov Vampire Value Town has seen me begin the "so, thoughts on the power level of x card and do you think it should be banned or is it fine and what is the reasoning of your argument?" at my local game shop in regards to the aforementioned P-Engine.

I've gone back and read over the last 5 or so pages back and did see a little discussion about it. The greatest argument for not banning I have heard is that it has a 5 cmc, requires a deck to be built around and can be dealt with in most situations (except there's this thing called I bury you in the stack, but I digress).

I'm not sure I agree with the "requires your deck to be built around it" argument so I would like to hear others thoughts as to how it stands right now. Is it on the RC radar? Have they had discussions about it? What are their thoughts about the card and how it interacts with the EDH format environment that it currently exists in?

I suspect it is going to go the route of PoK: people complaining about it on the forum are going to get shot down with the "play more removal scrub" argument while it slowly causes problems in less competitive playgroups. Eventually the RC will catch on and realize that just because self-imposed restrictions and competitive playgroups can minimize its impact doesn't mean that it is a good thing to have.

Really, cards that give this degree of tempo advantage as a (nearly) self-contained engine always need to be looked at because they can run away with games. I liked PoK, but I understood why it was bad for the RC's stated goal. I like Paradox Engine too. But I'm sure it will eventually get banned.

The RC won't come out and say whether it is a card they are watching, but they have stated that they keep an eye on all cards which get brought up frequently. PE is probably such a card that is one they are watching and may have even discussed in their meetings. I think When made a good comparison to PoK in that it is a card which can warp games, gives a disproportional amount of resources, and can to an extent protect itself. It's also a card which allows a window of response and dies to removal which everyone should be running regardless of it, so there's that.

It's not a card I would miss (and as I've mentioned here before I have personally banned it from my deckd), but I also don't see it getting played as much as PoK was.

Quote from theCreecH »

So playing with Paradox Engine in Edgar Markov Vampire Value Town has seen me begin the "so, thoughts on the power level of x card and do you think it should be banned or is it fine and what is the reasoning of your argument?" at my local game shop in regards to the aforementioned P-Engine.

I've gone back and read over the last 5 or so pages back and did see a little discussion about it. The greatest argument for not banning I have heard is that it has a 5 cmc, requires a deck to be built around and can be dealt with in most situations (except there's this thing called I bury you in the stack, but I digress).

I'm not sure I agree with the "requires your deck to be built around it" argument so I would like to hear others thoughts as to how it stands right now. Is it on the RC radar? Have they had discussions about it? What are their thoughts about the card and how it interacts with the EDH format environment that it currently exists in?

There are 6 pages of discussion here.

I am playing it in two decks.

In Phenax, God of Deception, it is like a second Intruder Alarm in many cases. Obviously, it can net me mana and obviously, it doesn't trigger off of tokens (I really like Curse of the Swine with Intruder Alarm). Haven't really decided if it is better or worse than alarm.

In Maelstrom Wanderer, it can help me cast my entire deck. But, it also has synergy with Beguiler of Wills, Tradewind Rider, etc.

It goes infinite in a lot of situations. That's not really a problem though - people play infinite combos all the time.

My main argument against not banning it is that PoK had to be killed at intant-speed. If you didn't kill it when it was cast, the controller would be able to protect it.

PE can be killed at sorcery speed. I know a lot of people will win the turn they cast it... but then they could have tutored up any combo to win on that turn. No different than tutoring a Food Chain in that regard.

The other argument is that it does nothing by itself. You need mana rocks and mana dorks, and a lot of them, and a steady stream of spells to cast. If you cast PE, wait until your next turn, cast a single creature and net 2 mana, you aren't doing anything broken.


Honestly, the only times I've seen it be consistently broken is in Captain Sisay and in Ad Nauseam decks. Maybe in Selvala, Explorer Returned.
The card is not played nearly enough for me to consider it banworthy. PoK was in every UGx deck. Barely needed to be build around. It was like 3 timewalks per turn cycle.

YEah, PE does go infinite a lot.
However, this is partly due to the format being eternal, granting you enough cantrips and mana rocks to just generate an absurd amount of mana. When most of your spells turn into Voltaic Key for your Mana Vault or Grim Monolith, absurdity will occur.

The solution might be just axing Mana Crypt and Grim Monolith as these are the worst mana-enabling offenders. I don't currently have a ton of issues with PE as we simply gang on the PE player to remove his engines, but it certainly can be classified as a centralizing and warping card.

Quote from Crazy Pierre »

YEah, PE does go infinite a lot.
However, this is partly due to the format being eternal, granting you enough cantrips and mana rocks to just generate an absurd amount of mana. When most of your spells turn into Voltaic Key for your Mana Vault or Grim Monolith, absurdity will occur.

The solution might be just axing Mana Crypt and Grim Monolith as these are the worst mana-enabling offenders. I don't currently have a ton of issues with PE as we simply gang on the PE player to remove his engines, but it certainly can be classified as a centralizing and warping card.

Honestly this is one time where banning fast mana isn't the answer. Sol Rings are nice, but PE likes Signets, Talismans, Darksteel Ingots, and other rocks that tap for colored mana.

Quote from cryogen »

Honestly this is one time where banning fast mana isn't the answer. Sol Rings are nice, but PE likes Signets, Talismans, Darksteel Ingots, and other rocks that tap for colored mana.

Yeah, I went infinite with it, a Signet and Boomerang on Isochron Scepter a while back, so your statement is accurate. I would not mind it being banned, but overall I don't expect anything to go at the next announcement, and I would not be overly upset if that were the case.

Hey Sheldon and/Or Papa Funk, un-rules question:

Does Spike count as a U/B for color identity because of her shirt? And since she pulls cards outside the game can I pull a Mox Pearl with her ability?

Edit: derp

Quote from cryogen »

And since she pulls cards outside the game can I pull a Mox Pearl with her ability?

That's.... actually an interesting question. Are cards pulled from outside the game beholden to color identity rules?

Well I answered my own question, since CI only looks at casting cost and rules text. So she's definitely mono black. However, the second question still remains.

You can pull a Mox Pearl if your playgroup agrees that those are the rules.

By default, you can't pull anything.

Yea, by default un cards are not legal so its a question of what your meta lets you do. Its silly to ask for a clarification of how a not legal card works in commander lol.

I was answering under the assumption that they'd agreed to make the card legal. Rule 13 still applies, though. (Of course, any conversation involving "hey, can I run Spike?" almost certainly involves setting parameters)

Yea... there is a big difference between asking if you can run some un squrrel and spike. Its troubling that there is such a big difference in the level of so many of the cards. Some of them are mostly harmless and cool and others are like.... can I break the game guys???

I'm not seeing anything that problematic, honestly. Spike would be a huge problem if Rule 13 didn't exist, but nothing makes me go "oh holy crap no" like, say, Richard Garfield.

Hmm, ok. For some reason I thought the rule was no sideboards. So she's a real nonbo then without making other rules changes.

Yeah, I'm not very enthusiastic about the change either. Like, I don't really care if they unbanned Un-cards, but doing a temporary ban out of nowhere feels of a way to help Wizards sell product. And it also goes against their long stance of no longer doing temporary unbans.

Quote from cryogen »

Yeah, I'm not very enthusiastic about the change either. Like, I don't really care if they unbanned Un-cards, but doing a temporary ban out of nowhere feels of a way to help Wizards sell product. And it also goes against their long stance of no longer doing temporary unbans.

Now that I've thought about, yeah it feels more like a promo for wizards than anything else....