It's Time To Talk About Paradox Engine
Commander (EDH) forum
Posted on May 26, 2019, 7:48 a.m. by Cybersix
Each set it seems to get 'better'.
It's virtually an autoinclude in the 'Mid-to-High' range Casual.
Prophet of Kruphix is banned. Why not PE?
Prophet basically gives you an extra turn during your opponents turn paradox engine on the other hand takes a lot of set up to be broken
May 26, 2019 9:50 a.m.
Having played in about a half-a-dozen playgroups all over the US, I rarely see copy-paste decks. I see a lot of common packages integrated into custom decks - is that what you're seeing?
The big draw of commander with the many different playgroups I've been in is building your own deck, often integrating and iterating on existing combo and interaction packages.
Is net-decking per se really the problem?
May 26, 2019 10:22 a.m.
LiquidGaming says... #6
Wizards for their part regulates their formats. Commander on the other hand is handled by the rules committee. They ban things as a last resort and only if the card is absolutely "too strong" that ince it sees play resolves the game too consistently or does too much for a single card.
By itself Paradox engine is not the problem. Combined with other threats it can be problematic but that is why removal is a part of the format. You adapt around problematic pieces. This did not hold true for Prophet of Kruphix as having flash on creatures as well as untapping lands immediately sets the control player and aggressive creature utility players ahead. Awakening is good, but it is universal. Seedvorn muse is good, but doesnt give flash. Paradox engine is amazing, but again on it's own and without the cards to get it going it just is a good tool, not a winning piece.
The rules committee is making sound judgement, ad when pieces are consistently banned, you end up killing a format. Similar to how EDH/Commander is now popular, Prismatic was exceptionally strong casually. The over reach of the card banning though, as well as the sharp responses from critical community members pushing for bans, hurt the format and ultimately killed it as the ban list stopped players from playing the cards they had collected. Keep the ban list small and for the absolutely needed cards. Every group and format will generate a competitive player or scene. Know how to deal with those players by selecting a playgroup for you, or be those players. No one says you MUST play magic with them, allow each playgroup to set that tone with the banlist simply the stopgap for incidental chaos.
May 26, 2019 10:25 a.m.
Seeing the RC unbanned a much bigger offender than Paradox Engine , in the form of Protean Hulk , I'd be surprised if they banned Paradox Engine . At the very least, it would make me further question their judgement.
May 26, 2019 10:37 a.m.
The cards you listed are generally inferior to Prophet, as they do not also give your creature cards Flash. That’s why Prophet is banned and the others are not - those others do not automatically enable you to drop a creature on each of your opponent’s turns.
I also take a little issue with your characterisation of netdecking players.
First, not everyone who builds a netdeck is netdecking. There’s a simple fact that some cards are generally more optimised than others. Even building on your own, it’s easy to recreate the wheel and include Paradox Engine, or Scepter-Reversal, or any number of other netdeck victory conditions.
I know I have done that before - start with a silly, janky idea, then start making cuts and additions, and, when the dust settles and the deck building is complete, realised I have accidentally recreated U/W stax, or Pox, or Burn, etc.
My second issue is the characterisation of players who netdeck as “putting little effort into actually playing the game.” Deckbuilding is only one half of Magic, and it’s a half a lot of people do not enjoy. They might put a lot of effort into their actual gameplay, but do not want to spend time on an aspect they dislike. There’s nothing wrong with that - it is not our place to judge how people want to play.
Now, I agree that people should not be jerks when it comes to playing, and should not insult others for their deck choices. But that is not a problem resultant from netdecking - that is a problem resultant from the individual being a substandard human being.
May 26, 2019 11:12 a.m.
Megalomania says... #9
TypicalTimmy Similar to how things are in the real world, people tend to use what works. And when something works too well, more people tend to use it. It’s not because they don’t want to put effort into the game. It’s because people are able to recognize that some cards and card interactions that are simply better and more optimized than the rest.
I’m curious what banned cards have the exact same “versions” that escaped everyone’s notice. I hope you are not referring to Prophet being the same as Seedborn Muse and the other cards you mentioned. Those are far from being suitable alternatives.
May 26, 2019 6:24 p.m.
GhostChieftain says... #10
If your playgroup dislikes them, then a soft ban can be instated for your group. If only you dislike them you have a few options a) build your deck to stop that plan b) find a different group c) do nothing and accept the fact that you will be playing against things you don't like.
As others have said, I don't think it will be banned. If rules committee took out all cEDH win cons (i.e. the stupid good combo cards) there would be an extra long list of cards to remember that you cannot play.
May 26, 2019 7:07 p.m.
Dredge4life says... #11
Paradox Engine is a perfectly fair Magic card. It can not go off without minimum three other cards (excluding nonsense with Everflowing Chalice and Ancestral Statue , and is an extremely disruptable value engine. Decks that can cast it already have access to an exorbitant amount of mana, and Engine combos don’t really do much more than the cards Expropriate or Omniscience do singlehandedly. It is simply another massive spell that can win the game in combination with other cards.
May 26, 2019 7:30 p.m.
Tbh I don't think Paradox Engine should be banned, I do think we should have a conversation about how to deal with powerful artifacts since a) most decks that can abuse them will and b) pretty much every game they come up.
I've seen this conversation about Sol Ring and Helm of the Host too, and I can definitely say this: although some artifacts can literally break a game, there is no better reason to run multi-permanent destruction or prevention. These artifacts aren't going to be banned. In addition, part of the fun in edh is the combos and giant plays that are ultimately unusable in standard or modern due to cost restrictions and pace of the game. Edh, while fast paced at times, would honestly be kind of ruined if we could pull of combos like that.
Also, the other part of it is the fact that most artifacts aren't game warping. It doesn't immediately become a race to who can most quickly steal, destroy or copy the artifact, unlike Prophet of Kruphix .
There is only one artifact that deserves to be banned, at the moment, is Celestial Prism . Just cause it's so bad and I have actually seen people use it.
May 26, 2019 7:56 p.m.
Winterblast says... #13
If you have problems in dealing with certain cards, have a look at how the decks that use them work and add cards that shut these functions down. For example paradox engine can be removed but if you attack what the deck needs to operate it's just as effective... Null Rod , Cursed Totem shut down the rocks and dorks they need to produce mana from nonland sources and also helps against non-engine-decks. Just an example.
Attack the strategy around the cards, don't get fucked by single cards.
May 27, 2019 4:33 a.m.
I agree with most of the comments here. Posts like this is why I'm glad the RC isn't as trigger happy on the banhammer.
bryanedds says... #2
It's a great value engine, but it doesn't always win games. It takes some non-trivial setup to make it win the game. It's on the high end of cost as far as combo pieces go. Is it really broken?
May 26, 2019 9:36 a.m.