Eldrazi Processor Mechanic: Bad or Good?
Spoilers, Rumors, and Speculation forum
Posted on Sept. 2, 2015, 12:06 p.m. by JWiley129
To carry on a debate we've been having over in the main BFZ spoiler thread, is the Eldrazi Processor mechanic as seen on Blight Herder good for the game or bad for the game?
I'm leaving my opinion out of this post and putting it in the comments after a few people have spoken their mind.
As an EDH exclusive player, I wouldn't say it's THAT big of a deal. I mean, the Processors MUST bring back 2 cards for them to do their thing. If they involved your stuff, then it would be far too broken. Against the likes of Tasigur, the Golden Fang, it is likely to be a double-edged sword. It wrecks some strategies, but it's not ban worthy, especially if it only involves a few cards. It's not like you must tutor for them.
As for 60-card formats like Modern and Standard, don't ask me.
September 2, 2015 12:18 p.m.
I will preface that we've only seen one Processor. We don't know if they all require two cards to be in exile.
September 2, 2015 12:19 p.m.
Hjaltrohir says... #5
I honestly think it is an interesting idea but don't believe it is broken. Sure you can return exiled cards from things like Isochron Scepter and Path to Exile to your graveyard, but i don't think it affects the game in such dire ways as i have seen people suggesting.
It is also too early to pass prescriptive judgement as the card isn't even out yet and has not seen any play.
September 2, 2015 12:20 p.m.
That is true. Let's wait and see what the others are like, but I doubt they would make a significant impact on EDH, unlike some (cough Sylvan Primordial cough).
September 2, 2015 12:21 p.m.
awesomeguy37: The processors only return your opponent's stuff.
September 2, 2015 12:22 p.m.
Hjaltrohir says... #8
Sorry Phaetion i missed that. I don't believe it makes a whole load of difference however.
September 2, 2015 12:27 p.m.
Named_Tawyny says... #9
I'm the sort of player who wishes 'remove from game' actually permanently removed things from the game still. I don't even like things like Fiend Hunter, let alone cards like Torrent Elemental, or Pull from Eternity. It's not about game-breakingness, it's about consistency.
That said, if making yet another way to interact with the exile zone is going to finally push Wizards to create the "absolutely-removed-from-the-freaking-game-forever" zone, I'll be happy.
September 2, 2015 12:28 p.m.
I might have. If it was your stuff, then I would be going wacko about how good it is with Sedris, the Traitor King. And Salty Sea Dogs in standard and modern will complain about how good Yawgmoth's Will and the Delve mechanic will be. That's just outside of how awkward the flavor would have been.
September 2, 2015 12:29 p.m.
MagicalHacker says... #11
I'm excited to see these interactions, so my question is why anyone wouldn't?
September 2, 2015 12:32 p.m.
Ok, here are my opinions.
First, we all need to play with the cards before making a final conclusion. The way the mechanic is worded makes it essentially unbreakable. But, we haven't seen all the Processor cards and we haven't seen the other effects that could come from those cards.
Second, I think that this mechanic is positive. It opens up interesting design space in every format. In Standard, the mechanic plays well with Delve allowing for some odd decision trees. In older formats it does cool things with other cards in the exile zone. "Do I put my opponent's blue card they exiled with Force of Will into the graveyard?" "Should I put Griselbrand back into the graveyard of my reanimator opponent?" (This is probably a no), etc. In Commander it lets you make use of the multiplayer aspect to put only one card into each players' graveyard.
And to address the detractors, I still emphasize that we should play with the cards first. However, the downsides that show up are not impactful enough for me to say this mechanic is broken. I feel like the design space it opens up is more beneficial than the mechanics that are impacted by Eldrazi Processors
September 2, 2015 12:40 p.m.
TheAnnihilator says... #13
I know that it will depend on the cards and gameplay, but:
I like the idea of a place that no-one can have access to, which is the idea behind Exile. I may be willing to suspend my apprehensions so opponents can manipulate my exiled cards (and vise versa) as the processors do, but it sets a weird precedent to bend the logistics of cards in ways that they really shouldn't. After processors are a thing, what is the reason you can't pull your own stuff back from Exile? I'd prefer that "Exile" doesn't become "Graveyard #2", because it would lose both the flavor and the functionality.
That being said, I love the flavor of the Eldrazi manipulate the exile -- almost like they came from it. Maybe if the Eldrazi could be cast or targeted while in exile it would be better -- Ingest could target yourself rather than the opponent to make it work. Maybe something like this:
- Otherworldly (This card may be cast from Exile, and may be targeted as if it were in the graveyard.)
Keep in mind that this is a mechanic that isn't restricted to Creatures -- you could have otherworldly on All Is Dust or Eldrazi Conscription too.
September 2, 2015 2:32 p.m.
TheAnnihilator - Mark Rosewater discusses this very thing in the Blogatog Live panel. To summarize, he said he doesn't want you being able to get things you own back from exile. However he's fine using this design space for the Eldrazi that it opens up. Some quotes:- "It's important for the game that exiling is a cost that you can't undo."- "You can't exile your own things and you choose to get them back."- "Your opponent has a lot of control over what you get back."- "I think we did it in such a way that doesn't let you abuse it."
September 2, 2015 2:42 p.m.
TheAnnihilator says... #15
Yeah, I watched that panel! =D I liked it a lot.
The thing is, with Otherworldy, you don't actually control what you get back from exile. Only cards printed with the mechanic can be accessed from exile, the non-Eldrazi that get exiled aren't coming back. Thus, the WotC team has all say on what is accessible and can control it via oversight of what gets printed. It could even be paired with devoid to limit what colors get access to he effect.
I believe that MaRo doesn't like players selectively getting back cards from exile, like rebuying a card you pitched to Force of Will. However, using it as a mechanic takes away the selective nature of it -- in other words, the only cards you could EVER get back from exile would be Eldrazi related. This is far from player choice, which is the thing MaRo wants to avoid.
Also -- and I know this is MaRo's quote, not yours -- "Your opponent has a lot of control over what you get back."
This isn't true. Your opponent can only choose from what gets put there by random chance (or intentionaly, like a FoW exiled card), whereas Otherworldy is limited to the few cards that are printed with the mechanic, regardless of how it got to exile in the first place.
September 2, 2015 3:01 p.m.
TheAnnihilator - While the Processor ability is restricted to what gets exiled, with Ingest (in Limited) and Delve (in Standard) you'll likely get lots of choices over what you choose to put back. Yes, it's not like "I put my whole deck into exile, what do you put back!" but more of "From these 4-5 cards, what do you put back." There is room for collusion in multiplayer formats, however in 1-v-1 play you'll always get the worst thing back in your graveyard.
Also, I haven't talked about your mechanic Otherworldly because I haven't formed an opinion yet. It seems fine, but I need more time to grok it.
September 2, 2015 3:35 p.m.
Harashiohorn says... #17
It doesn't really matter about this particular mechanic because it's on a card that won't see eternal play. And overall the mechanic seems far to clunky to be affixed to a good card. Overall this is nothing new, and if exiling continues to become more prominent, these kinds of cards do at least open up more possible interactions, if all be it interactions nobody feels compelled to use.
September 2, 2015 3:58 p.m.
Harashiohorn - Again, we've only seen one card. We don't know if this mechanic won't show up in Legacy.
September 2, 2015 4:02 p.m.
TheAnnihilator says... #19
It's true that your opponent gets to choose the least backbreaking of a number of options, but it doesn't matter if the choice is between (purely for example) Jace, the Mind Sculptor and Liliana of the Veil, as both options are bad for the opponent regardless of the choice. The selection with delve costs could prove to be strong against processors due to you having more control over what's in exile than your opponent does -- a kind of interaction MaRo was specifically trying to avoid.
In fact, you can use Delve to abuse the processor ability by only delving away good cards, and thus retaining more-or-less constant control of what you get back from a processor.
September 2, 2015 4:13 p.m.
TheAnnihilator - Exactly. This is why I feel like this mechanic is interesting, purely from a game play perspective. If you have to cast the spell, and your choices are LotV or JtMS, it's an interesting debate. (This is also assuming your opponent can put those cards either in their hand or into play). On the other hand, if you know you're against a Processor, you can selectively Delve out your good cards. This starts getting REALLY interesting with Tasigur, the Golden Fang and his activated ability. Do you dare put your opponent's best card in their graveyard? This adds incredible depth to the game play.
E.g. Blight Herder is a may ability. You don't have to get three 1/1's, but you can if you need the tokens.
September 2, 2015 4:21 p.m.
Triforce-Finder says... #21
The main issue I have with this is not the untouchability of exiled cards in general. You're returning my cards from exile? Cool! Here's a snappy! Snee-Snaa-Snappy...
But cards in exile are not always "exiled" in the common way. Many cards use exile as a place to store a card for reference. The exile zone is actually used like a second in-play zone by many cards. Isochron Scepter is only one of many cards that reference exiled cards.
Allowing a bunch of processors (there will be more than one, and probably cheaper too) to remove cards from exile and thereby to remove them from the referenced zone is messing with the consistency of the rules and mechanics too much for my taste.
Many try to play this off by saying that it won't affect the game much and definitely won't break it. They will be hard pressed to find actual quotes for that straw man.
The issue is not one of magnitude, it is one of principle.
Let us look at the past, at the glorious time when Clone could kill a Progenitus by abusing the legend rule. I myself have played Sakashima's Student for that very reason. However, that is not a matter of magnitude, except maybe in EDH. A simple Counterspell or Away could do the same and do it more reliably. Planeswalkers? There's better deaths than the uniqueness rule for those. Most counter- and kill spells are cheaper than than clone effects, and work against non-legendary cards too. Here's an excerpt from the article talking about the actual reasons for the rule change.
I believe that the net result of the change is that the game has more meaningful and satisfying interactions. While it was useful to use the "legend rule" and clones to kill your opponent's hard-to-target legends, or to play your Planeswalker to kill your opponent's, the general feeling within the Pit was that this interaction was not how we wanted games to be decided. I don't feel that the old version of the rules was inherently bad, but it did end up making interactions between players who shared legendary permanents a game about who could use his or her permanent as a terror more often and not about the cool things the legendary permanents or Planeswalkers themselves could do.
I didn't like it at first. That stupid ninja was expensive, and the johnny in me was screaming at having possibilities removed. But reflecting on it, it made sense. They were damn right to put a stop to that. Besides, flinging is reserved for goblins.
I'm still playing Sakashima's Student student against Progenitus. It only copies it instead of killing, but that means my copy stays on the field too, potentially dealing damage before my opponent's original has recovered from summoning sickness. Heck, that's even more fun than the old way!
The players were using legends and clones as kill spells. It perverted and defaced the nature of the mechanics and the cards themselves, not to mention the flavor. Now they will use the cards designed to interact with other mechanics in the BFZ set to remove cards referenced by Imprint, Cipher, Suspend and a lot of individual abilities from the referenced zone, exile.
This is not a question of magnitude, but a question of principle and consistency. Returning a card from exile should simply not be the same as removing a card from play.
September 2, 2015 4:27 p.m. Edited.
Triforce-Finder - Your points are all valid and well thought out. However I would like to posit that the instances you are concerned about is not violating the perceived intent of the card. In the case of Isochron Scepter, Player A exiles Brainstorm so they can Brainstorm every turn. Player B casts a Processor putting the exiled Brainstorm into Player A's graveyard. At no point did the Isochron Scepter not do what it is intended to do, create a repeatable effect using a cheap Instant. This type of interaction is already a part of the game through Riftsweeper, so there is nothing mechanically wrong with Processors.
I can create other examples for the other mechanics. I Cipher Stolen Identity onto my Invisible Stalker, then you cast a Processor to put it back into my library. At no point did Stolen Identity stop doing what it was intended. I suspend Reality Strobe, then my opponent Processes it into my graveyard. At no point did Reality Strobe stop functioning as intended. Etc.
At the end of the day even Mark Rosewater, the staunchest defender of "exile should be untouchable", said that this opens interesting design space. And what matters most is not that cards can come back from exile, but that you cannot get your own cards back from exile.
September 2, 2015 4:46 p.m.
TheAnnihilator says... #23
@JWiley129 It does add interesting depth, but at the cost that you can now manipulate/abuse your Exile via your opponents' processors -- which wasn't the intended outcome, nor even a welcome one (coming from MaRo's point of view).
I personally dislike interaction with the Exile zone, and thus I like my theoretical keyword as it only lets you utilize special cards (specifically, the Eldrazi) from Exile, rather than allowing you to take advantage of the other cards that are -- by definition -- supposed to be considered removed from the game entirely.
The Eldrazi breaking this rule doesn't bother me since that's what Eldrazi are supposed to do (i.e. That is their flavor), but allowing players to utilize non-Eldrazi cards from Exile seems like a flavor fail. "Can never be totally removed from the game" would be the definition of what Eldrazi are now allowed to do since they are Not of This World.
September 2, 2015 4:47 p.m.
TheAnnihilator says... #24
@JWiley129 Also, just because the processors don't violate the "intent of the card" doesn't mean that they don't violate the spirit of what "Exile" is really supposed to mean. :P
September 2, 2015 4:52 p.m.
TheAnnihilator - You aren't wrong. However the interpretation of the Exile Zone changes from card to card. Swords to Plowshares is flavored as the creature losing all will to fight. Oblivion Ring is flavored as a permanent being locked away. Fiend Hunter is flavored as "PUT THE CREATURE IN THE BAG!" (ok, this one has some artistic stylizing to it). So while the spirit of the exile zone comes from the old name of Removed from the Game, the Exile zone is a Zone within the game of Magic. There are cards that reference Exile such as Warden of the Beyond and Riftsweeper. There are even cards that reference Suspended cards like Venser's Diffusion, which are removed from the game!
It should be within the rules to reference the Exile Zone and care about what is Exiled. However, I stand by MaRo in this case. The real problem would be getting your own cards back from Exile. However returning your opponent's cards from exile is a real cost with real ramifications.
September 2, 2015 4:58 p.m.
Additionally, I'll post this question I asked Matt Tabak about Processors and mechanics like Imprint.
September 2, 2015 5:06 p.m.
TheAnnihilator says... #27
@JWiley129
Fair enough -- the only person who really controls what the spirit of Exile should be is WotC. I'd just be let down if Exile became essentially another graveyard, since the "completely removed from the game" aspect of it really shined and defined what Exile meant for me.
Also, thanks for linking the question -- I'll be sure to read it in just a sec.
September 2, 2015 5:08 p.m.
TheAnnihilator - I agree there. No one wants Exile to be Graveyard #2.
September 2, 2015 5:09 p.m.
Well, crap. Avacyn, Angel of Hope got a whole lot harder to keep out of play. :(
September 2, 2015 5:14 p.m.
Triforce-Finder says... #30
I'm not sure if you are doing it on purpose, but you are misrepresenting my argument.
See, at no point have I claimed that Isochron Scepter or Hidden Strings would work in a different way than intended when de-exiled by a processoor. It is the processor itself that is violating the "perceived intent", as you like to put it.
Your counter-examples are therefore irrelevant.
So the R+D (Who now, design, R+D or the rules team?) were aware of the interaction. I bet they were aware of the legend rule's killing potential too.
"It is not possible to get your own cards back" is nothing but a diversion. It is re-routing the attention to a problem that doesn't even exist. Since the problem doesn't exist, it is not a relevant argument to discuss problems that do exist.
One could just as well say that (insert any topic) isn't significant because alien invasions would be worse, and since we don't have those, everything's fine.
September 2, 2015 5:41 p.m.
Triforce-Finder - I understand that you are against this, as you said, on principle. That, and I quote, Returning a card from exile should simply not be the same as removing a card from play. Now, that statement is inherently false as that happens whenever you destroy a Banishing Light. I simply removed a card from play, and returned a card from exile.
Of course, that exception is fine, since Banishing Light is using exile as a placeholder. Temporary storage. You are clearly ok with exile being used in this way. But where is the line drawn?
Riftsweeper has existed since Future Sight, and has interacted with Suspend cards and those in Exile since 2007. You said that you're fine with exile not being "untouchable", however here is a card that brings cards back from exile (although you contradict yourself here ). And not even into the graveyard, as the Processors do, but into your deck! That's even more abusable!
Furthermore, you said here that "It is mostly about cards being used in a way that they were neither intended nor balanced for...". Contradicting yourself above.
Also, the key point is that you cannot get your own cards back from exile. If you could, then exile would just be another graveyard, and we'd need AWOL in black border. Using this design space creates interesting game play and deckbuilding considerations, which is really what WotC wants to promote. Are there negative aspects to every mechanic? Yes. However that should not stop them from making new Magic cards or new designs.
Oh, and far as your most recent comment. It is not an appeal to authority, it is citing a reliable source. There is not one person more knowledgeable about Magic design than Mark Rosewater. And if there is, they are probably working in Magic R&D. Which, by the way, includes the Rules team which Matt Tabak is the head of.
I hope this post sufficiently meets your criteria.
September 2, 2015 6:08 p.m.
Triforce-Finder says... #32
Again misrepresenting my point. The card that is removed from the field is not the one that is returned from exile in your example, therefore the returning of the card is not the same as removing it. Logic! Get some, it helps.
There is no contradiction on my posts, no matter haw hard you try to construct one. If I had been active on TO back in 2007, you'd have heard me rant about it. The fact that a few single cards exists that have been released before I even started playing does not invalidate anything.
I don't know where you learned to build straw men that easily. You're awfully good at it. Anyways, I will not engage in further discussion with you until you stop misrepresenting my words and address the argument as i posted them.
Sorry, all you have proven is that you are not fit to address my points without misconstruing them in a manner that makes them easier for you to counter. Great achievement.
September 2, 2015 6:22 p.m. Edited.
Triforce-Finder - Then stop me from doing so. In one sentence, state your argument. For the sake of acting in good faith, I will put mine first.
The Processor mechanic, while interacting with the exile zone, does not violate the rules of Magic nor does it undermine previously made cards that interact with that zone.
September 2, 2015 6:27 p.m.
TheNextRedDude says... #34
This argument has gone on so long that it has become amusing to me.
September 2, 2015 6:44 p.m.
TheNextRedDude - I cannot refute your point. You sir, clearly are the winner.
September 2, 2015 6:45 p.m.
TheNextRedDude says... #36
JWiley129 I also forgot how fun typing in bold was.
September 2, 2015 6:47 p.m.
Triforce-Finder - By the way, accusing a math teacher with a B.S. in Mathematics and a math paper published in a professional journal of not using Logic is adorable.
Oops, that's an appeal to authority. Specifically an appeal to accomplishment, another logical fallacy! So clearly I'm wrong.
Although you clearly were hedging your bets using ambiguous language with Returning a card from exile should simply not be the same as removing a card from play, quoted from post #20. Because at no point did you stress that the card being removed from play had to be the one returned from exile. Another logical fallacy.
So now we're tied.
September 2, 2015 6:54 p.m.
Triforce-Finder says... #38
No bets were hedged. There was enough cross-reference in the very same post to make that statement crystal clear.
You still aren't getting it, are you? Stop arguing and start discussing, or just stop bothering me. I don't want to block an active member since that would mean seeing only partial threads frequently. But on the other hand, your behavior is aggressive, and your posts do not add to my enjoyment of T/O. Are you a person I need to block?
In any case, I'd recommend that you pay a short visit here for a refresher. Pay special attention to question 2.
Good day.
September 2, 2015 7:26 p.m.
Triforce-Finder - I was discussing, but then you played the victim and claimed I was attacking you and your character. Which I was not. If it appeared that way, I apologize. Aside from the previous comment where it was purposeful, I was nothing but civil and did not intentionally use inflammatory language.
However, you kept falling back on "you're misrepresenting me" and did nothing to further the dialogue. I brought forth new points which you continued to ignore and fell back again on "you're misrepresenting me."
Luckily for you, I have no such qualms about blocking you. If you're going to play the victim and be more stubborn than a mule, fine by me.
September 2, 2015 7:55 p.m.
DemonDragonJ says... #40
I hope that this mechanic is only for this block, since the exile zone is not supposed to function like a second graveyard; it is supposed to be a permanent place to which cards are sent, and any effects that return cards from the exile zone, or even reference that zone at all, should be few and far between, in my mind.
September 2, 2015 10:17 p.m.
MagicalHacker says... #41
I actually don't see how this mechanic bends the rules, doesn't fit flavor of the exile zone, OR is turning the exile zone into graveyard 2.0; to me, it makes sense that Eldrazi creatures to do weird things with other cards that use the exile zone as a temporary storage zone AND with cards that have been permanently exiled.
My only question is about if they will be able to target face down exiled cards, if that will be any different than normal cards, and if they will stay face-down in the graveyard.
September 3, 2015 1:45 a.m.
I'm not sure if the Processor mechanic is going to be good for the game overall, but I'm certainly excited about it.
I play Jeleva, Nephalia's Scourge in Commander, and now maybe I can get some use out of the cards she sweeps up that are neither instants nor sorceries ...
September 3, 2015 2:50 a.m.
canterlotguardian says... #43
JWiley129 would it be too much of a Time Stretch to accuse you of not using Logic Knot?
September 17, 2015 6:28 p.m.
TheNextRedDude says... #44
canterlotguardian, wow, what a Necropotence (necropost)
September 17, 2015 6:32 p.m.
canterlotguardian says... #45
Oh shit this thread is two weeks old, isn't it? Well damn. :P
CuteSnail says... #2
I personally think that we need to see how it plays out, but I think It'll be fine. Both Riftsweeper and Pull from Eternity already exist, so I don't think it's that bit of a deal. Yes, Blight Herder can get face down cards, but it requires 2 targets, so if any, its use is pretty narrow.
September 2, 2015 12:16 p.m.