Paragon Keeper II

[Azhrei]

Self-explanatory. If you have any more questions, comments, or ideas post them here.

[Big Blue]

Since aggro is of some concern for people playing Paragon Keeper (and since this idea has been raised at the end of the previous thread):

Would it not be a good idea to try the following substitutions (provided you play 2 Morphlings):

1 Morphling -> Power Artifact
1 Wasteland -> Grim Monolith

The possibility to "just win" makes it better against aggro, while you don't lose anything against combo and not too much against control.

Moreover, the deck is not altered radically (as opposed to e.g. using a KrOathan engine in the SB), i.e. you need not change anything else in the deck or the SB.

[rozetta]

I've been trying this for a bit and I think I like it. I noticed some other people (notably some of the German guys) are also trying it.

I'd actually also be interested in hearing more discussion about it, since mostly all I've heard so far is things like "its too disruptable" or "it's not optimal" which is not really that relevant.

Actually, in my build I'm currently trying swapping one brainstorm for the power artifact, thus keeping the 2 morphlings. I'm also testing Future Sight in the Zuran Orb slot.

[Desert Fox]

I actually run 2 Morphlings and the Grim Monolith + Power Artifact combo in my build. Then again, my deck is powerless (well, aside from a LoA) and I play in a powerless environment. But sometimes you just get that nice turn 2 kill even without power.

Turn 1: U-producing land, Sol Ring, Grim Monolith
Turn 2: U-producing land, Lotus Petal, Power Artifact, Stroke of Genius/Fireball for win.

Granted, it's 7 cards, but it's happened to me before.

So personally, I've always been a fan of having the combo in the deck as an alternate win condition.

[Smmenen]

Quote (Big Blue @ Jan. 17 2003,07:48)Since aggro is of some concern for people playing Paragon Keeper (and since this idea has been raised at the end of the previous thread):

Would it not be a good idea to try the following substitutions (provided you play 2 Morphlings):

1 Morphling -> Power Artifact
1 Wasteland -> Grim Monolith

The possibility to "just win" makes it better against aggro, while you don't lose anything against combo and not too much against control.

I would totally agree with you IF it were that simple.  But it isn't.

Power Artifact + Grim Monolith Does NOT equal win.  You need a third card such as Gyser or Stroke.  And those cards are pretty important to getting you the combo pieces.  Which means that you are less likely to have them to use to win.  

Steve

[Zherbus]

I think it is really ultimately decided whether you need Grim/Power if you are losing to aggro. Personally, I am not dying to aggro, yet I play against TnT, Sligh, Stacker2, Void, Mask, and other scariness fairly regularly. I know that some of the other Paragons, Azhrei and SliverKing, also face a good mix of decks and generally do well against aggro. In addition, we face a great number of control and aggro-control in comparison to the aggro we see.

Easily, for each TnT or Sligh deck we run into, we will see something with strong countering capability. Simply put, Grim/Power is not for me and I can see that Azhrei and SliverKing don't need it either.

However, had I have to wade through enough aggro that seeing Gro, BBS, URPhid, and Keeper was indeed a rarity, then I would certainly sport the combo. Of course, I believe in choosing the right metagame deck and feel that once you see too few control, running Combo or Oath would just be the right answer.

Another sect of Paragons, the NG crew, is a harder one to nail. When they all play, there is plenty of control mirrors, when they play in NJ they also see a good mixed environment where I believe the combo to be unfavorable. However, from reports I read, the weekly tournaments are aggro slanted and I think that those NG Keeper players that play, should give it a shot if they aren't expecting the mirror every other round like they used to.

In summary here is where I think it belongs and where it does not:

Heavily mixed metagame where Force of Wills and Mana Drains are fairly common:

Nope, I confident in my version of Keeper without the combo.

A mixed environment with a heavy slant towards aggro. You may see 1 or 2 other control matches the whole tournament, but mainly you are facing the best and fastest aggro out there:

Yes! This is primarily what the Dulmen was for a time but has since shifted to a control/combo meta. I can see the Keeper players there now cutting the combo, but if TnT fell back into favor like it was a while back, then I agree with the combo.

Heavy aggro environment. You probably wont see anything with counterspells, but there is a chance you may run into 1:

Yeah, sure. Why oh why aren't you just running a combo deck though, it'll go off faster and more reliable than Keeper. Oath is also another perfectly good option. However, if you insist on running Keeper then you have to pretty much take out key Keeper spells to fit in Impulse to make it go off as reliably as you want it to.

[Milton]

An honest question here:

Isn't the Monolith/Power Artifact combo way too unreliable to be an option?  

No Vapiric Tutor to find the components.  Each component is a one-of card in the deck (I suppose you can use Geyser and Stroke, but there is only one Power Artifact and one Grim Monolith).  In my experience, if you can't stabalize against good aggro by turn five or six, you are pobabally dead anyway.  How do you pull off this three card combo reliably in the face of GOOD aggro?

[Zherbus]

I really think if you go to combo Keeper, Vampiric Tutor is a no brainer.

[Azhrei]

If I were to use the Power/Grim combo, I would play KrOathan Keeper instead. Unless you can make it an ACTUAL combo deck (as in, kablammo, it's turn two and I win NOW), there's just no point. It's too slow to work otherwise-- I tried it for a while and my deck just fell to shit because Smmenen is right: the combo pieces are what you need to burn to set up the parts of the combo that don't DO anything.

So, I'd have to say that no, there's really no good reason to include the pseudo-combo when you could instead either 1) play Stone Keeper (as it was introduced to me under that name) or 2) play an ACTUAL COMBO DECK.

Yeah, you can "win right now" on turn seven but by that time you're already in the driver's seat. Why bother and why have a weaker start?

[cooberp]

I don't know what everyone else's experiences have been, but I played a ton of games with a pretty standard Paragon Keeper last night against various aggro piloted by Redman, and could not BELIEVE the results.  I was literally winning four out of five games consistently.  There has been so much talk on this board about "Keeper is dead" and "aggro has made a comeback," but at least in my testing I found myself stunned by how well the deck was doing, and my mind kept returning to Azhrei's initial post on Paragon Keeper--"a complete wrecking ball."  It is SO consistent, SO difficult to disrupt, has access to so many different types of answers for any possible threat.  It is without question the best deck I have seen since I started playing T1--maybe even good enough to beat old 4-FoF BBS.  I can't imagine why anyone would want to totally screw up the deck to put in a janky three-card combo involving two otherwise dead cards, when the thing puts the smack down on beatdown already.
Maybe my results were skewed, but I just wanted to try to shift the debate here a bit and say that even with TnT all over the place, Keeper is as dominant if not more than it has been since the restriction of Fact or Fiction.

[MoreFling]

To be honest, the combo is not just against Aggro. It works good against any other deck, and with the added consistency of Brainstorms/Fetchers and Cunning Wish (with Enl. Tutor in the side) it's working out great!

I won't spam the list here, but if anyone is interested in it, I can post it when I get back in Tilburg (which is sunday/monday)

[Fishhead]

Quote my deck just fell to shit because Smmenen is right: the combo pieces are what you need to burn to set up the parts of the combo that don't DO anything.

I'm not sure why people keep saying things like this.  Originally, I cut the Emerald to put in Grim Monolith - I didnt see the need for the Green mana as opposed to 3 quick mana for a fast Morphling or Mind Twist.  I look at Emerald->Grim as being a step up, not a step backwards.

The Stroke and Geyser are already part of the deck.  You dont need to wedge them in either.  So thats absolutely equal.

The only thing thats difficult on its own in the Power Artifact.  About the only thing it goes on is the Grim, so its definitely the most combo-ish part.  Its not totally useless without the full combo though - access to inifinite mana is very nice.  Its also a blue card, so if you dont have anything going feel free to pitch it to FoW (as long as you have 2 win conditions in your deck!)

Quote In my experience, if you can't stabalize against good aggro by turn five or six, you are pobabally dead anyway.  How do you pull off this three card combo reliably in the face of GOOD aggro?

Well, you do have 2 paths to victory here.  Like you say, you can just use the standard Keeper elements to stabilize by turn 5.  "I've Balanced you, layed Abyss and refilled my hand with 'Geyser for 4. Go."  What the Combo does is win you games where you dont have the resources to gain control of the board.  You well know how Keeper can take a Big Turn and use multiple Tutors and Time Walks to dominate a game - but how you still sometimes lose after your Big Turn.  "I dropped Morphling, Abyss and Keg, but I couldnt find the Time Walk to get the Keg to 1 for your Scroll."  With the Combo, you dont often lose after your Big Turn because you have the option, instead of trying to control the board, to just win.    

So the point is that it doesnt have to be reliable that you pull the combo off by turn 5.  The rest of your deck is designed to help you win this matchup - but every time the combo goes off by turn 5 is gravy.  You are winning a game you might not have won in other cases.  Your win percentage against aggro goes up.  For me, I usually see one game in a 4 round tournament that I know I would not have won if I didnt have the Combo.

[j_orlove]

Quote For me, I usually see one game in a 4 round tournament that I know I would not have won if I didnt have the Combo.

Yes, but how many games do you see where running the combo hurt you just enough to cause a loss? This is a lot harder to measure, but there will be games where you draw a worthless power artifact, and wish you had a Morphling. Or when your monolith gets to stare at an opponent's turn-1 library. Or maybe where your opponent has a misdirection after you've pitched your morphling.

Granted, one specific situation where the combo is bad may not come up once every tournament, but it will affect most of the games you play--and that effect won't always be positive.

[FeverDog]

One thing most people seem to dismiss rather quickly is just how awful Grim Monolith is by itself, the card is just ass 90% of the time.

Quote Originally, I cut the Emerald to put in Grim Monolith - I didnt see the need for the Green mana as opposed to 3 quick mana for a fast Morphling or Mind Twist.  I look at Emerald->Grim as being a step up, not a step backwards.

I dont run Emerald anymore because i cut green, but i would still take it over Monolith every single time. Why? Because its a reliable mana source thats not just a one-shot burst of speed. Sure, you may be able to untap Mononlith and use it again later in the game, but by that point it shouldnt matter as you should already be in control.

I dont understand running 2 totally sub-optimal cards like Monolith and Power Artifact just so your deck can "win now" versus aggro. Its not like Keeper auto-loses to any kind of aggro anyway, so i truly dont see the logic.\n\n

[Fishhead]

Quote One thing most people seem to dismiss rather quickly is just how awful Grim Monolith is by itself, the card is just ass 90% of the time

Back this up with something useful please.  

The Monolith allows you to make aggressive early plays like a quick Mind Twist, Morphling or Abyss.  I played with Monolith on and off long before the Combo; it was something that I would change in or out of my deck depending on how aggressive I wanted to be.  It is not "90% ass."

Quote This is a lot harder to measure, but there will be games where you draw a worthless power artifact, and wish you had a Morphling.

This has not happened to me yet, I dont think its a very likely occurance.  I agree that it gets hard to measure the "coulda happened" aspect of MtG, especially T1.

Thinking about it, there are plenty of games where you need to topdeck but dont and you therefore lose.  But since your deck is like 45% mana the most common thing that happens is that you flip over a land and throw it on the table with a pout and say, "Well, I guess Tundra's not the answer."  Lol.  Sure, Power Artifact may be useless in a certain situation where maybe Morphling would save you, but I dont think thats a good way to think about the card.

I purposely didnt get into it the first time around, but when I say "1 game in 4 rounds that I know I would have lost without the Combo", I'm not saying I only win 1 game in 4 rounds with the Combo.  I win a lot more games with the Combo than I do with the Morphling during the course of the day.  But most of the Combo wins are after I've already gained control, Morphling probably would have done the job just as well.  

The flip side of this is the flip side of your arguement: How many of these games would I have lost if I had to hold the game together for 4 turns to swing with Morphling for 20?  Its probably not zero percent (because anything can happen in T1), but I suspect its not very high either.  I'd bet that "games I lose because Morphling takes 4 turns to win" pretty much balances out "games I lose because Power Artifact is not Morphling."

[FeverDog]

Fishead, i dont need to back up anything, the card IS ass. Just because you cant seem to recognize that doesnt mean im going to go into a thesis about it. Sorry.

[BigChuck]

In my experience, I haven't really found it to be that great of an addition to normal keeper. Power artifact is just an awful card unless you have the monolith. Sure you can pitch it, but you can pitch any blue card, so you might as well have one that is more all around useful. What else do you have to put it on? Nothing! It is good with ONE card, and completely useless without it. Personally, I want my deck to be consistent, and useless cards are most definitely not the way to keep it that way.

[NaClhv]

Feverdog, check your attitude.  Even if Fishhead is completely wrong, you're out of line, and he deserves a coherent, polite answer.

Having not tested extensively for or against the goodness of grim monolith, I cannot say with any authority whether Fishhead is correct or not.  However, I must say that since his is the only line of argument presented to me so far, and it makes sense, I have to buy into his position.  Now, if anyone would say something to actually present the other side, maybe I can consider it and switch my position.

But if I may present a rough analysis of the casting costs of cards in keeper:  The cards basically fall into four categories:

1. Big CC bombs, often cast with mana drain mana:
Things like abyss, morphling, X spells, FoF, etc.

2. Small CC spells, usually tutors, but sometimes utility:
Like cunning wish, merchant scroll, etc.

3. Pitch spells:  i.e. FoW and MisD.

4. Things requiring UU or U:  Mana drains, ancestrals, brainstorms, etc.

Now, neither mox emerald or grim monolith helps to cast spells in the last two categories (Mana drains or pitch spells).  However, mox emerald helps to cast things in category 2, whereas grim monolith helps to cast things in category 1.  

Now, it can be argued that mox emerald also helps in category 1, so it gets used in both categories.  That's somethings to consider.

But Grim monolith can be used to cast multiple category 2 spells, so actually, either the mox or the monolith has limited usage in the "other" category.

It's important to note that Grim monolith itself is a category 2 spell, whereas the mox is just a pure, simple mana source.

But also, often the things you get with category 2 spells (e.g. you tutor for abyss, or yawgwill, etc) will be category 1 spells.  So it can be argued that even if the mox helps you cast the tutor, the thing that you want to tutor for will require the mana boost of a grim monolith to truly shine.

The above are the factors that I see in deciding the mox emerald vs. grim monolith decision.  It's a lot of things to weigh, and I don't really see it as being clear-cut either way.  I am open to guidance from more experienced keeper players.

(p.s.:  As an ABM player, I fear combo keeper more than normal keeper.)

[CrazyCarl]

It isn't an choice of Grim Monolith or Mox Emerald.  It's a decision between Grim Monolith and Wasteland.  If you're on topic and talking about Paragon Keeper, it doesn't run an Emerald.  People are suggesting cutting a Wasteland.  Personally, I don't want to run a card that doesn't do anything unless I have another card on the table.  That's just a bad way to build your deck.  Everything should do something by itself, and if it happens to be really good with another card, then that's icing on the cake.

By the way: Pitching it to FoW does NOT count as doing something because you have just made your Monolith that much worse(not that it's bad, but i'd rather have a Wasteland most of the time).

[NaClhv]

Bigchuck:  Your line of reasoning for arguing against the combo is more sound.  While mox vs. monolith is debatable, I think it's pretty clear that power artifact is pretty much useless on its own.  So the question to think about when deciding whether to run the combo or not would be whether you're willing to add the power artifact into the deck.  That is the true cost of adding the combo to the deck.

[cooberp]

No, it's not at all.  Grim Monolith costs 2 mainphase mana, and you get one use out of it until a bunch of turns later when you have 4 free endphase and then your mana base is already established.  It is *not* a good card for the Keeper manabase.  The fact that it costs 4 to untap is what makes it suck.

[PsychoCid]

Really, ComboKeeper should not be discussed as optimal in a standard Keeper thread.

Even if you're not running ANYthing outside of the norm except Grim Monolith and Power Artifact, the deck is entirely different.  Those 2 cards make a significant difference in the mirror and other control matchups, and the chances of you using the combo to go off, there, are not worth counting on.

Zherbus and Azhrei pretty much covered it with the summary on belief of where the combo does and does not belong, when playing Keeper, and where you might as well simply be playing straight combo.

[BigChuck]

I have no problem with the monolith. If you want to run it, and feel it helps, then by all means, don't let anyone stop you. It can be good in the right situation, or if you don't have full power, it might be a decent option. Grim isn't the bad card here, power artifact is. My point is, if your going to play a 4cc "bomb", why not play something like masticore, which is more generally useful? Personally, I can't find anything to cut from mine to add grim, let alone power artifact, though, as I said, I see no reason to add either. My deck runs fine, and I'm happy with my matchups. 'Nuff said about that.

Theoretically, it could help in a very aggro metagame, but I think that in any environment where the combo would be useful, you'd be better off playing trinity. But, if there was enough aggro where you would want to do that, then you'd probably be better off playing a regular combo deck anyway.\n\n

[Fishhead]

Quote It is *not* a good card for the Keeper manabase.  The fact that it costs 4 to untap is what makes it suck.

Who untaps the Grim for 4?  My goal is to just Mind Twist you for 5 in the early game.  I dont care if I ever untap it.  Just think of it as 3 mana off an early Mana Drain.  Spend 2 one turn, get 3 next turn.  Are you ever sad to Drain the Ball Lightning and then throw a Mind Twist back in their face?  Nope.  Thats what the Grim is.  

Quote Really, ComboKeeper should not be discussed as optimal in a standard Keeper thread.

I dont get what you are thinking??  The German results speak for themselves.  I realize that Zherbus and Az dont believe in the combo, but as long as it keeps winning against good players at Dulmen then you cant seriously make the claim that its "not optimal".  

My personal opinion, having played both styles in tournament play, is that they are both very viable.

[Rico Suave]

Everytime I topdeck a Swords to Plowshares, I somehow manage to gain just as much breathing room as if I were to topdeck Power Artifact.  Except StP doesn't need a Grim Monolith and X spell in hand to work.

Combo-Keeper would be fine and dandy if my worst fears were losing to sligh.

[Zherbus]

Quote I dont get what you are thinking??  The German results speak for themselves.  I realize that Zherbus and Az dont believe in the combo, but as long as it keeps winning against good players at Dulmen then you cant seriously make the claim that its "not optimal".  

Actually, both of us have recommended it to players on occasions where they have stated having problems with aggro. Neither one of us ever said anything about believing in it.

[PsychoCid]

Quote (Fishhead @ Jan. 17 2003,19:52)I dont get what you are thinking??  The German results speak for themselves.  I realize that Zherbus and Az dont believe in the combo, but as long as it keeps winning against good players at Dulmen then you cant seriously make the claim that its "not optimal".

If you simply cannot outplay aggro, by all means, go for the auto-win attempt.  Key issue being that if it works for you, you might as well use it.  Otherwise, if you can play cleverly enough, you can escape without blowing room on what can be dead cards and thereby potentially damage yourself prior to even starting other matchups.  This is why I won't consider optimal for the general metagame or nearly flawless player.

This was also for a specific metagame, not just in general, which is what the majority of you all (supporters of the combo, and the lesser known Keeper players in general) seem to fail to take into account.\n\n

[Big Blue]

Wow, I wanted to check if there was already a reply and now I have to scroll over 2 pages

Fishhead explained it nicely, but let me reapeat some of his arguments and add some of my own experience:

First, it is important to realize that even with the combo you are NOT playing a combo deck. Of course, the combo is unreliable. Nobody will argue about this. OTOH, you have not changed the deck radically, so you play it essentially as a normal Keeper deck. There are pros and cons concerning Grim Monolith - it is obviously not completely useless without Power artifact (Morphling, Abyss, Geysir, Stroke, Mindtwist, YawgWin, Cunning Wish+something, hard-cast FoW and Mis-D, occassionally infinite mana drain sink (yes, it can happen)); IMO the advantages overwhelm the disadvantages, but surely I am biased. So maybe it is just a fair trade.

If you manage to establish board control, well you just win. You could probably win with Mons Goblin Raiders, Sedge Troll or, more conveniently, with Morphling. Or with the combo - it does not matter.

However, there exist games where you manage to get that one big turn (as explained before, so I am not going into details) where only the combo can win you the game.

And sometimes (although rarely) you just end up with "oh, I win"-hands. Or with a double Tutor hand and 1 combo piece.

You have to be cautious, though - in general it is better to use the Tutors for cards which you would fetch without having the combo (this is an important rule of thumb for G/PA-beginners!). Let me emphasize this again: YOU ARE NOT PLAYING A COMBO DECK!

So the bottomline of my first statement is that you should not change your style of playing, except that you have to remember that you can win fast, if needed.

The second statement concerns games against combo. It seems to me that against combo you are better off with G/PA than with Morphling. Although it probably does not make a big diffeence, since either you are going to lose fast or you will win anyway.

The third statement concerns control. I am not sure that you really lose anything in that matchup. Yes, you do lose your second Morphling and 1 Wasteland. You trade it for 1 potentially dead card (which, however, is at least blue) and one good accelerator. In such matchups fast mana can be key. I would say, the Wasteland/Monolith trade is a fair one and I am inclined to think that even here Monolith is better. I should also remark on comboing in that matchup. Obviously, Mis-D is bad news, no doubt. But FoW does the same when FoWing a Morphling it "just" counters . And Mana Drain is risky, if your opponent does not have a sink. So although being risky, it is not that you will auto-lose when attempting the combo in a desperate move. Note also, that (when your opponent has drawn more cards, so you are in a desperate situation) you can Stroke yourself for all cards in the library - now Mis-D becomes a dead card for him, and you can kill him with Geysir, protected with all cards in your library (and possibly your graveyard). The last remark is of course very situational, but you should remember it, since in about 50% of all mirror games your opponent will outdraw you.

Moreover, as mentioned in other posts, having access to infinite mana is not too bad, even without Geysir/Stroke in your hand - it puts your opponent on a clock, so-to-speak.

A final remark concerns the overall philosophy of Paragon Keeper. It is an amazingly flexible deck with access to graveyard, library and SB. However, it is rather inflexible when it comes to victory conditions - Morphling, and to a much lesser extent Mox Monkey and Stroke/Geysir (sounds difficult wihtout Academy and without G/PA). By ading the combo you diversify also your victory conditions, thus making you less predictable. Probably this is more a psychological advantage, but you have to take these issues into account as well (although clearly this is not the main point here - so if you disagree with playing G/PA please do not just pick this last statement as a basis for your counter arguments).

Well, and of course it is completely true that also your metagame has something to say whether G/PA is good or not. For a "random metagame" I'd favour Paragon+G/PA. For control heavy, er, why not just play a good Sligh deck or aggro-control? For aggro heavy, yes, combo is obviously better. But it seems to me that many metagames have a healthy mix of different archetypes now...

[Saucemaster]

Quote This was also for a specific metagame, not just in general, which is what the majority of you all (supporters of the combo, and the lesser known Keeper players in general) seem to fail to take into account.

It developed in response to a particular metagame, certainly, but from these results (Latest Castricum Results)
it appears that the combo seems to be gaining popularity in the German/European metagame, if anything.  I'm not trying to draw any particular conclusions from this, I'm not making claims about what's optimal and what's not, etc., but it does seem that a number of players are increasingly sold on the idea--well known players or not, the combo has been posting some pretty solid results.  Whether or not those results would have been similarly good without the combo is of course another question.

[Pyromaniac]

I'm the number 4 of that particular tourney in Castricum, and I have to say, I don't mind having the combo. I play rather like a normal keeper with my deck, except I have an alternate win. It's good for so many things, like accelerated Morphlings, Strokes etc.

In that tourney I only killed someone with a Morphling 3 or 4 times, the rest were all combo wins. Either cause I had the pieces I needed fast, or because I had drawn so many cards through Brainstrosm, FoF, Ancestral etc that I had the combo, so why not use it?

I'll continue playing with the combo for now, as I don't have all the experience I really need playing vs aggro, as the ppl I playtest against mostly play control of some sort or another.