There are also a lot of cards, which have been cut, just because of the power level, which is something, I don't think is necessary.
I think it is absolutely fine to lower the power level of a cube in favor of synergies and archetype cards. The most enjoyable gameplay isn't necesarily the most powerful gameplay, but I trust you all to understand that, or you wouldn't be playing pauper cube in the first place.
It's interesting to hear that Inverter's win precentage is below 50%, but even then, that is because people know they will play against it and prepare their sideboards for it. It's warping the meta around it, basically. I hope the meta continues to evolve after this. Maybe Ikoria will be as impactful as THB was.
Either way, play your cube however you want to play it
I like to play Magic according to the current rules of Magic, because it's unambiguous and generally clear to everyone. It's not just that there's downsides to changing these rules for the sake of my cube experience, it's also that there is no real upside to me. I like complexity too, but there is enough complexity in my cube without introducing some counterintuitive rule.
On a sidenote: in my cube it only affects Sakura-Tribe Elder anyway, so even if I'd think damage on the stack was an upside, it wouldn't be worth it.
This is something we are not going to agree on, and that's ok. Ghostly Flicker, Ephemerate, and Displace are some of my favorite cards in my cube
The example of banding you're providing is different, because teaching people about banding is still teaching them something about the current rules of magic. If I teach a new player that damage goes on the stack and they start to get used to that, they might have some trouble adjusting to the actual rules when drafting at an FNM later. The skill of abusing the 'damage on the stack' rule is not transferable, because nobody else plays like that.
Honestly I prefer discussing cards as they would function within the current rules of the game. If I play cube, I want to be playing Magic. My view is that Magic, at this level, has to be fun and educational. I like to teach the players something about the rules of this game we love. Introducing odd old rules does not further that goal, and I don't think it's much fun either.
Either way, play your cube however you want to play it, but don't expect others on this forum to evaluate cards based on the rules you enforce.
Heliod is expensive because it's hyped up, and even though it's hyped up you don't see it that often. As Boombox said, the pro's aren't too impressed with it.
Underworld Breach has had a bigger inpact so far. Lotus Field decks are now faster, more consistent, less dependant on Lotus Fields and easier to play, at the cost of relying more heavily on the graveyard. I'm not calling for a ban right now, but I think this is one to watch out for.
Edit:
Just to be clear, I don't expect Underworld Breach to be banned if the deck is problematic. They would ban Lotus Field.
I have no clue what this means
I disagree with this part, but it's a matter of taste, and it's probably why I like Peasant cube over Pauper.
I think it is absolutely fine to lower the power level of a cube in favor of synergies and archetype cards. The most enjoyable gameplay isn't necesarily the most powerful gameplay, but I trust you all to understand that, or you wouldn't be playing pauper cube in the first place.
Inverter is a real problem currently, so bans are in order there, but Possibility Storm is barely played.
I also quote:
I like to play Magic according to the current rules of Magic, because it's unambiguous and generally clear to everyone. It's not just that there's downsides to changing these rules for the sake of my cube experience, it's also that there is no real upside to me. I like complexity too, but there is enough complexity in my cube without introducing some counterintuitive rule.
On a sidenote: in my cube it only affects Sakura-Tribe Elder anyway, so even if I'd think damage on the stack was an upside, it wouldn't be worth it.
This is something we are not going to agree on, and that's ok. Ghostly Flicker, Ephemerate, and Displace are some of my favorite cards in my cube
Either way, play your cube however you want to play it, but don't expect others on this forum to evaluate cards based on the rules you enforce.
So you think Inverter of Truth is one to watch out for, but Lotus Field is a-ok?
Underworld Breach has had a bigger inpact so far. Lotus Field decks are now faster, more consistent, less dependant on Lotus Fields and easier to play, at the cost of relying more heavily on the graveyard. I'm not calling for a ban right now, but I think this is one to watch out for.
Edit:
Just to be clear, I don't expect Underworld Breach to be banned if the deck is problematic. They would ban Lotus Field.