Protection thought experiment

[Morganator 2.0]

Imagine you have an opponent with Asceticism, Shalai, Voice of Plenty, or Grand Abolisher on the battlefield. They currently have no other threatening permanents.

Do you think it is worth removing the protection piece just so you don't have to worry about it later? That way, when there is something threatening, you or another player will be able to deal with it.

[CleanBelwas]

Generally I'd say no as there are usually enough wipes going around that they tend to not be a problem for long, but there are definitely times when I would do it.

In creature based decks, if I had a Beast Whisperer or similar in play and a Rec Sage or similar in hand, I can see me playing it and destroy the Ascetisicm because it's still a fine target and I want to play more creatures to draw more cards and build my board presence.

If my removal is instant speed and I'm moving in to my turn with the mana open to cast it and my text turn is going to be a big one, I'd consider firing it off just in case.

If there was any comedy value at all I would windmill slam my removal immediately.

[robort]

Most definitely to deal with it now. If they are using a protective piece then more than likely they’ll have a piece that also makes their stuff also indestructible. Thus making their board nearly impossible to deal with

[Landale]

Things like Asceticism and Shalai, Voice of Plenty I'd probably not rush to remove. Stuff like Grand Abolisher, on the other hand, need to go immediately.
There is a distinct difference between "you have to work for it" and "you can't" and I don't ever want to be in a situation where I'm stuck with the latter.

[mynameiscalled]

It's very situational, right (as is everything else in life lol). I tend to lean more towards all the political decks (Queen Marchesa or Kwain, with a political group hug etc) so generally I am not the one trying to make enemies on the board, but rather let other people take care of themselves while I hang in the backline, maybe fire of a Scheming Symmetry with hints of "remove this piece" etc, but with that being said - I think the Grand Abolisher has to go ASAP. I feel like my decks usually have answer for most things I can think of (ofcourse not concidering actually drawing everything I need all the time) I feel like that ability is way to powerful to stay.

[Aetherium Slinky]

Leave it alone.

I operate with counterspells so most things are not a problem. Grand Abolisher... Meh. Unless it's obvious they're winning on the spot I won't counter it.

[anjinsan]

If they’re playing GA, they probably are. 

[TrueNeutralPaladin]

Grand Abolisher: Remove.

Others: Shrug.

I like to play things like Dawn Charm to nerf someone's alpha strike - Craterhoof Behemoth, Triumph of the Hordes, Cyclonic Rift, etc.

I also tend to reserve my removal until something directly and significantly threatens me, unless someone is playing a value train commander (Prosper, Chulane, etc).

Thus I need to be able to respond during opponents' turns. And when you add GA's potential use as combo protection... It's gotta go.

I'd love a new version of Grand Abolisher that reads something like:

Shining Warden - WW - Creature - Angel

Flying

During your main phases, your opponents can’t cast spells or activate abilities of nonland permanents.

During your main phases, you can't cast more than one non-creature spell or activate the abilities of nonland permanents more than once."

2/2

The idea is "useful to aggro, useless to combo". Spur of the moment design, so it might need some tweaking.

[crimsonking]

The question in not well-posed, in my opinion.
You see, with Grand Abolisher you'd better remove it as soon as possible, because once it's your opponent's turn and he goes for the win, you won't be able to do a thing to stop him.
As for the others, I normally don't care that much. Any wrath effect could still wipe the board with or without them in play.
So, in the end, it depends on the protection. If it screams: "Kill me or you're gonna lose next turn." Yes. I will kill it. Otherwise I don't bother.