Ensnaring Bridge is nice because of the versatility, but it doesn't stop a reanimated Iona from locking you out and buying them as long as they need. PTE is an option there, but realistically, you want to be using Tormod's Crypt or Faerie Macabre to disrupt Reanimator by turn 2.
Hey folks, been playing burn for years in legacy and pauper mainly while sometimes in other formats. I've never posted here but have been lurking recently for answers to reanimator and lands other than graveyard hate.
Hey folks, been playing burn for years in legacy and pauper mainly while sometimes in other formats. I've never posted here but have been lurking recently for answers to reanimator and lands other than graveyard hate.
Just figured I'd come in and drop a few lines, hopefully Provoke a few thoughts...
Strong card but you can’t play it into an Iona. You can against Show and Tell and Lands but this is why I am thinking Path is still the way to go. The drawback to Path is you can’t target Emrakul but you can Deflecting Palm it which should win you the game. I will do some more testing on Friday and post my results.
So just as an update I was only able to play against Lands last night out of the aforementioned 3 decks to test Path and Palm against. We didn’t have enough to fire off (only 6 of us) so we just did a round robin where we played each person. Here is the breakdown:
R1 G/B midrange 2-0: long game 1 because drawing creatures and not a ton of burn along with him playing DRS. Game 2 was quick as he didn’t have much to board in against me.
R2 U/R Delver 2-0: both games were really quick and nothing was notable either game.
R3 Lands 0-2: Game 1 he T1 manabond made 20/20 shook hands. Game 2 on the play I kept a hand with 2 Price, 1 Path, 1 Palm, 1 Mountain, 1 Chain, and 1 Swiftspear. He Turn 2 made a token and I never drew another land.
R4 U/B control 2-0: Game 1 he got land flooded and only thing he played was a Strix. Game 2 not much better for him as he played Strix and Snap but that was it.
R5 Dregde 1-2: Game 1 opponent literally scooped to a T1 Goblin Guide. Game 2 I misplayed terribly as I didn’t block an Ichorid which would have removed the 3 bridges. Game 3 close race but lost. Both games 2 and 3 never saw any sb cards but that is how it goes sometimes.
I still like the idea of Path and Palm in the sb so I will keep testing. I may need to increase fetch count to 10 to accommodate this though.
For me it looks like... the burn lists didn't make any progress after some years of absence. The lists which are currently posted are most of the time nearly (not exactly) the same as 4 years ago and even worse, but maybe that's how it is today. New expansions doesn't contain useful cards for the main and ppl talking about the same problems and stuff of this kind of deck over and over again. Anyway I wish you good luck and better cards in the future, I hope you guys will find your answers here. I am out.
Sorry to disappoint you but there has been 4 cards to see significant play since Eidolon in legacy (Fatal Push, Stormchaser Mage, Treasure Cruise, and Dig Through Time which the last 2 were banned). Hard to make it into legacy due to the power level of the format.
Hello again everyone. Thanks for your advice in the past. This is the list im currently using. I know some of the cards might be considered....questionable by the burn community at large, but i like them and the deck works pretty well. Im here with 2 specific questions, but im more then happy to debate any of my other card choices if someone wants to.
i took out the goblin guide and put in the monastery swiftspear. it seems to me that the swiftspear is better then the goblin on every turn except the first. and even on the first turn, shes only slightly worse. how do other people feel about that?
my land count. ideally i like to have 2 or 3 mountains in my opening hand. I usually mulligan if i dont have them. If i start with 4 mountains and 3 other cards, it never seems to work out. the deck has a very low mana curve and i often convince myself to play a hand with only 1 mountain. it works out if my first few draws are mountains, but it feels like that doesnt happen very often.
when i play with 19 mountains it seems like i get 4 mountain opening hands way too often. it's almost impossible to have a deck with a lower mana curve (none of my spells cost more then 2) but when i drop down to 18 mountains, i seem to get 1 mountain hands way too often.
i want 18.5 mountains.
am i running the wrong number of mountains?
am i wrong about what hands to keep?
do i add a non land card, making the deck 61 cards to kind of virtually skew the land to spell ratio so its more like i have 18.5 mountains?
thanks for your thoughts
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My decks. Feel free to make suggestions. The Precious B___U___G___R___W
For me it looks like... the burn lists didn't make any progress after some years of absence. The lists which are currently posted are most of the time nearly (not exactly) the same as 4 years ago and even worse, but maybe that's how it is today. New expansions doesn't contain useful cards for the main and ppl talking about the same problems and stuff of this kind of deck over and over again. Anyway I wish you good luck and better cards in the future, I hope you guys will find your answers here. I am out.
Sorry to disappoint you but there has been 4 cards to see significant play since Eidolon in legacy (Fatal Push, Stormchaser Mage, Treasure Cruise, and Dig Through Time which the last 2 were banned). Hard to make it into legacy due to the power level of the format.
I wouldn't worry too much. Fellow has all of three posts at the moment, and joins a new thread to say "stuff hasn't changed, I'm out." I don't think we should really give it much thought.
Hello again everyone. Thanks for your advice in the past. This is the list im currently using. I know some of the cards might be considered....questionable by the burn community at large, but i like them and the deck works pretty well. Im here with 2 specific questions, but im more then happy to debate any of my other card choices if someone wants to.
i took out the goblin guide and put in the monastery swiftspear. it seems to me that the swiftspear is better then the goblin on every turn except the first. and even on the first turn, shes only slightly worse. how do other people feel about that?
my land count. ideally i like to have 2 or 3 mountains in my opening hand. I usually mulligan if i dont have them. If i start with 4 mountains and 3 other cards, it never seems to work out. the deck has a very low mana curve and i often convince myself to play a hand with only 1 mountain. it works out if my first few draws are mountains, but it feels like that doesnt happen very often.
when i play with 19 mountains it seems like i get 4 mountain opening hands way too often. it's almost impossible to have a deck with a lower mana curve (none of my spells cost more then 2) but when i drop down to 18 mountains, i seem to get 1 mountain hands way too often.
i want 18.5 mountains.
am i running the wrong number of mountains?
am i wrong about what hands to keep?
do i add a non land card, making the deck 61 cards to kind of virtually skew the land to spell ratio so its more like i have 18.5 mountains?
thanks for your thoughts
19 Mountains is fine. That's what I run as my mana base. 18-20 has been shown to be playable. If 19 is flooding you too much, you can always mix in some fetchlands: these will help you land your first 2 or so land-drops, but reduce your odds of drawing land later. I don't think it's worth it, but you might have better luck this way.
As for GG vs MS, well, GG has been shown to generally do more damage overall. MS isn't bad per se (and I certainly got good mileage out of it), but GG frees you to cast spells at your own pace and it also is an okay topdeck on an open board. Running the full set of both is actually feasible, if you want to be very aggressive.
Vexing Devil is an odd duck. A turn 1 Devil can be a better Lava Spike. The problem is, when topdecked later, it tends to be pretty bad since creatures or removal can stop it from scoring hits. In your case, it's also bad with MS, since it doesn't trigger Prowess. I'd probably go GG+Devil or GG+SS.
The Flame Rift used to be a mainstay, but most people agree that Eidolon of the Great Revel serves a similar purpose now, only it does the job even better. I never liked Flame Rift, but it's certainly powerful.
Magma Jet I consider to be criminally underrated. For a while, people were mistakenly using SDT. Magma Jet is simply better, hands down. There is nothing wrong with this card.
Searing Blood is the only other less well liked card, and I also think it's fine.
So really, there isn't much I can find to be too critical of. While not the build I'd play, I'm certain it still wins a fair number of games.
Thanks for your quick reply.
I have a bunch of fetches..ive just never tried them in this deck. Ive thought about it but so often when i win its like my fourth turn and ive got like 3 or 4 life left...if i did go with fetches i think id have to loose flame rift.
Speaking of flame rift....i dont play NEARLY as much as i used to. If i played more i might have moved on from flame rift too, but i still love flame rifting and then sacing those same 2 mountains for fireblast. Its almost half your life for 2 mountains. And once you do it to someone they seem to remember that you do that. People seem to play differently when they know with only 2 lands you can easily do 8 damage.
I know vexing devil has been hotly debated on this forum in the past, i dont want to revisit that. But here are my quick thoughts.
As you say when people take the damage (and sometimes they do) its great. 4 damage for R makes it the best straight burn spell available doesnt it?
When people let it stay on the board (and sometimes they do) its a 4/3 for R. I dont know all the magic cards anymore, but in my experience thats a pretty big body for a pretty low casting cost.
And sure, when people let it stay, and they have the removal, (and sometimes that happens) he gets removed. Such is life, sometimes your opponent has the answer to your threat. But any removal that can take care of the devil can also take care of eidoln or GoBlinGUidE or grim lavamancer or any of the other creatures i might play instead of the devil, correct?
I also love magma jet. Its especially useful with the land consistency issues im having
And as for blood/ blaze.... I feel like im running the right amount of land, but i dont consistently have them in my hand. Im sticking with blood for now. If i go with fetches, i might switch.
Do you think im wrong to mulligan hands with 1 land? Like i said, the curve on the deck is very low. But i hate sitting there with 1 land waiting to pull the second for 2 or 3 turns.
Thanks again
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My decks. Feel free to make suggestions. The Precious B___U___G___R___W
Well, like I said about Devil, I don't think it's wrong. I just don't think I'd play Devil and MS. The thing about Devil being subject to removal isn't as big a deal as another creature you might play, but what is a big deal is that your opponent might have an Angler, Tarmogoyf, or other large creature to block it with. While this is also true for GG, that creature having Haste often means it can sneak in 2 extra damage when your opponent is attacking instead of leaving back blockers.
As for fetches, I tend to agree that it's not really worth the life points for slightly improved draws. You brought up that issue specifically though, which is why I mentioned it. If you're running Grim Lavamancer or Searing Blaze, that might change the calculation.
And regarding whether to mulligan a 1-land hand, for me, it's based on what I have. With 19 land in the deck and one in hand, you have a roughly 1-in-3 chance to get one in a single draw, and just better than a 1-in-2 chance to get one on your second draw. That means that (a) I mulligan more on the play, and (b) I evaluate how much damage I can do if I miss my land drops. Creatures like GG are especially helpful since they can add up to a lot of damage; MS is worse because it's hard to take advantage of Prowess when you're tight on mana. If my hand is Mountain, GG, GG, Bolt, CL, PoP, Fireblast, I'm keeping that, especially on the draw. I'd mulligan if I had something like Mountain, Bolt, Spike, Searing Blood, Eidolon, Vortex, Fireblast on the play. It's going to be a judgment call every time.
I have a bunch of fetches..ive just never tried them in this deck. Ive thought about it but so often when i win its like my fourth turn and ive got like 3 or 4 life left...if i did go with fetches i think id have to loose flame rift.
Fetches are good but not necessary for mono-red builds.
I had never had any issue with Fetchlands and Flame Rift. The only time I had an issue with Flame Rift is when I'm playing with Eidolon of the Great Revel.
Speaking of flame rift....i dont play NEARLY as much as i used to. If i played more i might have moved on from flame rift too, but i still love flame rifting and then sacing those same 2 mountains for fireblast. Its almost half your life for 2 mountains. And once you do it to someone they seem to remember that you do that. People seem to play differently when they know with only 2 lands you can easily do 8 damage.
I believe the popularly of Flame Rift started with the response after sacking lands to fireblast. Long, long time ago before magic ban/restricted Fork (yeah the card was ban/restricted) burn players would fork the fireblast for the massive 8 damage. Then when fork was ban/restricted, burn players found Flame Rift as a similar card for the old school burn combo.
In general, I can see playing 2 to 3 Flame Rifts. The card is still harsh for it's 2cc as well as dealing 4 damage to the owner.
I know vexing devil has been hotly debated on this forum in the past, i dont want to revisit that. But here are my quick thoughts.
As you say when people take the damage (and sometimes they do) its great. 4 damage for R makes it the best straight burn spell available doesnt it?
When people let it stay on the board (and sometimes they do) its a 4/3 for R. I dont know all the magic cards anymore, but in my experience thats a pretty big body for a pretty low casting cost.
And sure, when people let it stay, and they have the removal, (and sometimes that happens) he gets removed. Such is life, sometimes your opponent has the answer to your threat. But any removal that can take care of the devil can also take care of eidoln or GoBlinGUidE or grim lavamancer or any of the other creatures i might play instead of the devil, correct?
I'm a huge fan of Vexing devil and it seems that you have a good idea why the card is so freaking awesome. I rank Vexing Devil higher than Swiftspear... only because, what most burn players seemed to forget is that 18/20 lands + 7/11 creatures (almost half your deck) that don't do anything to make swiftspear to grow.
I also love magma jet. Its especially useful with the land consistency issues im having
Sorry but magma jet don't help with land consistency. All the card do is let you peek at the next two cards or allow you to draw the unknown 3rd card instead. You are still going to have mana issues. And worst because you are now playing another 2cc spell with 19 lands.
And as for blood/ blaze.... I feel like im running the right amount of land, but i dont consistently have them in my hand. Im sticking with blood for now. If i go with fetches, i might switch.
Blood is good, there is a good number of targets. Personally, I like both cards!
Do you think im wrong to mulligan hands with 1 land? Like i said, the curve on the deck is very low. But i hate sitting there with 1 land waiting to pull the second for 2 or 3 turns.
Tricky because it depends on the 6 cards and the person your playing against. Most of the time I'll keep my hand, but I'm playing with 20 lands so I know my odds is drawing up a land within the next 2 turns is good.
Yeah, Main suggestion I would have regards Eidolon. Eidolon took Burn from a gimmick deck to a legitimately competitive deck. The other choices are debatable. Eidolon is not. Though, I vaguely remember this being discussed last time as well.
Ok....i confess...i have no idea how to play eidolon in this deck. Really. Ive been playing magic since 1994 and i just dont get it.
So i play this card in my second turn? Then what? Every spell i cast for the rest of the game costs me 2 life? I play lightning bolt to do 3 damage to you and 2 damage to me?
Do i wait till later in the game to cast it?
Do i cast it then do nothing until i have lethal damage in my hand?
I get it, im wrong. Everyone who has ever played magic sees how awesome this card is in a burn deck but me.
Can someone tell me how to play this card?
As in:
When do i want to cast it in a ideal situation?
What am i trying to do before i cast it?
What am i trying to do after i cast it?
What 4 cards should i cut to fit it in?
You're not the first player to look at Eidolon, look at a Burn list, and say "seems bad, everything is low CMC". That's a pretty common sentiment for players who haven't gazed into the flames and seen what the Lord of Light has to say about it. It's absolutely one of the best cards in the deck. You cast it turn 2 and try make it behave as if it's a pseudo-asymmetric effect by forcing your opponent to answer it or get wrecked by it, though there's nothing wrong with casting a Lava Spike while you have an Eidolon out if you judge that you can afford to lose 2. Eidolon is the kind of card that your opponent either has to answer or it will ruin their day. Even if Eidolon isn't shocking them, your opponent's game plan just got disrupted because of it and that alone is a powerful effect. If they can't remove it, they're faced with not casting things or getting shocked all day long. If they can, it still deals 2 to them and forced them to spend resources when you wanted them to spend resources. If you have an Eidolon in play and you're thinking of attacking with it, you do want to make sure you attack to probe for removal on their side and then cast Lava Spike second main. If they don't kill it, you should probably cast it second main anyway.
Look at cutting 4 of Magma Jet, Flame Rift, or Vexing Devil, though the Devils should be 4 Goblin Guides. When you said you cut Guide for Swiftspear and said that Guide is only better on T1, that's actually why Guide is the better card, but Swiftspear is still better than Vexing Devil. Within the context of Modern Burn, I did a rough estimate of how much damage these creatures are worth given that it's your only creature in play and some probability that your opponent can kill or otherwise render it useless as an attacker. Given those assumptions, T1 Guide is worth nearly 4 damage on the play while Swift is nearly 3 and T1 is going to be the most important turn for any of these creatures. Go look at the Modern primer for details on how I did that calculation, and scroll down to "Creature damage model".
Magma Jet isn't very good at 2 damage and a scry for 2 mana. Flame Rift gets very painful when you're playing Eidolon, though the fact that you aren't playing fetches makes that a little easier on your life total. Most decks don't play Flame Rift.
Ok....i confess...i have no idea how to play eidolon in this deck. Really. Ive been playing magic since 1994 and i just dont get it.
So i play this card in my second turn? Then what? Every spell i cast for the rest of the game costs me 2 life? I play lightning bolt to do 3 damage to you and 2 damage to me?
Do i wait till later in the game to cast it?
Do i cast it then do nothing until i have lethal damage in my hand?
I get it, im wrong. Everyone who has ever played magic sees how awesome this card is in a burn deck but me.
Can someone tell me how to play this card?
As in:
When do i want to cast it in a ideal situation?
What am i trying to do before i cast it?
What am i trying to do after i cast it?
What 4 cards should i cut to fit it in?
Im really looking forward to your answers.
Thanks
I agree with most (though not all) of what elconquistador1985 said.
The key thing to understand about Eidolon of the Great Revel is the same thing you understand about Flame Rift: we are counting to 20 damage, and are almost always ahead in that count. Why is Flame Rift good? Because failing to count to 20 is more likely than anything else about not having enough cards to get there. Getting 1/5 of the way there on a single card is worth taking damage yourself.
Eidolon has the same thing going for it. Most of Legacy consists of spells that are affected by Eidolon, and so it totals up to a lot. If the opponent removes it on the following turn, they'll likely have taken at least 2 damage asymmetrically just to remove it. If they don't, they're going to take 4 or more. The ability to attack on an open board matters too, or being able to block if you need to get rid of your own Eidolon.
I wouldn't play Eidolon with Flame Rift. That's too much self-damage for my liking.
As for when to play Eidolon, the answer is usually "as soon as able, as long as it's not obviously suicidal." If your opponent can win with just what's on the board and life totals are precarious, maybe don't play it. Likewise if they're so far ahead that you need to use burn as removal, because you'll sabotage yourself that way. But other than a very narrow band of situations, an early Eidolon does a lot more damage, and should be encouraged.
There are certainly times where I've cast an eidolon and shouldn't have, and doing it helps you learn how to recognize those situations.
You don't want to trap yourself under one, but it's a pretty good trade to take 2 to deal 3 if it means that your opponent will take 2 for pretty much everything they do.
Ok....i confess...i have no idea how to play eidolon in this deck. Really. Ive been playing magic since 1994 and i just dont get it.
So i play this card in my second turn? Then what? Every spell i cast for the rest of the game costs me 2 life? I play lightning bolt to do 3 damage to you and 2 damage to me?
Cool... I've been playing since 1996. (I kind of thought you were an old school player)
Eidolon 101
You are forcing the opponent to slow down and/or Eidolon will turn your burn spells into finishers!
Do i wait till later in the game to cast it?
Do i cast it then do nothing until i have lethal damage in my hand?
I get it, im wrong. Everyone who has ever played magic sees how awesome this card is in a burn deck but me.
I would put Eidolon into play as soon as I can... Turn 2. (in most burn decks). I'm actually playing with 2 Chrome Mox but that's personal preference.
Can someone tell me how to play this card?
As in:
When do i want to cast it in a ideal situation?
Playing Eidolon is a strategery change from your traditional draw-burn-go style. So you are not imposed to top deck draws for every turn. Eidolon has legs and they can attack and block, and some opponents maybe forced to hold a creature back just to block an attactking Eidolon. Depends on situtation.
What am i trying to do before i cast it?
Usually it's best to lock in a creature. This is why most players play Goblin Guide on turn 1 and turn 2 they would play Eidolon.
What am i trying to do after i cast it?
I like to follow it with a 2cc Blaze/Blood, before an attack. I would kill a potental blocker, than play Vexing Devil. The devil would stay in play. Or play a 3 damage bolt and follow it with the devil.
What 4 cards should i cut to fit it in?
This is up to you. I'm not a fan of Swiftspear because half our deck don't make them grow! Swiftspear are also tricky to play with Eidolon because they are not growing until turn 3! So if you have Swiftspear into play on turn 1, it's only dealing 2 damage until turn 3. Goblin Guide would deal 4 damage.
But the weakest card on your deck list is Magma Jet. So I would drop 3 jets and 1 flame rift.
This really depends on you, I do suggest that you should proxy 4 Eidolon's first and see if you like the strategery change.
If your not liking Eidolon because you have a stronger love for Swiftspear (I'm assuming this because you came off very defensive on playing Swiftpear over Goblin Guide), anyway, I think adding a few free spells would be better move. Adding 4 Lotus Petal to a swiftspear burn would make a faster clock.
Thanks for all your advice. Its going to take me a while to really digest it. It seems like the idea is to play him as early as possible, then just kind of lay back and wait to see what my opponent does. If he gets removed then i carry on burning my opponent like an old school burn deck. If he doesnt get removed i use him to attack and use my burn spells mostly to kill my opponents creatures so eidolon can get through.
Is that more or less correct?
Thanks
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My decks. Feel free to make suggestions. The Precious B___U___G___R___W
Thanks for all your advice. Its going to take me a while to really digest it. It seems like the idea is to play him as early as possible, then just kind of lay back and wait to see what my opponent does. If he gets removed then i carry on burning my opponent like an old school burn deck. If he doesnt get removed i use him to attack and use my burn spells mostly to kill my opponents creatures so eidolon can get through.
Is that more or less correct?
Thanks
Not very correct at all, in my opinion. You don't just stop playing anything because you have Eidolon in play. You should continue casting spells if you can afford to lose life. It's also a waste of a 3 damage spell to kill blockers just to get Eidolon through, which isn't too say you should never burn a creature but that you don't do it just to get 2 damage through. Eidolon attacking is a perk that's nice while you have it, but not a situation you need to strive to create. Burn isn't a creature combat deck, it's a spell based damage combo-ish deck that uses some very efficient creatures to aid that game plan.
You don't make Eidolon asymmetric by ceasing your game plan entirely, which is essentially allowing Eidolon to totally disrupt your own game plan. You make it asymmetric by making your opponent answer it and sequencing accordingly. If you are attacking this turn wait to cast sorceries until after combat in case they kill your Eidolon, for example. It's basically just "play smart", and it takes some trial and error to learn how to play with Eidolon. Situations where Eidolon is very good are when you're ahead, and losing 2 to Eidolon to deal 3 to your opponent is a fine situation to be in because you're still staying ahead.
Pretty much. He's more like Sulfuric Vortex or Flame Rift in that he lowers both player's life totals. That might mean you only need 3-4 direct Burn spells to finish the job. If you're at 10 with Eidolon and they're at 6, throw your Bolts to their face.
On the other hand, if your opponent has no ability to win-from-nowhere (combo, reanimator) and you're not being clocked, you can afford to slow-roll efficient play by sacrificing one point per turn (Bolting creatures rather than the opponent) to maintain board parity and chip away at their life total with Eidolon attacks. This is not the primary mode of action, but there is a time and place for it too.
Burn involves a lot of complex decision-making (for yourself and your opponent), and Eidolon increases the difficulty of the calculations. It makes the deck both better and more fun to play.
Thanks for all your advice. Its going to take me a while to really digest it. It seems like the idea is to play him as early as possible, then just kind of lay back and wait to see what my opponent does. If he gets removed then i carry on burning my opponent like an old school burn deck. If he doesnt get removed i use him to attack and use my burn spells mostly to kill my opponents creatures so eidolon can get through.
Is that more or less correct?
Thanks
I think you're getting the idea. Eidolon is an awesome creature, he's a burn card advantage (you don't need to keep worrying about that damn top card) and you can play your spells conservatively. I also think Eidolon makes searing blood/blaze more awesome because the opponent most likely hold back from an attack so they can chump block your eidolon.
Thank you all for your time and advice .....im still working on the eidolon thing, i dont know if ill ever really get it but oh well...on to other things.
magma jet
Some people here have said they like it, but mostly it seems like people think its a weak burn card. I like it and heres why:
When i was playing more....obsessively, "7 bolts to win the game" was a thing in burn decks. Is that still a thing?
Without some kind of mana acceleration, (does burn have viable mana acceleration?) youll need 4 turns to play 7 'bolts', right?
In my own (admittedly very limited) play testing, i havent come across a situation where magma jet didnt work just fine as one of my 7 'bolts'. Meaning that i still needed 4 turns and 7 spells to count to 20.
In recent days, its helped me draw a land on my 3rd turn, and not draw a land on my fourth turn.
In the "7 bolts" theory it seems to me to perform as well as any other 'bolt' with the added bonus of giving me 2 options for what card i want to draw next.
Its 2 mana instead of 1, but considering i need 4 turns anyway, that extra mana is there on one of my turns weather i use it or not.
What downside am i missing?
Thanks for your thoughts.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My decks. Feel free to make suggestions. The Precious B___U___G___R___W
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Ensnaring Bridge is nice because of the versatility, but it doesn't stop a reanimated Iona from locking you out and buying them as long as they need. PTE is an option there, but realistically, you want to be using Tormod's Crypt or Faerie Macabre to disrupt Reanimator by turn 2.
Modern: Merfolk UU // Green Devotion GG // SkRed Red RR
Legacy: Death & Taxes WW // Burn RR // Death's Shadow Delver UB
Commander: Brago UW // Karlov WB
I've found that Stingscourger is a good answer for Show and Tell decks, Reanimator, and Lands. I've had some moderate success in the Competitive Leagues on MTGO (several 4-1 finishes a few days in a row) when sideboarding three of these, 4 Exquisite Firecraft, 4 Smash to Smithereens, 2 Volcanic Fallout, and 2 Ensnaring Bridge.
Just figured I'd come in and drop a few lines, hopefully Provoke a few thoughts...
Twitch Channel - https://www.twitch.tv/moontimedweller
MODERN - Mono-Blue Merfolk & 7-Forest Goblin Charbelcher
LEGACY - Ruby Storm & Burn
PAUPER - Zombies, Bogles, & Burn
Strong card but you can’t play it into an Iona. You can against Show and Tell and Lands but this is why I am thinking Path is still the way to go. The drawback to Path is you can’t target Emrakul but you can Deflecting Palm it which should win you the game. I will do some more testing on Friday and post my results.
R1 G/B midrange 2-0: long game 1 because drawing creatures and not a ton of burn along with him playing DRS. Game 2 was quick as he didn’t have much to board in against me.
R2 U/R Delver 2-0: both games were really quick and nothing was notable either game.
R3 Lands 0-2: Game 1 he T1 manabond made 20/20 shook hands. Game 2 on the play I kept a hand with 2 Price, 1 Path, 1 Palm, 1 Mountain, 1 Chain, and 1 Swiftspear. He Turn 2 made a token and I never drew another land.
R4 U/B control 2-0: Game 1 he got land flooded and only thing he played was a Strix. Game 2 not much better for him as he played Strix and Snap but that was it.
R5 Dregde 1-2: Game 1 opponent literally scooped to a T1 Goblin Guide. Game 2 I misplayed terribly as I didn’t block an Ichorid which would have removed the 3 bridges. Game 3 close race but lost. Both games 2 and 3 never saw any sb cards but that is how it goes sometimes.
I still like the idea of Path and Palm in the sb so I will keep testing. I may need to increase fetch count to 10 to accommodate this though.
Modern: Merfolk UU // Green Devotion GG // SkRed Red RR
Legacy: Death & Taxes WW // Burn RR // Death's Shadow Delver UB
Commander: Brago UW // Karlov WB
Modern: Merfolk UU // Green Devotion GG // SkRed Red RR
Legacy: Death & Taxes WW // Burn RR // Death's Shadow Delver UB
Commander: Brago UW // Karlov WB
Sorry to disappoint you but there has been 4 cards to see significant play since Eidolon in legacy (Fatal Push, Stormchaser Mage, Treasure Cruise, and Dig Through Time which the last 2 were banned). Hard to make it into legacy due to the power level of the format.
4 chain lightning
4 lava spike
4 rift bolt
4 fireblast
4 flame rift
4 monastery swiftspear
4 vexing devil
3 magma jet
3 price of progress
3 searing blood
19 mountain
i took out the goblin guide and put in the monastery swiftspear. it seems to me that the swiftspear is better then the goblin on every turn except the first. and even on the first turn, shes only slightly worse. how do other people feel about that?
my land count. ideally i like to have 2 or 3 mountains in my opening hand. I usually mulligan if i dont have them. If i start with 4 mountains and 3 other cards, it never seems to work out. the deck has a very low mana curve and i often convince myself to play a hand with only 1 mountain. it works out if my first few draws are mountains, but it feels like that doesnt happen very often.
when i play with 19 mountains it seems like i get 4 mountain opening hands way too often. it's almost impossible to have a deck with a lower mana curve (none of my spells cost more then 2) but when i drop down to 18 mountains, i seem to get 1 mountain hands way too often.
i want 18.5 mountains.
am i running the wrong number of mountains?
am i wrong about what hands to keep?
do i add a non land card, making the deck 61 cards to kind of virtually skew the land to spell ratio so its more like i have 18.5 mountains?
thanks for your thoughts
The Precious
B___U___G___R___W
I wouldn't worry too much. Fellow has all of three posts at the moment, and joins a new thread to say "stuff hasn't changed, I'm out." I don't think we should really give it much thought.
19 Mountains is fine. That's what I run as my mana base. 18-20 has been shown to be playable. If 19 is flooding you too much, you can always mix in some fetchlands: these will help you land your first 2 or so land-drops, but reduce your odds of drawing land later. I don't think it's worth it, but you might have better luck this way.
As for GG vs MS, well, GG has been shown to generally do more damage overall. MS isn't bad per se (and I certainly got good mileage out of it), but GG frees you to cast spells at your own pace and it also is an okay topdeck on an open board. Running the full set of both is actually feasible, if you want to be very aggressive.
Vexing Devil is an odd duck. A turn 1 Devil can be a better Lava Spike. The problem is, when topdecked later, it tends to be pretty bad since creatures or removal can stop it from scoring hits. In your case, it's also bad with MS, since it doesn't trigger Prowess. I'd probably go GG+Devil or GG+SS.
The Flame Rift used to be a mainstay, but most people agree that Eidolon of the Great Revel serves a similar purpose now, only it does the job even better. I never liked Flame Rift, but it's certainly powerful.
Magma Jet I consider to be criminally underrated. For a while, people were mistakenly using SDT. Magma Jet is simply better, hands down. There is nothing wrong with this card.
Searing Blood is the only other less well liked card, and I also think it's fine.
So really, there isn't much I can find to be too critical of. While not the build I'd play, I'm certain it still wins a fair number of games.
Modern: Merfolk UU // Green Devotion GG // SkRed Red RR
Legacy: Death & Taxes WW // Burn RR // Death's Shadow Delver UB
Commander: Brago UW // Karlov WB
I have a bunch of fetches..ive just never tried them in this deck. Ive thought about it but so often when i win its like my fourth turn and ive got like 3 or 4 life left...if i did go with fetches i think id have to loose flame rift.
Speaking of flame rift....i dont play NEARLY as much as i used to. If i played more i might have moved on from flame rift too, but i still love flame rifting and then sacing those same 2 mountains for fireblast. Its almost half your life for 2 mountains. And once you do it to someone they seem to remember that you do that. People seem to play differently when they know with only 2 lands you can easily do 8 damage.
I know vexing devil has been hotly debated on this forum in the past, i dont want to revisit that. But here are my quick thoughts.
As you say when people take the damage (and sometimes they do) its great. 4 damage for R makes it the best straight burn spell available doesnt it?
When people let it stay on the board (and sometimes they do) its a 4/3 for R. I dont know all the magic cards anymore, but in my experience thats a pretty big body for a pretty low casting cost.
And sure, when people let it stay, and they have the removal, (and sometimes that happens) he gets removed. Such is life, sometimes your opponent has the answer to your threat. But any removal that can take care of the devil can also take care of eidoln or GoBlinGUidE or grim lavamancer or any of the other creatures i might play instead of the devil, correct?
I also love magma jet. Its especially useful with the land consistency issues im having
And as for blood/ blaze.... I feel like im running the right amount of land, but i dont consistently have them in my hand. Im sticking with blood for now. If i go with fetches, i might switch.
Do you think im wrong to mulligan hands with 1 land? Like i said, the curve on the deck is very low. But i hate sitting there with 1 land waiting to pull the second for 2 or 3 turns.
Thanks again
The Precious
B___U___G___R___W
As for fetches, I tend to agree that it's not really worth the life points for slightly improved draws. You brought up that issue specifically though, which is why I mentioned it. If you're running Grim Lavamancer or Searing Blaze, that might change the calculation.
And regarding whether to mulligan a 1-land hand, for me, it's based on what I have. With 19 land in the deck and one in hand, you have a roughly 1-in-3 chance to get one in a single draw, and just better than a 1-in-2 chance to get one on your second draw. That means that (a) I mulligan more on the play, and (b) I evaluate how much damage I can do if I miss my land drops. Creatures like GG are especially helpful since they can add up to a lot of damage; MS is worse because it's hard to take advantage of Prowess when you're tight on mana. If my hand is Mountain, GG, GG, Bolt, CL, PoP, Fireblast, I'm keeping that, especially on the draw. I'd mulligan if I had something like Mountain, Bolt, Spike, Searing Blood, Eidolon, Vortex, Fireblast on the play. It's going to be a judgment call every time.
Modern: Merfolk UU // Green Devotion GG // SkRed Red RR
Legacy: Death & Taxes WW // Burn RR // Death's Shadow Delver UB
Commander: Brago UW // Karlov WB
Fetches are good but not necessary for mono-red builds.
If your playing with Grim Lavamancer and Searing Blaze - yep fetches is necessary for the the deck.
I had never had any issue with Fetchlands and Flame Rift. The only time I had an issue with Flame Rift is when I'm playing with Eidolon of the Great Revel.
I believe the popularly of Flame Rift started with the response after sacking lands to fireblast. Long, long time ago before magic ban/restricted Fork (yeah the card was ban/restricted) burn players would fork the fireblast for the massive 8 damage. Then when fork was ban/restricted, burn players found Flame Rift as a similar card for the old school burn combo.
In general, I can see playing 2 to 3 Flame Rifts. The card is still harsh for it's 2cc as well as dealing 4 damage to the owner.
I'm a huge fan of Vexing devil and it seems that you have a good idea why the card is so freaking awesome. I rank Vexing Devil higher than Swiftspear... only because, what most burn players seemed to forget is that 18/20 lands + 7/11 creatures (almost half your deck) that don't do anything to make swiftspear to grow.
Sorry but magma jet don't help with land consistency. All the card do is let you peek at the next two cards or allow you to draw the unknown 3rd card instead. You are still going to have mana issues. And worst because you are now playing another 2cc spell with 19 lands.
Blood is good, there is a good number of targets. Personally, I like both cards!
Tricky because it depends on the 6 cards and the person your playing against. Most of the time I'll keep my hand, but I'm playing with 20 lands so I know my odds is drawing up a land within the next 2 turns is good.
Is there a reason why your not playing with Eidolon of the Great Revel?
Modern: R Skred -- WBG Melira Co -- URW Nahiri Control
Legacy: R Mono Red Burn -- UWB Stoneblade
Commander: R Krenko, Mob Boss -- WUBRG Scion of the Ur-Dragon -- WUBRG Maze’s End
Other: R No Rares Red (Standard) -- URC Izzet Tron (Pauper)
So i play this card in my second turn? Then what? Every spell i cast for the rest of the game costs me 2 life? I play lightning bolt to do 3 damage to you and 2 damage to me?
Do i wait till later in the game to cast it?
Do i cast it then do nothing until i have lethal damage in my hand?
I get it, im wrong. Everyone who has ever played magic sees how awesome this card is in a burn deck but me.
Can someone tell me how to play this card?
As in:
When do i want to cast it in a ideal situation?
What am i trying to do before i cast it?
What am i trying to do after i cast it?
What 4 cards should i cut to fit it in?
Im really looking forward to your answers.
Thanks
The Precious
B___U___G___R___W
Look at cutting 4 of Magma Jet, Flame Rift, or Vexing Devil, though the Devils should be 4 Goblin Guides. When you said you cut Guide for Swiftspear and said that Guide is only better on T1, that's actually why Guide is the better card, but Swiftspear is still better than Vexing Devil. Within the context of Modern Burn, I did a rough estimate of how much damage these creatures are worth given that it's your only creature in play and some probability that your opponent can kill or otherwise render it useless as an attacker. Given those assumptions, T1 Guide is worth nearly 4 damage on the play while Swift is nearly 3 and T1 is going to be the most important turn for any of these creatures. Go look at the Modern primer for details on how I did that calculation, and scroll down to "Creature damage model".
Magma Jet isn't very good at 2 damage and a scry for 2 mana. Flame Rift gets very painful when you're playing Eidolon, though the fact that you aren't playing fetches makes that a little easier on your life total. Most decks don't play Flame Rift.
I agree with most (though not all) of what elconquistador1985 said.
The key thing to understand about Eidolon of the Great Revel is the same thing you understand about Flame Rift: we are counting to 20 damage, and are almost always ahead in that count. Why is Flame Rift good? Because failing to count to 20 is more likely than anything else about not having enough cards to get there. Getting 1/5 of the way there on a single card is worth taking damage yourself.
Eidolon has the same thing going for it. Most of Legacy consists of spells that are affected by Eidolon, and so it totals up to a lot. If the opponent removes it on the following turn, they'll likely have taken at least 2 damage asymmetrically just to remove it. If they don't, they're going to take 4 or more. The ability to attack on an open board matters too, or being able to block if you need to get rid of your own Eidolon.
I wouldn't play Eidolon with Flame Rift. That's too much self-damage for my liking.
As for when to play Eidolon, the answer is usually "as soon as able, as long as it's not obviously suicidal." If your opponent can win with just what's on the board and life totals are precarious, maybe don't play it. Likewise if they're so far ahead that you need to use burn as removal, because you'll sabotage yourself that way. But other than a very narrow band of situations, an early Eidolon does a lot more damage, and should be encouraged.
Modern: Merfolk UU // Green Devotion GG // SkRed Red RR
Legacy: Death & Taxes WW // Burn RR // Death's Shadow Delver UB
Commander: Brago UW // Karlov WB
You don't want to trap yourself under one, but it's a pretty good trade to take 2 to deal 3 if it means that your opponent will take 2 for pretty much everything they do.
Cool... I've been playing since 1996. (I kind of thought you were an old school player)
Eidolon 101
You are forcing the opponent to slow down and/or Eidolon will turn your burn spells into finishers!
I would put Eidolon into play as soon as I can... Turn 2. (in most burn decks). I'm actually playing with 2 Chrome Mox but that's personal preference.
Playing Eidolon is a strategery change from your traditional draw-burn-go style. So you are not imposed to top deck draws for every turn. Eidolon has legs and they can attack and block, and some opponents maybe forced to hold a creature back just to block an attactking Eidolon. Depends on situtation.
Usually it's best to lock in a creature. This is why most players play Goblin Guide on turn 1 and turn 2 they would play Eidolon.
I like to follow it with a 2cc Blaze/Blood, before an attack. I would kill a potental blocker, than play Vexing Devil. The devil would stay in play. Or play a 3 damage bolt and follow it with the devil.
This is up to you. I'm not a fan of Swiftspear because half our deck don't make them grow! Swiftspear are also tricky to play with Eidolon because they are not growing until turn 3! So if you have Swiftspear into play on turn 1, it's only dealing 2 damage until turn 3. Goblin Guide would deal 4 damage.
But the weakest card on your deck list is Magma Jet. So I would drop 3 jets and 1 flame rift.
This really depends on you, I do suggest that you should proxy 4 Eidolon's first and see if you like the strategery change.
If your not liking Eidolon because you have a stronger love for Swiftspear (I'm assuming this because you came off very defensive on playing Swiftpear over Goblin Guide), anyway, I think adding a few free spells would be better move. Adding 4 Lotus Petal to a swiftspear burn would make a faster clock.
I hope it helps
Is that more or less correct?
Thanks
The Precious
B___U___G___R___W
Not very correct at all, in my opinion. You don't just stop playing anything because you have Eidolon in play. You should continue casting spells if you can afford to lose life. It's also a waste of a 3 damage spell to kill blockers just to get Eidolon through, which isn't too say you should never burn a creature but that you don't do it just to get 2 damage through. Eidolon attacking is a perk that's nice while you have it, but not a situation you need to strive to create. Burn isn't a creature combat deck, it's a spell based damage combo-ish deck that uses some very efficient creatures to aid that game plan.
You don't make Eidolon asymmetric by ceasing your game plan entirely, which is essentially allowing Eidolon to totally disrupt your own game plan. You make it asymmetric by making your opponent answer it and sequencing accordingly. If you are attacking this turn wait to cast sorceries until after combat in case they kill your Eidolon, for example. It's basically just "play smart", and it takes some trial and error to learn how to play with Eidolon. Situations where Eidolon is very good are when you're ahead, and losing 2 to Eidolon to deal 3 to your opponent is a fine situation to be in because you're still staying ahead.
On the other hand, if your opponent has no ability to win-from-nowhere (combo, reanimator) and you're not being clocked, you can afford to slow-roll efficient play by sacrificing one point per turn (Bolting creatures rather than the opponent) to maintain board parity and chip away at their life total with Eidolon attacks. This is not the primary mode of action, but there is a time and place for it too.
Burn involves a lot of complex decision-making (for yourself and your opponent), and Eidolon increases the difficulty of the calculations. It makes the deck both better and more fun to play.
Modern: Merfolk UU // Green Devotion GG // SkRed Red RR
Legacy: Death & Taxes WW // Burn RR // Death's Shadow Delver UB
Commander: Brago UW // Karlov WB
I think you're getting the idea. Eidolon is an awesome creature, he's a burn card advantage (you don't need to keep worrying about that damn top card) and you can play your spells conservatively. I also think Eidolon makes searing blood/blaze more awesome because the opponent most likely hold back from an attack so they can chump block your eidolon.
magma jet
Some people here have said they like it, but mostly it seems like people think its a weak burn card. I like it and heres why:
When i was playing more....obsessively, "7 bolts to win the game" was a thing in burn decks. Is that still a thing?
Without some kind of mana acceleration, (does burn have viable mana acceleration?) youll need 4 turns to play 7 'bolts', right?
In my own (admittedly very limited) play testing, i havent come across a situation where magma jet didnt work just fine as one of my 7 'bolts'. Meaning that i still needed 4 turns and 7 spells to count to 20.
In recent days, its helped me draw a land on my 3rd turn, and not draw a land on my fourth turn.
In the "7 bolts" theory it seems to me to perform as well as any other 'bolt' with the added bonus of giving me 2 options for what card i want to draw next.
Its 2 mana instead of 1, but considering i need 4 turns anyway, that extra mana is there on one of my turns weather i use it or not.
What downside am i missing?
Thanks for your thoughts.
The Precious
B___U___G___R___W