Hey all, looking to get into Burn on MODO for the first time.
What does everyone consider the stock list for someone to get started with?
I'm looking at this list that recently 5-0'd and I like the choices: https://www.mtggoldfish.com/deck/1189573#online
(I'd rather avoid Ensnaring Bridge for budget reasons, but I could probably be talked into it)
Bridge is really good in this deck good. You're going to dump your hand quickly.
I suppose Palm has fallen out of favor for some, but I prefer it to Firecraft
I'm assuming where you listed 3 skullcrack in your sideboard was meant to be searing blood? Some of us are against bridge because casting it for 3 and having it removed meant tapping out to achieve nothing. Bridge can be good but some of us feels it's too much mana to not achieve our game plan. That being said, it's very popular and many burn lists that have posted results have had it in their side which is undeniable. However, there have also been lists that didn't. So it's definitely not a necessary side board and could probably be called one of our side board flex spots.
yes, searing blood. my apologies. Personally, i would rather have bridge. Its very good at giving burn that extra draw or 2 it needs to close out a game
Hey all, looking to get into Burn on MODO for the first time.
What does everyone consider the stock list for someone to get started with?
I'm looking at this list that recently 5-0'd and I like the choices: https://www.mtggoldfish.com/deck/1189573#online
(I'd rather avoid Ensnaring Bridge for budget reasons, but I could probably be talked into it)
Once you get to flex cards, there isn't a stock list anymore but rather a stock set of cards to choose from.
This is the core set of cards you're pretty much always playing (this leaves 13 slots).
If you expect small creatures, play more Blaze and Grim. If you expect a lot of lifegain, play more Skullcrack. Lightning Helix is pretty close to being always a full playset, but it's ok to play 3 (so maybe count 3 as part of the core cards above). Some people like the singleton Shard Volley, some don't, I think it's fine as an extra shot a 1CMC spell to win the game.
As far as the sideboard:
3-4 Artifact hate (I generally play 4, never less, sometimes more, maybe cover enchantments as well, via Wear//Tear or DRev)
2-3 Path to Exile (I always play 3)
2-3 Graveyard hate (I always play at least 2)
Probably finish the playsets of what you pulled from the main for flex slots (if Blaze/Helix/Skullcrack)
The core sideboard things are the first 3 in that list. The rest comes down to what you like and depends on what you expect to run into, and there isn't anything "stock" about it. Personally, I like 2 Firecrafts for control matchups and they also serve as a generic red burn spell if I need to side something out and "any burn spell will do". I don't like Bridge because it's too expensive and may just stall before you lose anyway. I don't like Palm, but I play it sometimes. I like Blood if I'm expecting a lot of small creatures and already have 4 Blazes in the main.
In David Ernenwein's latest Modern Nexus article, "Answering Combo: A Beginner's Guide", he goes over his views on the different types of combo decks in the format. One such category he labels Critical Mass Combo. I'm going to quote the article below.
"These decks need certain cards in large quantities to start their combos....Once that happens, they “go off” and start doing math to determine a path to victory."
"There are many options for disrupting critical mass decks. Keeping them off their mass is the obvious move, but that isn’t always possible; Storm survives Thoughtseize and Liliana of the Veil via Past in Flames, for instance. A stonewall of counterspells is more effective thanks to instant speed, but not without another element."
"The trick is to attack from multiple angles. Jund relies on discard to proactively disrupt Storm, then Scavenging Ooze to close the door. Humans taxes the combo and attacks their hand while presenting a very fast clock. Tron struggles against these combos because Karn Liberated is not very disruptive and its clock is slow. Figure out what kinds of disruption are available and prioritize them."
I feel this further supports my statement that Burn should be viewed as a combo deck, specifically a critical mass combo deck as defined by David. The same reasoning David uses in his article to describe Storm, fit Burn to a tee. We're weak to discard and counterspells, but it ultimately doesn't matter without a clock to back it up. In the way that Storm gets their disrupted combo back through Past in Flames, we get ours back by virtue of having a draw step each turn. We're even strong against Tron for the same reason David lists here. It's not that we don't have combo pieces; it's that EVERY card is a combo piece.
Thanks Decepticon, Reslin, Conquistador!
Appreciate the insight, I think I'm going to skip Bridge for now and start with a list like this: https://www.mtggoldfish.com/deck/1191298#paper
Thanks Decepticon, Reslin, Conquistador!
Appreciate the insight, I think I'm going to skip Bridge for now and start with a list like this: https://www.mtggoldfish.com/deck/1191298#paper
Cheers
That looks like a solid core to start with. If your budget is able to stretch a little more, I’d recommend picking up the fourth Inspiring Vantage, a third Searing Blood, two Deflecting Palms, two Kor Firewalkers, one (or two) Shard Volley and a playset of Smash to Smithereens to give yourself a little bit of extra flexibility to adjust to the meta. Those additions are pretty inexpensive overall for how many more options they’ll provide. You should definitely just jam a few games with your current 75 first though just to make sure you enjoy the play style.
Just to make your initial 75 cheaper and equally effective, you could even just replace the third Lavamancer with a third Searing Blood. I think you’d really want to be running 12 fetches if you’re going to play 3 Lavamancers.
Hi guys I’ve noticed Kor Firewalker is on the down turn in people’s sideboard yet burn is still performing well. Is it worth it to have it in the sideboard or is it too much of a specific hate card for just the mirror?
Also Deflecting Palm in the sideboard what’s it good for? It seems to only be good in matchups that are already favorable and doesn’t help much in unfavorable matchups. Also I don’t like the reactive nature of the card as we are such an aggressive deck. If I’m wrong please let me know.
I only play Kor Firewalker at fnms because there are several other burn decks. I wouldn't play it in a wide open tournament because it is so narrow.
I have the same issues as you with Palm. I think it's an ok card if you can expect it to be worth Boros Charm or better in damage. I liked it a lot while Infect was big before they lost Probe. I would often being it in against Goyf decks at the time. These days, I generally play it only if I expect a lot of mirrors and don't want to play Kor Firewalker. I agree that it doesn't really fit with our proactive strategy because it's a reactive card. I've certainly won games with it, but I've also watched my opponent stabilize while it sat in my hand as a dead card.
Hi guys I’ve noticed Kor Firewalker is on the down turn in people’s sideboard yet burn is still performing well. Is it worth it to have it in the sideboard or is it too much of a specific hate card for just the mirror?
Also Deflecting Palm in the sideboard what’s it good for? It seems to only be good in matchups that are already favorable and doesn’t help much in unfavorable matchups. Also I don’t like the reactive nature of the card as we are such an aggressive deck. If I’m wrong please let me know.
Firewalker is great in burn mirrors. The problem is it is mediocre at best in all other matchups. I would rather have searing blood in those 2-3 slots due to its efficiency in the mirror as well as other matchups. Palm is still nice, IMO, if you see a lot of tron because it can function as another way to blank wurmcoil engine attacks.
I recently learned of the non-bo between exquisite firecraft and rest in peace, so i'm probably dropping the former and lessening my control matchups a bit in favor of two firewalker. I have seen a slight uptick in burn that may make it worth a try.
That’s what I was getting at in regards to Palm is that it’s good in favorable match ups. Tron might as well be a bye for us as it’s such an overwhelmingly lopsided matchup in Burn’s favor, with or without Palm.
Just went 2-3 drop in a six round modern tournament...I'm pretty frustrated.
R1: Beat Tron 2-0. Not much to say here, he stumbled game 1 and I had a god draw game 2.
R2: Loss to Bring to Light weird combo 0-2. So he was playing utopia sprawls and forests, but naming other colors with sprawl. Turns out it was to get spike feeder into play, then play bring to light to tutor for archangel of thune. Okay, ***** happens. Game 2 I am pissed though, because I got him to one life, I go to searing blaze a wall of omens for the win, and he blinks it with a restoration angel (the third he played in three turns). I didn't freaking know that didn't fizzle a searing blaze! Someone heard me venting later and told me I should have won.
R3: Beat Jund 2-1. I get to test the searing blaze ruling again, as we are both at 1 life to end game three with him having three goyfs out to my empty board with a searing blaze. I blaze for the win, he tries to fatal push the goyf, I call a judge. Judge says the player damage goes through. My opponent asks that he check oracle ruling to be absolutely sure, and that confirms it.
R4: Loss to Jund 0-2. So I have to ask a question. Game two here I mull to six on the play and get a one land hand with swiftspear and some two-mana spells. I scry a land, but the land in my hand is a bloodstained mire. Is the proper line of play to hold the swiftspear one turn to get the guaranteed second land? I didn't...I thought putting early pressure on was more important, and lost to mana screw.
R5: Loss to Affinity 0-2. Turn two etched champion into turn three cranial plating game one...game two he just had a god draw with a welding jar, spellskite and ravager to basically blank my removal.
I'm pretty salty right now over the second round error. Obviously I have learned from it just in time for PPTQ season, but that just seems weird and inconsistent with other similar cards like cryptic command (the official ruling we were told is that when a spell has multiple targets, all targets must be invalidated to stop a spell from resolving).
I'm pretty salty right now over the second round error. Obviously I have learned from it just in time for PPTQ season, but that just seems weird and inconsistent with other similar cards like cryptic command (the official ruling we were told is that when a spell has multiple targets, all targets must be invalidated to stop a spell from resolving).
That's why Searing Blaze damage still goes through. Blaze targets a player and a creature that player controls.
As for your question on the keep/mull...I think it depends on the full hand. If Swiftspear was your only one mana spell, I probably would have waited to crack the fetch until I got my second land. If you had...let's say two other one mana spells, I probably would have taken the risk.
I'm pretty salty right now over the second round error. Obviously I have learned from it just in time for PPTQ season, but that just seems weird and inconsistent with other similar cards like cryptic command (the official ruling we were told is that when a spell has multiple targets, all targets must be invalidated to stop a spell from resolving).
This is in the gatherer rulings for Searing Blaze.
3/1/2010: If either target is illegal by the time Searing Blaze resolves, it still deals damage to the other target.
Every time I see a post with a new Burn player asking for tricks they should know, I bring this one up. I've had people kill their own creature and then look at me and say "so, uhh, illegal target, blaze fizzles" and I say "you're taking 3 unless you can flash in something like hexproof for yourself, too".
If a spell has a single target and that target becomes invalid, none of the spell resolves (this is why Cryptic cast as "Bounce+Draw" fizzles if the target of the bounce mode becomes illegal). If a spell has 2 or more targets, and one of them becomes invalid, the spell resolves as much as it can because the other legal targets. It sounds like Cryptic should resolve "as much as it can" because the Draw part doesn't have a target, but it's not correct within the rules to think of Cryptic Command as a series of disconnected clauses, so it fizzles if the target becomes illegal. Searing Blaze requires 2 targets to cast but it only needs one target to remain legal for it to resolve.
There is a rule in the rule book that deals with what we call "fizzles", and it says that a spell is countered if all targets become illegal. Counter+Draw or Bounce+Draw Cryptic has one target. Searing Blaze has two. It's not inconsistent at all. It's the same rule governing both cases, and "all" happens to be one for a lot of cases. Imagine if you could counter Hex by sacrificing a single creature (doens't work, and shouldn't work).
Yeah, I didn't know, my opponent in that round didn't know, and honestly it is crazy to think the exact situation occurred twice in a tournament. I'll live obviously.
The hand in that game where I kept the one lander and lost was as follows:
Bloodstained Mire
Monastery Swiftspear
Skullcrack
Skullcrack
Boros Charm
Eidolon of the Great Revel
and scried an inspiring vantage. Guess I'm still learning.
So for the sake of argument now since I have a month before the first PPTQ, are there any other major weird rules I should know? Honestly when I told my round two opponent he looked like I sprouted wings he was that confused, as were two other people nearby. At the very least, I learned to not assume and call a judge for any card interaction I have not seen before.
It’s kind of an addition to the other lesson learned about Searing Blaze, but the rules about it having two targets also means you can hold priority and cast multiple Blazes on the same target creature with 3 or less health to hit your opponent for more damage. Even though the first one will resolve and kill it, the second one will still hit the opponent’s face.
Also, using Skullcrack to force damage through to protection from red creatures after they’ve blocked is another one that can be handy at times. Can come up in mirror matches with Kor Firewalker or against Affinity with Etched Champion.
If you play with Shard Volley a lot and your opponent targets lands, you can sacrifice that land in response to make the rest of the effect fizzle, using the inverse of the rule. I've used it mostly against control, stripping the cantrip from Spreading Seas and the land search against Field of Ruin decks.
You can block a lifelinker with Lavamancer and then use his effect on himself before damage to prevent the lifegain.
Had the same situation last week casting Searing Blaze on a Walking Ballista; Arcbound Ravager or any other sac outlet presents the same issue.
More lifegain shenanigans: last night against opponent at 8 life, presenting a two turn clock and a Dragon’s Claw: suspend two rift bolts and pass, chump block to survive the turn, Skullcrack in response to the suspend triggers for exactly 8.
So for the sake of argument now since I have a month before the first PPTQ, are there any other major weird rules I should know? Honestly when I told my round two opponent he looked like I sprouted wings he was that confused, as were two other people nearby. At the very least, I learned to not assume and call a judge for any card interaction I have not seen before.
Since you mention an example with Searing Blaze, also remember that it cannot kill a Death’s Shadow. If there are no instants in the yard, it will not kill a 3-toughness Tarmogoyf, either. (Similarly, opponent could save it by Fatal Pushing something else if there were no creatures in the gy.)
So for the sake of argument now since I have a month before the first PPTQ, are there any other major weird rules I should know? Honestly when I told my round two opponent he looked like I sprouted wings he was that confused, as were two other people nearby. At the very least, I learned to not assume and call a judge for any card interaction I have not seen before.
Since you mention an example with Searing Blaze, also remember that it cannot kill a Death’s Shadow. If there are no instants in the yard, it will not kill a 3-toughness Tarmogoyf, either. (Similarly, opponent could save it by Fatal Pushing something else if there were no creatures in the gy.)
With luck I'll be slamming RiP turn two against all the junds and mardus and just steamrolling them. I think I have to up my gy hate total from three to four as I expect this to be a recurring theme.
So for the sake of argument now since I have a month before the first PPTQ, are there any other major weird rules I should know? Honestly when I told my round two opponent he looked like I sprouted wings he was that confused, as were two other people nearby. At the very least, I learned to not assume and call a judge for any card interaction I have not seen before.
Since you mention an example with Searing Blaze, also remember that it cannot kill a Death’s Shadow. If there are no instants in the yard, it will not kill a 3-toughness Tarmogoyf, either. (Similarly, opponent could save it by Fatal Pushing something else if there were no creatures in the gy.)
Don't let this stop you from throwing Searing Blaze at a Death's Shadow just for the 3 damage to the face, though. It won't die, but your opponent might spend resources increasing its power because they think it will die. I've had that happen. Of course, you can't let them put it in their graveyard, but you can absolutely let them fetch to lower their life total by 1 because they think they have to do that to keep it alive.
Once you get to flex cards, there isn't a stock list anymore but rather a stock set of cards to choose from.
This is the core set of cards you're pretty much always playing (this leaves 13 slots).
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Lava Spike
4 Rift Bolt
4 Boros Charm
4 Eidolon of the Great Revel
4 Monastery Swiftspear
Some combination of the following generally fills out the rest of the deck:
As far as the sideboard:
The core sideboard things are the first 3 in that list. The rest comes down to what you like and depends on what you expect to run into, and there isn't anything "stock" about it. Personally, I like 2 Firecrafts for control matchups and they also serve as a generic red burn spell if I need to side something out and "any burn spell will do". I don't like Bridge because it's too expensive and may just stall before you lose anyway. I don't like Palm, but I play it sometimes. I like Blood if I'm expecting a lot of small creatures and already have 4 Blazes in the main.
"There are many options for disrupting critical mass decks. Keeping them off their mass is the obvious move, but that isn’t always possible; Storm survives Thoughtseize and Liliana of the Veil via Past in Flames, for instance. A stonewall of counterspells is more effective thanks to instant speed, but not without another element."
"The trick is to attack from multiple angles. Jund relies on discard to proactively disrupt Storm, then Scavenging Ooze to close the door. Humans taxes the combo and attacks their hand while presenting a very fast clock. Tron struggles against these combos because Karn Liberated is not very disruptive and its clock is slow. Figure out what kinds of disruption are available and prioritize them."
I feel this further supports my statement that Burn should be viewed as a combo deck, specifically a critical mass combo deck as defined by David. The same reasoning David uses in his article to describe Storm, fit Burn to a tee. We're weak to discard and counterspells, but it ultimately doesn't matter without a clock to back it up. In the way that Storm gets their disrupted combo back through Past in Flames, we get ours back by virtue of having a draw step each turn. We're even strong against Tron for the same reason David lists here. It's not that we don't have combo pieces; it's that EVERY card is a combo piece.
Appreciate the insight, I think I'm going to skip Bridge for now and start with a list like this: https://www.mtggoldfish.com/deck/1191298#paper
Cheers
That looks like a solid core to start with. If your budget is able to stretch a little more, I’d recommend picking up the fourth Inspiring Vantage, a third Searing Blood, two Deflecting Palms, two Kor Firewalkers, one (or two) Shard Volley and a playset of Smash to Smithereens to give yourself a little bit of extra flexibility to adjust to the meta. Those additions are pretty inexpensive overall for how many more options they’ll provide. You should definitely just jam a few games with your current 75 first though just to make sure you enjoy the play style.
Just to make your initial 75 cheaper and equally effective, you could even just replace the third Lavamancer with a third Searing Blood. I think you’d really want to be running 12 fetches if you’re going to play 3 Lavamancers.
Thanks again all
Also Deflecting Palm in the sideboard what’s it good for? It seems to only be good in matchups that are already favorable and doesn’t help much in unfavorable matchups. Also I don’t like the reactive nature of the card as we are such an aggressive deck. If I’m wrong please let me know.
I have the same issues as you with Palm. I think it's an ok card if you can expect it to be worth Boros Charm or better in damage. I liked it a lot while Infect was big before they lost Probe. I would often being it in against Goyf decks at the time. These days, I generally play it only if I expect a lot of mirrors and don't want to play Kor Firewalker. I agree that it doesn't really fit with our proactive strategy because it's a reactive card. I've certainly won games with it, but I've also watched my opponent stabilize while it sat in my hand as a dead card.
Firewalker is great in burn mirrors. The problem is it is mediocre at best in all other matchups. I would rather have searing blood in those 2-3 slots due to its efficiency in the mirror as well as other matchups. Palm is still nice, IMO, if you see a lot of tron because it can function as another way to blank wurmcoil engine attacks.
I recently learned of the non-bo between exquisite firecraft and rest in peace, so i'm probably dropping the former and lessening my control matchups a bit in favor of two firewalker. I have seen a slight uptick in burn that may make it worth a try.
R1: Beat Tron 2-0. Not much to say here, he stumbled game 1 and I had a god draw game 2.
R2: Loss to Bring to Light weird combo 0-2. So he was playing utopia sprawls and forests, but naming other colors with sprawl. Turns out it was to get spike feeder into play, then play bring to light to tutor for archangel of thune. Okay, ***** happens. Game 2 I am pissed though, because I got him to one life, I go to searing blaze a wall of omens for the win, and he blinks it with a restoration angel (the third he played in three turns). I didn't freaking know that didn't fizzle a searing blaze! Someone heard me venting later and told me I should have won.
R3: Beat Jund 2-1. I get to test the searing blaze ruling again, as we are both at 1 life to end game three with him having three goyfs out to my empty board with a searing blaze. I blaze for the win, he tries to fatal push the goyf, I call a judge. Judge says the player damage goes through. My opponent asks that he check oracle ruling to be absolutely sure, and that confirms it.
R4: Loss to Jund 0-2. So I have to ask a question. Game two here I mull to six on the play and get a one land hand with swiftspear and some two-mana spells. I scry a land, but the land in my hand is a bloodstained mire. Is the proper line of play to hold the swiftspear one turn to get the guaranteed second land? I didn't...I thought putting early pressure on was more important, and lost to mana screw.
R5: Loss to Affinity 0-2. Turn two etched champion into turn three cranial plating game one...game two he just had a god draw with a welding jar, spellskite and ravager to basically blank my removal.
I'm pretty salty right now over the second round error. Obviously I have learned from it just in time for PPTQ season, but that just seems weird and inconsistent with other similar cards like cryptic command (the official ruling we were told is that when a spell has multiple targets, all targets must be invalidated to stop a spell from resolving).
That's why Searing Blaze damage still goes through. Blaze targets a player and a creature that player controls.
As for your question on the keep/mull...I think it depends on the full hand. If Swiftspear was your only one mana spell, I probably would have waited to crack the fetch until I got my second land. If you had...let's say two other one mana spells, I probably would have taken the risk.
This is in the gatherer rulings for Searing Blaze.
Every time I see a post with a new Burn player asking for tricks they should know, I bring this one up. I've had people kill their own creature and then look at me and say "so, uhh, illegal target, blaze fizzles" and I say "you're taking 3 unless you can flash in something like hexproof for yourself, too".
If a spell has a single target and that target becomes invalid, none of the spell resolves (this is why Cryptic cast as "Bounce+Draw" fizzles if the target of the bounce mode becomes illegal). If a spell has 2 or more targets, and one of them becomes invalid, the spell resolves as much as it can because the other legal targets. It sounds like Cryptic should resolve "as much as it can" because the Draw part doesn't have a target, but it's not correct within the rules to think of Cryptic Command as a series of disconnected clauses, so it fizzles if the target becomes illegal. Searing Blaze requires 2 targets to cast but it only needs one target to remain legal for it to resolve.
There is a rule in the rule book that deals with what we call "fizzles", and it says that a spell is countered if all targets become illegal. Counter+Draw or Bounce+Draw Cryptic has one target. Searing Blaze has two. It's not inconsistent at all. It's the same rule governing both cases, and "all" happens to be one for a lot of cases. Imagine if you could counter Hex by sacrificing a single creature (doens't work, and shouldn't work).
The hand in that game where I kept the one lander and lost was as follows:
Bloodstained Mire
Monastery Swiftspear
Skullcrack
Skullcrack
Boros Charm
Eidolon of the Great Revel
and scried an inspiring vantage. Guess I'm still learning.
So for the sake of argument now since I have a month before the first PPTQ, are there any other major weird rules I should know? Honestly when I told my round two opponent he looked like I sprouted wings he was that confused, as were two other people nearby. At the very least, I learned to not assume and call a judge for any card interaction I have not seen before.
Also, using Skullcrack to force damage through to protection from red creatures after they’ve blocked is another one that can be handy at times. Can come up in mirror matches with Kor Firewalker or against Affinity with Etched Champion.
You can block a lifelinker with Lavamancer and then use his effect on himself before damage to prevent the lifegain.
More lifegain shenanigans: last night against opponent at 8 life, presenting a two turn clock and a Dragon’s Claw: suspend two rift bolts and pass, chump block to survive the turn, Skullcrack in response to the suspend triggers for exactly 8.
Since you mention an example with Searing Blaze, also remember that it cannot kill a Death’s Shadow. If there are no instants in the yard, it will not kill a 3-toughness Tarmogoyf, either. (Similarly, opponent could save it by Fatal Pushing something else if there were no creatures in the gy.)
With luck I'll be slamming RiP turn two against all the junds and mardus and just steamrolling them. I think I have to up my gy hate total from three to four as I expect this to be a recurring theme.
Don't let this stop you from throwing Searing Blaze at a Death's Shadow just for the 3 damage to the face, though. It won't die, but your opponent might spend resources increasing its power because they think it will die. I've had that happen. Of course, you can't let them put it in their graveyard, but you can absolutely let them fetch to lower their life total by 1 because they think they have to do that to keep it alive.