I play 28 burn spells, 19 lands, and 13 creatures. About 1/2 is burn spells, about 1/3 is lands, and about 1/6 is creatures that may or may not be dead draws depending on the circumstances, and that's where I got the numbers for results from a cantrip-Burn spell.
As I said in my other comment, if you assume that all creatures are live draws, then a cantrip is worth 35/59 of a live card (since drawing a land or draw spell is a dead draw in the case of Mishra's Bauble and even more painful on your life in the case of Street Wraith). It's still worse than Shock. If you assume that all creatures are dead draws, it's a lot worse than Shock and barely better than Needle Drop. Reality is somewhere between "worse than Shock" and "barely better than Needle Drop", and if the upper bound is bad and the lower bound is really bad you can easily conclude that it's a bad card in Burn.
There's no reason to play a draw spell to hope to draw a burn spell when you can just play burn spells in the first place.
has anyone felt that harsh mentor might be something to play? Legacy burn thread has a few people talking about it as a sideboard card but I don't know how useful it would be for us in modern
It looks situationally strong against Lantern and some of these artifact based storm decks, possibly Merfolk for Vial and Mutavault, and maybe some other decks, but there's not really anything like Deathrite Shaman in Modern like there is in Legacy.
It's worth playing in a local meta that's full of things that it hates on, but I don't think it's generically strong enough to play in an unknown meta.
There may be more. My initial estimation is that we would be better served with actual removal spells that eliminate the threat entirely and do damage if possible - Destructive Revelry, Searing Blood and Path to Exile seem best.
I agree with your last statement. Additionally, Harsh Mentor would just be a speed bump in a lot of those cases, and they'd just have to kill it for 1 mana before they proceed with their plans. On its surface, the card looks like an Eidolon analogue, but it's similar to Ash Zealot in that it can be removed before it deals damage.
It's a rather narrow card that depends on the meta, but might be perfectly reasonable for someone's own local meta.
Ah! I see now where your numbers are comming from. I was kind of counfused initially, but now I understand your logic. Even if we were to include monsters as potential burn and/or follow Renaud_256's logic, a cantrip would still be a 2 damage at best. I was going to mention Needle drop but following your logic, this card is a 2.5 damage spell AND it has a prerequisite to cast (a laughable one in our deck, but still).
So this eliminate my point about playing cantrips to add card quality since we have plenty of ways to do 3 damage for one card even in modern. It does still help to get to our sideboard cards, but now that I know it does not help with our gameplan, I'm pretty sure I don't want to go that route.
It would help get to sideboard cards, but the effect is pretty small for the life cost (or delay, in the case of Bauble).
To everyone: I've added a lot of beautification-type stuff to the main primer post, with a lot of automatic thumbnails. I also added a new banner with some smoldering text.
I recently read the sideboard guide in the primer, in it it suggests that we should take out skull crack, is this a mistake. sure skull crack is not great in the match up but its still better than searing blaze. why on gods green earth would you take out cracks before blaze.
What matchup are you talking about? Skullcrack is just a player only Lightning Strike if your opponent never plays lifegain. Searing Blaze has the possibility to kill something, and is otherwise a Lightning Strike to their face.
The only places where you've mentioned sideboarding out Skullcrack was against Gifts-Storm and GDS. That seems reasonable.
Separate question: I saw someone mentioning not running Arid Mesa as its a massive signal that you're playing Burn. Something like Wooded Foothills into Lightning Bolt could be Jund or Valakut; Scalding Tarn into Bolt could be Grixis or Jeskai builds.
He removed Mesa entirely from his list. Does this seem sensible in a build that's purely Mountain or R/X Shock lands? Are there any downsides?
The only places where you've mentioned sideboarding out Skullcrack was against Gifts-Storm and GDS. That seems reasonable.
Separate question: I saw someone mentioning not running Arid Mesa as its a massive signal that you're playing Burn. Something like Wooded Foothills into Lightning Bolt could be Jund or Valakut; Scalding Tarn into Bolt could be Grixis or Jeskai builds.
He removed Mesa entirely from his list. Does this seem sensible in a build that's purely Mountain or R/X Shock lands? Are there any downsides?
I could see it. We don't run any Plains, so the two fetches are the same card for us. I am gonna pick up Mesa because it's a bit cheaper, but if you have access to Tarn, there is no harm.
That said, I wouldn't spend the extra on Tarn to do that because I don't really care if the other player knows I am playing Burn. Bh the second or third turn, they should figure it out no matter what, and be dead shortly after. What are they really going to do different? I understand it in principle, but in practice I don't see Burn caring.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Project Booster Fun makes it less fun to open a booster.
All fetches in the deck are functionally equivalent from a pure gameplay standpoint, because they're always fetching Mountains.
If you play T1 Arid Mesa and pass, you're signaling that you're on Burn because barely anyone else plays them. If you play T1 Scalding Tarn and pass, you're signaling that you're on some URx deck. That might change your opponent's T1 play (the dream is fetch, shock, thoughsteize). It only makes a difference in situations where you think the proper G1T1 play is to put down a fetch and pass, and there aren't many situations where that's the case and you have a Scalding Tarn in hand. Maybe the only gameplay downside is that you might be tempted to play Tarn and pass in a situation where you should fetch and make a play. The financial downside exists as well. Is a marginal effect on turn 1 of game 1 worth the price of Scalding Tarn?
To me, there's a stronger argument to split all of your fetches across Tarn, Mesa, Mire, and Foothills so that you're less vulnerable to Pithing Needle.
Chapin and Flores talk about it in this episode of the Top Level podcast. I think it's somewhere in the second half of the episode, if you don't want to listen to it all. They start out talking about Shrine of Burning Rage (neither like it in Burn). It's a solid episode from a Modern standpoint, as well.
Talking about lands, did anyone try Gemstone Mine? Seem like a neat land for 3+ color list (Mardu, naya, jund) and the downside seem manageable. I wouldn't replace a Fetch/shock with this, but I think I could definitely play it over one or two fastland/Mountain.
What matchup are you talking about? Skullcrack is just a player only Lightning Strike if your opponent never plays lifegain. Searing Blaze has the possibility to kill something, and is otherwise a Lightning Strike to their face.
the match up I am talking about is Grixis Death shadow. in the match up searing blaze literally only kills Snapcaster mage. why on gods green earth would I prioritize sideboard out skullcrack before searing blaze.
@Melkor - I already had 2 Tarns from my old Jeskai Midrange days, but I'd agree they're not essential if £££ is a concern. I was lucky bidding on eBay. As it stands, I run 4 Foothills, 2 Mesa, 2 Tarn and 2 Mire. In an ideal world I'd run 4, 3 and 3 with no Mesa at all.
@ElCon - I really don't think Pithing Needle is a card we have to be afraid of... Apart from fetchlands and a 1 or 2-of Grim Lavamancer we don't have any other cards with activated abilities. If they cast Pithing Needle, I'd crack my fetch pre-emptively in response. Its really not a big deal unless I was holding a land up for Searing Blaze, but I doubt Pithing Needle is high on the sideboard list coming in against us...
Ideally, our opponent will T1 Fetch+Shock, meaning 1 less burn spell is needed. In some scenarios a keepable hand (keepable, not optimal) will have fetch + Lightning Bolt, some other 1 and 2CMC spells but no Goblin Guide or Monastery Swiftspear. If we're on the draw, ending T1 killing their mana dork or with our opponent at 14 (maybe even 12 with Thoughtseize!) seems solid. Hiding the information that we're Burn instead of Valakut, Jund or Grixis by not using Arid Mesa to make them lose 3 life themselves is valuable.
@jmonk - if you can kill a Snapcaster Mage AND deal 3 damage to your opponent, that's better than just dealing 3 damage to your opponent. If you can block/be blocked by a Tasigur, the Golden Fang or a Gurmag Angler, cast Searing Blaze, kill it AND deal 3 damage to your opponent, that's better than Skullcrack. GDS doesn't have much lifegain but its main threats are creature based. Blaze is better than Crack in this instance.
@ElCon - I really don't think Pithing Needle is a card we have to be afraid of... Apart from fetchlands and a 1 or 2-of Grim Lavamancer we don't have any other cards with activated abilities. If they cast Pithing Needle, I'd crack my fetch pre-emptively in response. Its really not a big deal unless I was holding a land up for Searing Blaze, but I doubt Pithing Needle is high on the sideboard list coming in against us...
Ideally, our opponent will T1 Fetch+Shock, meaning 1 less burn spell is needed. In some scenarios a keepable hand (keepable, not optimal) will have fetch + Lightning Bolt, some other 1 and 2CMC spells but no Goblin Guide or Monastery Swiftspear. If we're on the draw, ending T1 killing their mana dork or with our opponent at 14 (maybe even 12 with Thoughtseize!) seems solid. Hiding the information that we're Burn instead of Valakut, Jund or Grixis by not using Arid Mesa to make them lose 3 life themselves is valuable.
I don't think Pithing Needle is something we need to be afraid of either, but I do believe there's a stronger argument to split fetches because of Pithing Needle than there is to remove Mesa and play Tarn solely because it will matter once in a blue moon. The situation where Needle destroys you are ones where you can't fetch in response, because you just got hit with IoK, they saw 2 of the same fetch in your hand, and you've suddenly lost the game.
Ideally, they fetch+shock, but what if they don't? What if they lead with a fast land? What if it's Merfolk? What if it's Tron? What if they lead with Fetch->Island->Serum Visions? What if they were going to fetch+shock regardless? In those situations, you've chosen to waste your T1 for no reason. Lightning Bolt is your only out to salvage that turn, but what if you needed to save it to kill something? So, you're banking on your opponent fetching+shocking, not having Guide/Swift, having Lightning Bolt in hand... on top of that, it only matters in Game 1 because it sounds impossible for you to get to Game 2 without your opponent knowing you're playing Burn. It also has to be a large tournament rather than a small local one (because everyone local knows you play Burn) and it has to be an early round (because everyone at the top tables is scouting the other top tables). That's a long list of small probabilities. If you're playing SCG Opens or GPs every weekend, how often do you think Scalding Tarn nets you a result you want? Once a month? Frankly, that sounds way too high to me. Once every 3 months? Maybe even less?
You're better off mulliganing your marginal hand, or dropping Lavamancer/Rift Bolt/Lava Spike on T1. You're an aggro deck, just come out of the gates swinging like an aggro deck should. If you lead with that, your opponent will either fetch+shock (because they have to) or alter their plans and possibly make their color fixing worse because they're scared of you. In the first situation, it was going to happen anyway and your Tarn ruse wouldn't matter. In the latter, you're disrupting your opponent. I prefer those outcomes.
All things being equal (ie. dollars don't matter), I'm convinced that a 12 fetch build should play 3 of each red fetch because of Pithing Needle, even if it's almost irrelevant. The "drop Mesa for Tarn" argument is even less relevant and can just backfire on you because you're making bad T1 plays when you should have just led with Spike.
What matchup are you talking about? Skullcrack is just a player only Lightning Strike if your opponent never plays lifegain. Searing Blaze has the possibility to kill something, and is otherwise a Lightning Strike to their face.
the match up I am talking about is Grixis Death shadow. in the match up searing blaze literally only kills Snapcaster mage. why on gods green earth would I prioritize sideboard out skullcrack before searing blaze.
GDS won't beat you without creatures and they won't be gaining any life because they don't like killing their own DS. Blaze will deal 3 damage to their face if you target Death's Shadow just as well Tasigur and Snap. It straight kills Snap. A block+Blaze can kill Tasigur and Gurmag, and still deal 3 to the face. Blaze is 3 damage that might do something else good. Skullcrack is 3 damage and only 3 damage. Blaze is better in that matchup.
Talking about lands, did anyone try Gemstone Mine? Seem like a neat land for 3+ color list (Mardu, naya, jund) and the downside seem manageable. I wouldn't replace a Fetch/shock with this, but I think I could definitely play it over one or two fastland/Mountain.
It's painless fixing, but I'd rather my lands didn't disappear on T3/4 when I need 1 more land to win the game. I'd prefer Mountains and Fastlands over 1-2 Gemstone Mine.
I agree with elcon. I would play three of each red fetch for a 12 fetch build. 3-3-2-2 For a ten fetch build.
Having said that, it doesn't come up enough to matter for me. It is better, but I'm not willing to buy three Tarns for it. I should probably play some Snow-Covered Mountains for the Skred matchup, too, but then I couldn't honor the God Pharoh (may his return come quickly, and may we be found worthy).
It's still worse than a regular burn spell, but I'm wondering
"Are you serious?" Chandra replied.
As I said in my other comment, if you assume that all creatures are live draws, then a cantrip is worth 35/59 of a live card (since drawing a land or draw spell is a dead draw in the case of Mishra's Bauble and even more painful on your life in the case of Street Wraith). It's still worse than Shock. If you assume that all creatures are dead draws, it's a lot worse than Shock and barely better than Needle Drop. Reality is somewhere between "worse than Shock" and "barely better than Needle Drop", and if the upper bound is bad and the lower bound is really bad you can easily conclude that it's a bad card in Burn.
There's no reason to play a draw spell to hope to draw a burn spell when you can just play burn spells in the first place.
It's worth playing in a local meta that's full of things that it hates on, but I don't think it's generically strong enough to play in an unknown meta.
Any Manland and Fetchland. Ghost Quarter + Tectonic Edge.
A lot of Affinity + regular Tron, and most of Lantern Control.
Endbringer and Walking Ballista
Tasigur, the Golden Fang.
Duskwatch Recruiter and Viscera Seer.
Sakura-Tribe Elder.
Insolent Neonate.
Borborygmos Enraged and Griselbrand.
Aether Vial in Merfolk and Death+Taxes.
Knight of the Reliquary.
Burrenton Forge-Tender.
Eldrazi Displacer.
There may be more. My initial estimation is that we would be better served with actual removal spells that eliminate the threat entirely and do damage if possible - Destructive Revelry, Searing Blood and Path to Exile seem best.
It's a rather narrow card that depends on the meta, but might be perfectly reasonable for someone's own local meta.
So this eliminate my point about playing cantrips to add card quality since we have plenty of ways to do 3 damage for one card even in modern. It does still help to get to our sideboard cards, but now that I know it does not help with our gameplan, I'm pretty sure I don't want to go that route.
Thanks for the detailed and fast response.
(W/B)BW Tokens(W/B) | (B/R)Rakdos Burn(B/R) | (U/R)Gift Storm(U/R)
To everyone: I've added a lot of beautification-type stuff to the main primer post, with a lot of automatic thumbnails. I also added a new banner with some smoldering text.
Separate question: I saw someone mentioning not running Arid Mesa as its a massive signal that you're playing Burn. Something like Wooded Foothills into Lightning Bolt could be Jund or Valakut; Scalding Tarn into Bolt could be Grixis or Jeskai builds.
He removed Mesa entirely from his list. Does this seem sensible in a build that's purely Mountain or R/X Shock lands? Are there any downsides?
I could see it. We don't run any Plains, so the two fetches are the same card for us. I am gonna pick up Mesa because it's a bit cheaper, but if you have access to Tarn, there is no harm.
That said, I wouldn't spend the extra on Tarn to do that because I don't really care if the other player knows I am playing Burn. Bh the second or third turn, they should figure it out no matter what, and be dead shortly after. What are they really going to do different? I understand it in principle, but in practice I don't see Burn caring.
If you play T1 Arid Mesa and pass, you're signaling that you're on Burn because barely anyone else plays them. If you play T1 Scalding Tarn and pass, you're signaling that you're on some URx deck. That might change your opponent's T1 play (the dream is fetch, shock, thoughsteize). It only makes a difference in situations where you think the proper G1T1 play is to put down a fetch and pass, and there aren't many situations where that's the case and you have a Scalding Tarn in hand. Maybe the only gameplay downside is that you might be tempted to play Tarn and pass in a situation where you should fetch and make a play. The financial downside exists as well. Is a marginal effect on turn 1 of game 1 worth the price of Scalding Tarn?
To me, there's a stronger argument to split all of your fetches across Tarn, Mesa, Mire, and Foothills so that you're less vulnerable to Pithing Needle.
Chapin and Flores talk about it in this episode of the Top Level podcast. I think it's somewhere in the second half of the episode, if you don't want to listen to it all. They start out talking about Shrine of Burning Rage (neither like it in Burn). It's a solid episode from a Modern standpoint, as well.
(W/B)BW Tokens(W/B) | (B/R)Rakdos Burn(B/R) | (U/R)Gift Storm(U/R)
the match up I am talking about is Grixis Death shadow. in the match up searing blaze literally only kills Snapcaster mage. why on gods green earth would I prioritize sideboard out skullcrack before searing blaze.
@ElCon - I really don't think Pithing Needle is a card we have to be afraid of... Apart from fetchlands and a 1 or 2-of Grim Lavamancer we don't have any other cards with activated abilities. If they cast Pithing Needle, I'd crack my fetch pre-emptively in response. Its really not a big deal unless I was holding a land up for Searing Blaze, but I doubt Pithing Needle is high on the sideboard list coming in against us...
Ideally, our opponent will T1 Fetch+Shock, meaning 1 less burn spell is needed. In some scenarios a keepable hand (keepable, not optimal) will have fetch + Lightning Bolt, some other 1 and 2CMC spells but no Goblin Guide or Monastery Swiftspear. If we're on the draw, ending T1 killing their mana dork or with our opponent at 14 (maybe even 12 with Thoughtseize!) seems solid. Hiding the information that we're Burn instead of Valakut, Jund or Grixis by not using Arid Mesa to make them lose 3 life themselves is valuable.
I don't think Pithing Needle is something we need to be afraid of either, but I do believe there's a stronger argument to split fetches because of Pithing Needle than there is to remove Mesa and play Tarn solely because it will matter once in a blue moon. The situation where Needle destroys you are ones where you can't fetch in response, because you just got hit with IoK, they saw 2 of the same fetch in your hand, and you've suddenly lost the game.
Ideally, they fetch+shock, but what if they don't? What if they lead with a fast land? What if it's Merfolk? What if it's Tron? What if they lead with Fetch->Island->Serum Visions? What if they were going to fetch+shock regardless? In those situations, you've chosen to waste your T1 for no reason. Lightning Bolt is your only out to salvage that turn, but what if you needed to save it to kill something? So, you're banking on your opponent fetching+shocking, not having Guide/Swift, having Lightning Bolt in hand... on top of that, it only matters in Game 1 because it sounds impossible for you to get to Game 2 without your opponent knowing you're playing Burn. It also has to be a large tournament rather than a small local one (because everyone local knows you play Burn) and it has to be an early round (because everyone at the top tables is scouting the other top tables). That's a long list of small probabilities. If you're playing SCG Opens or GPs every weekend, how often do you think Scalding Tarn nets you a result you want? Once a month? Frankly, that sounds way too high to me. Once every 3 months? Maybe even less?
You're better off mulliganing your marginal hand, or dropping Lavamancer/Rift Bolt/Lava Spike on T1. You're an aggro deck, just come out of the gates swinging like an aggro deck should. If you lead with that, your opponent will either fetch+shock (because they have to) or alter their plans and possibly make their color fixing worse because they're scared of you. In the first situation, it was going to happen anyway and your Tarn ruse wouldn't matter. In the latter, you're disrupting your opponent. I prefer those outcomes.
All things being equal (ie. dollars don't matter), I'm convinced that a 12 fetch build should play 3 of each red fetch because of Pithing Needle, even if it's almost irrelevant. The "drop Mesa for Tarn" argument is even less relevant and can just backfire on you because you're making bad T1 plays when you should have just led with Spike.
GDS won't beat you without creatures and they won't be gaining any life because they don't like killing their own DS. Blaze will deal 3 damage to their face if you target Death's Shadow just as well Tasigur and Snap. It straight kills Snap. A block+Blaze can kill Tasigur and Gurmag, and still deal 3 to the face. Blaze is 3 damage that might do something else good. Skullcrack is 3 damage and only 3 damage. Blaze is better in that matchup.
It's painless fixing, but I'd rather my lands didn't disappear on T3/4 when I need 1 more land to win the game. I'd prefer Mountains and Fastlands over 1-2 Gemstone Mine.
Having said that, it doesn't come up enough to matter for me. It is better, but I'm not willing to buy three Tarns for it. I should probably play some Snow-Covered Mountains for the Skred matchup, too, but then I couldn't honor the God Pharoh (may his return come quickly, and may we be found worthy).
Mardu Burn
Monogreen Stompy
Legacy
Burn
Pauper
Dimir Flicker
Monowhite Tokens