I like the way he thinks about atarka command and nacatl, althought I think he should a stomping ground and destructive revelry in his sideboard
I don't really like his argument against Grim Lavamancer... I could understand cutting him because he doesn't have haste, or because he 'dies to removal'... but cutting him because it's hard to decide whether to attack or use it's ability? Are you kidding me?
He really makes it sounds like burn is a "DUR I BURN TO FACE I WIN" kind of deck :/
I feel like the intent was more that of a thought experiment/what to think about when you're learning to play, but yeah, it does kind of come off that way. I think this has kind of become a truism about Burn that's a little silly; even though the plan is fairly linear, there's a lot of decisions to be made even with Lava Spike. For instance, dealing with a deck heavy on Spellskite can often mean throwing away your targeted damage so that you're left with only Spikes and blank the Skite's ability. What's basically bolts #5-8 becomes a very different card if you're thinking about how your opponent's going to stop you.
Also, I'm kind of surprised that he only ever used the +1/+1 on Atarka's Command once; I'm pretty sure I used it way more often than the anti life gain. Also interesting that he points out how Skullcrack protect you against Fog (seriously? of all damage prevention card he used fog?) but leaves out that AC gets around leyline & can give reach (although I could see how using reach would be hard for his 'let's avoid decisions' play style)
The Fog thing was just weird, yeah. Skullcrack does have an advantage over Atarka's Command in that damage prevention can allow you to attack into things like Kor Firewalker and Etched Champion, but I don't think I've ever heard of anyone casting Fog in Modern.
I was going to say I've never used reach either, but come to think of it I have a couple times, when I'm forced to pump the brakes and am facing an Eldrazi Skyspawner or Vault Skirge or something like that... I just tend to discount those cases because those are typically games you're losing anyway. :/ That said, I think the value of the flexibility a modal card gives you cannot be emphasized enough. Right now I'm running 3 x AC, 3x Skullcrack, with a 4th 'crack in the board because there's that much lifegain in my meta. All in all, I think the green is a key role player, though I'm not sold on Wild Nacatl.
So i understand some of his points. I've played about every version there is and I recently made a similar decision to cut lavamancer. I like it in certain matchups but it feels horrible in others as it is just slow. I made a pseudo compromise and have gone down to 1. I think his point about when to attack vs shock them is nonsense. I think it is almost always correct to shock when you can as you can save the burn in your hand for after they deal with the lavamancer.
I also am not a fan of the nacatl version - which also means I don't run Atarka's command since creature base is less dense. I've also gone up on 4 helix main. But i've gone down on searing blaze. I love the card but I've too often had it stuck in my hand without lands to drop. I missed top 8 of a GP simply because in game 3 I had 2 lands and drew 2 consecutive searing blaze. Felt horrible and so ever since then I don't run 4. I will say that command reach mode has come in handy and won me games against affinity but that is about it. I feel my matchup is better against affinity in my current version and affinity has declined anyway.
As for the fog argument I think it is more just about boom or bust potential. There is a chance to do a lot of damage with certain draws but you essentially have to start the game at 14 and then sometimes it'll just be a skullcrack.
I disagree about lava spike. you can absolutely misplay it. Not only when it comes to face or a planeswalker, but timing and most of the time I see it misplayed it is a timing thing.
I won a few games with reach to save myself from a inkmoth
I actually have been back and forth on both Nacatl & Grim lavamancer; and I can definitely see arguments in both ways... but avoiding having to deal with decisions just seemed silly
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"What's your plan?" Gideon asked.
"Are you serious?" Chandra replied.
Thoughts on cutting Firewalker from the board? I find that what I REALLY want in a burn mirror is to kill the opposing Firewalkers, and be more efficient with fetching less painful mana. I've considered running 4 PtE in the sideboard instead of my 50/50 split of Firewalker and PtE at the moment. H from my sbelps into the Tasigur/Tarmagoyf/TKS/Reality Smasher matches (it's hard to push through bodies that big) as a side-benefit. Having Deflecting Palm or 2 PtE in the deck is great, but when they get taken by a TKS on turn 2, it's a difficult game. Firewalkers basically come in for one matchup, where paths are useful in loads more - seems like better use of the small number of SB slots you get?
I would rather play a card which 'furthers the plan', and definitely considered Reality Haemorrhage (hits Firewalker, Etched Champion and Aurok Champion). I'd rather topdeck that than a PtE when the opponent is on 2 life, even if it is an inefficient 2 mana shock, but it's just not a heavy enough lifter to deal with the big creatures.
Same thought with me. I have remove 2 firewalker from my SB cause my mirror opponent might have path or skullcrack to deal with him. Instead, I run 3 path and 2 skullcrack to deal with possible opponent's firewalker.
I admit Bant Eldrazi gives burn hard time for able to cast big creature in mid game. Yet, playing with them need to be play early disruption from their mana dorks and destroy their temple, with continuous to burn them. Little mind game is required.
I removed my Firewalkers a bit ago and play 4 Path in the sideboard and have never looked back. Firewalkers is virtually only good in the mirror which makes it feel too narrow for my taste. As a bit of compensation, I also run 4 Helix in the 75.
I agree on one Grim Lavamancer, I think it's great once in a while but I don't ever want to be holding more than one.
As for Kor Firewalkers, I see the mirror a lot in my meta and I feel like I'd rather be the one forcing my opponent to have something than the one reacting to the opposing Firewalker. I currently run two, which I feel is safe. Maybe it's a little too slow on the draw? I could see an argument for cutting one and only bringing it in on the play, but it's really such a haymaker when you draw it that it often decides the game all by itself.
I agree on one Grim Lavamancer, I think it's great once in a while but I don't ever want to be holding more than one.
As for Kor Firewalkers, I see the mirror a lot in my meta and I feel like I'd rather be the one forcing my opponent to have something than the one reacting to the opposing Firewalker. I currently run two, which I feel is safe. Maybe it's a little too slow on the draw? I could see an argument for cutting one and only bringing it in on the play, but it's really such a haymaker when you draw it that it often decides the game all by itself.
You answered your own thoughts. You have a lot of burn in your meta, so it's a strong meta call. My meta has a couple other burn players, but the majority are other decks, so I feel stronger not running it. I also believe he's worse in a blind meta, and filling up on Helix is a better priority in that case.
You answered your own thoughts. You have a lot of burn in your meta, so it's a strong meta call. My meta has a couple other burn players, but the majority are other decks, so I feel stronger not running it. I also believe he's worse in a blind meta, and filling up on Helix is a better priority in that case.
Yeah, I totally agree on cutting Firewalker if you don't expect to see the mirror a lot.
Thoughts on Fatal Push and whether it makes Mardu Burn a more attractive variant? I personally run a mardu build that splashes green for DRev; I really like the idea of replacing a few of my PtE's w/ Push out of the SB.
I agreed on path sense. Grixis delver have tasigur. Eldrazi have smasher. Company decks have finks. Any white might have firewalker. Trons have wurmcoil engine. Where thaes kind of creature always give problem and we have a perfect solution with it.
On the other hand, how do u guys feel blessed alliance? Its great for mirror, bogle etc
I also came here to ask about Fatal Push... but on the other way around. I have just finished building my Naya Burn, and this card really kills any of our early creatures.
So, having literally zero experience with Burn whatsoever, I would like to ask some questions to the burn players. How much damage do you usually get out of creatures? In an opening with no creatures, is it an automatic mulligan, is it a safe keep (context depending)? I ask this mainly because (I expect) that losing card advantage for a Deck like Burn would hurt more than not opening with a creature. Or is my expectation wrong?
Thanks for the answer. I know these are context-sensitive questions, but I goldfished some hands and wondered whether, on a vacuum, is it ok to keep no creature hands and my mind wandered off to the value of mulligans in Burn. Especially now that a extremely cheap removal will most likely enter the Modern metagame. Surely a Deck with almost no way get CA wants to begin with th highest amount of cards possible. It may also be my control-biased mindset, as I have always played Blue-based control.
Yeah, I think I can imagine a good one-lander keep like Arid Mesa, Goblin Guide, Goblin Guide, Rift Bolt, Lightning Bolt, Lightning Bolt, Atarka's Command (drew this ealier during said experiments).
Right. Path deals with more threats, but I'm interested in running a combination since Push hits 22 of the most played creatures in Modern and misses only 9 of the top 50.
I think Push is better against burn than for burn, unless you want to run a weird Jund variant I guess and need a Path substitute. Once it comes out I definitely don't think playing Nacatl will be worth it, and have already pulled it back out to practice for my region's GP. I really don't see anything I like for burn in the current spoilers and unless the red Expertise is a burn spell with 2-3cmc and a 1-2cmc bonus spell I doubt we'll get anything.
Fatal Push is going to be in Grixis control and might give BUG control a chance at being a thing. It's also certainly a viable replacement for Path if you want to play Jund Burn. Perhaps the good news is that it's a strong reason to play black as a control deck and may keep white out of control decks (less opposing Helix).
As far as playing against it, it's just another 1 mana answer to the creatures we already play which isn't a big deal in and of itself. It may lead to cycles of "more answers exist, therefore don't play Nacatl" -> "it's a less creature heavy meta, less answers exist, therefore play Nacatl". There may also be decks playing delve creatures to dodge Fatal Push, so Path may become more important for Naya Burn.
My thoughts exactly. In the short term, more cheap removal means that the Wild Nacatls don't feel great, but we have to see how widespread the adoption of Push actually is before making any list edits.
Is running 3 Mountains too much? I can't decide whether the correct number is 2 or 3 mainboard.
Thanks in advance for the feedback and help.
I feel that running 2 Grim Lavamancer maindeck is the correct amount. It's great at clearing your opponents' attackers/blockers, while also providing additional reach. There is some consideration towards a third in the sideboard, for when you need to play a grindier Control-style game. 3 Mountains is good in Rw, as you have enough white sources to consistently cast your white spells, and the extra Mountain can also make some difference when your opponent has a Path to Exile.
I'm not so sold on the two Flames of the Bloodhand, but I haven't tested that card for a considerable amount of time. I'd personally run another Smash to Smitehreens, and the third Grim Lavamancer.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Eternal Masters 2015 Legacy Champion. Has an unnatural love towards perfectly reasonable respect for Lightning Bolt.
I would say that first and foremost, burn is about speed and consistency. Inevitability isn't a thing. If you like inevitability play Tron.
The Pros to Boros burn are that it's less painful. That means you can battle better vs some of the aggro decks. Taking out Atarka's command opens spots for Helix. Which, the lifegain helps.
In the Boros build, I can see a case for 2, MAYBE 3 vantage. 4 is too much. There are plenty of times you want your 4th land coming in untapped so that you can play 2 spells, or if it's late game and you're trying to bottle neck counters, maybe it's the 7th land you're worried about. But I don't think I want to risk too many lands coming into play tapped.
I understand the need for anti-lifegain. But, realistically, most decks don't run that much in their main. A lot comes in out of the board. I like 2 Skullcrackk main and 2 in the board. 4 Atarka's command makes sense in Naya because it can anthem and provide reach to block fliers.
Sideboard:
I think Flames of the Bloodhand is a bad card. 3 cmc is just too much.
3 Deflecting palm is too many. You can usually get away with 2. But you never want more than 1 in your hand at the same time. A lot of lists have dropped to 1.
I think you want 3-4 path given the hyper-aggro world Modern is currently in.
I prefer Grafdigger's cage for burn instead of Relic. Relic has some applications against Goyf.
But, I feel like Goyf is rarely my problem. Unless Jund Sticks a Kalitas, we're winning.
Cage shuts off snapcaster, collected company, chord of calling, etc.
That said, I don't think Relic is incorrect.
Lavamancers...2 is always fine. You'll rarely see more than 1. They usually show up enough to impact the right matchups.
Mountains--I've always ran 3.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I feel like the intent was more that of a thought experiment/what to think about when you're learning to play, but yeah, it does kind of come off that way. I think this has kind of become a truism about Burn that's a little silly; even though the plan is fairly linear, there's a lot of decisions to be made even with Lava Spike. For instance, dealing with a deck heavy on Spellskite can often mean throwing away your targeted damage so that you're left with only Spikes and blank the Skite's ability. What's basically bolts #5-8 becomes a very different card if you're thinking about how your opponent's going to stop you.
The Fog thing was just weird, yeah. Skullcrack does have an advantage over Atarka's Command in that damage prevention can allow you to attack into things like Kor Firewalker and Etched Champion, but I don't think I've ever heard of anyone casting Fog in Modern.
I was going to say I've never used reach either, but come to think of it I have a couple times, when I'm forced to pump the brakes and am facing an Eldrazi Skyspawner or Vault Skirge or something like that... I just tend to discount those cases because those are typically games you're losing anyway. :/ That said, I think the value of the flexibility a modal card gives you cannot be emphasized enough. Right now I'm running 3 x AC, 3x Skullcrack, with a 4th 'crack in the board because there's that much lifegain in my meta. All in all, I think the green is a key role player, though I'm not sold on Wild Nacatl.
I also am not a fan of the nacatl version - which also means I don't run Atarka's command since creature base is less dense. I've also gone up on 4 helix main. But i've gone down on searing blaze. I love the card but I've too often had it stuck in my hand without lands to drop. I missed top 8 of a GP simply because in game 3 I had 2 lands and drew 2 consecutive searing blaze. Felt horrible and so ever since then I don't run 4. I will say that command reach mode has come in handy and won me games against affinity but that is about it. I feel my matchup is better against affinity in my current version and affinity has declined anyway.
As for the fog argument I think it is more just about boom or bust potential. There is a chance to do a lot of damage with certain draws but you essentially have to start the game at 14 and then sometimes it'll just be a skullcrack.
I disagree about lava spike. you can absolutely misplay it. Not only when it comes to face or a planeswalker, but timing and most of the time I see it misplayed it is a timing thing.
I actually have been back and forth on both Nacatl & Grim lavamancer; and I can definitely see arguments in both ways... but avoiding having to deal with decisions just seemed silly
"Are you serious?" Chandra replied.
I removed my Firewalkers a bit ago and play 4 Path in the sideboard and have never looked back. Firewalkers is virtually only good in the mirror which makes it feel too narrow for my taste. As a bit of compensation, I also run 4 Helix in the 75.
Legacy: Merfolk U; Shadow UB; Eldrazi Stompy C
Pauper: Delver U
Vintage: Merfolk U
Primers:
As for Kor Firewalkers, I see the mirror a lot in my meta and I feel like I'd rather be the one forcing my opponent to have something than the one reacting to the opposing Firewalker. I currently run two, which I feel is safe. Maybe it's a little too slow on the draw? I could see an argument for cutting one and only bringing it in on the play, but it's really such a haymaker when you draw it that it often decides the game all by itself.
You answered your own thoughts. You have a lot of burn in your meta, so it's a strong meta call. My meta has a couple other burn players, but the majority are other decks, so I feel stronger not running it. I also believe he's worse in a blind meta, and filling up on Helix is a better priority in that case.
Yeah, I totally agree on cutting Firewalker if you don't expect to see the mirror a lot.
Link to Discord server where anybody from MTGS can keep up with thread topics while everything is being sorted out with the new site.
On the other hand, how do u guys feel blessed alliance? Its great for mirror, bogle etc
So, having literally zero experience with Burn whatsoever, I would like to ask some questions to the burn players. How much damage do you usually get out of creatures? In an opening with no creatures, is it an automatic mulligan, is it a safe keep (context depending)? I ask this mainly because (I expect) that losing card advantage for a Deck like Burn would hurt more than not opening with a creature. Or is my expectation wrong?
Yeah, I think I can imagine a good one-lander keep like Arid Mesa, Goblin Guide, Goblin Guide, Rift Bolt, Lightning Bolt, Lightning Bolt, Atarka's Command (drew this ealier during said experiments).
Link to Discord server where anybody from MTGS can keep up with thread topics while everything is being sorted out with the new site.
As far as playing against it, it's just another 1 mana answer to the creatures we already play which isn't a big deal in and of itself. It may lead to cycles of "more answers exist, therefore don't play Nacatl" -> "it's a less creature heavy meta, less answers exist, therefore play Nacatl". There may also be decks playing delve creatures to dodge Fatal Push, so Path may become more important for Naya Burn.
Legacy: Merfolk U; Shadow UB; Eldrazi Stompy C
Pauper: Delver U
Vintage: Merfolk U
Primers:
Seems like a lot of pros are leaning towards the RW version now.
I'm currently working towards running the following Boros Burn list:
4 Monastery Swiftspear
4 Goblin Guide
2 Grim Lavamancer
4 Eidolon of the Great Revel
Instants
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Searing Blaze
4 Boros Charm
4 Skullcrack
3 Lightning Helix
4 Lava Spike
4 Rift Bolt
Lands
3 Mountain
2 Sacred Foundry
4 Inspiring Vantage
4 Wooded Foothills
4 Bloodstained Mire
2 Arid Mesa
2 Smash to Smithereens
2 Kor Firewalker
2 Flames of the Blood Hand
3 Deflecting Palm
2 Path to Exile
2 Wear // Tear
2 Relic of Progenitus
I don't like Wild Nacatl, and I find Atarka's Command somehow dissapointing, so, I'm decided on running a pure Boros list.
The goals I'm trying to achieve with this list are:
That said, my main concerns are:
Thanks in advance for the feedback and help.
I'm not so sold on the two Flames of the Bloodhand, but I haven't tested that card for a considerable amount of time. I'd personally run another Smash to Smitehreens, and the third Grim Lavamancer.
an unnatural love towardsperfectly reasonable respect for Lightning Bolt.The Kiwi third of The Salt Mine Podcast: An Australian Legacy Podcast
The Pros to Boros burn are that it's less painful. That means you can battle better vs some of the aggro decks. Taking out Atarka's command opens spots for Helix. Which, the lifegain helps.
In the Boros build, I can see a case for 2, MAYBE 3 vantage. 4 is too much. There are plenty of times you want your 4th land coming in untapped so that you can play 2 spells, or if it's late game and you're trying to bottle neck counters, maybe it's the 7th land you're worried about. But I don't think I want to risk too many lands coming into play tapped.
I understand the need for anti-lifegain. But, realistically, most decks don't run that much in their main. A lot comes in out of the board. I like 2 Skullcrackk main and 2 in the board. 4 Atarka's command makes sense in Naya because it can anthem and provide reach to block fliers.
Sideboard:
I think Flames of the Bloodhand is a bad card. 3 cmc is just too much.
3 Deflecting palm is too many. You can usually get away with 2. But you never want more than 1 in your hand at the same time. A lot of lists have dropped to 1.
I think you want 3-4 path given the hyper-aggro world Modern is currently in.
I prefer Grafdigger's cage for burn instead of Relic. Relic has some applications against Goyf.
But, I feel like Goyf is rarely my problem. Unless Jund Sticks a Kalitas, we're winning.
Cage shuts off snapcaster, collected company, chord of calling, etc.
That said, I don't think Relic is incorrect.
Lavamancers...2 is always fine. You'll rarely see more than 1. They usually show up enough to impact the right matchups.
Mountains--I've always ran 3.