If you can't see why Harsh Mentor is good, you need to re-evaluate how Burn approaches a certain subset of its matchups postboard. Abzan Company's infinite life combo doesn't work while that card is out. You can punish Vial activations. Plating and every manland out of Affinity does damage to them. Side this in against anything light on removal, and just watch the fireworks.
i think we have to evaluate on how many decks the harsh mentor hits to know if it deserves a slot on the sideboard.
sure it stops the infinite life combo on abzam company but is it really worth it? they still get infinite scry and put the needed removal on top.
if it is to punish vials, isn't it just better to destroy it with a revelry?
if it is about lantern and affinity, isn't it just better to play a kataki and completly destroy them? on these two matchups there's already 4 revelry to put on the deck, that's already a good ammount of cards to take out from maindeck.
Easy answer, what card is often bad against Affinity?
Eidolon.
But if I had something that I knew would do what Eidolon did and never put me behind, well that's a pretty strong card.
Vial decks:
Yeah, it's great to blow up a vial. But vial makes Eidolon not nearly as good. And I'm still playing spells from my hand. If I can make you take 2 damage off of vial, it really cuts down on the advantage that vial gives you. Again, probably taking Eidolon out in a lot of these vial matchups.
In regards to Abzan company--you're right they can scry up their path to exile or abrupt decay. But, that buys you an entire turn. You can win the game based on getting that one extra turn. Abzan company will always be a bad matchup, but if this gives you a few percentage points here, and several in other matchups--that's big.
also you never really want to board in destructive revelry against vial decks. due to the card being too narrow. and if your opponent doesn't end up drawing the vial then the card is dead
Harsh Mentor is being overly hyped up. Sure people will play it when it comes out, but eventually it will just fade away and people will stop playing it in burn. Here's why,
The narrow usage of this card is why it will never earn a maindeck slot. Eidolon is still superior. Guaranteed/Instant answers (that do damage) are and always will be the best sideboard options for burn. This card doesn't necessarily do this as removal and hand disruption are at an all time high.
The card costs 2 mana and is a terrible top deck. People keeping saying how it will help vs lantern. Lantern isn't even a tough match-up for burn, it's pretty much a free win.
This card won't stick long enough vs harder match ups. Most decks with any form of removal will get rid of this ASAP. At least eidolon still deals 2 in exchange. This has too high of a chance of being a wasted play.
If this card was 1 CMC then it would be amazing for burn.
I can see Harsh Mentor as a 1 or 2-of in the main deck, and 2-3 copies of him in the SB. He looks like a beast against artifact decks (affinity, lantern, eggs) and punishes fetchlands enough to see some play G1 (however I don't think you want 4 copies of him in the mainboard).
I think Grim Lavamancer should be a template for evaluating this card. Both cards don't impact the board right away, and can die to removal before being effective. However, both have lots of potential against certain types of decks, and Harsh Mentor has (IMO) even more potential after sideboarding, when you could bring 2 or 3 extra copies of him to your mainboard to wreak havoc against artifact decks.
Harsh mentor seems like a dead card if you don't play him before turn 3, and he gets significantly worse on the draw like Eidolon. Against midrange/control decks, they're not going to crack lands as long as they have 2 mana, maybe they they will if they need that third land and they'd take 2 regardless.
He seems more like a 2x of in the side, it seems like it just dilutes the deck otherwise
Can people think of the matchups you want to see this? Sure, it gets around leyline, but it feels like a lot of decks that play leyline are combo/ramp decks that are going to combo out quick; you need that revelry or creature mass more.
The narrow usage of this card is why it will never earn a maindeck slot. Eidolon is still superior
No one who has a clue what they're talking about is saying that this card replaces Eidolon of the Great Revel. You're arguing against a point that no one is making. This is maybe a few of flex spot card or sideboard card.
I think a better comparison for Harsh Mentor is Grim Lavamancer, not Eidolon.
Even though Harsh mentor does a different job than Grim Lavamancer, both are powerful enough to mainboard, but narrow enough to be just a one-of.
Harsh Mentor is decent enough to be a one-of maindeck, and to have extra copies in the SB. Also, in the way it happens with Grim Lavamancer, there are matchups where you will side him out, and matchups where you would want to run extra copies of him. You don't want to run a full playset of Grim Lavamancer mainboard, and you won't run a full playset of Harsh Mentor mainboard. However, Harsh Mentor has more sideboard potential than Lavamancer, so you should consider extra copies of him in the SB.
Harsh Mentor is 100% sideboard playable, but mainboard too narrow. The way I see it, he's a Stony Silence hatebear mixed with a Suppression Field hatebear, and comes in to matches where such a card is helpful. He's an absolute hosing on turn 2 vs Affinity, Lantern Control, Tron, Abzan CoCo, any deck that plays Aether Vial, any deck that plays manlands, etc.
The interaction with fetches is nice, and he's stellar on the play in that regard. On the draw however he is significantly worse. I do think he is too narrow to come in to the MB, except perhaps in lavamancer's slot. That said, Lavamancer is a solid topdeck when you need to close the game, whereas this guy is not.
I don't think he's the red OP 2 drop to finish the cycle of goyf/sfm/bob/snappy. If he hit planeswalkers or if he was a 1 drop or if he had haste he could be. As it stands now his mainboard home is probably a boros death and taxes/hatebear style deck.
You say that it dies to everything--but so do Goblin Guide, Monastery Swiftspear, Eidolon of the Great Revel, Wild Nacatl, and Grim Lavamancer. None of our dudes escape removal. Soul scar mage suffers from the exact same problem. So let's lose that argument.
You're free to lose that argument all you want. All the creatures you mentioned either have haste or eidolon will hit them for 2 when they use a removal spell. This is a two mana do-nothing bear.
I assume your point here is that you made their 5/6 into a 2/3 so it's slower now? You're not assessing this properly. You're likely in topdeck mode at this point. You bolt goyf and add a turn to the amount of time it takes to kill them. Simultaneously, you only add 1 turn to their clock since the correct play with a different creature in place of SSM would have been to block Goyf and fog their attack that turn. If you add a turn to their clock and add a turn to your clock, you haven't actually improved your situation. Your best hope in this case is that you bolt Goyf and block with SSM, kill Goyf, and keep SSM to maintain some clock. But, if you've reached topdeck mode, Goyf will be larger than 3/4 which means you need another spell to keep SSM and that's difficult in topdeck mode.
I'm not sure what your meta game is, but where I play large Goyfs, Death's Shadows, Tasigurs, and Eldrazi are coming down on turn 2 nowadays.
Making a comparison to Eidolon is completely valid as to put his into the deck you need to take something out, so comparing the other 2 mana creature that sees play is valid. Recognizing how lopsided that is towards Eidolon should demonstrate to everyone how not-actually-good this card is.
Comparing it to Lavamancer is also incorrect. There are obviously matchups where Lavamancer is worse, same with Harsh Mentor, yes. Except in Lavamancer's poorer matches you can still just shock your opponent and not their creatures.
Harsh Mentor is too narrow, too expensive, and not resilient. It is worse than anything else that sees play except against Lantern (a matchup that is already good) and Affinity.
I assume your point here is that you made their 5/6 into a 2/3 so it's slower now? You're not assessing this properly. You're likely in topdeck mode at this point. You bolt goyf and add a turn to the amount of time it takes to kill them. Simultaneously, you only add 1 turn to their clock since the correct play with a different creature in place of SSM would have been to block Goyf and fog their attack that turn. If you add a turn to their clock and add a turn to your clock, you haven't actually improved your situation. Your best hope in this case is that you bolt Goyf and block with SSM, kill Goyf, and keep SSM to maintain some clock. But, if you've reached topdeck mode, Goyf will be larger than 3/4 which means you need another spell to keep SSM and that's difficult in topdeck mode.
I'm not sure what your meta game is, but where I play large Goyfs, Death's Shadows, Tasigurs, and Eldrazi are coming down on turn 2 nowadays.
Making a comparison to Eidolon is completely valid as to put his into the deck you need to take something out, so comparing the other 2 mana creature that sees play is valid. Recognizing how lopsided that is towards Eidolon should demonstrate to everyone how not-actually-good this card is.
Comparing it to Lavamancer is also incorrect. There are obviously matchups where Lavamancer is worse, same with Harsh Mentor, yes. Except in Lavamancer's poorer matches you can still just shock your opponent and not their creatures.
Harsh Mentor is too narrow, too expensive, and not resilient. It is worse than anything else that sees play except against Lantern (a matchup that is already good) and Affinity.
You keep saying "Harsh Mentor is narrow" as if you're refuting something yet several people have already stated the same thing. The fact that it is narrow is why it's a flex card/sideboard card and not a maindeck 4 of. You're simply wrong that this only affects Affinity and Lantern.
Recognizing how lopsided that is towards Eidolon should demonstrate to everyone how not-actually-good this card is
The fact that this is so lopsided in favor of Eidolon demonstrates how extremely powerful Eidolon is. Rift Bolt is garbage compared to Lightning Bolt, which demonstrates how not-actually-good Rift Bolt is, right? That's your reasoning here, and that Rift Bolt example should demonstrate how not-actually-good your reasoning is. No person who has a clue what they're talking about would suggest that Harsh Mentor should replace Eidolon, so it makes no sense to look at Eidolon at all. What reasonable people have said is that it's a flex/sideboard card. It would take the spot of Grim or spare Burn spells that sit in flex spots. It would also take the place of some more narrow sideboard cards, since this card is narrow but not extraordinarily narrow (certainly not Kor Firewalker narrow).
Soul-scar Mage is not remotely playable, not as a flex card, not as a sideboard card, and not as a 4-of. You're saying that a proper line of play for a Burn deck with 14-ish creatures is to Bolt creatures in order to squeeze attackers past them. You're applying a Zoo strategy to a deck playing about half the creatures of a Zoo deck. You want to voluntarily cast Lightning Bolt and get 2 damage out of it? That's a terrible decision. The correct line of play there is to Bolt their face and sacrifice a creature by blocking with it. Burn's creatures get outclassed quickly and the correct use for them later is to just block and let them die.
SSM's ability is not relevant at all because it's contrary to Burn's game plan. Beyond that, it's a bad Swiftspear and Burn doesn't need to play bad Swiftspears.
Harsh Mentor is a obviously a vastly superior card to Soul-scar Mage.
My point is not that Eidolon is better. My point is that obviously Eidolon is better, so unless you're running 60+ cards you still don't play Harsh Mentor.
Same with the SB. People are saying it's narrow, I'm saying it's TOO narrow. Too narrow even for a SB slot.
My deck does lean a bit towards a zoo strategy, I'll grant you that, but considering Nacatl was recently a 4-of in most lists I don't think this tendency is necessarily wrong. It's not like we're playing 4 Eidolons and 36 damage spells here. As far as that goes though I admit it is preference and could be less than optimal.
My point is not that Eidolon is better. My point is that obviously Eidolon is better, so unless you're running 60+ cards you still don't play Harsh Mentor.
Same with the SB. People are saying it's narrow, I'm saying it's TOO narrow. Too narrow even for a SB slot.
My deck does lean a bit towards a zoo strategy, I'll grant you that, but considering Nacatl was recently a 4-of in most lists I don't think this tendency is necessarily wrong. It's not like we're playing 4 Eidolons and 36 damage spells here. As far as that goes though I admit it is preference and could be less than optimal.
Eidolon is not relevant to this discussion. That's like trying to say "nah, it's not as good as Lightning Bolt, not worth playing". You would never drop Bolt, Rift, Spike, Charm, Guide, Swift, or Eidolon for this card so bringing any of them up is pointless. That's 28 cards that are not getting dropped for this. After that, you play 19-20 lands, so that's 47-48 cards that are not getting dropped for this. You're left with flex spots. If you're Boros, you play 4 Skullcracks and if you're Naya you play 4 Atarka's Command, so now we're at 51-52 cards that are not getting dropped for this. What's left in the main? Lightning Helix (though probably auto 4 is Boros), Grim, Searing Blaze, Skullcrack (if Naya), Nacatl. That's what's left to evaluate tradeoffs for this card in the maindeck. In the side, you're looking at some already narrow cards like FIrewalker and Stony Silence. It's not replacing extra Blazes there and it's not replacing DRev or Path. If you're playing Nocatl and have some spare maindeck Skullcracks (which are often just player only Lightning Strikes), 1 Harsh Mentor is a perfectly valid swap. If you play 2 Grim Lavamancers, 1 and 1 is reasonable. If you still have Firewalkers in the side, a couple of these is reasonable. Stony Silence? Again, a couple of these is reasonable.
You're making a mistake if you take a new card and compare it to what amounts to an untouchable 4-of. Everyone agrees that it's not better than the card that is the reason Burn is tier 1 right now, and saying so does not mean that the card is bad or unplayable. This card is, however, a stronger choice than player only Lightning Strike. It's a stronger choice than extremely narrow Firewalkers and Stony Silences. That's what you should be looking at when you evaluate cards. You have to compare it to things that it might replace, not things that are almost untouchable. This card hoses a lot of stuff. It's like an asymmetrical Price of Progress against fetchlands, if you can't see how powerful that is I really don't know any other ways to say it so that you do.
Harsh Mentor is also vastly superior to Soul-scar Mage.
First: Enough talking about Soul-Scar Mage. The card is decent, but not good enough for burn. It can see play in some UR brews or even Monored Skred (where it can fully benefit from Pyroclasm/Volcanic Fallout effects), but it's too slow for burn.
Second: I think Harsh Mentor will be a good sideboard 2-of card, but not for every local meta. It screws Affinity and Lantern pretty hard, greedy manabases and CoCo/Kiki combos. But IT IS meta dependent. Also, it DESTROYS Living End through its cycling effects, and even though is not a tier 1 deck, you guys should keep an eye out for it, specially with potential buffs after Amonkhet.
Third: The good ol' removal discussion. Sure, it dies to staple removals, but so any of typical burn creatures. Granted Eidolon can do damage in response, but the hasty guys don't always do damage, specially off-curve. Lavamancer and Nacatls suffers in this regard.
Conclusion: a good card, but currently not worth the price. I'll probably test 2 on my sideboard, but it can be left in some local metas.
All of this discussion is pretty interesting; I like it when a new card is printed that seem like a shoe-in for a deck that ends up creating a swell of divisiveness, never mind two cards in one set.
I like Burn and I always want new toys for the deck. I preorderd both Soul-Scar and Mentor ($4 and $6 each respectively) because I just don't know what their practical application would be and the price was low enough that I don't feel too bad if they don't pan out.
They both do things that are relevant to a game plan, but whether or not it's relevant to Burn's game plan remains to be seen. I can think of cases where both improve poor match ups, but an argument can be made that you're deviating too much from the game plan that makes the deck good against so many other strategies.
Personally, I'm always at a little bit of a loss for how many creatures to run. I used to run a Nacatl build and found that Push really hosed that for me. That said, I felt that before Push, having 16 creatures made the deck more consistent for me, and that a lot of my wins came off the heels of early creature beats. Whenever I see a solid red creature it makes me think that it would slot in, particularly a punisher creature, but then the top deck argument comes into play and I come here to read what people have to say and get so confused that I can't do anything.
First: Enough talking about Soul-Scar Mage. The card is decent, but not good enough for burn. It can see play in some UR brews or even Monored Skred (where it can fully benefit from Pyroclasm/Volcanic Fallout effects), but it's too slow for burn.
Second: I think Harsh Mentor will be a good sideboard 2-of card, but not for every local meta. It screws Affinity and Lantern pretty hard, greedy manabases and CoCo/Kiki combos. But IT IS meta dependent. Also, it DESTROYS Living End through its cycling effects, and even though is not a tier 1 deck, you guys should keep an eye out for it, specially with potential buffs after Amonkhet.
Third: The good ol' removal discussion. Sure, it dies to staple removals, but so any of typical burn creatures. Granted Eidolon can do damage in response, but the hasty guys don't always do damage, specially off-curve. Lavamancer and Nacatls suffers in this regard.
Conclusion: a good card, but currently not worth the price. I'll probably test 2 on my sideboard, but it can be left in some local metas.
Harsh Mentor doesn't touch Living End or Cycling. Cycling is an ability of a card, not an ability of a creature. Harsh Mentor only affects abilities of things that are on the battlefield.
Would need to confirm with a judge, but I was under the impression that Harsh Mentor did affect cycling (as long as the card was a creature/land/arti)
I mean, it explicitly says it doesn't:
Whenever an opponent activates an ability of an artifact, creature, or land on the battlefield, if it isn't a mana ability, Harsh Mentor deals 2 damage to that player.
However, a creature with cycling in your hand is a creature card and not a creature. It's not a creature until it's on the battlefield, so I don't believe it's even necessary to make the "on the battlefield" statement.
Harsh Mentor is not trying to be a Lightning Bolt or Skullcrack, it is trying to be a 2/2 creature for 2 with a relevant ability. So yes, it gets compared to Eidolon. I agree, with you when you say "You have to compare it to things that it might replace". Well it isn't replacing Lightning Bolt, or any other spell I can see that sees play (I'm not sure why you mention a card like lightning strike) the only real ability or part or curve it compares to is Eidolon.
To matter against Fetchlands Harsh Mentor is dependent on drawing it in your opening hand, being on the play, having an opponent that needs to fetch, and is easily killed. So for those reasons I do not buy the Fetchland argument. I do not like to use the "dies to removal" argument but in this case it is a 2/2 for 2, not a Goyf, or a Snapcaster, or an islandwalking lord. It's power and toughness are mediocre and has no ETB. It doesn't do enough.
Since I think Harsh Mentor will not see play and you do, would you post a list you could see it in as well instead of just saying it should be included?
Legacy: Merfolk U; Shadow UB; Eldrazi Stompy C
Pauper: Delver U
Vintage: Merfolk U
Primers:
sure it stops the infinite life combo on abzam company but is it really worth it? they still get infinite scry and put the needed removal on top.
if it is to punish vials, isn't it just better to destroy it with a revelry?
if it is about lantern and affinity, isn't it just better to play a kataki and completly destroy them? on these two matchups there's already 4 revelry to put on the deck, that's already a good ammount of cards to take out from maindeck.
Easy answer, what card is often bad against Affinity?
Eidolon.
But if I had something that I knew would do what Eidolon did and never put me behind, well that's a pretty strong card.
Vial decks:
Yeah, it's great to blow up a vial. But vial makes Eidolon not nearly as good. And I'm still playing spells from my hand. If I can make you take 2 damage off of vial, it really cuts down on the advantage that vial gives you. Again, probably taking Eidolon out in a lot of these vial matchups.
In regards to Abzan company--you're right they can scry up their path to exile or abrupt decay. But, that buys you an entire turn. You can win the game based on getting that one extra turn. Abzan company will always be a bad matchup, but if this gives you a few percentage points here, and several in other matchups--that's big.
The narrow usage of this card is why it will never earn a maindeck slot. Eidolon is still superior. Guaranteed/Instant answers (that do damage) are and always will be the best sideboard options for burn. This card doesn't necessarily do this as removal and hand disruption are at an all time high.
The card costs 2 mana and is a terrible top deck. People keeping saying how it will help vs lantern. Lantern isn't even a tough match-up for burn, it's pretty much a free win.
This card won't stick long enough vs harder match ups. Most decks with any form of removal will get rid of this ASAP. At least eidolon still deals 2 in exchange. This has too high of a chance of being a wasted play.
If this card was 1 CMC then it would be amazing for burn.
I think Grim Lavamancer should be a template for evaluating this card. Both cards don't impact the board right away, and can die to removal before being effective. However, both have lots of potential against certain types of decks, and Harsh Mentor has (IMO) even more potential after sideboarding, when you could bring 2 or 3 extra copies of him to your mainboard to wreak havoc against artifact decks.
He seems more like a 2x of in the side, it seems like it just dilutes the deck otherwise
Can people think of the matchups you want to see this? Sure, it gets around leyline, but it feels like a lot of decks that play leyline are combo/ramp decks that are going to combo out quick; you need that revelry or creature mass more.
No one who has a clue what they're talking about is saying that this card replaces Eidolon of the Great Revel. You're arguing against a point that no one is making. This is maybe a few of flex spot card or sideboard card.
Even though Harsh mentor does a different job than Grim Lavamancer, both are powerful enough to mainboard, but narrow enough to be just a one-of.
Harsh Mentor is decent enough to be a one-of maindeck, and to have extra copies in the SB. Also, in the way it happens with Grim Lavamancer, there are matchups where you will side him out, and matchups where you would want to run extra copies of him. You don't want to run a full playset of Grim Lavamancer mainboard, and you won't run a full playset of Harsh Mentor mainboard. However, Harsh Mentor has more sideboard potential than Lavamancer, so you should consider extra copies of him in the SB.
The interaction with fetches is nice, and he's stellar on the play in that regard. On the draw however he is significantly worse. I do think he is too narrow to come in to the MB, except perhaps in lavamancer's slot. That said, Lavamancer is a solid topdeck when you need to close the game, whereas this guy is not.
I don't think he's the red OP 2 drop to finish the cycle of goyf/sfm/bob/snappy. If he hit planeswalkers or if he was a 1 drop or if he had haste he could be. As it stands now his mainboard home is probably a boros death and taxes/hatebear style deck.
BG Rock
Modern:
RW Sun & Moon
RBG Dredge
RWG Burn
Legacy:
W Death & Taxes
You're free to lose that argument all you want. All the creatures you mentioned either have haste or eidolon will hit them for 2 when they use a removal spell. This is a two mana do-nothing bear.
I'm not sure what your meta game is, but where I play large Goyfs, Death's Shadows, Tasigurs, and Eldrazi are coming down on turn 2 nowadays.
Making a comparison to Eidolon is completely valid as to put his into the deck you need to take something out, so comparing the other 2 mana creature that sees play is valid. Recognizing how lopsided that is towards Eidolon should demonstrate to everyone how not-actually-good this card is.
Comparing it to Lavamancer is also incorrect. There are obviously matchups where Lavamancer is worse, same with Harsh Mentor, yes. Except in Lavamancer's poorer matches you can still just shock your opponent and not their creatures.
Harsh Mentor is too narrow, too expensive, and not resilient. It is worse than anything else that sees play except against Lantern (a matchup that is already good) and Affinity.
You keep saying "Harsh Mentor is narrow" as if you're refuting something yet several people have already stated the same thing. The fact that it is narrow is why it's a flex card/sideboard card and not a maindeck 4 of. You're simply wrong that this only affects Affinity and Lantern.
The fact that this is so lopsided in favor of Eidolon demonstrates how extremely powerful Eidolon is. Rift Bolt is garbage compared to Lightning Bolt, which demonstrates how not-actually-good Rift Bolt is, right? That's your reasoning here, and that Rift Bolt example should demonstrate how not-actually-good your reasoning is. No person who has a clue what they're talking about would suggest that Harsh Mentor should replace Eidolon, so it makes no sense to look at Eidolon at all. What reasonable people have said is that it's a flex/sideboard card. It would take the spot of Grim or spare Burn spells that sit in flex spots. It would also take the place of some more narrow sideboard cards, since this card is narrow but not extraordinarily narrow (certainly not Kor Firewalker narrow).
Soul-scar Mage is not remotely playable, not as a flex card, not as a sideboard card, and not as a 4-of. You're saying that a proper line of play for a Burn deck with 14-ish creatures is to Bolt creatures in order to squeeze attackers past them. You're applying a Zoo strategy to a deck playing about half the creatures of a Zoo deck. You want to voluntarily cast Lightning Bolt and get 2 damage out of it? That's a terrible decision. The correct line of play there is to Bolt their face and sacrifice a creature by blocking with it. Burn's creatures get outclassed quickly and the correct use for them later is to just block and let them die.
SSM's ability is not relevant at all because it's contrary to Burn's game plan. Beyond that, it's a bad Swiftspear and Burn doesn't need to play bad Swiftspears.
Harsh Mentor is a obviously a vastly superior card to Soul-scar Mage.
Same with the SB. People are saying it's narrow, I'm saying it's TOO narrow. Too narrow even for a SB slot.
My deck does lean a bit towards a zoo strategy, I'll grant you that, but considering Nacatl was recently a 4-of in most lists I don't think this tendency is necessarily wrong. It's not like we're playing 4 Eidolons and 36 damage spells here. As far as that goes though I admit it is preference and could be less than optimal.
Eidolon is not relevant to this discussion. That's like trying to say "nah, it's not as good as Lightning Bolt, not worth playing". You would never drop Bolt, Rift, Spike, Charm, Guide, Swift, or Eidolon for this card so bringing any of them up is pointless. That's 28 cards that are not getting dropped for this. After that, you play 19-20 lands, so that's 47-48 cards that are not getting dropped for this. You're left with flex spots. If you're Boros, you play 4 Skullcracks and if you're Naya you play 4 Atarka's Command, so now we're at 51-52 cards that are not getting dropped for this. What's left in the main? Lightning Helix (though probably auto 4 is Boros), Grim, Searing Blaze, Skullcrack (if Naya), Nacatl. That's what's left to evaluate tradeoffs for this card in the maindeck. In the side, you're looking at some already narrow cards like FIrewalker and Stony Silence. It's not replacing extra Blazes there and it's not replacing DRev or Path. If you're playing Nocatl and have some spare maindeck Skullcracks (which are often just player only Lightning Strikes), 1 Harsh Mentor is a perfectly valid swap. If you play 2 Grim Lavamancers, 1 and 1 is reasonable. If you still have Firewalkers in the side, a couple of these is reasonable. Stony Silence? Again, a couple of these is reasonable.
You're making a mistake if you take a new card and compare it to what amounts to an untouchable 4-of. Everyone agrees that it's not better than the card that is the reason Burn is tier 1 right now, and saying so does not mean that the card is bad or unplayable. This card is, however, a stronger choice than player only Lightning Strike. It's a stronger choice than extremely narrow Firewalkers and Stony Silences. That's what you should be looking at when you evaluate cards. You have to compare it to things that it might replace, not things that are almost untouchable. This card hoses a lot of stuff. It's like an asymmetrical Price of Progress against fetchlands, if you can't see how powerful that is I really don't know any other ways to say it so that you do.
Harsh Mentor is also vastly superior to Soul-scar Mage.
First: Enough talking about Soul-Scar Mage. The card is decent, but not good enough for burn. It can see play in some UR brews or even Monored Skred (where it can fully benefit from Pyroclasm/Volcanic Fallout effects), but it's too slow for burn.
Second: I think Harsh Mentor will be a good sideboard 2-of card, but not for every local meta. It screws Affinity and Lantern pretty hard, greedy manabases and CoCo/Kiki combos. But IT IS meta dependent. Also, it DESTROYS Living End through its cycling effects, and even though is not a tier 1 deck, you guys should keep an eye out for it, specially with potential buffs after Amonkhet.
Third: The good ol' removal discussion. Sure, it dies to staple removals, but so any of typical burn creatures. Granted Eidolon can do damage in response, but the hasty guys don't always do damage, specially off-curve. Lavamancer and Nacatls suffers in this regard.
Conclusion: a good card, but currently not worth the price. I'll probably test 2 on my sideboard, but it can be left in some local metas.
I like Burn and I always want new toys for the deck. I preorderd both Soul-Scar and Mentor ($4 and $6 each respectively) because I just don't know what their practical application would be and the price was low enough that I don't feel too bad if they don't pan out.
They both do things that are relevant to a game plan, but whether or not it's relevant to Burn's game plan remains to be seen. I can think of cases where both improve poor match ups, but an argument can be made that you're deviating too much from the game plan that makes the deck good against so many other strategies.
Personally, I'm always at a little bit of a loss for how many creatures to run. I used to run a Nacatl build and found that Push really hosed that for me. That said, I felt that before Push, having 16 creatures made the deck more consistent for me, and that a lot of my wins came off the heels of early creature beats. Whenever I see a solid red creature it makes me think that it would slot in, particularly a punisher creature, but then the top deck argument comes into play and I come here to read what people have to say and get so confused that I can't do anything.
Want to be a better Magic player? Read the rulings forum and check out the comprehensive rules!
Harsh Mentor doesn't touch Living End or Cycling. Cycling is an ability of a card, not an ability of a creature. Harsh Mentor only affects abilities of things that are on the battlefield.
"Are you serious?" Chandra replied.
I mean, it explicitly says it doesn't:
However, a creature with cycling in your hand is a creature card and not a creature. It's not a creature until it's on the battlefield, so I don't believe it's even necessary to make the "on the battlefield" statement.
To matter against Fetchlands Harsh Mentor is dependent on drawing it in your opening hand, being on the play, having an opponent that needs to fetch, and is easily killed. So for those reasons I do not buy the Fetchland argument. I do not like to use the "dies to removal" argument but in this case it is a 2/2 for 2, not a Goyf, or a Snapcaster, or an islandwalking lord. It's power and toughness are mediocre and has no ETB. It doesn't do enough.
Since I think Harsh Mentor will not see play and you do, would you post a list you could see it in as well instead of just saying it should be included?