Ive seen people try to run a Burn deck with 24 creatures but that strikes me as more a RDW build. Over the many years of running Burn in Legacy and Modern Ive seen cards like Ball Lightning, Vexing Devil, Keldon Marauders, Ash Zealot, etc. float in and out. Mainly because at that time in MTG that was acceptable because there wasent something better, it was the best option at that time, it was used cause the meta or people were play testing an idea. Burn has held strong when it hit tier 1 with Guide, Eidolon and Swiftspear as the main creatures/core and there was a time Nacatl Burn was a thing. And yes Grim Lavamancer is a 50/50 call with many.
Anyone is more then welcome to make their own version of Burn. Heck I run a "rogue"/renegade list most of the time.I fully support people's creativity. Its your deck, run/test/play what you feel like. Have fun with it.
I will say that the core list below has been proven in pretty much every Burn deck that has successfully won, top 8 and well represented Burn in big events since Burn climbed to tier 1.
Burn's core is pretty much set starting with Mono Red, Boros, Naya, hell basically almost all Burn deck types have these 44
19-20 Lands
4 Guide
4 Swift Swiftspear
4 Eidolon
4 Lava
4 Rift
4 Bolt
After this its a toss up of about 16 spots with any of these, yeah I know you may have another card to throw in here. Yes I know Skullcrack and/or Atarka's is more then likely in the core but not everyone runs 4 of and some even have it in their sides and the same for the rest.
Helix
Atarka's
Skullcrack
Charm
Grim
Blaze
Volley
And the side is even more diverse.
If there was another card we could get in the next set that fits into those 16 slots that would be great. Or heck even better if we had another card push their way into the core like Eidolon and Swiftspear has since their arrival. For now Burn is still tier 1 and very competitive.
What I would like to see is a Burn playable main deckable Planeswalker. Now that would be cool. All the "Red" PW's out there now fit decks like RW Prison, Jund, Zoo, etc. Tibalt is too weak and Koth and Chandra at 4 mana is too high mana wise and Chandra, Fire of Kaladesh just never panned out.
Its needs to be all Red mana to cast, 2-3 mana, the ultimate doesnt even have to be great but the first 2 abilities need to be at least a Shock and exile target permanent type thing so we can have repeatable damage/removal. Oh and a cant be countered would be nice also
I've been putting up some results at my local FNM! Thanks for the advice on my previous post. I piloted it to first place in a mini 4 person tournament on it's maiden voyage. Second place tonight out of 8!
I'm currently without Eidolon and trying to fill the slot with budget options. What do you all think of the proposed changes in my deck for next time?
Changes include:
Minus a land to include Faithless Looting.
Up to 11 fetchlands, down to one bloodcrypt.
Minus 2 Vexing Devil +1 Grim Lavamancer +1 Harsh Mentor
Slight changes to the sideboard.
I'm curious about faithless looting in place of a land. 20 land seemed to feel like too many after some play testing. Looting can fix a hand with too many land in it, add cards to graveyard for mentor, help us dig for sideboard cards and be flashbacked in a particularly long game. It also is a 1 cost prowess trigger for Monastery Swiftspear. I have high hopes for a one of copy of this card. I think the potential to filter lands and give us extra chances to find much needed sideboard cards will give the deck more reach than a land.
Sideboarding in Bloodmoon for Bump in the Night has been ruining the resident Tron deck. There are quite a number of greedy mana bases at my shop, so moon almost always hurts them more than me.
Should I have Harsh Mentor mainboard? Maybe 2? He seems like he might fill the Eidolon of the Great Revel slot better than Vexing Devil. He seems potentially good against Affinity, Tron, elves and a 4 colored Coco deck running around my shop. Then again 2 mana vs. 1 mana is something to be considered.
Thanks again for the support everyone! I'm stoked to be taking home some prizes at FNM. This deck is stronger than I expected! Looking forward to switching over to a Naya build in the future.
I've been putting up some results at my local FNM! Thanks for the advice on my previous post. I piloted it to first place in a mini 4 person tournament on it's maiden voyage. Second place tonight out of 8!
I'm currently without Eidolon and trying to fill the slot with budget options. What do you all think of the proposed changes in my deck for next time?
Changes include:
Minus a land to include Faithless Looting.
Up to 11 fetchlands, down to one bloodcrypt.
Minus 2 Vexing Devil +1 Grim Lavamancer +1 Harsh Mentor
Slight changes to the sideboard.
I'm curious about faithless looting in place of a land. 20 land seemed to feel like too many after some play testing. Looting can fix a hand with too many land in it, add cards to graveyard for mentor, help us dig for sideboard cards and be flashbacked in a particularly long game. It also is a 1 cost prowess trigger for Monastery Swiftspear. I have high hopes for a one of copy of this card. I think the potential to filter lands and give us extra chances to find much needed sideboard cards will give the deck more reach than a land.
Sideboarding in Bloodmoon for Bump in the Night has been ruining the resident Tron deck. There are quite a number of greedy mana bases at my shop, so moon almost always hurts them more than me.
Should I have Harsh Mentor mainboard? Maybe 2? He seems like he might fill the Eidolon of the Great Revel slot better than Vexing Devil. He seems potentially good against Affinity, Tron, elves and a 4 colored Coco deck running around my shop. Then again 2 mana vs. 1 mana is something to be considered.
Thanks again for the support everyone! I'm stoked to be taking home some prizes at FNM. This deck is stronger than I expected! Looking forward to switching over to a Naya build in the future.
Harsh Mentor is a good budget Replacement for Eidolon of the great revel. In some matchups it will be better but Eidolon is the better of the two for sure. If your meta is creature heavy and bogles isn't everywhere Satyr Firedancer can be a good replacement too.
What I would like to see is a Burn playable main deckable Planeswalker. Now that would be cool. All the "Red" PW's out there now fit decks like RW Prison, Jund, Zoo, etc. Tibalt is too weak and Koth and Chandra at 4 mana is too high mana wise and Chandra, Fire of Kaladesh just never panned out.
Its needs to be all Red mana to cast, 2-3 mana, the ultimate doesnt even have to be great but the first 2 abilities need to be at least a Shock and exile target permanent type thing so we can have repeatable damage/removal. Oh and a cant be countered would be nice also
I've been putting up some results at my local FNM! Thanks for the advice on my previous post. I piloted it to first place in a mini 4 person tournament on it's maiden voyage. Second place tonight out of 8!
I'm currently without Eidolon and trying to fill the slot with budget options. What do you all think of the proposed changes in my deck for next time?
Changes include:
Minus a land to include Faithless Looting.
Up to 11 fetchlands, down to one bloodcrypt.
Minus 2 Vexing Devil +1 Grim Lavamancer +1 Harsh Mentor
Slight changes to the sideboard.
I'm curious about faithless looting in place of a land. 20 land seemed to feel like too many after some play testing. Looting can fix a hand with too many land in it, add cards to graveyard for mentor, help us dig for sideboard cards and be flashbacked in a particularly long game. It also is a 1 cost prowess trigger for Monastery Swiftspear. I have high hopes for a one of copy of this card. I think the potential to filter lands and give us extra chances to find much needed sideboard cards will give the deck more reach than a land.
Sideboarding in Bloodmoon for Bump in the Night has been ruining the resident Tron deck. There are quite a number of greedy mana bases at my shop, so moon almost always hurts them more than me.
Should I have Harsh Mentor mainboard? Maybe 2? He seems like he might fill the Eidolon of the Great Revel slot better than Vexing Devil. He seems potentially good against Affinity, Tron, elves and a 4 colored Coco deck running around my shop. Then again 2 mana vs. 1 mana is something to be considered.
Thanks again for the support everyone! I'm stoked to be taking home some prizes at FNM. This deck is stronger than I expected! Looking forward to switching over to a Naya build in the future.
Interesting list, and congrats on the results so far!
Personally, I don't like the looting because it does nothing to advance our gameplan. We typically do not want a long game, because that means we're behind, and would rather topdeck an extra spell/creature over it. I think we want every card to be able to push damage the turn it hits the board (or cause damage to remove it, like Eidolon). That said, because you don't have Eidolons, another Harsh Mentor might be worth it to try and get similar value. I run 19 lands and am happy with it, and in this type of deck, I'd much rather have the extra spell. The only time I sometimes feel like 20 may be better is when I sideboard any of my 3CMC cards (2 Firecraft, 2 Anger). Regardless if you run 19 or 20, the deck is designed to not get flooded, and when it does, I chalk it up to variance.
Also, I'd be a little worried that Collateral Damage may be stuck in hand sometimes, since we only have 12 creatures.
For consistency sake, my suggestion would be to take out the CD and Looting, make it so you have 4 Mentor or 4 Vexing, whichever you decide will have the bigger impact based on your meta.
Good luck and I hope you can get those Eidolons in the near future; you'll notice a difference with the impact it makes in a lot of matchups.
This thread's community has been super supportive! Thanks y'all
Also, I'd be a little worried that Collateral Damage may be stuck in hand sometimes, since we only have 12 creatures.
This card would probably be Boros Charm or Lightning Helix in a white build. I plan on transitioning to Naya in the future.
For any archetype not playing white, a one of Collateral damage can work out. While I'm still new to the deck, I have been getting in more playtesting lately. The card seems to help more than it hurts. I was skeptical when I first put it in. Yes, sometimes I don't have a creature to sac to it. The majority of the time, I do. It was definitely won me games when I needed to do 6 damage for 2 mana right at the end. I'll make an effort going forward to keep track of the ratio of how often it helps vs. hurts my game.
On the creature count, we could have 13-14 creatures with some Grim Flayer thrown in the mix. There's a 90.8% chance we'll draw a creature by turn 3 while on the play with 13 creatures. We could honestly wait until turn 4 most games anyway to find a suitable mate for Collateral Damage.
Collateral equals another copy of lightning bolt if our opponent targets our creature for removal. I have successfully sacrificed a creature targeted for removal on more than one occasion. There is a small potential that we can foil a secondary part of an opponent's spell by sacrificing a creature they target. (The only spell I can think of now is Searing Blood, but there's probably at least one more out there.)
I don't have Eidolon of the Great Revels yet, but I'm curious about an interaction between Collateral and this card. Imagine this: We have Eidolon out with collateral in hand plus red mana open. Opponent targets Eidolon for removal, triggering it's ability. We respond with collateral sacrificing Eidolon. It seems to me that we evade triggering Eidolon ourselves in this instance. In my mind, the spell isn't cast until the creature is sacrificed, thus it's ability won't trigger when Collateral is cast because Eidolon isn't on the field anymore. Any rules expert have a definitive answer to this?
If this is true, there's further potential for this, in a mirror match up for instance. Imagine having Eidolon out, both you and opponent are in kill range or close to it. Your opponent thinks you can't cast anything because your Eidolon is out and you're at 2 life. Surprise! We cast collateral and two more spells without taking any damage.
One thing I've noticed in playing is that our small creatures will become much less useful against an aggro deck or removal heavy deck, especially when going second. Collateral provides another niche edge in this matter. I had an instance where drawing another monastery swiftspear with one on the field seemed bad at first because my opponent had out a couple of creatures. With collateral in hand, I attacked in anyway because I knew that if he blocked of my swiftspears with one creature each, one of my swiftspears would destroy one of his creatures while surviving the attack due to Collateral's prowess trigger.
While these instances may seem negligible, having another potential "Lightning Bolt" instead of a two cost burn spell can sometimes save the day.
Anyone else think Collateral has potential as a 1 of in a non-white situation after this explanation?
I can see what you are saying about Faithless Looting not being the ideal choice. I'm just so scared of getting mana screwed! I'll try putting in another Mentor in it's place though. I can see him doing some real work against Tron and Affinity if I'm on the play.
This thread's community has been super supportive! Thanks y'all
Anyone think Collateral has potential in a non-white situation after this explanation?
I can see what you are saying about Faithless Looting not being the ideal choice. I'm just so scared of getting mana screwed! I'll try putting in another Mentor in it's place though. I can see him doing some real work against Tron and Affinity if I'm on the play.
Welcome to the Modern Burn thread
I like this forum because there are much more positive aspects like you mentioned then negative. There isnt much bickering or know it alls that try to play the "you need to listen to me because Im better then anyone else in the world" card.
Some suggestions, as for Collateral I can see in a Mono Red or Gruul build like yours with at least 16 creatures it can be playable, since there's just so much removal for small/low cmc creatures that we run. Id also recommend trying another Shard Volley as another option in its place to try as you have more lands to sac and creatures are usually more valuable then lands especially mid/late game.
Id also look at Reality Hemorrhage and Dismember in the side to help deal with creatures like Kor, Matyr and the others with Protection that usually come in vs Burn. Dismember is really good in my Mono Red vs creatures out of Bolt range.
Mentor can be really good in some matches but play testing vs your meta will help you with some (not all) major questions we all face when adding to the deck
"Will this card be there enough when I need it, does it add to the consistency of the benefits of playing Burn, is this a need/hate card against certain match ups and is this card a big enough impact/needed in my meta or can this spot be used for another card that will".
I don't have Eidolon of the Great Revels yet, but I'm curious about an interaction between Collateral and this card. Imagine this: We have Eidolon out with collateral in hand plus red mana open. Opponent targets Eidolon for removal, triggering it's ability. We respond with collateral sacrificing Eidolon. It seems to me that we evade triggering Eidolon ourselves in this instance. In my mind, the spell isn't cast until the creature is sacrificed, thus it's ability won't trigger when Collateral is cast because Eidolon isn't on the field anymore. Any rules expert have a definitive answer to this?
If this is true, there's further potential for this, in a mirror match up for instance. Imagine having Eidolon out, both you and opponent are in kill range or close to it. Your opponent thinks you can't cast anything because your Eidolon is out and you're at 2 life. Surprise! We cast collateral and two more spells without taking any damage.
Standard // nRG Aggro
Modern // Burn (main) and Living End (secondary) now Jund.
For fun check out my janky combo primer: Turn 3 Grixis Combo
"Can't beat em' Jund em'!"
Destructive Revelry is the strongest artifact+enchantment hate card we have access to, so the SG is necessary. You need 2 minimum Sacred Foundry so that you can fetch for white twice if one gets destroyed or to play Kor Firewalker. You also want enough Mountains that you can fetch to make landfall, I personally like 3. You need enough fetches to satisfy your color needs, generally 10-12. After that, you can fill out the remaining lands with Inspiring Vantage. It's kind of the last priority, really.
Slightly off topic, but here's some thought experiment questions:
1. Do you guys think Burn will get a new burn spell or tool in the next expansion?
2. Does Burn even need one to keep up with the changing modern meta and/or to just expand the burn varieties?
3. What do you think it should be?
Personally, I think it should be Burn spell that replaces itself so that Burn doesn't run out of steam as quickly as it does, allows the deck to search for crucial answers/lethals.
Something like: 2 Mana (RU) instant, "Deal 3 damage to target player. Look at the top two cards of your library. Put one of them into your hand and the other on the bottom of your library." Basically Lava spike + Sleight of hand at instant speed.
Slightly off topic, but here's some thought experiment questions:
1. Do you guys think Burn will get a new burn spell or tool in the next expansion?
2. Does Burn even need one to keep up with the changing modern meta and/or to just expand the burn varieties?
I, personally, think that getting a new card into the MB of Naya Burn is maybe the hardest slot to fit. Wizards has reduced the direct damage slots quite drastically the last couple of years, and getting a better creature than Goblin Guide/Eidolon seems unrealistic.
IF we get an upgrade I would guess that it is a creature that knocks Monastery Swiftspear out of the deck, but I dont think it will happen any time soon.
So, for a question i have,
can i play double Searing Blaze's on 1 target opponent creature to deal 6 damage to opponent? (landfall included)
Cast the first Searing Blaze and hold priority, then cast the second one with first still on the stack. Searing Blaze targets both player and creature. Removing the creature in response will not cause the 3 damage to player to fizzle as long as both targets were legal when Searing Blaze was cast.
Slightly off topic, but here's some thought experiment questions:
1. Do you guys think Burn will get a new burn spell or tool in the next expansion?
2. Does Burn even need one to keep up with the changing modern meta and/or to just expand the burn varieties?
3. What do you think it should be?
Personally, I think it should be Burn spell that replaces itself so that Burn doesn't run out of steam as quickly as it does, allows the deck to search for crucial answers/lethals.
Something like: 2 Mana (RU) instant, "Deal 3 damage to target player. Look at the top two cards of your library. Put one of them into your hand and the other on the bottom of your library." Basically Lava spike + Sleight of hand at instant speed.
What do guys think?
I wouldn't get my hopes up for anything new, considering Lightning Strike is currently "too strong".
I highly doubt your UR spell would ever get printed. I think the 3CMC Electrolyze is the cheapest we'll ever see such effects.
I personally want a cantrip-Shock, but that's never going to happen considering how restrictive Needle Drop is. I think cantrip-Lightning Strike would be too powerful, even if it's sorcery speed and player only. Maybe an impulsive draw 3 damage spell at 1 or 2CMC could happen.
So, for a question i have,
can i play double Searing Blaze's on 1 target opponent creature to deal 6 damage to opponent? (landfall included)
Cast the first Searing Blaze and hold priority, then cast the second one with first still on the stack. Searing Blaze targets both player and creature. Removing the creature in response will not cause the 3 damage to player to fizzle as long as both targets were legal when Searing Blaze was cast.
It works, but not for the reason you mentioned. It's at the resolution you check: 1 of the 2 targets is still valid, you resolve the spell "at best" and deal 3 damages to the player. If for some reason the player received hexproof in response, your second blaze would fizzle, even if both targets were legal on cast (because there is no legal target anymore)
Cheers
This is the right description.
I love it when an opponent kills their own creature and then matter of factly asserts "searing blaze fizzles" and I say "no, no it doesn't". This is why I always share this particular interaction with new burn players, so they don't get screwed by someone telling them something wrong.
You need 2 legal targets to cast it, always, but a spell with multiple targets won't fizzle due to illegal targets unless all targets are made illegal.
It`s always fun when your opponents tell you how mindless and unskilled you must be for playing Baby's First Deck (all things that I have been told on MTGO), right before those same opponents demonstrate their own lack of rules knowledge.
It`s always fun when your opponents tell you how mindless and unskilled you must be for playing Baby's First Deck (all things that I have been told on MTGO), right before those same opponents demonstrate their own lack of rules knowledge.
Been a while since I sleeved up burn. Wondering if Atarka's Command is still a solid choice. Seems all the topping lists choose to forgo it. This is currently what I'll be rocking:
So, for a question i have,
can i play double Searing Blaze's on 1 target opponent creature to deal 6 damage to opponent? (landfall included)
Cast the first Searing Blaze and hold priority, then cast the second one with first still on the stack. Searing Blaze targets both player and creature. Removing the creature in response will not cause the 3 damage to player to fizzle as long as both targets were legal when Searing Blaze was cast.
It works, but not for the reason you mentioned. It's at the resolution you check: 1 of the 2 targets is still valid, you resolve the spell "at best" and deal 3 damages to the player. If for some reason the player received hexproof in response, your second blaze would fizzle, even if both targets were legal on cast (because there is no legal target anymore)
Cheers
This is the right description.
I love it when an opponent kills their own creature and then matter of factly asserts "searing blaze fizzles" and I say "no, no it doesn't". This is why I always share this particular interaction with new burn players, so they don't get screwed by someone telling them something wrong.
You need 2 legal targets to cast it, always, but a spell with multiple targets won't fizzle due to illegal targets unless all targets are made illegal.
Relevant question for me as a I am just now getting back into Magic after a very long hiatus and aspects related to rulings, priority, and the stack are all
a bit fuzzy. The linked rulings discussion goes on to explain that you must 'retain priority' in order to legally cast the two Searing Blaze.
Initially I was thinking that this would be the order of events:
Me: Cast Searing Blaze, targeting creature and player. [Pass priority]
Opponent: No response. [Pass priority]
Me: In response to no response, cast second Searing Blaze, targeting same creature and player. [Pass priority]
Opponent: No response. [Pass priority]
==Spell resolution==
But my reading is that the proper sequence would be:
Me: Cast Searing Blaze targeting creature and player. Retaining priority and in response to my first cast, cast a second Searing Blaze targeting same creature and player. [Pass priority]
Opponent: No response. [Pass priority]
==Spell resolution==
Anyone is more then welcome to make their own version of Burn. Heck I run a "rogue"/renegade list most of the time. I fully support people's creativity. Its your deck, run/test/play what you feel like. Have fun with it.
I will say that the core list below has been proven in pretty much every Burn deck that has successfully won, top 8 and well represented Burn in big events since Burn climbed to tier 1.
Burn's core is pretty much set starting with Mono Red, Boros, Naya, hell basically almost all Burn deck types have these 44
19-20 Lands
4 Guide
4 Swift Swiftspear
4 Eidolon
4 Lava
4 Rift
4 Bolt
After this its a toss up of about 16 spots with any of these, yeah I know you may have another card to throw in here. Yes I know Skullcrack and/or Atarka's is more then likely in the core but not everyone runs 4 of and some even have it in their sides and the same for the rest.
Helix
Atarka's
Skullcrack
Charm
Grim
Blaze
Volley
And the side is even more diverse.
If there was another card we could get in the next set that fits into those 16 slots that would be great. Or heck even better if we had another card push their way into the core like Eidolon and Swiftspear has since their arrival. For now Burn is still tier 1 and very competitive.
Its needs to be all Red mana to cast, 2-3 mana, the ultimate doesnt even have to be great but the first 2 abilities need to be at least a Shock and exile target permanent type thing so we can have repeatable damage/removal. Oh and a cant be countered would be nice also
I'm currently without Eidolon and trying to fill the slot with budget options. What do you all think of the proposed changes in my deck for next time?
My deck list tonight was this Jund version:
3x Vexing Devil
1x Grim Lavamancer
4x Monastery Swiftspear
1x Collateral Damage
4x Lava Spike
4x Lightning Bolt
2x Shard Volley
4x Rift Bolt
3x Searing Blaze
3x Skullcrack
3x Atarka's Command
4x Bump in the Night
4x Wooded Foothills
2x Arid Mesa
2x Stomping Ground
2x Blood Crypt
1x Copperline Gorge
1x Blackcleave Cliffs
4x Mountain
2x Searing Blood
1x Searing Blaze
1x Molten Rain
4x Blood Moon
3x Destructive Revelry
1x Harsh Mentor
3x Slagstorm
Planning to change it to this:
1x Vexing Devil
1x Harsh Mentor
2x Grim Lavamancer
4x Monastery Swiftspear
1x Faithless Looting
4x Lava Spike
4x Lightning Bolt
1x Collateral Damage
2x Shard Volley
4x Rift Bolt
3x Searing Blaze
2x Skullcrack
4x Atarka's Command
4x Bump in the Night
4x Wooded Foothills
3x Arid Mesa
2x Stomping Ground
1x Blood Crypt
1x Copperline Gorge
1x Blackcleave Cliffs
3x Mountain
1x Searing Blood
1x Searing Blaze
1x Molten Rain
4x Blood Moon
4x Destructive Revelry
4x Slagstorm
Changes include:
Minus a land to include Faithless Looting.
Up to 11 fetchlands, down to one bloodcrypt.
Minus 2 Vexing Devil +1 Grim Lavamancer +1 Harsh Mentor
Slight changes to the sideboard.
I'm curious about faithless looting in place of a land. 20 land seemed to feel like too many after some play testing. Looting can fix a hand with too many land in it, add cards to graveyard for mentor, help us dig for sideboard cards and be flashbacked in a particularly long game. It also is a 1 cost prowess trigger for Monastery Swiftspear. I have high hopes for a one of copy of this card. I think the potential to filter lands and give us extra chances to find much needed sideboard cards will give the deck more reach than a land.
Sideboarding in Bloodmoon for Bump in the Night has been ruining the resident Tron deck. There are quite a number of greedy mana bases at my shop, so moon almost always hurts them more than me.
Should I have Harsh Mentor mainboard? Maybe 2? He seems like he might fill the Eidolon of the Great Revel slot better than Vexing Devil. He seems potentially good against Affinity, Tron, elves and a 4 colored Coco deck running around my shop. Then again 2 mana vs. 1 mana is something to be considered.
Thanks again for the support everyone! I'm stoked to be taking home some prizes at FNM. This deck is stronger than I expected! Looking forward to switching over to a Naya build in the future.
Cost: R, starting loyalty 1.
Interesting list, and congrats on the results so far!
Personally, I don't like the looting because it does nothing to advance our gameplan. We typically do not want a long game, because that means we're behind, and would rather topdeck an extra spell/creature over it. I think we want every card to be able to push damage the turn it hits the board (or cause damage to remove it, like Eidolon). That said, because you don't have Eidolons, another Harsh Mentor might be worth it to try and get similar value. I run 19 lands and am happy with it, and in this type of deck, I'd much rather have the extra spell. The only time I sometimes feel like 20 may be better is when I sideboard any of my 3CMC cards (2 Firecraft, 2 Anger). Regardless if you run 19 or 20, the deck is designed to not get flooded, and when it does, I chalk it up to variance.
Also, I'd be a little worried that Collateral Damage may be stuck in hand sometimes, since we only have 12 creatures.
For consistency sake, my suggestion would be to take out the CD and Looting, make it so you have 4 Mentor or 4 Vexing, whichever you decide will have the bigger impact based on your meta.
Good luck and I hope you can get those Eidolons in the near future; you'll notice a difference with the impact it makes in a lot of matchups.
BG The Rock
This card would probably be Boros Charm or Lightning Helix in a white build. I plan on transitioning to Naya in the future.
For any archetype not playing white, a one of Collateral damage can work out. While I'm still new to the deck, I have been getting in more playtesting lately. The card seems to help more than it hurts. I was skeptical when I first put it in. Yes, sometimes I don't have a creature to sac to it. The majority of the time, I do. It was definitely won me games when I needed to do 6 damage for 2 mana right at the end. I'll make an effort going forward to keep track of the ratio of how often it helps vs. hurts my game.
On the creature count, we could have 13-14 creatures with some Grim Flayer thrown in the mix. There's a 90.8% chance we'll draw a creature by turn 3 while on the play with 13 creatures. We could honestly wait until turn 4 most games anyway to find a suitable mate for Collateral Damage.
Collateral equals another copy of lightning bolt if our opponent targets our creature for removal. I have successfully sacrificed a creature targeted for removal on more than one occasion. There is a small potential that we can foil a secondary part of an opponent's spell by sacrificing a creature they target. (The only spell I can think of now is Searing Blood, but there's probably at least one more out there.)
I don't have Eidolon of the Great Revels yet, but I'm curious about an interaction between Collateral and this card. Imagine this: We have Eidolon out with collateral in hand plus red mana open. Opponent targets Eidolon for removal, triggering it's ability. We respond with collateral sacrificing Eidolon. It seems to me that we evade triggering Eidolon ourselves in this instance. In my mind, the spell isn't cast until the creature is sacrificed, thus it's ability won't trigger when Collateral is cast because Eidolon isn't on the field anymore. Any rules expert have a definitive answer to this?
If this is true, there's further potential for this, in a mirror match up for instance. Imagine having Eidolon out, both you and opponent are in kill range or close to it. Your opponent thinks you can't cast anything because your Eidolon is out and you're at 2 life. Surprise! We cast collateral and two more spells without taking any damage.
One thing I've noticed in playing is that our small creatures will become much less useful against an aggro deck or removal heavy deck, especially when going second. Collateral provides another niche edge in this matter. I had an instance where drawing another monastery swiftspear with one on the field seemed bad at first because my opponent had out a couple of creatures. With collateral in hand, I attacked in anyway because I knew that if he blocked of my swiftspears with one creature each, one of my swiftspears would destroy one of his creatures while surviving the attack due to Collateral's prowess trigger.
While these instances may seem negligible, having another potential "Lightning Bolt" instead of a two cost burn spell can sometimes save the day.
Anyone else think Collateral has potential as a 1 of in a non-white situation after this explanation?
I can see what you are saying about Faithless Looting not being the ideal choice. I'm just so scared of getting mana screwed!
Welcome to the Modern Burn thread
I like this forum because there are much more positive aspects like you mentioned then negative. There isnt much bickering or know it alls that try to play the "you need to listen to me because Im better then anyone else in the world" card.
Some suggestions, as for Collateral I can see in a Mono Red or Gruul build like yours with at least 16 creatures it can be playable, since there's just so much removal for small/low cmc creatures that we run. Id also recommend trying another Shard Volley as another option in its place to try as you have more lands to sac and creatures are usually more valuable then lands especially mid/late game.
Id also look at Reality Hemorrhage and Dismember in the side to help deal with creatures like Kor, Matyr and the others with Protection that usually come in vs Burn. Dismember is really good in my Mono Red vs creatures out of Bolt range.
Mentor can be really good in some matches but play testing vs your meta will help you with some (not all) major questions we all face when adding to the deck
"Will this card be there enough when I need it, does it add to the consistency of the benefits of playing Burn, is this a need/hate card against certain match ups and is this card a big enough impact/needed in my meta or can this spot be used for another card that will".
Should be how it works.
Modern // Burn (main) and Living End (secondary) now Jund.
For fun check out my janky combo primer: Turn 3 Grixis Combo
"Can't beat em' Jund em'!"
Destructive Revelry is the strongest artifact+enchantment hate card we have access to, so the SG is necessary. You need 2 minimum Sacred Foundry so that you can fetch for white twice if one gets destroyed or to play Kor Firewalker. You also want enough Mountains that you can fetch to make landfall, I personally like 3. You need enough fetches to satisfy your color needs, generally 10-12. After that, you can fill out the remaining lands with Inspiring Vantage. It's kind of the last priority, really.
1. Do you guys think Burn will get a new burn spell or tool in the next expansion?
2. Does Burn even need one to keep up with the changing modern meta and/or to just expand the burn varieties?
3. What do you think it should be?
Personally, I think it should be Burn spell that replaces itself so that Burn doesn't run out of steam as quickly as it does, allows the deck to search for crucial answers/lethals.
Something like: 2 Mana (RU) instant, "Deal 3 damage to target player. Look at the top two cards of your library. Put one of them into your hand and the other on the bottom of your library." Basically Lava spike + Sleight of hand at instant speed.
What do guys think?
I, personally, think that getting a new card into the MB of Naya Burn is maybe the hardest slot to fit. Wizards has reduced the direct damage slots quite drastically the last couple of years, and getting a better creature than Goblin Guide/Eidolon seems unrealistic.
IF we get an upgrade I would guess that it is a creature that knocks Monastery Swiftspear out of the deck, but I dont think it will happen any time soon.
Cast the first Searing Blaze and hold priority, then cast the second one with first still on the stack. Searing Blaze targets both player and creature. Removing the creature in response will not cause the 3 damage to player to fizzle as long as both targets were legal when Searing Blaze was cast.
I wouldn't get my hopes up for anything new, considering Lightning Strike is currently "too strong".
I highly doubt your UR spell would ever get printed. I think the 3CMC Electrolyze is the cheapest we'll ever see such effects.
I personally want a cantrip-Shock, but that's never going to happen considering how restrictive Needle Drop is. I think cantrip-Lightning Strike would be too powerful, even if it's sorcery speed and player only. Maybe an impulsive draw 3 damage spell at 1 or 2CMC could happen.
This is the right description.
I love it when an opponent kills their own creature and then matter of factly asserts "searing blaze fizzles" and I say "no, no it doesn't". This is why I always share this particular interaction with new burn players, so they don't get screwed by someone telling them something wrong.
You need 2 legal targets to cast it, always, but a spell with multiple targets won't fizzle due to illegal targets unless all targets are made illegal.
4 Goblin Guide
4 Monastery Swiftspear
1 Grim Lavamancer
4 Eidolon of the Great Revel
Zaps
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Lava Spike
4 Rift Bolt
4 Atarka's Command
4 Boros Charm
4 Searing Blaze
4 Lightning Helix
3 Arid Mesa
3 Bloodstained Mire
3 Wooded Foothills
1 Scalding Tarn
3 Mountain
2 Sacred Foundry
2 Inspiring Vantage
2 Stomping Ground
2 Kor Firewalker
2 Deflecting Palm
4 Destructive Revelry
2 Path to Exile
2 Relic of Progenitus
3 Skullcrack
Additional discussion on the topic can be found here: http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/magic-fundamentals/magic-rulings/magic-rulings-archives/284416-double-searing-blaze
Relevant question for me as a I am just now getting back into Magic after a very long hiatus and aspects related to rulings, priority, and the stack are all
a bit fuzzy. The linked rulings discussion goes on to explain that you must 'retain priority' in order to legally cast the two Searing Blaze.
Initially I was thinking that this would be the order of events:
But my reading is that the proper sequence would be:
Appreciate the discussion!