Any time you can kill a permanent that costs four or more mana with Beast Within, you are ahead of the game. The lower your cube's average mana cost, the worse it gets.
Any time you can kill a permanent that costs four or more mana with Beast Within, you are ahead of the game.
I don't think that's really true at all.
I mean, if I pay 3 mana and lose a card to turn their 4-drop into a 3/3, I'd consider myself pretty behind. I mean, nobody plays Pongify, and that costs 3 times less mana than Beast Within. The reason why it's bad is that downgrading a creature sucks compared to removing a creature, and it's rarely worth a card just to reduce the power of their threat. Now Beast Within is better than Pongify because it can target a whole bunch of different permanent types, but the theory still applies. I don't want to spend resources and cards to turn their threat into ...another threat.
Why not? Unless you're going to lose the game to a 3/3, it's always worth it to me because I make the decision on when to play it. I pick when my opponent gets a beast instead of a Jace2 or Sword of Body and Mind. It's not "another" threat. It's a lesser threat. And green is a color that is freaking amazing at dealing with lesser threats.
Beast Within ranks in that second tier of removal after you get past all of green's 187 creatures and whatever cheap instant spell you enjoy cubing. At a certain size, this is an invaluable effect to have. And there are so many game-winning bombs that demand an answer in cube that a 3/3 is just insignificant compared to those, honestly.
I agree that a 3/3 beast is less of a threat than a Sword. But downgrading a threat from something to a 3/3 isn't worth three mana and a card from me when I can deal with the threat permanently in a more effective way. I'd rather Bramblecrush the threat away forever than turn their threat into a different threat. A 3/3 is still a legitimate creature for your opponent to have in play. Maybe at 720 I'd feel different, but my 2nd color can deal with their creatures (as can my superior green creatures) and green has no shortage of ways to deal with noncreature targets my opponent has out.
I think this card is at its best in EDH where a 3/3 is a relatively small threat. A 3/3 in a normal 1v1 game is no slouch though. In my experience Beast Within is usually a 2 for 1. One card to deal with the permanent, and another to deal with the 3/3. While the effect is nice, I don't think it's worth that.
It's been about 4 years since the last comment for this card. While I do think Song of the Dryads is superior, I'm assuming this card's stock has increased as the average power level of cubes have grown since. Have your opinions changed about this card in these last 4 years?
We've gotten better removal all across the cube so I don't see any particular need for this. Also, the drawback is steeper now since we've been getting more aggressive cards.
I think Reclamation Sage does a lot of what Beast Within wanted to do, plus it's easier to pressure planeswalkers by being more aggressive or going wide.
It's a bit too swingy for my liking. It seems like for every time you don't care about the 3/3, there's another where the 3/3 ****s you up. There's too much variance for my liking i.e. the result of the removal is entirely dependent on how the board is developed, whereas most other removal spells let you remove with minimal draw back from whatever else is happening. In slower cubes where the pressure of a 3/3 isn't as brutal it can do a lot better--see: the MODO legendary cube, iterations of the MODO legacy cube where aggro is heavily stifled--but it's too often relegated to SBs in a lot of the cubes I've played in.
Essentially, I'd rather run no answer than run an answer which blows up in the caster's face too often.
The drawback on Beast Within is too steep, a 3/3 is a viable enough threat that you're usually giving your opponent a 2-for-1. There are plenty of options for noncreature removal out there that are already in most cubes, but if you're looking to add some creature removal to your green section you might try Utopia Vow, Epic Confrontation, or Nature's Way.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
465 card Unpowered cube thread. Draft it here and I'll be happy to return the favor.
450 card Peasant cube thread. Draft it here.
It's been about 4 years since the last comment for this card. While I do think Song of the Dryads is superior, I'm assuming this card's stock has increased as the average power level of cubes have grown since. Have your opinions changed about this card in these last 4 years?
I... think I like Beast Within more, to be honest?
It's certainly not a card for every deck and a deck packing Beast Within has to be cognizant that a 3/3 on board can represent a real threat, and someone including Beast Within in their deck has to realize how that puzzle works itself out. For example, a deck that only has a few cards/creatures that can effectively deal with a 3/3 likely isn't going to want to play it, but decks that don't care about the 3/3, I've found, play it quite well. Those decks also can have a board state where a single permanent like a planeswalker, Moat, etc can change the dynamic of the game, and suddenly that's one of the few cards that really matters.
Because of that, I've found that it's not for every deck and it's one that can certainly backfire, but I haven't really found too many scenarios where it really blows up in someone's face. It's obviously not "an instant speed Vindicate" as people may have thought (in Standard when it was initially shown) but it's a nice one; if you end up including it, see with your drafters how often the drawback is a thing. Sometimes it is. But it probably isn't as much as you think (which I ended up finding out.)
Usman's right in that there are certainly decks that are better prepared to deal with the drawback than others, so it can't freely be tossed into anything. I like pairing it with threaten effects (particularly Sarkhan Vol) when I'm guest drafting another cube list. I guess I've been too hurt by the drawback in too many situations, and I've found myself enjoying Song of the Dryads more, but it does lose some of the utility that Beast Within grants, given that it's an instant and it can also target your own permanents.
I haven't cubed Beast Within for years, but I really like Song of the Dryads. Sees heavy play in mono green and Simic decks. They were not close in power level in my experience. One of the qualities I seek in removal spells is to be able to pull even with them when I am behind, and BW lacks that. Feels like a dead card against fast decks and bad in them.
I haven't cubed Beast Within for years, but I really like Song of the Dryads. Sees heavy play in mono green and Simic decks. They were not close in power level in my experience. One of the qualities I seek in removal spells is to be able to pull even with them when I am behind, and BW lacks that. Feels like a dead card against fast decks and bad in them.
Even if that's the case (that it's bad against fast decks) - doesn't that apply to other high-cost cards like Ugin, Sundering Titan and Emrakul, the Promised End which get sideboarded out in games 2 (and 3) where they're bad in that matchup? There's an argument that those cards are more powerful than Beast Within, but isn't that kinda a given of cards in certain matchups?
Even if that's the case (that it's bad against fast decks) - doesn't that apply to other high-cost cards like Ugin, Sundering Titan and Emrakul, the Promised End which get sideboarded out in games 2 (and 3) where they're bad in that matchup? There's an argument that those cards are more powerful than Beast Within, but isn't that kinda a given of cards in certain matchups?
My point was lost. I think Song does not suffer from these limitations, and is a better card as a result.
I don't think your point was lost, I think Usman is saying that a better card existing doesn't diminish the need for a second version even if a second version is worse in a certain match up, and he's saying that he finds Beast Within performing well enough in the other match ups to deserve a spot in his cube. Clearly YMMV as Beast Within isn't a staple or close to it, but if you're looking for redundancy like Usman might be then Beast Within would be that second version albeit with a match up where it doesn't work as well.
I don't think your point was lost, I think Usman is saying that a better card existing doesn't diminish the need for a second version even if a second version is worse in a certain match up, and he's saying that he finds Beast Within performing well enough in the other match ups to deserve a spot in his cube. Clearly YMMV as Beast Within isn't a staple or close to it, but if you're looking for redundancy like Usman might be then Beast Within would be that second version albeit with a match up where it doesn't work as well.
yeeeeeeepppppppppppppp, exact-a-mundo
Also it seems a bit reductionist to say that the cards perform the same in other matchups (I'd much rather have BW in slower matchups due to being able to hold up counter magic and not ramping the opponent) and that BW being bad in fast matchups makes it worse overall.
As I moved away from a lot of "must answer" cards in my midrange list (thinking high powered enchantments/artifacts specifically), the need to hit a critical mass of these sorts of removal cards dropped and it really highlighted how weak ones like this are outside being janky versatile answers in desperate situations. As creature removal, Beast Within has always been miserable IMO as you can splash pretty much any other color and find something better.
I could see this having more of a home in my combo list though and I can definitely see the appeal in very high powered lists with many broken things that have to be removed. It's also a decent answer to walkers (something I don't run in either of my lists). Still, it's pretty side board specific.
As far as the comparison to Song of the Dryads. I've flip flopped on that many times. I don't think one is necessarily better than the other. The biggest problem with enchantment type removal (O-Ring suffers from this too) is the conditional nature of it. If someone can answer your Song, it's often a blowout loss for you. If my deck can handle creatures easily and just needs a versatile answer to non-creature permanents (and I miss virtually every other choice out there), Beast Within is something I'll consider over Song.
I don't think your point was lost, I think Usman is saying that a better card existing doesn't diminish the need for a second version even if a second version is worse in a certain match up, and he's saying that he finds Beast Within performing well enough in the other match ups to deserve a spot in his cube. Clearly YMMV as Beast Within isn't a staple or close to it, but if you're looking for redundancy like Usman might be then Beast Within would be that second version albeit with a match up where it doesn't work as well.
yeeeeeeepppppppppppppp, exact-a-mundo
Also it seems a bit reductionist to say that the cards perform the same in other matchups (I'd much rather have BW in slower matchups due to being able to hold up counter magic and not ramping the opponent) and that BW being bad in fast matchups makes it worse overall.
I was trying to condense my argument as I thought I was misinterpreted. You said you prefer BW (or not? there was a question mark) but haven't brought arguments for that claim until now. I think
Those decks also can have a board state where a single permanent like a planeswalker, Moat, etc can change the dynamic of the game, and suddenly that's one of the few cards that really matters.
Applies to Song as well. I was referring specifically to the comparison in my comment, and not about whether or not BW merits inclusion as a second version of the effect. I am not saying something general as cards that are bad against aggressive decks are bad inclusions, I'm highlighting what I think is an advantage Song has over BW.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As for not being instant, at least here the overlap between decks that pack permission to decks that can comfortably contain a 3/3 before the late game is small. Even in said decks there are common situations where I'd rather tap out than have to deal with a 3/3, or I'm just casting Song when I already have mana for it + counter backup. Ramping them is definitely a drawback. They usually do not play green (if you play Song/BW you are probably heavy green yourself) so it is effectively a colorless mana. Turning a threat into a mana source is generally preferable to turning it into another threat, a stretch analog would be Pongify vs. Path to Exile. You do not play Song on a mana elf, but that is probably true to all 3 mana answers.
I think Song being maindeckable against a third of the field makes it overall significantly better.
I don't think your point was lost, I think Usman is saying that a better card existing doesn't diminish the need for a second version even if a second version is worse in a certain match up, and he's saying that he finds Beast Within performing well enough in the other match ups to deserve a spot in his cube. Clearly YMMV as Beast Within isn't a staple or close to it, but if you're looking for redundancy like Usman might be then Beast Within would be that second version albeit with a match up where it doesn't work as well.
yeeeeeeepppppppppppppp, exact-a-mundo
Also it seems a bit reductionist to say that the cards perform the same in other matchups (I'd much rather have BW in slower matchups due to being able to hold up counter magic and not ramping the opponent) and that BW being bad in fast matchups makes it worse overall.
I was trying to condense my argument as I thought I was misinterpreted. You said you prefer BW (or not? there was a question mark) but haven't brought arguments for that claim until now. I think
Those decks also can have a board state where a single permanent like a planeswalker, Moat, etc can change the dynamic of the game, and suddenly that's one of the few cards that really matters.
Applies to Song as well. I was referring specifically to the comparison in my comment, and not about whether or not BW merits inclusion as a second version of the effect. I am not saying something general as cards that are bad against aggressive decks are bad inclusions, I'm highlighting what I think is an advantage Song has over BW.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As for not being instant, at least here the overlap between decks that pack permission to decks that can comfortably contain a 3/3 before the late game is small. Even in said decks there are common situations where I'd rather tap out than have to deal with a 3/3, or I'm just casting Song when I already have mana for it + counter backup. Ramping them is definitely a drawback. They usually do not play green (if you play Song/BW you are probably heavy green yourself) so it is effectively a colorless mana. Turning a threat into a mana source is generally preferable to turning it into another threat, a stretch analog would be Pongify vs. Path to Exile. You do not play Song on a mana elf, but that is probably true to all 3 mana answers.
I think Song being maindeckable against a third of the field makes it overall significantly better.
Song is far better than Beast Within, and this is coming from someone who push Beast Within a lot when it was released. 3/3 is just too big and matter too much.
My Cube (DeckStats)
My Pauper Cube: 540 (CubeTutor link!)
Level 1 Judge
I don't think that's really true at all.
I mean, if I pay 3 mana and lose a card to turn their 4-drop into a 3/3, I'd consider myself pretty behind. I mean, nobody plays Pongify, and that costs 3 times less mana than Beast Within. The reason why it's bad is that downgrading a creature sucks compared to removing a creature, and it's rarely worth a card just to reduce the power of their threat. Now Beast Within is better than Pongify because it can target a whole bunch of different permanent types, but the theory still applies. I don't want to spend resources and cards to turn their threat into ...another threat.
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 49th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from MKM!
Beast Within ranks in that second tier of removal after you get past all of green's 187 creatures and whatever cheap instant spell you enjoy cubing. At a certain size, this is an invaluable effect to have. And there are so many game-winning bombs that demand an answer in cube that a 3/3 is just insignificant compared to those, honestly.
My Cube (DeckStats)
My Pauper Cube: 540 (CubeTutor link!)
Level 1 Judge
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 49th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from MKM!
360 Unpowered Cube | Cubetutor
450 Unpowered Cube Cobra
I think Reclamation Sage does a lot of what Beast Within wanted to do, plus it's easier to pressure planeswalkers by being more aggressive or going wide.
My High Octane Unpowered Cube on CubeCobra
Essentially, I'd rather run no answer than run an answer which blows up in the caster's face too often.
Also, follow us on twitter! @TurnOneMagic
450 card Peasant cube thread. Draft it here.
I... think I like Beast Within more, to be honest?
It's certainly not a card for every deck and a deck packing Beast Within has to be cognizant that a 3/3 on board can represent a real threat, and someone including Beast Within in their deck has to realize how that puzzle works itself out. For example, a deck that only has a few cards/creatures that can effectively deal with a 3/3 likely isn't going to want to play it, but decks that don't care about the 3/3, I've found, play it quite well. Those decks also can have a board state where a single permanent like a planeswalker, Moat, etc can change the dynamic of the game, and suddenly that's one of the few cards that really matters.
Because of that, I've found that it's not for every deck and it's one that can certainly backfire, but I haven't really found too many scenarios where it really blows up in someone's face. It's obviously not "an instant speed Vindicate" as people may have thought (in Standard when it was initially shown) but it's a nice one; if you end up including it, see with your drafters how often the drawback is a thing. Sometimes it is. But it probably isn't as much as you think (which I ended up finding out.)
I used to write cube articles on StarCityGames, now for GatheringMagic and podcast about cube (w/Antknee42.)
My 630 Card Powered Cube
My Article - "Cube Design Philosophy"
My Article - "Mana Short: A study in limited resource management."
My 49th Set (P)review - Discusses my top 20 Cube cards from MKM!
The list on cube cobra
Read my blog on cube - Latest post June 2nd 2022
http://cubetutor.com/cubeblog/993
http://www.cubetutor.com/cubeblog/23690
Even if that's the case (that it's bad against fast decks) - doesn't that apply to other high-cost cards like Ugin, Sundering Titan and Emrakul, the Promised End which get sideboarded out in games 2 (and 3) where they're bad in that matchup? There's an argument that those cards are more powerful than Beast Within, but isn't that kinda a given of cards in certain matchups?
I used to write cube articles on StarCityGames, now for GatheringMagic and podcast about cube (w/Antknee42.)
My point was lost. I think Song does not suffer from these limitations, and is a better card as a result.
The list on cube cobra
Read my blog on cube - Latest post June 2nd 2022
Also, follow us on twitter! @TurnOneMagic
yeeeeeeepppppppppppppp, exact-a-mundo
Also it seems a bit reductionist to say that the cards perform the same in other matchups (I'd much rather have BW in slower matchups due to being able to hold up counter magic and not ramping the opponent) and that BW being bad in fast matchups makes it worse overall.
I used to write cube articles on StarCityGames, now for GatheringMagic and podcast about cube (w/Antknee42.)
I could see this having more of a home in my combo list though and I can definitely see the appeal in very high powered lists with many broken things that have to be removed. It's also a decent answer to walkers (something I don't run in either of my lists). Still, it's pretty side board specific.
As far as the comparison to Song of the Dryads. I've flip flopped on that many times. I don't think one is necessarily better than the other. The biggest problem with enchantment type removal (O-Ring suffers from this too) is the conditional nature of it. If someone can answer your Song, it's often a blowout loss for you. If my deck can handle creatures easily and just needs a versatile answer to non-creature permanents (and I miss virtually every other choice out there), Beast Within is something I'll consider over Song.
http://riptidelab.com/forum/threads/modular-cube-5-colors.800/
Retro combo cube thread
http://riptidelab.com/forum/threads/retro-combo-cube.1454/
I was trying to condense my argument as I thought I was misinterpreted. You said you prefer BW (or not? there was a question mark) but haven't brought arguments for that claim until now. I think
Applies to Song as well. I was referring specifically to the comparison in my comment, and not about whether or not BW merits inclusion as a second version of the effect. I am not saying something general as cards that are bad against aggressive decks are bad inclusions, I'm highlighting what I think is an advantage Song has over BW.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As for not being instant, at least here the overlap between decks that pack permission to decks that can comfortably contain a 3/3 before the late game is small. Even in said decks there are common situations where I'd rather tap out than have to deal with a 3/3, or I'm just casting Song when I already have mana for it + counter backup. Ramping them is definitely a drawback. They usually do not play green (if you play Song/BW you are probably heavy green yourself) so it is effectively a colorless mana. Turning a threat into a mana source is generally preferable to turning it into another threat, a stretch analog would be Pongify vs. Path to Exile. You do not play Song on a mana elf, but that is probably true to all 3 mana answers.
I think Song being maindeckable against a third of the field makes it overall significantly better.
The list on cube cobra
Read my blog on cube - Latest post June 2nd 2022
I was trying to condense my argument as I thought I was misinterpreted. You said you prefer BW (or not? there was a question mark) but haven't brought arguments for that claim until now. I think
Applies to Song as well. I was referring specifically to the comparison in my comment, and not about whether or not BW merits inclusion as a second version of the effect. I am not saying something general as cards that are bad against aggressive decks are bad inclusions, I'm highlighting what I think is an advantage Song has over BW.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As for not being instant, at least here the overlap between decks that pack permission to decks that can comfortably contain a 3/3 before the late game is small. Even in said decks there are common situations where I'd rather tap out than have to deal with a 3/3, or I'm just casting Song when I already have mana for it + counter backup. Ramping them is definitely a drawback. They usually do not play green (if you play Song/BW you are probably heavy green yourself) so it is effectively a colorless mana. Turning a threat into a mana source is generally preferable to turning it into another threat, a stretch analog would be Pongify vs. Path to Exile. You do not play Song on a mana elf, but that is probably true to all 3 mana answers.
I think Song being maindeckable against a third of the field makes it overall significantly better.
The list on cube cobra
Read my blog on cube - Latest post June 2nd 2022
My cube
My cube on Cube tutor
I'm OP_Forever. I'll be putting this in my signature for a while so everyone know I change my nickname.