Question, since Red Elemental Blast was errata'd to be modal: If I target an opponent's blue permanent with REB, can he change the target to a spell on the stack with Misdirection, or does he have to stick with the mode I chose when switching targets?
I don't know if it's the best 75 but this is what I'm taking to a tourney this weekend. There are 2 cards I'd want in the deck that I don't have, Sigarda, Host of Herons and Iona, Shield of Emeria If you want to try a budget version, Haunted Plate Mail and Phyrexian Totem work fine as threats but most of the deck is extremely cheap. The deck is good and can beat any non-dedicated control deck and burn, but it can be vulnerable to artifact hate. You don't need Blood Moon but I like it
Good Luck... I would play at least 3 searing cards in the main. I'm not sure if the deck list is playing a Sensei's Diving Top but I do recommend you should play at least 1 if you don't. I don't seemed the need to play mindbreak since eidolon. But I do like mindbreak as an option to consider and I have it on my reserve sideboard (If you noticed a lot more combo players, yeah, it would be worth playing.)
@BasedFuster Burn mirror is interesting. I do think fetchlandless has a 3 point advantage in a burn mirror. I'm not sure how well Jet is but I can see how a scry advantage may help.
Draft is funny... I picture first draft pick would be a FOW unless there was a FOW, a wasteland and a mana drain in a booster pack (that would be nuts!) lol I remember opening an Italian legends booster pack once and got a mana drain, a kobold, chain lighting and an abyss. I can't imagine how I would draft that. (ok I wouldnt first round draft the kobold)
I know most players do feel the samething. I've been hearing this story back when Vintage was Type 1.
I like running Mindbreak in my board for 2 reasons: Firstly, I get to interact with combo on turn 1. Secondly, I don't want to have to rely on drawing one single card (even if I do run a playset of it) to win the game. If you don't see Eidolon or you have it but your opponent combos turn 1, your opponent has a virtual bye. Also, Eidolon isn't as effective against Belcher or Oops, all spells, since those decks don't need to resolve 9-10 spells to win.
I actually did playtest the burn mirror against a guy playing fetchless burn. There were a few games where he had an advantage and he won just because he was able to put one more creature on the board than I was able to, but I won the majority of the games. Top was really what put me over the edge late-game when both our hands were depleted, since not only was I able to filter for burn spells I needed, there was also a game where I used top to keep myself from drawing Price of Progress in our non-sideboarded games.
Also, I learned some interesting things about Chain Lightning, since this is pretty much the only matchup where the drawback actually becomes relevant. Sometimes, even if my opponent had mana up, he elected not to copy it because he didn't want me copying his copy. When you're actually at a boardstate where you can copy a chain lightning, both player's life totals are likely to be low, and your opponent may easily get lethal on you if you copy his chain lightning.
I like Jet because of the scry tbh, I know we have top though but that's only 2 cards. Jet would most likely be the best card to have in a burn mirror and if I had the space or if burn became widely played I would dedicate some sb slots to Jet just for the mirror.
FOW at mythic wouldn't be so bad if the set had the same MSRP and print run as standard legal sets. Also it wouldn't be hard to enable force in a 2 color draft deck. There's a minimum threshold of blue cards that need to be in a deck to make force playable, I know for 60 cards that number is like 20 something, and I imagine it would be a lot lower for a 40 card draft deck. I'm also assuming cards like Brainstorm will get reprints as well so that would also immensely help.
I'm a relatively newer player and I bought/traded into playsets of FOW, Wasteland, Port, duals, etc and I still want the prices to drop. What's the point in going in and buying these awesome cards if I can't ever play them? There's no major SCG legacy events close to me because I live in the south; most of the big Legacy events are gonna be in the northeast.
yeah, if you're playing in a meta where not a lot of people can afford to play with duals then by all means cut price. My go-to after searing effects would probably be Magma Jet in all honesty if we were to cut all 4 prices.
The mythic flavor is all about powerful cards or legendary creatures with unique abilities or a character that has a very high importance to the story. Guide fits none of these traits to be honest. I honestly think FOW makes sense in the Mythic slot because it's such a legendary card in the game, plus free counterspells are probably something that Wizards doesn't want to happen often in a draft environment.
If Modern/Eternal masters was up to me I'd make the MSRP and print run of these sets the same as Conspiracy or even standard-legal sets. Heck, I'd probably remove duals from the reserved list and put one in every Eternal Masters pack because I'm tired of having no legacy events to attend and I want more players in my area. I hate that exclusivity and hypebeasts are keeping people out of a format that's actually worth playing.
I've had so many games where I've drawn 3+ fireblast, either in my opening hand or through natural draw steps that I've felt like cutting one because I'll never use it before turn 3 anyway. There are also some situations where I really hate topdecking the card. It's a great finisher but also really bad to draw in multiples like Grim Lavamancer is. I'm actually considering cutting a second Fireblast instead of the fourth Price because I never want to draw more than 2 per game.
I had not been lucky with POP... Sometimes I've consider taking POP out of my deck... then there are games that I can deal 8 damage! (which makes me feel happy for having POP). Fireblast multiples never seemed as bad to me as multiples of Rift Bolt. My issue with Rift Bolt is timing, I'm either playing Rift Bolt on turn 1 (no GG in hand) or turn 4... and turn 4 sort of sucks for me. (Turn 3 I'm looking to attack with eidolon and use a searling/bolt to killer a blocker).
I wouldn't be worried about top getting ban hammered for a while though. It's brand new tech, and looking at a lot of recent SCG lists not a lot of people are adopting it right now. Heck, a lot of my friends at the store think it's a bad card to put in the deck.
haha (sorry) but this is how I feel when I talk about Vexing Devil... Anyway I do not to get into VD, but I do want to point out the similarities... I do think Sensei's Divining Top should pick-up by summer.
Although, I'm wondering what a goblin guideless burn deck would look like. I got a gut feeling that GG would be reprinted as a mystic and it won't reduce the second market cost of the card.
Yeah, there's games where the card single-handedly can win the game for you, some games where it's straight up dead, and some where the opponent is forced to play around it. Personally though, I feel like the vast majority of matchups fall into the first and third categories. Forcing your opponent to play around price might also not be as bad as you think as well, since they can potentially lose out on some mana consistency by fetching basics or by wasting their nonbasics. If you're more worried about players who are wasting their nonbasics to dodge price you could probably splash a taiga and punish your opponent for using their wasteland on your land instead of their own (tempt them with wasteland fodder why don't we lol), but this seems rather narrow.
Other cards I was thinking of cutting besides a 4th price for the second top would be either a 2nd Fireblast, a Searing Blaze, or a Rift Bolt. I'm dubious on rift bolt because while it is slow it does let us play around certain cards like Chalice, Spell Pierce, Daze, etc.
Also I doubt guide will be reprinted at mythic, that wouldn't make sense flavor wise. I honestly doubt it would get a reprint in Eternal masters mostly because that could potentially mess up draft balancing.
I've had so many games where I've drawn 3+ fireblast, either in my opening hand or through natural draw steps that I've felt like cutting one because I'll never use it before turn 3 anyway. There are also some situations where I really hate topdecking the card. It's a great finisher but also really bad to draw in multiples like Grim Lavamancer is. I'm actually considering cutting a second Fireblast instead of the fourth Price because I never want to draw more than 2 per game.
I wouldn't be worried about top getting ban hammered for a while though. It's brand new tech, and looking at a lot of recent SCG lists not a lot of people are adopting it right now. Heck, a lot of my friends at the store think it's a bad card to put in the deck.
I have another fetch I can run to fuel Searing Blaze and Grim Lavamancer however 12 is probably enough, right? Also would you run a single searing blaze and 2 grim or 3 grim?
I think 12 is more than enough of fetchlands. Usually 8 is a good number too. If you think you need more fetchlands to fuel Searing Blaze than you might need to pop your fetchlands slower.
Other stuff. Grim Lavamancer is good but I tend to think the Searing cards (Blaze and Blood) seemed to work better, at a point that we don't need to play or have room to play Grim. I do think at least 3 Searing Cards (Blaze or Blood) should be included to any burn design. I do think both cards are good and it might also be a good idea to play a mixture of both (just in case the opponent does something to take one out).
Price of Progress is one of those awesome must have spells that seem too awesome for us not to play but it can be a dead card. I do want to say that 4 is too many! You just don't want to start the opening hand with 2 price of progress and then find out that the opponent is purposely holding back on their duals because they are expecting POP from you. The best numbers of POP is 2 to 3. Usually if your playing 2 one can be placed in the sideboard.
1 Sensei's Divining Top - All you need is one (awesome card)... some players do play 2 Divining Tops so they can beef-up Swiftspear in late game play.
I would honestly cut a fireblast over a price of progress. Fireblast is the worst card to have multiples of in your hand IMO. They're dead until late game and unless you're flooded out the wazoo you usually can't cast more than 2. That said, I've cut both a Fireblast and POP (per your suggestions) for 2 tops, simply because I want a better chance of drawing one. I like that card too much to simply never see it during gameplay.
The thing about swiftspear's prowess triggers is that we were going to cast these spells anyway, but now we get an additional benefit from casting them. If our opponent decides to answer a fatass swiftspear when Eidolon is on the board, more power to them because either way they're taking tons of damage and will continue to take damage until they make the correct play and remove Eidolon.
The reason we play Eidolon main instead of Pyrostatic pillar is because Eidolon can attack. The Pillar build you mention most likely ran Devil over Swiftspear because it was a creature heavy sligh build, and there weren't enough spells to justify including Swiftspear. I would argue for putting Lavamancer in the slot Devil occupied, but I personally felt like Devil was included as an afterthought because the player needed more cheap creatures and swiftspear didn't cut it because it ran fewer spells than the typical burn deck. Like someone else said earlier, that deck did well because it ran like 11 pillars, not because it ran Devil.
Can you describe to me how Goblin Guide would interact with Eidolon? Because however you'd describe it, I'd replace Guide with Swiftspear in any given scenario and it would work exactly the same way. I basically treat Swiftspear like it's guides 5-8.
No, a goyf, Tasigur, or angler will outclass both devil AND swiftspear stat wise. You want to deal damage, not just simply stop your opponent from doing so. The problem with Devil isn't even that it doesn't have haste, but that your opponent can decide what to do with the card once you play it. Yeah, they'll take 4 on turn 1... but only if they choose to. Most players will let it stick then remove it. Just because this is an argument from 2012 doesn't make it any less valid. A card isn't good when it lets your opponent make the decisions for your deck because they will choose the worst option for you every time.
To be honest, goblin guide is such a huge staple of this deck that budget players are probably going to have to either run Grim Lavamancer in Guide's slot, or just play a completely different deck altogether. The latter option might be the most viable for most people. Hopefully eternal masters comes with Chain Lightning and goblin guide reprints too, but that does seem like it would mess with draft balancing too much.
Cards like Goyf, Tasigur, and Gurmag Angler are why Devil isn't the correct creature. If your hand is depleted and you topdeck Devil against a board with a 4/5 goyf or a Tasigur your opponent is just gonna laugh at you as they let your weaker Devil stick around. Sure guide and swiftspear have the same problem, but they also have better early game potential.
You might think Devil is a better turn 1 play than Swiftspear because it has the potential to deal more damage, but I think Swiftspear is better because it has haste. If your opponent lets a Turn 1 devil stick it means that removal is coming and your devil will have dealt 0 damage. If Devil had haste or was even a 3/2 with haste that had the same punisher mechanic the turn 1-2 argument would be viable, but that's not the case here.
If you're really that budget oriented (bauble is like 7-10 bucks a pop still), you might as well play Belcher or Oops all spells because they're faster decks with arguably the same consistency and roughly the same budget as the deck you're trying to build.
Speaking of Primers: I just finished mine, which I have hosted on reddit's r/mtglegacy subreddit. It is a comprehensive and up to date primer on where burn is in today's metagame, and it looks at the history and philosophy of burn as well as looking at matchups. Here's a link if you guys want to check it out!
It's a really good job for such a short time. I do think it needs to mention cards like Vexing Devil.
I've also been experimenting with a swiftspear/bauble build with fair results. I'm not sure if baubles are worth writing about but I do think if players are looking for combo speed this might be the build for them.
Unless you want him to put a section in for "Unplayable cards you shouldn't run" like this primer has, there's no point in talking about Vexing Devil. It's been talked to death and it's time to move on.
If all you're trying to get is a prowess trigger with a cantrip attached to it, you might be better served running Gitaxian Probe, just for the fact that you get to look at your opponent's hand and you get the card immediately as opposed to next turn. However, going back to unplayables, I don't believe cantrips are playable as well (the author of this primer seems to think so too if you read the unplayables section), but for more subtle deck math reasons, since you have to either cut burn spells (and risk getting flooded more often because you're running a 56 card deck with 19 land as opposed to 60) or cut lands (which is also risky for obvious reasons). Cantrips will also mess with your mulligans because they essentially become wildcards that make it extremely difficult to determine whether your hand is keepable or not, especially if you only have a one-lander. Probe isn't as bad because you get to look at your opponent's hand, but it's just a word of caution regardless. The decks that do play Probe also use it as Force fodder.
Furthermore, I may tend to play the deck like it's fast combo sometimes but honestly looking at burn like it is a combo deck seems incorrect, as there are combo decks that are both faster and more consistent through disruption than burn is. I think it's more correct to look at burn as a fair strategy that utilizes some tempo as well. I honestly believe we're closer to a deck like RUG delver than we are to a deck like Storm if you were to plot this deck on a wheel that was divided into Aggro, Midrange, Control, and Combo. Even if you don't agree with this, the fact that there are combo decks that are both faster and more consistent than us means we should probably slow down and try to favor consistency over speed anyway. We're not going to win any races against faster decks by trying to be faster, and we're most likely going to lose win percentage points against slower fair decks because of the reduced consistency that comes from this mindset.
What would your recommended 75 be at the moment? Budget is somewhat of a concern because I don't have a lot of money right now but I do have a decent amount of tradestock. I'll probably proxy up whatever list you give me and see how that goes while I learn the ins and outs of the deck. I just don't want to be playing something that's dated and won't stand a chance in the new meta.
Hey guys, I'm looking to build a new modern deck (was playing elves but the deck is really bad in my local meta at the moment so I've just kind of quit playing for a little bit until I can acquire a new deck to play), I saw an older primer from about last year on this deck and I think the idea and combo is very cool, plus it's inexpensive.
However, I want to see what kind of list you guys would recommend in the new meta to prepare against Eldrazi. The primer I did watch was about a year old, and I just want something more up to date before I decide to invest in this deck. I think with the proper build I could totally blindside the local modern league for the next season.
I did some playtesting with 2 Sensei's Divining top against Death and Taxes and I have to say so far I'm liking the card. I got blown out the first game, but thanks to top at least it was a turn 7 blowout when without it it would have been a turn 3 blowout. The card performed well every time I played it. I noticed it actually becomes a better card after sideboarding, since it felt like I could find my sideboard cards more often with top than without top. The last tournament I was in I drew 0 sideboard cards against both DNT and Dredge, which cost me both matchups.
The biggest reason I like it, however, is that the card actually forces me to change my playstyle and play more conservatively, which, at least against DNT, forces me to actually make correct plays in order to maximize the value out of top. Previously I'd be more combo oriented and play out as much of my hand as possible. Yes, top might trade off speed, but that might not necessarily be a bad thing if it forces me to make the correct plays instead of just dumping my hand ASAP like a noob.
Edit: I thought about Splashing for Revelry some more, and I realized that it would be really bad to play Revelry against DNT even though I'll probably gain against decks that run enchantments for the sole reason that DNT runs wasteland. I need artifact removal to stay competitive against DNT after game 1, so not being able to cast Revelry due to wasteland is just backbreaking. Same goes for the MUD matchup, and I feel like I'll encounter both decks more often than Enchantress, or even the U/W RIP Helm deck that's been doing well locally.
Our local place doesn't do Legacy however at their casual event most bring a legacy deck. My sideboard is more about what I would see from a casual enviroment and is the reason why I'm running access to white for Path. Other than that, thoughts?
You don't need 4 paths (you have plenty of removal main deck), nor do you need a white splash. If anything, if you care about removing enchantments, you're better off splashing green and replacing the Wear/Tears with Destructive Revelry. I don't know your meta, but generally sweepers like Volcanic fallout are unnecessary and probably counterintuitive unless your meta is full of creature decks, in which case you're probably better off running Pyroclasm since most of these creature decks don't run blue.
Assuming you lose the Paths and you have 3 Revelry instead of 2 Wears and 2 Smash, and you don't need sweepers, I've just freed up 7 sideboard slots for you to put in more grave hate and possibly combo hate.
I already have Sigarda and Iona, I don't have blood moon though. What do you suggest I cut from your list to run both?
I like running Mindbreak in my board for 2 reasons: Firstly, I get to interact with combo on turn 1. Secondly, I don't want to have to rely on drawing one single card (even if I do run a playset of it) to win the game. If you don't see Eidolon or you have it but your opponent combos turn 1, your opponent has a virtual bye. Also, Eidolon isn't as effective against Belcher or Oops, all spells, since those decks don't need to resolve 9-10 spells to win.
I actually did playtest the burn mirror against a guy playing fetchless burn. There were a few games where he had an advantage and he won just because he was able to put one more creature on the board than I was able to, but I won the majority of the games. Top was really what put me over the edge late-game when both our hands were depleted, since not only was I able to filter for burn spells I needed, there was also a game where I used top to keep myself from drawing Price of Progress in our non-sideboarded games.
Also, I learned some interesting things about Chain Lightning, since this is pretty much the only matchup where the drawback actually becomes relevant. Sometimes, even if my opponent had mana up, he elected not to copy it because he didn't want me copying his copy. When you're actually at a boardstate where you can copy a chain lightning, both player's life totals are likely to be low, and your opponent may easily get lethal on you if you copy his chain lightning.
FOW at mythic wouldn't be so bad if the set had the same MSRP and print run as standard legal sets. Also it wouldn't be hard to enable force in a 2 color draft deck. There's a minimum threshold of blue cards that need to be in a deck to make force playable, I know for 60 cards that number is like 20 something, and I imagine it would be a lot lower for a 40 card draft deck. I'm also assuming cards like Brainstorm will get reprints as well so that would also immensely help.
I'm a relatively newer player and I bought/traded into playsets of FOW, Wasteland, Port, duals, etc and I still want the prices to drop. What's the point in going in and buying these awesome cards if I can't ever play them? There's no major SCG legacy events close to me because I live in the south; most of the big Legacy events are gonna be in the northeast.
The mythic flavor is all about powerful cards or legendary creatures with unique abilities or a character that has a very high importance to the story. Guide fits none of these traits to be honest. I honestly think FOW makes sense in the Mythic slot because it's such a legendary card in the game, plus free counterspells are probably something that Wizards doesn't want to happen often in a draft environment.
If Modern/Eternal masters was up to me I'd make the MSRP and print run of these sets the same as Conspiracy or even standard-legal sets. Heck, I'd probably remove duals from the reserved list and put one in every Eternal Masters pack because I'm tired of having no legacy events to attend and I want more players in my area. I hate that exclusivity and hypebeasts are keeping people out of a format that's actually worth playing.
Yeah, there's games where the card single-handedly can win the game for you, some games where it's straight up dead, and some where the opponent is forced to play around it. Personally though, I feel like the vast majority of matchups fall into the first and third categories. Forcing your opponent to play around price might also not be as bad as you think as well, since they can potentially lose out on some mana consistency by fetching basics or by wasting their nonbasics. If you're more worried about players who are wasting their nonbasics to dodge price you could probably splash a taiga and punish your opponent for using their wasteland on your land instead of their own (tempt them with wasteland fodder why don't we lol), but this seems rather narrow.
Other cards I was thinking of cutting besides a 4th price for the second top would be either a 2nd Fireblast, a Searing Blaze, or a Rift Bolt. I'm dubious on rift bolt because while it is slow it does let us play around certain cards like Chalice, Spell Pierce, Daze, etc.
Also I doubt guide will be reprinted at mythic, that wouldn't make sense flavor wise. I honestly doubt it would get a reprint in Eternal masters mostly because that could potentially mess up draft balancing.
I wouldn't be worried about top getting ban hammered for a while though. It's brand new tech, and looking at a lot of recent SCG lists not a lot of people are adopting it right now. Heck, a lot of my friends at the store think it's a bad card to put in the deck.
I would honestly cut a fireblast over a price of progress. Fireblast is the worst card to have multiples of in your hand IMO. They're dead until late game and unless you're flooded out the wazoo you usually can't cast more than 2. That said, I've cut both a Fireblast and POP (per your suggestions) for 2 tops, simply because I want a better chance of drawing one. I like that card too much to simply never see it during gameplay.
The reason we play Eidolon main instead of Pyrostatic pillar is because Eidolon can attack. The Pillar build you mention most likely ran Devil over Swiftspear because it was a creature heavy sligh build, and there weren't enough spells to justify including Swiftspear. I would argue for putting Lavamancer in the slot Devil occupied, but I personally felt like Devil was included as an afterthought because the player needed more cheap creatures and swiftspear didn't cut it because it ran fewer spells than the typical burn deck. Like someone else said earlier, that deck did well because it ran like 11 pillars, not because it ran Devil.
Can you describe to me how Goblin Guide would interact with Eidolon? Because however you'd describe it, I'd replace Guide with Swiftspear in any given scenario and it would work exactly the same way. I basically treat Swiftspear like it's guides 5-8.
To be honest, goblin guide is such a huge staple of this deck that budget players are probably going to have to either run Grim Lavamancer in Guide's slot, or just play a completely different deck altogether. The latter option might be the most viable for most people. Hopefully eternal masters comes with Chain Lightning and goblin guide reprints too, but that does seem like it would mess with draft balancing too much.
You might think Devil is a better turn 1 play than Swiftspear because it has the potential to deal more damage, but I think Swiftspear is better because it has haste. If your opponent lets a Turn 1 devil stick it means that removal is coming and your devil will have dealt 0 damage. If Devil had haste or was even a 3/2 with haste that had the same punisher mechanic the turn 1-2 argument would be viable, but that's not the case here.
If you're really that budget oriented (bauble is like 7-10 bucks a pop still), you might as well play Belcher or Oops all spells because they're faster decks with arguably the same consistency and roughly the same budget as the deck you're trying to build.
Unless you want him to put a section in for "Unplayable cards you shouldn't run" like this primer has, there's no point in talking about Vexing Devil. It's been talked to death and it's time to move on.
If all you're trying to get is a prowess trigger with a cantrip attached to it, you might be better served running Gitaxian Probe, just for the fact that you get to look at your opponent's hand and you get the card immediately as opposed to next turn. However, going back to unplayables, I don't believe cantrips are playable as well (the author of this primer seems to think so too if you read the unplayables section), but for more subtle deck math reasons, since you have to either cut burn spells (and risk getting flooded more often because you're running a 56 card deck with 19 land as opposed to 60) or cut lands (which is also risky for obvious reasons). Cantrips will also mess with your mulligans because they essentially become wildcards that make it extremely difficult to determine whether your hand is keepable or not, especially if you only have a one-lander. Probe isn't as bad because you get to look at your opponent's hand, but it's just a word of caution regardless. The decks that do play Probe also use it as Force fodder.
Furthermore, I may tend to play the deck like it's fast combo sometimes but honestly looking at burn like it is a combo deck seems incorrect, as there are combo decks that are both faster and more consistent through disruption than burn is. I think it's more correct to look at burn as a fair strategy that utilizes some tempo as well. I honestly believe we're closer to a deck like RUG delver than we are to a deck like Storm if you were to plot this deck on a wheel that was divided into Aggro, Midrange, Control, and Combo. Even if you don't agree with this, the fact that there are combo decks that are both faster and more consistent than us means we should probably slow down and try to favor consistency over speed anyway. We're not going to win any races against faster decks by trying to be faster, and we're most likely going to lose win percentage points against slower fair decks because of the reduced consistency that comes from this mindset.
However, I want to see what kind of list you guys would recommend in the new meta to prepare against Eldrazi. The primer I did watch was about a year old, and I just want something more up to date before I decide to invest in this deck. I think with the proper build I could totally blindside the local modern league for the next season.
Thanks for your help guys!
The biggest reason I like it, however, is that the card actually forces me to change my playstyle and play more conservatively, which, at least against DNT, forces me to actually make correct plays in order to maximize the value out of top. Previously I'd be more combo oriented and play out as much of my hand as possible. Yes, top might trade off speed, but that might not necessarily be a bad thing if it forces me to make the correct plays instead of just dumping my hand ASAP like a noob.
Edit: I thought about Splashing for Revelry some more, and I realized that it would be really bad to play Revelry against DNT even though I'll probably gain against decks that run enchantments for the sole reason that DNT runs wasteland. I need artifact removal to stay competitive against DNT after game 1, so not being able to cast Revelry due to wasteland is just backbreaking. Same goes for the MUD matchup, and I feel like I'll encounter both decks more often than Enchantress, or even the U/W RIP Helm deck that's been doing well locally.
You don't need 4 paths (you have plenty of removal main deck), nor do you need a white splash. If anything, if you care about removing enchantments, you're better off splashing green and replacing the Wear/Tears with Destructive Revelry. I don't know your meta, but generally sweepers like Volcanic fallout are unnecessary and probably counterintuitive unless your meta is full of creature decks, in which case you're probably better off running Pyroclasm since most of these creature decks don't run blue.
Assuming you lose the Paths and you have 3 Revelry instead of 2 Wears and 2 Smash, and you don't need sweepers, I've just freed up 7 sideboard slots for you to put in more grave hate and possibly combo hate.