Volcanic Strength is a pretty big gamble a lot of the time and honestly doesn't promote a very skill-intensive style of play. Much of the time it will just be a question of whether they have the Mortars or not. If they do you will very likely fall too far behind on both cards and board position to recover (remember, you're forgoing playing another creature/removal spell to cast this), if they do not then you probably mised a free win. The exceptions being if you can put it on a Stromkirk Noble when he's already a 2/2 and can attack that turn to become a 5/5 or a Frostburn Weird but then you're banking on drawing specific two-card combos (and hoping for the Noble to survive to that point) which isn't the most reliable of plans. I could see it going up in value with Boros Reckoner though, since even if they kill it in response you still should be even on cards and if they don't then you've basically built a better Thundermaw Hellkite.
Thragtusk doesn't promote skill intensive play, but hey, when it's legit, it's legit.
Volcanic Strength leads to some serious blowouts. The question of "do they have it" is irrelevant if you get to connect even one time with an x/2, and if you untap with a Hellrider in play and a Strength in hand it's most definitely GG.
I have seen some players board a 1 of Volatile Rig. Is that some sort of anti-sweeper technology? I guess it beats Restoration Angel straight up, and if they kill it, it might hit them for another four. Haven't seen anything written about it anywhere though.
Ari Lax wrote about it, saying that he disliked Archwing Dragon, and that some other obscene four drop should be in it's place, and made the recommendation of Volatile Rig. His words were something like, "Volitile Rig maybe but it seems eh."
I think I am just biased against it, I don't like creature enchantments. Are you using them just on the play? What ae the electrickery for? Lingering Souls?
Volcanic Strenght is an absolute blowout in the mirror when you put it on a Stromkirk Noble on turn two. It then becomes bigger than any removal spell they play, unless they sided in Mortars (which I do for this very reason). If they don't have the Mortars though, it becomes increasingly more card advantage, as they have to invest more cards to kill your Noble.
The part about learning from the past though, you mis-understand my point. I don't mind learning from the past. I can tell you though, that basing card evaluations around narrow cards that were successful in past formats is a very bad trap to fall into. Flames was good in that format, but it was a very narrow card and it filled a very specific role in that format. You also missed the part where I mentioned that the application it was used in was the can't gain life part, which, well, Skull Crack. It wasn't because the card dealt opponents 4 damage. If you want that comparison, the better card is Char, which also could deal the damage to creatures.
I watched the Naya Humans deck leave blockers back against the mono red deck because they knew if they survived to the mid game at a reasonable life total, their guys off the top were more valuable than the red deck. This was in round 7ish of the SCG Open this past weekend, watching the guy who won the tournament play another friend of mine so that also may have something to do with it. I've actually played against Naya Humans exactly 0 times so...
I didn't take the time to read what you responded with, mostly because you mentioned holes in logic, and I can definitely agree there were holes in logic. Like I said, I'd been working on that post between and during League of Legends games, so my train of thought was definitely interrupted. I'll go back and read it and respond, but I'm on a binge right now so I'm mostly absent minded at the moment. I will say that what Z said is more or less my argument summed up, I just haven't been in a discussion mode in a long time (being as I just got out of the Navy, where discussion is much less supported than in reality :P, and Z has a better way of wording things anyway).
This post may be all over the place since I'm typing my reply from skimming, then I'm going to reread what you wrote and edit.
Firstly, I actually just wrote a mini-article with 3 large paragraphs saying why guildgates are good and people don't understand them. Caverns are actually the aweful cards because they limit your stonewrights, control players side out there counters, and you'd rather have a utility land that impacts the board. You might have willfully chosen to ignore the percentages I posted, but with 8 white sources, you miss casting charm only 1 out of 4 games on the play and less then 1 of 5 with 10 white sources.
To understand how good charm is, I say you time travel backwards 6 or seven years and play with some flames of the blood hand. That format had a creature called Loxodon hiearch that was a 4/4 for 4 that gained 4 upon entering the battlefield. It was supposed to be a stud. The Finals of the standard pro tour was Gruul vs Zoo and I think both decks had a total of 8 flames of the firebrand between main and side. 4 damage instants kill people. That's why you play them.
Since you want a list, I'll show you what I've been testing, at least until my 'Trice stopped working:
No pillar. I'm faster then zombies so it's not important there. That and I have lifegain for this matchup in spark trooper. I'm playing spark trooper and tricky faith's shield so I've done very well in the mirror~ that and I didn't cut my pyreheart wolves like some people >_>. Boros guildgates because it's a solid card. I gain percentage against control by not having pillar in my mainboard and FS lets me randomly shrug off detention sphere.
Really, your arguments about charm being bad against control decks are so bad. When is burn ever good against control decks? When it kills them. If it can't effectively be used to kill your opponent by going upstairs, it's dead in hand. Charm deals more base damage then any other burn spell therefore is less dead versus control then any other burn spell. That in addition to being a counterspel to supreme verdict which nothing else effectively does for our deck(rootborn defense being only sideboardable and bad, nevermore being an enchantment that is relatively narrow).
The only matchup where having charm instead of pillar might be annoying is against mana dork.dec and even that's not highly likely since most Pilgrim decks are likely going to play 10+ shocks making the 4 damage effect very valuable since they'll be hurting themselves with there manabase more often. And again, pillar only would interact with 2-3 cards in there deck: Avacyn's Pilgrim, maybe Arbor Elf, and parts of Huntmaster of the Fells. Charm intereacts with there face at twice the efficiency and gives you a combat trick.
First, guildgates are pretty terrible. It always comes into play tapped. It actually takes hands that normally are keepers because you have some decent one drops and a few two's and turn them into correct mulligans because your second land could be a guild gate. They also are really bad to have in your deck if you plan to mulligan aggressively because every time you go down a card, your guild gate gets that much worse... i.e, you go to six, you have a smaller chance to have multiple lands in your hand, and if your only land, or two, is a guild gate, you most certainly are no longer faster than zombies. Also, since your list is running Stronghold, you now have three lands out of twenty four that can't cast a turn one guy.
Now, my arguments about Charm vs. Control. You know when 4 damage to the dome is bad? When they're at 15 and you don't have a board position or cards in your hand. Your deck already has Spark Trooper or w//e, which is 6 damage, one time and doesn't create a lasting board position. Boros Charm is at it's best when you have a board position that is worth answering. It's sweet on turn six when you can Charm your guy and do 12, but that's about it...
Now, when else is Charm good against control? When they have Supreme Verdict. So, the bant decks have access to it on three, the esper decks on four. Lets say hypothetically we're on the play and we have Charm in hand on turn four. We have Hellrider which can take them to two or so, which leaves our Charm up to kill them next turn. This is the optimal line of play. If they wrath our board, we kill them with Charm. We also would have killed them with Pillar, with Spear, with any haste guy... so, Boros Charm isn't the answer here. So, what if we don't tap out on four for Hellrider and keep up Boros Charm mana? Then they untap and... Well, they aren't in super trouble so they are probably going to cast a Lingering Souls, or a Detention Sphere, or miracle a Terminus. They could also just cast a Faithmender or Thragtusk. Chances are you aren't going to "boros charm" them out here because, well, just as you understand optimal lines of play, so must you give credit to your opponents.
Then there is the Double Strike. This is actually the mode that I think is most effective. It can provide some sick beats, and can be worth more than the normal four points of damage when put on a Reckoner or a Hellrider. It's also good for "removal" when paired with some smaller guys. Here's the catch though, generally when using it as a removal spell you are 2 for 1'ing yourself, and preventing further damage. Lets use the "cackler trade for 5" argument. If you have Pillar here, you can get rid of a large number of relevant creatures, such as Huntmaster of the Fells, Champion of the Parish, Ash Zealot, Lightning Mauler, etc. These are all important cards. Now, Pillar out right kills these guys before combat, so your 5 points of damage turns into 7 points. If you have Boros Charm, you are still only dealing 5 damage to your opponent this turn, and you are down a card to save your Cackler. Saving a Cackler... Is that Cackler worth 4 points of Damage?
Boros Charm has the same major draw-back that Skull Crack does, it doesn't target creatures. The reason it's playable main deck at all is because it has other options that kind of make up for that, and can provide blowouts... if the situation is correct. I fully stand by the fact that Boros Charm is not even remotely good enough to warrant a switch from Mono Red to Boros, because even in Boros I would run a max of two charms main deck, and only side in more if Naya Humans became a bigger portion of the meta.
See, the thing about Magic is I doubt very many people on these forums have been playing as long as I have. When Flames was legal, and Heirarch was legal, I played during that standard. I played when Pulse of the Forge was legal. I played when the die roll determined the winner, in standard, because games ended on turn one. Have you ever played with Curse Scroll? My first real deck had four of them in it... I also had the privilege of playing Mogg Flunkies when they were good. The key is not trying to rehash the past. The meta where Flames was legal was good because there was enough burn that you could realistically burn your opponent out. Flames was important because going into that particular tournament the Beach House deck that both players were well aware of was a Heirarch BGW deck that had a very midrange feel. The deck was slow enough that you could actually lean pretty hard on your burn spells, and usually the first Flames was enough to end the game. That pro tour, and format, are completely different than this format. That was actually the first pro tour I ever attended. I didn't play, but three of my close friends were playing and I have family out there anyway so it was a no-brainer for me to attend the first exotic PT. In fact, the reason why Flames was so strong was because of its similarities to Skull Crack and not Boros Charm.
It's been like, four games of League of Legends that I've been working on this post so I kind of lost my train of thought, so I'll sum it up as:
If this card becomes nothing more than a burn 4 to the face against control, then I see this card easily and quickly being replaced by other burn spells. The utility that this provides in R/x mirrors is actually less than that of Searing Spear, and the sacrifices you have to make in order to play this card are substantial. I want my burn spells to act as removal in this format, not finish the game. If I have to throw a Spear at their face, I will, but more often than not, having a burn spell means I'm getting my dudes through for more damage than I otherwise would.
MOST IMPORTANTLY Is that I believe that card disadvantage is bad, and I believe most of the time you will be using Boros Charm as a psuedo removal spell will involve you trading one of your small dudes and the Charm for one of their medium sized dudes. If instead you had Spear or even Volley here, you should be able to avoid having to 2 for 1 yourself.
We're within a few cards of each other in our 60, and probably in our 75 as well (I haven't settled on a sideboard). I have 1 less burn spell and 1 less Stonewright for + 2 Pyreheart; your curve is more classical, but I think it might be appropriate to lean on the extra Pyrehearts, even if that means more clunky hands more often. I do feel the card is that good, good enough to maindeck a playset. I think we agree we want the ful number in our 75.
RE: Boros Reckoner
Yep, card is mental. I actually like it enough to want to include Volcanic Strength in my 75 (a card I normally don't like) because that + Reckoner = GG. They can't kill it without using 2 spells, which will possible become a 3-for-2 in our favour, and in the meantime, its dealing them 5 damage a turn, unblockable. That's crazy!
RE: Esper
Its a good deck. I don't know 'how good' because I have seen so many different versions. Will think about it, look at some lists and get back to everyone.
I enjoy Stonewright + Reckoner. If they block, its good for me, if they don't block, then well, that's going to be a significant chunk of damage.
The bolded part is the only completely nonsensical thing in your post, but it is completely nonsensical. I think the term is logical fallacy. If you're going under, at some point, you're perfectly happy to throw away cards for damage. As Z put it once, attacking with your team and losing a cackler in the process is fine because the cackler just became lava-axe. Similarly, it doesn't matter when you play Boros charm because whenever you throw burn at someones face, it means you have a plan for killing them soon. For what it's worth, I'm usually holding hellrider for a turn and charming my opponent if they have charm mana and verdict mana available. This is mostly a terrible situation to theorycraft though because there are to many variables imo.
Furthermore, your argument against boros charm is that something's better. My stance is that boros charm is versatile enough for it to not matter. Pillar of flame is terrible against not-agro. I'm not sure if mizzium mortars is playable maindeck since it can't go upstairs. Skullcrack is probably unplayable mainboard in most Red decks though I could be wrong. Volley is the only card that shares Charms versatily since it's situationally a LOT of damage and can kill creatures. Charm is a lot of damage and situationally kills creatures. The big difference being 2 mana multi-colored vs 3 mana mono-colored.
The white in charm isn't really a problem because mana-bases aren't as shaky as you seem to think. BR zombies has mediocre mana because it wants to curve messenger into hellrider. Dos Rakis has much better mana sinc it only needs a single black mana for two drops, aristocrat and maybe hell-hole flailer and cavern usually does everything you need. Boros would have even better mana since the only maindeck white spells I'd consider playing at least are Charm, Faiths shield(maybe) and the activation on slayers stronghold if I opt to run that instead of crucible. By charm and slayers nature, you don't need the white mana most of the time till turn 4/5. With just the 8 standard duals, you hit white mana turn 3 75% of the time on the play, gaining approximately 3% each turn after that. Adding two guildgates jumps that number to 83% on turn three. And since we're generally going to be playing guys on 3, that buys a draw step which is just more %.
When I'm talking about it being a four drop, I'm saying that you are never holding two up prior to four for Boros Charm tricks. If you are, you risk falling behind the other decks in the format.
You talk about turning Cackler into a Lava Axe, you forget that if you are turning him into a Lava Axe but can instead Spear their guy, you are doing that 9/10 times because it means that you get seven in this turn, and 5 in next turn, instead of five this turn and >5 next turn. Boros Charm doesn't give you that option as often as Searing Spear does, because you are still trading your Cackler away to get rid of their guy because it the two first strike damage won't be enough to kill most things in the format, and you'll end up trading two cards for one. You could make your guys indestructible, but then you are trading one card for 10 damage over two turns, whereas if you had Spear instead, you'd be doing 12 over two turns instead. Then there's always the four to the dome, which is equal to like, 12 points or so over two turns. Not to mention, Boros Charm works pretty poorly with Pyreheart since it gives you less opportunity to set up awkward blocks where you blow them out with indestructible, etc.
The question I want to ask you is, where do you play Boros Charm? You can't get rid of your spears, because you need the removal. You can't really justify playing this over Pillar because you can't cast Boros Charm to kill a mana dork when they are stalling, doesn't exile random black zombies, isn't able to take out an important guy in race in the mirror... So, now you have to start looking at the dudes you want to cut from your lists, but right now your guys are worth more than 4 points of damage more often than they are worth less. Hellrider is obviously busted, so dropping him is out of the question, and you need your 1's and 2's, so now we're at cutting three drops, and in the creature feature match-ups, you really want Pyreheart to give you an advantage, and since you are in Boros, Silverblade provides the double strike already while also being, well, a dude.
This kind of card doesn't really fit into what the aggressive decks are trying to accomplish. I see it fitting best into the midrangey decks like Naya because you end up in creature stand off's a lot and it can let you attack through their board position pretty regularly. It's hard for me to see a card that's actually really commitment involved fitting into hyper aggressive decks, especially when one of the modes seems almost like a blank to me (the four damage) because the cards you would be playing this over are almost always going to be worth more than four points of damage.
To summarize, it's a "4" drop because you aren't playing it before then unless it allows for an absolute blowout. It also prevents you from playing your four drop, so its' application probably doesn't come online until turn 5 which is actually pretty bad against Supreme Verdict decks.
It doesn't really provide utility that other cards in your deck don't already provide, but better. It's generally going to be worth less damage than Searing Spear, unless pointed at the dome... which we don't do often enough to warrant an inclusion.
It also doesn't actually deal with creatures other than situational and awkward combat steps, which can easily be avoided by proper play by your opponent. This is a huge drawback.
Finally, it has a trade off of creating a deck with poor mana in comparison to one with excellent mana and can prevent you from potentially casting important two drops, and preventing you from reasonably being able to play Helion Crucible, which is a non-zero amount of relevance.
I'll more than happily eat my words if the card turns out to be bonkers like the hype, but I don't see it. I haven't seen a single reasonable use of the card that wouldn't be equally accomplished by something else if not better by something else.
Oh, and Cavern can't cast this, which is what helps Dos Rakis mana, and so unless you are running plains that gives you 8 white sources unless you dip into Guildgates which is awful.
Pre-board has turned into a fairly bad matchup against esper so charm is again whatever. Post board, there is actually a lot of incentive to run skullcrack since they've FINALLY adopted dramatic rescue and tribute. When you're on the crack plan, having boros charm helps you attain a critical mass of reach and just end games.
Against control, you're argument against boros charm is faulty. Realistically it's replacing another burn spell in your deck like volley or pillar, both of which range from poop to game ending. I think at this point we've learned if we want to cast hellrider or hold volley. Charm is basically volley in this situation with save my guys being an option instead of morbid fireball and it saves money letting you charm and spear in the same turn for lethal in the corner cases where you think hellrider isn't enough and/or is getting charmed.
The nomenclature of whether or not this is cryptic command good isn't really important so I won't bother to debate that further.
Well, since this is the mono red I wont elaborate much further, as the discussion originally started to discuss whether Boros Charm made mono red obsolete (I think that's what I was responding too), but I still feel like a burn spell against the control decks is going to be mediocre. If this is it's primary function in this match-up, depending on how they build their decks obviously, then it seems like a bunch of other cards actually just fill more useful purposes in more match-ups. The question because how much value do you expect to get out of Boros Charm vs. something else in this spot, and while many people know when to Cast Hellrider and when to Volley, if you are casting Hellrider more often than you are saving mana for Boros Charm, isn't it just better to have something that is more useful in other match-ups?
How much value is Boros Charm giving you in the red mirror? I think the answer is not very much. In the G aggressive match-up, it depends on how often you can swing all in and make your guys indestructible in order to net 4+ damage because if it's not very often, then again there are cards that are better positioned, like Mizzium Mortars (as it kills their dudes instead of pointing 4 at their face, which is usually worth more than 4 points of damage over a few turns). Finally we have Reanimator decks, where this card is actually surprisingly good because it can finish them off if you are trying to race them. Against Control though is where this card should shine, but deck construction can easily lead to decks not being blown out by this card, which means that with proper deck construction the meta can shift to actually blank Boros Charm decks. Remember, the red decks are winning by going under right now, and Boros Charm acts more as a four drop than a two drop because you are never casting it on two (most of the time at least) and generally it's outclassed by cards like Hellrider and Boros Reckoner in turns of how much damage it's worth. So why would you want to succumb to a shaky mana base for a card that is less value than a card like Hellrider?
To me, Boros Charm is a card that is going to be jammed into a ton of decks but ultimately falls off and people start to revert back to Mono red and Dos Rakis.
If you're speaking purely in the context of the mirror, then boros charm is a whatever card. On the play it's nice, on the draw, it's pretty bad. Most everywhere else though it's pretty amazing. When Aurelia's fury was spoiled, I called it the boros cryptic command. I was wrong. That would be boros charm.
Still, I do think there are merits to staying mono-red, mostly a painfree mana base and better stonewrights.
I was responding to the "It's a straight up counterspell against us" comment. It does actually counter Supreme Verdict, which is nice, but at what cost? What if you don't cast Hellrider on four so you can keep this up, and instead of casting Verdict, they cast Terminus and when you Hellrider they Charm it? That's a pretty brutal sequence that Boros Charm doesn't help.
Cryptic Command this is not. Strong, but I would say this is closer to Primal Command in that it does a heck of a lot of work, but sometimes it's just a mediocre lifegain spell.
For the record, the match-ups that Boros Charm is an all star in I'm pretty comfortable with in Mono Red anyway, outside of present day Esper. I think that deck will have to adapt anyway though, so I'm not entirely sure they won't be on some number less than 4 Supreme Verdicts anyway.
I agree with Lauphiette on this one. I like your deck, but I think your assessment of Boros Charm is off. It can be a straight up counterspell against us, that is what I think you are missing. You cast Searing Spear to kill a creature and they respond with Boros Charm. Then of course, if they don't need it for that, they can always use it to hit our dome for 4. 4 damage to a player for 2 mana is a very good proposition.
But that requires them keeping two open on turn 3. That's so bad for them. If they are leaving two open then they aren't committing to the board, and I'll gladly turn Searing Spear into a psuedo time walk. The decks that Boros Charm is good against, it's really good, but I think the evaluations of the card currently are missing what you have to sacrifice in order to keep two up that early. In the late game for that match-up, they are keeping two up while we're tapping out for Hellrider. Who's winning that trade?
Then there is the play where you swing into their dudes, and they make some dumb blocks and Boros Charm to either double strike or save their guys, and you just Spear their guy anyway. It's just such an easy card for aggressive decks to play around, because they have to give up on casting a spell in order to keep the two mana open, and what have we learned about Mana Sinks this season? Boros Charm suffers the same problem Skull Crack does, in that it is completely reactionary in this match-up, therefore, incredibly high tempo loss for potentially no gain. Then there are the games where they only have humans in play and your turn 1 Stromkirk will go the distance and they'll never have a legit Boros Charm play and then you just Rishidan Ported two lands all game from them if they feel like trying to get us.
I want to clarify, I think the card is really good. Easily the best charm. However, I think the evaluations are looking at the card from a point of view that doesn't take into account the actual situations in which you would want to keep two up over playing something else to add to the board presence.
First I'll touch on current Esper. I think the match-up might be our worst, but it is most certainly okay to have a poor match-up in any given metagame. Eventually the format can adapt, and I don't think we have the tools to fight Faithmender regularly, however saving burn spells for him specifically is pretty strong. The Tibalt in my board is incredibly strong in this match-up, as they can't really pressure him, so eventually he's going to take over the game with a series of -4's and you can even -7 if they manage to assemble an army. Waif is at his weakest in this match-up of all the match-ups I side him in for, but the fact that their only reasonable card pre-turn 4 for this guy is Charm makes me still feel like he is correct.
I've been doing some GTC testing offline, and I've found Reckoner to be incredibly strong in Lightning Mauler lists. The fact that he's essentially unblockable in the Naya match-up is pretty insane, as he kills everything they play minus Thragtusk/Angel, and if they block with Thrag they are taking a boatload of damage. The deck has to change a little in order to fit Reckoner in though, including cutting some number of Pyreheart Wolf, though I think keeping the ability to have four post board is something that is important. This is where I am currently for paper post GTC.
I've cut the Waifs from the board for Skullcrack because I feel like it's very strong against the versions of Revelations decks that my crew has been brewing, so whether I play it will depend very much so on how the Sphinx Revelation decks move going forward. The question I've been working on most though is how many Volcanic Strengths I want, because a lot of the red sideboard games are won based turn one guy, two turn Strength go to town. I want the Fourth Pillar for various Black based aggressive decks, and Mortars is still really strong post board. I considered actually running a 23'd land main deck, and putting some of the Mortars in the main instead of the board, but I'm not 100% on that. I kept the two Brimstones because sometimes you're able to get them for five or get a Faithmender if you can bait hard enough.
I don't believe Boros decks will replace mono red. The boros decks are going to get very greedy, and while I love Boros Charm, I have a feeling it's going to disappoint people initially when they realize it's not the second coming of... well, something incredible. Card is insane value, however, I think that the way the meta is shifting a lot of match-ups it's really just going to nug someone for 4. How often do you find yourself wanting to just nug someone for four? Sure it's two mana, but... when we have the option to Spear a guy instead, I'm probably going to do it, and if double strike means my guy is trading instead of just getting through if I had a Spear instead, well... Spear is still really strong.
Here's a question for you guys. What are you doing currently against the Bant Hexproof deck? Just racing? Twice today I've gone all in on the critical turn just to get fogged, and it's a little annoying. Do we have anything special for them I'm missing?
Skull crack verdict: Almost sure it's unplayable maindeck.
100% agree. It's almost completely worse than any other burn spell in the main because more often you aren't pointing it at their face. It is most assuredly sideboard at best. I like it over the other options for the Bant/Revelations lists.
Isn't a ridiculous start exactly what you want in RDW? Don't get me wrong, I would tend to agree with what you said. But most RDW creatures get outclassed by other creatures in the late game. Even a powerhouse like Ash Zealot gets duped in the late game of this format. See all the creatures that get constructed play with toughness 3 or greater.
I would like to try Burning Tree Emissary, but he has some clunky-ness to him - the mana you get off him can't cast everything in your deck. GR can't cast Ash Zealot. GR also can't cast this new awesome Boros Reckoner. I am going to playtest him though, maybe as a 2-3 of, and see what I come up with.
What I meant was, in comparison to the other cards you want to be playing, he is outclassed. Off the top of your deck, he's essentially the worst. A vanilla 2/2 with no benefits if you have no cards in hand. Also, on two if you don't have a Lightning Mauler then at best you are casting a second one drop and passing, which I'll admit is still saucy, but not amazing. What would you play this over? You can't cut your one drops, and if you play him you really want Lightning Mauler in order to have the best opportunity to draw the nuts, so then you'd have to either cut Ash Zealot or cut a three/four drop or a burn spell. I can't see cutting Ash Zealot or Mauler at the two, and with Boros Reckoner, the list is already going to be super tight. So, while he allows for amazing starts turn two, everything has to be aligned for those starts, and the trade of later in the game I think is significant.
My biggest issue is that this is the kind of card that you'd want if you could take advantage of the effect all the time, but I think because of how often you might wiff with it, you want to go ahead and skip this one. However, I could see him in the following mono red shell:
What this aims to do is take complete advantage of the fact that this guy provides you with a free turn 3 play. He replaces himself, so anything that's 2R is suddenly an all-star. Not to mention you start turn 2 GHC, turn three this guy and then a Hellraiser Goblin and you've got a wicked quick start. It also is a free activation for Crucible, and since we aren't running anything with Double red except Hellrider, we can up our count of Crucibles.
It's worth testing, but in standard Ash Zealot red, I don't think he provides enough of the time to replace other, more useful cards.
Thragtusk doesn't promote skill intensive play, but hey, when it's legit, it's legit.
Volcanic Strength leads to some serious blowouts. The question of "do they have it" is irrelevant if you get to connect even one time with an x/2, and if you untap with a Hellrider in play and a Strength in hand it's most definitely GG.
Ari Lax wrote about it, saying that he disliked Archwing Dragon, and that some other obscene four drop should be in it's place, and made the recommendation of Volatile Rig. His words were something like, "Volitile Rig maybe but it seems eh."
Volcanic Strenght is an absolute blowout in the mirror when you put it on a Stromkirk Noble on turn two. It then becomes bigger than any removal spell they play, unless they sided in Mortars (which I do for this very reason). If they don't have the Mortars though, it becomes increasingly more card advantage, as they have to invest more cards to kill your Noble.
I watched the Naya Humans deck leave blockers back against the mono red deck because they knew if they survived to the mid game at a reasonable life total, their guys off the top were more valuable than the red deck. This was in round 7ish of the SCG Open this past weekend, watching the guy who won the tournament play another friend of mine so that also may have something to do with it. I've actually played against Naya Humans exactly 0 times so...
First, guildgates are pretty terrible. It always comes into play tapped. It actually takes hands that normally are keepers because you have some decent one drops and a few two's and turn them into correct mulligans because your second land could be a guild gate. They also are really bad to have in your deck if you plan to mulligan aggressively because every time you go down a card, your guild gate gets that much worse... i.e, you go to six, you have a smaller chance to have multiple lands in your hand, and if your only land, or two, is a guild gate, you most certainly are no longer faster than zombies. Also, since your list is running Stronghold, you now have three lands out of twenty four that can't cast a turn one guy.
Now, my arguments about Charm vs. Control. You know when 4 damage to the dome is bad? When they're at 15 and you don't have a board position or cards in your hand. Your deck already has Spark Trooper or w//e, which is 6 damage, one time and doesn't create a lasting board position. Boros Charm is at it's best when you have a board position that is worth answering. It's sweet on turn six when you can Charm your guy and do 12, but that's about it...
Now, when else is Charm good against control? When they have Supreme Verdict. So, the bant decks have access to it on three, the esper decks on four. Lets say hypothetically we're on the play and we have Charm in hand on turn four. We have Hellrider which can take them to two or so, which leaves our Charm up to kill them next turn. This is the optimal line of play. If they wrath our board, we kill them with Charm. We also would have killed them with Pillar, with Spear, with any haste guy... so, Boros Charm isn't the answer here. So, what if we don't tap out on four for Hellrider and keep up Boros Charm mana? Then they untap and... Well, they aren't in super trouble so they are probably going to cast a Lingering Souls, or a Detention Sphere, or miracle a Terminus. They could also just cast a Faithmender or Thragtusk. Chances are you aren't going to "boros charm" them out here because, well, just as you understand optimal lines of play, so must you give credit to your opponents.
Then there is the Double Strike. This is actually the mode that I think is most effective. It can provide some sick beats, and can be worth more than the normal four points of damage when put on a Reckoner or a Hellrider. It's also good for "removal" when paired with some smaller guys. Here's the catch though, generally when using it as a removal spell you are 2 for 1'ing yourself, and preventing further damage. Lets use the "cackler trade for 5" argument. If you have Pillar here, you can get rid of a large number of relevant creatures, such as Huntmaster of the Fells, Champion of the Parish, Ash Zealot, Lightning Mauler, etc. These are all important cards. Now, Pillar out right kills these guys before combat, so your 5 points of damage turns into 7 points. If you have Boros Charm, you are still only dealing 5 damage to your opponent this turn, and you are down a card to save your Cackler. Saving a Cackler... Is that Cackler worth 4 points of Damage?
Boros Charm has the same major draw-back that Skull Crack does, it doesn't target creatures. The reason it's playable main deck at all is because it has other options that kind of make up for that, and can provide blowouts... if the situation is correct. I fully stand by the fact that Boros Charm is not even remotely good enough to warrant a switch from Mono Red to Boros, because even in Boros I would run a max of two charms main deck, and only side in more if Naya Humans became a bigger portion of the meta.
See, the thing about Magic is I doubt very many people on these forums have been playing as long as I have. When Flames was legal, and Heirarch was legal, I played during that standard. I played when Pulse of the Forge was legal. I played when the die roll determined the winner, in standard, because games ended on turn one. Have you ever played with Curse Scroll? My first real deck had four of them in it... I also had the privilege of playing Mogg Flunkies when they were good. The key is not trying to rehash the past. The meta where Flames was legal was good because there was enough burn that you could realistically burn your opponent out. Flames was important because going into that particular tournament the Beach House deck that both players were well aware of was a Heirarch BGW deck that had a very midrange feel. The deck was slow enough that you could actually lean pretty hard on your burn spells, and usually the first Flames was enough to end the game. That pro tour, and format, are completely different than this format. That was actually the first pro tour I ever attended. I didn't play, but three of my close friends were playing and I have family out there anyway so it was a no-brainer for me to attend the first exotic PT. In fact, the reason why Flames was so strong was because of its similarities to Skull Crack and not Boros Charm.
It's been like, four games of League of Legends that I've been working on this post so I kind of lost my train of thought, so I'll sum it up as:
If this card becomes nothing more than a burn 4 to the face against control, then I see this card easily and quickly being replaced by other burn spells. The utility that this provides in R/x mirrors is actually less than that of Searing Spear, and the sacrifices you have to make in order to play this card are substantial. I want my burn spells to act as removal in this format, not finish the game. If I have to throw a Spear at their face, I will, but more often than not, having a burn spell means I'm getting my dudes through for more damage than I otherwise would.
MOST IMPORTANTLY Is that I believe that card disadvantage is bad, and I believe most of the time you will be using Boros Charm as a psuedo removal spell will involve you trading one of your small dudes and the Charm for one of their medium sized dudes. If instead you had Spear or even Volley here, you should be able to avoid having to 2 for 1 yourself.
I enjoy Stonewright + Reckoner. If they block, its good for me, if they don't block, then well, that's going to be a significant chunk of damage.
When I'm talking about it being a four drop, I'm saying that you are never holding two up prior to four for Boros Charm tricks. If you are, you risk falling behind the other decks in the format.
You talk about turning Cackler into a Lava Axe, you forget that if you are turning him into a Lava Axe but can instead Spear their guy, you are doing that 9/10 times because it means that you get seven in this turn, and 5 in next turn, instead of five this turn and >5 next turn. Boros Charm doesn't give you that option as often as Searing Spear does, because you are still trading your Cackler away to get rid of their guy because it the two first strike damage won't be enough to kill most things in the format, and you'll end up trading two cards for one. You could make your guys indestructible, but then you are trading one card for 10 damage over two turns, whereas if you had Spear instead, you'd be doing 12 over two turns instead. Then there's always the four to the dome, which is equal to like, 12 points or so over two turns. Not to mention, Boros Charm works pretty poorly with Pyreheart since it gives you less opportunity to set up awkward blocks where you blow them out with indestructible, etc.
The question I want to ask you is, where do you play Boros Charm? You can't get rid of your spears, because you need the removal. You can't really justify playing this over Pillar because you can't cast Boros Charm to kill a mana dork when they are stalling, doesn't exile random black zombies, isn't able to take out an important guy in race in the mirror... So, now you have to start looking at the dudes you want to cut from your lists, but right now your guys are worth more than 4 points of damage more often than they are worth less. Hellrider is obviously busted, so dropping him is out of the question, and you need your 1's and 2's, so now we're at cutting three drops, and in the creature feature match-ups, you really want Pyreheart to give you an advantage, and since you are in Boros, Silverblade provides the double strike already while also being, well, a dude.
This kind of card doesn't really fit into what the aggressive decks are trying to accomplish. I see it fitting best into the midrangey decks like Naya because you end up in creature stand off's a lot and it can let you attack through their board position pretty regularly. It's hard for me to see a card that's actually really commitment involved fitting into hyper aggressive decks, especially when one of the modes seems almost like a blank to me (the four damage) because the cards you would be playing this over are almost always going to be worth more than four points of damage.
To summarize, it's a "4" drop because you aren't playing it before then unless it allows for an absolute blowout. It also prevents you from playing your four drop, so its' application probably doesn't come online until turn 5 which is actually pretty bad against Supreme Verdict decks.
It doesn't really provide utility that other cards in your deck don't already provide, but better. It's generally going to be worth less damage than Searing Spear, unless pointed at the dome... which we don't do often enough to warrant an inclusion.
It also doesn't actually deal with creatures other than situational and awkward combat steps, which can easily be avoided by proper play by your opponent. This is a huge drawback.
Finally, it has a trade off of creating a deck with poor mana in comparison to one with excellent mana and can prevent you from potentially casting important two drops, and preventing you from reasonably being able to play Helion Crucible, which is a non-zero amount of relevance.
I'll more than happily eat my words if the card turns out to be bonkers like the hype, but I don't see it. I haven't seen a single reasonable use of the card that wouldn't be equally accomplished by something else if not better by something else.
Oh, and Cavern can't cast this, which is what helps Dos Rakis mana, and so unless you are running plains that gives you 8 white sources unless you dip into Guildgates which is awful.
Well, since this is the mono red I wont elaborate much further, as the discussion originally started to discuss whether Boros Charm made mono red obsolete (I think that's what I was responding too), but I still feel like a burn spell against the control decks is going to be mediocre. If this is it's primary function in this match-up, depending on how they build their decks obviously, then it seems like a bunch of other cards actually just fill more useful purposes in more match-ups. The question because how much value do you expect to get out of Boros Charm vs. something else in this spot, and while many people know when to Cast Hellrider and when to Volley, if you are casting Hellrider more often than you are saving mana for Boros Charm, isn't it just better to have something that is more useful in other match-ups?
How much value is Boros Charm giving you in the red mirror? I think the answer is not very much. In the G aggressive match-up, it depends on how often you can swing all in and make your guys indestructible in order to net 4+ damage because if it's not very often, then again there are cards that are better positioned, like Mizzium Mortars (as it kills their dudes instead of pointing 4 at their face, which is usually worth more than 4 points of damage over a few turns). Finally we have Reanimator decks, where this card is actually surprisingly good because it can finish them off if you are trying to race them. Against Control though is where this card should shine, but deck construction can easily lead to decks not being blown out by this card, which means that with proper deck construction the meta can shift to actually blank Boros Charm decks. Remember, the red decks are winning by going under right now, and Boros Charm acts more as a four drop than a two drop because you are never casting it on two (most of the time at least) and generally it's outclassed by cards like Hellrider and Boros Reckoner in turns of how much damage it's worth. So why would you want to succumb to a shaky mana base for a card that is less value than a card like Hellrider?
To me, Boros Charm is a card that is going to be jammed into a ton of decks but ultimately falls off and people start to revert back to Mono red and Dos Rakis.
I was responding to the "It's a straight up counterspell against us" comment. It does actually counter Supreme Verdict, which is nice, but at what cost? What if you don't cast Hellrider on four so you can keep this up, and instead of casting Verdict, they cast Terminus and when you Hellrider they Charm it? That's a pretty brutal sequence that Boros Charm doesn't help.
Cryptic Command this is not. Strong, but I would say this is closer to Primal Command in that it does a heck of a lot of work, but sometimes it's just a mediocre lifegain spell.
For the record, the match-ups that Boros Charm is an all star in I'm pretty comfortable with in Mono Red anyway, outside of present day Esper. I think that deck will have to adapt anyway though, so I'm not entirely sure they won't be on some number less than 4 Supreme Verdicts anyway.
But that requires them keeping two open on turn 3. That's so bad for them. If they are leaving two open then they aren't committing to the board, and I'll gladly turn Searing Spear into a psuedo time walk. The decks that Boros Charm is good against, it's really good, but I think the evaluations of the card currently are missing what you have to sacrifice in order to keep two up that early. In the late game for that match-up, they are keeping two up while we're tapping out for Hellrider. Who's winning that trade?
Then there is the play where you swing into their dudes, and they make some dumb blocks and Boros Charm to either double strike or save their guys, and you just Spear their guy anyway. It's just such an easy card for aggressive decks to play around, because they have to give up on casting a spell in order to keep the two mana open, and what have we learned about Mana Sinks this season? Boros Charm suffers the same problem Skull Crack does, in that it is completely reactionary in this match-up, therefore, incredibly high tempo loss for potentially no gain. Then there are the games where they only have humans in play and your turn 1 Stromkirk will go the distance and they'll never have a legit Boros Charm play and then you just Rishidan Ported two lands all game from them if they feel like trying to get us.
I want to clarify, I think the card is really good. Easily the best charm. However, I think the evaluations are looking at the card from a point of view that doesn't take into account the actual situations in which you would want to keep two up over playing something else to add to the board presence.
I've been doing some GTC testing offline, and I've found Reckoner to be incredibly strong in Lightning Mauler lists. The fact that he's essentially unblockable in the Naya match-up is pretty insane, as he kills everything they play minus Thragtusk/Angel, and if they block with Thrag they are taking a boatload of damage. The deck has to change a little in order to fit Reckoner in though, including cutting some number of Pyreheart Wolf, though I think keeping the ability to have four post board is something that is important. This is where I am currently for paper post GTC.
4 Rakdos Cackler
3 Stonewright
4 Lightning Mauler
4 Ash Zealot
4 Boros Reckoner
2 Pyreheart Wolf
4 Hellrider
3 Pillar of Flame
2 Brimstone Volley
1 Helion Crucible
21 Mountain
1 Pillar of Flame
4 Skull Crack
2 Pyreheart Wolf
4 Mizzium Mortars
2 Frostburn Weird
2 Volcanic Strength
I've cut the Waifs from the board for Skullcrack because I feel like it's very strong against the versions of Revelations decks that my crew has been brewing, so whether I play it will depend very much so on how the Sphinx Revelation decks move going forward. The question I've been working on most though is how many Volcanic Strengths I want, because a lot of the red sideboard games are won based turn one guy, two turn Strength go to town. I want the Fourth Pillar for various Black based aggressive decks, and Mortars is still really strong post board. I considered actually running a 23'd land main deck, and putting some of the Mortars in the main instead of the board, but I'm not 100% on that. I kept the two Brimstones because sometimes you're able to get them for five or get a Faithmender if you can bait hard enough.
I don't believe Boros decks will replace mono red. The boros decks are going to get very greedy, and while I love Boros Charm, I have a feeling it's going to disappoint people initially when they realize it's not the second coming of... well, something incredible. Card is insane value, however, I think that the way the meta is shifting a lot of match-ups it's really just going to nug someone for 4. How often do you find yourself wanting to just nug someone for four? Sure it's two mana, but... when we have the option to Spear a guy instead, I'm probably going to do it, and if double strike means my guy is trading instead of just getting through if I had a Spear instead, well... Spear is still really strong.
100% agree. It's almost completely worse than any other burn spell in the main because more often you aren't pointing it at their face. It is most assuredly sideboard at best. I like it over the other options for the Bant/Revelations lists.
What I meant was, in comparison to the other cards you want to be playing, he is outclassed. Off the top of your deck, he's essentially the worst. A vanilla 2/2 with no benefits if you have no cards in hand. Also, on two if you don't have a Lightning Mauler then at best you are casting a second one drop and passing, which I'll admit is still saucy, but not amazing. What would you play this over? You can't cut your one drops, and if you play him you really want Lightning Mauler in order to have the best opportunity to draw the nuts, so then you'd have to either cut Ash Zealot or cut a three/four drop or a burn spell. I can't see cutting Ash Zealot or Mauler at the two, and with Boros Reckoner, the list is already going to be super tight. So, while he allows for amazing starts turn two, everything has to be aligned for those starts, and the trade of later in the game I think is significant.
My biggest issue is that this is the kind of card that you'd want if you could take advantage of the effect all the time, but I think because of how often you might wiff with it, you want to go ahead and skip this one. However, I could see him in the following mono red shell:
4 Stromkirk Noble
4 Lightning Mauler
4 Gore-House Chainwalker
4 Burning-Tree Emissary
3 Hellraiser Goblin
4 Pyreheart Wolf
4 Hellrider
3 Brimstone Volley
3 Hellion Crucible
19 Mountains
What this aims to do is take complete advantage of the fact that this guy provides you with a free turn 3 play. He replaces himself, so anything that's 2R is suddenly an all-star. Not to mention you start turn 2 GHC, turn three this guy and then a Hellraiser Goblin and you've got a wicked quick start. It also is a free activation for Crucible, and since we aren't running anything with Double red except Hellrider, we can up our count of Crucibles.
It's worth testing, but in standard Ash Zealot red, I don't think he provides enough of the time to replace other, more useful cards.