I went 3-1 in a Standard 4 round yesterday with this list:
- AsLan~
- Registered User
-
Member for 12 years, 7 months, and 25 days
Last active Wed, Mar, 4 2020 05:38:23
- 2 Followers
- 575 Total Posts
- 40 Thanks
-
Mar 10, 2013Just posted this update to the deck in a thread so I might as well post it here too...Posted in: AsLan^ Blog
I went 3-1 in a Standard 4 round yesterday with this list:
-
May 31, 2012AsLan~ posted a message on Burning Vengeance v8Seems there has been some developments in Burning Vengeance! The addition of Lingering Souls and Feeling of Dread is pretty sweet.Posted in: AsLan^ Blog
Here's a list that I borrowed from the BV thread in standard deck creation and modified slightly to account for cards I didn't have, works great! ^^
"Grey Aven's Burning Vengeance mod v1"Magic OnlineOCTGN2ApprenticeBuy These Cards Spells
2 Think Twice
4 Lingering Souls
2 Slagstorm
1 Altar of the Lost
4 Feeling of Dread
4 Desperate Ravings
4 Forbidden Alchemy
4 Faithless Looting
4 Burning Vengeance
2 Day of Judgment
2 Secrets of the Dead
1 Darkslick Shores
1 Banishing StrokeLand
3 Seachrome Coast
2 Clifftop Retreat
2 Dragonskull Summit
3 Drowned Catacomb
3 Glacial Fortress
3 Mountain
3 Island
3 Plains
1 Swamp
2 Evolving WildsSideboard
2 Sever the Bloodline
2 Whipflare
3 Oblivion Ring
4 Negate
1 Rolling Temblor
2 Burning Oil
1 Banishing Stroke - To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
By acknowledging any additional attribute of either type and saying it's better or worse because of that is also acknowledging that they're not equal.
http://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post/129398709553/mark-im-not-asking-for-a-return-to-early-magics
I think this reply sums it up nicely:
* * *
For the record, I'm okay with the reduction in power levels and BFZ looks okay to me, I don't plan on drafting any because I generally dislike drafting but I think the set will make for an interesting Standard after Khans rotates. But it would be nice to see some more interesting (and better) spells.
Indeed, that will be pretty cool if an aristocrats style deck was constructed playable.
I'm not sure whether the black vampire mechanic (trigger on life gain) is supposed to be constructed playable or not, it'll be neat if it is.
I was actually going to post about that card, not really improved because it doesn't trigger when opponents creatures die like Blood Artist does, but still seems like it has potential.
And with that being said, given how bad they appear to be at this, I don't expect to see limited leagues for at least another year or so.
The existence of cards like Delver of Secrets, Goblin Guide, Monastery Swiftspear, Champion of the Parish, Wild Nactl, etc. basically 3 power for 1 mana are very much the problem. This was identified 20 years ago when Kird Ape* and Black Vise were restricted (*have to check up the specifics of Kird Ape exactly, can't remember whether it was banned or restricted).
Your argument that your deck should probably have removal is generally correct, but these creatures put pressure to have not just removal in your deck but removal in your opening hand every game. This affects deck construction in such a way that encourages linear strategies to leverage the power of the exceptional cards (whether you're playing the creatures or the removal).
Personally, I think the linear strategies that turn the game into a die roll or a match up are killing the game, and every time I see a deck like burn I lose a little interest in Magic.
Totally agree with this, Delver of Secrets is basically a Black Vise that you can't escape from and Black Vise is still banned! Not sure why so many people point the finger at everything else (previously Snapcaster Mage and Ponder, now Treasue Cruise and DTT) when it's the overpowered critter that's killing you.
If this is correct then I would agree that a basic land without subtype would work.
Reading further, it appears 305.8 only requires the supertype "basic" to be considered a basic land, so it seems like this approach works without altering the rules or other mechanics or cards.
Because it would have implications for the Domain mechanic and the card Coalition victory. I think it also would require a revision to the rules because the basic land types are specified. By my understanding of the reference material I believe this is section CR:305.
There is no reason to change the rules because an individual card can always override the rules for itself. All that needs to be added to the card (or Oracle text) is a line to the effect of "unlike regular basic lands, Colorless Swamp can only be tapped for colorless".
Simple and doesn't change existing card rules, or modify existing mechanics like Domain or Coalition Victory.
I think the same kind of rulings that apply to snow covered basics could be applied to colorless basics. The colorless land would have a type like "Basic Colorless Land - Swamp" and only tap for colorless, with further Oracle guidance if necessary that effects that target nonbasics can't target colorless basics, same as snow covered lands.
If you'd rather not then I think the Deckbuilder's Toolkit is a better deal than the fat pack for a new player. It comes with 4 boosters, some staple commons, and 100 basic lands, and it's around $20 which should be manageable.
It's a shame really because his inability to admit failure means we'll be getting more of the same "designs" as long as he's in charge. I mean even look at this recent tumblr post. Maybe I'm reading too much into the phrasing but it sounds like he's saying we the players are the ones at fault for failing to acknowledge that enchantment creatures are what makes an enchantment block.
Even the idea that everything would have been better if Constellation had been spread throughout the block is wrong. Constellation is a boring lazy mechanic, I'm actually not even convinced that it was designed into the block at the beginning, it has the feel of a mechanic that was quickly added after Born was released and people started to get upset about the no enchantments in the enchantment block.
Aside: They say they develop sets two years in advance etc. but a lot of the things they say don't add up e.g. printing Cavern of Souls in AVR to fight mana leak because of Snapcaster Mage in Innistrad. Which wouldn't have actually been that bad if it wasn't for the Delver tempo strategy, which they might have caught in the FFL except they didn't because the change to Delver's power was late in the development process.
Based on his other correspondence throughout the block, you can tell he thought enchantment creatures were a really cool and smart idea and that he's disappointed with their reception. What MaRo doesn't get is that people wanted enchantments to matter in a way unique to enchantments, nobody was asking for affinity for enchantments like he continually brings up, and nobody was asking for enchantment creatures. Anyone who's played Magic back in the days when enchantments did actually matter could of told them that so there's obviously a disconnect somewhere.