[Primer/Deck] Burn

[DragoFireheart]

The list here seems more like a RDW deck and less a Burn deck. I feel like having less creatures would give you more mileage with your Young Pyromancers. If you must run creatures in burn, Guides, Lavamancers, and Youngs seem like the best choice. Too many creatures dilutes your instant/sorcery base. On the other hand, having too few relevant creatures means your opponents need less removal.

Taking another look at the list, he's only using 2 Chains. That seems like a mistake. I'd cut some sparks and marauders to make room for more burn spells. The best creatures base seems like:

3 Lavamancers
4 Guides
2-3 Pyromancers

[Lyle Hopkins]

Brewing!

4 Young Pyromancer
4 Goblin Guide
4 Chain Lightning
4 Fireblast
4 Flame Rift
4 Lava Spike
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Price of Progress
4 Rift Bolt
4 Gitaxian Probe
20 Mountain


I wrote off Young Pyromancer when I first saw the card, but I've been testing this list since I saw Honeycutt's 3rd place finish and it has been pretty fun so far. I'm going to run it through the gauntlet in my play group, maybe bring it to a tournament next week if I feel like it can hang, and I'll let ya'll know how I feel about it down the road.

[DragoFireheart]

Brewing!

4 Young Pyromancer
4 Goblin Guide
4 Chain Lightning
4 Fireblast
4 Flame Rift
4 Lava Spike
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Price of Progress
4 Rift Bolt
4 Gitaxian Probe
20 Mountain


I wrote off Young Pyromancer when I first saw the card, but I've been testing this list since I saw Honeycutt's 3rd place finish and it has been pretty fun so far. I'm going to run it through the gauntlet in my play group, maybe bring it to a tournament next week if I feel like it can hang, and I'll let ya'll know how I feel about it down the road.

I feel like 4 may be too many, but let me know how they test and whether you ever felt like your hand was clogged with them.

[L0cke]

A friend of mine and I talked to Doug Honeycutt at the open yesterday and asked him about his deck choices. He said someone was supposed to loan him fetches and the last two chain lightnings, but they fell through and Young Pyromancer was the first thing he could find to stick in the deck half an hour before the open started.

[nedleeds]

Sounds about like how a burn deck should be built. Ask around for cards you can't afford, make budget subs. Lava Spike people for 9 rounds.

[Lyle Hopkins]

A friend of mine and I talked to Doug Honeycutt at the open yesterday and asked him about his deck choices. He said someone was supposed to loan him fetches and the last two chain lightnings, but they fell through and Young Pyromancer was the first thing he could find to stick in the deck half an hour before the open started.

I think the the most important thing that can be taken away from SCG Atlanta isn't necessarily the specific deck lists, but the fact that Burn is positioned fairly well against the current meta-game.

Thanks for the information on Honeycutt's build though.

[L0cke]

I think the the most important thing that can be taken away from SCG Atlanta isn't necessarily the specific deck lists, but the fact that Burn is positioned fairly well against the current meta-game.

Thanks for the information on Honeycutt's build though.

I don't think Burn is well positioned, as Price of Progress is well positioned. I didn't see a single Spell Snare all day, and despite the fear of the Moons being in people, they still ran mostly non-basics.

[LeoCop 90]

I've been building a burn deck lately, and I am leaning towards one of the more creature heavy builds. One thing that I don't understand is why Deathrite Shaman is such a threat for creature heavy builds. I understand that it can be used to gain life, but don't we have enough ways to kill it (especially with Grim Lavamancer)? It seems to be a pretty fragile creature against us (unless they have a Mother of Runes of course). I'm pretty new to the format so what am I missing?

When you play burn, you don't want to waste burn spells on opposing creatures unless it is absolutely necessary (for example you should always burn a creature attacking with an equipped umezawa's jitte). Deathrite shaman can most of the times be completely ignored because he won't have creatures to hit in graveyards; instead, if you are playing keldon marauders and hellspark elemental you will be forced to burn him to prevent lifegain... and if you burn him, is just like the opponent has gained three life because you wasted a bolt. Yes you can burn him with lavamancer , but this is not always the case.... so hellspark and marauders are not optimal choices in my opinion.

For all the ones saying that young pyromancer is a natural fit for a burn deck .... WHAT ? Creatures must be very aggressive to be included in burn, and mostly important they must guarantee damage for the opponent. Goblin guide is played mostly because of haste that almost always deals two damages to the opponent. The only exception to this rule is grim lavamancer because he is an effective mana sink.
Young pyromancer has none of this qualities, if you play him turn two you just delayed your win by a full turn. He is a midrange card (good for U/R delver or grixis delver) not an aggro card. He is fantastic in the right deck , but the right deck is not burn.... please don't play him here.

[DragoFireheart]

For all the ones saying that young pyromancer is a natural fit for a burn deck .... WHAT ? Creatures must be very aggressive to be included in burn, and mostly important they must guarantee damage for the opponent. Goblin guide is played mostly because of haste that almost always deals two damages to the opponent. The only exception to this rule is grim lavamancer because he is an effective mana sink.
Young pyromancer has none of this qualities, if you play him turn two you just delayed your win by a full turn. He is a midrange card (good for U/R delver or grixis delver) not an aggro card. He is fantastic in the right deck , but the right deck is not burn.... please don't play him here.

I disagree. We sometimes use Sulfuric Vortex and that also "delays you by a turn". Thing is, sometimes burn won't kill in time. Sometimes, we might need something else to help guarantee those last points of damage.

Course, he makes a terrible top deck.

[Bed Decks Palyer]

1 Bolt (17)
2 Pyromancer (17)
3 Double Burn, swing (5, dead if Fireblast before swing)

Turn 3 is beyond my understanding. Tokens don't have haste.

[LeoCop 90]

Yes, we do delay our win sometimes to play cards like sulfuric vortex and grim lavamancer. Anyway i think you can figure out yourself that they both are miles better than young pyromancer.... sulfuric vortex prevents lifegain for all the match and deals two damage every turn, grim lavamancer can burn directly the opponent or also get rid of problematic creatures.

Pyromancer doesn't do any of these things... the crucial point is that , even if unaswered, he doesn't guarantee any damage because him and the tokens can just get blocked. Moreover, he is decent only if played on turn two, being the worst topdeck in the world as you said. If he had haste, or the tokens have haste, it might have been worth testing. But this is not the case.

[paeng4983]

For me, Young Pyromancer doesn't suit the playing style of this deck. It fits well with tempo decks.

[DragoFireheart]

Turn 3 is beyond my understanding. Tokens don't have haste.

Yeah for some reason I thought they did. Fix'd my post.

[Valtrix]

So in general does burn suffer more from being too slow, or from running out of cards more often? If the latter is the case, some slower but more damage per card (but perhaps more expensive) might be valuable, and if the former lower CC cards would be better. I haven't really played it much, but I like making fun burn/sligh lists for fun, so this would give me a little bit more perspective.

Also, has anybody tested Boros Reckoner? It's almost certain that he's too costly/slow (and a creature), although despite that he is still a very interesting to me, so I was curious if anybody did try him.

[Firstborn]

So in general does burn suffer more from being too slow, or from running out of cards more often? If the latter is the case, some slower but more damage per card (but perhaps more expensive) might be valuable, and if the former lower CC cards would be better. I haven't really played it much, but I like making fun burn/sligh lists for fun, so this would give me a little bit more perspective.

I think it can be either too slow or running out of cards, or both. Burn tends to goldfish on turn 4 very consistently (sometimes turn 3) but that can be a turn too slow against combo, which is why these matchups are so tough. Running out of gas is another issue and too often it feels as if the deck goes into topdeck mode. Grim Lavamancers can help with consistency and to give you that final 2-4 points you need to get over the line.

In fact, I have a related question: I noted Dough Honeycutt's burn deck which placed well at a recent SCG Open was running Lavamancers without fetches, which seems unusual. I'm testing a fetchless version at the moment in which Lavamancers work fairly well with Vexing Devils but wondered if anyone had any additional comments?

Also, has anybody tested Boros Reckoner? It's almost certain that he's too costly/slow (and a creature), although despite that he is still a very interesting to me, so I was curious if anybody did try him.

Just my opinion but it looks costly and slow to me, and if you're considering 3CMC cards, there are probably better options.

[L0cke]

In fact, I have a related question: I noted Dough Honeycutt's burn deck which placed well at a recent SCG Open was running Lavamancers without fetches, which seems unusual. I'm testing a fetchless version at the moment in which Lavamancers work fairly well with Vexing Devils but wondered if anyone had any additional comments?

Your question was answered a whole half a page above where you posted it.

A friend of mine and I talked to Doug Honeycutt at the open yesterday and asked him about his deck choices. He said someone was supposed to loan him fetches and the last two chain lightnings, but they fell through and Young Pyromancer was the first thing he could find to stick in the deck half an hour before the open started.

[Valtrix]

In fact, I have a related question: I noted Dough Honeycutt's burn deck which placed well at a recent SCG Open was running Lavamancers without fetches, which seems unusual. I'm testing a fetchless version at the moment in which Lavamancers work fairly well with Vexing Devils but wondered if anyone had any additional comments?

I really like Vexing Devil. While the "choice" sometimes seem like it could be bad, I look at it this way: Would you play a 4/3 for with no drawback, or would you play a 4 damage to target player for ? For me the answer is yes in both accounts, so I don't really think it should matter which they choose since both are very good. The fact that it's a creature is "a drawback," but lists are already running a few creatures generally (goblin guide, lavamancer), so I think that argument is kind of pointless since they will likely have a target for removal anyway. If you're worried about devil not breaking through blockers, it's worth nothing that he will trade with almost everything, and if they leave a blocker up that means you've bought yourself at least one more turn to draw another burn spell to close out the game anyway.

[Dice_Box]

I find Devil to be great in your opener, but at turn four when your hand is near on empty and all you want is a bolt it's the last thing you want to see. Also, we have better openers.

Think about it this way. Would you pay R for a 4/3 creature that does not help you win the game once the other guy has a board presence? I am going to put into the grave in my first 3 turns at lest an Instant, Sorcery and a land. Add in one Deathrite I had to remove and suddenly all that thing can do is die to a Gofy. The card looks cute but it's a trap.

Sent from my mobile, forgive spelling and grammatical errors.

[TableTopMagic]

Hey this is a build I am letting a friend use for a upcoming SCG. Any thought or feelings you want to share go for it.

//Creature (8)
4 Goblin Guide
2 Grim Lavamancer
2 Vexing Devil

//Enchantment (3)
3 Sulfuric Vortex

//Instant (12)
4 Fireblast
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Price of Progress

//Sorcery (16)
4 Chain Lightning
4 Flame Rift
4 Lava Spike
4 Rift Bolt

//Land (21)
3 Arid Mesa
15 Mountain
3 Scalding Tarn


SB: 4 Mindbreak Trap (Turn one Kills)
SB: 3 Searing Blaze (Super Aggro match for removal while keeping pressure on the board)
SB: 2 Smash to Smithereens (Stoneblade/Affinity)
SB: 3 Surgical Extraction (Yep)
SB: 3 Volcanic Fallout (Delver matchups, can be countered)

[Valtrix]

Think about it this way. Would you pay R for a 4/3 creature that does not help you win the game once the other guy has a board presence?

What are you considering a board presence? I think your statement is just incorrect, and I tried to address this in my last post already. In fact, I would say that this statement applies to Goblin Guide as well, a card that many consider core to burn at this point. (If you advocate for not running guide, well I can understand, but that's a separate argument entirely.) As I said before, if Devil was just a 4/3 without any drawbacks, I would still play it, because that's just insane efficiency.

But, let's consider some of the bad scenarios. First, you're trying to outrace the enemy. If they leave a blocker for devil, this is still fine for you. Devil will trade with almost every creature in the format (except a strong tarmogoyf) right now, so it's still at least a 1-for-1. But in leaving a blocker up you've bought yourself at least another turn, which is another turn to draw that burn spell to close out the game. Yes, you won't draw that spell every time, but this is probably the worst case scenario, which I think is actually rather rare. Second, they have removal. This is a fair argument, since removal sucks. However, since you're liking running at least 8 other creatures (lavamancer, goblin guide, hellspark elemental maybe), chances are they'll have another target for their removal anyway, so I wouldn't be so concerned about this. Otherwise Devil is a 4/3 they can't handle, so it turns into a 4 damage spell for . This seems very strong to me, and in particular will help increase your clock against decks that don't want to win with the combat step.