Keep Mana Burn in Magic: the Gathering (One Million Strong)

[herbig]

Fight the man:

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=90736520971&ref=mf

[Pinder]

3 down, only 999,997 left to go!

Is there actually any confirmation that they plan to do this? I really hope they're not planning to do this, but given examples of past decisions they've made I wouldn't really be surprised.

[elof]

On it, 999 996 to go.

[Zach Tartell]

Ethan erwin convinced me that it's a good thing to lose manaburn.

[JeroenC]

Totally on it. It's going to take approx. 3 divine revelations for me to think losing mana burn is a good thing.

[Bardo]

I love the facebook post, but could not care less about removing mana burn from the game. Keep it. Remove it. I care not.

[mujadaddy]

Ethan erwin convinced me that it's a good thing to lose manaburn.
ORLY (http://magiccards.info/cs/en/78.html)? It's a carebear move that removes a strategic element from the game.

[RoddyVR]

Orim's chant (or silence) in repsonse to a seething song NEEDS to do 5 damamge.
I dont have a facebook account, and have no plans of making one, so consider me in silent support of this pettition.

[URABAHN]

Fight the man:

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=90736520971&ref=mf

This is dumb. Are you Championing this cause or are you just being topical?

[Nihil Credo]

ORLY (http://magiccards.info/cs/en/78.html)? It's a carebear move that removes a strategic element from the game.
Trading the occasionaly "Chant in response, burn for 5" (where the 'burn for 5' part is not always relevant, too) is an excellent price to pay for making it possible to design cards - heck, even entire sets - around life totals.

[Fonzy]

What's the source that this is even being considered? This is the second time I'ver heard this rumor.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

ORLY (http://magiccards.info/cs/en/78.html)? It's a carebear move that removes a strategic element from the game.

Yes (http://magiccards.info/ds/en/11.html), really (http://magiccards.info/sok/en/102.html).

Manaburn itself removes a strategic element from the game.

[JeroenC]

ORLY (http://magiccards.info/cs/en/78.html)? It's a carebear move that removes a strategic element from the game.

Actually (and unfortunately, I'm defending it like this), this doesn't change the fact that mana pools would empty at end of phases- it just wouldn't damage you anymore.

[puppektion]

Actually (and unfortunately, I'm defending it like this), this doesn't change the fact that mana pools would empty at end of phases- it just wouldn't damage you anymore.

At the same time, things like LED can be used with less fear of burning to death (say, from a Wish being countered)

[mujadaddy]

Actually (and unfortunately, I'm defending it like this), this doesn't change the fact that mana pools would empty at end of phases- it just wouldn't damage you anymore.:rolleyes: Consider my objection ill-considered, then.

[etrigan]

Ethan erwin (http://ethanerwin.com/) convinced me that it's a good thing to lose manaburn.

He's a big fella.

[herbig]

This is dumb. Are you Championing this cause or are you just being topical?

Oh no, I couldn't care less. Just wanted to make a funny Facebook group.

[Forbiddian]

Trading the occasionaly "Chant in response, burn for 5" (where the 'burn for 5' part is not always relevant, too) is an excellent price to pay for making it possible to design cards - heck, even entire sets - around life totals.

Could you elaborate on this?

I can't see how mana burn affects design one way or another. I've never burned myself intentionally or seen someone else do it in order to lose life.

[Bardo]

Could you elaborate on this?

I can't see how mana burn affects design one way or another. I've never burned myself intentionally or seen someone else do it in order to lose life.

I don't play block (let alone Mirrodin/Affinity block) but there are those that complain about the "strategic" mana burn because of the Pulse of Forge/Fields.

Also, Mindslaver would be a more elegant card if not for mana burn.

[Volt]

Meh

[Nihil Credo]

Could you elaborate on this?

I can't see how mana burn affects design one way or another. I've never burned myself intentionally or seen someone else do it in order to lose life.

Personal Nemesis
1B (or whatever)
Creature - Avatar
~ gets -X/-X, where X is your life total.
21/21

Truly Pedantic Learning
1U
Sorcery
Draw a card. Then draw three cards if your life total is exactly 16.


And so on... basically, ATM you have to take into account that all players have "1: Lose 1 life" when designing around life totals. Imagine designing Odyssey Block if players could discard as many cards as they wanted during their discard step, instead of just X-7.

[pi4meterftw]

The kind of logic where someone says "we better defend X or else the taking of X will act as a precedent for Y" is usually pretty silly. Take the following examples:

I better not allow the government to take my pasture where my blue cows feed otherwise the next thing I know it might force me into slavery.

I better not let him take back his spell cast otherwise next thing I know, he might pillage my house.

Mana burn is as insignificant, if not even more, as the first part of each of the above examples. Whether mana burn exists or not can at most be a question of flavor, because it rarely affects the actual game state.

Also, I should be more clear and say that the thing the examples are showcasing is that the notion of "precedents" only exists when human beings contort logic. Otherwise, logic is to be evaluated based not on such things as the past, but based on axioms.

Also, as far as Nihil's examples, I think that anything that demands a specific life total would be so stochastic as to make the game too random for it to see print. Maybe the avatar would get printed at a higher cost, but then it'd have to be way higher, and thus probably the card wouldn't matter as much. There's a lot getting in the way before mana burn or not can have an effect on how the game plays, I think.

[mercenarybdu]

not a huge issue. But keeps the game in check and balance.

[URABAHN]

Oh no, I couldn't care less. Just wanted to make a funny Facebook group.

Thank God for FACEBOOK!

[puppektion]

I can't see how mana burn affects design one way or another. I've never burned myself intentionally or seen someone else do it in order to lose life.

We used to do that back with those red Prophecy creatures:

Scoria Cat 3RR
Creature - Cat

Scoria Cat gets +3/+3 as long as you control no untapped lands.
3/3

Although it wasn't used to lose life necessarily, mana burning yourself for extra damage to your opponent's face was quite effective.

[Malchar]

Manaburn is just that, it's flavor. ONLY flavor. If no one even mentioned anything about mana burn, no one would expect it to exist. Reading through all the cards and basic rules of the game doesn't suggest that mana burn should exist at all. Sure, some cards reference it but only as a rules text reminder. In the rule book, it's awkwardly tacked on to the end of some other line of text. It makes sense that many only lasts for one turn (or phase to be correct) but for what reason do I get damaged if there's leftover?

Anyway, this is actually somewhat relevant in Legacy. I play imperial painter and frequently 3 myself by tapping mountain mountain ancient tomb to play my jaya. There have been games where I have taken more from mana burn than from ancient tombs. Granted it is somewhat strategic, I think it makes the game more elegant and sensible if it's just removed. I mean, you could also make people take 1 damage for each card that they discard at end of turn, or any other number of things for that matter.

[Forbiddian]

Manaburn is just that, it's flavor. ONLY flavor. If no one even mentioned anything about mana burn, no one would expect it to exist. Reading through all the cards and basic rules of the game doesn't suggest that mana burn should exist at all. Sure, some cards reference it but only as a rules text reminder. In the rule book, it's awkwardly tacked on to the end of some other line of text. It makes sense that many only lasts for one turn (or phase to be correct) but for what reason do I get damaged if there's leftover?

Anyway, this is actually somewhat relevant in Legacy. I play imperial painter and frequently 3 myself by tapping mountain mountain ancient tomb to play my jaya. There have been games where I have taken more from mana burn than from ancient tombs. Granted it is somewhat strategic, I think it makes the game more elegant and sensible if it's just removed. I mean, you could also make people take 1 damage for each card that they discard at end of turn, or any other number of things for that matter.

It should remain in the game precisely because it's flavorful and already in the game.

If they printed a card:


AK-47 3
Artifact - Equipment
1 - Equip
Equipped creature gains +4/+0 and first strike.
The remnants of the USSR's Cold War weapons arsenal were treasure troves for planeswalkers on a budget.

No shit everyone would complain. Why? Because the flavor doesn't line up. It ruins the atmosphere of the game.


Statements like, "It's only there because of flavor" as a criticism really underscore your inability to see through the tournament interactions. At some level, the cards have to fit into a fantasy universe. At some level, there's a concept that you're duking it out with another planeswalker, not for rating points, but for the fate of Dominaria.

And regardless, even if YOU'RE personally ok with summoning AK-47s or conjuring nuclear warheads, a huge chunk of the player base is founded on people playing the game for a fantasy feel.


It does make sense that Mana Burn causes life loss. You charge up as though you're going to release this huge amount of energy and then don't. The energy goes somewhere (presumably since at the end of the phase, it's no longer available to do work, it became heat energy, which can cause burns).

It reminds players/wizards/planeswalkers that the energies of the environment that they're using are inherently very powerful and very dangerous to inexperienced users.

[Obfuscate Freely]

Yes (http://magiccards.info/ds/en/11.html), really (http://magiccards.info/sok/en/102.html).

Manaburn itself removes a strategic element from the game.
You know, I'd like to mention that I am completely okay with Pulse of the Fields not being any better than it is. The card is absolutely no fun to play with or against, and removing manaburn from the game would make it unbelievably boring, as well.

Hidetsugu's Second Rite being slightly less randomly stupid is okay by me, too.

[pi4meterftw]

It should remain in the game precisely because it's flavorful and already in the game.

If they printed a card:


AK-47 3
Artifact - Equipment
1 - Equip
Equipped creature gains +4/+0 and first strike.
The remnants of the USSR's Cold War weapons arsenal were treasure troves for planeswalkers on a budget.

No shit everyone would complain. Why? Because the flavor doesn't line up. It ruins the atmosphere of the game.


Statements like, "It's only there because of flavor" as a criticism really underscore your inability to see through the tournament interactions. At some level, the cards have to fit into a fantasy universe. At some level, there's a concept that you're duking it out with another planeswalker, not for rating points, but for the fate of Dominaria.

And regardless, even if YOU'RE personally ok with summoning AK-47s or conjuring nuclear warheads, a huge chunk of the player base is founded on people playing the game for a fantasy feel.


It does make sense that Mana Burn causes life loss. You charge up as though you're going to release this huge amount of energy and then don't. The energy goes somewhere (presumably since at the end of the phase, it's no longer available to do work, it became heat energy, which can cause burns).

It reminds players/wizards/planeswalkers that the energies of the environment that they're using are inherently very powerful and very dangerous to inexperienced users.

LOL of course it's a sensible argument to say that it's only flavor. It's not as if you're actually a planeswalker or something, and then all of the sudden you draw "AK 47" and then your dreamworld gets shattered as you take a trip back to reality. In fact, when I play magic, I never think of Fantasy, Matt. The only time I have ever considered fantasy is when we joke about how silly the fantasy aspect of this game is, which is fine. Afterall, people play nonfantasy games. Flavor is pretty silly, its the strategic element of magic that puts it above most games, especially since from a flavor perspective, wizards hasn't really been promoting much.

[Forbiddian]

LOL of course it's a sensible argument to say that it's only flavor. It's not as if you're actually a planeswalker or something, and then all of the sudden you draw "AK 47" and then your dreamworld gets shattered as you take a trip back to reality. In fact, when I play magic, I never think of Fantasy, Matt. The only time I have ever considered fantasy is when we joke about how silly the fantasy aspect of this game is, which is fine. Afterall, people play nonfantasy games. Flavor is pretty silly, its the strategic element of magic that puts it above most games, especially since from a flavor perspective, wizards hasn't really been promoting much.

Totally spurious.

Most cards come with flavor text, and every card comes with an image and a fantasy-themed name. Magic has worked hard to promote the aesthetics of the game, and with it comes the flavor and some sense of immersion. At the tournament level, it is about interactions, but there wouldn't be tournaments if it weren't for flavor.

Magic would not have been successful were it simply gameplay based. I point to the success of card games: Yu-Gi-Oh, Star Wars CCG (which I played -- it's not half as good as Magic, but had a huge fanbase anyway), Star Wars TCG, Pokemon, L5R, and yes, Magic: the Gathering. Actually, pretty much all the games, ever.

Even Monopoly tries a little bit to make you feel like you're an entrepreneur, although at the tournament level, it's just about getting in on the first big trade and then outmanaging your opponents. Still, the people just picking up Monopoly are swept up into the fantasy world.

Those games would not have a tournament scene, nor would they even be played if their themes didn't resonate with customers.


I don't really see how you can have so much ignorance to think that Magic is above the laws that govern every other game. I don't think Mana Burn one way or another will change the game much, but Magic is far from being at the point where its tournament life alone will keep it afloat. In fact, everything seems to point to Magic being on the decline (although I haven't read the financial reports from Wizards).

The worst possible argument against Mana Burn is that, "Flavor should be removed categorically from the game." And it seems like the people espousing its removal are saying, "Flavor is irrelevant." Massive ignorance, I guess. Name a game that consistently violates its own theme or doesn't attempt any level of immersion.

I can only think of 12th and 15th century abstract strategy games. Broaden your search to: Any video game and any board game since 1900.


(I know that your brain operates differently than everyone else's, but you should at least understand that other people are affected by the fantasy element. I guess you're the person who intentionally doesn't download images to MWS, but by the sheer volume of traffic to the torrents, you should notice that other people feel differently than you do. Feel free to do your own market research or whatever if you don't believe me. But right now, claims like, "Oh, fuck the fantasy environment" seem as out of place and downright stupid as saying, "Why are there bikini-clad females in all the beer commercials? Doesn't Budweiser know most of its customers are males?")



Especially after reading interviews about M10, it seems like Wizards is trying hard to keep flavor in the game (or put it back into the game as the case may be).

[etrigan]

It should remain in the game precisely because it's flavorful and already in the game.

Yes, mana burn is flavorful, but removing it is not significantly unflavorful. Magic will not become a barren shell because people stop burning for 1 off Dark Rituals. Your AK equipment is completely different, as that is actively breaking flavor. Removing mana burn does no such thing.

I'd prefer if it stays, but if there's a good reason, rules-wise, why it has to go, I think I can live with that.

[Nihil Credo]

Nobody - before the strawman grows even bigger, let me repeat: nobody - is denying that flavour is important to Magic. However, it is established that flavour comes second after smooth gameplay (many people play vanilla but enjoyable games, but far less would play a flavourful but crappy game).

It's only sensible to strike away a rule like mana burn that has an annoying effect on gameplay and a restricting one on design, all for an infinitesimal flavour benefit. Seriously, if mana burn had never been in the game, would anyone be saying "you know, I think the rules should have a penalty for wasting mana"?

[pi4meterftw]

Nobody - before the strawman grows even bigger, let me repeat: nobody - is denying that flavour is important to Magic. However, it is established that flavour comes second after smooth gameplay (many people play vanilla but enjoyable games, but far less would play a flavourful but crappy game).

It's only sensible to strike away a rule like mana burn that has an annoying effect on gameplay and a restricting one on design, all for an infinitesimal flavour benefit. Seriously, if mana burn had never been in the game, would anyone be saying "you know, I think the rules should have a penalty for wasting mana"?

Sure even I'll agree with this, as I'd rather have flavor than not. Or at least, I wouldn't rather not have it. But it's of next to no importance to me, especially since so many other factors ruin it. Think of just about every MWS experience you've ever had, or in real life. So much as one stupid play from the opponent, or one SPL and the flavor is lost. Or perhaps you're imagining:

Planeswalker A keeps casting a bunch of spells
Planeswalker B walks away

or Planeswalker B casts standstill
Planeswalker B casts another standstill. Oopsies, says he.

How am I supposed to believe that these Planeswalkers are fighting for control of dominaria or whatever when they're doing such a craptastic job? The only way wizards could stop this is to ban bad sportsmen and bad magic players from playing, but then they'd lose money. Wait, what's money and where did that come from? Why is there this mastermind trying to make cash off of the magic spells I cast?

Maybe some of you have a different idea of what magic flavor should be like, but forget about being fooled into thinking you're a PW, I don't even think magic immerses you in the situation, since I never even think about it, whereas when I played other games, I did sometimes feel immersed.

[mujadaddy]

It's only sensible to strike away a rule like mana burn that has an annoying effect on gameplay and a restricting one on design, all for an infinitesimal flavour benefit. Here, I disagree that it's "annoying," that it "restricts" design and that it has anything to do with flavor.

It's a rule. You take damage for floating mana and not using it. Now they want to change that--not a huge deal, but it does remove a little bit of strategy from the game.

Design restriction? Whatever. It's a game--they change the rules all the time.


Seriously, if mana burn had never been in the game, would anyone be saying "you know, I think the rules should have a penalty for wasting mana"?We might, in fact be saying just that.

[Bryant Cook]

[I]Personal Nemesis
1B (or whatever)
Creature - Avatar
~ gets -X/-X, where X is your life total.
21/21


This card would be way better than goyf. Turn 1 Fetch, thoughtseize. turn 2 Snuffout, this guy. Win the Game.

Wizards needs to make this happen.

[Media314r8]

Piracy UU

Until end of turn, you may tap lands you don't control for mana. Spend this mana only to play spells.

Come on wizards... the spell already reads "UU: your opponent mana burns for the number of untapped lands he controls, your important spell resolves unless he has force, daze, forbid, or pact, yay. Piss off people in EDH."

Is this really going to relegate this obscure portal 2/starter rare to only assholes playing EDH and 2HG late-game schenanigans? The card alone is obviously reason enough to keep mana burn in the game.

/sarcasm.

For realsies, having negative repercussions for combo decks fizzling, and say, bouncelands casting shock/ponder effects adds an aspect of proper resource management to the game.

[Nihil Credo]

Sure even I'll agree with this, as I'd rather have flavor than not. Or at least, I wouldn't rather not have it. But it's of next to no importance to me, especially since so many other factors ruin it. Think of just about every MWS experience you've ever had, or in real life. So much as one stupid play from the opponent, or one SPL and the flavor is lost. Or perhaps you're imagining:

Planeswalker A keeps casting a bunch of spells
Planeswalker B walks away

or Planeswalker B casts standstill
Planeswalker B casts another standstill. Oopsies, says he.

How am I supposed to believe that these Planeswalkers are fighting for control of dominaria or whatever when they're doing such a craptastic job? The only way wizards could stop this is to ban bad sportsmen and bad magic players from playing, but then they'd lose money. Wait, what's money and where did that come from? Why is there this mastermind trying to make cash off of the magic spells I cast?

Maybe some of you have a different idea of what magic flavor should be like, but forget about being fooled into thinking you're a PW, I don't even think magic immerses you in the situation, since I never even think about it, whereas when I played other games, I did sometimes feel immersed.

Nah, flavour is much bigger than "MtG as a Planeswalker simulation" - a concept which I doubt really works for anyone who isn't borderline autistic. It's simply about giving the cards an identity, something you can remember and which makes sense by recalling other concepts. "Brainstorm" not only is far easier to remember than "IA/02/U", it also hints at what the card does. And the otherwise complicated rules for "trample" are much easier to grok once you picture a huge monster stomping through enemy lines.

For a similar example, how many people would play Call of Duty 4 multiplayer if your avatars were coloured blobs rather than soldiers and insurgents, the weapons abstract point emitters instead of realistic firearms, and the setting a wireframe-fest in place of Notiraqorafghanistan?

[mujadaddy]

For a similar example, how many people would play Call of Duty 4 multiplayer if your avatars were coloured blobs rather than soldiers and insurgents, the weapons abstract point emitters instead of realistic firearms, and the setting a wireframe-fest in place of Notiraqorafghanistan?
We used to play those games, and we liked it! We loved it!

[Forbiddian]

Nah, flavour is much bigger than "MtG as a Planeswalker simulation" - a concept which I doubt really works for anyone who isn't borderline autistic. It's simply about giving the cards an identity, something you can remember and which makes sense by recalling other concepts. "Brainstorm" not only is far easier to remember than "IA/02/U", it also hints at what the card does. And the otherwise complicated rules for "trample" are much easier to grok once you picture a huge monster stomping through enemy lines.

For a similar example, how many people would play Call of Duty 4 multiplayer if your avatars were coloured blobs rather than soldiers and insurgents, the weapons abstract point emitters instead of realistic firearms, and the setting a wireframe-fest in place of Notiraqorafghanistan?

"Flavor" is more than a memory aid.


Also, COD4 was pretty cool, I'm sure some people would play Slime Volleyball: Modern Warfare. But probably it wouldn't have attained 1/10th the popularity and it wouldn't be hosted as a tournament format at LAN parties across the country (Did COD4 make MLG?).

[jazzykat]

Regarding Mindslaver: I don't think it allows you to force your opponent to manaburn anyway.

Manaburn, is sometimes relevant when trying to go off with combo decks and it makes a few other cards worse (i.e. the RG legend that gives mana in the attack step ).

I'm not sure if it matters much one way or the other. Since I view myself as "Magic Conservative" I prefer to keep things the way they are/were originally worded if possible. In this case it is certainly possible.

[Paradigm Shift]

"Flavor" is more than a memory aid.


Also, COD4 was pretty cool, I'm sure some people would play Slime Volleyball: Modern Warfare. But probably it wouldn't have attained 1/10th the popularity and it wouldn't be hosted as a tournament format at LAN parties across the country (Did COD4 make MLG?).

Oh yeah it made MLG, it became a decently big deal. It's part of their big three now, Halo 3, CoD4, Gears 2. Along with some WoW 3's.

It still pays out like 1/10th of the Halo prize though haha.

[MattH]

They never should have had it in the game to begin with. I think people forget the weird, arbitrary rules we used to have. I'm thinking specifically of "tapped creatures don't deal damage" and "artifacts turn off when tapped". Those were both rules that were entirely justified by flavor, and yet the game is better off without them.

[Incidentally, those rules also provide precedent for cards like Braid of Fire and probably Mana Drain. If they ever DID remove mana burn, Braid would probably get errata, as Winter Orb and Master of Arms (eventually) did.]

However, that doesn't necessarily mean it should be removed now. I could go either way on that issue; making the game more in line with what it should have been all along is tempting, but the hassle of the established player base re-learning is significant. One thing I AM sure of, though, is that specific situations between specific cards like the Ritual vs. Chant scenario won't and shouldn't be a deciding factor. The important factors are things like, "Is this a barrier to new players?" Saving the combo player a few life points falls on the scale of importance about where killing The Mana Crypt Deck fell when they did away with the tapped-artifact rule*.


*At the time, if you could tap Crypt in your upkeep, you didn't have to flip and risk 3 damage, making it a kind of improved Thran Turbine.

[CallMeLiam]

I was playing with Pulse of the Forge pretty much throughout its time in Standard, and burning myself for card advantage was one of the only parts of that deck I had to put serious thought into. It was awesome and if only for that reason I'd be happier to keep mana burn in the game. Oh, and I happen to like using Eladamri's Vineyard in multiplayer. Killing mana burn would nerf the hell out of that already pretty mediocre card.

[Brad Herbig]

I totally agree mana burn should stay in magic, but refuse to join a facebook group due to the fact it will show up on my profile.

[Arctic_Slicer]

They never should have had it in the game to begin with. I think people forget the weird, arbitrary rules we used to have. I'm thinking specifically of "tapped creatures don't deal damage" and "artifacts turn off when tapped". Those were both rules that were entirely justified by flavor, and yet the game is better off without them.

[Incidentally, those rules also provide precedent for cards like Braid of Fire and probably Mana Drain. If they ever DID remove mana burn, Braid would probably get errata, as Winter Orb and Master of Arms (eventually) did.]

However, that doesn't necessarily mean it should be removed now. I could go either way on that issue; making the game more in line with what it should have been all along is tempting, but the hassle of the established player base re-learning is significant. One thing I AM sure of, though, is that specific situations between specific cards like the Ritual vs. Chant scenario won't and shouldn't be a deciding factor. The important factors are things like, "Is this a barrier to new players?" Saving the combo player a few life points falls on the scale of importance about where killing The Mana Crypt Deck fell when they did away with the tapped-artifact rule*.


*At the time, if you could tap Crypt in your upkeep, you didn't have to flip and risk 3 damage, making it a kind of improved Thran Turbine.

I totally agree with the sentiment here. It's kind of a stupid rule that probably shouldn't have existed but after 16 years it's seems pretty stupid to change it now. This isn't like the legend rule change; having mana burn in the game isn't restricting design, they can always add "doesn't cause mana burn" to cards they don't want people burning from, however removing mana burn from the rules will change other cards that "work" because of mana burn.

Spectral Searchlight is a great example of this; the card accelerates and fixes the mana of any player but if you don't need the mana you can alternatively use the "any player" part to add mana to your opponent's mana pool at the end of their turn gambling on the fact they probably wont be able to take advantage of it and burn for 1. Spectral Searchlight is probably one of my favorite cards ever simply because it's design was just plain "cool" it was a "ping stick" that didn't cause life loss or damage and definitely one of the most memorable cards I have ever played in a pre-release. If it wasn't for mana burn it's likely Spectral Seachlight wouldn't be nearly as memorable as it is and is cause enough to keep mana burn in the game.

[Dark_Cynic87]

I hate it when companies do crap like this. If it's not broke, don't fix it. I love mana burn. I like chanting in response to someone playing their third dark rit. It's hilarious, and I will be extremely upset if it goes away. In fact, I won't play any other way than with mana burn even if they do change it. This is just like when they re-errata'ed Inturrupts into Instants. That pissed a lot of people off, just like this will. Mana burn is a staple rule that keeps people from being gluttonous with their mana. It makes the math more relevant and also the game more fun. Not to mention it will make the actual text on Mindslaver look silly...:rolleyes:

Pce,

--DC

[Phoenix Ignition]

Not to mention, a big part of suicide decks like Eva Green is to get a kick-ass start off of a dark ritual. It often leaves me burning for 1 after putting a bob into play or hymning the opponent, but this adds to the "I'm playing a deck that I hurt myself a lot in order to hurt you more."

It's the flavor of black to have mana burn. I'm surprised they're thinking of removing it when they still print "hurt me, hurt you" cards like Putrid Leech. That card is perfect in terms of flavor and balancing. Getting rid of the hurt yourself for a better start openings really detracts from the flavor of a lot of decks, not just combo.

And like I mentioned in a different thread before, I love dazing things against stax players when they only have Ancient Tomb untapped. It's like hitting them with a lightning bolt! Sure, they'll still take 2 instead of 3, but that just comes from them using their land, not the whole "I charged too much for this, now the energy has gotta go somewhere" logic of mana burn.

Bleh, it's not like I'll quit or anything when they get rid of it, I just really don't buy into any of the "from a designer's point of view" arguments. If you're a designer, sure it might give you some cards like Glissa, Sunseeker type of cards, but it ruins all of the drawbacks behind using power accelerants like Dark Rit.