[SCD] Harm's Way

[Unknown2]

Hey, so I've been toying with this card in both constructed for legacy and type 2, and was wondering if it's even viable in legacy at all in something like a zoo deck. I'm thinking it's not as good considering the low amount of threats in most decks, but I figured it was worth a discussion.

[Skeggi]

Well, for Zoo you'd have to figure out if it's better than Lightning Bolt, Chain Lightning, Path to Exile or even Swords to Plowshares or Lightning Helix. Since all these spells don't require your opponent to deal damage, I think they're all better.

[Aggro_zombies]

Well, it's not entirely bad. Most decks in the format win through the combat step. The problem is that it's worse than the two currently playable one-white-mana removal spells in the format, since you'll almost always want to use to kill a creature unless your opponent is very low on life. There's also the fact that it's white...

This card wouldn't be played in Zoo because that deck has so many better options. It might see play in some sort of white weenie build, but it's worse than Jitte or Path at killing guys, and when was the last time straight white weenie was playable in this format anyway?

[JeroenC]

It's also dead against a lot of decks that won't deal damage to your creatures (MUC, Landstill, Storm Combo, etc).

[Skeggi]

While it is indeed totally dead against Storm Combo, it does work against any source dealing damage to either you or a permanent you control, so theoretically, it could kill an attacking Mishra's Factory.

[DrJones]

The advantage of Harm's Way is that it's far easier to do 2 for 1 with it than with Swords or Path, and also protects your creatures from removal. So to get the most of it you should be running creatures.

The "problem" with it, is that against big creatures is only a shock to the opponent plus prevent 2 damage (2/3 of lightning helix). I don't think it's bad either, but I can see some decks wanting to use that space for other cards.

[JeroenC]

While it is indeed totally dead against Storm Combo, it does work against any source dealing damage to either you or a permanent you control, so theoretically, it could kill an attacking Mishra's Factory.

But the same thing can be achieved with a StP or Bolt...

[RoddyVR]

I've started running it now in addition to STP, and will probably start dropping the stp number down to add the fourth of these. Its realy good against zoo.
I dont think there will be too many situations where this is strictly worse then STP (i'll admit, except against dreadnought, but i dont want to give them 12 life anyway, and would prefer killing that thing as an artifact, as apposed to as a creature).
Playing slivers its more important for me to keep my slivers alive then it is to kill off opponents creatures, and this allows me to have a card that does both.

[Bardo]

The problem is that Harm's Way requires your opponent to make certain decisions before it creates any value; any many games where you'd rather have StP, you'll flat out lose. Tombstalker, unopposed Goyf, Dreadnought, GG.

Danger of Cool Things and All.

Seems worth testing in Zoo, however.

[Valtrix]

Seems worth testing in Zoo, however.

Perhaps, but I don't really seeing it doing anything we don't already do already. Plus, most of the time zoo creatures will just be killing creatures, and not trading. Chances are that even if you are able to (1) save your creature while killing an opponent's in a combat war that either (A) The 2 extra damage to the head from harm's way probably won't matter or (B) You won't actually be able to kill another creature on the opponent's board. It seems strongest in the aggro matchup, but that's already really good. I think I'd rather just have something that can do 3 all the time, or get rid of a creature all the time.

I think that situation is pretty true for a lot of decks actually. It's really only a 2-for-1 when you're able to both trade for a creature and kill another creature, which quite frankly in legacy will be rare. Plus, I think the situations where you kill an opponent's creature, save your own, then deal 2 to your opponent are probably going to be either (1) not happening all that often or (2) not mattering over just destroying/removing their creature and swinging for damage to begin with.

[Bardo]

@ Valtrix. I agree. Too many things would have to magically align for it to be as cool as it is when you imagine the various scenarios.

Basically, they're mostly corner cases and shiny things are shiny.

[Nessaja]

I think people are approaching this spell the wrong way. Harm's Way is first a protection spell - it saves one of your creatures. Then - after that it could also kill an opposing creature. Don't compare it to straight removal like STP ot PtE, don't compare it to Lightning Bolt. This does something that those spells can not do.

It's still not spectacular at what it does and it's the question if it's worth including a spell that only has the potential to save your creatures, but it does have some card advantage and tempo potential.

[Valtrix]

Protects your creatures from what? If it protects your creatures from other creatures, then you might as well play straight up removal (or some pseudo-removal like bolt) to deal with it. That's essentially protecting your creature.

If it protects your creatures from burn, well then you're in a conundrum. In most decks that you'd want to protect a creature you don't want to leave mana open for that. You want to be laying threats on the board instead.

[Skeggi]

I think people are approaching this spell the wrong way. Harm's Way is first a protection spell - it saves one of your creatures. Then - after that it could also kill an opposing creature. Don't compare it to straight removal like STP ot PtE, don't compare it to Lightning Bolt. This does something that those spells can not do.

Why not just use

http://magiccards.info/scans/en/be/106.jpg

Oh look! It protects 3 damage and deals an extra 3 damage! And still it's not seen in Legacy... I wonder why...

[Maveric78f]

How does it deal damage to a target?

If it was play healing salve on a target + play lightning bolt on another target it would be unfair. That's approxiamtely what Harm's way does.

[Nessaja]

If it protects your creatures from burn, well then you're in a conundrum. In most decks that you'd want to protect a creature you don't want to leave mana open for that. You want to be laying threats on the board instead.
Ever heard of the second main phase, I heard it's pretty good.


Why not just use

Oh look! It protects 3 damage and deals an extra 3 damage! And still it's not seen in Legacy... I wonder why...
Could that have anything to do with the fact that it only applies to combat damage? Just a suggestion. Even in combat situations, note that the damage isn't targetted and cannot be used to protect yourself unlike a giant growth. Giant Growth would entirely be played if it did 3 targetable damage to a creature as well as giving your creature 3 toughness.

That seriously didn't take rocket science to figure out.

[Skeggi]

I was replying to the fact that you stated it can be used to protect your creatures. You can use a Giant Growth for that too. Giant Growth can also generate more damage output and doesn't depend on one of your opponent's sources to deal damage.

I see the potential in Harm's Way, and I see where it can be more useful than Swords to Plowshares, Lightning Bolt or Giant Growth, but I'm still not a believer :smile:.

[DrJones]

Actually, Giant Growth is pretty good at saving your creatures from burn and dealing extra damage to the opponent. It's not played anymore because it's outclassed by several other pump spells, for example Bounty of the Hunt, Invigorate, Might of Alara, or Might of old krosa.

I think that Harm's way is crazy good, too.

[Nessaja]

I was replying to the fact that you stated it can be used to protect your creatures. You can use a Giant Growth for that too. Giant Growth can also generate more damage output and doesn't depend on one of your opponent's sources to deal damage.
Do you seriously want to argue that Giant Growth is better then Harm's Way or are you arguing for the sake of argument? Just because I state that Harm's Way is first and foremost a protection spell (so not a removal spell) doesn't mean you can take that part out of context and disregard every other detail.

You don't need to be a believer, I'm not either (as I said in my post). But don't compare Harm's Way to Lightning Bolt or STP as they are entirely different things.

[Skeggi]

There is just no such slot for a 'creature protection spell' in any deck. Yet. Take the widely suggested Zoo for instance. Would you drop removal/burn for it? Seems like all these things are better. Would you drop a creature for it? Heck no.

So where would it fit? If it's primarily a protection spell to save your creatures, you could argue you could sacrifice some creature slots for it. But you never want to sacrifice creature slots for creature protection, especially if that protection doesn't even protect from stuff like StP, PtE or even Vindicates.

An aggressive deck could opt to put it into a removal slot, but as said before, that seems weak.

So you probably want to try it in a more control-oriented deck. Like UGw Thresh? But again, what to drop? You don't want to drop your counters, you don't want to drop the little removal you have.

It seems like Harm's Way is a good 61st-64th card in a couple of decks.

I don't argue for the sake of argument. I honestly question what the use of this card is. Yes, Harm's Way is different than the cards I mentioned - but I think in lines of what cards you'll have to drop for it, and then I think it's fair to make such a comparisson.

[Nessaja]

You're just repeating what I said in a... more wordy way;

It's still not spectacular at what it does and it's the question if it's worth including a spell that only has the potential to save your creatures, but it does have some card advantage and tempo potential.

And it's not worse then Giant Growth. Which is what I referred to when I said you were arguing for the sake of argument. But even so - this would go in an entirely different deck then Giant Growth to start with. If it's included anywhere it'll be a mono white deck.

[DrJones]

Harm's way is card advantage in white, it also provides at the same protection and removal. It's a tempo card against faster decks, and it even comboes with cards that do damage to every player (Ankh of Mishra, Ancient Tomb, Devastating Dreams...) so it can be useful even against control players with no creatures.

[Maveric78f]

DD does not do damage to players.

[Hopo]

DD does not do damage to players.
But it damages creatures, which I believe was the point. Harm's Way still works.

[RoddyVR]

I see Harm's Way as being a mixed use spell, when you only have 4 slots, but want to fit a bit of reach against some decks, some lifegain against burn, some removal against zoo... harm's way does all of it in one card. Yes there are cards that do each bit better, but none of them do it all.
The comparison with giant growth is actualy an arguable one even in JUST the "protects your creatures" category. A giant growth cant protect a shroud creature (be it crystalined sliver or mongoose) from a piroclasm effect. Harm's way can.

The thing i like most about Harm's way is the same thing i like about Daze. Before your opponent knows that you're playing it, they will likely walk into a situation where you can abuse the hell out of it (ie save your creature and kill theirs with one card). Once they know you have it, it becomes something they have to play around whenever you have a white open. Their exalted goyf will no longer attack into yours, bob and factory will no longer attack you when you have no defenders at all. It makes your opponent's decision making much harder when they know you have a posibility of this trick.

[Valtrix]

Ever heard of the second main phase, I heard it's pretty good.

Ever hear of the opponent's turn? I hear that's pretty good too. And if this is run in anything GW they'll probably want to play a pridemage before they attack sometimes too.

[Anusien]

Does Goblins want Harm's Way? "You play Firespout/Pyroclasm, okay I save two of my creatures and kill one of yours or Shock you."

[from Cairo]

Does Goblins want Harm's Way? "You play Firespout/Pyroclasm, okay I save two of my creatures and kill one of yours or Shock you."

While that play is very good, I'm not sure that just using Burrenton Forge-Tender wouldn't be better if one was splashing White already.

EDIT: Harm's Way probably is better actually since it doubles as a means to take down large blockers, where Forge-Tender really only doubles as a 1/1.

[TheCramp]

I think, most significantly, Harm's Way protects plains walkers. They are already hard to kill, and harm's way is one of the few cards which really profitably does this. Do you want to protect a creature or run another creature? most often, the answer is run more creatures. you can overwhelm the opponent, or replace it if they spend a card killing something. With walkers, you have a different dynamic. You want to maintain loyalty you have gained, you cannot overwhelm an opponent with a second Elspeth. If I had to make a prediction it would be that if Harm's Way played a roll in Legacy, it would be in this capacity. I do, however, like your suggestion Anusien about goblins. It does seem like the right kind of answer in goblins, "fuck that, oh, and fuck you..."

[Maveric78f]

Does Goblins want Harm's Way? "You play Firespout/Pyroclasm, okay I save two of my creatures and kill one of yours or Shock you."

Can you explain this? How can you choose the "next 2 damages" that are dealt by pyroclasm?

[RoddyVR]

Can you explain this? How can you choose the "next 2 damages" that are dealt by pyroclasm?
From the M10 FAQ:
* If the chosen source would simultaneously deal damage to multiple permanents you control (like Pyroclasm could) or to you and at least one permanent you control (like Earthquake could), Harm's Way will redirect just 2 of that damage. It won't redirect the next 2 damage that would be dealt to each recipient. You choose which 2 damage is redirected. If you like, you can choose to redirect 1 damage that would be dealt by the chosen source to each of two different recipients.

Even better then i thought. Also:
* If the chosen source would deal just 1 damage to you or a permanent you control, Harm's Way's effect will redirect that damage and still have a "shield" left for another 1 damage from that source later in the turn.

I cant realy thing of any use, except maybe a doublestriking 1/x, or maybe sharpshooter (though if the first activation is prevented, its unlikely there'll be a second...). Would it take 2 damage off a storming Grapeshot? Or is each copy a seperate source of damage?

[JeroenC]

Each copy is a seperate source.
Also, if you're going to use Harm's Way against Pyroclasm... Why wouldn't you just use a Lord effect?

[Roman Candle]

Each copy is a seperate source.
Also, if you're going to use Harm's Way against Pyroclasm... Why wouldn't you just use a Lord effect?

I think a better question would be, why not just play more Goblins?

[JeroenC]

It's pretty much the same question I guess. Don't play Harm's Way, people.

[bowvamp]

Actually, Harm's Way still looks pretty awesome to me. In boros, that is... we take out fanatic add a harm's way.

[Skeggi]

Hasn't all Boros been turned into Naya Zoo?

[urdjur]

I think it could see play in white splashed burn alongside Lightning Helix. There's discussion on whether Mogg Fanatic needs replacing in burn anyways, and people look to all sorts of other options including jank like Shock. There's always wasteland to worry about, but I guess there's more merit to splashing white in burn now than ever.