[Primer/Deck] Burn

[echofish]

Am I missing something? He didn't play Faerie Macabre, right? Or is that your point; play it over normal gy-hate?

Yeah, that was the point. He dies with Relic in hand. Joe even has a decay ready for any "normal" gy hate, as you call it.

[Chatto]

With normal I mean real gy-hosers. Tarmogoyf is still a card, and it gets more play these days. Faerie Macabre 'only' takes two cards, but in some scenarios that can be enough, of course. Your pros are very real in a fast meta: I'm going to try it in my SB for a while.

[Brael]

Playing a win a box tournament tomorrow (well, it's after midnight so I suppose it's today now) the format is Legacy with unlimited proxies available. With the ability to play anything in the world that I want, it means I'm playing Burn. I'm doing this because I expect Price of Progress to put in some serious work in such a format where everyone is playing all the ABU's they can jam, and probably playing more than they should. Plus, people have been saying lately around the shop that Burn sucks so I want to prove them wrong. I figure this prediction is 50/50, it will horribly backfire if everyone just jumps on turn 1-2 combo decks.

My list is similar to a couple pages back except there's no longer a need to capitalize on any MB Cruise hate. Most notably after defending Magma Jet a page back I'm dropping it here in favor of Searing Blaze, I expect a higher than normal number of targets as people try to capitalize on Stoneforge/Batterskull and DRS (few Legacy tournaments in the area, so I think people will want to play the big interactions) and in such a situation the Searing X spells are a bit more powerful.


//Land 19
1 Arid Mesa
4 Bloodstained Mire
4 Scalding Tarn
9 Mountain
1 Taiga

//Creatures 13
4 Goblin Guide
4 Monastery Swiftspear
4 Eidolon of the Great Revel
1 Grim Lavamancer

//Spells 28
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Chain Lightning
4 Fireblast
4 Price of Progress
4 Skullcrack
3 Searing Blaze
3 Rift Bolt
2 Collateral Damage

//Sideboard 15
3 Faerie Macabre
3 Sulfuric Vortex
2 Destructive Revelry
2 Volcanic Fallout
1 Red Elemental Blast
1 Pyroblast
2 Ensnaring Bridge
1 Grim Lavamancer

Anyone not convinced that Faerie Macabre is the graveyard hate of choice should see Burn vs Reanimator from SCG last weekend:
http://www.twitch.tv/scglive/b/618582124?t=7h30m

Pros:
-Instant speed
-Free
-Can't be countered (except stifle)
-Can't be destroyed
-Removes two creatures (Good in case they got two creatures in gy and plays Exhume. And you even get a 2/2 flyer in play for free!)

Macabre is very good in a deck like burn, that game showed why.

[bigwerdz]

@brael
I guess I just don't understand the lists you put together. Why on earth are you running a collateral damage over a rift bolt lol. I guess I could maybe see it if you had young pyromancer and were saccing tokens but you are playing guys that need to swing. Rift bolt is too valuable with monastery swift spear and profitable interactions against chalice and miracles. Also why skullcrack main and vortex board. I mean vortex is just better but if you insist on crack why run vortex at all? Just dump one or the other and shore up your 1-of/2-of sideboard so you can actually see the cards when you bring em in. You aren't running magma jet to dig for them anymore...

[I_Hate_Counterspells]

Agree with @bigwerdz. I can't see the reason for including Collateral Damage. Are you only planning to use it in response to an opponent bolting your own creature? The list posted by @paeng4983 is as good as it gets.

[bigwerdz]

Thanks I_Hate_Counterspells. If the meta is anything like I saw at Indy I can't see a good reason to run swiftspear over lavamancer. Elves was EVERYWHERE. Lavaman is also good for controlling bugs non-goyf creatures and bug was popular too. I mean to each their own and I understand why people run swifty but if there is a time to take a look at old lavamancer it is prolly now.

[Brael]

@brael
I guess I just don't understand the lists you put together. Why on earth are you running a collateral damage over a rift bolt lol. I guess I could maybe see it if you had young pyromancer and were saccing tokens but you are playing guys that need to swing. Rift bolt is too valuable with monastery swift spear and profitable interactions against chalice and miracles. Also why skullcrack main and vortex board. I mean vortex is just better but if you insist on crack why run vortex at all? Just dump one or the other and shore up your 1-of/2-of sideboard so you can actually see the cards when you bring em in. You aren't running magma jet to dig for them anymore...

I could see a Vortex/Skullcrack switch. Collateral Damage is very good against Batterskull and a few other things.

[Brael]

Sorry, I was in a rush when I wrote that. I'm running Collateral Damage because I suspect it's quite good. This will be my first tournament with it but I have played Reckless Abandon in the past and it was good despite the timing restrictions. Collateral Damage is almost a strict upgrade. It lets you swing into lifelink if you have multiple creatures, it lets you block lifelink, it lets you get value off creatures that can't swing, it salvages a block you failed to take into account, it gets rid of Eidolon if you have to, and it's strong against certain removal spells. I've played 3 Abandon before in a list with 4 Hellsparks and 4 Marauders, I think 2 is the perfect number here.

The Rift Bolt is cut because it had to be something, I suspect Miracles isn't going to show up, and if it does that's a matchup I'm very familiar and comfortable with usually winning it by capitalizing on my opponent making the wrong plays. I'm confident I can win it here because no one including me is a legacy expert (I just happen to know this one deck well).

I've been thinking about Vortex/Skullcrack for the past couple hours and I'm not sure what to add so what I'll try is swap the 2 Vortex with 2 Skullcrack.

Agree with @bigwerdz. I can't see the reason for including Collateral Damage. Are you only planning to use it in response to an opponent bolting your own creature? The list posted by @paeng4983 is as good as it gets.

Paeng4983's list isn't that far off from mine MB. I'm on 3 Blaze/1 Lavamancer where he's on 4 Blaze which is pretty similar in function, and after the switch above I've got 2 Skullcracks, and a Fireblast, and where he has Lava Spikes. The last two Bolts we both have, mine are just named Collateral Damage which provides a different type of utility. I suspect both lists play out rather similar SB's aside which can't really be compared due to different metas.

Edit: Editing to avoid a triple post. I ended up going 3-1 taking second on tiebreakers, beat Shardless BUG, Esper Deathblade, and Goblins, lost to Dredge in the finals, I narrowly lost out on game 1 then punted the sideboard and was severely punished in game 2. However I did use every card in my sideboard so I'm happy with what I went with. Sulfuric Vortex was fantastic but I was fortunate with land draws I think I may go up to 20 lands if I continue with it MB. Collateral Damage performed well above expectations but I did side it out from time to time. Collateral did everything it let me score me some free -loyalty against Liliana, kill 4 Bridge from Below at once, and profitably interact with Batterskull for 1 mana. The one negative I noticed is that the interaction between it and Monastery Swiftspear wasn't the best as it actively works against you making Swiftspear 2+ power each turn if it's your only creature. Two seemed like the perfect number.

Needless to say I was very happy with Collateral but I think I want to hedge against that Mentor/Collateral interaction. I might go to say a 3/2 split on Mentor/Lavamancer.

[Scott]

Has anyone played with a Burn deck like this? I like the feel of it in testing, and I'm wondering what people's impressions of this sort of thing have been.

Again with the cutting of Lava Spike!

To answer the question, yes, I love the black splash in burn. But playing 24 mana producers in order to support high cc utility cards like Sulfuric Vortex, Sylvan Library and Searing Blaze in place of burn's bread and butter: 3 damage for 1 mana cards like Lava Spike and Bump in the Night is not the correct route to take.


I'm a big proponent of splashing black into burn (especially now that TC got the boot). But being able to play 4 Bump in the Night alongside 4 Deathrite Shaman (which allows you to get away with playing 18 lands) are the main reasons why I think the black splash is worthwhile. Sulfuric Vortex, Sylvan Library and Searing Blaze have no place in a burn deck that splashes another color. The whole point of splashing is to enable the deck to play more mana efficient spells and a lower curve.

I had similar instincts when Bump in the Night and then Tyrant's Choice came out, alongside Deathrite Shaman. My thought was, "Great, cut the chaff like Hellspark Elemental and Flame Rift, splash black, add another 1 CMC 3 damage spell in Bump in the Night (once in a blue moon flashed back with the help of DRS), add DRS for reach, acceleration, & graveyard hosing, and add Tyrant's Choice. Done."

I tested things like http://tcdecks.net/deck.php?id=13245&iddeck=97215 in various forms, including updated ones to include Tyrant's Choice, and it went fine. The mana base and Price of Progress were rarely problems. After extensive testing of http://www.tcdecks.net/deck.php?id=14232&iddeck=104883, I do believe that it's on the right track more than the previous one, though.

I can't speak for the designer, but I think I understand the philosophy behind the differences, and get what makes it tick, in comparison to the other. In a sentence, you don't want to be fetching a dual land unless it's for a substantial benefit, and you don't want to do it with your first land drop unless you're dropping a DRS. We're not starved for 1 CMC 3 damage spells anymore. If we're running things like DRS and Searing Blaze in the main deck of the black splash, as I think we should be, we don't even have space for another one. It's just another Lava Spike, which itself doesn't make the cut in that configuration, and yet another (and a worse one) Rift Bolt/Chain Lightning/Lava Spike is not good enough to be fetching a Badlands. And that flashback ain't happening.

As for the other non-red cards, fetching a Badlands or a Taiga for a Deathrite Shaman actually helps your mana most games and is much more powerful than a Bump in the Night, and Tyrant's Choice & Sylvan Library don't require the possible tempo loss of a turn 1 Wasteland, while also being powerful enough to warrant the dual land fetch.

As far as lowering the mana curve and land count to 18, even with DRS I wouldn't be comfortable playing 18 lands in what I believe to be the optimal list, without any card selection. It's not like Sulfuric Vortex is the only reason one would go up to 3 CMC; you have Ensnaring Bridge and Krosan Grip from the side, and occasional need for it with Rift Bolt and Fireblast fuel. I don't see why a burn deck splashing another color wouldn't want Searing Blaze. It has the same CMC as Tyrant's Choice, Price of Progress, and Eidolon of the Great Revel, and I think it's a hell of a card, especially with our fetches.

Thanks for your thoughts though. The strategy of lowering the curve that you're pursuing could have separate merit. These are just my fallible takeaways, but I encourage anyone to test the Rbg burn list, as I'm sold on it being an upgrade from mono red.

[bigwerdz]

@scott
In your testing how often can your list t3 somebody? I know the deck isn't strictly built for the t3 kill but I feel like the threat of the t3 kill is very important. Mono red is already pretty consistent so having things like sylvan library is just taking away from the pressure to get more of something we already have. I like the idea of using our life as a resource to draw gas but I feel like I'd rather spend my second or third turn keeping the pressure up with damage. I feel like we lost alot of efficiency for color splashes that we cannot afford. Also lavaman hitting creatures is huge over drs only draining opponents. He did work over that weekend against infect and d&t. I haven't posted my list yet so here it is. http://sales.starcitygames.com//deck...p?DeckID=79340.

[jmlima]

I had similar instincts when Bump in the Night and then Tyrant's Choice came out, alongside Deathrite Shaman. My thought was, "Great, cut the chaff like Hellspark Elemental and Flame Rift, splash black, add another 1 CMC 3 damage spell in Bump in the Night (once in a blue moon flashed back with the help of DRS), add DRS for reach, acceleration, & graveyard hosing, and add Tyrant's Choice. Done."

I tested things like http://tcdecks.net/deck.php?id=13245&iddeck=97215 in various forms, including updated ones to include Tyrant's Choice, and it went fine. The mana base and Price of Progress were rarely problems. After extensive testing of http://www.tcdecks.net/deck.php?id=14232&iddeck=104883, I do believe that it's on the right track more than the previous one, though.

I can't speak for the designer, but I think I understand the philosophy behind the differences, and get what makes it tick, in comparison to the other. In a sentence, you don't want to be fetching a dual land unless it's for a substantial benefit, and you don't want to do it with your first land drop unless you're dropping a DRS. We're not starved for 1 CMC 3 damage spells anymore. If we're running things like DRS and Searing Blaze in the main deck of the black splash, as I think we should be, we don't even have space for another one. It's just another Lava Spike, which itself doesn't make the cut in that configuration, and yet another (and a worse one) Rift Bolt/Chain Lightning/Lava Spike is not good enough to be fetching a Badlands. And that flashback ain't happening.

As for the other non-red cards, fetching a Badlands or a Taiga for a Deathrite Shaman actually helps your mana most games and is much more powerful than a Bump in the Night, and Tyrant's Choice & Sylvan Library don't require the possible tempo loss of a turn 1 Wasteland, while also being powerful enough to warrant the dual land fetch.

As far as lowering the mana curve and land count to 18, even with DRS I wouldn't be comfortable playing 18 lands in what I believe to be the optimal list, without any card selection. It's not like Sulfuric Vortex is the only reason one would go up to 3 CMC; you have Ensnaring Bridge and Krosan Grip from the side, and occasional need for it with Rift Bolt and Fireblast fuel. I don't see why a burn deck splashing another color wouldn't want Searing Blaze. It has the same CMC as Tyrant's Choice, Price of Progress, and Eidolon of the Great Revel, and I think it's a hell of a card, especially with our fetches.

Thanks for your thoughts though. The strategy of lowering the curve that you're pursuing could have separate merit. These are just my fallible takeaways, but I encourage anyone to test the Rbg burn list, as I'm sold on it being an upgrade from mono red.

I'm with you regarding the splash.

IF there is a splash, then the obvious starting point is Death Rite Shaman. But I feel this creates a slight conundrum in the sense that the obvious fetch for Death Rite Shaman is Bayou, but Bayou is far from the ideal fetch for Burn. Hence, you end up fetching something like Badlands, which puts with a single option from what Death Rite Shaman offers. I appreciate the to use green with Death Rite Shaman is probably redundant in this deck as life gain is far from a priority, which in turn makes me wonder if, to avoid even more exposure to Wasteland, one would not be better to ignore entirely the green sources and green cards for main deck, leaving in the board the green sources, plus something like Destructive Revelry to deal with possible Leyline of Sanctity. If Leyline of Sanctity is not a threat, then potentially Null Rod could be used instead of the green splash and green sources would not be required at all.

Just a random thought.

[Chatto]

I'm with you regarding the splash.

IF there is a splash, then the obvious starting point is Death Rite Shaman. But I feel this creates a slight conundrum in the sense that the obvious fetch for Death Rite Shaman is Bayou, but Bayou is far from the ideal fetch for Burn. Hence, you end up fetching something like Badlands, which puts with a single option from what Death Rite Shaman offers. I appreciate the to use green with Death Rite Shaman is probably redundant in this deck as life gain is far from a priority, which in turn makes me wonder if, to avoid even more exposure to Wasteland, one would not be better to ignore entirely the green sources and green cards for main deck, leaving in the board the green sources, plus something like Destructive Revelry to deal with possible Leyline of Sanctity. If Leyline of Sanctity is not a threat, then potentially Null Rod could be used instead of the green splash and green sources would not be required at all.

Just a random thought.

Wow, that is one hell of a long sentence.

In my humble opinion the only splash is Green for enchantment-hate: K-Grip or Destructive Revelry.

[jmlima]

Wow, that is one hell of a long sentence.

In my humble opinion the only splash is Green for enchantment-hate: K-Grip or Destructive Revelry.

If you're splashing a single colour wouldn't white be the colour to go? It opens up a sea of anti-enchantment / artifact / combo hate... plus some soft locks if there is the need (which there shouldn't but hey-ho).

[Scott]

@scott
In your testing how often can your list t3 somebody? I know the deck isn't strictly built for the t3 kill but I feel like the threat of the t3 kill is very important. Mono red is already pretty consistent so having things like sylvan library is just taking away from the pressure to get more of something we already have. I like the idea of using our life as a resource to draw gas but I feel like I'd rather spend my second or third turn keeping the pressure up with damage. I feel like we lost alot of efficiency for color splashes that we cannot afford. Also lavaman hitting creatures is huge over drs only draining opponents. He did work over that weekend against infect and d&t. I haven't posted my list yet so here it is. http://sales.starcitygames.com//deck...p?DeckID=79340.

I did a small amount of comparative testing on the speed matter, not enough to be sufficient, but turn 3 kills look to be more frequent in Marcos Morelli's Rbg list. Compared to traditional post-Eidolon burn, its impediments to a faster kill are a singleton Library, a singleton Vortex which many mono red lists carry--2 in yours, basically the same lack of pressure as 1 Sylvan, 1 Vortex in Rbg--too, and the occasional DRS taking the place of a burn spell and having nothing to accelerate into (uncommon, and also usually making up for it with slower reach). Its boosts to a faster kill are DRS acceleration and Tyrant's Choice (4 damage instead of 3 seems more relevant than it being 2 CMC, as it's rare to have a sequence like Turn 1 Guide; Turn 2 Rift Bolt, Lava Spike; Turn 3 Chain Lightning, Bolt, Bolt of entirely 1-drops). Essentially, DRS acceleration is more relevant to speed than a 1-of Library speed bump, and in most games, Library is a big plus for consistency. Openings like Turn 1 DRS; Turn 2 Guide Searing Blaze; Turn 3 Tyrant's Choice Bolt Fireblast 0 life and many variations on it are not a stretch. Your list also carries Lavamancer, which is a hindrance to speed too.

Lavamancer's a good card, but I don't think it can be positively compared to DRS. DRS is just awesome in the deck: providing the same reach as Lavamancer, acceleration, shoring up bad graveyard match ups, occasional life gain, mana fixing, etc. In my opinion, it's better to run the better DRS and run the Searing Blazes play set for creatures. Not counting Fireblast, but counting Lavamancer, your list carries 18 creature removal cards, in comparison to Morelli's 16, so yours does have a slight advantage there.

Splashing also carries the obvious benefits of cards like Destructive Revelry and Krosan Grip, which are huge, with miniscule drawback, in my experience.

Nicely done in the Open, by the way.

[Chatto]

If you're splashing a single colour wouldn't white be the colour to go? It opens up a sea of anti-enchantment / artifact / combo hate... plus some soft locks if there is the need (which there shouldn't but hey-ho).

Well, no, because white offers nothing Burn already has: Eidolon, E-Bridge, Smash to Smithereens. Of course you could use Disenchant, but K-Grip does it strictly better. And yeah, you will not splash white for soft locks. I think it's something personal, though.

[jmlima]

Well, no, because white offers nothing Burn already has: Eidolon, E-Bridge, Smash to Smithereens. Of course you could use Disenchant, but K-Grip does it strictly better. And yeah, you will not splash white for soft locks. I think it's something personal, though.

I guess so. I'm probably just a bit obsessed about fast combo at the moment.

[Chatto]

@ Burnwillows, Swiftspear is a great card, and I've played her too, but the results weren't always satisfying. Right now I've decided to drop her for good old GG: the damage-output is more consistent. I would consider Lavamancer as a replacement, especially when there is Tempo and Elves in your meta. Same goes for Searing Blaze and Sulfuric Vortex: creature-heavy meta? Go for Blaze. A lot of control? Go for Vortex.

As for your SB: it looks allright to me

[Redkid43]

Something that I've been really wanted to try out is Lotus Petal over some number of mountains. Thete was a few successful versions of Petal Burn that splash blue before Cruise got the axe--lotus petal was a spell that triggered prowess on Swiftspear and filled the graveyard for early Cruises.

I had a quick brew session last night and this came out of it. Granted, this deck can change back to a more traditional burn deck if Petal fails.

4 Goblin Guide
4 Monastery Swiftspear
4 Eidolon of the Great Revel

4 Lightning Bolt
4 Lava Spike
4 Rift Bolt
4 Chain Lightning
4 Fireblast
3 Price of Progress
2 Searing Blaze
2 Sulfuric Vortex

4 Lotus Petal

8 Fetches
2 Barbarian Ring
7 Mountain

Petal allowed for some explosive turn 1s--multiple plus Swiftspear and a burn spell was 6+ damage first turn, Turn 1 Eidolon was awesome on the play too. But again, petals take up space that could be more burn so..

[bigwerdz]

@burnwillows
I agree with chatto. Grim gives decent dmg output and utility without ever having to venture into combat. As for the vortex/blaze split, I think he is correct there as well. My local meta is more creature heavy so I go 3/2 in favor of blaze with the 3rd vortex in the board. As for a large tourney I'd error on the side of the extra blaze. Control players get draws. Burn players do not get draws. My logic says that well see more matches where blaze is better then vortex.

Another general burn shout out. A guy took 16th at the legacy 5k at scg houston.

[Nina]

Looking at the Pro Tour (wich was Modern ofc.) the players choose Swiftspear over Lavamancer in 4-1 or 4-2 splits.
Looking at this thread it seems the opinions are not that clear.
Is that cause of the different qualities thoose cards have in the formats?
Guess Lavamancer is better against Elves and Delver decks wich are not that common in Modern.