DLCR: Bountiful Harvest

28 posts / 0 new
Last post
Todays other M13 card to rate is...

Bountiful Harvest

 
Show

5.0: I will always play this card. Period.
4.5: I will almost always play this card, regardless of what else I get.
4.0: I will strongly consider playing this as the only card of its color.
3.5: I feel a strong pull into this card’s color.
3.0: This card makes me want to play this color. (Given that I’m playing that color, I will play this card 100% of the time.)
2.5: Several cards of this power level start to pull me into this color. If playing that color, I essentially always play these. (Given that I’m playing that color, I will play this card 90% of the time.)
2.0: If I’m playing this color, I usually play these. (70%)
1.5: This card will make the cut into the main deck about half the times I play this color. (50%)
1.0: I feel bad when this card is in my main deck. (30%)
0.5: There are situations where I might sideboard this into my deck, but I’ll never start it. (10%)
0.0: I will never put this card into my deck (main deck or after sideboarding). (0%).


Two 0's in a row in the same color.  Sad day for green.  And on this card, it's just terribad.  I suppose if you have the realms you can gain a bunch of life



Discuss! 
Life gain in limited needs to be repeatable on a creature like Healer of the Pride or Soul Warden, attached to a good body like Lone Missionary, or be obscene like Beacon of Immortality.  The only time Bountiful Harvest will be any of these is if you're mana flooded, and that's usually a situation where you're dead anyway.  0

Those who fear the darkness have never seen what the light can do.

I've seen angels fall from blinding heights. But you yourself are nothing so divine. Just next in line.

191752181 wrote:
All I'm saying is, I don't really see how she goes around petrifying swords and boots and especially mirrors. How the heck does she beat a Panoptic Mirror? It makes no sense for artifacts either. Or enchantments, for that matter. "Well, you see, Jimmy cast this spell to flood the mountain, but then the gorgon just looked at the water really hard and it went away."
This one is a bounterific 0. They really should have considered making this one an instant as the "I'm not really dead" trick is one the few ways that one-shot removal is viable.
I agree with Silent Bob--an instant would be nice in response to Shock, Bonfire of the Damned, etc. or used like Fog when your opponent thinks he can win by swinging with everything.  Also costs too much for what it is.  2G would be about right, I think.

When a sorcery needs to be an instant at a cheaper price to see play, it's truly a weak card.
I've found this card usually is like a counterspell for two Searing Spears, a very relevant card in the format. 3.5/5.

Edit:
Or Chandra's Fury + Shock 
I've found this card usually is like a counterspell for two Searing Spears, a very relevant card in the format. 3.5/5.

Edit:
Or Chandra's Fury + Shock 



Since it's not an instant, it's not countering anything and if they used two spears to your face when you aren't dead, they aren't playing very well.

Those who fear the darkness have never seen what the light can do.

I've seen angels fall from blinding heights. But you yourself are nothing so divine. Just next in line.

191752181 wrote:
All I'm saying is, I don't really see how she goes around petrifying swords and boots and especially mirrors. How the heck does she beat a Panoptic Mirror? It makes no sense for artifacts either. Or enchantments, for that matter. "Well, you see, Jimmy cast this spell to flood the mountain, but then the gorgon just looked at the water really hard and it went away."
I've found this card usually is like a counterspell for two Searing Spears, a very relevant card in the format. 3.5/5.

Edit:
Or Chandra's Fury + Shock 



Since it's not an instant, it's not countering anything and if they used two spears to your face when you aren't dead, they aren't playing very well.




There's this thing called mana efficiency where players try to use their mana in the best possible way every turn. Maybe you're just a scrub and don't understand this concept, but if you have two searing spears and no other plays and four mana the route you should take should be obvious.

I've found this card usually is like a counterspell for two Searing Spears, a very relevant card in the format. 3.5/5.

Edit:
Or Chandra's Fury + Shock 



Since it's not an instant, it's not countering anything and if they used two spears to your face when you aren't dead, they aren't playing very well.




There's this thing called mana efficiency where players try to use their mana in the best possible way every turn. Maybe you're just a scrub and don't understand this concept, but if you have two searing spears and no other plays and four mana the route you should take should be obvious.




No, the route you should take is patience.  If I have no other play, I can hold onto the Spears and a) kill your creatures if need be or b) go to your face once you're down into burn range.  Wasting them on you and having something nasty come down when I could have held them until I needed them is STUPID.  Removal is such a premium that I do not need to waste them unless I'm ending the game.

Those who fear the darkness have never seen what the light can do.

I've seen angels fall from blinding heights. But you yourself are nothing so divine. Just next in line.

191752181 wrote:
All I'm saying is, I don't really see how she goes around petrifying swords and boots and especially mirrors. How the heck does she beat a Panoptic Mirror? It makes no sense for artifacts either. Or enchantments, for that matter. "Well, you see, Jimmy cast this spell to flood the mountain, but then the gorgon just looked at the water really hard and it went away."
Okay, have fun drawing your Chandra's Fury next turn. You could have killed them right there, but no! You just had to hold onto your Spears last turn! Now they've cast their Bountiful Harvest and it's all over for you...

I think you need to read some professional articles on the subject. By putting your opponent in the _red zone_ you are effectively blanking some of their cards because they are forced to play differently.
Okay, have fun drawing your Chandra's Fury next turn. You could have killed them right there, but no! You just had to hold onto your Spears last turn! Now they've cast their Bountiful Harvest and it's all over for you...

I think you need to read some professional articles on the subject. By putting your opponent in the _red zone_ you are effectively blanking some of their cards because they are forced to play differently.



Well if we're talking about professional articles I haven't read a single one that says Bountiful Harvest is playable.
I know it's no Thragtusk, but it's the most important part of it. You can't expect too much from a common.
Okay, have fun drawing your Chandra's Fury next turn. You could have killed them right there, but no! You just had to hold onto your Spears last turn! Now they've cast their Bountiful Harvest and it's all over for you...

I think you need to read some professional articles on the subject. By putting your opponent in the _red zone_ you are effectively blanking some of their cards because they are forced to play differently.



Really?  I see nowhere on the card that says "You win the game."  For the few times that holding a burn spell instead of going to the face was a mistake, I can see more times where I'll have wasted my burn on an opponent, and they'll drop a real threat like Nefarox, or Thragtusk, or Champion of the Watch, or any planeswalker, or Arctic Aven, or Vampire Nighthawk, or even just big beaters like Vastwood Gorger, or Spiked Baloth and I'll be dead before I can draw a response to it because I gave up the removal in hand when I wasn't going to win the game.

Those who fear the darkness have never seen what the light can do.

I've seen angels fall from blinding heights. But you yourself are nothing so divine. Just next in line.

191752181 wrote:
All I'm saying is, I don't really see how she goes around petrifying swords and boots and especially mirrors. How the heck does she beat a Panoptic Mirror? It makes no sense for artifacts either. Or enchantments, for that matter. "Well, you see, Jimmy cast this spell to flood the mountain, but then the gorgon just looked at the water really hard and it went away."
I agree with Sleeping, there's a thing called opportunity cost. If you're not a pro player or a game theorist you may not have heard of it. But it means if you don't cast your spells on your turn, you're wasting your mana that turn. It's literally costing you the opportunity to burn them out.

Unfortunately, R&D seems to hate green, because you'll never get the kind of 2-for-1 value out of Bountiful Harvest that you would with a well-timed Angel's Mercy. Still, a solid 3.5, since we can't all draft white.
I agree with Sleeping, there's a thing called opportunity cost. If you're not a pro player or a game theorist you may not have heard of it. But it means if you don't cast your spells on your turn, you're wasting your mana that turn. It's literally costing you the opportunity to burn them out.

Unfortunately, R&D seems to hate green, because you'll never get the kind of 2-for-1 value out of Bountiful Harvest that you would with a well-timed Angel's Mercy. Still, a solid 3.5, since we can't all draft white.



See, this is exactly the kind of thing I was talking about.

It's hard to comprehend, but eventually it might just click. That's how it worked with me anyway. 
community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/758... 

Ok, I know I'm being trolled now.  Congrats.  You got me boys.

Those who fear the darkness have never seen what the light can do.

I've seen angels fall from blinding heights. But you yourself are nothing so divine. Just next in line.

191752181 wrote:
All I'm saying is, I don't really see how she goes around petrifying swords and boots and especially mirrors. How the heck does she beat a Panoptic Mirror? It makes no sense for artifacts either. Or enchantments, for that matter. "Well, you see, Jimmy cast this spell to flood the mountain, but then the gorgon just looked at the water really hard and it went away."
I agree with Sleeping, there's a thing called opportunity cost. If you're not a pro player or a game theorist you may not have heard of it. But it means if you don't cast your spells on your turn, you're wasting your mana that turn. It's literally costing you the opportunity to burn them out.

Unfortunately, R&D seems to hate green, because you'll never get the kind of 2-for-1 value out of Bountiful Harvest that you would with a well-timed Angel's Mercy. Still, a solid 3.5, since we can't all draft white.

Opportunity cost is a bigger concern in Constructed; in Limited you'll almost always be playing with creatures, even if you have good burn, and you'd be best keeping the burn for killing blockers.
Hope these guys are being sarcastic.  If they are, they are potentially misleading new players, which is a pretty crummy thing to do.

If they're being serious, please come draft with me.  I love playing against players who want to run blanks.
They know better.  But I won't deny I took them seriously long enough to actually think it through and confirm that they're wrong.  I prefer to avoid relying on dogmatic "X is good/bad" view of card evaluation; this is a game where you can win a Vintage tournament with four copies of Slash Panther.  As much as sophomoric players love their assumptions like "life gain is bad", you really need to open your mind to the possibility that there could be situations where life gain is good.

Turns out that if such a situation exists, this isn't it. This card is 31 varieties of bullcrap.
Life gain is okay, but pure lifegain is generally not worth a card.
Life gain is okay, but pure lifegain is generally not worth a card.

Trend, not guaranteed fact.  Occasionally it can be, in niche situations.  This is not one of them.
At last week's FNM sealed tournament I played against a kid who was running Elixir of Immortality... and Angel's Mercy. In one game he drew the Elixir of Immortality at least 3 times. I had to do 42 points of damage to him to win the game, but at no point did I seriously doubt that I would beat him.

After the match I dutifully pointed out to him that strictly life gain cards usually aren't worth putting into a deck. He pointed out that he had a Rhox Faithmender. There are two things to learn from this:

1. Life gain without some specific reason for it simply isn't good because it does nothing to help your board state
2. Playing mediocre or bad cards (say a Bond Beetle) just because they combo with one card in your deck usually isn't worth it
I agree with Sleeping, there's a thing called opportunity cost. If you're not a pro player or a game theorist you may not have heard of it. But it means if you don't cast your spells on your turn, you're wasting your mana that turn. It's literally costing you the opportunity to burn them out.

Unfortunately, R&D seems to hate green, because you'll never get the kind of 2-for-1 value out of Bountiful Harvest that you would with a well-timed Angel's Mercy. Still, a solid 3.5, since we can't all draft white.

Opportunity cost is a bigger concern in Constructed; in Limited you'll almost always be playing with creatures, even if you have good burn, and you'd be best keeping the burn for killing blockers.




Honestly, I hate when people misuse the term opportunity cost, especially after having it drilled into me for four years.

Those who fear the darkness have never seen what the light can do.

I've seen angels fall from blinding heights. But you yourself are nothing so divine. Just next in line.

191752181 wrote:
All I'm saying is, I don't really see how she goes around petrifying swords and boots and especially mirrors. How the heck does she beat a Panoptic Mirror? It makes no sense for artifacts either. Or enchantments, for that matter. "Well, you see, Jimmy cast this spell to flood the mountain, but then the gorgon just looked at the water really hard and it went away."
I was doing an Scars 8-4 on MTGO once and my first opponent game one went:
T1: Plains, Glint Hawk
With no artifacts out to bounce.

Then game two went:
T1: Plains
T2: Plains, Whitesun's Passage
T3: Plains, Whitesun's Passage
I was even playing infect.

I had no clue what was going on.
At last week's FNM sealed tournament I played against a kid who was running Elixir of Immortality... and Angel's Mercy. In one game he drew the Elixir of Immortality at least 3 times. I had to do 42 points of damage to him to win the game, but at no point did I seriously doubt that I would beat him.

After the match I dutifully pointed out to him that strictly life gain cards usually aren't worth putting into a deck. He pointed out that he had a Rhox Faithmender. There are two things to learn from this:

1. Life gain without some specific reason for it simply isn't good because it does nothing to help your board state
2. Playing mediocre or bad cards (say a Bond Beetle) just because they combo with one card in your deck usually isn't worth it



Elixir is actually a pretty decent card that I will pick up one or two mid to late draft as a solid sideboard option.  At least in my area, mill is pretty prevalent in M13 limited (Mind Sculpt+Archaeomancer is a brutal combination).  I've been decked out by turn 5 in many games(Three Mind Sculpts to the face, followed by a round of Archaeomancers).  Also, it's both cheap and reusable, as well as soft recurrance.  It's situational, but in the situations where you want to use it, it's the best at what it does.  It's not good in every match-up however, and should never see use in a maindeck.  The life-gain is nice, but I find that it's not the relevant ability.

Also, I find myself playing a couple bond beetles in drafts if I'm playing green.  Certainly a last pick most of the time, but usually makes the cut.  It nothing more than a cheap early blocker.

Anywho, as for Harvest, it's both strict lifegain and at sorcery speed to boot.  And it's expensive.

Angel's Mercy is actually a solid side-board option against red to try and bait them into burning you.  You can screw up their plan if you're lingering low and they Spear you.  This not so much, as it's an over-costed sorcery.  At 5 CMC it'll likely be no better than a fog-at best.  And frankly, I'd much rather have a fog as it's cheaper and has much greater potential, as well as many more uses.  This may buy you a turn or two at most, and you'd be better off puttin anything in.

At it's best, I'd give it .5-1.  Mercy is much better, and I can think of legitimate reasons to play that.  This not so much, and it's only real purpose is if you have a REALLY slow green deck and aren't splashing white.
What the **** is going on in this thread?

Anyways, solid 5.  Easily splashable, can undo like 2 searing spears, which is already a powerful card.



Nobody worth their salt is every going to Spear you unless they actually can kill you in the process.

For instance, the only reason I Speared my opponent last night without killing them was that I had Volcanic Geiser in my hand, and could finish them out the next turn.  If I didn't have the Geiser, I would have speared him down a bit, but couldn't edge out enough to win, as he had a stronger board presence.  However I could have used my spear in such a scenario on any number of his creatures to do so.

Playing burn, you *never* choose the player unless it is a winning decision.  You will games that way, as you will get pounded in the face and hard by their threats.  The only exception to this is if your deck is specifically structured to burn them out by turn 3-4 (Which is more than possible).  But that is the exception to the rule.

So basically, you never burn the player unless it is a winning play.
Angel's Mercy, Bountiful Harvest, and Elixir are all blanks and should not even come in as sideboard material.  I have not seen a viable Mill deck.  If you bring any of these cards in, you have to take something else out, which is for sure going to be better.
Angel's Mercy, Bountiful Harvest, and Elixir are all blanks and should not even come in as sideboard material.  I have not seen a viable Mill deck.  If you bring any of these cards in, you have to take something else out, which is for sure going to be better.



Mill is possible, particularly if a player can snag 4 Mind Sculpts, which is not a terribly difficult thing to do as they are generally passed up most of the time.  Throw in some Archaeomancer, and any number of relatively efficient blocking creatures in blue and it can be both a relatively quick and unexpected deck.  Consider that by turn 5, you have drawn 12 of your 40 cards.  All that is needed is four casts of Mind Sculpt by that point to finish you at this point.  Coupling Mind Sculpt with Archaeomancer (As well as Unsummon) can be deadly in a control style deck.  Splash in red to pick up some burn (Or White/Green for fog-style control) and it's no huge task to lock up the board well enough to get things rolling.  It's unconventional, for certain, but that's actually a major selling point.

That said, I've only found the need to side in Elixir a couple times, though when I do it's most always been a life-saver.  Generally speaking most people simply don't build well into mill, and only half commit to the strategy.  Which is a losing bet most of the time.  Those who are willing to commit to it, however, can be downright deadly.  Which is why I don't feel bad if I can snag an Elixir or two later on if nothing else is particularly good.  At the least, it can save in situations where you are playing against a committed mill deck. 

Angel's Mercy is worse, as it has exactly one use, and it's a very situational and rare use.  It still can be a viable option on rare cases, and I wouldn't really consider even sideboarding it in unless I'm playing Mono-white and can afford to cut a land out (Or something that the other deck is situationally prepared for in some case or another).  Still, the fact that it is instant speed can lead you to "bait" your opponent into going all in hoping that their final push (Be it attacking with everything to eek out that last bit of damage, or Spearing you) and can turn things in your favor under the right circumstances.  Circumstantial, for certain, but not exactly useless.

Harvest, on the other hand, is completely and totally worthless.  It's an overcosted sorcery, that can't be used as any sort of trick.  It has no use beyond buying yourself a couple turns at best, and may not even buy you any time at all at its worst.  It's just not good in any sense of the word, and has no practical usage.   At least with Elixir and Mercy I can think of a few situations where they'd be a relevant choice to utilize.  Harvest is not relevant at all.