Since you have black already, what about Dark Confidant? You could take out Grim Lavamancers, since both cards have the weakness of needing to stick around for a turn to be useful, and a third of the deck is still ready to be played on the 1st turn.
Since you have black already, what about Dark Confidant? You could take out Grim Lavamancers, since both cards have the weakness of needing to stick around for a turn to be useful, and a third of the deck is still ready to be played on the 1st turn.
I took out Confidant for the same reason that I dropped Hellspark--too mana-intensive with too little reward. Same goes for Magma Jet, but I'd submitted the list before I got far enough in testing to see it.
I took out Confidant for the same reason that I dropped Hellspark--too mana-intensive with too little reward. Same goes for Magma Jet, but I'd submitted the list before I got far enough in testing to see it.
Neat article, but I'm a bit confused about the lands. I understand Blackcleave Cliffs and Blood Crypt for Bump in the Night (black mana), but everything else is just red. So why Scalding Tarn and Arid Mesa? I don't see anything that combos off la
Deck thinning: The fetches let you pull an additional land out of the library, increasing the spell to land ratio, thereby increasing the chance you'll draw a spell. You can also hold it in reserve to turn on the landfall trigger of Searing Blaze. They also let you fetch the Blood Crypt.
Deck thinning: The fetches let you pull an additional land out of the library, increasing the spell to land ratio, thereby increasing the chance you'll draw a spell. You can also hold it in reserve to turn on the landfall trigger of Searing Blaze. Th
Deck thinning: The fetches let you pull an additional land out of the library, increasing the spell to land ratio, thereby increasing the chance you'll draw a spell. You can also hold it in reserve to turn on the landfall trigger of Searing Blaze. They also let you fetch the Blood Crypt.
To add to this, it also puts more cards in your graveyard to fuel Grim Lavamancer.
Deck thinning: The fetches let you pull an additional land out of the library, increasing the spell to land ratio, thereby increasing the chance you'll draw a spell. You can also hold it in reserve to turn on the landfall trigger of Searing Blaze. Th
Deck thinning: The fetches let you pull an additional land out of the library, increasing the spell to land ratio, thereby increasing the chance you'll draw a spell. You can also hold it in reserve to turn on the landfall trigger of Searing Blaze. They also let you fetch the Blood Crypt.
To add to this, it also puts more cards in your graveyard to fuel Grim Lavamancer.
Not only THAT, they can also fetch you that Blood Crypt you might need for a timely Bump in the Night, since Blood Crypt is a Mountain.
Deck thinning: The fetches let you pull an additional land out of the library, increasing the spell to land ratio, thereby increasing the chance you'll draw a spell. You can also hold it in reserve to turn on the landfall trigger of Searing Blaze. Th
Deck thinning: The fetches let you pull an additional land out of the library, increasing the spell to land ratio, thereby increasing the chance you'll draw a spell. You can also hold it in reserve to turn on the landfall trigger of Searing Blaze. They also let you fetch the Blood Crypt.
To add to this, it also puts more cards in your graveyard to fuel Grim Lavamancer.
Not only THAT, they can also fetch you that Blood Crypt you might need for a timely Bump in the Night, since Blood Crypt is a Mountain.
Yes, I hit that point. I did miss mentioning that they load you up for Grim Lavamancer. The point about Blood Crypt being a mountain (as well as a swamp) is one of the main reason shocklands are so powerful (that and being able to enter untapped when you need them to). The shock is the only downside compared to the original duals. (e.g. Badlands) which are both basic types AND come in untapped without penalty. Shocks are the next best thing.. AND are way, way cheaper, and modern legal.
Deck thinning: The fetches let you pull an additional land out of the library, increasing the spell to land ratio, thereby increasing the chance you'll draw a spell. You can also hold it in reserve to turn on the landfall trigger of Searing Blaze. Th
I'm what you'd call a newbie, but when I was looking at a "burn" deck, it seemed that Guttersnipe was a very logical choice for one? It seems better than several of the creatures you chose. Am I missing something?
I'm what you'd call a newbie, but when I was looking at a "burn" deck, it seemed that Guttersnipe was a very logical choice for one? It seems better than several of the creatures you chose. Am I missing something?
I'm what you'd call a newbie, but when I was looking at a "burn" deck, it seemed that Guttersnipe was a very logical choice for one? It seems better than several of the creatures you chose. Am I missing something?
Speed and content, I'm guessing. By the time Guttersnipe comes out, one's hand is at least half-empty. And with only eighteen instants/sorceries in the deck, he's not contributing maximum bang for each spell being played every turn.
Speed and content, I'm guessing. By the time Guttersnipe comes out, one's hand is at least half-empty. And with only eighteen instants/sorceries in the deck, he's not contributing maximum bang for each spell being played every turn.
Fetch lands "thinning" the deck is statistically insignificant.
Seriously?
OK, you are on the play and have not mulliganned with the deck as is. Assuming average luck, you will have drawn 2 or 3 land (assuming 2) leaving you with 18/53 of your deck as land, or 33.96% land. Playing and popping a fetch drops that to 17/52, or 32.69%. A difference of ~0.7% is significant.
Turn two, assume you get ANOTHER (not out of the question, given 9 fetches). Assuming this was in your opening hand, then it drops to 16/50, or 32.00%. Believe me when I say that the thinning of your deck like this is HUGE. It gets you closer the spells you want.
Seriously? OK, you are on the play and have not mulliganned with the deck as is. Assuming average luck, you will have drawn 2 or 3 land (assuming 2) leaving you with 18/53 of your deck as land, or 33.96% land. Playing and popping a fetch drops that t
Yes, I hit that point. I did miss mentioning that they load you up for Grim Lavamancer. The point about Blood Crypt being a mountain (as well as a swamp) is one of the main reason shocklands are so powerful (that and being able to enter untapped when you need them to). The shock is the only downside compared to the original duals. (e.g. Badlands) which are both basic types AND come in untapped without penalty. Shocks are the next best thing.. AND are way, way cheaper, and modern legal.
Regarding the single Blood Crypt - it's the only fetchable black source the deck has. Do people run land destruction in Modern? Your opponent blasting your Blood Crypt kind of shuts down your Bumps unless you have a fastland in play. It won't come up often I think, but it is annoying. I'm asking because I haven't played Modern even in a FNM setting, and I'd like to build this deck to get into the format.
Regarding the single Blood Crypt - it's the only fetchable black source the deck has. Do people run land destruction in Modern? Your opponent blasting your Blood Crypt kind of shuts down your Bumps unless you have a fastland in play. It won't come up
OK, you are on the play and have not mulliganned with the deck as is. Assuming average luck, you will have drawn 2 or 3 land (assuming 2) leaving you with 18/53 of your deck as land, or 33.96% land. Playing and popping a fetch drops that to 17/52, or 32.69%. A difference of ~0.7% is significant.
Turn two, assume you get ANOTHER (not out of the question, given 9 fetches). Assuming this was in your opening hand, then it drops to 16/50, or 32.00%. Believe me when I say that the thinning of your deck like this is HUGE. It gets you closer the spells you want.
"Huge"? Drawing one less land for every 25 games you play is "Huge"? I'm not sure that's a statement I can get behind. If you just want to talk percentages of things that impact the game when you fetch, in your scenario you're increasing your odds of drawing a spell by 0.007, but you're losing 5% of your life total (or more) to do it. Is that still worth it? No, it isn't, if the thinning is ALL that you care about.
Obviously thinning isn't the only benefit of fetchlands so they're still clearly worth playing (particularly with a Lavamancer), but theoretically in a mono-colored deck (no need for color-fixing) with no graveyard benefits at all, the thinning is not worth it.
"Huge"? Drawing one less land for every 25 games you play is "Huge"? I'm not sure that's a statement I can get behind. If you just want to talk percentages of things that impact the game when you fetch, in your scenario you're increasing your odds of
