Nivix Guildmage UR 1UR: Copy target instant or sorcery spell you control. You may choose new targets for the copy XUR: Return target instant or sorcery card with converted mana cost X or less from your graveyard to your hand.
...or something to that effect.
A (perhaps random?) loot ability would synergize nicely with the second ability.
Deathseer should read "name a creature card". In addition, it's pretty good, much more powerful than the rest of these. In particular, the gambler and the druid aren't consistent at all, limiting their usefulness.
Also, watchman should probably use some way of naming, in order to keep parity with the rest of the cycle.
Achilles, Master of Deception 2UB
Legendary Creature - Human Child
T, Sacrifice a creature: Gain control of target creature (this effect is permanent).
2/2
Yeah, with due respect, your deck is just a lot worse.
I'm glad you said with due respect.
17 lands is not good. If you do not like the double ancient grudge, take 1 out. I can see someone taking out 1 or even 2 faithless looting, but even when you draw two, you just use the first one and discard the second - thats actually a really strong play...now you a going two deeper, adding a counter but not losing card advantage.
The land count may be incorrect. I'm trying some things out, is all. I may go up to 18 soon. I just hate drawing more than 3 lands during a game. It's so hard to win with 4 or 5 lands out, because each land after 3 is more or less unneeded.
Ancient Grudge is not what I want to be doing. It's an attempt to control the game, which is a losing proposition when playing the deck that aims to go under every other deck around.
As for faithless looting. Even the situation you describe is losing card advantage, as you did not maintain card parity just because you discarded a "worthless" card; having the "worthless" card (in this case the faithless looting) in the first place is the card disadvantage. A faithless looting is never card advantage.
I don't mind the creature base, I hope it works. Fireslinger is my worst creature, so I can understand not playing it. Furnace scamp seems janky, but sure why not.
The furnace scamp is a bad (maybe worse is a better word haha) version of vexing devil. If I can get 1 attack in with it, its worth me playing furnace scamp, because that's 4 damage for 1 card and 1 mana. Pretty good deal, if you ask me.
My big problem with the deck is all the shocks - these are the worst type of card in a burn deck. You have so few resources, having one doing only 2 damage is rough. I now for certain that once m13 is available, i will be running the full eight incinerate effects, four arc trail. They are the best spells available.
The assumption that shocks are the "worst type of card in a burn deck" is exactly the idea I'm trying to challenge. I am convinced that the worst card in burn is instead faithless looting, for the exact reasons you are saying - on's lack of resources. Faithless looting loses you resources regardless of what you're discarding, unless they are so impactful in the graveyard that together they're worth a card. The only in any of these lists that satisfies this requirement is ancient grudge.
However, I think that grudge is not what you want to do. I 'respect' SoWaP in that games where it is being equipped you are going to lose. However, I don't think that destroying it will win those games. Maybe I'm wrong, or maybe I'm playing ancient grudge (in which case I recommend someone actually explain where it's a good card).
When are you bringing in the phoenix?
Honestly, I have no idea. The mirror, perhaps? The sideboard is absolute crap; the only cards I bring in are the mountains or the thunderbolts (against angel delver).
Now, I have gone through a couple of different iteration before this, including your deck, zemanjaski, as well as variations thereof. The problem I had with your deck is it had too many cards that just didn't do anything to lower the opponents life total. Often, I would mulligan hands (disastrous for this type of deck) not because I had the wrong mix of lands/spells, but because I had the double ancient grudge or double faithless looting draw. There were situations where I thought faithless looting would be useful, but in those situations, I was probably not going to win the game anyway. Ancient grudge, on the other hand, was awful all the time. If your opponent is going to have time to play, equip, and swing with a sword, you've probably kept a bad hand, and are going to lose.
In addition, I really disliked chandra's phoenix and goblin fireslinger in all matchups except for the really slow control. They seem like an attempt to grind someone out. But there's the problem: you're never going to do that. This deck's game plan is to kill someone before they can do anything about it; it can't also be able to beat them in the long game.
So because of all of this, I instead switched to a build where every single card dealt damage to the opponent. Obviously I would need to draw more nonland cards than normal to do this, so I would need to play less lands. Because I needed to play less lands, all of my cards needed to cost a very small amount. There are 26 one-cost cards in my list (not including the 3 thunderous wrath, which will almost always be played for one, and the 2 noxious revival). The most expensive thing I plan on doing is cracking a shrine at the end of the game, where hopefully I've drawn another land. Otherwise, I plan on being fine with 2 mana.
An aside on Noxious Revival: I'm mostly just testing it out. The theory is that its any burn spell that you've already played that game, or in the best case scenario, its another thunderous wrath.
Overall, my idea with this list is to limit the variance that is inherent in this deck with lots of the same cards. I'd like to know what you think. Thanks.
P.S.: If anyone wants to, I need to test this against delver some more.
I think this card is insane. IT's so good against lingering souls, and it might cause them to play their spells in a different order - that is, Honor of the Pure/Intagible virtue before anything else. I really think this is good for every aggressive red deck, but especially RDW. Many of RDW's creatures can be stopped by a 3-4 tokens from a lingering souls. This gives them an actual answer, and (along with thunderous wrath, perhaps?)may lead to a resurgence in the format.
This is my pick for the best miracle card of the set for the meta. That said, to answer the above poster, its not a 4-of. more like 2 or 3-of, depending on the presence of token strategies in the meta.
Seems good in delver. Especially in the esper delver decks that play all the tokens that can protect her more effectively. I mean she really only needs to live after the first turn.
You should really put... creatures in. And other spells other than planeswalkers. Planeswalkers alone cannpot make a deck, and just being a planeswalker doesn't make it good enough.
apocalypse31 is just about spot-on. This gives RDW (or other red decks, not sure) a great amount of reach, and is actually quite the skill-tester. When to pull the trigger on the first ability and when to just do nothing is actually an important question. I also enjoy the fact its a planeswalker that isn't a bomb in limited.
A (perhaps random?) loot ability would synergize nicely with the second ability.
Also, watchman should probably use some way of naming, in order to keep parity with the rest of the cycle.
Legendary Creature - Human Child
T, Sacrifice a creature: Gain control of target creature (this effect is permanent).
2/2
From several Ender's Shadow books.
I'm glad you said with due respect.
The land count may be incorrect. I'm trying some things out, is all. I may go up to 18 soon. I just hate drawing more than 3 lands during a game. It's so hard to win with 4 or 5 lands out, because each land after 3 is more or less unneeded.
Ancient Grudge is not what I want to be doing. It's an attempt to control the game, which is a losing proposition when playing the deck that aims to go under every other deck around.
As for faithless looting. Even the situation you describe is losing card advantage, as you did not maintain card parity just because you discarded a "worthless" card; having the "worthless" card (in this case the faithless looting) in the first place is the card disadvantage. A faithless looting is never card advantage.
The furnace scamp is a bad (maybe worse is a better word haha) version of vexing devil. If I can get 1 attack in with it, its worth me playing furnace scamp, because that's 4 damage for 1 card and 1 mana. Pretty good deal, if you ask me.
The assumption that shocks are the "worst type of card in a burn deck" is exactly the idea I'm trying to challenge. I am convinced that the worst card in burn is instead faithless looting, for the exact reasons you are saying - on's lack of resources. Faithless looting loses you resources regardless of what you're discarding, unless they are so impactful in the graveyard that together they're worth a card. The only in any of these lists that satisfies this requirement is ancient grudge.
However, I think that grudge is not what you want to do. I 'respect' SoWaP in that games where it is being equipped you are going to lose. However, I don't think that destroying it will win those games. Maybe I'm wrong, or maybe I'm playing ancient grudge (in which case I recommend someone actually explain where it's a good card).
Honestly, I have no idea. The mirror, perhaps? The sideboard is absolute crap; the only cards I bring in are the mountains or the thunderbolts (against angel delver).
17 Mountain
Creatures
4 Grim Lavamancer
4 Vexing Devil
4 Stronmkirk Noble
4 Furnace Scamp
Spells
3 Shock
4 Pillar of Flame
3 Galvanic Blast
4 Incinerate
4 Arc Trail
4 Shrine of Burning Rage
3 Thunderous Wrath
2 Noxious Revival
4 Chandra's Phoenix
2 Artillerize
3 Mountain
2 Brimstone Volley
4 Thunderbolt
Now, I have gone through a couple of different iteration before this, including your deck, zemanjaski, as well as variations thereof. The problem I had with your deck is it had too many cards that just didn't do anything to lower the opponents life total. Often, I would mulligan hands (disastrous for this type of deck) not because I had the wrong mix of lands/spells, but because I had the double ancient grudge or double faithless looting draw. There were situations where I thought faithless looting would be useful, but in those situations, I was probably not going to win the game anyway. Ancient grudge, on the other hand, was awful all the time. If your opponent is going to have time to play, equip, and swing with a sword, you've probably kept a bad hand, and are going to lose.
In addition, I really disliked chandra's phoenix and goblin fireslinger in all matchups except for the really slow control. They seem like an attempt to grind someone out. But there's the problem: you're never going to do that. This deck's game plan is to kill someone before they can do anything about it; it can't also be able to beat them in the long game.
So because of all of this, I instead switched to a build where every single card dealt damage to the opponent. Obviously I would need to draw more nonland cards than normal to do this, so I would need to play less lands. Because I needed to play less lands, all of my cards needed to cost a very small amount. There are 26 one-cost cards in my list (not including the 3 thunderous wrath, which will almost always be played for one, and the 2 noxious revival). The most expensive thing I plan on doing is cracking a shrine at the end of the game, where hopefully I've drawn another land. Otherwise, I plan on being fine with 2 mana.
An aside on Noxious Revival: I'm mostly just testing it out. The theory is that its any burn spell that you've already played that game, or in the best case scenario, its another thunderous wrath.
Overall, my idea with this list is to limit the variance that is inherent in this deck with lots of the same cards. I'd like to know what you think. Thanks.
P.S.: If anyone wants to, I need to test this against delver some more.
QFT
Urza - Coolest character in MTG since the 90's.
This is my pick for the best miracle card of the set for the meta. That said, to answer the above poster, its not a 4-of. more like 2 or 3-of, depending on the presence of token strategies in the meta.