Rx Burn

[LP, of the Fires]

Also, don't expect a wave of relevant new burn players. Must good players have to much "self respect" to pay burn and as such, you'll only see dedicated red players and noobs jumping on the wagon.

[Khaospawn]

Basically online results only matter if you play online. Additionally, mono red is generally always gonna do better onLine based on costs. Look at you. You own all the staples but didn't want to buy everything twice, so you play the cheaper deck. All the successful burn decks I've seen so well in events have splashed. Recently, gOing backwards, doesn't matter. Also, EXPECTING to play the burn mirror and finding for percentage there at the cost of the rest of the first seems pretty backwards, especially taking in to account all the board cards you lose.

The power you lose isn't worth the slight consistency bump.

I'm actually almost where I want to be now. Just 2 more Tarns....

By splashing, what are you getting? Black for Bump and
Rakdos Charm with a less stable manabase? Or could you just play Shard Volley and Relic of Progenitus? What sideboard cards are you losing? I already said G is pretty much needed if you want to deal with enchantments, but it is a minimal splash. White gives you Leyline, Stony Silence, and Kataki. While these are good cards, they also don't straight up deal damage either....However they do have results to justify their inclusion.

Also, everything in the last 2 months does matter. Eidolon is still a relatively new card and he's changing the face of Burn as we know it. Burn is now a tier 1 deck in Modern. You have to expect it, especially after GP Kobe. Use all of this to prepare moving forward.

I use MTG Top 8 for most of my data, along with personal experiences online and in paper. I am scouring this shit every day for new information on Burn. Give me something concrete when you say Mono Red Burn is "JUST BAD." It's
not.

[Khaospawn]

Also, don't expect a wave of relevant new burn players. Must good players have to much "self respect" to pay burn and as such, you'll only see dedicated red players and noobs jumping on the wagon.

I didn't see people like Raphael Levy having to much self respect to not play Burn in Modern.

[LP, of the Fires]

Basically online results only matter if you play online. Additionally, mono red is generally always gonna do better onLine based on costs. Look at you. You own all the staples but didn't want to buy everything twice, so you play the cheaper deck. All the successful burn decks I've seen so well in events have splashed. Recently, gOing backwards, doesn't matter. Also, EXPECTING to play the burn mirror and finding for percentage there at the cost of the rest of the first seems pretty backwards, especially taking in to account all the board cards you lose.

The power you lose isn't worth the slight
consistency bump.

I'm actually almost where I want to be now. Just 2 more Tarns....

By splashing, what are you getting? Black for Bump and Rakdos Charm with a less stable manabase? Or could you just play Shard Volley and Relic of Progenitus? What sideboard cards are you losing? I already said G is pretty much needed if you want to deal with enchantments, but it is a minimal splash. White gives you Leyline, Stony Silence, and Kataki. While these are good cards, they also don't straight up deal damage either....However they do have results to justify their inclusion.

Also, everything in the last 2 months does matter. Eidolon is still a relatively new card and he's changing the face of Burn as we know it. Burn is now a tier 1 deck in Modern. You have to expect it, especially after GP Kobe. Use all of this to prepare moving forward.

I use MTG Top 8 for most of my data, along with personal experiences online and in paper. I am
scouring this shit every day for new information on Burn. Give me something concrete when you say Mono Red Burn is "JUST BAD." It's not.

Fucking shit balls. Had an epic post and my comp at it.

Get over the "purity" of mono-red and play a deck that can actually win a ptq. On average, you'll take 4/5 damage from your lands, but you'll deal that or more in upgrades to shitty burn spells with dega and your sideboard is infinitely better. If you tell me that reds sideboard is fine and the upgrades are marginal, I'll cockslap you for that lie.

Stoney silence, and rakdos charm are cards that can win games outright. Molten rain can also do that, or they can just draw more lands and it's like nothing happened. The former two are just WAY more consistently good AND have higher ceailings on how good they are. Molten rain's just a very random card when you don't also have a bunch of creatures attacking your opponent to death.

The argument
that the manabase of Mono-Bad is better is also fairly flawed. Sure you take less damage, but you aren't inherently more stable by much. For one, as the burn player, you're only getting your manabase disrupted in very weird games, and for two, even when this happens, burn is generally playing less then 4 basic mountains so it's highly likely that you'll have multiple dual lands out. Blackcleave cliffs is the biggest freeroll ever in that regard.

My point on what players will play burn also still stands.

There's basically 4 types of magic players and you only have to worry about 2 of them. Noobs, fresh meat(noobs learning to be competitive), mid level grinders, and pros. The type of player to play burn is going to be exclusively a budget player(first two categories) a seasoned pro, or a dedicated red mage(which can fall into any category). To win the tourney, you must beat all caliber of players, but the ones you're worried about the grinders and pros as assuming you have the gusto to win the
tourney, you're inherently advantaged vs. the lower tier of players.

Mid level grinders don't pick up burn. This sounds harsh, but most mid level grinders are a bunch of tryhards. They've all got skill but they handicap themselves in one way or another. They always play control. They always play agro. They never play red. Combo's the best deck always. Whatever bad habit and or lie it is, it's embedded in all grinders. I'm one of them, I'd know. Unless our tryhard grinder is a dedicated red mage, he's never playing burn, so don't expect burn to explode in popularity amongst players you need to savagely outplay to beat. If the noobs and fish pick up burn, who cares, because you're expected win rate against them is astronomical anyways. The players you should concern yourself with beating the most are the tryhards playing Pod, affinity, junk, whatever the pros are telling them is the best while the actual pros are playing burn, scapeshift, tron, or whatever flawed but powerful deck is positioned
for supremacy.

Pros as mentioned will play anything and as such the only prep for beating them is knowing your deck better. The edge against any pro player is a deeper knowledge pool to pull from in whatever format. They generally have a more conceptual understanding of the format which is great for deck selection(which is arguably the most important skill in constructed) but leaves them actually disadvantage for the tryhard that knows the merfolk/pod matchup way more then anyone should. And thus, even if Levy does play burn, who gives a shit. He'll be moderately proficient with his deck, and have actual decades of magic experience on people, but when paired against someone who's been playing twin since PT philly, he's probably going to lose.

I actually share many pro player qualities including the ability to just pick up decks and play them proficiently off of magic skills because I've forgotten more magic theory then most people have ever heard of, and in this instance, I STRONGLY believe I'm
100% right about mono-red burn currently being a strictly worse version of splash burn in all but the most extreme metagames.

[Khaospawn]

I think you need to back way up and define "bad" for everyone because obviously your definition of bad us entirely different from mine

As for these "pro qualities" you profess to have, let me tell you something as a friend - you'd be twice the player you are now if you'd just follow your own advice

Example? Writing an article on prepping for competitive play and time and time again you do the opposite of what you preach by doing the opposite. You play in big events on next to no sleep, hungry, and hungover and when you fail to top 8, you go into this mode where you wonder where you stand as a player

LP, you're a great player and I value your advice and experience, but you're falling into the some of the same trap that some of these lesser players fall into, such as being dismissive and the entire "I'm right, you're wrong " mindset

But back to the debate on Splash vs Mono, they'
re both good because they both have the same goal

One just trades consistency and life for higher damage output, which is something to consider depending on if you expect to compete in against a much more aggressive metagame. Obviously Mono Red does better online due to the increase of aggressive decks whereas Splash Burn does better in paper

[Khaospawn]

I can elaborate further on this when I'm not posting from my broken phone

[Khaospawn]

At this point arguing over the flavors of Burn is like arguing over which version of Pod or Twin decks are better

[LP, of the Fires]

A bad deck is clearly in this case a worse version of an existing deck. Context clues.

I'm also rarely of the "I'm right, you're wrong" mindset; accept for the times where I am right and you are wrong.

Pod and Twin aren't even good examples because those decks play out fundamentally different which again makes me think that you aren't getting it. There are GREAT reasons for wanting to play a different color in your tier 1 deck and you can make good reasoned arguments both ways.

The only argument that you can make for not playing more colors in your burn deck are:

a) I'm cheap.

b) I want to beat fringe agro decks that are terrible and the mirror at the cost of all my other matches. Which is stupid.

[LP, of the Fires]

Also, addressing the tangent, I was well rested, hydrated, and fed at the WMCQ for the first time ever at a tourney and was dead for top 8 during round 5 of a 10 round tourney.

At the PTQ where I was hungover, dehydrated, and sleepy, I was playing for top at 6-1 before dropping my next two. The overall competition was worse on the whole for this event, but the caliber of players I personally faced was equal or higher.

[Khaospawn]

I like how you just call things bad and then passive aggressively take shots at me without actually explaining anything, only merely stating that there are things hidden within the context.

There are results of both kinds of Burn decks performing well - Mono Red has won PTQs and is competing well online , Dega has come close to winning a PTQ and has some Day 2 results at a GP, and Boros Burn won a GP

How in the world you've concluded that Mono Red is strictly inferior is beyond me

I suppose you may add a third reason for wanting to eschew a color:

You prefer a consistent mana base that doesn't allow for tempo loss or color screw and allows for fewer decision making that will save your brain power in the long run of a tournament, as well as preventing you from making a wrong decision that could cost you a game

Having played Burn of all flavors in Modern for a couple years now, I'd like to think I know what I'm
talking about

You say I don't get what you're saying, but you're wrong - I know exactly what you mean

[Khaospawn]

I firmly believe one of two things can happen when there is a conflict of opinions, especially amongst competitive Magic players

The first being a degenerative flame fest that gets nowhere and only brings negativity, which is oftentimes the most common and most damaging

The second is that barriers are torn down, progress is made, and some deep understanding of some shit can occur

I'd love for the latter to come to pass from this.

[BrainsickHater]

Is this the mono-red burn thread or just a general burn thread? I see a lot of lists splashing for other colors in here, and I want to know the proper place to post the questions I have.

[Khaospawn]

At the end of the day, both varieties of Burn win in the same way: dealing damage to the opponent. Both varieties are able to win on turn 3 or 4. And both varieties value consistency over everything else since you will inevitably be forced to live off your topdeck at some point.

Do I agree that splash varieties are inherently a little more powerful? Yes, absolutely, but they have a cost: that mana base. Time and time again, after a loss, I've traced my decision trees backwards only to find that it was that shock damage or offsetting my tempo with a tapped shock that allowed me to lose a game. Sometimes those things add up. However, I've also had games where flashing back that Bump in the Night gave me the win, so I guess it's a double-edged sword.

I guess the big question is: how bad do you want to play with Boros Charm and Bump in the Night in your main deck? If you're not always winning on Turn 3 or 4, does it
matter if those cards are Shard Volley and Flames of the Blood Hand instead? Would you rather have the land destruction angle of attack instead?

The point is, those are all different options but they all add up to the same thing: killing your opponent with damage. No matter what you do with your 8 flex slots and mana base, you will still have those opportunities for a "free win" with the abundance of Lightning Bolt effects, Eidolon, Guide, and Devil.

As for the sideboard options, I'm personally only a huge fan of Rakdos Charm, and Revelry. And I suppose you could add Wear//Tear to that too. Don't get me wrong, Leyline, Kataki, Stony Silence, and Rest in Peace are awesome cards, but they're all just like Blood Moon. Why don't we play Blood Moon in Burn? It's because it doesn't deal damage, it doesn't guarantee your win, and it is the last thing you want to topdeck when you need to deal damage. It requires you to have additional cards to make it a game winner.
n
How do you kill Affinity? You destroy the problem artifacts while also dealing damage. You don't need Stony Silence. Kataki is only so-so since it still needs to wait to attack for the win, but the effects it can have are somewhat devastating under the right circumstances.

How do you kill Tron, Scapeshift, Rock varieties, Pod, and Twin? With damage. Sure it pays to be faster most of the time, but when the game gets grindy (and you will have those games), you can still hang back with anti-life gain cards (gets around Spellskite too) and even land destruction to offset their tempo. You will finish them off with damage.

How does Burn deal with aggro decks? It has to play control. There's no way around it. And for that matter, how does Burn win in the mirror? It conserves its life total - this is the key to both the mirror and acting as the control role. It's much harder for the splash varieties to
do this because, not only is the splash deck taking damage trying to fix its mana, but most of its lands will be coming into play tapped. This isn't so much the case for Mono Red (or R/g).

Again, not saying Mono Red is better than Splash Burn decks, but you have to ask yourself, what are you willing to risk at this point?

Back to sideboarding, a Burn player must concern himself with the 4 pillars of the format: Twin, Rock, Pod, and Affinity. He must also be wary of other aggressive decks, hexproof beaters, graveyard-based combo type decks that can win before Burn or lock Burn out, and decks using life gain.

A typical sideboard will consist of 2-4 artifact hate slots, 2-4 creature hate slots, 1-3 Twin hate slots, 1-3 graveyard hate slots, 0-4 land destruction slots, and 0-3 slots dedicated to beating the mirror (ex: Dragon's Claw). Some of these slots will overlap and that's a good thing - multi-functional spells are essential.

I've always said that Burn sideboard cards should do 1 of 3
things in order to be considered, for consistency's sake. It should either (1) deal damage, (2) draw a card, or (3) stop a faster (most likely combo) deck from locking you out cold. Some cards fill all those criteria, like Pyrite Spellbomb, which can kill a Pro-Red creature or Pestermite, deal damage to the opponent, or cycle for a bigger Burn spell or land.

Some cards do the same thing (or more) and compete in the same slot, like Smash to Smithereens, Rakdos Charm, and Destructive Revelry. They all do what you want to do - kill an artifact. However, some do more. Smash deals a Bolt's worth of damage (!), but Revelry can kill an enchantment too while only dealing a Shock's worth of damage and at the risk of a Green splash. Rakdos Charm can kill an artifact, nuke a graveyard, or maybe (keyword being maybe) deal a buttload of damage at the expense of a Black Splash. It just comes down to what you value more: dealing a lot of damage quickly, versatility, or stopping a game-
locking enchantment.

Another example is Relic of Progenitus - it threatens to kill both yards as early as turn 1, effectively making Tarmogoyf an 0/1 in the process, and draws you a card. It's guaranteed value. Rakdos Charm, on the other hand, only hits a single yard and it must target the player (hey, that matters sometimes). Again, it just depends on what you want to do.

At the end of the day, I really think most Burn sideboards in Modern come down to something like this-
3x Smash to Smithereens/ Revelry/ Wear//Tear
2-4x Searing XXXX
2x Relic of Progenitus/Rakdos Charm
1-3x Combust (with R-Charm filling this void sometimes)
2x Dragon's Claw / Leyline of Sanctity
1-2x Volcanic Fallout /Electrickery
0-4 Molten Rain /Peak Eruption/Cryoclasm

You'll notice that the most reliable and consistent options begin in Mono Red. The tools are there.

Are the splash cards better?

Well, they can[/b:
29ko1zpj] be. Sometimes, not always. For example, if Twin want to force the combo early, they could just tap your lone Green or Black source and outright take the game away should you solely be relying on Charm or Revelry. Combust is pretty much the only "for sure" answer. But to be fair, if they don;t play around Charm and they go to combo off, you may very well just end the game instead of merely delaying it for another turn or two.


I'm only touching on all of this briefly, but I am providing examples. Mono Red isn't bad, but it is much more consistent with some of its card choices. The cards do exist to make it good.

I do realize that I'm probably better than most Burn pilots out there (given my history with the archetype), which give me an edge in that I can "make do" with weaker cards, which in turn can diminish my so-called edge. However, the number don't lie - Mono Red has a very good showing
online and has also done well in PTQ's. Heal won a PTQ with his version of "Burn" (I do use that loosely) and Raphael Levy mentioned in his article that his friend won a PTQ with an early version of the Molten Rain Red Deck. In fact, a girl names Allie Smith played Levy's deck at a PTQ to a Top 4 finish (out of 156 players, including Florida's best grinders) with a "free" Black splash for Rakdos Charm - she ran 1 Crypt and 4 Cliffs, and removed the Relic and lone Tactics for 3x Rakdos Charm!

It's all about the "give and take" when tweaking Burn decks. How far can you push them? Can you add more repeatable sources of damage (i.e., creatures) at the expense of direct damage, which would push it into other territories and expose new weaknesses (e.g., sweepers)? Can you splash heavier hitting Burn spells at the expense of stretching your manabase?

At the end of the day, the core is in Mono Red. It could stay there, but the choice is yours. Just know the risks.

But I
do want to add one more thing: I want to challenge you guys. Especially LP. Enough with the arguing. Let's grow as players. What can we learn now? What new boundaries are there to explore?

I want to build a better Burn deck. With no rules. I feel like I've done everything with the deck - I've played all the splashes, I've lost in the most horrific ways, I've grinded games out to nth turn to an exhausting victory, I've scrumped out to some DUMB FUCKING blunders, most recently entering a PTQ without Combust. The only thing I've never done with Burn is 4-0 a Daily and win a big event. I want to do that and I know you guys do too.

What's the worst that can happen? If I have to buy my remaining 2 Tarns out of pocket and a handful of shocks online to really test this, I will. What can we do as players? I want to find out. Let's fucking show the world that Burn is here to stay as Tier 1.

[Khaospawn]

Is this the mono-red burn thread or just a general burn thread? I see a lot of lists splashing for other colors in here, and I want to know the proper place to post the questions I have.

It started as strictly Mono Red, but at the end of the day, somebody is usually splashing for another color here and there and we discuss other options.


Since MDU and I are (usually) the most active posters for Burn, posting any questions here would probably be the best place. Ask away.

[BrainsickHater]

I'm basically wondering if a black splash is worth it. I really like the white splash and will definitely be at least RW, but the only card that I really want out of black is Rakdos Charm, and that's just a SB card.

[Khaospawn]

Read my giant Tyrannosaur post I just made.

[Khaospawn]

R -Charm is handy and it is possible to get a "free" splash for it by playing just a Crypt and Blackcleave Cliffs, which LP referred to as a "free roll."

[LP, of the Fires]

Rakdos charm is one of the best sideboard cards in the format.

Boros charm makes my dick hard.

If you're going to splash for rakdos charm, you should play bump. 4 cliffs+1 Blood crypt+8 fetches, is 13 sources which is either enough or close to enough(you'd ideally want 14, and marsh flats does the trick if you splash white as well).

Bump is factually the best lava spike in the game.

[Khaospawn]

Today online, I was Path to Exiled twice (hitting my Devil and Eidolon) when I went into my combat step. The next turn, I untapped and flashbacked Bump FTW.

[LP, of the Fires]

metal

[magicdownunder]

Want me to change the title into Rx Burn?

Thoughts on Japan's Boros Burn List? It seem like it fixes that which does not need fixing... (namely mirror, discard.deck, shift, storm and robots) it doesn't improve UWr or Pod which seems "dangerous" too me.

(I'm taking am mini-break from standard so this thread is kinda my oasis keep up the posting guys).

[LaZerBurn]

There is some good stuff on the Rx Burn thread from when we tested all the splashes for Revelry etc. Can we somehow combine the two threads or does someone want to make a Rx Burn Primer by plundering the threads?

[Khaospawn]

So Splash Burn variants are about to get a whole lot slightly better. Hello, Bloodstained Mire and Wooded Foothills! So long, Scalding Tarn, you overpriced Island-fetching turncoat!

[magicdownunder]

So Splash Burn variants are about to get a whole lot slightly better. Hello, Bloodstained Mire and Wooded Foothills! So long, Scalding Tarn, you overpriced Island-fetching turncoat!

Bloodstained Mire and Wooded Foothill will be a decent improvement for the Dega/4c lists which run 21 lands because now they can finally cut that 1 miser Marsh Flats (imo 21 lands is the correct number for 3-4c burn).

[Khaospawn]

Want me to change the title into Rx Burn?

Yeah, that's probably a good idea.

[magicdownunder]

I put together an 4c Burn deck, it played rather well though I performed poorly (1-1).

I manage to win through 2x Leylines during R1 but I simply died against a triple Spreading Sea play by Merfolk R2G1, then a double Spreading Sea on the draw with MoW + Counter backup.... on R3G3

[Khaospawn]

I played this last night in the DE:
[deck]Creature 15
4 Goblin Guide
4 Vexing Devil
3 Grim Lavamancer
4 Eidolon of the Great Revel

Burn 25
2 Forked Bolt
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Rift Bolt
4 Lava Spike
3 Searing Blaze
4 Skullcrack
4 Molten Rain

Land 20
4 Arid Mesa
2 Scalding Tarn
4 Copperline Gorge
2 Stomping Ground
8 Mountain

Sideboard 15
3 Destructive Revelry
2 Relic of Progenitus
2 Pyrite Spellbomb
2 Combust
2 Volcanic Fallout
2 Searing Blood
2 Dragon's Claw[/deck]

I took the deck out for a spin in an 8-Man an hour before the DE and I lost to Merfolk in a Game3. I was actually very pleased with what I was able to bring in: Combust, Fallout, Revelry, Spellbomb, and Blood. All cards were used with great effectiveness, but I got stuck on 2 lands in Game 3 and a Spreading Seas locked me out of being able to play RR cards, such as Searing Blood.

I played a pretty memorable game in R1 of the DE
against a Jund opponent. I'm just going to copy/paste my Facebook status:

"I just played a Magic game for the books:

I'm playing in a Modern DE with Burn (what else is new?) and my opener has no lands. I mulligan into another no land hand. Lather, rinse, repeat. Multiple times. I keep a 1 card hand: Skullcrack. No fucking lands...

My opponent plays a Verdant Catacombs, cracks, shocks for an Overgrown Tomb and Thoughtseizes me. He's now at 15 life.

I draw a Mountain, play it, and pass.

On his turn, he lands a Swamp and plays a Dark Confidant.

I draw a Lava Spike. He's now at 12 life.

Confidant reveals a Lilianna of the Veil. He's now at 9 and he plays a Tarmogoyf. He attacks me for 2 and I pass.

On my turn I draw another Lava Spike. He's now at 6.

On his turn, Confidant reveals a Garruk, Wildspeaker and he takes 4 more damage. He's now at 2. He attacks me with both Bob and Tarmogoyf.

My next draw is...wouldn't ya know it? It's a muthafuckin' Lava Spike FTW.

I
should not have won that game.

In game 2 I stomp him, but damn, that Game 1..."

R2: Twin 2-1 (W) I prevented him from winning with the combo in Game 1, thanks to Molten Rain. In Game 2, he had the natural combo and played it on Turn 4 after I suspended 3 Rift Bolts behind an Eidolon. In Game 3, Molten Rain and Revelry came to the rescue, giving me the win.

R3: Burn 0-2 (L) This guy came out of the gates swinging. I was on the draw Game 1 and I kept a very good hand that would've been useful against anything BUT Burn (I had Molten Rains and Vexing Devils). In Game 2, I destroyed his Dragon's Claw with a Revelry, but it wasn't enough to stop the onslaught of Hellspark Elementals.

R4: Melira Pod 1-2 (L) In Game 1, he leads with a Bird and I kill it. Following that, he plays a Voice, 2 Finks, and then finally a Seer. After burning out my hand, I die. Game 2 went a little better for me - I stuck a Grim Lavamancer
and started picking off his mana dorks before I nuked his Overgrown Tomb with a Molten Rain. In Game 3, I thought we were going to have a great game, but my first 3 draws were all Arid Mesas and my opponent began playing Kitched Finks repeatedly. I lost with having seen 11 of my 20 lands.



I don't know how it is for everyone else, but I've been really struggling with Pod matches. Without "blaming the shuffler," I find that most matches seem to be decided by "who draws the most heat." If I draw a few too many lands, I'll be losing. Or if they draw a few Finks in succession, I'll be losing. Typically, what's been happening is they lead with a dork, and then a Voice, and then a Finks. Almost every time. It's when they don't do that is when I feel like I actually have a chance. By the time the Pod player is making it's 4th land drop into a creature, I've begun to fade out or I'
m just drawing all lands.

To combat all of this, I've been leaning heavily on Grim Lavamancer, Forked Bolt, and Molten Rain maindeck to interact with them and keep them from being able to play the Finks to stabilize. I'm not disappointed with these choices or the strategy, since it works well against the overall field in Modern, but I can't help but think that I'm doing something wrong against Pod.

[Mr. Metronome]

The pod matchup has felt pretty similar to that for me too. I might want to try out something close to that list, would you still play Grim Lavaman's with only 4 Arid Mesa?

[Khaospawn]

Sure would

[Mr. Metronome]

Something I'm having trouble figuring out with this deck is when you can keep 1 landers. I feel like sometimes I mull them and just end up going down to barely any cards and losing, is it something I have to get a feel for on my own or is there something specific you look for?

[magicdownunder]

Have you ever tried running 2x Anger of the Gods vs pod? If you resolve one you also auto-win.

[Khaospawn]

Something I'm having trouble figuring out with this deck is when you can keep 1 landers. I feel like sometimes I mull them and just end up going down to barely any cards and losing, is it something I have to get a feel for on my own or is there something specific you look for?

If it's 4-6 one drops/burn spells, I'll typically keep it.

Have you ever tried running 2x Anger of the Gods vs pod? If you resolve one you also auto-win.

I haven't and I think I'll try that.

[Aodh]

How many fetchlands should we run in R, Rx, Rxx, and Rbwg burn?

[Khaospawn]

8. Soon to be more, depending

[Khaospawn]

8-10 is probably a good number

[Aodh]

I assume it depends on the number of colors right? We have access to all 16 now, and they're all functionally equivalent since our mana base is mountains plus fetchlands. Historically we've been running 8 in pretty much all varieties, but with access to more, do we want more?

[magicdownunder]

How many fetchlands should we run in R, Rx, Rxx, and Rbwg burn?

9-10 (I'm running 9) for 4c or 3c - I believe 7-8 is optimal for 2c or mono-because every point of damage counts.

[Khaospawn]

Digger, please. I'll run Mono Red with 10 fetches all day, errday!

[magicdownunder]

Digger, please. I'll run Mono Red with 10 fetches all day, errday!

Your at least running Grim and Searing Blaze with those 10 fetches right?

[Khaospawn]

Absolutely. I probably should've mentioned that. In fact, the core of what I've been running won't change.

In Legacy, I've run anywhere from 10-12 fetches for years. It's what I'm used to.