27:50 why go down the spirit guides? They are strictly better than desperate ritual: They are a source of damage, can ramp you from 1 mana, don't ping you when you ramp through an opponent's eidolon, and in a pinch they can block a goblin guide or something. If anything cut the rituals. I don't think splice will ever come up in a match against burn.
so math against burn 26:50. 1 burning vengeance 3+4 = 7 do it 3 times is 21. 2 burning vengeances 3+4+4=11 do it 2 times is 22. Yep 1 damage different therefor punt for not playing around helix. You could have waited until the end step to see if they try and burn you. In that case you may have lost out on 2 damage but they fail to do anything to you and waste 2 mana and gives you an extra turn.
Flame jab is sorcery speed. And in this particular case i just can't blame seth for not have played around the only card that could have saved the opponent by one. I mean...he was dealing 21 damage with flame jab. C'mon now, some over excitement is understandable xD
@@arashinoguardianyeah9083 You can definitely blame Seth, as long as there's a chance that the opponent has the card and you HAVE to win the game that turn, you gotta account for it.
Yeah, it was a punt, but a pretty understandable one I think. I was excited that we had our opponent dead so I didn't bother to count if we could deal more damage by playing it another way, unfortunately that would have made the difference between winning and losing. Lesson learned!
Hey, curious about what you guys think. @ 12:06, instead of tapping the ghost quarter for Mana, maybe Seth could have tapped the mountain then ghost quartered himself, fetching for a forest? Since it comes in untapped he can still play blood moon but also has a forest and a basic mountain in hand, plus flame of keld. This is bad if the opponent has assassin's trophy but given the fact that he used abrupt decay, surgical and even Inquisition it seems unlikely he'd have an additional piece of removal . Curious to hear your thoughts!
I totally agree with you Seth, while I love Burning Vengence, it seems pretty bad in this deck. Seeing the deck with 2 more seismic assualts, and perhaps 2 more lands would be interesting.
Card Text: Whenever a source you control deals damage to an opponent, you may put a quest counter on Quest for Pure Flame. Remove four quest counters from Quest for Pure Flame and sacrifice it: If any source you control would deal damage to a permanent or player this turn, it deals double that damage to that permanent or player instead.
Yeah, I just saw that we had our opponent dead so I didn't bother to see if we could have them even more dead. Probably should have been more aware of the possibility of Helix though, since it's pretty popular in Burn these days.
I wonder if a Land Dredge deck could be viable. Use Magmatic Insight, discard a land, dredge two Life from the Loams, get six lands in hand? I feel like you can do some stuff from there.
Now this is a deck that can make burning vengeance (kinda) work! I really like that card, nice to see a cool but terrible card do what it was designed to do :)
I agree, I would at least cut 2 Vengeance for 2 more Assault. The thing is, if you remove Vengeance, then Flame Jab becomes a lot worse, so at that point it might just make sense to get rid of a couple Flame Jab and go 4x Assault 4x Vortex. Magmatic Insight could be ok in this deck, or even just Cathartic Reunion to get rid of the redundancy and get to the key components. Hmm, how else to improve it?
31:39 why not? It costs 3 doesn't it? You have enough mana to looting plus double flame jab (or alternatively, molten vortex+activate). That can kill the swift spear as long as OP doesn't prowess up the toughness.
I feel like burning vengeance should be replaced with thermo alchemist, still keeps the flame jab/flame of keld combo intact, but also triggers off your other red spells
When he says "for now" he usually doesn't mean "for now". It seems like he means "there's no immediate use for it" based on the situations he tends to use that phrase in.
I hate to call a theoretical punt, but game 2 against burn, when you milled faithless, I think you needed cast it, hope to hit flame jab, and double cast it targeting swiftspear.
remove the ritual and burning vengeance package and get some land draw or something instead. i'd even remove like 2 flame jabs only keep 2 since it's competing against better cards without burning vengeance edit: also why isn't the deck playing cycling lands?? 4 forgotten cave would really help fill the gy and gives you a draw engine with loam.
Two things: 1. Discarding Nature's Claim instead of a random land when you knew it had about a billion key targets in their deck was brutally greedy. 2. Not sure why you hate on the Burning Vengeance ... the majority of your wins were the BV + Flame Jab combo. Seismic Assault did very little for you at any point in time and it's terrible in multiples. (Unlike BV which is AMAZING in multiples.) Deck seems very cool though ... I'd be interested in seeing a version w/o the ramp and with more flashback / draw mechanisms. I think the sideboard has some room for flexibility as well.
When you drew the second burning vengeance you should of played one of your lands then played second burning vengeance so each flame jab would have been 11 damage and they would have been at 0 and not 1
24:32 Yikes! Discarding 3 lands with 1 Vengeance in play is 21 damage. Discarding 2 lands with 2 Vengeance in play is 22 damage. That tiny difference was enough to lose the game.
I dont understand people who put things like Dragonclaw only once in their sideboard. Either you want to win against burn or you dont. play four or none.
One of the only things I don't like about the deck is the blood moons. I think it's a dumb and low skill card that creates uninteresting games. The games against jund didn't show the power of your deck at all. They showed the power of blood moon. If I spend a bunch of time creating a deck I want to play the deck and try to figure out the puzzles and challenges in various scenarios, not just play a single card and watch my opponent scoop
Blood Moon is weird. I can see how it creates uninteresting games, but at the same time Modern is so far that janky decks really need a way to slow the opponent down to have a chance of winning consistently.
hello, this is seth, probably better known aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaas.... the guy who keeps lowing down his name more and more until eventually filling a video with just introducing himself.
I'm gonna be honest, people are more mad when you punt and don't notice it than when you punt and go over it and say "Oh yeah, I misplayed there" because if you don't notice the mistake you're likely to make a similar one in the future. Also they like complaining and it's less effective when you do it first and they have to settle for sloppy seconds
That's my question- this deck looks kinda fun, and I can probably borrow all the expensive cards, but I question whether its not just a completely carried by blood moon.
I think it really depends on the matchup. Decks like Death and Taxes seems like naturally good matchups, against Jund I think we were mostly carried by Blood Moon.
Tell me Seth, I love you, but I feel like your traditional introduction (Hello everyone it's Seth probably better known as Saffronolive) is slower and more awkward these days. Like you try to articulate way too much. Still loving the content though
I do not think you punted. Did you forget that Helix was a possibility for our opponent, sure. Did you know it was in their hand, no. It’s not really a punt to not play around something you don’t have to.
I would count it as a punt. He had a chance to do 22 and play around the helix, he didn't and dealt 21 which let his opponent untap and win. When you're against burn game one you can safely assume 56 of their 60 (and the last 4 are split between lands 19 & 20, skullcrack 3 & 4, and grim lavamancer 1 & 2). There isn't a card in those 56 that would punish you for casting the 2nd vengeance and nabbing that extra point, but there are 4 that punish you for not doing that. It's not the clearest line to see, and I wouldn't expect most players to see that line, but it was Seth's game to lose, and that makes it a punt.
Strictly speaking, it's a punt. He didn't take the winning line. And strictly speaking, he did need to play around Lightning Helix if he wanted to win.
I don't think you have the right definition of punt - a punt is losing or taking a disadvantage for not playing optimally. This wasn't even a difficult possibility to see, especially given helix's high profile in a historic PT match exactly like this
13:21 I never thought I would see someone exile a SSG to cast another one. That's some Tier 0 plays
Call back to “hit our swans draw some cards”.
think of Tetris
I saw someone playing Seismic Swans at GP Portland! I got super excited, but couldn't explain it to my opponent since their match was within earshot.
@@erfunk I think that was my buddy. Guy with red hair and beard?
@@XsumerianX Not positive, but sounds right.
"ghost quarter, probably better known as a mountain"
*crowd cheers*
27:50 why go down the spirit guides? They are strictly better than desperate ritual: They are a source of damage, can ramp you from 1 mana, don't ping you when you ramp through an opponent's eidolon, and in a pinch they can block a goblin guide or something. If anything cut the rituals. I don't think splice will ever come up in a match against burn.
Truth.
You can't Splice onto Arcane with a monkey, tho. That's the real deal.
so math against burn 26:50. 1 burning vengeance 3+4 = 7 do it 3 times is 21. 2 burning vengeances 3+4+4=11 do it 2 times is 22. Yep 1 damage different therefor punt for not playing around helix. You could have waited until the end step to see if they try and burn you. In that case you may have lost out on 2 damage but they fail to do anything to you and waste 2 mana and gives you an extra turn.
Flame jab is sorcery speed. And in this particular case i just can't blame seth for not have played around the only card that could have saved the opponent by one. I mean...he was dealing 21 damage with flame jab. C'mon now, some over excitement is understandable xD
I mean it was the better line but unfortunate loss is unfortunate.
@@arashinoguardianyeah9083 You can definitely blame Seth, as long as there's a chance that the opponent has the card and you HAVE to win the game that turn, you gotta account for it.
Yeah, it was a punt, but a pretty understandable one I think. I was excited that we had our opponent dead so I didn't bother to count if we could deal more damage by playing it another way, unfortunately that would have made the difference between winning and losing. Lesson learned!
This exact sequence (chain burn with lightning helix on top of the stack to win) was how a pro tour was decided
That game 1 against Burn was a thing of beauty and the turnaround was backbreaking. Insane stuff
I've been brewing with modern lands for years and this deck looks sweet. Land decks are my absolute favorite. Glad it won the poll
Land decks are my fav too. Something beautiful about winning with cards that are intented to play other cards.
It just doesn't work in modern. Sometimes you'll get there at FNM, but any higher level play than that and it's just not good enough.
Hey, curious about what you guys think.
@ 12:06, instead of tapping the ghost quarter for Mana, maybe Seth could have tapped the mountain then ghost quartered himself, fetching for a forest?
Since it comes in untapped he can still play blood moon but also has a forest and a basic mountain in hand, plus flame of keld.
This is bad if the opponent has assassin's trophy but given the fact that he used abrupt decay, surgical and even Inquisition it seems unlikely he'd have an additional piece of removal .
Curious to hear your thoughts!
2:54 perfect explanation about blood moon
I totally agree with you Seth, while I love Burning Vengence, it seems pretty bad in this deck. Seeing the deck with 2 more seismic assualts, and perhaps 2 more lands would be interesting.
It like you were reading my mind. Since loan dropped in price from UMA, I’ve been wanting to build a deck focusing on lands and land recursion.
It's like you are reading my mind, I was just dreaming about a R/G assault loam deck...
1:27 he said “The Flame of Keld”. I’m so happy!
@@UnholyPancake Because he usually says Flame of the Keld.
Discarding that nature's claim against Death and Taxes was super painful.
Yeah discarding a relevant sideboard card instead of one of 3 lands seems pretty bad, even if seismic resolves
I feel like *quest for the pure flame would be great for this deck
Quest for the pure flame?
@@Macro11Underscore1 yeah, forgot the name thx
Card Text:
Whenever a source you control deals damage to an opponent, you may put a quest counter on Quest for Pure Flame.
Remove four quest counters from Quest for Pure Flame and sacrifice it: If any source you control would deal damage to a permanent or player this turn, it deals double that damage to that permanent or player instead.
This is a super interesting deck. The burn punt, while technically wrong, is completely understandable
Yeah, I just saw that we had our opponent dead so I didn't bother to see if we could have them even more dead. Probably should have been more aware of the possibility of Helix though, since it's pretty popular in Burn these days.
Awesome deck :D
Would Ghost Quartering their Plains at 57:11 not been the sweetest play of all time? Ghost quarter their Plains, and they can't play.
Gotta love the 4 mismatched Blood Moons for maximum tilt value ;P
That empty hand BloodMoon was nasty !
Seth: "I don't think we need Nature's Claim"
Me: "NOoooo!!!....
*instantly punished*
I wonder if a Land Dredge deck could be viable. Use Magmatic Insight, discard a land, dredge two Life from the Loams, get six lands in hand? I feel like you can do some stuff from there.
That sounds pretty sweet.
I honestly didn't think about Helix, but when you didn't play Vengeance I was yelling at my screen "Play it, think about the value!" XD
45:50 This is the craziest standard deck I've seen in a while :o
You should do another vintage or legacy against the odds!
We're about due.
@@MTGGoldfish it's vinntage panharmonicon time. You have to do it.
Or legacy experimental frenzy. I'd accept that.
Now this is a deck that can make burning vengeance (kinda) work! I really like that card, nice to see a cool but terrible card do what it was designed to do :)
I agree, I would at least cut 2 Vengeance for 2 more Assault. The thing is, if you remove Vengeance, then Flame Jab becomes a lot worse, so at that point it might just make sense to get rid of a couple Flame Jab and go 4x Assault 4x Vortex. Magmatic Insight could be ok in this deck, or even just Cathartic Reunion to get rid of the redundancy and get to the key components. Hmm, how else to improve it?
Great video!
31:39 why not? It costs 3 doesn't it? You have enough mana to looting plus double flame jab (or alternatively, molten vortex+activate). That can kill the swift spear as long as OP doesn't prowess up the toughness.
I feel like burning vengeance should be replaced with thermo alchemist, still keeps the flame jab/flame of keld combo intact, but also triggers off your other red spells
1:04:32 !Punt
There is no "for now" in discarding the Claim. You have it or you don't, and not having it cost you severely.
When he says "for now" he usually doesn't mean "for now". It seems like he means "there's no immediate use for it" based on the situations he tends to use that phrase in.
Seth is preeetty good at clicking rmb->Concede instead of OK =)
But don't all Modern decks play lands?
*Goblin Charbelcher looks nervously around the room.*
Some dredge decks don't.
@AneirinTruong Maybe not competitively, but it's still possible.
I was hoping that somehow some copies of Secrets of the Dead would sneak their way in to generate that sweet sweet card advantage
45:50 playin some lands in... Standard?
You should try Spellweaver Helix + Worldfire + Flame Jab
We tried something like that on Against the Odds a long time ago.
Fish Doctor then?
I like decks where "jank 'em out with Blood Moon" is a plan. It keeps the greedy mana bases of Modern somewhat in check.
I hate to call a theoretical punt, but game 2 against burn, when you milled faithless, I think you needed cast it, hope to hit flame jab, and double cast it targeting swiftspear.
I'm still waiting for Patron if the Orochi with Nemesis of Mortals.
Those burning vengence could be Conflagrates.
Dude, this deck is very sweet. I guess it lacks some resistence against the most agressive decks.
remove the ritual and burning vengeance package and get some land draw or something instead. i'd even remove like 2 flame jabs only keep 2 since it's competing against better cards without burning vengeance edit: also why isn't the deck playing cycling lands?? 4 forgotten cave would really help fill the gy and gives you a draw engine with loam.
Forgotten cave is not modern legal. You'd have to play sheltered thicket or something.
I'm guessing this was made pre wrenn and six? I didn't think modern horizons was that new
Worm harvest in the side?
52:33 make that your SMS ringtone :P
3:41
Is the graven cairns just there to be able to cast leyline out of the sb?
Probably, yes. The deck sees a lot of cards with looting and dredging and can get it back with loam so it makes sense.
Land, it's the one thing they aren't making any more of.
Shoutouts to Mark Twain.
Two things: 1. Discarding Nature's Claim instead of a random land when you knew it had about a billion key targets in their deck was brutally greedy.
2. Not sure why you hate on the Burning Vengeance ... the majority of your wins were the BV + Flame Jab combo. Seismic Assault did very little for you at any point in time and it's terrible in multiples. (Unlike BV which is AMAZING in multiples.)
Deck seems very cool though ... I'd be interested in seeing a version w/o the ramp and with more flashback / draw mechanisms. I think the sideboard has some room for flexibility as well.
Small Japanese tournament?
45:51 wow thats a little strange deck for standar!
"I guess the lesson is: do the math"
gosh i never would've guessed
Can someone explain Graven Cairns to me? I see 0 reason why that card is in the deck over a basic mountain.
It's basically so we have some chance of casting Leyline of the Void after sideboarding (since it can make BB).
@@MTGGoldfish Oh, I see. That makes sense!
if u kept the natures claim u'd have that seismic assault immediately... note to self, discard one of 4 lands over a natures claim in the future'
When you can't afford the Tabernacles for Legacy Lands
i think there just needs to be one more piece for it to be hyper competitive
Yeah, it feels close, either some more brewing or one more new piece would go a long way.
Why is graven Cairns in the deck ?
To hardcast Leyline of the Void
When you drew the second burning vengeance you should of played one of your lands then played second burning vengeance so each flame jab would have been 11 damage and they would have been at 0 and not 1
24:32 Yikes! Discarding 3 lands with 1 Vengeance in play is 21 damage. Discarding 2 lands with 2 Vengeance in play is 22 damage. That tiny difference was enough to lose the game.
Instead of calling it 8-whack, can we call it Burning Bush?
24:55 Pog
Lightning helix into boros charm is pretty brutal. It's the only way you lose i think.
I dont understand people who put things like Dragonclaw only once in their sideboard. Either you want to win against burn or you dont. play four or none.
I think this deck might want Obstinate Baloth or Thragtusk instead, tbh.
45:48 Say what?
Today´s lesson: Never laught at your oponent
sb needs work. 6 artifact/enchantment hate spells and 1 (good) lifegain
Yeah, I think a sweeper might help.
It should really be 2 Vengeance, 4 Seismic
Agreed, Seismic Assault is just so much more immediately impactful (although Vengeance is still pretty good for the long game).
14:32 glitch in the matrix Seth laugh with himself O_o
One of the only things I don't like about the deck is the blood moons. I think it's a dumb and low skill card that creates uninteresting games. The games against jund didn't show the power of your deck at all. They showed the power of blood moon. If I spend a bunch of time creating a deck I want to play the deck and try to figure out the puzzles and challenges in various scenarios, not just play a single card and watch my opponent scoop
Blood Moon is weird. I can see how it creates uninteresting games, but at the same time Modern is so far that janky decks really need a way to slow the opponent down to have a chance of winning consistently.
38:20 as usual when u mull a 5 lander tou get a 0 lander😂
hello, this is seth, probably better known aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaas.... the guy who keeps lowing down his name more and more until eventually filling a video with just introducing himself.
Wtf that triple Simian
I'm gonna be honest, people are more mad when you punt and don't notice it than when you punt and go over it and say "Oh yeah, I misplayed there" because if you don't notice the mistake you're likely to make a similar one in the future. Also they like complaining and it's less effective when you do it first and they have to settle for sloppy seconds
So sad, if you played the other vengeance you'd have 22 dmg instead of 21...
45:50 "playing some lands in standard"
19:22
You're welcome
You've punted, but I would have done the same...
Against 8-whack you could have won a turn before (game 1)
no he couldn't have
where is face cam
Only face cam for streams right now (it messed up the editing for the youtube videos).
"Is this gonna work?"No.
"Graven Karens"
“Graven Karens” :)
end my pain!
the cure Zen= unwinnable wen quick sand
think of Tetris
So wait, this is just Punishing Jund but without Punishing...
Also without being Jund, but sort of...
Dew the math
If I had a goth girlfriend, I'd want her name to be Graven Karen. Gotta wonder how you're really supposed to pronounce "Cairns"...
Actually the way he did it is correct :D
@@Yuzuki1337 Really? Wow. English, man. Helluva language.
@@TheMattmatic Gotta side with you there, the more I speak English the more I realize how hard it is to differentiate a lot of words just by sound
Dem "lands in standars"
The constant clicking is quite annoying.
Really? No one wants to talk about Graven Karens @ 12:22
Last!
I feel like this is just a really bad Mono-Red Prison deck.
That's my question- this deck looks kinda fun, and I can probably borrow all the expensive cards, but I question whether its not just a completely carried by blood moon.
I think it really depends on the matchup. Decks like Death and Taxes seems like naturally good matchups, against Jund I think we were mostly carried by Blood Moon.
This deck is sweet though, I just don't see myself playing it over typical Free-Win Red.
lol did any1 else c that lightning helix coming? *burn players pride*
Farst!
Edit: Ah sh**************t
Yeet
Choke should be banned
Choke is brutal!
I love bloodmoon, but even I draw the line at choke...
Tell me Seth, I love you, but I feel like your traditional introduction (Hello everyone it's Seth probably better known as Saffronolive) is slower and more awkward these days. Like you try to articulate way too much.
Still loving the content though
Hmm, I didn't realize that, I'm going to have to listen to some old intros.
I’m really getting tired of these
“free win” blood moon decks...Please play something more interactive
I do not think you punted. Did you forget that Helix was a possibility for our opponent, sure. Did you know it was in their hand, no.
It’s not really a punt to not play around something you don’t have to.
He could have played another burning vengeance and would have delt one more dmg
I would count it as a punt. He had a chance to do 22 and play around the helix, he didn't and dealt 21 which let his opponent untap and win. When you're against burn game one you can safely assume 56 of their 60 (and the last 4 are split between lands 19 & 20, skullcrack 3 & 4, and grim lavamancer 1 & 2). There isn't a card in those 56 that would punish you for casting the 2nd vengeance and nabbing that extra point, but there are 4 that punish you for not doing that. It's not the clearest line to see, and I wouldn't expect most players to see that line, but it was Seth's game to lose, and that makes it a punt.
Strictly speaking, it's a punt. He didn't take the winning line. And strictly speaking, he did need to play around Lightning Helix if he wanted to win.
I don't think you have the right definition of punt - a punt is losing or taking a disadvantage for not playing optimally. This wasn't even a difficult possibility to see, especially given helix's high profile in a historic PT match exactly like this
it's definitely a punt, always important to think about how the opponent can win, and play accordingly.
Why do you talk like that?
Nobody talks like that.
3:42