I think that "Mana Burn" should be brought back
General forum
Posted on Dec. 27, 2013, 2:03 a.m. by WovenNebula
My reason for doing so would bring back more thought onto how you played your cards and make you think twice on what you are about to do, rather than having no care in the world and adding this mana to your pool with no consequences to your actions, it personally just seems lazy to me to not have this rule back in place. Though I love Magic regardless, I just believe it would cause a rise in cards that aren't used as often to make more frequent appearances and so on.. What are your thoughts on this matter and why would you choose Mana Burn, or no Mana Burn?
Unforgivn_II says... #3
Well, it would make Braid of Fire dangerous to play again.
December 27, 2013 2:52 a.m.
Darkness1835 says... #4
But now Braid of Fire and Banefire can end games like nobody's business. Why would we want to take that away?
December 27, 2013 3 a.m.
Unforgivn_II says... #5
I certainly didn't say I want it back. But it was one of those things where I was wondering why Wizards would make a cumulative upkeep that is bad in no way. Then I remembered mana burn used to be a thing.
December 27, 2013 3:11 a.m.
I never played with mana burn, but I've read MaRo discussing why it was removed. It was a rule that rarely ever came up. Relatively few effects add multiple mana, so its pretty uncommon for most players to see it most of the time. However, because it was a thing it had to be explained to new players. Those players had to be aware of it, even though it never came up, adding unnecessary complications which made it harder to learn.
Not only this, but it shut down some design space. Cards like Mindslaver couldn't exist until it was removed. From what I remember, Mindslaver was in the folder for Tempest, but was removed because of mana burn. It was only printed in Mirrodin because they specifically said you couldn't do it. This is just one example. Removing mana burn allowed them to do things they couldn't have done before.
They also tested some games without mana burn, and no one noticed the difference. A rule that effectively did nothing, while simultaneously adding complications and shutting down design space seems like a waste of time. If you want to read the article by MaRo for a clearer explanation I'll give you the link:
http://www.wizards.com/magic/magazine/article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/mm/44
December 27, 2013 3:13 a.m.
As a returning player, I was also surprised that they removed the concept of mana burn. One of the reasons they stated was because not a lot of players took it seriously. whut? -_-
Like the OP, I believe it's part of resource management. It's the difference of having two lands and casting Wild Growth
on each, or casting both to a single land card. if it's the latter, you get mana burn for 1 if you're casting a 2-drop card. it may not look much, but really...how many of us here hasn't lost in a tourney/FNM because of a reckless loss of 1 lifepoint? :)
Should WotC reconsider, i'm voting to return mana burn.
December 27, 2013 3:19 a.m.
It has nothing to do with people taking it seriously. It was just a rule which rarely came up, often confused new players, stopped certain types of cards being printed and rarely affected play. But I'm sure that 1 damage from Wild Growth was pretty relevant too... I'm sick of hearing the "Bring back mana burn," argument. It was removed for very clear and reasonable reasons, and bringing it back would change very little.
December 27, 2013 3:31 a.m.
I think the cons outweigh the pros in this case.
As already stated, the reasons behind it's removal are clear and reasonable.
Beyond that, how would anybody play Omnath, Locus of Mana in EDH?
December 27, 2013 4:12 a.m.
Mana burn is more relevant in older formats where cards like Mana Drain , Rite of Flame , etc. are played. The effects it had on Standard was non-existent since mana bases aren't broken.
Where mana burn has more influence are EDH, Legacy, and Vintage. Sol Ring , for example, is still a really powerful card. However, having it deal damage to you every turn because you don't have enough outlets for colorless mana means it can wind up killing you.
It's a shame they can't implement mana burn based on format, but that's not practical. It was a basic rule of the game, much like legendary permanents or priority.
December 27, 2013 5:30 a.m.
Triforce-Finder says... #11
It's an interesting Idea, yes, but also annoying as hell in its execution. Why not play a few casual games with house rule'd mana burn to try it out?
December 27, 2013 8:16 a.m.
nobu_the_bard says... #12
Instead of bringing mana burn back, there ought to be an enchantment and/or artifact that has a similar effect, to punish players keeping too much mana at the ends of phases (with its wording made to allow Omnath, Locus of Mana to continue to work as intended).
December 27, 2013 8:35 a.m.
But even in older formats its pretty uncommon to over tap your mana. It doesn't really come up at all in standard, but it still doesn't come up a huge amount in EDH or legacy. Maybe in vintage since I've never played that. I've played once or twice with house rules to see if it came up. The only time it did was when someone deliberately tapped a Signet for 2 mana so they would get burnt, just to prove that it happens. Its not something that happens very often, and what it adds in complexity isn't compensated for by relevance in play
December 27, 2013 9:02 a.m.
This would disproportionately favor U with its many tap effects becoming DD effects inadvertently.
December 27, 2013 9:32 a.m.
nobu_the_bard says... #15
I've seen various situations in EDH where it would have come into play. Particularly:
Mana Echoes
has no downside now
Braid of Fire
has no downside now
Black Market
has no downside now
Mana Cache
has much less upside (you can just tap all of your lands for mana even if you don't need it to deny your opponent your mana)
That is just a few examples. Something to bring the effect back as a permanent would create an "answer" to abuse of these sorts of things, or at least make having mana sinks more important again. Mana Burn the card probably needn't be a rare as it most likely would not be considered a strong card.
I do remember, back in the day, many players would burn themselves on purpose as a way of committing suicide if they were about to lose. I guess you could just do it anyway since it doesn't matter at that point, but there it is.
December 27, 2013 10:02 a.m.
Rasta_Viking29 says... #16
It would come up regularly with Nykthos, Shrine to Nyx in standard. I would vote nay.
December 27, 2013 10:34 a.m.
Well maybe I should take back my earlier comment ... since just tapping it isn't quite the same as activating it ... whoops ...
December 27, 2013 10:46 a.m.
I should mention that I'm heavily biased towards keeping mana burn for the sole reason that Mana Drain exists. While it's not format warping, it's still ridiculous how much it benefits from the lack of mana burn. It went from being Dark Ritual status to Mox Sapphire levels of power.
Rasta_Viking29 also brings up a good point about Nykthos, Shrine to Nyx . Standard would be a different place with mana burn and Nykthos, Shrine to Nyx existing at the same time. It turns into a high risk, high reward card, instead of "THE MANAZ!! I HAZ ALL OF THE MANAZ!!!!!"
December 27, 2013 11:12 a.m.
I agree with you, mana burn is a part of magic that essentially keeps you on your feet. Especially with those stupid devotion decks adding insane amounts of mana to the pool and using like 3/4 of it. I vote yes mana burn should be a thing .
December 27, 2013 11:55 a.m.
WovenNebula says... #20
The reason I brought this up is because in the last year at my local shop, multiple games, multiple players, were using mana carelessly which would effected how they would of played overall. Maybe it's just the meta by me?
December 27, 2013 12:16 p.m.
Didgeridooda says... #21
"Keeps you on your feet" Best way to describe it. It was a shocker for me when I started playing again. Not sure if it should come back or not though. It did not come up often, but I liked that you had to have it in the back of your mind. It was confusing for some people.
December 27, 2013 12:19 p.m.
WovenNebula says... #22
@Didgeridooda I agree with you on how it "Keeps you on your feet" maybe I just notice it more that I realize that its gone and I just see it happen frequently. I still try to use every last drop of mana that I use, old habits never die.
December 27, 2013 12:59 p.m.
Didgeridooda says... #23
TheGamer said that, but I am the same way. I don't like to leave any floating. I think it is like discarding random cards, banding, and others. They are useful, and add dimensions, but overall they take away from the game. That would be why they are not there any more. That does not stop me from using hymn, or having a first strike banding deck. I should post that while I am thinking of it.
December 27, 2013 2:54 p.m.
HarbingerJK says... #24
as a control player I can't agree with this, mana burn would fuck my shit up since half my decks are draw-pass
December 27, 2013 4:05 p.m.
Arachnarchist says... #25
HarbingerJK: Under mana burn rules, you don't get burned for having untapped lands at the end of a step or phase, you get burned if you tapped lands for mana and didn't use it.
Mana burn added a lot of complexity to the game even though it only came up on rare occasions. This article explains it pretty well
Additionally, the presence of mana burn would be detrimental to new players joining the game. Imagine a new player playing a Burning-Tree Emissary and then learning they take two damage because they can't use the mana. Or in Theros, playing or Monstrifying a Nemesis of Mortals and forgetting or miscalculating the cost reduction and losing 3+ life. They would feel cheated, and would be displeased with the game.
December 27, 2013 5:53 p.m.
megawurmple says... #26
For all those saying Braid of Fire would be broken, it still has a massive downside that it adds mana to your pool in your upkeep, so you can only use it for instants. It's not still there in your main phase. It never sees play for that reason.
December 27, 2013 6:53 p.m.
HarbingerJK says... #27
we must have played it wrong when I was younger then...but we played pretty much the whole game wrong then too
December 27, 2013 7:05 p.m.
so much hate for Mana Burn. what happened, you guys get killed by 4x Eladamri's Vineyard ? :D
iniksbane says... #2
Having played with both, my thought is mana burn rarely came up. It's one of those rules that really didn't impact the game often enough to matter.
December 27, 2013 2:52 a.m.