Shock versus Lightning Bolt
General forum
Posted on June 8, 2013, 1:31 p.m. by JoeMama
In magic, there are many cases of "strictly better" cards. The biggest example of this is the classic Shock versus Lightning Bolt . But is lightning bolt strictly better? My challenge to everyone is is to find a situation where shock is better than lightning bolt, no matter how small the difference.
Isn't there a card that's like "if -name- is a target of a single target spell, make a copy for each other possible target of that spell and make each spell target a different target"?
So if your opponent has a whole buncha tiny things, and the other guy has 3 toughness, then that situation. Other than that, Lightning Bolt FTW.
June 8, 2013 1:39 p.m.
Boros Reckoner with a -1/-1 counter on it. Shock kills it, you take 2 damage somewhere. Lightning Bolt also kills it, but you take 1 more damage than you would from Shock .
June 8, 2013 1:47 p.m.
pumpkinsword says... #5
When you only have enough money for a playset of Shock , but not enough money for a playset of Lightning Bolt .
June 8, 2013 1:59 p.m.
when you want to kill a Glory Seeker , Shock would do the job but if you use a Lightning Bolt then you will be wasting 1 point of damage on the same creature
June 8, 2013 2:15 p.m.
June 8, 2013 2:52 p.m.
"Strictly better" means you would rather have Lightning Bolt in a game over Shock in all situations except for extreme ones. Therefore, the point of this forum is to find an extreme situation and is (in my opinion) a big joke.
June 8, 2013 3 p.m.
Your Boros Reckoner is blocking 5/5 hexproof creature with trample. You Shock your Boros Reckoner for 2 after it blocks with first strike to kill the opposing creature.
June 8, 2013 3:34 p.m.
Oh duh... right the Boros Reckoner also targets when it deals damage. Well, I was trying to think why you would want to Shock Boros Reckoner instead of just targeting the creature with Shock ... Ok, my example is not a valid reason to prefer Shock over Lightning Bolt . Thanks Nigrescence.
There is only one reason I can see to run Shock over Lightning Bolt : pity.
June 8, 2013 3:52 p.m.
i believe they made Lightning Bolt , then time passed and the and the value of the abilities of the cards went up so wizards elevated the mana cost of the card abilities and that's how they made Shock then years later they felt a need to get some cards from the past that were the best in their class to bring some flavor to the game (of course without bringing the broken ones...) and that's how we ended up with Lightning Bolt again IMO of course
June 8, 2013 4:13 p.m.
Ruric, from what many people have told me it was shift in game concept. Developers think the game is more accessible to new players if it's simple to initially grasp and the devs thought a more creature centric game was the way to do it. So they prefer a concept where most viable strategies depend on creatures slugging it out, with other spells built for support. Strategies designed to slow this approach down are penalized to promote a creature-centric game. Thus spells like Counterspell , Lightning Bolt , Stone Rain become Cancel , Shock ... etc. same thing for things like Control Magic , discard, and the list goes on. There used to be many ways to win that didn't depend on creatures and in general creatures were less powerful and the easiest threat to deal with. Land destruction was a viable strategy. Discard was never top, but was playable. Prison decks were a real threat. For better or worse, this is the reality of Magic as it is today. I'm not sure whether I agree with the philosophy. As an older player the old way will always be first in my heart, but I enjoy the game as it is today. The game has always been complicated and certainly is more competitive and sophisticated then it was in the beginning. Today the developers worry a lot about balance, back in the day if a card was broken they said "whoops" and restricted/banned it and moved on. Now with the internet, everyone can instantly see the top decks. Whenever I sit down to play at a tournament, the majority of good players will know within a few plays what you are playing. Back in the day (when the internet was new), everything was home brew and there was no way to easily know what "was best". I don't know, it's big business today and a lot of thought goes into card design with the pro tours and all that... and not the wild west it used to be... Enough rambling from an old man, but that's what I've been told for why some of the spells are less powerful while creatures in general are beasts compared to the old days.
June 8, 2013 4:37 p.m.
i guess im not as old player as you are Apoptosis but i feel the same...i used to play back in the onslaught block with mistforms and avens, goblins and elves, zombies and slivers, beasts and clerics but now i feel that the cards nowdays are better, in the way that you pay less to do the same you used to do back on that time...
June 10, 2013 8:45 a.m.
Rhadamanthus says... #15
One more: you're at 3 life and your opponent hits the Ultimate ability on Jace, Architect of Thought . Don't you wish you had Shock in your deck instead of Lightning Bolt ?
June 10, 2013 10:24 a.m.
You want to instant kill a Mogg Maniac in response to Blasphemous Act . And in that case a Gut Shot or a Spark Spray is also better!
June 10, 2013 10:49 a.m.
only reason its better... Shock will be standard legal... i would have rather gotten a reprint of Pillar of Flame ya ok it is sorcery (which blows), but that exile makes a world of difference.
June 10, 2013 12:41 p.m.
Or Magma Spray . It hits only creatures, but at instant speed.
June 10, 2013 4:17 p.m.
hiddengibbons says... #19
A situation where Shock is better than Lightning Bolt is when your opponent uses one of those cards to remove all of the named card from your deck and they choose Lightning Bolt, but you don't have those, you have shock. That would also be embarrassing, although I'm not sure as to whom.
PotatoPi says... #2
If you are Mindslaver ed and on three life, it would be better to have a Shock .
June 8, 2013 1:38 p.m.