it's one of the highest damage spells at INSTANT speed to creatures OR players, and for only 3cmc. if you're fretting about the 2 dmg then you aren't a red mage
leomistico
★★☆☆☆ (2.9/5.0)(4 votes)
In fact, it seems quite costy or unbalanced, compared to Lightning Bolt, Flame Javenil or Incenerite, but it's full of flavor that I can't stop to love this card. Izzet, the best guild ever! However, is a good card, that saw a lot of play in those days... It seems that a 4-damages instant without drawback should cost , however: 5/5
Jackflap
★★★☆☆ (3.3/5.0)(8 votes)
Interesting that the blue version gets a higher rating.. your prejudice is showing, red mages!
Selez
★★★★☆ (4.6/5.0)(4 votes)
This is a beautiful card and a huge success. A flavorful card that sees tournament play? Huzzah! Ravnica FTW!
In mono red Flame Javelin is better, but then you CAN play eight copies with Char, and Char is splashable.
nammertime
★★★★☆ (4.8/5.0)(7 votes)
@Jackflap: The blue version gets a higher rating because the original version was the blue one... and actually, it's because blue doesn't have burn, so that would be considered a great card for blue.
alvantis
★★★★☆ (4.0/5.0)(1 vote)
Oh, I wish it was a common so I could play it in my pauper burn deck.
izzet_guild_mage
★★★★☆ (4.0/5.0)(1 vote)
It was great for its time. Nowadays, we have Lightning Bolt again, but this was big stuff. Red decks of every sort were using it.
Cyberium
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(4 votes)
Psionic Blast was rated higher because blue, by tradition, has almost no direct damage spell, and Psionic Blast fills that gap at minimal cost. Char is a good burn spell, 4 damage at instant speed, but red has a lot of burn spells already so even with this card the gain is not as much as Psionic Blast would for blue.
With that said, Char is a great burn spell.
redshoesrock
★★☆☆☆ (2.1/5.0)(8 votes)
"Hey, check out my awesome 3mc instant burn spell for 4 dmg!"
Oh please. Flames of the Blood Hand is just a smaller Lava Axe with the same target restriction, and Flame Javelin only costs 3 mana if you're playing mono red (and is also from an extremely overpowered block). The only time the 2 life loss will matter is when you're playing another burn deck.
dragonking987
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.5/5.0)(6 votes)
this card really sucks.
dberry02
★★★★☆ (4.6/5.0)(9 votes)
This used to be so good when it was in standard. Not so hot anymore.
Shiny_Umbreon
★★★★☆ (4.0/5.0)(6 votes)
@Qazior: It's actually rare to see cards that damage you for no reason at common. Also, it was considered pretty aggresively costed in its time.
That said, I always thought (and still do) this was highly overrated. 3/5 and no more.
God_Of_The_Smurfs
★☆☆☆☆ (1.0/5.0)(9 votes)
Why on earth is this a rare? I can think of an easy way to get nine damage for three mana. It's called lightning bolt. Sure, it's flavorful, but it's still a crap card. 2/5
justicarphaeton
★★☆☆☆ (2.8/5.0)(2 votes)
Funny how a few years ago every Standard Red Deck Wins player ran 4x Char. Now it's considered garbage. Flame Javelin does all it does without the drawback, and Lightning Bolt just makes it look silly.
Bazzoka
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(2 votes)
Personally, I would rather go with Flame Javelin or Flames of the Blood Hand because of how many burn and RDW decks there are where I live. I will admit, 3 cmc for 4 damage to anything is very nice, I'm just exceedingly greedy with my life points. However, with that infect, maybe self damaging spells aren't such a bad idea.
scumbling1
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(14 votes)
"Why on earth is this a rare? I can think of an easy way to get nine damage for three mana. It's called lightning bolt."
That's three seperate cards -- not really the same thing at all. Dealing nine damage with bolts drains you off over half your hand, so while they're efficient, they're costly in regards to another resource.
Cards that can deal large amounts of damage to an opponent tend to lose efficiency, as they have more potential to end games out of the blue. If you want four damage for less mana, you could also try Flame Rift, but it can't ever hit creatures and deals you twice the damage. Flames of the Bloodhand will save you the damage, but you're still going to suffer the targeting restriction. You could also try Galvanic Blast, but that's going to require artifacts that impose deck-building restrictions. Fireblast is better than Char in a dedicated burn deck, but it has it's own demands that are hard for many decks to pay. Clearly, the ratio of mana to damage goes down as the spells become more damaging. There aren't two mana cards that hit for six; three mana spells that hit for nine, ect. Taking greater portions of an opponent's life with a single card is worth greater amounts of mana.
If you start to look at what the alterantives actually are, Char begins to look a lot better. It's an instant, splashable, direct damage spell that hits creatures and players. It's not as efficient as Lightning Bolt, but you can't build a deck of forty Lightning Bolts anymore.
Gabriel422
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(2 votes)
Overrated? Hell no. This card does its job well. Staggershock is a great card even with Lightning Bolt around. And Staggershock can never kill a Meloku so your Kird Apes and Scab-Clan Maulers can run through.
Though I'm as bothered as all of you with the fact that it was a rare. Nowadays it would probably be mitigated a bit since the introduction of mythic rares drove rare prices down.
@scumbling1: I agree with everything you say, except for the comparison with Fireblast. Nothing, nothing ever compares with Fireblast. It's four damage for zero mana. The damage / cost ratio analysis was spot on, though.
Nagoragama
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(13 votes)
Let me post the flavor text from the DCI reprint, "If you've never choked on the embers of your own spell, you're not casting it hard enough."
Inexperienced players too highly value their life total. Splashable, Instant speed 4 damage for 3 mana is efficient, and the drawback only matters if you're at 2 life.
Kryptnyt
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(2 votes)
Char's utility depends on the metagame it lies in. If the greatest and most common threats have four toughness, char is in luck! Black creatures with four toughness, such as Moroii or Sengir Vampire? Even better! If the main threats have 1, 2, or 3, or 5+, you turn to Lighting Bolt or to "destroy" effects. In current Standard Format, Char would be passable to target Exarch in Splinter Twin decks, which lightning bolt is useless against. Other than that though, anything 5 toughness and under will go down to a Dismember (another card with backlash, strangely enough) which can be (and is) played in a lot of decks. Can't Dismember to the face, though.
Shadoflaam
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(3 votes)
Char is very good, but 3 months ago I would have called it not rare-worthy. I honestly don't think burn spells should even be rare, but I digress. This could have seen a lot of play in Zendikar as an uncommon. Now? It's probably rare again, because of the slight power drop. I hope to see it again sometime. But not Psionic Blast. When a burn spell is already good in RED...
pedrodyl
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(1 vote)
Regardless of whether this is a rare or not (which shouldn't affect the player rating, IMO) this is a highly underrated card. Remember, the only life point that matters, is your last.
Admiral_Ferret
★★★☆☆ (3.0/5.0)(1 vote)
Okay, I'm new to this.. redo!
Why not pay the extra {R} and have the 2 damage go to your opponent ( Chandra's Outrage )? I think the trade-off is well worth it.
Dream_Twist
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
Very, very Red, but some how not very good outside of its block. Slagstorm didn't exactly help matters, because it's better almost all the time.
In modern - I say run a few of each and let the good times roll!
zenitramleirdag
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
i'd probably run a couple of these if i were to build a straight burn deck..
charot!
adrian.malacoda
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
-mander!
DrJack
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(2 votes)
Timeshifted Psionic Blast, even though the rulings don't menion it. :-)
RunedServitor
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(2 votes)
This is a Timeshifted version of Psionic Blast...except it isn't. Weird!
battleofwits
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
Why is this rare? I know it is good, but it should be common.
tankthebest
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
@Admiral_Ferret
The extra {r} makes Chandra's Outrage less splashable than this, and in a red deck being able to play something on turn 3 rather than 4 can be a very large difference.
More importantly, Chandra's Outrage only targets creatures while this can hit players or creatures, another very large difference.
SAUS3
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(1 vote)
@battleofwits While I agree it could have a lower rarity, I think it should only be reduced to uncommon. It's more complex than most burn spells, so it shouldn't be common, but it's not special enough to be a rare (imo). Also, at common, it probably would have stepped on limited. Look at flame javelin for instance.
It's still a nice card though. It's really easy to put into multi-coloured decks (which is why it makes sense to be printed in ravnica), and 4 damage for 3 mana is pretty good (if you consider it was well before the lightning bolt reprint).
CamouFranky
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
Guys, you haven't realized yet that this is the timeshifted version of psionic blast!
TheWrathofShane
☆☆☆☆☆ (0.0/5.0)
Seems like a great card to me.
blurrymadness
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(1 vote)
I prefer Psionic Blast for sure; I feel like burn can have a few creatures in the deck, 1 and two drops can double up with a burn card on T3 and net you more value in the long run (as creatures do) while smoothing out shaky hands to reduce mulligans.
It's alright, but it's like Concentrate; way better outside of it's pie.
Lord_of_Gelectrodes
★★★★★ (5.0/5.0)(1 vote)
Good card, but because of its rarity, people tend to underestimate it. Great card, should have been uncommon. 4/5
Comments (42)
However, is a good card, that saw a lot of play in those days... It seems that a 4-damages instant without drawback should cost
In mono red Flame Javelin is better, but then you CAN play eight copies with Char, and Char is splashable.
With that said, Char is a great burn spell.
-"Not bad, dude. I've got a pair of them myself called Flames of the Blood Hand and Flame Javelin."
"So do yours damage you for 2 like mine does?"
-"Uhhh...no. I'm not that dumb."
"...oh..."
That said, I always thought (and still do) this was highly overrated. 3/5 and no more.
That's three seperate cards -- not really the same thing at all. Dealing nine damage with bolts drains you off over half your hand, so while they're efficient, they're costly in regards to another resource.
Cards that can deal large amounts of damage to an opponent tend to lose efficiency, as they have more potential to end games out of the blue. If you want four damage for less mana, you could also try Flame Rift, but it can't ever hit creatures and deals you twice the damage. Flames of the Bloodhand will save you the damage, but you're still going to suffer the targeting restriction. You could also try Galvanic Blast, but that's going to require artifacts that impose deck-building restrictions. Fireblast is better than Char in a dedicated burn deck, but it has it's own demands that are hard for many decks to pay. Clearly, the ratio of mana to damage goes down as the spells become more damaging. There aren't two mana cards that hit for six; three mana spells that hit for nine, ect. Taking greater portions of an opponent's life with a single card is worth greater amounts of mana.
If you start to look at what the alterantives actually are, Char begins to look a lot better. It's an instant, splashable, direct damage spell that hits creatures and players. It's not as efficient as Lightning Bolt, but you can't build a deck of forty Lightning Bolts anymore.
Though I'm as bothered as all of you with the fact that it was a rare. Nowadays it would probably be mitigated a bit since the introduction of mythic rares drove rare prices down.
@scumbling1: I agree with everything you say, except for the comparison with Fireblast. Nothing, nothing ever compares with Fireblast. It's four damage for zero mana. The damage / cost ratio analysis was spot on, though.
Inexperienced players too highly value their life total. Splashable, Instant speed 4 damage for 3 mana is efficient, and the drawback only matters if you're at 2 life.
In current Standard Format, Char would be passable to target Exarch in Splinter Twin decks, which lightning bolt is useless against. Other than that though, anything 5 toughness and under will go down to a Dismember (another card with backlash, strangely enough) which can be (and is) played in a lot of decks.
Can't Dismember to the face, though.
Remember, the only life point that matters, is your last.
Why not pay the extra {R} and have the 2 damage go to your opponent ( Chandra's Outrage )? I think the trade-off is well worth it.
In modern - I say run a few of each and let the good times roll!
charot!
The extra {r} makes Chandra's Outrage less splashable than this, and in a red deck being able to play something on turn 3 rather than 4 can be a very large difference.
More importantly, Chandra's Outrage only targets creatures while this can hit players or creatures, another very large difference.
While I agree it could have a lower rarity, I think it should only be reduced to uncommon. It's more complex than most burn spells, so it shouldn't be common, but it's not special enough to be a rare (imo). Also, at common, it probably would have stepped on limited. Look at flame javelin for instance.
It's still a nice card though. It's really easy to put into multi-coloured decks (which is why it makes sense to be printed in ravnica), and 4 damage for 3 mana is pretty good (if you consider it was well before the lightning bolt reprint).
It's alright, but it's like Concentrate; way better outside of it's pie.
4/5