> > Fork is better in the general sense. As you have pointed out, it can
be used
> > in pretty well any circumstance (unless all the players are playing
with
> > creature decks; why would you want to put such a card into a creature
deck
> > anyways?).
> >
> > Furnace on the other hand, only doubles damage. This is better
if you are
> > playing a deck that has the main purpose of dealing damage (either
with instants
> > or sorceries). So, if you have a deck that is just in the business
of dealing
> > lots of damage with instants and sorceries, furnace is a much better
card.
> >
> I disagree, I think that you would want a fork in a deck of
> instants and sorceries than in a deck of creatures. If the
opponent is
> playing a strictly creature based deck you will not be able to fork
one of
> his creatures, but you can double one of your big spells to buke
either
> him or him and one of his creatures, or whatever. I personally
thought
> that a forked firestorm kicked ass.
>
I think you missed my point about Fork. I was actually agreeing with
you in a
sense. I said that Fork was good in just about any situation (including
a deck
with direct damage instants and sorceries). The only situation it would
not be
good in would be where everyone (including yourself) is playing nothing
but
creatures.
The situation where I disagree that a Fork is more useful than a Furnace
is a
deck where the majority of your cards are instant and sorcery direct
damage.
In this case, it is almost as if all your spells are being forked (although
to
the same target).