Illusion of Choice, taken from MTG Art, by John Severin Brassell and Wizards of the Coast
Welcome to the Card Creation League! Everyone is free to participate in either or both of the first two rounds. Come join us!
Theme
It's June, which means time for the summer supplement! This year we're getting Archenemy: Nicol Bolas, which is exciting for anyone who likes to play the bad guy. This month's going to be all about supplemental products.
Just about everyone likes the Conspiracy sets, with their innovative take on drafting and extreme multiplayer politics. This round you're going to make a card featuring one of Conspiracy's signature mechanics.
Challenge
Design a card that refers to voting in some way.
The card can either involve a vote - a la will of the council or council's dilemma - or it can manipulate or care about outside votes like Brago's Representative or similar. Just as long as "vote" is in the text!
Make sure to include a rarity.
Stay tuned for May's CCL Final Poll. Anyone who votes will receive 2 bonus points for June's CCL!
Your submissions are due Tuesday, June 6, 23:59 EST.
Schedule
Round 1 — Open to Everyone (June 1st–6th)
Round 2 — Open to Everyone (June 7th–11th)
Rounds 1 and 2 Critiques (Due May 15th)
Top 8 — Open to top 8 finishers (May 16th–19th)
Top 8 Critiques (Due May 22nd)
Top 4 — Open to top 4 finishers from last round (May 23th–26th)
Top 4 Critiques (Due May 28th)
Final (End of month, winner determined by public poll)
Beguiling Sway1RR
Sorcery (U)
You choose how target player votes this turn. Untap target creature that player controls and gain control of it until end of turn. That creature gains haste until end of turn. "Give in to your emotions. They will tell you what you desire most."
Bandwagoning1U
Enchantment {U}
When Bandwagoning enters the battlefield, draw a card.
Whenever players vote, you vote first.
Whenever players finish voting, each player that voted for a choice you voted for draws a card. (This includes you.)
Anarchy FestivalR
Instant (U)
Each player votes at random this turn.
Draw a card. The book about the goblin attempt to build democracy in Paliano is one of the most exciting.
Prince of the Sewers1BB
Creature - Rat Assassin (R)
Deathtouch
Other rats you control have deathtouch.
Whenever players finish voting, create a 1/1 black Rat creature token for each opponent who voted for a choice you didn't vote for.
2/3
The Watcher1U
Legendary Creature - Homunculus (Mythic)
Defender
At the beginning of each player's upkeep, starting with a random opponent, each of his or her opponents votes to either keep the card on top or put it into its owner's graveyard. That player do what got the most votes. It sees all, it knows all.
0/4
Limitless Ideality3(U/B)(U/B)(U/B)
Sorcery
Undaunted (This spell costs 1 less to cast for each opponent.) Council’s dilemma — Starting with you, each player votes for research or development. You exile a card from your library face down for each player votes research, shuffle your library, then put the exiled cards in the top of your library in any order. You draw a card for each player votes development.
Art by
The effects of each council’s dilemma ability happen in the stated order. First the vote occurs, then the first effect, and finally the second effect.
Quarelling Co-ConspiratorsWU
Creature — Rogue Advisor (R)
Flash
If an opponent would become the monarch, instead, each player secretly votes for one of his or her opponents, then all players reveal their votes. If there is not a tie, the player with the most votes becomes the monarch. (A tied vote has no effect.) "The king is dead, long live the kings!"
1/3
Democratic ImplementUWR
Enchanment (R)
Flash
While voting, a player may vote an additional vote for each nontoken creatures he or she controls. A foreign idea in the lands of Fiora, accepted by all, controlled by a few.
Barduk, Crowd Favorite2BRG
Legendary Creature - Ogre Warrior (M) Will of the council — At the beginning of each combat, starting with you, each player votes for a creature you don't control. Barduk, Crowd Favorite fights each creature with the most votes or tied for most votes.
Whenever a creature dealt damage by Barduk, Crowd Favorite this turn dies, put a +1/+1 counter on Barduk, Crowd Favorite.
6/6
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Multiple instances of lifelink on the same creature are redundant.
Multiple instances of lifelink on the same creature are redundant.
Multiple instances of lifelink on the same creature are redundant.
—Eli Shiffrin, Rules Manager, on a design stacking lifelink instances
Pompous Skywatch1WU
Creature - Human Soldier (U) Will of the council — Whenever Cloudwatch Comrades attacks, starting with you, each player votes for high or mighty. If high gets more votes, attacking creatures you control gain flying until end of turn. If mighty gets more votes or the vote is tied, attacking creatures you control get +1/+1 until end of turn.
2/3
Vasily, Prime Minister of Trest2B
Legendary Creature — Human Advisor (R)
When Vasily, Prime Minister of Trest enters the battlefield, target opponent gains control of it.
Vasily's owner chooses how you vote.
1/4
Aldrulus, The Informed1U
Legendary Creature - Human Rogue (R)
Skulk
Whenever players finish voting, you may draw a card for each player that voted the same as you. If you do, discard a card for each player that voted differently. "If there is an opinion to be had I already know who has it."
2/1
Council Enforcer2WW
Creature — Human Soldier (U) Will of the Council — At the beginning of each upkeep, each player votes for a nonland permanent you don't control. Detain each permanent with the most votes or tied for most votes. (Until your next turn, that permanent can't attack or block and its activated abilities can't be activated.)
While a player is voting during his or her turn, that player may vote an additional time. (The votes can be for different choices or for the same choice.)
2/4
Prince of the Sewers1BB
Creature - Rat Assassin (R)
Deathtouch
Other rats you control have deathtouch.
Whenever players finish voting, create a 1/1 black Rat creature token for each opponent who voted for a choice you didn't vote for.
2/3
Pretty simple and not so interesting, but that's okay. At least, it much better than all previous versions of this card.
The Watcher1U
Legendary Creature - Homunculus (Mythic)
Defender
At the beginning of each player's upkeep, starting with a random opponent, each of his or her opponents votes to either keep the card on top or put it into its owner's graveyard. That player do what got the most votes. It sees all, it knows all.
0/4
It's small, it has a tiny effect but really slows down the game. Also, I don't quite get what it does because the wording is unclear. It mills for one or 0 after each voting? As I said before, it's weak but just extremely annoying.
Limitless Ideality3(U/B)(U/B)(U/B)
Sorcery
Undaunted (This spell costs 1 less to cast for each opponent.) Council’s dilemma — Starting with you, each player votes for research or development. You exile a card from your library face down for each player votes research, shuffle your library, then put the exiled cards in the top of your library in any order. You draw a card for each player votes development.
Art by
The effects of each council’s dilemma ability happen in the stated order. First the vote occurs, then the first effect, and finally the second effect.
Not a fan of this card, it's expensive and very complex - you even need to add an explanation how it works. My fear, the turn when you play it will be a mess.
Quarelling Co-ConspiratorsWU
Creature — Rogue Advisor (R)
Flash
If an opponent would become the monarch, instead, each player secretly votes for one of his or her opponents, then all players reveal their votes. If there is not a tie, the player with the most votes becomes the monarch. (A tied vote has no effect.) "The king is dead, long live the kings!"
1/3
Kinda interesting and sort of political, but how will it work? Every player will vote for itself because you ARE the opponent of that player who failed to become the monarch, so that player will choose who it actually will be. I prefer this over Prince of Sewers only because it feels a bit more political.
Democratic ImplementUWR
Enchanment (R)
Flash
While voting, a player may vote an additional vote for each nontoken creatures he or she controls. A foreign idea in the lands of Fiora, accepted by all, controlled by a few.
It would be extremely funny in Sultai colors - yes, as we all know, Leovold represents a true democracy. Ha-ha, not for real. Now, this is America. I am not sure why should it be red, otherwise I like it a lot. It barely works with Will of the Council (except for some cards like Council's Judgment or Custodi Squire) but boy, with Council's Dilemma it will be pure nuts. Can't say anything about balance, but I like it.
Barduk, Crowd Favorite2BRG
Legendary Creature - Ogre Warrior (M) Will of the council — At the beginning of each combat, starting with you, each player votes for a creature you don't control. Barduk, Crowd Favorite fights each creature with the most votes or tied for most votes.
Whenever a creature dealt damage by Barduk, Crowd Favorite this turn dies, put a +1/+1 counter on Barduk, Crowd Favorite.
6/6
*sigh* To be quite honest, most of you guys would have been screwed in MCC for cards like these - the wording is unclear, I don't even know how would it work with two or more creatures destined to be Barduk's fiddlers. He kills them at the same time or one by one - can it, for example, kill four 6/6 creatures in one go? But yeah, screw that, I like this guy. Also some trivia - a long, long time ago Victor Titov made a picture for the card (not MtG, it was another CCG) designed by me. And yes, that card was pretty Fiora-ish...
Democratic ImplementUWR
Enchanment (R)
Flash
While voting, a player may vote an additional vote for each nontoken creatures he or she controls. A foreign idea in the lands of Fiora, accepted by all, controlled by a few.
Text should read, "While voting, each player may vote an additional time for each nontoken creature he or she controls.", as-per Ballot Broker. It was clear what you meant, though. Every nontoken creature grants its controller one extra vote.
Why is this in Jeskai colors? Getting benefits from having lots of creatures is a Green thing, sometimes Red or White. But the nontoken clause renders it less white. This needed to be WRG, and maybe even monogreen. Mechanically, this will result in every vote strongly favoring a heavy creature-based strategy.
I've got no problem with that in principle, but consider that this card acts as negative incentive for opponents to play any vote-based cards until they even up the creature count. You'll have to be the one casting the vote cards to ensure optimal value, and if you're running lots of creatures, that might be difficult. If this just gave you an extra vote IF YOU control the most nontoken creatures, and it had a less-restrictive mana cost, I'd like it more. As it is, it feels self-contradictory.
Barduk, Crowd Favorite2BRG
Legendary Creature - Ogre Warrior (M) Will of the council — At the beginning of each combat, starting with you, each player votes for a creature you don't control. Barduk, Crowd Favorite fights each creature with the most votes or tied for most votes.
Whenever a creature dealt damage by Barduk, Crowd Favorite this turn dies, put a +1/+1 counter on Barduk, Crowd Favorite.
6/6
This guy rocks. Great flavor throughout. He feels like a Jund Spiritmonger, which is hawt. And this is definitely the way to use the vote mechanic in such a chaotic color combination. It's easy to mess up the color pie with voting. The effect is fun and potentially very good. If you got to choose, it would be unprintably powerful. But since your opponents get a say AFTER seeing which creature you pick, the power is way more balanced than that. One aspect of the card I especially like is that your opponents could decide among themselves to purposely tie the vote, so Barduk has to fight the creature you picked AND a creature they pick. (Now that I think about it, it would basically always be in their favor to do that) But a riskier play would be to all agree to vote for DIFFERENT creatures, so he'd have to fight four times instead of 1 or 2.
The only complaint I have is that it's not made clear how the fighting happens. As it is, it sounds like what would happen in a block: simultaneous damage. But I think you were going for a succession of individual fights, thus growing Barduk after each one. I think each fight is a separate effect, which means you'd get to decide the order, being the ability's controller. Some clarification to this point would have been appropriate.
Pompous Skywatch1WU
Creature - Human Soldier (U) Will of the council — Whenever Cloudwatch Comrades attacks, starting with you, each player votes for high or mighty. If high gets more votes, attacking creatures you control gain flying until end of turn. If mighty gets more votes or the vote is tied, attacking creatures you control get +1/+1 until end of turn.
2/3
I do mostly like the card, except for its vanilla-ness and defensive stats. 2/3 creatures with "sky" in their names have flying. This guy doesn't on his own, so the 2/3 stats seem odd. 3/2 would work fine, which must seem pretty picky of me. But otherwise, he's about the right power level for uncommon, and the effect is pretty exciting. One possible issue is that when attacking a single player, you and that player can be assumed to always vote differently, thus making the vote really only be decided by the two players it affects the least. That's almost up there in the Fatal-Flaw category, but it wouldn't take much retooling to minimize this problem. I still like the card.
Vasily, Prime Minister of Trest2B
Legendary Creature — Human Advisor (R)
When Vasily, Prime Minister of Trest enters the battlefield, target opponent gains control of it.
Vasily's owner chooses how you vote.
1/4
Ho, ho, ho wow. Dang, this is so simple, but so deep. I like how we both went with less-than-loyal advisor creatures, heh heh. I can't think of any major critiques of this. It strikes me as almost watertight. One minor gripe is that his controller might easily be helped more than hurt by his big butt. He blocks really well, and can chump or be sacced guilt-free, since he cost them no resources. It just might not play out how it's drawn up. But it will often, and it'll be so satisfying when it does. Nice work.
Aldrulus, The Informed1U
Legendary Creature - Human Rogue (R)
Skulk
Whenever players finish voting, you may draw a card for each player that voted the same as you. If you do, discard a card for each player that voted differently. "If there is an opinion to be had I already know who has it."
2/1
So the options are:
Draw 1, discard 3
Draw 2, discard 2
Draw 3, discard 1
Draw 4
In the first case, you'll never opt to draw the card. In all three other cases, I feel it's too good for a 2-drop with evasion. If the effect was triggered on damage, like Mask of Memory, and didn't have the potential to be quite as much of a Superbrainstorm, the card would make more sense to me. Voting doesn't happen THAT often, so you'd need to either provide a more reliable benefit or include some incentive for voting the way you do. I just don't like how it can go from "decent limited beater" to "card-advantage monster" and back again out of nowhere, but not even every time its ability triggers.
Diplomatic Endeavours2GWU
Enchantment (R)
Whenever players finish voting, investigate for each opponent who voted for a choice you didn't vote for.
Sacrifice two Clues: Prevent all combat damage that would be dealt this turn.
Sacrifice four Clues: You become the monarch. "He is happiest, be he king or peasant, who finds peace in his home." - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
Lemme just give you my thought process as I read your card the first time:
Name is a little bland, but the flavor intent is clear, and fits the colors.
I'm totally with you through the first ability. Sounds neat (and Bant) so far.
Suddenly going from investigating to fogging is a bit of an about-face, but let's see how you tie it together.
Erm. What does the Monarch have to do with anything?
Now, don't misunderstand; I totally get how diplomacy and monarchs relate in real life. I'm not subtracting style points, but substance points. You're trying to smash together four unrelated things, and the result feels like a clumsy amalgamation of multiple cards. Honestly, if you just reduced the mana cost and dropped the 2nd ability I'd have no major complaints. I think you just went too far with it, but I did like where you were going.
At the moment, this card doesn't do anything. Well, it does something - at the beginning of a player's upkeep, everyone votes whether to put the top card of a player's library into the graveyard. But no one knows what that card is, so this is like some sort of slow universal mill if everyone wants to mill everyone.
I think what you meant to do was have everyone vote on a card once revealed (like Delver of Secrets). Then the card would have a meaningful function.
One other technical note - I do not like "starting with a random opponent here". That adds a lot of wasted time and effort for no gain. Just start with the opponent to the left and go clockwise.
Ok, so, assuming I'm guessing correctly what the card meant to say, this is a card I would not want to see print. These Conspiracy games take a long time - 90 minutes even. This card, if left on the battlefield starting from turn 2, would single-handedly add an additional 15-30 minutes to the game. A mass Telepathy effect also reduces the sense of espionage, gamesmanship, and intrigue that I think these Conspiracy sets are trying to convey. It's less fun when everyone knows exactly what everyone else has in their hands.
If you want to keep the basic feel of the card, I think I would make it able to activate only 2-4 times. Use a "spy counter" or something. The effect just can't go on turn after turn after turn after turn all game long.
Flavor text is on-point.
You are my Wall of Omens guru. I love your dedication to producing variants of that card.
I think part of the difficulty in designing cards with the aftermath mechanic, fuse mechanic, split card mechanic, or these dichotomy voting mechanics is coming up with dichotomies that have resonance. I really like the "research" and "development" dichotomy. I think that the association of research with scrying and of development with drawing cards is clever and flavorful.
What is the dilemma? Don't we all prefer to draw cards instead of scrying? I do not know when it is correct for an opponent to choose development, nor do I know when it is correct for the caster to choose research. Ignoring the difference between your research ability and scrying, does this card not actually read: " Scry X and Draw Y cards, where X is the number of opponents you have and Y is one plus the number of allies you have."?
With 3 opponents, I think the card is costed fine. The black is unnecessary but could be useful for limiting access to the card for the sake of some goal for limited play and balance.
I wouldn't mind the card at Instant.
Minor criticism: the name does not fit the mechanics or feel of the card. Research and development does not give off the impression of infinity or of intangible idealism, be it of the Platonic or Hegelian variety.
I don't dislike the card, but it bothers me that there is no real dilemma in this council's dilemma: unless there is another mechanic (like Aetherworks Marvel or Miracles)that rewards draw order, scrying is always worse than drawing cards, and I'd expect players to vote accordingly. I don't readily associate miracles with the world of Conspiracy, but I'm trying to discern what you as a designer found novel or interesting enough to explore designing this card.
As a follow up to my last point, I think you got most of the way there. You thought of an interesting dilemma dichotomy (something I personally struggled with), then found a way to incorporate that dichotomy into a multiplayer format with respect to cost. I applaud those steps. What you now need to do is find a way to make the card foster meaningful choice in a multiplayer setting.
I'm not fond of this card, for a few reasons. But I'm soooo close to being fond of it! I'll start with what I would like, then with what I don't like, then with some suggestions for future design.
The best part about this card is that it has flash. That shows that you wanted the card's effect to be unexpected. It is a really cool effect, and it is an effect that is most interesting and most fun if it is unexpected. I think this card would be fantastic if it were an instant and had "draw a card". "Conspiratorial Quarrel" could be the name.
Minor note: the card doesn't actually work. "Vote" is a keyword action, like "fight". Thus "secretly voting" doesn't work. This doesn't bother me because I can understand what the card does, but you'll want to reword it differently, and if you can't word it differently, then perhaps Wizards should amend the rules mechanics of voting. Perhaps "secretly chooses a player he wishes to be the monarch" would be a suitable fix. Perhaps "secretly chooses a player to become the monarch" is better. Regardless, this is the card design stage of card design, not editing, and you conveyed the idea of your card fully in a way that is easy to understand. I just wanted to alert you to the fact that it doesn't technically function.
Minor issue: I think you want this creature to have a race. Right now it has only two classes.
More significant issue: This card does not feel white at all. At minimum this card needs to be black. Whether it be mono-black or black-blue or Esper or Grixis is up to you. But voting in secret to overthrow the rightful King is the opposite of White and everything White stands for philosophically. Pairing white with a morally-agnostic color like blue doesn't help overcome this problem. If I were designing the card, I would have made it UB, and if it didn't have flash I would contemplate a B or UB design.
More significant issue: I don't like that this effect is repeatable. I think the effect as a single instant would be fun and exciting, but as a static effect that remains for the whole game, I think that would become obnoxious and not fun for anyone. Presumably too much of the gameplay of a Conspiracy game is centered around vying for the monarchical Crown, and this card single-handedly throws that subgame out the window, and on a card that no one opponent is truly incentivized to expend a card to get rid of it. If you want it to remain a creature, I would add the words "this turn" in the first clause.
Most significant issue: this has the same problem as Netn10's card - this card will single-handedly add 15-30 minutes to the game. If you play this card, you're basically asking one of your opponents to leap across the table and stab you.
So, taking a step back, despite some definite issues, I think it is very close to a very cool and fun Conspiracy card. For the sake of fun and time, you really really really need to make it a single-time effect. The design shows creativity. It is clear to me that you saw value in its unexpectedness because you gave it flash, and in future iterations of the card I would like you to embrace this aspect of the card more. Make it a blue-black cantrip!
I don't know if I'm a fan of this card (I lean towards being a fan). I think the idea behind it shows creativity, and it's interesting to think about from a design perspective, and these are the sorts of cards that are important for a design team to throw at each other to see what each other think. I think I would need to playtest with the card to know whether it is oppressive or fun and balanced. I'm leaning toward it being fun and balanced (unless cards like netn10 and Rocco's get made, in which case cards like yours would become oppressive because the table would be spending more time voting and murdering each other than playing Magic). It is a cool design regardless.
There is a flavor-fail going on here that is annoying me. Democracy should champion creature tokens more than anything else, and yet you specifically exclude creature tokens. This seems like a build-around card, so why not let the player build around it with tokens? Seems like you're blocking a fun and unique draft experience from taking place with that design decision.
I really prefer the card at Bant, because Bant seems like the colors of democracy (more specifically, Green-White.) You could have limited this to two colors with a CMC of 4 or 5. Adding the blue is fine and enables you to give it a CMC of 3. Depending on how much fixing there is in the format you might want this to be only 2 colors. In the abstract, I, like most Magic players, believe that the American form of government is good and would probably prefer to see this effect as GWU or GW. In the abstract, I can see Red being the color of Libertarianism, but not of democracy.
However, when I sat down today to write these critiques, I asked myself: "Why on earth would Iphanx change this card from Bant to Jeskai?" And then I realized that there is a significant strand of thought in Western history that holds that democracy is a form of government for the common rabble, that it is chaotic, dangerous, subject to the whims of brutish man instead of to patricians. In choosing to make this card Jeskai, you are hinting that you view democracy with eyes more like Plato, Augustus Caesar, Stalin, or King George III instead of those like Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, [Christ?], Locke, or Rousseau. That's fine, I suppose, though you have to recognize that the current world tends to believe that democracy is fundamentally just and that other forms of government are oppressive, and thus you need to reocgnize that you are going against the grain of our present day liberal and democratic society in dropping green in favor of red here. If I supported monarchy or oligarchy, then I'd definitely like to see anything favoring democracy be Red to emphasize its danger and to display an implicit condemnation of the ordinary and mundane.
So, that was a long-winded way to say that, on some planes and in alternate timelines in our world, I could see justification for this card being Boros or Jeskai.
Sometimes Magic isn't about Magic, hah! So thank you for the submission. It's a cool and thought-provoking card.
Excellent name and flavor. The card is powerful, but there are some important checks being placed on the card's power (2 by my eye), and that shows intricate careful design.
appropriate cost, rarity, color, and power/toughness. I could see this card costing 6 instead of 5, and could see it as a 5/6 instead of a 6/6, but I think your card as-is is printable and would not be too oppressive. I think the card is incredibly immersive.
each combat is an awful lot. Maybe limit it to the combats of opponents only? In theory that lets you attack with it more often and also gives it a chance to be killed by the player to your left, so there's a slight increase in power and decrease in power going on in that change. Again, it's probably fine as is, but I'm just throwing some things out there for you to mull over.
One thing I'm unsure about is multiple creatures fighting. Assuming that Barduk is fighting with two creatures, I presume that all the damage being dealt is simultaneous, and that the two creatures fight only with Barduk and not with each other. The simultaneity is in question, by my eye. I don't know if this sort of thing has been done before and am unsure if the rules allow for it. I suspect that Wizards will clarify the rules when they make a card like this. I do think that many judges will be called over and asked about this interaction. I'd probably add the word "simultaneously" somewhere, or add reminder text.
Overall, a great submission and an exciting card. Thanks for sharing!
I'll preface by saying that I really don't like cards like this that force you to attack before seeing the effect. It's not really fun, and from experience I think most people shy away from putting cards like this into their decks.
With that said, there are some things redeeming this card, most notably the fact that we are in a multiplayer draft format. We aren't exactly rolling the dice here - there is a lot of bartering and backstabbing here, and I can envision many scenarios in which the card actively fosters a true "will of the council" dilemma, which shows good thoughtful design. These are the sorts of dilemmas that the "will of the council" abilities were designed for, and which really contribute to the novelty of the experience.
I think I'd still lean toward making this trigger at the beginning of your combat step instead of when you attack. You should see what others think though before making that change. I think that my proposed change would be a net positive in the fun and usefulness department while still preserving the fun deliberative aspect at the heart of the card. One potential reason to leave the card as-is is that it doesn't trigger as often, thereby preventing the card from becoming a major time-sink and drag on the flow of the game.
The effect is balanced for its cost, the card is well costed, with appropriate color and power/toughness.
Overall, a thoughtful card that is well-designed and, I think, one that will ultimately prove to be fun.
It is hard to judge how this card should be costed but I think maybe we should add 1 to it; Act of Treason is a solid spell on its own merits, and it's my guess that any set that has 'voting matters' cards will have vote spells worth spending a little extra mana to influence the outcome.
This is funny and I like it. It's a very straightforward and pleasing keystone for an annoying deck that calls for a lot of votes all the time, and the incentive to get others to vote in your favor is smart and cleanly implemented.
I'm afraid I don't like this card very much at all. It renders voting cards less predictable but does so at very little advantage to its user, and the flavor feels off (it seems like Fioran goblins are at least as intelligent and capable as Mercadian goblins.)
I'm not sure that I like this card at all by itself. Skulk is unimpressive on top-heavy creatures and its card draw ability can easily be defused by opponents. That said it does combo appealingly with RaikouRider's card and that made me smile.
I get what you're doing here but I also think you could clean it up. There's a great value in restraint and here we have a card that's got three set-specific mechanics on it. Also I think there is a flavor disconnect in that you get rewarded for basically dissenting with the other players but the card's flavor is about being diplomatic.
It took a couple of readthroughs for me to see what this card is doing.
Turbler: 4 cmc for 2/4 is okay for an uncommon and the ability to detain is also fine, this could result in at least 3 detainee when it comes back to you, in some weird cases, when each of the player vote for different things, you may get 12 detainee. this is the first ability only..
now, with the second ability, each player may vote 'twice' during voting process.. this allows player that sits before you, get a powerful choice to detain or not to detain two or more nonland permanent. since votes always starts with you, the last player to vote which sits before you will be able to make the vote end up in tie... i would say, for me to enjoy playing with this card, it should have detain a permanent during your upkeep only not during each player's upkeep.
Wildbold: the first ability is just so cool, the effect is weirdly cool i believe, you want to know why they voted differently, thus you gets a clue.. the flavor is so good too with understanding what each opposing force wants, you gain by preventing damage, and also become the king. balance wise, it seems somewhat balanced or low powered when you're using it for just itself. but in a Clue-build-around deck, this could be a game changer where you can help allies or push your foe via preventing combat damage.
JamBlock: another useful and fair card, but the effect itself is far from being flashy. balance wise its also fine, 3 multicolor for 2/3 that sometimes flies or becomes 3/4 is ok too,, in which direction it becomes would most probably not benefit you in a free-for-all kind of match.
doomfish: this is another cool card. this is how we, the crowd likes about gladiator, we watch other creatures fight and we loves watching the glory. but this could turn out bad when four players choose different creatures, which would be the case if i were to play against this card. i don't want this card to stay long on the battlefield, he could go around rampaging if left uncheck. cool design! that i like, balance wise, a three color nonflying 6/6 sengir for 5 mana is cool..
IcariiFA: this card if you have an ally, could be good. this also make people modify their choice accordingly to see if they could make you discard by choosing different than you. in a way, this lets you vote accordingly to if you are to vote last, which makes you in a very good position. the best is if three person choose the same vote, if you go along, you draw 3 cards, otherwise you would draw two and discard one from the voting process
willows: this sleeper agent mechanic seems cool to me, but the cost is somewhat high.. vote controlling mechanic sounds cool and can be useful when your deck is all about voting.. this card requires you to build around it to make the most out of it.. without any voting process, i don't think it could do anything.
1. Doomfish
2. Wildbold
3. IcariiFA
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
“Majority Rules”
Illusion of Choice, taken from MTG Art, by John Severin Brassell and Wizards of the Coast
Theme
It's June, which means time for the summer supplement! This year we're getting Archenemy: Nicol Bolas, which is exciting for anyone who likes to play the bad guy. This month's going to be all about supplemental products.
Just about everyone likes the Conspiracy sets, with their innovative take on drafting and extreme multiplayer politics. This round you're going to make a card featuring one of Conspiracy's signature mechanics.
Challenge
Stay tuned for May's CCL Final Poll. Anyone who votes will receive 2 bonus points for June's CCL!
Schedule
I̟̥͍̠ͅn̩͉̣͍̬͚ͅ ̬̬͖t̯̹̞̺͖͓̯̤h̘͍̬e͙̯͈̖̼̮ ̭̬f̺̲̲̪i͙͉̟̩̰r̪̝͚͈̝̥͍̝̲s̼̻͇̘̳͔ͅt̲̺̳̗̜̪̙ ̳̺̥̻͚̗ͅm̜̜̟̰͈͓͎͇o̝̖̮̝͇m̯̻̞̼̫̗͓̤e̩̯̬̮̩n͎̱̪̲̹͖t͇̖s̰̮ͅ,̤̲͙̻̭̻̯̹̰ ̖t̫̙̺̯͖͚̯ͅh͙̯̦̳̗̰̟e͖̪͉̼̯ ̪͕g̞̣͔a̗̦t̬̬͓͙̫̖̭̻e̩̻̯ ̜̖̦̖̤̭͙̬t̞̹̥̪͎͉ͅo͕͚͍͇̲͇͓̺ ̭̬͙͈̣̻t͈͍͙͓̫̖͙̩h̪̬̖̙e̗͈ ̗̬̟̞̺̤͉̯ͅa̦̯͚̙̜̮f͉͙̲̣̞̼t̪̤̞̣͚e̲͉̳̥r͇̪̙͚͓l̥̞̞͎̹̯̹ͅi͓̬f̮̥̬̞͈ͅe͎ ̟̩̤̳̠̯̩̯o̮̘̲p̟͚̣̞͉͓e͍̩̣n͔̼͕͚̜e̬̱d̼̘͎̖̹͍̮̠,͖̺̭̱̮ ̣̲͖̬̪̭̥a̪͚n̟̲̝̤̤̞̗d̘̱̗͇̮͕̳͕͔ ͖̞͉͎t̹̙͎h̰̱͉̗e̪̞̱̝̹̩ͅ ̠̱̩̭̦p̯̙e͓o̳͚̰̯̺̱̰͔̘p̬͎̱̣̼̩͇l̗̟̖͚̠e̱͉͔̱̦̬̟̙ ̖͚̪͔̼̦w̺̖̤̱e͖̗̻̦͓̖̘̜r̭̥e͔̹̫̱͕̦̰͕ ̗͔̠p̠̗͍͍̱̳̠r̰͔͎̰o͉̥͓̰͚̥s̟͚̹̱͔̣t͉̙̳̖͖̪̮r̥̘̥͙̹a͉̟̫̟̳̠̟̭t͈̜̰͈͎e̞̣̭̲̬ ͚̗̯̟͙i͍͖̰̘̦͖͉ṇ̮̻̯̦̲̩͍ ̦̮͚̫̤t͉͖̫͕ͅͅh͙̮̻̘̣̮̼e͕̺ ͙l͕̠͎̰̥i̲͓͉̲g̫̳̟͈͇̖h̠̦̖t͓̯͎̗ ̳̪̘̟̙̩̦o̫̲f̙͔̰̙̠ ̹̪̗͇̯t͖̼̼͉͖̬h̹͇̩e͚̖̺̤͉̹͕̪ ͚͓̭̝̺G͎̗̯̩o̫̯̮̟̮̳̘d̜̲͙̠-̩̳̯̲̗̜P̹̘̥͉̝h͍͈̗̖̝ͅa͍̗̮̼̗r̜̖͇̙̺a̭̺͔̞̳͈o̪̣͓̯̬͙̯̰̗h̖̦͈̥̯͔.͇̣̙̝
Sorcery (U)
You choose how target player votes this turn. Untap target creature that player controls and gain control of it until end of turn. That creature gains haste until end of turn.
"Give in to your emotions. They will tell you what you desire most."
Enchantment {U}
When Bandwagoning enters the battlefield, draw a card.
Whenever players vote, you vote first.
Whenever players finish voting, each player that voted for a choice you voted for draws a card. (This includes you.)
Emille, Seven-Sting Dancer Shalin Nariya
Instant (U)
Each player votes at random this turn.
Draw a card.
The book about the goblin attempt to build democracy in Paliano is one of the most exciting.
Creature - Rat Assassin (R)
Deathtouch
Other rats you control have deathtouch.
Whenever players finish voting, create a 1/1 black Rat creature token for each opponent who voted for a choice you didn't vote for.
2/3
Legendary Creature - Homunculus (Mythic)
Defender
At the beginning of each player's upkeep, starting with a random opponent, each of his or her opponents votes to either keep the card on top or put it into its owner's graveyard. That player do what got the most votes.
It sees all, it knows all.
0/4
Sorcery
Undaunted (This spell costs 1 less to cast for each opponent.)
Council’s dilemma — Starting with you, each player votes for research or development. You exile a card from your library face down for each player votes research, shuffle your library, then put the exiled cards in the top of your library in any order. You draw a card for each player votes development.
Art by
Tentatively...Slightly less tentatively...
Quarelling Co-Conspirators WU
Creature — Rogue Advisor (R)
Flash
If an opponent would become the monarch, instead, each player secretly votes for one of his or her opponents, then all players reveal their votes. If there is not a tie, the player with the most votes becomes the monarch. (A tied vote has no effect.)
"The king is dead, long live the kings!"
1/3
Enchanment (R)
Flash
While voting, a player may vote an additional vote for each nontoken creatures he or she controls.
A foreign idea in the lands of Fiora, accepted by all, controlled by a few.
Legendary Creature - Ogre Warrior (M)
Will of the council — At the beginning of each combat, starting with you, each player votes for a creature you don't control. Barduk, Crowd Favorite fights each creature with the most votes or tied for most votes.
Whenever a creature dealt damage by Barduk, Crowd Favorite this turn dies, put a +1/+1 counter on Barduk, Crowd Favorite.
6/6
Multiple instances of lifelink on the same creature are redundant.
Multiple instances of lifelink on the same creature are redundant.
—Eli Shiffrin, Rules Manager, on a design stacking lifelink instances
Creature - Human Soldier (U)
Will of the council — Whenever Cloudwatch Comrades attacks, starting with you, each player votes for high or mighty. If high gets more votes, attacking creatures you control gain flying until end of turn. If mighty gets more votes or the vote is tied, attacking creatures you control get +1/+1 until end of turn.
2/3
Legendary Creature — Human Advisor (R)
When Vasily, Prime Minister of Trest enters the battlefield, target opponent gains control of it.
Vasily's owner chooses how you vote.
1/4
Legendary Creature - Human Rogue (R)
Skulk
Whenever players finish voting, you may draw a card for each player that voted the same as you. If you do, discard a card for each player that voted differently.
"If there is an opinion to be had I already know who has it."
2/1
Creature — Human Soldier (U)
Will of the Council — At the beginning of each upkeep, each player votes for a nonland permanent you don't control. Detain each permanent with the most votes or tied for most votes. (Until your next turn, that permanent can't attack or block and its activated abilities can't be activated.)
While a player is voting during his or her turn, that player may vote an additional time. (The votes can be for different choices or for the same choice.)
2/4
scrad_the_wanderer
RaikouRider
Raptorchan
kjsharp
netn10
mirrodin71
Rocco
iphanx
doomfish
JamBlock
willows
IcariiFA
Wildbold
Turbler
I̟̥͍̠ͅn̩͉̣͍̬͚ͅ ̬̬͖t̯̹̞̺͖͓̯̤h̘͍̬e͙̯͈̖̼̮ ̭̬f̺̲̲̪i͙͉̟̩̰r̪̝͚͈̝̥͍̝̲s̼̻͇̘̳͔ͅt̲̺̳̗̜̪̙ ̳̺̥̻͚̗ͅm̜̜̟̰͈͓͎͇o̝̖̮̝͇m̯̻̞̼̫̗͓̤e̩̯̬̮̩n͎̱̪̲̹͖t͇̖s̰̮ͅ,̤̲͙̻̭̻̯̹̰ ̖t̫̙̺̯͖͚̯ͅh͙̯̦̳̗̰̟e͖̪͉̼̯ ̪͕g̞̣͔a̗̦t̬̬͓͙̫̖̭̻e̩̻̯ ̜̖̦̖̤̭͙̬t̞̹̥̪͎͉ͅo͕͚͍͇̲͇͓̺ ̭̬͙͈̣̻t͈͍͙͓̫̖͙̩h̪̬̖̙e̗͈ ̗̬̟̞̺̤͉̯ͅa̦̯͚̙̜̮f͉͙̲̣̞̼t̪̤̞̣͚e̲͉̳̥r͇̪̙͚͓l̥̞̞͎̹̯̹ͅi͓̬f̮̥̬̞͈ͅe͎ ̟̩̤̳̠̯̩̯o̮̘̲p̟͚̣̞͉͓e͍̩̣n͔̼͕͚̜e̬̱d̼̘͎̖̹͍̮̠,͖̺̭̱̮ ̣̲͖̬̪̭̥a̪͚n̟̲̝̤̤̞̗d̘̱̗͇̮͕̳͕͔ ͖̞͉͎t̹̙͎h̰̱͉̗e̪̞̱̝̹̩ͅ ̠̱̩̭̦p̯̙e͓o̳͚̰̯̺̱̰͔̘p̬͎̱̣̼̩͇l̗̟̖͚̠e̱͉͔̱̦̬̟̙ ̖͚̪͔̼̦w̺̖̤̱e͖̗̻̦͓̖̘̜r̭̥e͔̹̫̱͕̦̰͕ ̗͔̠p̠̗͍͍̱̳̠r̰͔͎̰o͉̥͓̰͚̥s̟͚̹̱͔̣t͉̙̳̖͖̪̮r̥̘̥͙̹a͉̟̫̟̳̠̟̭t͈̜̰͈͎e̞̣̭̲̬ ͚̗̯̟͙i͍͖̰̘̦͖͉ṇ̮̻̯̦̲̩͍ ̦̮͚̫̤t͉͖̫͕ͅͅh͙̮̻̘̣̮̼e͕̺ ͙l͕̠͎̰̥i̲͓͉̲g̫̳̟͈͇̖h̠̦̖t͓̯͎̗ ̳̪̘̟̙̩̦o̫̲f̙͔̰̙̠ ̹̪̗͇̯t͖̼̼͉͖̬h̹͇̩e͚̖̺̤͉̹͕̪ ͚͓̭̝̺G͎̗̯̩o̫̯̮̟̮̳̘d̜̲͙̠-̩̳̯̲̗̜P̹̘̥͉̝h͍͈̗̖̝ͅa͍̗̮̼̗r̜̖͇̙̺a̭̺͔̞̳͈o̪̣͓̯̬͙̯̰̗h̖̦͈̥̯͔.͇̣̙̝
Pretty simple and not so interesting, but that's okay. At least, it much better than all previous versions of this card.
It's small, it has a tiny effect but really slows down the game. Also, I don't quite get what it does because the wording is unclear. It mills for one or 0 after each voting? As I said before, it's weak but just extremely annoying.
Not a fan of this card, it's expensive and very complex - you even need to add an explanation how it works. My fear, the turn when you play it will be a mess.
Kinda interesting and sort of political, but how will it work? Every player will vote for itself because you ARE the opponent of that player who failed to become the monarch, so that player will choose who it actually will be. I prefer this over Prince of Sewers only because it feels a bit more political.
It would be extremely funny in Sultai colors - yes, as we all know, Leovold represents a true democracy. Ha-ha, not for real. Now, this is America. I am not sure why should it be red, otherwise I like it a lot. It barely works with Will of the Council (except for some cards like Council's Judgment or Custodi Squire) but boy, with Council's Dilemma it will be pure nuts. Can't say anything about balance, but I like it.
*sigh* To be quite honest, most of you guys would have been screwed in MCC for cards like these - the wording is unclear, I don't even know how would it work with two or more creatures destined to be Barduk's fiddlers. He kills them at the same time or one by one - can it, for example, kill four 6/6 creatures in one go? But yeah, screw that, I like this guy. Also some trivia - a long, long time ago Victor Titov made a picture for the card (not MtG, it was another CCG) designed by me. And yes, that card was pretty Fiora-ish...
1. iphanx
2. doomfish
3. Rocco
Enchanment (R)
Flash
While voting, a player may vote an additional vote for each nontoken creatures he or she controls.
A foreign idea in the lands of Fiora, accepted by all, controlled by a few.
Text should read, "While voting, each player may vote an additional time for each nontoken creature he or she controls.", as-per Ballot Broker. It was clear what you meant, though. Every nontoken creature grants its controller one extra vote.
Why is this in Jeskai colors? Getting benefits from having lots of creatures is a Green thing, sometimes Red or White. But the nontoken clause renders it less white. This needed to be WRG, and maybe even monogreen. Mechanically, this will result in every vote strongly favoring a heavy creature-based strategy.
I've got no problem with that in principle, but consider that this card acts as negative incentive for opponents to play any vote-based cards until they even up the creature count. You'll have to be the one casting the vote cards to ensure optimal value, and if you're running lots of creatures, that might be difficult. If this just gave you an extra vote IF YOU control the most nontoken creatures, and it had a less-restrictive mana cost, I'd like it more. As it is, it feels self-contradictory.
Legendary Creature - Ogre Warrior (M)
Will of the council — At the beginning of each combat, starting with you, each player votes for a creature you don't control. Barduk, Crowd Favorite fights each creature with the most votes or tied for most votes.
Whenever a creature dealt damage by Barduk, Crowd Favorite this turn dies, put a +1/+1 counter on Barduk, Crowd Favorite.
6/6
This guy rocks. Great flavor throughout. He feels like a Jund Spiritmonger, which is hawt. And this is definitely the way to use the vote mechanic in such a chaotic color combination. It's easy to mess up the color pie with voting. The effect is fun and potentially very good. If you got to choose, it would be unprintably powerful. But since your opponents get a say AFTER seeing which creature you pick, the power is way more balanced than that. One aspect of the card I especially like is that your opponents could decide among themselves to purposely tie the vote, so Barduk has to fight the creature you picked AND a creature they pick. (Now that I think about it, it would basically always be in their favor to do that) But a riskier play would be to all agree to vote for DIFFERENT creatures, so he'd have to fight four times instead of 1 or 2.
The only complaint I have is that it's not made clear how the fighting happens. As it is, it sounds like what would happen in a block: simultaneous damage. But I think you were going for a succession of individual fights, thus growing Barduk after each one. I think each fight is a separate effect, which means you'd get to decide the order, being the ability's controller. Some clarification to this point would have been appropriate.
Creature - Human Soldier (U)
Will of the council — Whenever Cloudwatch Comrades attacks, starting with you, each player votes for high or mighty. If high gets more votes, attacking creatures you control gain flying until end of turn. If mighty gets more votes or the vote is tied, attacking creatures you control get +1/+1 until end of turn.
2/3
I do mostly like the card, except for its vanilla-ness and defensive stats. 2/3 creatures with "sky" in their names have flying. This guy doesn't on his own, so the 2/3 stats seem odd. 3/2 would work fine, which must seem pretty picky of me. But otherwise, he's about the right power level for uncommon, and the effect is pretty exciting. One possible issue is that when attacking a single player, you and that player can be assumed to always vote differently, thus making the vote really only be decided by the two players it affects the least. That's almost up there in the Fatal-Flaw category, but it wouldn't take much retooling to minimize this problem. I still like the card.
Legendary Creature — Human Advisor (R)
When Vasily, Prime Minister of Trest enters the battlefield, target opponent gains control of it.
Vasily's owner chooses how you vote.
1/4
Ho, ho, ho wow. Dang, this is so simple, but so deep. I like how we both went with less-than-loyal advisor creatures, heh heh. I can't think of any major critiques of this. It strikes me as almost watertight. One minor gripe is that his controller might easily be helped more than hurt by his big butt. He blocks really well, and can chump or be sacced guilt-free, since he cost them no resources. It just might not play out how it's drawn up. But it will often, and it'll be so satisfying when it does. Nice work.
Legendary Creature - Human Rogue (R)
Skulk
Whenever players finish voting, you may draw a card for each player that voted the same as you. If you do, discard a card for each player that voted differently.
"If there is an opinion to be had I already know who has it."
2/1
So the options are:
Enchantment (R)
Whenever players finish voting, investigate for each opponent who voted for a choice you didn't vote for.
Sacrifice two Clues: Prevent all combat damage that would be dealt this turn.
Sacrifice four Clues: You become the monarch.
"He is happiest, be he king or peasant, who finds peace in his home." - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
Lemme just give you my thought process as I read your card the first time:
2) Jamblock
3) Iphanx
2. scrad_the_wanderer
3. IcariiFA
now, with the second ability, each player may vote 'twice' during voting process.. this allows player that sits before you, get a powerful choice to detain or not to detain two or more nonland permanent. since votes always starts with you, the last player to vote which sits before you will be able to make the vote end up in tie... i would say, for me to enjoy playing with this card, it should have detain a permanent during your upkeep only not during each player's upkeep.
Wildbold: the first ability is just so cool, the effect is weirdly cool i believe, you want to know why they voted differently, thus you gets a clue.. the flavor is so good too with understanding what each opposing force wants, you gain by preventing damage, and also become the king. balance wise, it seems somewhat balanced or low powered when you're using it for just itself. but in a Clue-build-around deck, this could be a game changer where you can help allies or push your foe via preventing combat damage.
JamBlock: another useful and fair card, but the effect itself is far from being flashy. balance wise its also fine, 3 multicolor for 2/3 that sometimes flies or becomes 3/4 is ok too,, in which direction it becomes would most probably not benefit you in a free-for-all kind of match.
doomfish: this is another cool card. this is how we, the crowd likes about gladiator, we watch other creatures fight and we loves watching the glory. but this could turn out bad when four players choose different creatures, which would be the case if i were to play against this card. i don't want this card to stay long on the battlefield, he could go around rampaging if left uncheck. cool design! that i like, balance wise, a three color nonflying 6/6 sengir for 5 mana is cool..
IcariiFA: this card if you have an ally, could be good. this also make people modify their choice accordingly to see if they could make you discard by choosing different than you. in a way, this lets you vote accordingly to if you are to vote last, which makes you in a very good position. the best is if three person choose the same vote, if you go along, you draw 3 cards, otherwise you would draw two and discard one from the voting process
willows: this sleeper agent mechanic seems cool to me, but the cost is somewhat high.. vote controlling mechanic sounds cool and can be useful when your deck is all about voting.. this card requires you to build around it to make the most out of it.. without any voting process, i don't think it could do anything.
1. Doomfish
2. Wildbold
3. IcariiFA